• 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!

FBI: More people killed with knives, hammers, clubs and even feet than rifles in 2018

Nickyjo said:
If you can't protect yourself with ten rounds, get two weapons. Do you really think that people who live in dangerous neighborhoods believe givin everyone more destructive firepower is the way to go? Why don't you poll parents in those neighborhoods, and depending on results, testify as to how they believe more weapons are the solution to protecting their kids?
Click to expand...

I haven't observed a single poster advocate giving everyone destructive firepower.
 
RF667799 said:
You proved it was arbitrary when I asked "Why 10?" and you responded that 6 would be okay.
Click to expand...

I was being facetious. As I said, you're a cop. Would you rather face a madman with ten rounds in his clip or thirty? No one seems to want to answer that question.
 
TurtleDude said:
see this shows how dishonest your argument is. honest people owning normal capacity firearms kills kids

using your moronic logic, you want to ban all semi autos
Click to expand...

It's not dishonest. Go poll people who live in crime ridden areas. See what they have to say.
 
TurtleDude said:
I'm not the one trying to restrict the rights of honest people. You are because you fear them (mainly how they vote)
Click to expand...

The rights of honest people are restricted all the time. Somehow when it comes to guns the rights have to be absolute. Tell me what controls if any you would put on guns.
 
Nickyjo said:
++ The question for me is what are they afraid of?
Click to expand...

Shootings in general and mass shootings in particular


No one beefs if you use it legitimately for self defense.
Click to expand...

Trouble is, many shooters claim this
Especially police - until damning video footage emerges



And, in addition we have thousands of gun deaths per year.
Click to expand...

And tens of thousands of injuries


"What they really want is to take away your guns" is an absurd paranoid delusion.
Click to expand...

I would take most guns away


What we softies want is less violence and less fear in our society...do we have to arm ourselves to ask a neighbor to turn down the volume?
Click to expand...


Sadly violence is a modern trend and guns make it worse

The gun lobby would say even church goers need to be packing


I was nearly shot because of the omnipresence of guns in our society, as plain clothes police told me they didn't want to risk showing ID before subduing me for fear I was armed....
Click to expand...

Guns cause US police to be trigger happy

In one year US police killed 1,537, British police (policing a population of about 60 million) killed just 3


I have brought up the Tombstone ordinance here, whereby there and in other western towns, visitors had to check their guns, often at the livery where they checked their horses on arrival. So the famous gunfight was about gun control, as townspeople back then were not as foolish as the Arizona legislature today.
Click to expand...


So what good inside the city limits should be good outside them, yes ?
 
Nickyjo said:
I was being facetious. As I said, you're a cop. Would you rather face a madman with ten rounds in his clip or thirty? No one seems to want to answer that question.
Click to expand...

Why stop at ten? Why not 15? Or 5? Maybe 9?

What will change the evil magazine to a nice magazine?
 
Nickyjo said:
It's not dishonest. Go poll people who live in crime ridden areas. See what they have to say.
Click to expand...

couldn't care less-but they probably will say criminals won't follow laws
 
Nickyjo said:
I was being facetious. As I said, you're a cop. Would you rather face a madman with ten rounds in his clip or thirty? No one seems to want to answer that question.
Click to expand...
you pretend that people who would shoot cops would somehow obey a magazine law
 
Nickyjo said:
The rights of honest people are restricted all the time. Somehow when it comes to guns the rights have to be absolute. Tell me what controls if any you would put on guns.
Click to expand...

you want controls designed to harass lawful gun owners

I support laws that punish the harmful use of firearms

if cops can use them other citizens ought to be able to own them

I don't have any use for stupid restrictions that are motivated by a desire to harass conservative voters.
 
Fledermaus said:
Why stop at ten? Why not 15? Or 5? Maybe 9?

What will change the evil magazine to a nice magazine?
Click to expand...

Already explained. Fewer rounds, necessitating a pause.
 
RF667799 said:
I haven't observed a single poster advocate giving everyone destructive firepower.
Click to expand...

I would call a weapon with 30 rounds pretty destructive. You’re a pastor, a community leader in a dangerous neighborhood. Your advice to parents who worry about the presence of many weapons in their community?
 
Nickyjo said:
Great argument for repealing all laws.
Click to expand...

again that is stupid. you want to criminalize objectively non-harmful behavior and pretend it will prevent actions that are already criminalized,.
 
Nickyjo said:
I would call a weapon with 30 rounds pretty destructive. You’re a pastor, a community leader in a dangerous neighborhood. Your advice to parents who worry about the presence of many weapons in their community?
Click to expand...

Who cares what you call it-you are on record essentially wanting to ban all semi autos. Why do you allow police to have "pretty destructive weapons"/.
 
Rich2018 said:
Yeah, why have laws if criminals don't obey them ?
Click to expand...

people are not interested in actually prosecuting criminals, hide that fact by calling for laws that prohibit objectively non-harmful behavior, because their real goal is harassing lawful gun owners
 
Fledermaus said:
What will change the evil magazine to a nice magazine?

And... There are literally millions of 30 round magazines. They become illegal over night. Who will compensate the owners?
Click to expand...

Who knows? The get grandfathered in as legal (save your receipts, boys), there is a subsidized exchange, probably lots of creative ways of dealing with such things.
 
TurtleDude said:
Who cares what you call it-you are on record essentially wanting to ban all semi autos. Why do you allow police to have "pretty destructive weapons"/.
Click to expand...

Because we designate them to protect us. I presume you can’t ride around with a gumball on your car and stop speeders, are not buzzed by the teller’s button during a bank robbery. Our society and other have decided that you have the right to defend your self, but cannot posses certain weapons or use them in certain ways. And where did I say all semi-autos should be banned?
 
Fledermaus said:
According to the FBI, more than five times as many people were killed in 2018 by knives, clubs and other cutting instruments than with rifles.

The metrics show that there were a total of 1,515 deaths by knives or other cutting instruments last year. Compare that against 297 people killed by rifles.

It’s a gap that widened significantly over 2017. In that year, the FBI said nearly four times as many people were stabbed to death as killed with rifles. During that year, the number of murders with rifles was around 400.

It gets better. More than 100 more people were killed with hammers and clubs in 2018 than were killed by rifles. There were 443 people killed with hammers, clubs, or other “blunt objects”.

We need to point out that the data isn’t just semiautomatic rifles – it’s ALL rifles, including bolt action, pump or lever action rifles as well.

If you were to contrast the numbers between JUST semiautomatic rifles and knife homicides, the gap would be even larger.

FBI: More people killed with knives, hammers, feet than rifles in 2018

Yet all the attention goes to the scary black rifle.
Click to expand...

All weapons matter.
 
Nickyjo said:
Because we designate them to protect us. I presume you can’t ride around with a gumball on your car and stop speeders, are not buzzed by the teller’s button during a bank robbery. Our society and other have decided that you have the right to defend your self, but cannot posses certain weapons or use them in certain ways. And where did I say all semi-autos should be banned?
Click to expand...

why do you have such a hard time answering the obvious questions

who is more likely to obey a ten round magazine limit-

someone willing to commit armed robbery or someone who has no criminal record?

what part of the constitution allows the federal government the power to tell us how many rounds our guns shall hold?
 
Nickyjo said:
Who knows? The get grandfathered in as legal (save your receipts, boys), there is a subsidized exchange, probably lots of creative ways of dealing with such things.
Click to expand...

most people would ignore it. rather than punish real criminals-I suspect you'd want to throw people in jail who don't give up their magazines
 
Nickyjo said:
I was being facetious. As I said, you're a cop. Would you rather face a madman with ten rounds in his clip or thirty? No one seems to want to answer that question.
Click to expand...

I would rather face a paraplegic madman with a flat tire on his wheelchair. What does that prove?
 
Nickyjo said:
I would call a weapon with 30 rounds pretty destructive. You’re a pastor, a community leader in a dangerous neighborhood. Your advice to parents who worry about the presence of many weapons in their community?
Click to expand...
I haven't seen anyone say to give them to everyone. I had to buy mine.

My advice to those parents is to quit reacting to bull****. The neighborhoods with a lot of crime have few guns per capita according to anti gunner stats I 've seen here. So it seems it isn't a proliferation of guns; it's a proliferation of people with no respect for the lives of others. I wouldn't even call it a proliferation. It only takes a small minority.
 
TurtleDude said:
why do you have such a hard time answering the obvious questions

who is more likely to obey a ten round magazine limit-

someone willing to commit armed robbery or someone who has no criminal record?

what part of the constitution allows the federal government the power to tell us how many rounds our guns shall hold?
Click to expand...

The Supreme Court interprets it. In Heller, they said some regulations were valid. I don’t know if magazine limits have been challenged. If the courts have said such violate the second amendment, so be it. I repeat again that your question, to which I presume the answer is someone willing to commit armed robbery, suggests that no laws should be passed because some will not obey them. We prohibit speeding and find those who speed. Yet people still speed. Obviously we shouldn’t prohibit speeding. Ditto robbery, as in your example. Why outlaw it if people will still rob?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom