• 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!

Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

Vadinho said:
It sure does. Even Heller admits that the federal government has the right to regulate arms. Can you own any weapon you want including any weapon used by the military? No. So how it only leaves us with which weapons they can forbid us. Remember, we did have an assault weapons ban for a long time and it was not ruled unconstitutional, it merely lapsed.
Click to expand...

Did you ignore the part where I said "ownership"?

And, Heller says no such thing.
 
TurtleDude said:
if only left-wingers who claim to be independents, cared about the bill of rights and the rights actually enumerated as they do for court created rights to abortion and homosexual relationships.
Click to expand...

So then women dont have a right to due process and privacy? Do men?

Did someone have to 'invent' a right to bodily sovereignty or do we recognize that? Is it just for men?

and certainly, gays shouldnt have HAD to bring challenges to the courts to be treated equally under the Constitution or with other laws that apply to "people." Just like blacks and women in their/our day...were blacks and women wrong to fight for their/our civil rights?
 
Lursa said:
So then women dont have a right to due process and privacy? Do men?

Did someone have to 'invent' a right to bodily sovereignty or do we recognize that? Is it just for men?
Click to expand...


I support those ninth amendment rights
 
TurtleDude said:
if only left-wingers who claim to be independents, cared about the bill of rights and the rights actually enumerated as they do for court created rights to abortion and homosexual relationships.
Click to expand...

But some of us do. Turtle.
 
Casper said:
But some of us do. Turtle.
Click to expand...

yes, and some of us RW Libertarians support gay rights and abortion but for the most part-the anti gay side is rightwing and the anti gun movement is almost 100% leftwing
 
Lursa said:
But not the 5th or 14th?

(due process is covered in a few)
Click to expand...

I support all the constitutional rights. When a fetus approaches viability, there is a conflict
 
TurtleDude said:
yes, and some of us RW Libertarians support gay rights and abortion but for the most part-the anti gay side is rightwing and the anti gun movement is almost 100% leftwing
Click to expand...

True, just saying that those described do exist. There are rational minds on both sides, man I miss the goid old days, even these sites were better for actual discussion and thought, that will never return, so on to what is next. A Storm is coming......
 
TurtleDude said:
I support all the constitutional rights. When a fetus approaches viability, there is a conflict
Click to expand...

No, there's not. SCOTUS has the authority to determine who is equal. They did so for blacks and women. They examined that for the unborn and did not find them equal. If there was an assumed, automatic 'right to life' by the FFs, indicated in the DOI or Constitution, SCOTUS would not have had to examine those things at all.

(Naturally, their criteria for each decision has been public, so you can see their justifications. Of course I dont automatically assume SCOTUS is always right)
 
Roadvirus said:
Some of them are highly overt in violating the Constitution. I posted a perfect example in the gun forum yesterday. An Illinois Dem wants to make it so gun buyers have to submit their social media accounts for "review" as part of any purchase.
Click to expand...

That’s outrageous. A psychiatric exam would be preferable to that.
 
TurtleDude said:
I sure don't see much coming from you that suggests you oppose federal interference with your right to keep and bear arms
Click to expand...

I lived in NJ. A big reason I left it state wide gun regulation.

The fed is not going to take any guns. The state, on the other hand, is a different animal.

I fully support the 2nd amendment. That's why I left NJ.
 
MauiMan said:
Is this reasonable “nut control”, or an infringement on the rights of gun owners?

Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting
Click to expand...

I support gun-seizure for cases of mental illness. I have faced this very problem with my father who has dementia. I think that shootings can be prevented by removing guns from people who have metal issues that warrant they do not have access to guns. This is one of the few situations where it is necessary to take action before someone does something illegal.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
I support gun-seizure for cases of mental illness. I have faced this very problem with my father who has dementia. I think that shootings can be prevented by removing guns from people who have metal issues that warrant they do not have access to guns. This is one of the few situations where it is necessary to take action before someone does something illegal.
Click to expand...

as long as there is substantive and procedural due process etc, I might agree with this-along with heavy civil and criminal penalties on those who bear false witness against someone
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
I support gun-seizure for cases of mental illness. I have faced this very problem with my father who has dementia. I think that shootings can be prevented by removing guns from people who have metal issues that warrant they do not have access to guns. This is one of the few situations where it is necessary to take action before someone does something illegal.
Click to expand...

Thank you, Pipewrench. On retrospect, my vernacular in starting this thread was crude. My apologies.
 
TurtleDude said:
as long as there is substantive and procedural due process etc, I might agree with this-along with heavy civil and criminal penalties on those who bear false witness against someone
Click to expand...

Absolutely. In my situation my father forgot about the gun. Out of sight out of mind.
 
Obscurity said:
You don't understand what an independent is. I care about my rights, to own guns and have privacy.

I dislike democrats and republicans.

I am an independent.

You call me a lib because I'm not a con. I am not a con. And I will never, ever vote for a con. Or a dim.
Click to expand...
Then you will never vote for a president.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
Absolutely. In my situation my father forgot about the gun. Out of sight out of mind.
Click to expand...

Your welcome. I am for gun control as long as we are not restricting the rights of law abiding people.

I see no need for a permit for concealed carry. I lived in Texas where they had open carry. So I strap on a holster and can walk the streets with a gun and everything is OK. I put on my coat and it conceals the gun now I have become a danger to the people around me? Who truly believes such nonsense? I put on a coat because it is cold out and because now the gun I was carrying is concealed all of a sudden I will turn into a bad person and start killing people. But if I go get permission from the government to conceal carry now I become a good person again who will do no wrong. Unbelievable.
 
I'd only support this if a) the person has a diagnosed mental illness; b) there is direct evidence or corroborating accounts on the threats of harm; c) there is a proper hearing, with the person having the ability to appeal the decision; and d) the state provides mental healthcare to the person for the duration of the confiscation to ensure their rights are restored as quickly as possible.

As an aside, statistics show people with mental illness are more likely to be the victims of violence than the perpetrators, so I question whether any of these measures would make any difference to the rate of gun violence.
 
Vadinho said:
Perhaps you meant to say "regulating" the 2nd amendment...as is a well regulated militia...
Click to expand...

Where is the language in any of those bills showing it to be regulating a militia? There is none, thanks for the specious nonsense.
 
Vadinho said:
It sure does. Even Heller admits that the federal government has the right to regulate arms. Can you own any weapon you want including any weapon used by the military? No. So how it only leaves us with which weapons they can forbid us. Remember, we did have an assault weapons ban for a long time and it was not ruled unconstitutional, it merely lapsed.
Click to expand...

What is an assault weapon? Do you have any of the definitions used in that lapsed statute? Any definitions at all that meet a minimum standard for relevance and accuracy?
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
Your welcome. I am for gun control as long as we are not restricting the rights of law abiding people.

I see no need for a permit for concealed carry. I lived in Texas where they had open carry. So I strap on a holster and can walk the streets with a gun and everything is OK. I put on my coat and it conceals the gun now I have become a danger to the people around me? Who truly believes such nonsense? I put on a coat because it is cold out and because now the gun I was carrying is concealed all of a sudden I will turn into a bad person and start killing people. But if I go get permission from the government to conceal carry now I become a good person again who will do no wrong. Unbelievable.
Click to expand...

Texas now requires a LTC whether the (loaded) handgun is carried openly or concealed (with a few confusing exceptions). Essentially, Texas has converted a Constitutional right into a mere state issued privilege.
 
SLC said:
Then you will never vote for a president.
Click to expand...


I don't care. Blood isn't on my hands. The Republicans are so in bed with the evangelicals I can't vote for them, ever.

The Democrats are spineless. A true progressive like Sanders earns my vote. But not corporatist Democrats.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Texas now requires a LTC whether the (loaded) handgun is carried openly or concealed (with a few confusing exceptions). Essentially, Texas has converted a Constitutional right into a mere state issued privilege.
Click to expand...

Do you not believe in federalism?
 
We will have gun control in this country and see great changes to our gun laws in the coming decades. Getting gun violence under control has been priority one, next to climate change, for the upcoming generation. Sad day for conservatives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom