• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Question for those who agree with an assault rife ban

Cardinal said:
I am consistent on this point. As I've already stated in an other thread, the definitions are confusing and irrelevant. This is why I believe that bullets...regardless of type...should cost a minimum of $1600 each.
Click to expand...

Do you think southern states would comply with that law?
 
Bucky said:
The majority of gun owners will voluntarily turn their guns in.

This will not be some sort of Armageddon. See Executive Order 6102 or Executive Order 9066. A civil war did not break out.

Those that do not follow the law are committing a crime. If "lawful" gun owners want to be outlaws, they will be sent where criminals go.
Click to expand...

Interesting post. Much of what I disagree with.

- "The majority of gun owners will voluntarily turn their guns in. "
What do you base that on?

- Those that do not follow the law are committing a crime. If "lawful" gun owners want to be outlaws, they will be sent where criminals go.
True. Those that do not follow the law are committing a crime. It already is a crime to commit murder. Does that stop some from committing murder? Nope.
It a crime to assault people. People get mugged all the time.

The majority of people are law abiding people. Let's punish those who are responsible firearm owners because of a few nut jobs. Yep, gets my vote to follow along.:mrgreen:

For those who have unregistered firearms. How is the govt. going to determine if they have a weapon?
 
Cardinal said:
Why would I have the answer to that?
Click to expand...

Well this is one issue with trying to govern with a centralized government for 300+ million people. If you have laws that go too far against the wills of the people of certain areas then it will cause rifts within the populace and cause polarization. Let's say that somehow that law were passed and held up to be constitutional, as shown by marijuana and immigration laws the states can simply tell the federal government to shove it and ignore it which would create more drama than it's worth.
 
Nap said:
Well this is one issue with trying to govern with a centralized government for 300+ million people. If you have laws that go too far against the wills of the people of certain areas then it will cause rifts within the populace and cause polarization. Let's say that somehow that law were passed and held up to be constitutional, as shown by marijuana and immigration laws the states can simply tell the federal government to shove it and ignore it which would create more drama than it's worth.
Click to expand...

It sounds like an issue I will let legal scholars handle. I don't need to address all logistical barriers of my proposal, or be an expert in fiscal policy or administration.
 
Maccabee said:
Actually handguns are used 60% of the time in mass shootings and the distance in which most mass shootinhs take place make the long range effectiveness of a rifle minuscule at best. The third largest shooting was done with two handguns and ten round magazines.
Click to expand...

Source? The only one I can think of offhand is the Pulse Nightclub shooting.
 
Old Trapper said:
Source? The only one I can think of offhand is the Pulse Nightclub shooting.
Click to expand...

Google Va Tech Massacre....



two handguns over thirty casualties....
 
Rexedgar said:
Google Va Tech Massacre....



two handguns over thirty casualties....
Click to expand...

That is one, not 60%. Also, on December 13, 2005 he was ordered by a judge to seek outpatient care after making suicidal remarks to his roommates. So, he was adjudicated to t=be mentally ill, and yet was allowed to buy guns.
 
Last edited:
Old Trapper said:
That is one, not 60%. Also, on December 13, 2005 he was ordered by a judge to seek outpatient care after making suicidal remarks to his roommates. So, he was adjudicated to t=be mentally ill, and yet was allowed to buy guns.
Click to expand...


Sorry, I came in at post #58 and thought i could shed some light......
 
There are valid sporting and security purposes for firearms. But large magazine assault weapon purchases are driven only by fear, hatred or vanity (my gun's bigger than yours). All three motives are just sad and have no place in America.

Assault rifles with large capacity magazines are intended only for the efficient slaughter of human beings. And they've been doing that too well. Guns of any kind should be limited to only the cartridges that can be loaded directly into the weapon. No clips or magazines that can be quickly replaced with a fresh load of cartridges should be lawful.

I am neither for nor against guns. I like to think of myself as reasonable and I own a six shot revolver myself. Six shots seems to be a reasonable and typical maximum. I believe you shouldn't be doing anything that takes more than about six shots to complete.

Owning a machine gun is a nice hobby but we're paying too dear a price for it.
 
jflabddts said:
There are valid sporting and security purposes for firearms. But large magazine assault weapon purchases are driven only by fear, hatred or vanity (my gun's bigger than yours). All three motives are just sad and have no place in America.

Assault rifles with large capacity magazines are intended only for the efficient slaughter of human beings. And they've been doing that too well. Guns of any kind should be limited to only the cartridges that can be loaded directly into the weapon. No clips or magazines that can be quickly replaced with a fresh load of cartridges should be lawful.

I am neither for nor against guns. I like to think of myself as reasonable and I own a six shot revolver myself. Six shots seems to be a reasonable and typical maximum. I believe you shouldn't be doing anything that takes more than about six shots to complete.
Click to expand...

Not even Australia believes this.
 
Old Trapper said:
Well, I am not going to click on every article top see what kind of weapon they had, and the tab where the guns are listed does not show everything. I did count 36 rifles, and shotguns, from what I could see. What did amaze me is how many were declared mentally ill, and still purchased a gun legally.
Click to expand...

If you looked at the last tab, that was done for you.
 
Old Trapper said:
What part of the post are you referring to?
Click to expand...

"Six shots seems to be a reasonable and typical maximum. I believe you shouldn't be doing anything that takes more than about six shots to complete."
 
Rucker61 said:
"Six shots seems to be a reasonable and typical maximum. I believe you shouldn't be doing anything that takes more than about six shots to complete."
Click to expand...

Under most circumstances that would be true. I know I have been out hunting and have heard some fool shoot off as many as 10 rounds presumably at a deer, or an elk. Ass couldn't shoot straight, and should not be allowed in the woods in my opinion. Not sure how, under the current circumstances, one could prevent the criminal types from getting larger mags.

Just as a thought, one rifle I have found to be very effective for most activities is the 7mm. mag. With the proper scope I used to be able to shoot silver dollars at 400 yards. Then too, I could do the same with a 30.06 and a 110 grain bullet. Then there is the .308 with the creedmoor bullets. Lots of choices for one to choose from.
 
Old Trapper said:
First reason would be the limited range of a handgun. Second reason would be that a handgun death is usually a suicide, not a mass killing.
Click to expand...

I’m sure it was already pointed out that handguns kill more people than any other gun combined. In fact...more people are beaten to death with blunt instruments than killed with assault weapons.
 
Old Trapper said:
Under most circumstances that would be true. I know I have been out hunting and have heard some fool shoot off as many as 10 rounds presumably at a deer, or an elk. Ass couldn't shoot straight, and should not be allowed in the woods in my opinion. Not sure how, under the current circumstances, one could prevent the criminal types from getting larger mags.
Click to expand...

With the 100s of millions out there, and the ability to 3D print them, no, we're not going to stop anyone that wants one. Self defense isn't necessarily a circumstance where one should limit themselves to six rounds. The police certainly don't. In the most recent tragedy, the cops showed up to stop a single shooter, and each was armed with an AR-15 with multiple 30 round magazines and a sidearm with multiple magazines with greater than six rounds. No one ever came out of a firefight admitting that they had brought too much ammo.

Just as a thought, one rifle I have found to be very effective for most activities is the 7mm. mag. With the proper scope I used to be able to shoot silver dollars at 400 yards. Then too, I could do the same with a 30.06 and a 110 grain bullet. Then there is the .308 with the creedmoor bullets. Lots of choices for one to choose from.
Click to expand...

Creedmoor is actually a different caliber than .308, most commonly 6.5mm but with 6mm and a few wildcats out there. Many people may find the 7mm magnum has too much recoil, but the 7mm does have a very nice selection of high ballistic coefficient bullets to choose from.
 
Rucker61 said:
With the 100s of millions out there, and the ability to 3D print them, no, we're not going to stop anyone that wants one. Self defense isn't necessarily a circumstance where one should limit themselves to six rounds. The police certainly don't. In the most recent tragedy, the cops showed up to stop a single shooter, and each was armed with an AR-15 with multiple 30 round magazines and a sidearm with multiple magazines with greater than six rounds. No one ever came out of a firefight admitting that they had brought too much ammo.
Click to expand...

The argument is that criminals will get the guns they want even if it's a crime to do so. But rarely is the person shooting up a school, mall or church a criminal. They are troubled and angry but not aware of how to obtain illegal guns in a black market situation or how to fabricate the parts they need to build one. Lives could be saved by ending the sale of magazined guns.

Police and the military are of course not going to be held to the same limitations placed on citizens. It's an arms race out there now and any police officer is going to have some trepidation when they are out-gunned. They deserve some degree of safety in their jobs just like you. They need to know they are better equipped than the person they're protecting you from. You should hope they are too.

I can see some people being paranoid about needing the populace armed with assault weapons to help put down a coup of some sort :roll:. Given current events this has become an ever more possible reality to me. I have a friend from Bulgaria who lived under Russian rule and knows what it's like to lose control of their government. She doesn't even understand the obsession with guns in this country.

I guess Americans are so angry, threatening and scary that we have good reason to be so afraid. Like the Beatles song goes; happiness is a warm gun. Stay warm, and try not to shoot me or those I care about.
 
Old Trapper said:
Under most circumstances that would be true. I know I have been out hunting and have heard some fool shoot off as many as 10 rounds presumably at a deer, or an elk. Ass couldn't shoot straight, and should not be allowed in the woods in my opinion. Not sure how, under the current circumstances, one could prevent the criminal types from getting larger mags.

Just as a thought, one rifle I have found to be very effective for most activities is the 7mm. mag. With the proper scope I used to be able to shoot silver dollars at 400 yards. Then too, I could do the same with a 30.06 and a 110 grain bullet. Then there is the .308 with the creedmoor bullets. Lots of choices for one to choose from.
Click to expand...

There you go! Someone who takes pride in his marksmanship and doesn't feel like he needs to spray the woods with bullets to hit what he intends.

I think I'd prefer Old Trapper by me in a shooting situation than Centrist. Sorry Centrist. I hope you're not on the receiving end of our shots.
 
blackjack50 said:
I’m sure it was already pointed out that handguns kill more people than any other gun combined. In fact...more people are beaten to death with blunt instruments than killed with assault weapons.
Click to expand...


Have you tried beating 49 people at once with a blunt instrument friend? Let me know how that works out for you.
 
Last edited:
jflabddts said:
Have you tried beating 49 people at once with a blunt instrument friend?
Click to expand...
Nope, but a pressure cooker with a few added ingredients does an excellent job.
 
Old Trapper said:
Under most circumstances that would be true. I know I have been out hunting and have heard some fool shoot off as many as 10 rounds presumably at a deer, or an elk. Ass couldn't shoot straight, and should not be allowed in the woods in my opinion. Not sure how, under the current circumstances, one could prevent the criminal types from getting larger mags.

Just as a thought, one rifle I have found to be very effective for most activities is the 7mm. mag. With the proper scope I used to be able to shoot silver dollars at 400 yards. Then too, I could do the same with a 30.06 and a 110 grain bullet. Then there is the .308 with the creedmoor bullets. Lots of choices for one to choose from.
Click to expand...

All right! A man who takes pride in his marksmanship and doesn't feel the need to spray the woods with bullets to hit what he intends. And doesn't need to compensate by having the bigger gun :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom