• 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!

Common Arguments For Gun Control Shot Down

Rucker61 said:
How does the US Constitutionally limit access and exposure to handguns, and how does the US prevent the substitution effect of other firearms (typically cheaper than handguns)?
Click to expand...

Same way other countries had done it. Same way US had done to some degree (e.g. severe limits on automatic weapons). Yes, US Constitution may or may not have to change along the way too. That's been done as well in this country. Also, apparently, substitution effect you describe is not being seen in places that have gun control.

But you are deflecting from the our discussion with DebateChallenge, which is WHAT is better (having or not having guns), and not as much on HOW we get there.
 
Slavister said:
There is a difference between being in a situation and preferring it over another one. If you really prefer to be in a restaurant or a movie theater where everyone has a gun over one where noone does, then you are in quite a minority.
Click to expand...
If I was in the Century 16 movie theater in Aurora, CO on July 20, 2012 I would definitely prefer it if everybody in the theater had a gun. If that was the case they could've stopped James Eagan Holmes from wrecking the havoc that he did. Unfortunately nobody had a gun and so he was able to kill all those people.
 
Slavister said:
Or do you suggest we make it a LAW that all guns must be stored in locked gun safes until a self-defense usage (or training)?
Click to expand...
I believe it should be strongly emphasized for gun owners to get good secure safes and to store their guns in such safes while not in use but no I do not believe it should be required by law.
 
Slavister said:
Same way other countries had done it. Same way US had done to some degree (e.g. severe limits on automatic weapons). Yes, US Constitution may or may not have to change along the way too. That's been done as well in this country.
Click to expand...

None of the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights has ever been restricted by new amendments.

Also, apparently, substitution effect you describe is not being seen in places that have gun control.
Click to expand...

Cite?

But you are deflecting from the our discussion with DebateChallenge, which is WHAT is better (having or not having guns), and not as much on HOW we get there.
Click to expand...

I'd say that you can never tell ahead of time if having or not having a gun is the best choice.
 
DebateChallenge said:
I believe it should be strongly emphasized for gun owners to get good secure safes and to store their guns in such safes while not in use but no I do not believe it should be required by law.
Click to expand...

Perhaps with tax incentives or such.
 
Slavister said:
Japan has strong cultural reasons for suicide. Since you don't account for huge different in culture when it comes to suicide, you are comparing things in vacuum.
Click to expand...
You've mentioned I believe that when discussing suicide it shouldn't be compared from country to country. I agree provided that gun control also is not compared from country to country. Lots of people like to compare the USA with other developed countries such as the UK and Australia. They like to point out how the UK and Australia have much more restrictive gun control than the USA and also much lower gun deaths and gun crime. I am going to point out that the USA cannot be compared to the UK or Australia or any other countries for that matter because countries can't be compared when it comes to gun control due to stuff such as cultural differences and other such factors.
 
DebateChallenge said:
You've mentioned I believe that when discussing suicide it shouldn't be compared from country to country. I agree provided that gun control also is not compared from country to country. Lots of people like to compare the USA with other developed countries such as the UK and Australia. They like to point out how the UK and Australia have much more restrictive gun control than the USA and also much lower gun deaths and gun crime. I am going to point out that the USA cannot be compared to the UK or Australia or any other countries for that matter because countries can't be compared when it comes to gun control due to stuff such as cultural differences and other such factors.
Click to expand...

Then do it within the US. States with lax gun control have the most gun deaths
 
DebateChallenge said:
If I was in the Century 16 movie theater in Aurora, CO on July 20, 2012 I would definitely prefer it if everybody in the theater had a gun. If that was the case they could've stopped James Eagan Holmes from wrecking the havoc that he did. Unfortunately nobody had a gun and so he was able to kill all those people.
Click to expand...

Only in america would someone think they need to be armed to go to the movies. Well....maybe Syria too. LOL
 
vegas giants said:
Only in america would someone think they need to be armed to go to the movies. Well....maybe Syria too. LOL
Click to expand...

As I said in post 81 we can't compare the USA with other countries.
 
DebateChallenge said:
As I said in post 81 we can't compare the USA with other countries.
Click to expand...

I will repeat my post


Only in america would someone think they need to be armed to go to the movies. Well....maybe Syria too. LOL
 
vegas giants said:
Then do it within the US. States with lax gun control have the most gun deaths
Click to expand...

Not with states such as New Hampshire and Maine.

And you also have to take into account that when talking about gun deaths they're also talking about suicides and justifiable self defense killings.
 
DebateChallenge said:
Not with states such as New Hampshire and Maine.

And you also have to take into account that when talking about gun deaths they're also talking about suicides and justifiable self defense killings.
Click to expand...

New Hampshire does not make the top ten and Maine is 9. I thoght guns made us safer?
 
Howard the Duck said:
Of course we can. If you take the war out of the picture I believe Afghanistan has a lower firearm homicide rate than we do.
Click to expand...

If we take drug related homicides out of the picture our homicide rate plummets, too.
 
Rucker61 said:
If we take drug related homicides out of the picture our homicide rate plummets, too.
Click to expand...

Lets just take out all the deaths....and we have a super low death rate!
 
Manc Skipper said:
He's not wrong. There is probably no other country in the world where a trip to the cinema requires thinking about arming yourself. Why do you fear your fellow Americans so?
Click to expand...

Will you be wearing a Croatia jersey around the bars today?
 
Manc Skipper said:
He's not wrong. There is probably no other country in the world where a trip to the cinema requires thinking about arming yourself. Why do you fear your fellow Americans so?
Click to expand...
I don't think about arming myself when going to the cinema. As for countries where you would think about arming yourself when going to the cinema Afghanistan and western Pakistan come to mind. But as I said you can't compare other countries when discussing gun control due to population differences, cultural differences, ect.
 
DebateChallenge said:
If I was in the Century 16 movie theater in Aurora, CO on July 20, 2012 I would definitely prefer it if everybody in the theater had a gun. If that was the case they could've stopped James Eagan Holmes from wrecking the havoc that he did. Unfortunately nobody had a gun and so he was able to kill all those people.
Click to expand...

Ridiculous. You want a bunch of people in a dark theater firing at each other? Because clearly everyone who shoots in a theater will know the right person to shoot, right? LOL!
 
Rucker61 said:
None of the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights has ever been restricted by new amendments.
Click to expand...

Does not matter. Some Amendments have been completely overwritten by others. That was the intent. Bill of Rights is just 10 Amendments.

Rucker61 said:
Cite?
Click to expand...

Please reread post 74, just a few posts above your question: .

Rucker61 said:
I'd say that you can never tell ahead of time if having or not having a gun is the best choice.
Click to expand...

The research is pretty clear on that.
 
Slavister said:
Ridiculous. You want a bunch of people in a dark theater firing at each other? Because clearly everyone who shoots in a theater will know the right person to shoot, right? LOL!
Click to expand...
Number one, if people in the theater were armed James Eagan Holmes might've not even tried shooting up the theater in the first place, because he would know people would be shooting back at him.

Number two, it was quite obvious where the bad guy was in that incident. James Eagan Holmes came in through an exit door dressed in tactical gear and everybody saw him and some actually did think he was a threat although most thought he was playing a prank or was hired by the movie theater for a publicity stunt. When he started shooting people knew that he was shooting and not somebody in the audience.
 
DebateChallenge said:
Number one, if people in the theater were armed James Eagan Holmes might've not even tried shooting up the theater in the first place, because he would know people would be shooting back at him.

Number two, it was quite obvious where the bad guy was in that incident. James Eagan Holmes came in through an exit door dressed in tactical gear and everybody saw him and some actually did think he was a threat although most thought he was playing a prank or was hired by the movie theater for a publicity stunt. When he started shooting people knew that he was shooting and not somebody in the audience.
Click to expand...

My god it would have been much much worse
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom