• 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!

The gun control debate is over and progressives have lost

Rich2018 said:
Because unless we criminalize taking drugs, you or a loved one may descend into this dangerous habit
Click to expand...

So when you said that the purpose of law enforcement is to protect people, you meant to protect people from themselves?
 
Fishking said:
Ummm...it's not over at all. I'm very pro-gun but I'm not divorced from reality. The gun control crowd has made lots of gains over the years and will continue to do so. The area they have been making the most gains is in public opinion. I think they will win in the end. That's the cycle of things.
Click to expand...

No, they have lost big time, particularly during the Obama administration. They will lose in the end, their loss has already started.
 
jamesbyoung said:
Any one whos says gun control is banning is either a drunk, mentally feeble, a fool, malignantly motivated, or a combination of any or all of the above.
Click to expand...
You've just described the gun control crowd when you said "all of the above."
 
Rich2018 said:
Private ownership of guns needs to be banned* and the 2nd amendment repealed.


Subject to certain exemption
Click to expand...
Yadda Yadda Yadda. We've heard it all before.

Rich2018 said:
Civilized countries use their police force for protection in quite a successful way.

What limits Americans for using the police in the same way ?
Click to expand...
When seconds matter the police are minutes away.
 
paul342160 said:
When African-Americans, Hispanics, and Asians apply for gun permits, gun owners will want gun control.
Click to expand...

Why? They have as much of a right to own guns as any American citizen.
 
Rich2018 said:
I think you mean "what"

It is to protect the people and enforce the law (which really is the same thing).
Click to expand...

Enforcing the law is not the same as protecting the people, not when it involves seizing guns from innocent people.
 
Rich2018 said:
Yes it is, think about it. What the enforcement of what law (OK, I guess an exception would be "blasphemy") could not be argued as protecting the people ?
Click to expand...

The enforcement of laws that prohibit "victimless crime" is not protecting the people.
 
aociswundumho said:
You know the world will not come to an end if you admit you were wrong about something.
Click to expand...

He's too stubborn to do that, although he is no different than lots of people in that regard.
 
jamesbyoung View Post
Any one whos says gun control is banning is either a drunk, mentally feeble, a fool, malignantly motivated, or a combination of any or all of the above.

DebateChallenge said:
You've just described the gun control crowd when you said "all of the above."
Click to expand...

You just proved my point.
 
DebateChallenge said:
When seconds matter the police are minutes away.
Click to expand...

To quote yourself:

"Yadda Yadda Yadda. We've heard it all before."


Enforcing the law is not the same as protecting the people, not when it involves seizing guns from innocent people.
Click to expand...

Yes it is

Because who is to say who is "innocent"

Do you care if you're shot by an active shooter who was a convicted felon or an "innocent" citizen ?

If the police seized guns, IMO, every one seized is potentially one less that can be used on me


The enforcement of laws that prohibit "victimless crime" is not protecting the people.
Click to expand...

"Blasphemy" I grant you is a victimless crime and blasphemy laws should not exist

What other laws can you think of though ?
 
Last edited:
Rich2018 said:
I think we might see a seismic shift in US politics come November.
Click to expand...

In the direction of people wanting more gun rights, absolutely. Especially in the wake of the Coronavirus and the rioting.
 
Rich2018 said:
To quote yourself:

"Yadda Yadda Yadda. We've heard it all before."
Click to expand...
And yet it hasn't registered no matter how many times you've heard it.

Rich2018 said:
Yes it is

Because who is to say who is "innocent"
Click to expand...
Anybody who isn't guilty is innocent, that's how the system in the USA works, you're innocent until proven guilty.

Rich2018 said:
Do you care if you're shot by an active shooter who was a convicted felon or an "innocent" citizen ?
Click to expand...
An active shooter isn't an innocent citizen.

Rich2018 said:
If the police seized guns, IMO, every one seized is potentially one less that can be used on me
Click to expand...
Guns seized from criminals yes, guns seized from innocent people no.

Seizing guns from innocent people leaves them defenseless, that is not protecting them its the opposite of protecting them.
 
DebateChallenge said:
In the direction of people wanting more gun rights, absolutely. Especially in the wake of the Coronavirus and the rioting.
Click to expand...

In terms of a rise in Democratic Congressmen

Trump is damaging the electability of the GOP and it's not unimaginable that they could lose the presidency and the Senate

A Trump's lack of leadership is really telling now....he's failed at protecting America from COVID-19, and now he's hiding in a White House bunker as America burns
He's like a caricature of the Emperor Nero playing his lyre as Rome burned


And yet it hasn't registered no matter how many times you've heard it.
Click to expand...


I could say the same to you


Anybody who isn't guilty is innocent, that's how the system in the USA works, you're innocent until proven guilty.
Click to expand...

So a cop at Parkland was unable to stop the shooting because a court had not passed a verdict yet ?


An active shooter isn't an innocent citizen.
Click to expand...

Like Stephen Paddock, who was an innocent citizen....until he pulled the trigger


So the question remains, who is an "innocent" citizen and how is anyone to know that now or how they'll act in the future.
Innocent now, doesn't mean you're not an active shooter in 5 minutes time


Guns seized from criminals yes, guns seized from innocent people no.
Click to expand...

Tell that to Stephen Paddock's victims - the ones still alive that is

Guns owned by "innocent citizens" are perfectly capable of harming me - and it might not be the owner using them


Seizing guns from innocent people leaves them defenseless, that is not protecting them its the opposite of protecting them.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't

1. I have no guns, yet do not consider myself defenseless
2. Even strict British gun laws allow for some guns - you know this so you're using a deliberate straw man here


Prostitution
Click to expand...

The argument is that it protects American morals and therefore protects Americans

Like nudity in public, on TV etc

Like giving movies censorship ratings so people can avoid movies with certain content

You could also make an argument for the prevention of the spreading of disease.
 
More evidence that the debate is over and progressives have lost:

moreguns.jpg
 
aociswundumho said:
More evidence that the debate is over and progressives have lost:
Click to expand...

Actually Trump's idea that tear gassing people in order to use a Bible as a prop in a photo opportunity, is his idea of "leadership" will do more to bring about a government favoring gun control than not.
 
Rich2018 said:
Actually Trump's idea that tear gassing people in order to use a Bible as a prop in a photo opportunity, is his idea of "leadership" will do more to bring about a government favoring gun control than not.
Click to expand...

It's got nothing to do with Trump.

People place a high value on security for themselves and their families. They see idiot looters and rioters in the news and correctly recognize how dangerous these morons really are. Imagine someone on the fence about gun control and both of us talk to him:

You: Don't worry, the police will protect you. If a looter attacks you, just call the police and wait patiently for them to arrive. You don't need a gun.

Me: You alone are responsible for your own safety the safety of your family. Arm yourself and shoot any looter that breaks into your home.


Honestly, who would be stupid enough to find your side of the argument convincing? Hell, you don't even believe that nonsense.
 
aociswundumho said:
It's got nothing to do with Trump.
Click to expand...

Actually, electorally wise it does

People who are turned off by Trump (or any president/candidate) tend to not vote for senators/congressmen of the same party

So Trump's unpopularity will have a side effect of lowering the vote for other Republican politicians

And that means the Democrats might well take a clean sweep in November.


People place a high value on security for themselves and their families. They see idiot looters and rioters in the news and correctly recognize how dangerous these morons really are. Imagine someone on the fence about gun control and both of us talk to him:
Click to expand...

Two weeks ago Biden had an 8 point lead over Trump, yesterday it was a 10 point lead:

US Election 2020: Biden has 10-point lead over Trump in poll | Daily Mail Online


Trump is losing support as the man who claims he will protect America
He failed over COVID-19 and he's failing even worse now

On top of that some 52% say he's racist:

52 per cent of Americans say Donald Trump is a RACIST | Daily Mail Online


You: Don't worry, the police will protect you. If a looter attacks you, just call the police and wait patiently for them to arrive. You don't need a gun.
Click to expand...

You don't
In fact having a weapon just makes you a target

Then again, we've not seen too many instances of rioters attacking private houses


(cue certain posters spending hours trawling the 'Net looking for a house that go a window broken)


Me: You alone are responsible for your own safety the safety of your family. Arm yourself and shoot any looter that breaks into your home.
Click to expand...


No, the police will tel you (assuming they're not in a homicidal mood that day) that they're just trying to keep everyone safe

Arm yourself by all means if you want, I just wouldn't recommend you do so with a gun.


Honestly, who would be stupid enough to find your side of the argument convincing? Hell, you don't even believe that nonsense.
Click to expand...


Then why are the majority of Americans not in possession of a gun ?
Are they all "stupid" ?
 
Rich2018 said:
No, the police will tel you (assuming they're not in a homicidal mood that day) that they're just trying to keep everyone safe
Click to expand...

Except they're not and they couldn't even if they wanted to.

Arm yourself by all means if you want, I just wouldn't recommend you do so with a gun.
Click to expand...

No, a gun and some training is by far the best means of self-defense. That is indisputable.


Then why are the majority of Americans not in possession of a gun ?
Are they all "stupid" ?
Click to expand...

I didn't say stupid, you did. It's a matter of costs and benefits. I just looked it up and 43% of American households have at least one gun already. The longer these riots keep up the worse it is for the gun control movement. Who would have thought there would be a silver lining to idiots rioting and looting?
 
aociswundumho said:
Except they're not and they couldn't even if they wanted to.
Click to expand...

What do you think they're trying to do ?


No, a gun and some training is by far the best means of self-defense. That is indisputable.
Click to expand...

I would dispute it

A gun usually gives you one option (shooting to wound is legally fraught) and can lead to hesitation, where a non-lethal means would not
A gun's use cannot be taken back, so if you shoot someone, you might kill someone/something (like a family pet) you don't want to (whereas they can recover from a on-lethal attack like MACE)
A gun also makes you less safe in your home


I didn't say stupid, you did...
Click to expand...

Ahem. Post #70:

Honestly, who would be stupid enough to find your side of the argument convincing? Hell, you don't even believe that nonsense.
Click to expand...

Care to retract ?


It's a matter of costs and benefits. I just looked it up and 43% of American households have at least one gun already. The longer these riots keep up the worse it is for the gun control movement. Who would have thought there would be a silver lining to idiots rioting and looting?
Click to expand...


So that's most Americans DON'T have guns.
 
Rich2018 said:
What do you think they're trying to do ?
Click to expand...

Idk, find the best donut shop?


I would dispute it

A gun usually gives you one option (shooting to wound is legally fraught) and can lead to hesitation, where a non-lethal means would not
Click to expand...

Provide an example. Explain how the average 120lb woman can reliably stop a 200lb male attacker without a firearm.

A gun also makes you less safe in your home
Click to expand...

Does that statistic include suicides?

Ahem. Post #70:
Care to retract ?
Click to expand...

You're mixing up two different claims. I said, "Honestly, who would be stupid enough to find your side of the argument convincing? Hell, you don't even believe that nonsense." This was based on a hypothetical situation where you and I both spoke to someone who was on the fence about gun control.

I didn't claim people who don't own at least one gun are stupid, because, as I already said in post #72, whether to own a gun will be based on costs and benefits, which are different for each person. For example, I currently don't own any guns because we have young kids in the house all the time.

The misunderstanding occurred because you weren't following the argument.
 
aociswundumho said:
Idk, find the best donut shop?
Click to expand...

Why do you think that

Are you normally so gullible in accepting BS stereotype as truth ?

So maybe you should try again, what do you think the US police force is (generally) trying to do ?


Provide an example. Explain how the average 120lb woman can reliably stop a 200lb male attacker without a firearm.
Click to expand...

MACE, Pepper Spray, Taser, Shotgun with bean bag round...


Does that statistic include suicides?
Click to expand...

No
Statistically, if you have a gun in your house/home, you are more likely to be shot, than not
ie: the threat of your own gun (on you or a household member), outweighs the threat of an outside agent using a gun on you (or a household member)


You're mixing up two different claims. I said, "Honestly, who would be stupid enough to find your side of the argument convincing?
Click to expand...

Yes and then you completed a 180 degree backtrack by saying:

I didn't say stupid, you did...
Click to expand...

Kinda caught out in a bare face lie there


I didn't claim people who don't own at least one gun are stupid, because, as I already said in post #72, whether to own a gun will be based on costs and benefits, which are different for each person. For example, I currently don't own any guns because we have young kids in the house all the time.
Click to expand...

So you agree that a gun in the house makes them LESS safe ?


The misunderstanding occurred because you weren't following the argument.
Click to expand...


You said anyone agreeing with the gun control argument was "stupid"

I pointed out that most Americans don't have guns and challenged you as to whether they were "stupid"

Well do you ?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom