• 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!

Why Guns Should Be Confiscated[W:730]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bodi

Bodi

Just waiting for my set...
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
123,647
Reaction score
27,989
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent


 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

This woman is actually arguing that the mentally ill should be able to own firearms. Forget about all the other catch all right wing nonsense like taxation is stealing ..... but pretending that the mentally ill should own firearms...... WOW!!!!!!

What more needs to be said?
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

Bodhisattva said:


Click to expand...


people who have not been adjudicated (committed) don't lose their rights. Do you have a problem with that?
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

haymarket said:
This woman is actually arguing that the mentally ill should be able to own firearms. Forget about all the other catch all right wing nonsense like taxation is stealing ..... but pretending that the mentally ill should own firearms...... WOW!!!!!!

What more needs to be said?
Click to expand...

Do you believe that all mentally ill people are dangerous? Are they only dangerous with guns?
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

TurtleDude said:
people who have not been adjudicated (committed) don't lose their rights. Do you have a problem with that?
Click to expand...

There are countless disabilities that prevent a person from operating a (dangerous) motor vehicle.

Yes, obviously, there are countless disabilities that necessitate restricting their access to firearms.

It's as obvious as dirt.
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

haymarket said:
This woman is actually arguing that the mentally ill should be able to own firearms. Forget about all the other catch all right wing nonsense like taxation is stealing ..... but pretending that the mentally ill should own firearms...... WOW!!!!!!

What more needs to be said?
Click to expand...

I couldn't listen to the whole thing but what I got out of it is that she was discussing the very important concept of due process.
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

Mach said:
There are countless disabilities that prevent a person from operating a (dangerous) motor vehicle.

Yes, obviously, there are countless disabilities that necessitate restricting their access to firearms.

It's as obvious as dirt.
Click to expand...

Then get Congress to change the law. The restrictions we have now were written by Democrats in 1968.
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

Mach said:
There are countless disabilities that prevent a person from operating a (dangerous) motor vehicle.

Yes, obviously, there are countless disabilities that necessitate restricting their access to firearms.

It's as obvious as dirt.
Click to expand...

Obvious if one does not care about the difference between privilege and right.
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

Mach said:
There are countless disabilities that prevent a person from operating a (dangerous) motor vehicle.

Yes, obviously, there are countless disabilities that necessitate restricting their access to firearms.

It's as obvious as dirt.
Click to expand...

well then get Congress to change the law, Constitutional rights require a rather high standard to abrogate even if its a right lefties don't want people to have
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

MACS-24 said:
Obvious if one does not care about the difference between privilege and right.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. Most gun advocates always immediately fall back to "but the 2nd", kind of like "but her emails".

The supreme court has said explicitly that guns can be regulated, that the 2nd is not unlimited (Scalia of all people in Heller vs.), and passed on numerous opportunities to overturn all of the state firearms bans that the NRA has been trying frantically to overturn (most recently, CT, Maryland, NY on certain weapons..including AR-15s I believe).

The 2nd cannot stop gun control. Without an amendment, the second will likely guarantee that at the very least, mentally fit, trained individuals of appropriate age, if they follow the legal process, can own most handguns, stun guns, shotguns, and some rifles. That's up to the states apparently to limit appropriately, but tracking should be coordinated nationally else it's irrelevant.

So all of that has been done to one degree or another, and has not been ruled to violate the 2nd. So rights is irrelevant in the reasonable gun control provisions that get brought up. Complete confiscation violates the 2nd, won't happen without an amendment. Si the slippery slope nonsense is just scare tactics and unreasonable arguments the NRA drums up to continue to lobby government.
 
Last edited:
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

TurtleDude said:
well then get Congress to change the law, Constitutional rights require a rather high standard to abrogate even if its a right lefties don't want people to have
Click to expand...

We're not congress, we're supposed to be discussing what is reasonable. Do you not find that argument reasonable? You have to find good reasons FIRST, then decide on what policy to back. Or were you doing it the other way around all this time?
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

Mach said:
Irrelevant. Most gun advocates always immediately fall back to "but the 2nd", kind of like "but her emails".

The supreme court has said explicitly that guns can be regulated, that the 2nd is not unlimited (Scalia of all people in Heller vs.), and passed on numerous opportunities to overturn all of the state firearms bans that the NRA has been trying frantically to overturn (most recently, CT, Maryland, NY on certain weapons..including AR-15s I believe).
Click to expand...

Yet Heller didn't say all restrictions are Constitutional. If a firearm determined to be "in common use for lawful purposes" fails to be protected by Heller, or a firearm "with a reasonable relationship to the preservation and efficiency of a well-regulated militia" fails to be protected by Miller, then no 2A protections exist at all.

Or we have Courts that ignore SCOTUS.
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

Rucker61 said:
Yet Heller didn't say all restrictions are Constitutional.
Click to expand...
Nor did I claim they all were. Nor did either of us claim to know what all would pass or be blocked, or later be overturned, etc. They like to leave us guessing.

If a firearm determined to be "in common use for lawful purposes" fails to be protected by Heller, or a firearm "with a reasonable relationship to the preservation and efficiency of a well-regulated militia" fails to be protected by Miller, then no 2A protections exist at all.
Click to expand...
I see no reason to believe that. AR-15s were banned and SCOTUS refused the opportunity to strike it down, so they believe the states can enact such gun control and not violate the 2nd. Didn't we go through this in that other thread?
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

Rucker61 said:
Do you believe that all mentally ill people are dangerous? Are they only dangerous with guns?
Click to expand...

I am not a psychiatrist.
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

Mach said:
We're not congress, we're supposed to be discussing what is reasonable. Do you not find that argument reasonable? You have to find good reasons FIRST, then decide on what policy to back. Or were you doing it the other way around all this time?
Click to expand...

I am happy with the current standard. Mental illness can mean many things that do not rise to someone being a threat. Heck, some liberals consider anyone who wants to own a gun for self defense or who voted for Trump to have a mental illness Due process requires a right to be heard before one's rights are abrogated.
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

haymarket said:
I am not a psychiatrist.
Click to expand...

Yet you posted an opinion:

"This woman is actually arguing that the mentally ill should be able to own firearms. Forget about all the other catch all right wing nonsense like taxation is stealing ..... but pretending that the mentally ill should own firearms...... WOW!!!!!!

What more needs to be said?"

The clear implication is that all mentally ill people are too dangerous to own guns.
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

TurtleDude said:
Heck, some liberals consider anyone who wants to own a gun for self defense or who voted for Trump to have a mental illness .
Click to expand...
That's what I mean by not willing to have a reasonable discussion.
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

Mach said:
That's what I mean by not willing to have a reasonable discussion.
Click to expand...

The current law is sufficient. You have demonstrated a hostility towards legal gun ownership and a hostility towards gun owners based on their politics.
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

Mach said:
That's what I mean by not willing to have a reasonable discussion.
Click to expand...

I'm for a background check system that is free and accessible by all.
I'm for making CC permits require a target proficiency equal to security guard standards.
I'm ok with raising the AR age to 21 while keeping most other long guns at 18.
I'm ok to ban bumpstocks.

I would like to see CC permits recognised in all 50 states and expect it as part of a deal implimintig the above.

I oppose are banning certain semi auto rifles and handguns
I oppose any registration or licensing requirement to own or purchase a firearm.
I oppose any "turn in your gun upon death" requirement.
Any deal containing the above I could not, would not support.

Do you consider those to be reasonable positions or classify me as someone not open up to gun control ideas?
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

Chillfolks said:
I'm for a background check system that is free and accessible by all.
I'm for making CC permits require a target proficiency equal to security guard standards.
I'm ok with raising the AR age to 21 while keeping most other long guns at 18.
I'm ok to ban bumpstocks.

I would like to see CC permits recognised in all 50 states and expect it as part of a deal implimintig the above.

I oppose are banning certain semi auto rifles and handguns
I oppose any registration or licensing requirement to own or purchase a firearm.
I oppose any "turn in your gun upon death" requirement.
Any deal containing the above I could not, would not support.

Do you consider those to be reasonable positions or classify me as someone not open up to gun control ideas?
Click to expand...

you do know that you can ape bumpstock firing with almost any semi auto
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

Rucker61 said:
Yet you posted an opinion:

"This woman is actually arguing that the mentally ill should be able to own firearms. Forget about all the other catch all right wing nonsense like taxation is stealing ..... but pretending that the mentally ill should own firearms...... WOW!!!!!!

What more needs to be said?"

The clear implication is that all mentally ill people are too dangerous to own guns.
Click to expand...

Actually the clear implication is that carrying and using a gun is something which requires ones faculties to be intact so that good judgment can be exercised.
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

Mach said:
Irrelevant. Most gun advocates always immediately fall back to "but the 2nd", kind of like "but her emails".

The supreme court has said explicitly that guns can be regulated, that the 2nd is not unlimited (Scalia of all people in Heller vs.), and passed on numerous opportunities to overturn all of the state firearms bans that the NRA has been trying frantically to overturn (most recently, CT, Maryland, NY on certain weapons..including AR-15s I believe).

The 2nd cannot stop gun control. Without an amendment, the second will likely guarantee that at the very least, mentally fit, trained individuals of appropriate age, if they follow the legal process, can own most handguns, stun guns, shotguns, and some rifles. That's up to the states apparently to limit appropriately, but tracking should be coordinated nationally else it's irrelevant.

So all of that has been done to one degree or another, and has not been ruled to violate the 2nd. So rights is irrelevant in the reasonable gun control provisions that get brought up. Complete confiscation violates the 2nd, won't happen without an amendment. Si the slippery slope nonsense is just scare tactics and unreasonable arguments the NRA drums up to continue to lobby government.
Click to expand...

Absolutely relevant. Strawman aside, what you completely left out in your original post and why it was foolish is "Due Process".

This hypothetical mental person who is not allowed to drive ("operating a (dangerous) motor vehicle") still could own a vehicle and even drive that vehicle on private property.
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

haymarket said:
Actually the clear implication is that carrying and using a gun is something which requires ones faculties to be intact so that good judgment can be exercised.
Click to expand...

Yet you're not a psychiatrist so, this is just your unsupported opinion.
 
Re: Why Guns Should Be Confiscated

MACS-24 said:
Yet you're not a psychiatrist so, this is just your unsupported opinion.
Click to expand...

I did NOT render an opinion that required a psychiatrist.

But do you disagree with my statement that carrying and using gun is something that requires one faculties to be intact so that good judgment can be exercised?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom