• 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!

Guns

What do you think gun control should be like?

  • Let everyone have a gun

    Votes: 19 22.4%

  • Quick background check to purchase and carry

    Votes: 25 29.4%

  • Quick background check to purchase, but more difficult to carry

    Votes: 11 12.9%

  • Background check, waiting period for purchase and carrying.

    Votes: 17 20.0%

  • Background check, waiting period, no carrying

    Votes: 5 5.9%

  • No guns at all

    Votes: 8 9.4%
  • Total voters
    85
Status
Not open for further replies.
TurtleDude said:
Its a typo and you knew what was frefering too

You pretended to be pro gun and everyone-left, right, and middle thrashed that bit of dishonesty.

There is no negative to a right anymore there is a negative to a tool (assuming it works as intended)

Someone can misuse or abuse a right or misuse a tool or use it improperly

that is where your obvious errors and confusions come from
Click to expand...

What I have repeatedly stated is that I support the Second Amendment and I believe it is more of a positive than it has negatives.

Somehow, someway, that seems to be not enough for you.

Every right has a negative that can come of it because it is associated with human beings exercising it and human beings are not perfect. Thus, your embracing the idea that the Second Amendment is a perfect good is absurd. It is a denial of reality.

The First Amendment can result in slander and libel so we have laws protecting against that negative that can arise from exercising ones freedom of speech and freedom of the press. However, a strict reading of the actual text of the Firtst Amendment says otherwise:


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Slander and libel are indeed negatives which can flow from a perfectly good right. But even those are not perfect goods.

The Second Amendment is no different and even some of your fellow gun supporters have admitted so.

But again, that is not enough for you. You seem to take the stance that unless one is among the most ardent and totally devoted gun nuts in the land, they are then anti-gun and anti-Second Amendment. This desire to paint anyone who accepts reality and subtleties and both the pro and con of the Second Amendment as a gun grabber only marganilizes the one who would attempt that dishonest tactic.
 
Last edited:
We were taught, "Gentlemen, this is a handgun. It is lethal when correctly pointed and utilized. The only problem with it is it is uni-directional. And this, gentlemen, is a knife, in close quarters, it can be deadlier than the handgun. This, my friends is a pump shotgun. This noise here, "Wrakrak" (as he pumped a shell in the chamber) has stopped more crimnal in their tracks than either the handgun or knife and it has done so without even firing."

I still remember that lecture just like it was yesterday. It is as true today as it was 30 years ago when I was a rook.
 
haymarket said:
What I have repeatedly stated is that I support the Second Amendment and I believe it is more of a positive than it has negatives.

Somehow, someway, that seems to be not enough for you.

Every right has a negative that can come of it because it is associated with human beings exercising it and human beings are not perfect. Thus, your embracing the idea that the Second Amendment is a perfect good is absurd. It is a denial of reality.

The First Amendment can result in slander and libel so we have laws protecting against that negative that can arise from exercising ones freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The Second Amendment is no different and even some of your fellow gun supporters have admitted so.

But again, that is not enough for you. You seem to take the stance that unless one is among the most ardent and totally devoted gun nuts in the land, they are then anti-gun and anti-Second Amendment. This desire to paint anyone who accepts reality and subtleties and both the pro and con of the Second Amendment as a gun grabber only marganilizes the one who would attempt that dishonest tactic.
Click to expand...

In all fairness, I have to say that I get your point. TD knows I am pro-gun. Hell, everybody knows that. But that doesn't mean we should have to live in a society where carrying around a shoulder fired missle is considered acceptable. Eventually, common sense has to prevail.
 
haymarket said:
What I have repeatedly stated is that I support the Second Amendment and I believe it is more of a positive than it has negatives.

Somehow, someway, that seems to be not enough for you.

Every right has a negative that can come of it because it is associated with human beings exercising it and human beings are not perfect. Thus, your embracing the idea that the Second Amendment is a perfect good is absurd. It is a denial of reality.

The First Amendment can result in slander and libel so we have laws protecting against that negative that can arise from exercising ones freedom of speech and freedom of the press. However, a strict reading of the actual text of the Firtst Amendment says otherwise:


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Slander and libel are indeed negatives which can flow from a perfectly good right. But even those are not perfect goods.

The Second Amendment is no different and even some of your fellow gun supporters have admitted so.

But again, that is not enough for you. You seem to take the stance that unless one is among the most ardent and totally devoted gun nuts in the land, they are then anti-gun and anti-Second Amendment. This desire to paint anyone who accepts reality and subtleties and both the pro and con of the Second Amendment as a gun grabber only marganilizes the one who would attempt that dishonest tactic.
Click to expand...

Stop the nonsense-you try to smear the second amendment and lay a massive guilt trip on gun owners by your obvious crap that we should see those innocent children killed last week as paying the price for our rights

It won't work Haymarket and your claims are so bogus that even lefties called you out on it
 
Captain America said:
In all fairness, I have to say that I get your point. TD knows I am pro-gun. Hell, everybody knows that. But that doesn't mean we should have to live in a society where carrying around a shoulder fired missle is considered acceptable. Eventually, common sense has to prevail.
Click to expand...

shoulder fired missiles are issued to military groups and is not an individual weapon as contemplated by the second amendment nor does it have generally self defense use.
 
TurtleDude said:
shoulder fired missiles are issued to military groups and is not an individual weapon as contemplated by the second amendment nor does it have generally self defense use.
Click to expand...

True dat TD but I think you understand what I was getting at. The ol' "If you give them an inch they will take a mile" defense to anything that resembles any attempts to control arms doesn't always fly with me. I believe in reasonable regulation. One being, "No shoulder fired missles allowed in school zones." LOL!
 
Captain America said:
True dat TD but I think you understand what I was getting at. The ol' "If you give them an inch they will take a mile" defense to anything that resembles any attempts to control arms doesn't always fly with me. I believe in reasonable regulation. One being, "No shoulder fired missles allowed in school zones." LOL!
Click to expand...


Its illegal for scumbags to own any type of firearm

its illegal to do anything nasty or harmful with a firearm

seems to me that covers the bases pretty well
 
cthomp said:
What do you think about gun control? Poll speaks for its self.
Click to expand...

I am all for gun control. You control your gun and I will control mine. Fair enough?
 
TurtleDude said:
Its illegal for scumbags to own any type of firearm

its illegal to do anything nasty or harmful with a firearm

seems to me that covers the bases pretty well
Click to expand...

Scumbags will own firearms, legally or not, which means that it is best that we own them too, and if the scumbags want to do something illegal against us with firearms, then we have the right to do something legal with ours, such as blow the scumbags' asses away.
 
danarhea said:
I am all for gun control. You control your gun and I will control mine. Fair enough?
Click to expand...

Fair 'nuff.

I had a pretty scary one today. I knew to vest up, and I did. I find the side arm to be a great deterrent. I'm going home tonight safe and sound and I'm looking forward to a rockin' weekend.
 
danarhea said:
I am all for gun control. You control your gun and I will control mine. Fair enough?
Click to expand...

i wanted the same thing but they liked each others posts:lol:
 
TurtleDude said:
Stop the nonsense-you try to smear the second amendment and lay a massive guilt trip on gun owners by your obvious crap that we should see those innocent children killed last week as paying the price for our rights

It won't work Haymarket and your claims are so bogus that even lefties called you out on it
Click to expand...

It is very telling that you hide your head in the sand ostrich style and pretend not to read what was written and simply use it to repeat all your same old attack points.

Why are you impotent to actually speak to what was written. Other gun supporters here are not like you. Can't you see what is wrong with your own approach here?
 
haymarket said:
It is very telling that you hide your head in the sand ostrich style and pretend not to read what was written and simply use it to repeat all your same old attack points.

Why are you impotent to actually speak to what was written. Other gun supporters here are not like you. Can't you see what is wrong with your own approach here?
Click to expand...

interesting that everyone slapped around your claims and not mine

I am never wrong on gun issues. and I am not wrong noting that rights are not wrong either

its how they are used that is at issue
 
TurtleDude said:
interesting that everyone slapped around your claims and not mine

I am never wrong on gun issues. and I am not wrong noting that rights are not wrong either

its how they are used that is at issue
Click to expand...

Again, you engage in a basic fallacy of debate.

Again, your extremism on this issue - the pure good belief - shows you are beyond having any actual intellectual exchange with because you do not approach this subject from any position of reality.

And you now you claim the equal of Papal Infallability on Second Amendment issues. Amazing. The ultimate absurdity in debate assertions has been achieved.

I gave you perfect examples of rights that have negative sides. You ignored them in favor of continuing your attacks upon me and repeating your standard talking points.

When will you actually engage in debate about the real world?
 
haymarket said:
Again, you engage in a basic fallacy of debate.

Again, your extremism on this issue - the pure good belief - shows you are beyond having any actual intellectual exchange with because you do not approach this subject from any position of reality.

And you now you claim the equal of Papal Infallability on Second Amendment issues. Amazing. The ultimate absurdity in debate assertions has been achieved.

I gave you perfect examples of rights that have negative sides. You ignored them in favor of continuing your attacks upon me and repeating your standard talking points.

When will you actually engage in debate about the real world?
Click to expand...

why do you hate rights? that is the true extremism

and you really have demonstrated you don't have the knowledge sufficient to debate anyone on firearms

you still think that dead children gave their lives for the second amendment
 
TurtleDude said:
why do you hate rights? that is the true extremism

and you really have demonstrated you don't have the knowledge sufficient to debate anyone on firearms

you still think that dead children gave their lives for the second amendment
Click to expand...
i dont know the second amendment,but i cant understand the right of having gun
 
Medusa said:
i dont know the second amendment,but i cant understand the right of having gun
Click to expand...

I really don't care. Its an American thing-you wouldn't understand. That you want to live as a sheep and defenseless is your business. Be happy in your pen
 
TurtleDude said:
I really don't care. Its an American thing-you wouldn't understand. That you want to live as a sheep and defenseless is your business. Be happy in your pen
Click to expand...

not only there but in turkey lots of people are killed by guns..
 
Medusa said:
not only there but in turkey lots of people are killed by guns..
Click to expand...


Lots of Turkeys killed by guns where I live though I prefer hunting them with a bow.

Lots of Armenians probably wished they had more guns too
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom