• 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!

Stop the Slaughter of Our Children With These Weapons of War

CLAX1911 said:
How would you get probable cause that someone has a gun?
Click to expand...

Oh jeez, did you not say you graduated from a police academy ?


Let's see from the top of my head:

1. Membership (past or present) of a gun club or association like the NRA
2. Membership or customer of a gun range
3. Purchaser of on-line gun accessories
4. Purchaser of on-line ammunition
5. CCW holder
6. Record of felony involving guns
7. Purchased ammunition, guns or accessories from a store using a credit card
8. Owner of a gun shop or range
9. Provider of gun classes
10.Ever had a stall at a gun show
11.Ever registered ownership of a gun
12.Ever reported using a gun (for whatever reason like self defense)
13.Tip offs from the public

Note: none of these PROVE you have a gun or guns


BUT they give law enforcement grounds to argue reasonable cause and get a search warrant.
 
Rich2018 said:
Oh jeez, did you not say you graduated from a police academy ?


Let's see from the top of my head:

1. Membership (past or present) of a gun club or association like the NRA
2. Membership or customer of a gun range
3. Purchaser of on-line gun accessories
4. Purchaser of on-line ammunition
5. CCW holder
6. Record of felony involving guns
7. Purchased ammunition, guns or accessories from a store using a credit card
8. Owner of a gun shop or range
9. Provider of gun classes
10.Ever had a stall at a gun show
11.Ever registered ownership of a gun
12.Ever reported using a gun (for whatever reason like self defense)
13.Tip offs from the public

Note: none of these PROVE you have a gun or guns


BUT they give law enforcement grounds to argue reasonable cause and get a search warrant.
Click to expand...

What do any of the 13 points have to do with whether a person has or will harm any other person?
 
Rich2018 said:
Oh jeez, did you not say you graduated from a police academy ?


Let's see from the top of my head:

1. Membership (past or present) of a gun club or association like the NRA
2. Membership or customer of a gun range
3. Purchaser of on-line gun accessories
4. Purchaser of on-line ammunition
5. CCW holder
6. Record of felony involving guns
7. Purchased ammunition, guns or accessories from a store using a credit card
8. Owner of a gun shop or range
9. Provider of gun classes
10.Ever had a stall at a gun show
11.Ever registered ownership of a gun
12.Ever reported using a gun (for whatever reason like self defense)
13.Tip offs from the public

Note: none of these PROVE you have a gun or guns


BUT they give law enforcement grounds to argue reasonable cause and get a search warrant.
Click to expand...
1 and 2 you have the right to peaceably assemble so now you have to repeal the First Amendment.

3 &4 are not probable cause.

5, maybe
6, such a person is already not allowed to have a gun and probable cause to search them does not exist.

7-10 are not probable cause.

11-perfect reason to oppose all attempts to register. And good reason for if there is a registry not to register.

12-this is not probable cause.

13- is hearsay not probable cause.

The only one you listed here that probable cause is a firearms license. And that's a stretch.

The more you say about this the more amendments have to be repealed you're up to 3 now.
 
Last edited:
Samwise said:
What do any of the 13 points have to do with whether a person has or will harm any other person?
Click to expand...

They have to do with whether or not you have probable cause to search none of them are probable cause to search.

point number 13 is hearsay hearsay does not establish probable cause.

@Rich2018 doesn't seem just interested in repealing the Second Amendment he seems interested in repealing just about the entire Constitution.
 
CLAX1911 said:
They have to do with whether or not you have probable cause to search none of them are probable cause to search.

point number 13 is hearsay hearsay does not establish probable cause.

@Rich2018 doesn't seem just interested in repealing the Second Amendment he seems interested in repealing just about the entire Constitution.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of psychopaths on the internet who feel as if they are the rulers of their fellow man. I find it fun to engage and show how retarded their opinions are.
 
What part of "shall NOT be infringed" do some of you NOT comprehend? Don't come back with us wanting to own actual "weapons of war" or tanks or nukes....We're talking about your standard guns which can be sold at your local gun store.
 
cmoneal71 said:
What part of "shall NOT be infringed" do some of you NOT comprehend? Don't come back with us wanting to own actual "weapons of war" or tanks or nukes....We're talking about your standard guns which can be sold at your local gun store.
Click to expand...

As another long-time poster here has said, we plebs should be allowed to have any weapon that civilian police (including SWAT) are allowed to use.
 
Samwise said:
As another long-time poster here has said, we plebs should be allowed to have any weapon that civilian police (including SWAT) are allowed to use.
Click to expand...

Absolutely.
 
CLAX1911 said:
1 and 2 you have the right to peaceably assemble so now you have to repeal the First Amendment.
Click to expand...

Explain why they wouldn't be probable cause

How is using membership of a gun club as probable cause a violation of the 1st ?


3 &4 are not probable cause.
Click to expand...

Yes they are
Explain why they wouldn't be

5, maybe
Click to expand...

Definitely
Explain why there would be any doubt


6, such a person is already not allowed to have a gun and probable cause to search them does not exist.
Click to expand...

Yes it does
Explain why it wouldn't be


7-10 are not probable cause.
Click to expand...

Yes they are
Explain why they wouldn't be


11-perfect reason to oppose all attempts to register. And good reason for if there is a registry not to register.
Click to expand...

But probable cause, yes ?

12-this is not probable cause.

13- is hearsay not probable cause.
Click to expand...


Yes they are
Explain why they wouldn't be probable cause


The only one you listed here that probable cause is a firearms license. And that's a stretch.
Click to expand...

No all of them would be sufficient to get a search warrant - assuming of course no guns have been surrendered
LEO's would have probable suspicion that a gun was in the home

The more you say about this the more amendments have to be repealed you're up to 3 now.
Click to expand...

Nope, only one



ps: If a suspect admits to police under interrogation that a certain house is processing drugs, are you really saying that isn't enough for a warrant ?


You did say you graduated cop school didn't you ?
 
Rich2018 said:
Oh jeez, did you not say you graduated from a police academy ?


Let's see from the top of my head:

1. Membership (past or present) of a gun club or association like the NRA
2. Membership or customer of a gun range
3. Purchaser of on-line gun accessories
4. Purchaser of on-line ammunition
5. CCW holder
6. Record of felony involving guns
7. Purchased ammunition, guns or accessories from a store using a credit card
8. Owner of a gun shop or range
9. Provider of gun classes
10.Ever had a stall at a gun show
11.Ever registered ownership of a gun
12.Ever reported using a gun (for whatever reason like self defense)
13.Tip offs from the public

Note: none of these PROVE you have a gun or guns


BUT they give law enforcement grounds to argue reasonable cause and get a search warrant.
Click to expand...



By any chance we have any legally trained lawyers or cops who could pass their comments ?
 
Rich2018 said:
Explain why they wouldn't be probable cause

How is using membership of a gun club as probable cause a violation of the 1st ?




Yes they are
Explain why they wouldn't be



Definitely
Explain why there would be any doubt




Yes it does
Explain why it wouldn't be




Yes they are
Explain why they wouldn't be




But probable cause, yes ?




Yes they are
Explain why they wouldn't be probable cause




No all of them would be sufficient to get a search warrant - assuming of course no guns have been surrendered
LEO's would have probable suspicion that a gun was in the home



Nope, only one



ps: If a suspect admits to police under interrogation that a certain house is processing drugs, are you really saying that isn't enough for a warrant ?


You did say you graduated cop school didn't you ?
Click to expand...

If you don't know what probable causes maybe you shouldn't use the phrase. There are legal definitions I suggest you figure them out.

I have no interest in educating the pigheaded.

So if you want to show me how those things are probable cause be my guest keep in mind I know the legal definition of it.

but since it's your argument and you're positive claim it is your burden to prove it correct not my burden to prove it wrong.
 
CLAX1911 said:
If you don't know what probable causes maybe you shouldn't use the phrase. There are legal definitions I suggest you figure them out.
Click to expand...

Clearly you don't

"Typically, to obtain a warrant, an officer will sign an affidavit stating the facts as to why there is an adequate reason to arrest someone, conduct a search or seize property."


Probable Cause - FindLaw



All of the above would classify as an "adequate reason" to search for a gun...because the person or persons showed behavior that they reasonably had one.

You obviously don't know the law


I have no interest in educating the pigheaded.
Click to expand...

"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers." - Socrates



So if you want to show me how those things are probable cause be my guest keep in mind I know the legal definition of it.
Click to expand...

See above, a judge would see any of the above an "adequate reason" to search


but since it's your argument and you're positive claim it is your burden to prove it correct not my burden to prove it wrong.
Click to expand...

Mission accomplished

It's "your" not "you're" Btw.
 
CLAX1911 said:
Assault weapon is a term attached to rifles with features that don't make it and deadlier. So it's rhetorical.
Click to expand...

"Assault Weapons" stick are advanced military weapons designed to kill as many people as possible in as short amount of time as possible. The AR15 is for all intents and purposes an M16. Neither of which belong in the public market.
 
jet57 said:
"Assault Weapons" stick are advanced military weapons designed to kill as many people as possible in as short amount of time as possible.
Click to expand...
So nothing available to the public.

The AR15 is for all intents and purposes an M16. Neither of which belong in the public market.
Click to expand...
Except in the one aspect that separates them. One is a fully auto the other isn't. So by your definition (hokey as it is) an AR15 can't be classified as an assault weapon. It's not an advanced military weapon and it isn't designed to kill as many people as possible in a short amount of time.

It has the same rate of fire as any other non automatic gun.
 
jet57 said:
"Assault Weapons" stick are advanced military weapons designed to kill as many people as possible in as short amount of time as possible. The AR15 is for all intents and purposes an M16. Neither of which belong in the public market.
Click to expand...

That includes all semi-automatic guns (as well as fully automatic) IMO and all hand guns.
 
Rich2018 said:
That includes all semi-automatic guns (as well as fully automatic) IMO and all hand guns.
Click to expand...

Whatever cops (including SWAT) can carry, we citizens ought to be able to carry.
 
CLAX1911 said:
So nothing available to the public.


Except in the one aspect that separates them. One is a fully auto the other isn't. So by your definition (hokey as it is) an AR15 can't be classified as an assault weapon. It's not an advanced military weapon and it isn't designed to kill as many people as possible in a short amount of time.

It has the same rate of fire as any other non automatic gun.
Click to expand...

Right, so other than that, when a guy modifies his AR15, he has in effect - an M16 doesn't he stick. The AR15 IS as an assault weapon: that's what it was made for and then rejected for the M16.
 
jet57 said:
Right, so other than that, when a guy modifies his AR15, he has in effect - an M16 doesn't he stick.
Click to expand...
No, he has a modified AR-15. That is already banned.
The AR15 IS as an assault weapon: that's what it was made for and then rejected for the M16.
Click to expand...
No the AR-15 was made for. It was made to be a select fire rifle. That isn't what it is today.
 
CLAX1911 said:
No, he has a modified AR-15. That is already banned. No the AR-15 was made for. It was made to be a select fire rifle. That isn't what it is today.
Click to expand...

Wrong again stick:

Initially designed to kill enemy combatants on a battlefield, the AR-15 combat/assault rifle has had a long and controversial history.
Click to expand...

From Military to Mainstream: The Evolution of the AR-15 | HowStuffWorks


Christopher Bartocci’s Combat-Reliable AR-15 Build
Click to expand...

Christopher Bartocci's Combat-Reliable AR-15 Build -The Firearm Blog


Designed for law enforcement, our versatile AR-15 Combat rifle is ideal on patrol or in a tactical situation.
Click to expand...

Cormat AR Combat Rifle


The AR platform has served as our country’s battle rifle since 1962, first as the M16, which was used during the Vietnam War.
Click to expand...

Top 20 Next-Gen Combat Rifles


The ArmaLite 15 is a classic assault rifle. You might know it better as an M-16, the U.S. Military's version of the weapon.

A common misconception about the AR-15 is that "AR" stands for "assault rifle," a phrase that stems from the German "Sturmgewehr" ("Storm" or "assault" rifle) used in World War II propaganda posters and later applied to military-style weapons. This shouldn't be confused with the term "Assault Weapon," a legal term for a specific class of illegal firearm during the years 1994 to 2004.

Ironically enough, the AR-15 fits both of these descriptions: it's a military style rifle that was illegal during the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban. The "AR" in the name, however, stands for the name of the manufacturer: ArmaLite.

1961: Eugene Stoner Becomes a Consultant at Colt

At this time, Eugene Stoner leaves the ArmaLite company, taking a position as a consultant at Colt. Around the same time, the United States Airforce tests the AR-15, commissioning 8,500 for Air Force use.
Click to expand...

The Complete History of the AR-15 Rifle | Small Wars Journal



So, do I really have to go on proving to you that you don't know what you're talking about stick? I could, but the quote time monitor will block me out...


READ, LEARN, THINK, speak.
 
Last edited:
jet57 said:
Wrong again stick:



From Military to Mainstream: The Evolution of the AR-15 | HowStuffWorks




Christopher Bartocci's Combat-Reliable AR-15 Build -The Firearm Blog




Cormat AR Combat Rifle




Top 20 Next-Gen Combat Rifles




So, do I really have to go on proving to you that you don't know what you're talking about stick? I could, but the quote time monitor will block me out...


READ, LEARN, THINK, speak.


1961: Eugene Stoner Becomes a Consultant at Colt

At this time, Eugene Stoner leaves the ArmaLite company, taking a position as a consultant at Colt. Around the same time, the United States Airforce tests the AR-15, commissioning 8,500 for Air Force use.
Click to expand...

The several sovereign states didn't enter into their treaty so that the general government could ban arms.

Which of congress's enumerated legislative powers would allow them to ban these arms of which you speak?
 
Samwise said:
The several sovereign states didn't enter into their treaty so that the general government could ban arms.

Which of congress's enumerated legislative powers would allow them to ban these arms of which you speak?
Click to expand...

Your side lost the civil war - remember? And the Supreme Court said you're wrong; ask Turtledude about that one...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom