• 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!

US gun deaths reach highest level in nearly 40 years

TurtleDude said:
In other words, he understands that gun banners only pretend to care about the lives of innocents while their real reasons behind gun bans has nothing to do with altruism
Click to expand...


Oh please tell us the "real agenda" of gun banners...

Would it be to use gun control as a means to instituting socialism in the USA ?

To form the United Socialist States of America ?

To build a GULAG to hold all republicans in?

To allow in the refugees from Mexico and the rest of Latin America and grant them citizenship ?

To change the official language of the USA to Spanish ?

To bring in universal healthcare ?

To fine every sportsman who refuses to kneel when the Star Spangled Banner is played ?

What other heinous crimes to the gun banners plan ?
 
Rich2018 said:
Your "solution" is do nothing...


Or in other words "do anything that doesn't entail me losing my guns".
Click to expand...
And your solution(s) is/are do something that would have made no appreciable difference to past gun deaths and hope "maybe this time they'll work".
 
Lursa said:
...how can we make guns safer?
Click to expand...

Ban them from private ownership ?


Seize all guns in private ownership and melt them down...how safe do you want ?


...do you think that millions of gun owners are stupid? Out there shooting millions of rounds in practice with unsafe guns?
Click to expand...

Guns are designed to kill...of COURSE THEY'RE UNSAFE !


...but I'm open to any suggestions you have to 'make guns safer.' Let's see them....
Click to expand...

Repeal the 2nd amendment
Ban all guns in private ownership
Seize all privately owned guns
Melt them down

How's that ?


...Here, let me get you started:

There are loads of safety mechanisms manufactured into (by law and optional) and also those that can be added.

A few:

--manual safeties
--internal drop-safeties (mandatory)
--grip safeties
--standards for caliber loads and gun ratings
--chamber ejection clearance
--magazine feed standards
--double-action triggers
--trigger spring tension standards
--trigger locks are mandatory and included with every new firearm​
Click to expand...


How about removing all working parts so no gun is capable of firing any kind of projectile ?

Granted gun owners could still use guns as a club but hey you have to draw the line somewhere.
 
Bullseye said:
And your solution(s) is/are do something that would have made no appreciable difference to past gun deaths and hope "maybe this time they'll work".
Click to expand...

Of course my solution can't affect the past.

But it would reduce future gun deaths...including suicides.

It would certainly reduce mass shootings significantly.
 
Rich2018 said:
Tell the families of the Parkland...and all of these (there's quite a few so you'll be on the phone for a long time):-



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2018




Oh and that's just this year...when you get done, hit me up and I'll give you the list of last year's 345 mass shootings:
Click to expand...
That "mass shooting" stat is pure bull pucky. Every shooting where two or more people, including the shooter is injured or kill counts. Raise that number to 4-5 and the number just about disappears. What we need is rational discussions rather than slobber slinging histrionics and using victims families as weapons.
 
Bucky said:
Big difference.

Dogs, cats, even Parrots can pull a trigger on a gun. It is not that hard.

Alcohol does not provide an immediate danger to your life unless you overdose, but then again you can die from eating too much peanut butter or sushi.
Click to expand...
If that dog, cat, or bird, can work the combo lock on my gun safe I'd say he deserves to take a shot - the noise in that confined space will probably scare the crap out of him and he'll run off anyway.
 
Rucker61 said:
I've posted my solutions multiple times here, but I'm on my phone and can't post them now. The three main points are arrest criminals prosecute criminals, punish criminals. Any solution that requires law abiding citizens to give up guns isn't a solution.
Click to expand...

Criminals are arrested, tried, convicted and sentenced

The USA leads the world in the number of people incarcerated.

Criminals, it appears, are not deterred by prison.


In states where there is capital punishment, people like Dylan Roofe still go into churches and kill as many people as they can.


Jails are over-flowing with convicted criminals in the USA....it's NOT working !


If we can't stop gun crime through fear, we can only stop it through removing the means.
ie: remove guns


Gun owners will squeal one or more of the following excuses not to ban guns:

1. Gun ownership is some natural right:
2. Guns are needed:
a. to protect themselves
b. to provide food
3. Guns can not be banned because:
a. There are too many in existence and it's just too big a job to seize them
b. US law enforcement would refuse any such or to seize them anyway.
 
Bullseye said:
That "mass shooting" stat is pure bull pucky. Every shooting where two or more people, including the shooter is injured or kill counts. Raise that number to 4-5 and the number just about disappears. What we need is rational discussions rather than slobber slinging histrionics and using victims families as weapons.
Click to expand...

No, the US Congress defines a mass shooting as an incident in which FOUR or more people (not counting the shooter(s) are shot) - though not necessarily killed.

In 2017 there were 345 such incidents.
 
Rich2018 said:
Of course my solution can't affect the past.
Click to expand...
Not what I said. I was suggesting that IF your solutions were in effect at the time of the shooting they wouldn't have prevented it.

Rich2018 said:
But it would reduce future gun deaths...including suicides.

It would certainly reduce mass shootings significantly.
Click to expand...
At most a miniscule change. If that.
 
Bullseye said:
Not what I said. I was suggesting that IF your solutions were in effect at the time of the shooting they wouldn't have prevented it....
Click to expand...

People can't commit gun crimes if they don't have guns and can't buy ammunition


... at most a miniscule change. If that.
Click to expand...


Are you still trying to say that the number of people shot in mass shooters is "minuscule" ?
 
Rich2018 said:
People can't commit gun crimes if they don't have guns and can't buy ammunition
Click to expand...
That's the best idea you have? See, the problem is that people already DO have guns - hundreds of millions of them.




Rich2018 said:
Are you still trying to say that the number of people shot in mass shooters is "minuscule" ?
Click to expand...
Compared to the number of guns it is even smaller than "miniscule" Compared to the entire popular it's smaller than miniscule.
 
Bullseye said:
That's the best idea you have? See, the problem is that people already DO have guns - hundreds of millions of them...
Click to expand...

See post #160

Gun owners will squeal one or more of the following excuses not to ban guns:

1. Gun ownership is some natural right:
2. Guns are needed:
a. to protect themselves
b. to provide food
3. Guns can not be banned because:
a. There are too many in existence and it's just too big a job to seize them
b. US law enforcement would refuse any such or to seize them anyway.


You just dropped into excuse to do nothing # 3.1


...compared to the number of guns it is even smaller than "miniscule" Compared to the entire popular it's smaller than miniscule.
Click to expand...


Begs the question, what would you consider to be a "significant" number of people killed by guns before you'd consider supporting action to ban them?
 
Rich2018 said:
People can't commit gun crimes if they don't have guns and can't buy ammunition





Are you still trying to say that the number of people shot in mass shooters is "minuscule" ?
Click to expand...

Compared to the number shot in non-mass shootings, or the number knifed, clubbed, or killed by falling out of chairs, beds, down stairs, and out windows, sure.
 
Rich2018 said:
See post #160

Gun owners will squeal one or more of the following excuses not to ban guns:

1. Gun ownership is some natural right:
2. Guns are needed:
a. to protect themselves
b. to provide food
3. Guns can not be banned because:
a. There are too many in existence and it's just too big a job to seize them
b. US law enforcement would refuse any such or to seize them anyway.


You just dropped into excuse to do nothing # 3.1
Click to expand...

Not agreeing with your ideas doesn't mean "doing nothing". I call that the "hubris of the Left", signifying that they believe that only they have the ideas to solve problems.

Begs the question, what would you consider to be a "significant" number of people killed by guns before you'd consider supporting action to ban them?
Click to expand...

It's not a numbers game. How come you aren't in Atlanta confiscating guns from those who are prohibited from owning them and who are most likely to commit a crime with one?
 
Rich2018 said:
See post #160

Gun owners will squeal one or more of the following excuses not to ban guns:

1. Gun ownership is some natural right:
2. Guns are needed:
a. to protect themselves
b. to provide food
3. Guns can not be banned because:
a. There are too many in existence and it's just too big a job to seize them
b. US law enforcement would refuse any such or to seize them anyway.


You just dropped into excuse to do nothing # 3.1
Click to expand...

Follow up:

1. Allow individual access to NICS so that private sales can utilize the background check process. Sen Coburn sponsored a bill that would be very effective for this.
2. Exempt CCW and LEO from background checks.
3. Arrest those who commit felonies while attempting to get guns. In 2010, 72,000 applicants were denied permission to purchase a firearm via the NICS and state systems. 34,000 of these were denied for previous felony convictions. Only 10 (10!) were convicted. We still have tens of thousands of people who committed a felony by lying on the Form 4473 and have a violent past free to find guns through illegal means. Given that a violent felon is looking for a gun, how many violent crimes could be prevented by arresting and incarcerating these felons? https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/239272.pdf
4. Focus on the gun dealers and sellers who sell large amounts of guns to ineligible buyers. If the Brady Campaign knows who they are, then ATF knows who the major sellers are.
5. Mandatory sentences for those who use guns in acts of criminal violence. Stop plea bargaining away gun crimes. Thousands of felony gun cases are being dismissed in Cook County criminal courts | Chicago Reporter
6. Extend the legal possession geographies for CCW holders.
7. Go arrest the criminals who have guns illegally now - don't wait for them to commit a crime.
8. Fully prosecute and punish straw purchasers. Police oppose probation sentence given to buyer of gun used to kill Kerrie Orozco | Crime & Courts | omaha.com
 
Rich2018 said:
No, the US Congress defines a mass shooting as an incident in which FOUR or more people (not counting the shooter(s) are shot) - though not necessarily killed.

In 2017 there were 345 such incidents.
Click to expand...

So I suppose a mass shooting is a matter of definition. Europe could define a mass shooting of where TWENTY or more people are shot, in which case there would be far more mass shootings in the USA than in Europe when you go by the USA's definition vs Europe's definition.
 
Rich2018 said:
In states where there is capital punishment, people like Dylan Roofe still go into churches and kill as many people as they can.
Click to expand...

That's why we need armed security in places such as churches.
 
Rich2018 said:
See post #160

Gun owners will squeal one or more of the following excuses not to ban guns:

1. Gun ownership is some natural right:
2. Guns are needed:
a. to protect themselves
b. to provide food
3. Guns can not be banned because:
a. There are too many in existence and it's just too big a job to seize them
b. US law enforcement would refuse any such or to seize them anyway.
Click to expand...

You keep missing #4, even after I repeatedly point it out, it just doesn't register with you does it.
 
Rich2018 said:
No, the US Congress defines a mass shooting as an incident in which FOUR or more people (not counting the shooter(s) are shot) - though not necessarily killed.

In 2017 there were 345 such incidents.
Click to expand...
Let's see some data.
 
Rich2018 said:
See post #160

Gun owners will squeal one or more of the following excuses not to ban guns:

1. Gun ownership is some natural right:
2. Guns are needed:
a. to protect themselves
b. to provide food
3. Guns can not be banned because:
a. There are too many in existence and it's just too big a job to seize them
b. US law enforcement would refuse any such or to seize them anyway.


You just dropped into excuse to do nothing # 3.1
Click to expand...
You call it a "excuse", I call it a fact.





Begs the question, what would you consider to be a "significant" number of people killed by guns before you'd consider supporting action to ban them?[/QUOTE] Maybe a hundred thousand or so. Maybe more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom