• 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!

would you support this gun control compromise?

Do you support Luna's gun control compromise?

  • Total voters
    20
Thunder said:
sorry, but I do not share your trust & faith in convicted felons.

convicted felons cannot be trusted with guns, until our legal system deems them to be trustworthy.
Click to expand...

nice deflection but not true and irrelevant, im still waiting for any proof you have to back up your claim, oh thats right currently you have NONE LMAO
 
Thunder said:
how does vandalism & theft ALWAYS infringe upon someone elses' rights?

it doesn't.
Click to expand...

WTF are you talking about? You asked what crimes can be taken against property, I told you. This has nothing to do with the topic on hand. Vandalism and theft does always infringe upon one's rights if the act is against another's property.
 
Ikari said:
...Vandalism and theft does always infringe upon one's rights if the act is against another's property.
Click to expand...

and what if the property is owned by the public..or a company?

than no individual's rights are violated.
 
Thunder said:
and what if the property is owned by the public..or a company?

than no individual's rights are violated.
Click to expand...

And? Do you have a point? Having a gun doesn't automatically infringe upon one's rights either. Neither does driving. But driving is the number one cause of death in my age group. Not guns. Aggregation you can't trust the public to drive well and aware, so by your logic we can use government force to strip them of their ability to drive.

I fear your zeal to deflect has caused you to stop making any amount of sense.
 
Goshin said:
Actually it is 270 million guns, 99.99%+ of which are never used in a crime.



The problems I'd have lay in two things:

Defining "mentally unstable" and how you determine who is and is not.... this could easily be subject to abuse.

Second, the domestic violence issue.... I know, as an ex-cop, there's a lot of men convicted of CDV who were actually DEFENDING themselves against a woman who initiated the violence, and I have some issues with a universal and permanent loss of gun rights from same in all cases.


Also, I'd rather have nationwide universal concealed-carry, than repeal of the machine-gun act.
Click to expand...

the machine gun ban is useful in the sense that it proves that the democrat party and the gun control scum are not really motivated by crime control because there has been only one documented case of a legally owned machine gun being used in a crime

obviously that ban was not motivated by a desire to stop crime

but the Hughes Amendment should be stricken in the next 10 years based on the language of HELLER
 
"Domestic violence" is just a catch all "crime" to try and ban guns that way.

if you tell your ex bitch (or so to be ex) to **** off, your "guilty" of "domestic violence" ...........

the right to keep and bare arms shale not be infringed...........and banning auto weapons is infringment.
 
Thunder said:
they can appeal to get these restrictions removed. They have due process.
Click to expand...

Through a pardon. The BATFE has expressed that it will not reinstate gun ownership rights, which is backed by the Supreme Court ruling of the United States v Thomas Lamar Bean.
 
TurtleDude said:
people ignorant about weapons tend to assume full auto is more lethal than semi auto

it depends on the circumstances and generally is not true

but when someone's main source of education is watching Rambo or Commando they tend to have silly ideas
Click to expand...

The truth is the military uses semiautomatic far more than automatic in combat. Automatic is available to them as an option, if they get into a "spray and pray" situation, but most of the time they're more effective if they're in semi and are selective about their targets.

I think the myths come about from Hollywood movies. Automatic gunfire is dramatic for the big screen.
 
Last edited:
Lokiate said:
Through a pardon. The BATFE has expressed that it will not reinstate gun ownership rights, which is backed by the Supreme Court ruling of the United States v Thomas Lamar Bean.
Click to expand...

that is incorrect.

felons appeal to get back their firearm rights all the time, and often win them back. thousands have done so.
 
Last edited:
Thunder said:
that is incorrect.

felons appeal to get back their firearm rights all the time, and often win them back.
Click to expand...

Uh that is very rare. a presidential pardon works

in the case of a state felony you have to have it expunged or have it wiped away
 
Thunder said:
rare?

3,300 since 1995 in just Washington State....is rare?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/14/us/felons-finding-it-easy-to-regain-gun-rights.html?pagewanted=all

oh...and around 13% of those folks...went on to commit new crimes.
Click to expand...

Interesting-certainly not the case here where I live

I litigated an expungement all the way to the ohio supreme court. the OSC admitted that under the old law my client should have had an expungement but they decided to overrule the Court of Appeals that had sustained our appeal and made it much harder

I cannot really get into it but it had nothing to do with weapons but rather a job but i know it was tough in ohio
 
Thunder said:
that is incorrect.

felons appeal to get back their firearm rights all the time, and often win them back. thousands have done so.
Click to expand...

I should note that if you had a federal felony you are basically screwed. You are clearly correct about some states though
 
Thunder said:
that is incorrect.

felons appeal to get back their firearm rights all the time, and often win them back. thousands have done so.
Click to expand...

The only way a felon can have their Second Amendment right restored is if they receive a pardon, and have their criminal record expunged.
 
Lokiate said:
The only way a felon can have their Second Amendment right restored is if they receive a pardon, and have their criminal record expunged.
Click to expand...

that is false.

I have provided the evidence.

since 1995, 3,300 felons got back their gun rights. And that's just in WA.
 
Thunder said:
that is false.

I have provided the evidence.

since 1995, 3,300 felons got back their gun rights. And that's just in WA.
Click to expand...

Then I was wrong. I was unaware that 11 states automatically restored gun rights. However, federal law prohibits any convicted felon from legally purchasing a firearm, so I don't know how these states get around that. The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 makes federal background checks mandatory, and places these prohibitions as a bar from legal gun ownership:


Has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;

Is a fugitive from justice;

Is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance;

Has been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution;

Is an alien illegally or unlawfully in the United States;

Has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;

Having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced U.S. citizenship;

Is subject to a court order that restrains the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner, or;

Has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

Has a record of being a felon

I don't know how any retailer, who must be licensed by the federal government to sell arms, can legally sell arms to felons without facing federal charges.
 
Thunder said:
sorry, but I do not share your trust & faith in convicted felons.

convicted felons cannot be trusted with guns, until our legal system deems them to be trustworthy.
Click to expand...

You have enough trust and faith in them to consistently object to my suggestion that the most dangerous of them ought to be permanently removed from free society.

Either that or else you are flat-out lying (and I consider this the more likely case) when you pretend that any part of your tyrannical NannY-statist position on the subject is motivated in any way by any vestige of concern for public safety.

If you truly cared about public safety, then you would agree with me about how the most dangerous of convicted criminals should be treated, and you would agree with me in being solidly opposed to putting any obstacles in the way of allowing honest people the tools with which to defend themselves against these criminals.

It is clear what side you are on.
 
Thunder said:
and what if the property is owned by the public..or a company?

than no individual's rights are violated.
Click to expand...

Ultimately, it all gets down to humans rights.

If property is stolen or damaged, that belongs to an individual, then that individual's rights have been violated.

If property is stolen or damaged, that belongs to a corporation, then the rights of that corporation, or the rights of the individuals who own stock in that corporation have been violated.

Public property belongs to the taxpayers of whatever level of government owns that property. Their rights are violated when that property is stolen, damaged, or misused.

Destruction or theft of property is always a violation of someone's rights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom