• 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!

Guns

Status
Not open for further replies.
What sort of paranoid Alex Jones world do you live in exactly? One where government is tyranny and going to get you... I guess the American Revolution and the US Constitution don't mean anything in your world.
The one where we know a militant a force armed with nothing but shotguns wouldn’t stand a chance.
 
Are you arguing FOR the 1934 FFA now?

NO, I oppose any federal gun control law as violating both the second and tenth amendments. The only laws I can possibly seen as valid might be import laws of weapons from hostile nations and laws controlling weapons use in federal facilities (laws banning firearms in federal courthouses for example)
 
Of course you will be leading from the front? But then I think you are one of those "go ahead and start without me" types.

Actually, I'm a, "how about if we don't do this," kind of guy.

Maybe when the Tribulation is over (2027) our leaders will be thinking cleasrly enough to get this done right.

It must be doable or there would not be so much contention.

OH NO! Now it sounds like we are under curfew or worse.

Exactly.

All my guns have cases(except one)but I don't have chains wrapped around them and padlocked.

Thank you for considering the practical ramifications of my proposal.
 
The Earth is spherical.

You could say it was an oval and be wrong it is an ellipsoid, but to say a cube is opposite of a sphere is not correct because they both contain volume, why wouldn't its opposite be a point?
 
Nope, sorry; I read what you wrote. You said the right to keep was the foundation: it's not.

You can imagine what you want but that's not what the words say. I'm not repeating your grade school education.
 
You could say it was an oval and be wrong it is an ellipsoid, but to say a cube is opposite of a sphere is not correct because they both contain volume, why wouldn't its opposite be a point?
It was a flat-earther reference that you didn't get. Nevermind.
 
The one where we know a militant a force armed with nothing but shotguns wouldn’t stand a chance.

Okay, so you cannot validate your paranoid reality then.

I didn't think you could.
 
You can imagine what you want but that's not what the words say. I'm not repeating your grade school education.

YOU wrote it. You said that guns are the foundation of this country and that's laughable just on its face; never mind trying educate you on the early history of this country.
 
Okay, so cannot validate your paranoid reality then.

I didn't think you could.
you. Validate me? Ha! You wouldn’t know an Ithaca Twist if Foghorn Leghorn himself wrapped it around your head, tied it in a bow and pulled the trigger.
 
you. Validate me? Ha! You wouldn’t know an Ithaca Twist if Foghorn Leghorn himself wrapped it around your head, tied it in a bow and pulled the trigger.

You filed to prove your point dude.

So -....:2wave:
 
YOU wrote it. You said that guns are the foundation of this country and that's laughable just on its face; never mind trying educate you on the early history of this country.

No...that is not what the words in that post said. Again, your ability to read has failed you. Please stop going on and on about this.

You are making a claim that I never wrote. Feel free to repost my quote. If it needs clarification for you, maybe we can help you.
 
No...that is not what the words in that post said. Again, your ability to read has failed you. Please stop going on and on about this.

You are making a claim that I never wrote. Feel free to repost my quote. If it needs clarification for you, maybe we can help you.

That's exactly what you said:
We have a Constitutional right to bear arms...because that's the legal foundation our country is based on

Guns are the legal foundation according to you.
 
That's exactly what you said:

Guns are the legal foundation according to you.

We have a Constitutional right to bear arms...because that's the legal foundation our country is based on
Yes..the Constitution is the legal foundation our country is based on :doh

The 2A isnt a legal foundation...it's an amendment enumerating a right.

You just read what you wanted to read.
 
Yes..the Constitution is the legal foundation our country is based on :doh

The 2A isnt a legal foundation...it's an amendment enumerating a right.

You just read what you wanted to read.

No, I just read what you wrote.
 
No, I just read what you wrote.
Too bad you didnt understand the words then.

Are we done yet? Everyone else can see what I wrote. You quoted it, you choose to believe it means what you want it to mean, rather than what it does mean.

We get it. It's not like you have a record of correctly evaluating information in this sub-forum.
 
Too bad you didnt understand the words then.

Are we done yet? Everyone else can see what I wrote. You quoted it, you choose to believe it means what you want it to mean, rather than what it does mean.

We get it. It's not like you have a record of correctly evaluating information in this sub-forum.

(chuckle)
 
Most people do not realize there is NO doctor-patient privilege (privacy protection) in most states. Anything you tell a doctor, psychologist or psychiatrist, any blood work done - all can be subpoenaed to criminal court to testify and provide all records. It also circumstantially can be used in civil court such as in divorce hearings. For some matters, such health professionals are REQUIRED to report you to law enforcement.
 
I'm not sure why the OPer focused on AR15s - other than maybe low costs and ammo availability. In the situation he speaks of, an AR10 (.308) would make more sense.
 
So was my .308 hunting rifle, and with a much more powerful round. So was the 1864 Colt Navy revolver.

How many people each year, on average, are killed in a mass shooting by someone using an AR15 since it's introduction in 1964?

No, an 1864 Colt Navy is NOT even CLOSE to the fire power, killing power, range, accuracy or penetration power of a .223. Actually, you have to get up to a 44 Colt Walker to reach a .357 magnum revolver. An 1864 Colt Navy probably is about the same close range ballistics as a .32 modern powder short.

.308 definitely is far more firepower, but less capacity and much heavier ammo weight - plus slower repeat shots due to higher recoil. Practice is going to cost a lot more too for ammo costs.
 
So if a criminal shoots you in the back and steals from you...how is that an "equal footing" ?

How does a seatbelt or any federal vehicle safety laws protect you if you're hit head-on by a semi-truck on the Interstate? Obviously those are all worthless laws, right?

Your message is typical worthless anti-gun crap. Equal footing means equal firepower.

All of life in terms of safety is about the odds. There are no guarantees. A private plane might crash into you in the next minute. You might scratch your foot on a shell at a beach, and 3 days later you're dead from the flesh eating bacteria.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom