• 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!

Constitutional carry now in effect in Oklahoma.

Helix said:
work to increase checks and balances to prevent violent idiots / mentally ill people from building up stockpiles that they end up using to shoot up public places. as i said, the biggest threat to your hobby is violent nutters. if gun collecting was my big thing, that's what i would want.
Click to expand...

that seems like nothing solid. What are the checks and balances you want that are both constitutional and aren't a pathway to confiscation or banning., how many mentally ill people "build up stockpiles". Other than Paddock, can you name a single mass shooting that involved more than a couple guns?

Sandy Hook-NO
Columbine (two shooters) NO
Orlando Florida-NO
Va Tech-NO
Fort Hood-NO
Florida School shooting-NO
Gabby Giffords wounding-NO
Aurora Colorado Theater Shooting-NO
Luby's of Texas NO
San Ysidro McDonald's shooting-NO
San Bernardino Shooting (two shooters) NO
Texas tower (40+ years ago) NO
Dylan Root racist murders at church-NO
Texas Church shooting-NO
Paddock Las Vegas-Yes
Naval shipyard shooting-NO
 
TurtleDude said:
that seems like nothing solid. What are the checks and balances you want that are both constitutional and aren't a pathway to confiscation or banning., how many mentally ill people "build up stockpiles". Other than Paddock, can you name a single mass shooting that involved more than a couple guns?

Sandy Hook-NO
Columbine (two shooters) NO
Orlando Florida-NO
Va Tech-NO
Fort Hood-NO
Florida School shooting-NO
Gabby Giffords wounding-NO
Aurora Colorado Theater Shooting-NO
Luby's of Texas NO
San Ysidro McDonald's shooting-NO
San Bernardino Shooting (two shooters) NO
Texas tower (40+ years ago) NO
Dylan Root racist murders at church-NO
Texas Church shooting-NO
Paddock Las Vegas-Yes
Naval shipyard shooting-NO
Click to expand...

it's an interesting discussion. i'd probably support flagging people who are buying a bunch of ammo. it should be pretty easy to separate the enthusiasts / target shooters from the insane / violent assholes.
 
TurtleDude said:
are you claiming you like to troll?
Click to expand...
As long as I'm being civil about it, who cares? I like it when people do it to me, I like discussing the issues. Helix is right, you guys use this subforum as your own tribal purity test. You should not be doing that. You folks remind me of DemocratUnderground where it's not enough to agree, but you have to agree for the same reasons. That's YOU on the pro-gun side.
 
Helix said:
it's an interesting discussion. i'd probably support flagging people who are buying a bunch of ammo. it should be pretty easy to separate the enthusiasts / target shooters from the insane / violent assholes.
Click to expand...

how so-and once again, how many shootings involved someone buying lots of ammo? I will clue you in. Serious tennis players hit thousands of balls a week. When I was a decent table tennis player (2100 or so USATT rating) I'd hit 1000 serves a week and play 6-7 hours a week and then another hour or two on a ball machine. When I taught squash and competed on the USSRA circuit I was on the court 15-20 hours a week. And when I was a resident at the USOTC for Skeet, I was shooting 600 targets or so a week-sometimes more. The guy who won the European IPSC champion years ago, Tommy Campbell was asked how many rounds he practiced in the three months of training before he won that event. he said SEVENTY THOUSAND, and the reporter said Rounds-and TC said no 70K in ammo (TC worked for Smith and Wesson and was testing and then using the prototypes of the 645 Double action 45 caliber pistol).

in other words, serious competitive shooters are just like serious tennis, squash, table tennis and golf competitions. They shoot LOTS of ammo.
 
TurtleDude said:
that seems like nothing solid. What are the checks and balances you want that are both constitutional and aren't a pathway to confiscation or banning., how many mentally ill people "build up stockpiles". Other than Paddock, can you name a single mass shooting that involved more than a couple guns?

Sandy Hook-NO
Columbine (two shooters) NO
Orlando Florida-NO
Va Tech-NO
Fort Hood-NO
Florida School shooting-NO
Gabby Giffords wounding-NO
Aurora Colorado Theater Shooting-NO
Luby's of Texas NO
San Ysidro McDonald's shooting-NO
San Bernardino Shooting (two shooters) NO
Texas tower (40+ years ago) NO
Dylan Root racist murders at church-NO
Texas Church shooting-NO
Paddock Las Vegas-Yes
Naval shipyard shooting-NO
Click to expand...

I wonder how many of those were gun-free zones...
 
Wayne Jr said:
As long as I'm being civil about it, who cares? I like it when people do it to me, I like discussing the issues. Helix is right, you guys use this subforum as your own tribal purity test. You should not be doing that. You folks remind me of DemocratUnderground where it's not enough to agree, but you have to agree for the same reasons. That's YOU on the pro-gun side.
Click to expand...

so in your mind, supporting some paths that others use to get to a gun ban is ok and those who oppose tools gun banners want to use-such as registration-are wrong?
 
Wayne Jr said:
I wonder how many of those were gun-free zones...
Click to expand...

Columbine-mainly, there was one armed guard
Orlando-completely gun free-cannot carry in a bar down there
Fort Hood-had armed guards-none of the victims could carry
Luby's of Texas-completely gun free zone-one of the survivors who had a firearm, left it in her purse so she wouldn't violate Texas laws at the time-she testified she could have stopped the shooter before he killed her parents
U of Texas-gun free but when the sniper started shooting, citizens arrived and helped pin him down with rifle fire and a private citizen-a veteran, backed up the police officer who went up the tower and killed the shooter. I believe both were decorated by the governor
Dylan Roof-I believe that church was gun free-none of the victims were armed
aurora Colorado-movie theater was a gun free zone
Giffords shooting-I think there were armed citizens in the crowd
San Ysidro McDonalds-no one had a hard to get carry permit
Naval Shipyard, none of the victims were armed nor were there any armed personnel in the area when the shooting started
 
TurtleDude said:
so in your mind, supporting some paths that others use to get to a gun ban is ok and those who oppose tools gun banners want to use-such as registration-are wrong?
Click to expand...
Someone people use I-90 to go commit murder, that doesn't mean I'm using I-90 to go commit murder. According to you, EVERYONE who uses I-90 MUST be going to commit murder simply because SOME people use I-90 to go commit murder. It's the 'guilt by association' logical fallacy. You do it all the time. Just because gun-banners want Safe Storage law does not mean all Safe Storage law supporters want to ban guns.

What's the saying....the truth doesn't become a lie just because the devil says it.
 
Wayne Jr said:
Someone people use I-90 to go commit murder, that doesn't mean I'm using I-90 to go commit murder. According to you, EVERYONE who uses I-90 MUST be going to commit murder simply because SOME people use I-90 to go commit murder. It's the 'guilt by association' logical fallacy. You do it all the time. Just because gun-banners want Safe Storage law does not mean all Safe Storage law supporters want to ban guns.

What's the saying....the truth doesn't become a lie just because the devil says it.
Click to expand...

that is a poor analogy. Safe storage laws can be used to disarm people who have not committed felonies or have engaged in harmful activity. I am sure there might be a couple people who want registration who do not support confiscation and I am sure that there are people who want the government to have the proper power to ban 100 round or 40 round magazines but don't support it banning 20 round magazines. However, if you think citizens should be able to own the same size magazines as cops-you'd be an idiot in supporting giving the government the power to ban 40 round magazines.
 
TurtleDude said:
that is a poor analogy.
Click to expand...
It's a perfect analogy.

TurtleDude said:
Safe storage laws can be used to disarm people who have not committed felonies or have engaged in harmful activity.
Click to expand...
That's every law. Politicians will use anything they can to curtail rights, that's why we need to pay attention to what they do and remove them when they cross a line. There is no safe-space for rights, any rights. Your rights are always in danger. There's nothing specific to Safe Storage that puts our rights at risk any more than any other law.
 
Wayne Jr said:
It's a perfect analogy.


That's every law. Politicians will use anything they can to curtail rights, that's why we need to pay attention to what they do and remove them when they cross a line. There is no safe-space for rights, any rights. Your rights are always in danger. There's nothing specific to Safe Storage that puts our rights at risk any more than any other law.
Click to expand...

I don't believe your analogy has much merit. What you are supporting is steps towards a gun ban but claiming that those steps won't lead to a ban.
 
TurtleDude said:
I don't believe your analogy has much merit.
Click to expand...
That's too bad because it's perfect, an exact representation of how you behave on this forum.

TurtleDude said:
What you are supporting is steps towards a gun ban but claiming that those steps won't lead to a ban.
Click to expand...
Safe Storage leads to gun-bans if you take it that far just like I-90 leads to Bosten if you take it that far. That doesn't mean everyone who wants Safe Storage wants to ban guns just like not everyone who wants to use I-90 also wants to go to Bosten. We stop before we get that far.

I know a guy who wants to rais the federal minimum age to buy handguns to 21. Such a law could lead to a gun-ban, but he wouldn't take it that far. My brother likes the idea of requiring everyone to complete a comprehensive training course, and such a law could lead to gun-bans if it were taken that far. My brother wouldn't take it that far, however, because he doesn't want to ban guns.
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
how so-and once again, how many shootings involved someone buying lots of ammo? I will clue you in. Serious tennis players hit thousands of balls a week. When I was a decent table tennis player (2100 or so USATT rating) I'd hit 1000 serves a week and play 6-7 hours a week and then another hour or two on a ball machine. When I taught squash and competed on the USSRA circuit I was on the court 15-20 hours a week. And when I was a resident at the USOTC for Skeet, I was shooting 600 targets or so a week-sometimes more. The guy who won the European IPSC champion years ago, Tommy Campbell was asked how many rounds he practiced in the three months of training before he won that event. he said SEVENTY THOUSAND, and the reporter said Rounds-and TC said no 70K in ammo (TC worked for Smith and Wesson and was testing and then using the prototypes of the 645 Double action 45 caliber pistol).

in other words, serious competitive shooters are just like serious tennis, squash, table tennis and golf competitions. They shoot LOTS of ammo.
Click to expand...

"serious competitive shooters" should be an easy enough variable to filter. in the event that one of them trips an alarm occasionally, i'm sure that they'll live through explaining that they are a serious competitive shooter.
 
Helix said:
"serious competitive shooters" should be an easy enough variable to filter. in the event that one of them trips an alarm occasionally, i'm sure that they'll live through explaining that they are a serious competitive shooter.
Click to expand...

But the harrassment!!!!!!
 
Helix said:
I have no idea about your level of skill. In my own experience with firearms, I have been around a lot of people who desperately needed education and oversight when it came to properly handling guns, though. Any honest gun enthusiast would admit the same. However, that category is in short supply lately.
Click to expand...

I have been around a lot of people who desperately needed education and oversight when it came to properly handling guns
Click to expand...

Then tell them Helix that Gun safety is one google away

I'm glad I can help





:poke
 
Last edited:
vegas giants said:
But the harrassment!!!!!!
Click to expand...

we all have freedom of speech under the first amendment. however, typing certain statements online virtually guarantees a visit from the SS. i don't see how flagging large ammo purchases for scrutiny is that much of a difference.
 
Helix said:
we all have freedom of speech under the first amendment. however, typing certain statements online virtually guarantees a visit from the SS. i don't see how flagging large ammo purchases for scrutiny is that much of a difference.
Click to expand...
Most criminals, including mass shooters, do not buy large quantities of ammo. You're barking up the wrong tree.

Besides, if I'm the criminal then I'm either making undocumented purchases, or documented small purchases and saving it, or representing myself as one such avid shooter.
 
Wayne Jr said:
Most criminals, including mass shooters, do not buy large quantities of ammo. You're barking up the wrong tree.

Besides, if I'm the criminal then I'm either making undocumented purchases, or documented small purchases and saving it, or representing myself as one such avid shooter.
Click to expand...

while i'm generally supportive of your hobby, i'm about one mass shooting nutter killing a family member away from supporting more serious gun control laws that would affect you personally. i expect that most neutral Americans fall into that category. with mass shootings happening weekly, it's not unimaginable that the tide will turn. if guns were my all-encompassing hobby, i would definitely support keeping them away from those who are too stupid, violent, or crazy to handle them responsibly. at the very least, i would support flagging purchases that look like someone is prepping for a mass shooting. the Democrats, lefties, or gun grabbing independents aren't your worst enemy. nutcases who shoot civilians are. now, i understand that there is no room for rational thought in a gun discussion and that this reality will fall on deaf ears. however, it is what it is.
 
Wayne Jr said:
We have the 8hr class here in Ohio and it's a joke. Training is great but when you legally require it you lower the quality because instructors are more concerned with cranking out certificates in volume than giving you your money's worth. 1 class isn't going to make you a more responsible gun owner anyway.

1 class does not reduce negligent discharges or road rage in the first place tho. If you were careless before you took the class then you will be careless after the class. If you had a temper before the class then you will have a temper after the class.
Click to expand...

1 class denies liberals the ammunition of adding the words "no training" to the headlines when one of those careless idiots carrying legally makes a choice that leads to tragedy. It may not prevent tragedy, but it may at least help prevent one from leading to a legislative over-correction by frightened liberals in the wake of one.
 
Helix said:
while i'm generally supportive of your hobby, i'm about one mass shooting nutter killing a family member away from supporting more serious gun control laws that would affect you personally. i expect that most neutral Americans fall into that category. with mass shootings happening weekly, it's not unimaginable that the tide will turn. if guns were my all-encompassing hobby, i would definitely support keeping them away from those who are too stupid, violent, or crazy to handle them responsibly. at the very least, i would support flagging purchases that look like someone is prepping for a mass shooting. the Democrats, lefties, or gun-grabbing independents aren't your worst enemy. nutcases who shoot civilians are. now, i understand that there is no room for rational thought in a gun discussion and that this reality will fall on deaf ears. however, it is what it is.
Click to expand...
Gun control hasn't stopped a single mass shooter yet. More gun control will not prevent additional mass shootings, either.

News flash: criminals do not obey the law. The only way to stop them is to kill them, which means a broad allowance of firearms, which means practice, which means no recording of ammunition purchasing.
 
lwf said:
1 class denies liberals the ammunition of adding the words "no training" to the headlines when one of those careless idiots carrying legally makes a choice that leads to tragedy. It may not prevent tragedy, but it may at least help prevent one from leading to a legislative over-correction by frightened liberals in the wake of one.
Click to expand...

Please apply the rules of English grammar to your post and try again.
 
Wayne Jr said:
Gun control hasn't stopped a single mass shooter yet. More gun control will not prevent additional mass shootings, either.

News flash: criminals do not obey the law. The only way to stop them is to kill them, which means a broad allowance of firearms, which means practice, which means no recording of ammunition purchasing.
Click to expand...

You can not possibly know that. Gun control may have stopped thousands of mass shootings.
 
Wayne Jr said:
Please apply the rules of English grammar to your post and try again.
Click to expand...

Man, that was the weakest bow-out I've ever encountered on this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom