• 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!

Thailand Shooting Spree

BlueTex said:
How many commanders have authorized carrying on a military installation? And who have they authorized?
Click to expand...

This should Answer you


many locations do not allow any personal firearms to be brought on the installation or stored in base housing or barracks.
Click to expand...
 
Luther said:
This should Answer you
Click to expand...

How can those commanders sleep at night..... Leaving their soldiers as sitting ducks.. what do they know that you don't?
 
BlueTex said:
How can those commanders sleep at night..... Leaving their soldiers as sitting ducks.. what do they know that you don't?
Click to expand...

Well , I got both my Daughter and Son in law in the Air force

Guess what?

They're unarmed

Yep(Angry)
 
Luther said:
Well , I got both my Daughter and Son in law in the Air force

Guess what?

They're unarmed

Yep(Angry)
Click to expand...


Hmmm... What do their commanders know that you seem to be missing?... hmmmmm.....
 
BlueTex said:
Hmmm... What do their commanders know that you seem to be missing?... hmmmmm.....
Click to expand...

Obviously nothing for they're not armed!
 
Irredentist said:
Weapons should be distributed on an as needed basis. Only sentries should be carrying them on base.
Click to expand...

Sentries need to be armed with (loaded) guns?


In London, the ceremonial guards do not carry loaded guns.
 
DebateChallenge said:
And if a sentry decides to go on a shooting spree?
Click to expand...

In 1988 I spent some time "guarding" the Berlin Wall. Have you ever seen the movie "The Great Escape" with Steve McQueen ? The sequence where he attempts to "jump" over a barbed wire fence on a motorbike? Away from the city, the Berlin Wall looked like that.


We manned a guard tower and opposite was a member of the Volkssturm in his.
We had no bullets for our SLR, Im pretty sure his AK-74 was loaded.
 
zsu2357 said:
Before I even scroll down, someone is probably already blaming Trump or the NRA if not both. Just saying.
Click to expand...

Any time someone is given a loaded gun around people, there is the potential for a mass shooting.
 
Rich2018 said:
Any time someone is given a loaded gun around people, there is the potential for a mass shooting.
Click to expand...

Not if the other people also have loaded guns in which case they can shoot him as soon as he starts the mass shooting.
 
DebateChallenge said:
Not if the other people also have loaded guns in which case they can shoot him as soon as he starts the mass shooting.
Click to expand...

But then the mass shooting has already happened...would you place a guard on the guards...how about a guard on them...and a guard on them.

If everyone has a gun, you have the Wild West.

Better no-one has guns except law enforcement.
 
Rich2018 said:
But then the mass shooting has already happened...would you place a guard on the guards...how about a guard on them...and a guard on them.

If everyone has a gun, you have the Wild West.
Click to expand...
From my experience, and I've had experiences where everybody has a gun, it does not turn into a shooting spree.
BTW there wasn't much in the way of shooting sprees in the real Old West, gunfights were quite rare, unlike how Hollywood makes it look, you've been watching too many cowboy movies.

Rich2018 said:
Better no-one has guns except law enforcement.
Click to expand...
So you put your blanket trust in law enforcement, that's really naive.
 
DebateChallenge said:
From my experience, and I've had experiences where everybody has a gun, it does not turn into a shooting spree.
BTW there wasn't much in the way of shooting sprees in the real Old West, gunfights were quite rare, unlike how Hollywood makes it look, you've been watching too many cowboy movies.
Click to expand...

How would you suggest armed citizens protect from a shooting like we saw from Stephen Paddock in Vegas ?


So you put your blanket trust in law enforcement, that's really naive.
Click to expand...

Seems to work where there's a gun ban
eg: the UK and three recent terrorist attacks in London (where the terrorists had no access to guns)


Contrast this with a terrorist incident in New Jersey last year:

4 deaths, including a cop. Where were your armed citizens to stop it?
 
Rich2018 said:
How would you suggest armed citizens protect from a shooting like we saw from Stephen Paddock in Vegas ?
Click to expand...
There wasn't really anything anybody could do about Paddock and the shooting spree he went on including having more restrictive gun control. No amount of gun control would've stopped Paddock.

Rich2018 said:
Seems to work where there's a gun ban
eg: the UK and three recent terrorist attacks in London (where the terrorists had no access to guns)
Click to expand...
So they resort to stabbing and vehicle ramming.


Rich2018 said:
Contrast this with a terrorist incident in New Jersey last year:

4 deaths, including a cop. Where were your armed citizens to stop it?
Click to expand...
This is New Jersey we're talking about, the chances of finding armed citizens there is close to zero.
 
DebateChallenge said:
There wasn't really anything anybody could do about Paddock...
Click to expand...

Ban guns so he couldn't buy them

It seems that the gun owning lobby is just accepting mass shootings as a bearable consequence of the right to bear arms

Like Paddock's victims and the victim's of other mass shooters are nothing

And that the only response they offer is arrest AFTER the fact


So they resort to stabbing and vehicle ramming.
Click to expand...

Some do, most don't attack people at all.

Terrorist knife attacks have proven to be far less deadly.

Vehicle attacks have proven to be far less common

Attacks by hijacking an aircraft seem to have been prevented following 9/11


This is New Jersey we're talking about, the chances of finding armed citizens there is close to zero.
Click to expand...

Was not the cop armed ?


Bottom line people were killed by guns, not injured by knife as was the case in a recent London terrorist attack.
 
Rich2018 said:
Ban guns so he couldn't buy them

It seems that the gun owning lobby is just accepting mass shootings as a bearable consequence of the right to bear arms

Like Paddock's victims and the victim's of other mass shooters are nothing

And that the only response they offer is arrest AFTER the fact
Click to expand...
No amount of gun control would've stopped Paddock what with him being as well funded as he was.




Rich2018 said:
Some do, most don't attack people at all.

Terrorist knife attacks have proven to be far less deadly.
Click to expand...
Really? 2014 Kunming attack - Wikipedia

Rich2018 said:
Vehicle attacks have proven to be far less common
Click to expand...
And they're increasing in frequency.

Rich2018 said:
Attacks by hijacking an aircraft seem to have been prevented following 9/11
Click to expand...
And if the aircraft is privately owned, then what?

Rich2018 said:
Was not the cop armed ?
Click to expand...
In New Jersey your chances of finding armed citizens who aren't cops is close to zero.

Rich2018 said:
Bottom line people were killed by guns, not injured by knife as was the case in a recent London terrorist attack.
Click to expand...
People can be killed in knife attacks too as I pointed out above.
 
DebateChallenge said:
No amount of gun control would've stopped Paddock...
Click to expand...

Except a ban on the guns he bought and used in the LV shooting


Really
Click to expand...

Yes really

Look up the definition of "most"


And they're increasing in frequency.
Click to expand...

Where's your evidence of this


And if the aircraft is privately owned, then what?
Click to expand...

Then so far, they haven't been hi-jacked
So controls put in place after 9/11 seem to be working


In New Jersey your chances of finding armed citizens who aren't cops is close to zero.
Click to expand...

Evidence ?

Doesn't New Jersey issue CCW's ?


People can be killed in knife attacks too as I pointed out above.
Click to expand...


But not so much in lieu of a mass shooting.
 
Rich2018 said:
Except a ban on the guns he bought and used in the LV shooting
Click to expand...
You've admitted yourself that no amount of gun control is going to stop somebody whose well funded. Paddock was very well funded being a multimillionaire and all.

Rich2018 said:
Yes really

Look up the definition of "most"
Click to expand...
Bombings and arsons on the average kill more people than shootings or stabbings.

Rich2018 said:
Where's your evidence of this
Click to expand...
Have you been watching the news the last few years?

Rich2018 said:
Then so far, they haven't been hi-jacked
So controls put in place after 9/11 seem to be working
Click to expand...
You don't need to hi-jack a plane you privately own to fly it into a building or some other area where there's lots of people.

Rich2018 said:
Evidence ?

Doesn't New Jersey issue CCW's ?
Click to expand...
Technically NJ does issue CCWs but its very rarely ever done. NJ is a may issue state which means they may issue you a CCW if you apply for one if a judge decides you need one and most NJ judges are not going to issue a CCW for most reasons. The only way I can think of that can guarantee you would get a CCW in NJ is if you have a job where you carry a gun.

Rich2018 said:
But not so much in lieu of a mass shooting.
Click to expand...
And as I pointed out there are other methods of mass killing that can kill just as many or more people than mass shootings.
 
Those who do not study history are going to be ridiculed as foolish by those who do. Prohibition didn't stop drinking-rather it made gangsters rich. Same with the war on drugs. Pretending a gun ban will prevent criminals from obtaining firearms is a faith based argument that isn't even really believed by those who advocate it.
 
TurtleDude said:
Those who do not study history are going to be ridiculed as foolish by those who do. Prohibition didn't stop drinking-rather it made gangsters rich. Same with the war on drugs. Pretending a gun ban will prevent criminals from obtaining firearms is a faith based argument that isn't even really believed by those who advocate it.
Click to expand...

So because banning alcohol didn't work, banning guns wouldn't either ?

So by that score, banning anything - that is any object/item to prevent your smart comments - is useless ?
 
Rich2018 said:
So because banning alcohol didn't work, banning guns wouldn't either ?

So by that score, banning anything - that is any object/item to prevent your smart comments - is useless ?
Click to expand...

Banning anything has never worked. I can get anything I want.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom