• 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.
I see you did a pretty good job of staying silent when I provided legitimate sources instead of an open source and VERY flawed Wikipedia article. You have been owned on these arguments continuously, just admit it already.

The United Nations Office on Drugs & Crime, and the Geneva Declaration on Armed Violence and Development, are not legitimate sources?

who is for you? Fox News?

:lamo
 
The United Nations Office on Drugs & Crime, and the Geneva Declaration on Armed Violence and Development, are not legitimate sources?

who is for you? Fox News?

:lamo
Too bad you presented a wikipedia article, oh BTW, the UN doesn't use uniform crime reporting and neither does Geneva. Of course if you weren't out of your league you would know that. Seriously you are getting smoked like a ham in these arguments, but if you want to keep losing ground be my guest, it's not my funeral.
 
because such a law would make it harder for criminals to get guns.

nope but it hassles people like me

my freedom is more important than some idiotic law that may or may not do any good

I can prove it hassles me, you cannot prove that law helps anything
 
oh, so you didn't even look at the article?

that's intelligent.
Don't have to, it's not a credible source and I've already seen the proper international data that proves you are wrong. Care to keep losing?
 
you again engage in dishonesty. You are confusing a right with an object.

USE Of an OBJECT can be for good or evil. You appear to confuse rights with objects

what is idiotic is your pretense of being pro second amendment. No one believes that on this thread.


and your idiotic "Heroes of the second amendment" was a new low of dishonesty

No. The dishonesty is YOU attempting to falsely disconnect the use of the right with the effects of the right and the firearms protected in the use of that right. The right deals with the ability to keep and bear those objects which you say has nothing to do with the right.

I have stated that I believe the Second Amendment is - on balance - something which is more positive than it is negative. It does more good than it does harm. But only a ideological zealot blinded against reality would think that there is no negatives that come from it. And that is your position.
 
No. The dishonesty is YOU attempting to falsely disconnect the use of the right with the effects of the right and the firearms protected in the use of that right. The right deals with the ability to keep and bear those objects which you say has nothing to do with the right.

I have stated that I believe the Second Amendment is - on balance - something which is more positive than it is negative. It does more good than it does harm. But only a ideological zealot blinded against reality would think that there is no negatives that come from it. And that is your position.


so what you are telling us is this bit of idiocy-that no second amendment means NO GUNS and no gun crime

is that what you are saying?

so you ARE blaming our right with some criminal misuse

so much for the facade of being pro gun
 
Only idiots claim that guns illegally owned or possessed or used are PROTECTED BY THE RIGHT recognized in the second amendment

even more idiotic is the insinuation that if there was no second amendment criminals would have NO GUNs
 
so what you are telling us is this bit of idiocy-that no second amendment means NO GUNS and no gun crime

is that what you are saying?

so you ARE blaming our right with some criminal misuse

so much for the facade of being pro gun

I never said that. Again, when you state what my views are, please have the decency to quote me instead of lying and making it up.

I am not BLAMING anything. I simply accept the reality that there is both good and bad that comes from our rights. Others can see this. Why cannot you see this? Provide an honest answer to that question and this discussion need not go any further.
 
Only idiots claim that guns illegally owned or possessed or used are PROTECTED BY THE RIGHT recognized in the second amendment

even more idiotic is the insinuation that if there was no second amendment criminals would have NO GUNs

I see nobody here that made either claim.

You do love the frankenstein monster.
 
I never said that. Again, when you state what my views are, please have the decency to quote me instead of lying and making it up.

I am not BLAMING anything. I simply accept the reality that there is both good and bad that comes from our rights. Others can see this. Why cannot you see this? Provide an honest answer to that question and this discussion need not go any further.

So tell us how are children killed by someone illegally possessing a weapon and illegally using it heroes of an amendment that does not protect illegal use or possession
 
So tell us how are children killed by someone illegally possessing a weapon and illegally using it heroes of an amendment that does not protect illegal use or possession

When it comes to the issue of your claim that the Second Amendment is a PURE GOOD with no bad evolving from it, it matters not what is a crime and what is not a crime. It matters not what is done legally and what is done illegally. It is not the labeling of an act with the word CRIME that makes it a negative, it is the act itself that is negative. Surely you know the difference from law school training. The evil in the action does not come because we put the label of crime upon it. The evil in the action is inherent in the action itself. And it is for that reason that the peoples government applies the label of CRIME or ILLEGAL.
 
Don't have to, it's not a credible source and I've already seen the proper international data that proves you are wrong. Care to keep losing?

don't have to?

you make a baseless claim, I counter it with evidence to the contrary, and you refuse to read such evidence?

wow, that's really intelligent.
 
nope but it hassles people like me

my freedom is more important than some idiotic law that may or may not do any good

I can prove it hassles me, you cannot prove that law helps anything

requiring an ID to vote, also hassles folks. yet many 2nd Amendment absolutists want to require the display of an ID to vote.
 
requiring an ID to vote, also hassles folks. yet many 2nd Amendment absolutists want to require the display of an ID to vote.

Not relevant
 
When it comes to the issue of your claim that the Second Amendment is a PURE GOOD with no bad evolving from it, it matters not what is a crime and what is not a crime. It matters not what is done legally and what is done illegally. It is not the labeling of an act with the word CRIME that makes it a negative, it is the act itself that is negative. Surely you know the difference from law school training. The evil in the action does not come because we put the label of crime upon it. The evil in the action is inherent in the action itself. And it is for that reason that the peoples government applies the label of CRIME or ILLEGAL.


You still confuse a right with someone's misuse of an object



and what is your purpose with calling slain children Heroes of the second amendment
 
requiring an ID to vote, also hassles folks. yet many 2nd Amendment absolutists want to require the display of an ID to vote.

If you don't have an ID then you also do not have a job nor drive.
 
kinda puts things into perspective though, don't it?

we can hassle honest citizens who just want to vote, but we can't hassle honest citizens who want to buy 30 guns a month?

I was going to say something, but I bought 3 guns just this week, and I plan on buying a 4th tomorrow...maybe a 5th if I find a deal. :p
 
If you don't have an ID then you also do not have a job nor drive.

hey, if we can hassle honest citizens who just want to vote, then we can hassle honest citizens who want to buy 30 guns in one month. its only fair.
 
kinda puts things into perspective though, don't it?

we can hassle honest citizens who just want to vote, but we can't hassle honest citizens who want to buy 30 guns a month?

You'd have an argument if someone didn't have to show an ID to buy a gun

you are infringing on my right to obtain as many guns as I want. your analogy is stupid

THunder-I have been dealing with anti gun nuts for 35 years. Some of those people just like to argue for the sake of arguing like you do, others were committed hard core gun hating activists who were nationally prominent

you aren't going to come up with something I cannot address.

you'd be better off arguing with the Pope over Catholic Doctrine
 
so we shouldn't pass any laws since criminals ain't gonna follow them?

:lamo

"alright guys, its now legal to commit murder, since the criminals don't seem to read the state penal code".

Not the point of the statement, but I suspect you KNOW what I am saying and are simply trying to avoid the point that you know is actually a good one.

The point is of course that: gun laws that clearly have had no impact upon gun crime are clearly NOT the answer. They are merely laws enacted to excersise control. They have no point, since the criminals not only are not abiding by those laws, but they circumvent the most important gun laws we have, "No Felons, license for fully automatics, age restrictions, concealed licenses," and so what is the point of laws beyond these?

There are none.

Essentially it would be like saying: You cannot murder someone with a knife. Murder is already illegal. Why add extra charges because it was with a knife? Or a gun? Or with a frying pan?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom