• 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!

Don't Give Up Your Guns

I’m sure they said the same thing in nations that banned firearms. Fact is...there will be bans. What happens when someone kills with a grandfathered weapon? Something else? They ban thosez

That's simply slippery slope fallacy there. As I said, nothing I've said is incorrect. No one is going to ban ALL semi-autos and just because you can't slap on a high powered rifle and walk the streets doesn't make it an authoritarian nation.

Like I said before Trump is blaming video games and is wanting a bump stock ban. Where is your criticism of him?
 
I understand the emotion but if one looks at the actual data, those states with the most firearm deaths are the ones with the weakest gun laws and those states with the strongest gun laws have the least gun deaths.

CDC DATA

Gun deaths by state, as they relate to gun laws, has never been an accurate way to judge the effect of gun laws upon gun deaths. Why? Because gun deaths are higher in urban centers and not in other parts of the state, so the only valid way to compare the laws vs. the deaths is by looking at the urban centers specifically and then the laws that govern the state in which they are.

For whatever reason, there’s a faction in our country that sees public action for the public good, no matter how justified, as part of a conspiracy to destroy our freedom.

What some see as "public action for public good" others see as detrimental to the public (and individual) good. Therein lies the main problem.
 
There are not millions that are demanding ALL semi auto's be banned. Also there really isn't a "ban" on the AR15, you can still own them and keep them in your house. You just can't slap it on your back and go walk the city streets. Again, I'm not for bans. If it were up to me, I'd end any ban on firearms, end the drug war, increase incarceration time for criminals that use firearms when committing a crime. Alas, I am not king.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-polls-show-otherwise/?utm_term=.65db3e4e875e

Requiring I restrict my guns inside my home is a restriction I can't go along with. I have never fired a weapon inside my home.

Thinking like this why I can never compromise with anything past thou shalt not infringe.
 
Well, I, for one, am very impressed with this thread. I'm sure plenty of children will be spared the fate of those poor kids in Florida (and any number of other places in the endless list) as a direct result. Good job! Calling each other "lefties" and "righties" is the answer!

Mutual disdain for partisanship aside, I don't think there's been a single thread anywhere on this site that has prevented a death.
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-polls-show-otherwise/?utm_term=.65db3e4e875e

Requiring I restrict my guns inside my home is a restriction I can't go along with. I have never fired a weapon inside my home.

Thinking like this why I can never compromise with anything past thou shalt not infringe.

so when was the last time you slapped your AR-15 type weapon on your back and walked the streets? I can tell you the last time I did.....NEVER. Also I have to laugh at your link because NOW you are believing polls? I thought all polls were FAKE NEWS.

You are not going to get a COUNTRY wide Semi-Auto ban. It simply isn't going to happen.
 
The current wave of gun control demands are to make illegal certain features--pistol grip, bump stocks, and such and if those demands were met, it would take some 200+ different makes of guns off the market. The problem is that there would still be 200+ essentially identical guns that would still be legal.

So some idiot at the Rubio rally this week hollered, "That's great. Go ahead and get those 200 guns off the market. It's a good start. And then we can go after the rest."

Which of course is the ultimate goal of the anti-gun crowd. And it is that kind of convoluted thinking and rhetoric that does upset those who believe the right to self defense to be an unalienable God given/natural right.
The facts are that the highest Firearm Mortality by State are the states with the weakest gun laws. When Australia was very aggressive after a mass shooting in 1996, acting to remove all assault weapons from individuals with just compensation, mass shootings never reoccurred.

It's hard to argue with the numbers and the facts -- but gun fetishists are motivated by emotion. It's also impossible to argue that Australia is not a democracy with freedom.
 
Gun deaths by state, as they relate to gun laws, has never been an accurate way to judge the effect of gun laws upon gun deaths. Why? Because gun deaths are higher in urban centers and not in other parts of the state, so the only valid way to compare the laws vs. the deaths is by looking at the urban centers specifically and then the laws that govern the state in which they are.
...
I often urge people that before they make statements about numbers, they actually look at the numbers. According to you, gun deaths should be higher in states with more urban centers. But that's not what we find.

The top 10 American States by Firearm Mortality by State: 2016 are:

Alaska
Alabama
Louisiana
Mississippi
Oklahoma
Missouri
Montana
New Mexico
Arkansas
South Carolina

The lowest are:
Massachusetts
Rhode Island
New York
Hawaii
Connecticut
New Jersey
Minnesota
California
Maine
Washington

The lowest states have one thing in common, besides being "blue" states. They all have strict gun laws.
 
so when was the last time you slapped your AR-15 type weapon on your back and walked the streets? I can tell you the last time I did.....NEVER. Also I have to laugh at your link because NOW you are believing polls? I thought all polls were FAKE NEWS.

You are not going to get a COUNTRY wide Semi-Auto ban. It simply isn't going to happen.

Terrible walkback. It's a CNN poll via WaPo. Whether I believe in polls is irrelevant.

Aside from a circa 1938 Browning 12 gauge, I have never owned a semi auto. But that's me. I slap my Ruger LCR in my waistband or pocket nearly every time I leave my home. The Black Hawk goes when I am in bear country. Sometimes I carry both to my friend's range for practice. Sometimes just because.

I support other peoples right to keep, bear, and use whatever they are comfortable with.

Again, you are claiming you are not supporting banning or restricting while doing just that.
 
Terrible walkback. It's a CNN poll via WaPo. Whether I believe in polls is irrelevant.

Aside from a circa 1938 Browning 12 gauge, I have never owned a semi auto. But that's me. I slap my Ruger LCR in my waistband or pocket nearly every time I leave my home. The Black Hawk goes when I am in bear country. Sometimes I carry both to my friend's range for practice. Sometimes just because.

I support other peoples right to keep, bear, and use whatever they are comfortable with.

Again, you are claiming you are not supporting banning or restricting while doing just that.
I won't speak for Praxas but I don't think there is anything wrong with restricting or banning certain weapons. We already do that with machine guns and sawed off shotguns. I really don't feel that my liberty is infringed if I can't by a weapon made for war use.
 
Terrible walkback. It's a CNN poll via WaPo. Whether I believe in polls is irrelevant.

Well it is important if you are using that as "proof" that MILLIONS want a semi-auto ban. It simply isn't true.

Aside from a circa 1938 Browning 12 gauge, I have never owned a semi auto. But that's me. I slap my Ruger LCR in my waistband or pocket nearly every time I leave my home. The Black Hawk goes when I am in bear country. Sometimes I carry both to my friend's range for practice. Sometimes just because.

I support other peoples right to keep, bear, and use whatever they are comfortable with.

Again, you are claiming you are not supporting banning or restricting while doing just that.

You are confusing "supporting" with "just not caring". I'm not going to get up in arms over high powered rifles not being allowed on the streets. I already was plain and clear what "I" want. But what "I" want is not what we are going to get. I don't want bans, I don't want a war on drugs and I want higher sentences for people who use firearms for crimes. THAT is what I support. Got it now? I think I have made it QUITE clear what "I" want.
 
I often urge people that before they make statements about numbers, they actually look at the numbers. According to you, gun deaths should be higher in states with more urban centers. But that's not what we find.

The top 10 American States by Firearm Mortality by State: 2016 are:

Alaska
Alabama
Louisiana
Mississippi
Oklahoma
Missouri
Montana
New Mexico
Arkansas
South Carolina

The lowest are:
Massachusetts
Rhode Island
New York
Hawaii
Connecticut
New Jersey
Minnesota
California
Maine
Washington

The lowest states have one thing in common, besides being "blue" states. They all have strict gun laws.

That's misleading because the state numbers are as percentage of residents. But, compare overall NUMBERS of deaths and you'll find a much different picture.

The only accurate way to get a feel for the true impact of gun laws is to compare the areas with large numbers of gun deaths to the laws of the specific states.

What you're doing does not paint a clear picture of the link between gun laws and gun deaths. Demographics is much more important.
 
That's misleading because the state numbers are as percentage of residents. But, compare overall NUMBERS of deaths and you'll find a much different picture.

The only accurate way to get a feel for the true impact of gun laws is to compare the areas with large numbers of gun deaths to the laws of the specific states.

What you're doing does not paint a clear picture of the link between gun laws and gun deaths. Demographics is much more important.
The number of deaths per number of residents is exactly the right way to normalize the size of different states. It's what statisticians do for every metric -- (ex: deaths per miles traveled, for cars, aircraft, etc.)

The "true impact" is that all of the low death states have strict gun laws and all of the high death states have lax gun laws.
 
I won't speak for Praxas but I don't think there is anything wrong with restricting or banning certain weapons. We already do that with machine guns and sawed off shotguns. I really don't feel that my liberty is infringed if I can't by a weapon made for war use.

I don't own any weapons made for war use. I've had 3 I purchased and converted to sporters. All WWII bolt actions. Very few people have owned weapons recently made for war use. There are 5 or 6 minis in civilian hands. That's about it.

The so called AK's available are made specifically for the civilian market. They are the same functional weapon as the Ruger 10/22. A gun commonly used in safety and marksmanship training. Different caliber and cosmetics. You can walk into many gun stores, pick your parts, and they will assemble them any way you want while you go pick up a box of ammunition. That doesn't change the function. But for some reason we must ban thumb hole and pistol grip stocks. Barrel shrouds. Suppresors. None of which figure in school shootings or any other crime.
 
You mean about being obsessed with staying alive? Yes, we're not giving that up.

Incredibly, billions of people have stayed alive for decades without having even one gun.
 
The facts are that the highest Firearm Mortality by State are the states with the weakest gun laws. When Australia was very aggressive after a mass shooting in 1996, acting to remove all assault weapons from individuals with just compensation, mass shootings never reoccurred.

It's hard to argue with the numbers and the facts -- but gun fetishists are motivated by emotion. It's also impossible to argue that Australia is not a democracy with freedom.

Again Australia is the sixth largest country in land mass in the world with a population slightly larger than that of Florida, a far more homogenous population than the USA. And we can argue until the cows come home which population enjoys the most liberties, i.e. which government is the least authoritarian. Comparing Australia to the USA is like comparing Topeka KS to New York City.

But we can compare the result of differing cultures.

Roughly 80% of Australian children live in 2 parent homes. In the USA it is less than half.

Australia has far tougher immigration laws than we do and they enforce them, thus somebody in Australia illegally is very rare. In the United States illegals number somewhere between 12 and 20 million.

While three years ago Australia did impose some restrictions on religious groups operating in the schools, Australian kids can attend 30 minutes of religious instruction classes and are allowed to pray openly in public schools and acknowledge and celebrate religious holidays (Christmas, Hannukah etc.) and can bring their Bibles to school with impunity.

Australian school kids are required to get a standard education through high school or, if they refuse or just can't cut it for whatever reason are required to get vocational training up to a given age. Thus virtually all Australian school children are prepared to get a paying job when they complete their formal schooling. And culturally they are expected to do so.

If the situation in the USA was like that, I think we would have a lot less gun violence regardless of the number of guns which is irrelevent.

Only 44% of American households have some some of firearm according to a recent Pew poll.

By comparison in Switzerland, all able bodied Swiss men between the ages of 18 and 34 are expected to do some kind of military service/training and are issued assault rifles or pistols which they are to keep at home. Thus a very high percentage of Swiss households have some sort of weapon, but the gun crime rate there is very low and the school children do not fear mass shootings.

It is not the number or type of weapons that is the problem. Switzerland proves that extremely high levels of gun ownership result in an even safer society. While almost every household has automatic rifles kept from their army training, the homicide rate in Switzerland is roughly 0.3 per 100,000, well over ten times lower than the USA and a quarter the rate experienced in the mostly gun-free Britain.

Until the gun control advocates acknowledge that and are willing to concede we need to change our culture along with adopt sensible gun control laws, the situation is unlikely to change.
 
Back
Top Bottom