• 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!

The kids are taking a stand!

jet57 said:
It may not make sense to you, but you didn't write the law either.
Click to expand...

It has yet to be demonstrated that any gun banning legislation would have prevented the terrible tragedy of school shootings.
The argument that they would appears to be an emotionally based one.

There are a number of things that might have prevented such occurrences, but any non-emotionally based discussion that doesn't include bans just gets shouted down.

Is that really how to have a rational discussion and debate about public policy? Seems only one side really wants to have one of those.
 
PleasantValley said:
Yes, your point is well taken.
However, I personally think it would be good to harden the schools like we do the airports.
...and i have yet to have a liberal tell me those GUN FREE ZONES are not at all working.
Not even once have a heard anyone with a liberal lean say those GUN FREE ZONES were ineffective at stopping anything.
They just can not bring themselves to admit to their own mistakes.
They will never admit to their mistakes, which is why they are repeating them again, and again, and again.
Click to expand...
They are not gun free zones. Lets call them what they actually are. They are gun absemt protection areas that are vulnerable to balastic assaults lacking an equal response of of force defense.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
jet57 said:
Ya can't carry a pistol legally without a permit...

Some of this startin to make sense now?
Click to expand...

On ones own property, yes they can.

Rifles can be carried openly because they are not concealed.

Make sense, yet?
 
trouble13 said:
They are not gun free zones. Lets call them what they actually are. They are gun absemt protection areas that are vulnerable to balastic assaults lacking an equal response of of force defense.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Targets of Easy Opportunity,

Killing Zones,

Live Kill Range,

There are many other possibilities but if there is a trained good shooter or two making this very risky and unlikely to succeed, then they will move on to easier targets, that is unless those easier targets are also armed.
 
trouble13 said:
They are not gun free zones. Lets call them what they actually are. They are gun absemt protection areas that are vulnerable to balastic assaults lacking an equal response of of force defense.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Like an AR-15 is an assault rifle minus a select fire switch.
 
eohrnberger said:
It has yet to be demonstrated that any gun banning legislation would have prevented the terrible tragedy of school shootings.
The argument that they would appears to be an emotionally based one.

There are a number of things that might have prevented such occurrences, but any non-emotionally based discussion that doesn't include bans just gets shouted down.

Is that really how to have a rational discussion and debate about public policy? Seems only one side really wants to have one of those.
Click to expand...

The side you are claiming as rational has been voting to let blind people concealed carry, mentally ill people purchase and carry legally, nationwide CC reciprocity which in some states means anybody without restriction, guns in bars, guns in schools, guns everywhere. You know what? When you get your state rep to allow you to carry in his office in the capitol, you let me know.
You think rational thought is going to win this? This is starting to look like MAAD. It became an unstoppable force. You think you are in the majority because all of your friends think like you. They do. You just don't realize how limited your circle of friends is. 80% or so of voters believe we can do something about better background checks, better enforcement of existing laws.
You and the other 8-10 million who insist on the right to own Ingrams, AR's, Uzi's, etc are a MINORITY. You and the NRA have over twenty years to propose something, and all you can do is tear down any existing law and fight tooth and nail against new ones.
You are digging the grave to throw your fake assault rifle into. Good plan. Good job. These kids, their parents, and the already majority of Americans who don't see this your way will vote your toys into the dust bin of history.
 
Casper said:
Targets of Easy Opportunity,

Killing Zones,

Live Kill Range,

There are many other possibilities but if there is a trained good shooter or two making this very risky and unlikely to succeed, then they will move on to easier targets, that is unless those easier targets are also armed.
Click to expand...

Then it is just the new normal. Thanks for clarifying your opinion on the future as you see it.
 
Casper said:
Targets of Easy Opportunity,

Killing Zones,

Live Kill Range,

There are many other possibilities but if there is a trained good shooter or two making this very risky and unlikely to succeed, then they will move on to easier targets, that is unless those easier targets are also armed.
Click to expand...
That is really well said. I kinda got stuck circling the Mayberry bush. I appreciate your assist.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
ObamacareFail said:
Much could have and should have been done. for a start, the law mandates that mentally ill individual individuals be reported to the national database used for background checks. Why wasn't he? And the FBI also dropped the ball. They were tipped off about the individual that carried out the Parkland shooting and did little to nothing about it.
Click to expand...

Who should have reported him to the national database? His GP? and what could the FBI have done without crossing the 'constitutional rights' line?
There was a regulation about people who were on Social Security for mental health issues and people who'd been deemed unfit to manage their affairs but one of the first things Trump did was revoke them. How could a law be passed about a nineteen-year-old with no crim record being denied his 2nd. amendment rights, given the atmosphere in the country today? It's become such a boogeyman, anything that smells like a constitutional violation, that the rights of a psycho killer who hasn't yet pulled a trigger must not be infringed.
 
trblmkr said:
The side you are claiming as rational has been voting to let blind people concealed carry, mentally ill people purchase and carry legally, nationwide CC reciprocity which in some states means anybody without restriction, guns in bars, guns in schools, guns everywhere. You know what? When you get your state rep to allow you to carry in his office in the capitol, you let me know.
You think rational thought is going to win this? This is starting to look like MAAD. It became an unstoppable force. You think you are in the majority because all of your friends think like you. They do. You just don't realize how limited your circle of friends is. 80% or so of voters believe we can do something about better background checks, better enforcement of existing laws.
You and the other 8-10 million who insist on the right to own Ingrams, AR's, Uzi's, etc are a MINORITY. You and the NRA have over twenty years to propose something, and all you can do is tear down any existing law and fight tooth and nail against new ones.
You are digging the grave to throw your fake assault rifle into. Good plan. Good job. These kids, their parents, and the already majority of Americans who don't see this your way will vote your toys into the dust bin of history.
Click to expand...

Nothing more than an emotional rant, an a not very fact based on at that.

Not addressing anything of the list of root causes outlined.

Your proposed 'solution' is doom to fail, as it doesn't address the root causes (and it isn't the inanimate object).
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
Then ignore the people you call idiots. I care not. The NRA, whether it's extremist or not, has undue influence over the political process and my life. Just like every other uber-lobby. The fact that you like their message doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

What exact undue influence does the NRA have over your life? If I recall, you claim that you survived a school shooting in your youth. What about the NRA causes you issues over that? Is it that the NRA does not support an outright ban on AR-15s? if so, do try to develop an open mind. If AR-15s were banned, one, the demand for AR 15s would simply grow, and two, the gun makers would simply alter the cosmetic features that make a simple semi-automatic rifle look like a military M-16 and keep on selling them as they did when the Brady Bill passed in the 1990s. the NRA does support taking steps that would keep AR15s and all other guns out of the hands of mentally ill individuals like the one who shot up the school in Florida last week. The question is, do you actually want something done that will jhelp prevent school shootings? or do you just want emotionally based gun control laws(usually bans) that do nothing to prevent the carnage?
 
eohrnberger said:
Nothing more than an emotional rant, an a not very fact based on at that.

Not addressing anything of the list of root causes outlined.

Your proposed 'solution' is doom to fail, as it doesn't address the root causes (and it isn't the inanimate object).
Click to expand...

Not pointing to a solution. There is no solution. Pointing out how you are bringing about the demise of your precious toys.
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
No, you've already made up your mind. Don't lie.
Click to expand...

Do not attempt to speak for me.The kids that are speaking up have just got started. I'll withhold judgement until I find out what they actually are proposing or supporting. I will say that some of the rhetoric I have heard so far is not encouraging. The ones saying "if you are not for us, you are against us" is premature and wrong headed. It suggests that whatever they have in mind, they want to call the shots. I am all for the kids taking a part in government, however I just want it to be taking a constructive part. If it turns out to be just political, I will tune out, as will everyone else.
 
trblmkr said:
Not pointing to a solution. There is no solution. Pointing out how you are bringing about the demise of your precious toys.
Click to expand...

It is a right.
You don't have to like other people's rights.
You don't have to like other people exercising their rights.
No one is forcing you to exercise that right that you too have.
Trying to curb other people's rights?
I thought for sure that you'd be against that, curbing other people's rights.
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
I wasn't talking to you, Obama. The poster I addressed did suggest that gun deaths don't matter because more people die in vehicle accidents.
Click to expand...

I don't care that it was not me that you were talking to. You are still wrong. Nobody on the pro-second amendment side including the gentleman you were talking to has expressed that gun deaths do not matter. You just wrongly took it that way.

Since you inserted yourself into my dialogues three times but apparently ignored all my posts that would have addressed your comments, let me do it here directly to you. Guns are not the problem. I never suggested they were. They do play in a role in the mass violence that disproportionately affects American communities. We need to address the social, cultural, and functionals factors that contribute to that fact. Anti-gun and pro-gun zealots prevent that conversation every time a bunch of innocent people get shot to death in vulnerable situations.
Click to expand...


If you want to discuss the social and cultural issues that lead to gun violence in the inner cities that would at least be out of the realm of raw biased politics, however the issue in regards to school shootings is not social or cultural. It is primarily mental illness. It has nothing to do with NRA members or anti-gunners, even though the anti-gunners can't wait to attempt to take political advantage, when they occur, then they scream bloody murder if the NRA does not capitulate.
 
Astrodome said:
I actually believe that it should be illegal to sell / purchase an AR 15 or any other semi-automatic weapon. This type of arsenal should be relegated to the military battlefield, not on our streets.
Click to expand...

good, call on all major police departments and other civilian LE agencies to get rid of their AR 15s along with fully automatic MP 5s and M16/M4s. You obviously are clueless about semi autos given the olympic target pistols are semi autos as are half the sporting clays and skeet guns sold these days.
 
RF667799 said:
Makes no sense. If concealability was a concern they would make handguns illegal. Even compared to some of the largest, an M1 carbine with a folding stock is less concealable.
Click to expand...

its california: its laws are made by assholes like this guy

 
Grand Mal said:
Who should have reported him to the national database? His GP? and what could the FBI have done without crossing the 'constitutional rights' line?
There was a regulation about people who were on Social Security for mental health issues and people who'd been deemed unfit to manage their affairs but one of the first things Trump did was revoke them. How could a law be passed about a nineteen-year-old with no crim record being denied his 2nd. amendment rights, given the atmosphere in the country today? It's become such a boogeyman, anything that smells like a constitutional violation, that the rights of a psycho killer who hasn't yet pulled a trigger must not be infringed.
Click to expand...

I am not even going to consider the SS nonsense in the same breath as the gun issue. It is a no brainer who should have reported the Parkland shooter to the database. Primarily it should have been the shrink that treated him as well as the police who were called on him 39 times for domestic violence. Read the damn law. as for the FBI, they had enough to act on and stood a good chance of preventing what happened had they acted on it. Even the FBI itself has admitted that they dropped the ball. Many knew the boy was a threat and those who could have done something about it did not do a damn thing.
 
ObamacareFail said:
I am not even going to consider the SS nonsense in the same breath as the gun issue. It is a no brainer who should have reported the Parkland shooter to the database. Primarily it should have been the shrink that treated him as well as the police who were called on him 39 times for domestic violence. Read the damn law. as for the FBI, they had enough to act on and stood a good chance of preventing what happened had they acted on it. Even the FBI itself has admitted that they dropped the ball. Many knew the boy was a threat and those who could have done something about it did not do a damn thing.
Click to expand...

Forget the gun issue. Put it aside. Let's just talk about the mental health issue. Well, and how it relates to mentally ill people having access to guns. What does the Social Security issue mean to you? Should people who are on public assistance because of mental health issues be allowed to buy guns?
And this kid- you say his shrink should have been able to put him in the database and make a red flag come up so he couldn't have bought the gun? If you do, I agree. Make a route of appeal, but have his name come up as soon as he's being treated for a metal illness. The way the law reads now, a judge has to make that call.
Have I got it wrong, or does a history of domestic violence already disqualify you from gun ownership? Or does a judge have to be involved again?
As for the FBI, what do you say they should have done?
 
ObamacareFail said:
What exact undue influence does the NRA have over your life? If I recall, you claim that you survived a school shooting in your youth. What about the NRA causes you issues over that? Is it that the NRA does not support an outright ban on AR-15s? if so, do try to develop an open mind. If AR-15s were banned, one, the demand for AR 15s would simply grow, and two, the gun makers would simply alter the cosmetic features that make a simple semi-automatic rifle look like a military M-16 and keep on selling them as they did when the Brady Bill passed in the 1990s. the NRA does support taking steps that would keep AR15s and all other guns out of the hands of mentally ill individuals like the one who shot up the school in Florida last week. The question is, do you actually want something done that will jhelp prevent school shootings? or do you just want emotionally based gun control laws(usually bans) that do nothing to prevent the carnage?
Click to expand...

I have revealed some aspects of my personal life in this forum, but I do not think that you are a person with the requisite respect and experience that I require in order to continue that conversation.

Your sustained rambling about gun bans doesn't inspire a response from me. I already told you how I feel about mass violence and what I think should be done.
 
MateoMtnClimber said:
I have revealed some aspects of my personal life in this forum, but I do not think that you are a person with the requisite respect and experience that I require in order to continue that conversation.

Your sustained rambling about gun bans doesn't inspire a response from me. I already told you how I feel about mass violence and what I think should be done.
Click to expand...

ObamaFail is all in on the ideology. You can trust that he is genuine. I don't agree with him on anything, but as a poster, he's legit enough to trust, at least for me.
 
ObamacareFail said:
Do not attempt to speak for me.The kids that are speaking up have just got started. I'll withhold judgement until I find out what they actually are proposing or supporting. I will say that some of the rhetoric I have heard so far is not encouraging. The ones saying "if you are not for us, you are against us" is premature and wrong headed. It suggests that whatever they have in mind, they want to call the shots. I am all for the kids taking a part in government, however I just want it to be taking a constructive part. If it turns out to be just political, I will tune out, as will everyone else.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to speak for you. To the extent that I did, I apologize. I don't know what the students want. I've been relatively tuned out since last Friday. I support their activism. I hope it's not only about gun control, although I fear that it might be. The issue of mass violence is so much bigger and so much more significant. I wish a single official elected to national office had the courage that these students have and could guide a national conversation about how we save lives. Not talk about guns. Talk about murdered humans.
 
ObamacareFail said:
I don't care that it was not me that you were talking to. You are still wrong. Nobody on the pro-second amendment side including the gentleman you were talking to has expressed that gun deaths do not matter. You just wrongly took it that way.




If you want to discuss the social and cultural issues that lead to gun violence in the inner cities that would at least be out of the realm of raw biased politics, however the issue in regards to school shootings is not social or cultural. It is primarily mental illness. It has nothing to do with NRA members or anti-gunners, even though the anti-gunners can't wait to attempt to take political advantage, when they occur, then they scream bloody murder if the NRA does not capitulate.
Click to expand...

I won't argue with you about the first point. It's not worth it.

The second point is far narrower than I wanted it to be. I wasn't talking about inner cities or schools exclusively. It would be advantageous if the NRA and the people who oppose it took the back seat in a national conversation about why mass killings happen in the US and if and how we can reduce or prevent them.
 
jet57 said:
Ya can't carry a pistol legally without a permit...

Some of this startin to make sense now?
Click to expand...

No, it still makes no sense. Go ahead and explain it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom