• 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!

Texas to allow guns in schools and churches.. LONG overdue!

ttwtt78640 said:
Yep, no matter how many laws are passed criminals will still violate them.
Click to expand...
Then why do we bother with laws at all as a society if they don't do anything ttwtt78640?
The entirety of the United States Legal System, by ttwtt's accounting, has no value. I never took you for an anarchist.
 
Mach said:
Then why do we bother with laws at all as a society if they don't do anything ttwtt78640?
The entirety of the United States Legal System, by ttwtt's accounting, has no value. I never took you for an anarchist.
Click to expand...

Laws are means of punishing those who have been proven (beyond a reasonable doubt) to have violated them. That may (or may not) deter folks from engaging in illegal acts. What you want are laws which limit the freedom of all in hopes that it will be (a bit?) harder for some folks to commit crime. Declaring "street drugs" (or scary black rifles) to be illegal does not make them harder to get other than by raising their costs (which creates a black market, which is simply more crime) thus the drug addicted (or those wanting 'better' guns) criminals are apt to commit more crime to acquire the added money to pay those inflated prices.
 
tres borrachos said:
"Patriots" body slam 13 year olds for not taking off their hats while the National Anthem is playing. I wonder what they will do to the kids who really act up.
Click to expand...

The whole football team did that? Bill Belichick should be fired immediately!
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Laws are means of punishing those who have been proven (beyond a reasonable doubt) to have violated them. That may (or may not) deter folks from engaging in illegal acts. What you want are laws which limit the freedom of all in hopes that it will be (a bit?) harder for some folks to commit crime. Declaring "street drugs" (or scary black rifles) to be illegal does not make them harder to get other than by raising their costs (which creates a black market, which is simply more crime) thus the drug addicted (or those wanting 'better' guns) criminals are apt to commit more crime to acquire the added money to pay those inflated prices.
Click to expand...

Then you support legalizing meth, heroin and all opiates
 
Mach said:
Mass shootings will still occur, they will still rack up body counts, just as Dayton did...30 seconds, still killed 9 wounded 27. Armed guards everywhere are a terrible idea.
How many accidental shootings will occur as a result? How many mistaken targets? You'll rack up the body count.
Click to expand...

well you all have been screaming about states that started allowing CCW about 20 years ago, and one of the most often repeated claims was that CCW would cause "blood in the streets" and people shooting each over out of road rage or parking spaces during the Christmas shopping madness. Guess what-that speculation was completely wrong
 
vegas giants said:
There is no place on earth that has lax gun laws and low gun deaths thru great enforcement
Click to expand...

Then its high time to become one. Very little "gun crime" is committed by first offenders. I have owned guns for over 40 years and committed no "gun crime" (or any other violent crime) - how is changing what guns I can (legally) own going to help make society safer? Do you think that a mass shooter (or any other violent criminal) is going to worry about adding a "gun control" law violation to their criminal record? Of the millions of 'prohibited persons' who possessed guns when arrested less than 6K were convicted of that felony "gun control" offense.
 
bongsaway said:
Oddly enough that's the one thing missing from all of these mass shootings. Citizens shooting back at the shooter. Where are all these he men who spout stuff like you are doing now? My guess, if citizens started pulling out guns at the scene of a mass shooting, more citizens will be killed by the cops. Does one really think in that scene a cop saw you with a gun he or she wouldn't think you are the shooter?
Click to expand...



And that, among other reason, is why LEO across America are against such ill-minded notion.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Then its high time to become one. Very little "gun crime" is committed by first offenders. I have owned guns for over 40 years and committed no "gun crime" (or any other violent crime) - how is changing what guns I can (legally) own going to help make society safer? Do you think that a mass shooter (or any other violent criminal) is going to worry about adding a "gun control" law violation to their criminal record? Of the millions of 'prohibited persons' that had guns when arrested less than 6K were convicted of that "gun control" offense.
Click to expand...

Again.


You want a system that does not work anywhere.


Every country on earth that has low gun deaths also has effective gun control.


You want to believe.....even without evidence
 
bluesmoke said:
And that, among other reason, is why LEO across America are against such ill-minded notion.
Click to expand...

I don't know how many cops you know or your job, but the vast majority of cops I know, especially beat cops (as oppose to those riding a desk and answering directly to politicians) support ccw.
 
vegas giants said:
Then you support legalizing meth, heroin and all opiates
Click to expand...

Either that or punish those who possess them to the same degree as we purport to punish those prohibited persons who illegally possess guns (up to a ten year felony prison sentence for that non-violent crime).
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Either that or punish those who possess them to the same degree as we purport to punish those prohibited persons who illegally possess guns (up to a ten year felony prison sentence for that non-violent crime).
Click to expand...

One choice would results in millions dead.....the other in billions of tax dollars
 
vegas giants said:
Again.


You want a system that does not work anywhere.


Every country on earth that has low gun deaths also has effective gun control.


You want to believe.....even without evidence
Click to expand...

Effective meaning that those laws are actually enforced. Any prohibited person can now be locked up for ten years simply for the felony possession of any gun yet that happens very rarely. If someone fails a NICS BGC when attempting to illegally buy a gun then they have also committed a felony (lied on a signed form 4473) - how many of them are ever charged, much less, convicted of that offense?
 
Last edited:
ttwtt78640 said:
Effective meaning that those laws are actually enforced. Any prohibited person can now be locked up for ten years simply for the felony possession of any gun yet that happens very rarely.
Click to expand...

Nah. There are lots of other effective gun control laws that prevent gun deaths at a fraction of the cost.
 
vegas giants said:
Nah. There are lots of other effective gun control laws that prevent gun deaths at a fraction of the cost.
Click to expand...

How effective (or not costly) has the nationwide ban on recreational drugs been?
 
vegas giants said:
So you are proposing to make it worse?
Click to expand...

Not at all, I am simply noting that you can't make the possession of (demand for) drug X non-prosecutable and expect the manufacture and sales (supply) of drug X to stop. This is the same folly as building the Great Wall Of Trump while not having an eVerify mandate - invite illegal immigrants into the country for huge pay/benefit increases over those available in their homelands and then try to keep them out with a (partial) physical barrier.
 
Rogue Valley said:
Why not? If say air pollution is killing people, we'll just order up more air pollution until such deaths become normalized right? Makes perfect sense.
Click to expand...

What can AOC do to get America to hire more billion dollar democrat global warming research foundations to put a stop to polluting cow farting and volcanoe eruptions worldwide?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Not at all, I am simply noting that you can't make the possession of (demand for) drug X non-prosecutable and expect the manufacture and sales (supply) of drug X to stop. This is the same folly as building the Great Wall Of Trump while not having an eVerify mandate - invite illegal immigrants into the country for huge pay/benefit increases over those available in their homelands and then try to keep them out with a (partial) physical barrier.
Click to expand...

No one expects drug sales to stop no matter what law you pass.


Perfection is impossible
 
TurtleDude said:
I don't know how many cops you know or your job, but the vast majority of cops I know, especially beat cops (as oppose to those riding a desk and answering directly to politicians) support ccw.
Click to expand...



I've known plenty of LEO. I used to shoot pool with them at a bar/café across from the main station next to where I worked. My sister used to date one, but he just passed the joint when I handed it to him. I'd be in a car one was driving, drunk as a skunk. Yes, they do support CCW. But not teachers having guns in class.
 
vegas giants said:
No one expects drug sales to stop no matter what law you pass.


Perfection is impossible
Click to expand...

Exactly, law abiding folks will still face a threat from violent criminals (some of them armed) yet would not be legally able to offer armed defense/resistance.
 
bongsaway said:
Oddly enough that's the one thing missing from all of these mass shootings. Citizens shooting back at the shooter. Where are all these he men who spout stuff like you are doing now? My guess, if citizens started pulling out guns at the scene of a mass shooting, more citizens will be killed by the cops. Does one really think in that scene a cop saw you with a gun he or she wouldn't think you are the shooter?
Click to expand...
Where were the police during the Sandy Hook shooting? The Parkland Shooting? The VA Tech shooting? Columbine?Where has there ever been a police response that would have been hindered by a responding private citizen?

There IS historical precedence. Citizens have ALREADY ENGAGED mass shooters...and stopped them..without police presence.
 
bluesmoke said:
I've known plenty of LEO. I used to shoot pool with them at a bar/café across from the main station next to where I worked. My sister used to date one, but he just passed the joint when I handed it to him. I'd be in a car one was driving, drunk as a skunk. Yes, they do support CCW. But not teachers having guns in class.
Click to expand...

What was their reasons of opposition. btw in 1996, Clinton's AG commissioned a poll of law enforcement as to both the clinton gun ban and the Brady Bill. It was very extensive. The US Attorney for the SD of Ohio had a copy in that office's mail room. I was there one day for an argument before the Sixth Circuit-the courtroom was upstairs. This study was never released because of the results-less than 8% support for either bill.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom