• 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!

Another "Good Guy" with a Gun

Not my problem. I proposed a solution. Others can make it work. I'm the big picture guy. :)

Hmm... surely a man intent on committing murder would never miss returning their gun(s) to the police locker on time. How does that idea fit into your "big picture"?
 
Why would you think that?
By the fact that you don't want men to have gun rights, only women.


oh, wait didn't you also think 9-11 happened in November?
I meant September, that was about a week ago and I was under lots of stress so I made a mistake, lets move on shall we?


I get it now.
You're just like the vast majority of the gun banning crowd, the only thing you're good at is mocking and making insults.
 
I suppose that depends on how you look at it, Japan has a huge suicide problem. The US does have a higher murder rate that most first world countries. It could be because guns are more accessible to the wrong people, it could have a few other factors as well tho.

Then gun control could help lower crime in the US
 
Incidence of mental health problems are not greater in the US than other first world nations

Maybe not but they do take better care of mentally ill people in other first world nations than they do in the USA.
 
Hmm... surely a man intent on committing murder would never miss returning their gun(s) to the police locker on time. How does that idea fit into your "big picture"?

Apparently he was suspended and was supposed to have already relinquished all of his guns anyway. So the gun he shot people with was illegal.
 
bare hands are not the weapon of choice--guns are, by far.

Be that as it may, restricting men from getting guns would not make a difference in regards to them murdering their wives since most men wouldn't need a gun anyway to murder their wives. At my college there was a female student who was strangled to death by her boyfriend. He didn't have a gun, and he didn't need one to kill her.
 
Then gun control could help lower crime in the US

It depends on how well it is implemented. and/or enforced. I am not opposed to some type of licensing as a form of gun control. It depends on how the bill would be written.
 
Maybe not but they do take better care of mentally ill people in other first world nations than they do in the USA.

Maybe you can show me a place with lax gun laws and low gun deaths due to great mental health system
 
We have a men with guns problem. So, a solution is to take guns away from men. Seems logical. Obviously.
So now you're advocating reverse discrimination, oh wait a minute, you were already doing that in this thread.
 
Apparently he was suspended and was supposed to have already relinquished all of his guns anyway. So the gun he shot people with was illegal.

It's certainly amazing how criminals don't obey the rules/laws. ;)
 
If he gave up his guns, how did he shoot his ex wife dead?

When he was arrested, he gave up his guns. :doh

You have no argument other than you want some of the public to have their guns taken.
 
If all you look at are the gun homicides you get a skewd outlook. If you look at just homicides you get a better picture of what is going on. We need better gun control that gets guns out of the hands of criminals. We also need to better enforce the controls that are already there.

Enforcing the controls that are already there should be adequate, and if we can do that we can perhaps even eliminate some of the unnecessary controls. We don't need more gun control, we've already got over 2000 gun laws on the books.
 
Enforcing the controls that are already there should be adequate, and if we can do that we can perhaps even eliminate some of the unnecessary controls. We don't need more gun control, we've already got over 2000 gun laws on the books.

It cant be done without doubling your taxes at the very least
 
Not necessarily, not if we cut back on other expenses.

Like what?

You want increased patrols, increased cops, increased prisons, increased lawyers, increased judges and increased courts.


Is all that free?
 
Like what?

You want increased patrols, increased cops, increased prisons, increased lawyers, increased judges and increased courts.


Is all that free?
On the contrary I want to decrease all of those things, particularly prisons. The USA imprisons more convicts than any other first world nation and we should cut down on that. Running prisons is expensive and the cost only goes up when there's more inmates.
 
On the contrary I want to decrease all of those things, particularly prisons. The USA imprisons more convicts than any other first world nation and we should cut down on that. Running prisons is expensive and the cost only goes up when there's more inmates.

You dont know what you want. You want mutually exclusive things.
 
You dont know what you want. You want mutually exclusive things.

Lets face it, we put people in prison for some of the most ridiculous things, stuff they don't deserve to go to prison for.
 
Cigarettes are restricted, taxed and banned from countless places. I'm fine with doing that re: guns.

Are you?

Aren't they already?
 
Hasn't happened yet and all the solutions involve disarming honest people at far higher rates than criminals; which of course, is what people like you really want.

Actually, it is "honest people" that are making easier for bad guys to be able to use guns.

Stand-your-ground laws are just legalized senseless gun violence.
 
Back
Top Bottom