• 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!

VA Senate Votes Down Gun Ban

ecofarm said:
No way, buddy.

He's talking about the political ramifications of presumed crimes. Same as you.
Click to expand...

wrong, he is advocating prior restraint involving confiscation of firearms because someone might later use the firearm to shoot him
 
TurtleDude said:
wrong, he is advocating prior restraint involving confiscation of firearms because someone might later use the firearm to shoot him
Click to expand...

He's calling for political action based on presumed crimes. Same thing.
 
ecofarm said:
He's calling for political action based on presumed crimes. Same thing.
Click to expand...

He is calling for the rights of millions to be stripped so he doesn't suffer irrational fear
 
TurtleDude said:
He is calling for the rights of millions to be stripped so he doesn't suffer irrational fear
Click to expand...

Why is the fear of being shot, or loved one being shot, or just anyone being shot, in a random mass shooting, irrational.

Last year these mass shootings happened more than once per day.


What frequency would make this fear "rational" in your eyes ?


or you are a woman walking alone one night and a guy with a clean record decides to become a serial rapist murderer. In my ideal society, she stops the attack with a 9mm lobotomy. in your ideal society, she is found raped and sodomized and strangled by her own tights or belt.
Click to expand...

In your ideal society she is robbed/raped at gun point.


you seem to be ignorant of the concept of innocent until proven guilty.
Click to expand...

Again you betray a lack of legal knowledge I would expect any lawyer to know.

Only a human is innocent until proven guilty

An inanimate object is guilty until proven innocent.
 
Last edited:
Chillfolks said:
You clearly established that rights of ownership are secondary to thr rights of life and liberty. Now that this idea is tossed back at you but doesn’t help your argument you dismiss it as what about ism. Are ownership rights based off the potential to cause harm or not?
Click to expand...

What-about-ism

You seek to deflect attention away from guns


It's like a naughty school boy being punished wailing that why is he being punished when John is even naughtier than him.


If you have an issue with cars, start a thread to ban them, I think that legislators are ahead of you in trying to make, what is an essential item, safer.
 
Rich2018 said:
Why is the fear of being shot, or loved one being shot, or just anyone being shot, in a random mass shooting, irrational.

Last year these mass shootings happened more than once per day.


What frequency would make this fear "rational" in your eyes ?




In your ideal society she is robbed/raped at gun point.




Again you betray a lack of legal knowledge I would expect any lawyer to know.

Only a human is innocent until proven guilty

An inanimate object is guilty until proven innocent.
Click to expand...
massive dishonest diversion-banning gun ownership harms HUMANS
 
Royal PITA said:
LOL. Obviously you don't know the definition of whataboutism.

Of course you'd seek to ban those too because that's how you roll. Your posts are all over this forum seeking to control what others do, believe and think.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's seeking to deflect attention away from what is being examined to other things.

Deflecting attention away from the carnage caused by guns by trying to move it to something like automobiles is pure "what-about-ism"
It's basically saying the deaths and injuries caused by guns are perfectly OK because cars cause more.
 
TurtleDude said:
massive dishonest diversion-banning gun ownership harms HUMANS
Click to expand...

So you admit that after some legal schooling, inanimate objects like guns are guilty until proven innocent ?


You have nothing to say, you're just "pounding the table"



There is an old adage among lawyers that says, "If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts; if you have the law on your side, pound the law; if you have neither the facts nor the law, pound the table."
 
Rich2018 said:
So you admit that after some legal schooling, inanimate objects like guns are guilty until proven innocent ?


You have nothing to say, you're just "pounding the table"



There is an old adage among lawyers that says, "If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts; if you have the law on your side, pound the law; if you have neither the facts nor the law, pound the table."
Click to expand...

you're just posting inane nonsense in your usual manner of trying to spam gun threads with hoplophobic nonsense. People have a right to keep and bear arms. A right that is part of our societal fabric and for which people have died to protect and killed others to keep. You want to wash that away so you won't suffer irrational fear. That is an idiotic argument
 
TurtleDude said:
you're just posting inane nonsense in your usual manner of trying to spam gun threads with hoplophobic nonsense. People have a right to keep and bear arms. A right that is part of our societal fabric and for which people have died to protect and killed others to keep. You want to wash that away so you won't suffer irrational fear. That is an idiotic argument
Click to expand...

While it may well be simply an irrational fear and while, IMO, far too many far RWers demonize anyone to the left of their own extreme position, I see Rich’s form of authoritarianism as far more insidious and destructive the our nation than a simple political disagreement on how to reduce “gun deaths”. Such people use “gun control” and “we’re just trying to save lives” to mask an evil intent: dividing Americans and seeking to deprive them of their rights.
 
TurtleDude said:
you're just posting inane nonsense...
Click to expand...

You mean stuff that you don't understand...or dare not acknowledge


I'll tell you again, and refute it if you can: people are innocent until proven guilty (in US criminal justice that is), whereas an inanimate object is guilty until proven innocent


If it's "inane nonsense" your 30 years of experience as a lawyer should enable you to provide evidence to the contrary. But you can't so I guess "pound the table" is the best you can do.



in your usual manner of trying to spam gun threads with hoplophobic nonsense....
Click to expand...

Is that some legal term or one you just made up? I suspect the latter...now that is a candidate for "inane nonsense"


People have a right to keep and bear arms.
Click to expand...


Of course, why do you even mention it...is it more evidence of "pounding the table" ?


A right that is part of our societal fabric and for which people have died to protect and killed others to keep....
Click to expand...

No. That's entirely in your opinion.


You want to wash that away so you won't suffer irrational fear. That is an idiotic argument
Click to expand...


No, I want to "wash it away" to save life and injury

The "idiotic argument" is that 40,000 deaths and 70,000+ gun related injuries pa, is something worth keeping much less the obscene suggestion that people fought and died to preserve.
 
TurtleDude said:
wrong, he is advocating prior restraint involving confiscation of firearms because someone might later use the firearm to shoot him
Click to expand...

Agreed. The same logic applies to banning automobiles because someone might use it to run over people, baseball bats because they might be used by muggers, etc.

Again, those advocating this type of "prior restraint" seek to empower the Federal government with the ability to prosecute "thoughtcrime". Literally right out of Orwell's "1984". Not the first time Rich as proposed or danced with Totalitarian Socialism.

Thoghtcrime.jpg
 
Michael Bloomberg poured a lot of money into Virginia to get this gun ban. When it passed in the House Bloomberg was ecstatic and is on video. But when the Virginia Senate voted it down he hasn't said a thing. Congrats to Virginians maintaining their 2nd Amendment rights. But there are more bills in the works to dwindle those rights in Virginia. Stay strong.
 
vesper said:
Michael Bloomberg poured a lot of money into Virginia to get this gun ban. When it passed in the House Bloomberg was ecstatic and is on video. But when the Virginia Senate voted it down he hasn't said a thing. Congrats to Virginians maintaining their 2nd Amendment rights. But there are more bills in the works to dwindle those rights in Virginia. Stay strong.
Click to expand...

The people of Virginia need to vote out those scum sucking assholes who are pawns of Mini-Mike the Midget Martinet
 
TurtleDude said:
The people of Virginia need to vote out those scum sucking assholes who are pawns of Mini-Mike the Midget Martinet
Click to expand...

Here's hoping they do Turtle because James Madison,Thomas Jefferson, George Mason, Thomas Paine and Patrick Henry and a slew more are spinning in their graves over what is going on. But then again I doubt a good number of persons I just mentioned the voters in Virginia have little knowledge of them on none at all and have the right to vote..
 
Rich2018 said:
The truth is, the USA allows a virtually unchecked supply of firearms to the people
Click to expand...
True enough. :2razz:

Rich2018 said:
and this results in tens of thousands of deaths and injuries each year.
Click to expand...
The USA also allows a virtually unchecked supply of automobiles to the people and this results in more deaths and injuries than from guns, your point?

Rich2018 said:
I suspect those trying to rebuild their lives after surviving a gunshot wound or the loss of a loved one to guns, feel way more pain.
Click to expand...
And people who survive car crashes and/or lose a loved one from a car crash feel just as much pain, I know because Im one of them, yet I don't blame cars or the availability of cars and I don't think most other people who fall under that category do.

Rich2018 said:
So yes, the truth hurts. Big time.
Click to expand...
It must really hurt for you, about the kind of gun control you fantasize about never coming to be.

Rich2018 said:
Yes it can.

Maybe you have heard of the civil war ?

Or more recently:

"In September 1957, President Eisenhower sent federal troops to Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas to enforce the Court’s desegregation order..."


"Massive Resistance" and the Little Rock Nine (article) | Khan Academy
Click to expand...
The only time the Army can get involved in domestic conflicts is in a national emergency. The Civil War was a national emergency.

Rich2018 said:
That is exactly what the gun control lobby is trying to achieve*

*Though personally I think British gun laws that allow certain guns should be used as a template in the USA.
Click to expand...
What I meant was, if you don't like guns the solution for you is to not own any guns. If the people that make up the gun control lobby don't like guns the solution for them is to not own any guns although as ridiculous as it is some of them do own guns such as Kamala Harris and Michael Bloomberg what with them being big hypocrites.

So if you don't want to own guns that's your choice. If the people in the gun control lobby don't want to own guns that's their choice, but that's where it stops. It is not for you to say whether other people own guns. So if you don't like guns don't own any yourself, problem solved, and keep your nose out of other people's business about whether or not they want to own guns.
 
DebateChallenge said:
The USA also allows a virtually unchecked supply of automobiles to the people and this results in more deaths and injuries than from guns, your point?
Click to expand...

And we register every single car.... We take them away when you are irresponsible... We license every driver and have escalating penalties for operating those cars without a license... We regulate the safety of those cars... Agreed... Let's treat firearms exactly the same way
 
BlueTex said:
And we register every single car.... We take them away when you are irresponsible... We license every driver and have escalating penalties for operating those cars without a license... We regulate the safety of those cars... Agreed... Let's treat firearms exactly the same way
Click to expand...
Nope, that's only for driving cars on public roads, which is a privilege not a right. Anybody with the money can buy a car without registering it and anybody can own a car without registering it or having a license. Registration and licensing is only required for driving cars on public roads. They don't take your car away if you're an irresponsible driver they take your license away which means you can't drive on public roads. There are people who own cars only for use on their own property and they don't register them because they don't have to.
 
ludin said:
damn there are a few democrats that still go by the constitution.
they should switch parties quick before the mob comes for their heads.
Click to expand...

And which party should they join? The one currently in power and crapping all over the constitution?
 
DebateChallenge said:
Nope, that's only for driving cars on public roads, which is a privilege not a right. Anybody with the money can buy a car without registering it and anybody can own a car without registering it or having a license. Registration and licensing is only required for driving cars on public roads. They don't take your car away if you're an irresponsible driver they take your license away which means you can't drive on public roads. There are people who own cars only for use on their own property and they don't register them because they don't have to.
Click to expand...

And what happens when an unregistered car is found not on private property?

Agreed... I will agree to absolutely no restrictions of firearms that remain solely on your private property... Once you take a firearm outside of your private property I reserve the right to tell you what, when and where you can take that firearm... I'm not restricting your right at all on YOUR property...
 
bongsaway said:
And which party should they join? The one currently in power and crapping all over the constitution?
Click to expand...

again that would be democrats.
thanks for admitting it.
 
ludin said:
again that would be democrats.
thanks for admitting it.
Click to expand...

And thanks for using alternative facts to prove your point that the republicans control the white house and the senate but the democrats are in power by your thinking. Weird.
 
bongsaway said:
And thanks for using alternative facts to prove your point that the republicans control the white house and the senate but the democrats are in power by your thinking. Weird.
Click to expand...

They were not alternative facts. Democrat control the house.
why did you leave that out of your post?

nothing the republicans have done was unconstitutional.
in fact they stopped an unconstitutional act from happening.
 
Last edited:
BlueTex said:
And what happens when an unregistered car is found not on private property?

Agreed... I will agree to absolutely no restrictions of firearms that remain solely on your private property... Once you take a firearm outside of your private property I reserve the right to tell you what, when and where you can take that firearm... I'm not restricting your right at all on YOUR property...
Click to expand...

you have 0 rights to dictate what someone does on public property.
either. they have constitutional rights that apply outside of their house as well.

also all handguns are already registered. in fact getting caught with an unregistered handgun is 1-5.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom