• 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!

Universal background checks

Do you support universal background checks?


  • Total voters
    104
Interesting article. Now all they need to do is move the line that describes what "mentally ill" means.

Government Mental Health Test

Q: Do you want to own firearms?

a) Yes
b) No

If you answered a), how long have you been mentally ill?
 
Nothing wrong with beloning to the far-right.

Nope, just as long as you realize they only represent about 10% - 15% of the voters on the background check issue. That was the point being made that you responded to.
 
Nope, just as long as you realize they only represent about 10% - 15% of the voters on the background check issue. That was the point being made that you responded to.

Are you still clinging to this lie? It was disproven weeks ago. All you accomplish by continuing to repeat it is to make yourself look like a dishonest fool.
 
Are you still clinging to this lie? It was disproven weeks ago. All you accomplish by continuing to repeat it is to make yourself look like a dishonest fool.


BS! You have yet to show any credible national poll to back your claim that more than 10% - 15% oppose background checks for all gun sales.
 
BS! You have yet to show any credible national poll to back your claim that more than 10% - 15% oppose background checks for all gun sales.

Several have been cited in the course of this thread. You define “credible” to only include that which supports your lies.

If there was really the 85% to 90% support that you claim for these background checks, then there would be a credible effort underway—if not already completed—to amend the Constitution to allow it. There is no such effort underway, because nobody credibly believes that there is anywhere near enough support for such an amendment to give it any chance of passing; and the support that it would take to ensure passage of such an amendment is far less than the 85% to 90% that you claim there is.
 
Several have been cited in the course of this thread. You define “credible” to only include that which supports your lies.

If there was really the 85% to 90% support that you claim for these background checks, then there would be a credible effort underway—if not already completed—to amend the Constitution to allow it. There is no such effort underway, because nobody credibly believes that there is anywhere near enough support for such an amendment to give it any chance of passing; and the support that it would take to ensure passage of such an amendment is far less than the 85% to 90% that you claim there is.


More BS blah, blah, blah from you! When you can post some facts to back up your claims that your position is not the extreme minority of voters feel free to do so! :cool:
 
More BS blah, blah, blah from you! When you can post some facts to back up your claims that your position is not the extreme minority of voters feel free to do so! :cool:

Isn't the idea of a constitutional republic supposed to be that the rights of the minority are protected against the whims of the majority? What if 90% of people were in favor of quartering soldiers in people's homes?
 
Isn't the idea of a constitutional republic supposed to be that the rights of the minority are protected against the whims of the majority? What if 90% of people were in favor of quartering soldiers in people's homes?

You are bringing up a separate issue, whether the 10% - 15% of those that oppose background checks are right or not. That has nothing to do with the poll results that show 85% - 90% of voters support background checks for all gun sales.
 
Nope, just as long as you realize they only represent about 10% - 15% of the voters on the background check issue. That was the point being made that you responded to.
I like arguing for the underdog.
 
Isn't the idea of a constitutional republic supposed to be that the rights of the minority are protected against the whims of the majority? What if 90% of people were in favor of quartering soldiers in people's homes?

You are bringing up a separate issue, whether the 10% - 15% of those that oppose background checks are right or not. That has nothing to do with the poll results that show 85% - 90% of voters support background checks for all gun sales.

If there is 85% to 90% support for anything not allowed by the Constitution, then there would be no difficulty getting the Constitution amended to allow it.
 
its interesting. those who support such checks include the posters who are most ignorant about guns and gun laws

those who oppose it are mainly those who have demonstrated the most expertise on guns and gun laws.

what does that tell you?
 
its interesting. those who support such checks include the posters who are most ignorant about guns and gun laws

those who oppose it are mainly those who have demonstrated the most expertise on guns and gun laws.

what does that tell you?


That anti-2nd amendment tards generally support anti-2nd amendment laws and anti-gun laws while 2nd amendment advocates do not.
 
its interesting. those who support such checks include the posters who are most ignorant about guns and gun laws

those who oppose it are mainly those who have demonstrated the most expertise on guns and gun laws.

what does that tell you?


Honestly? Nothing ...
 
Honestly? Nothing ...

your lean tells me plenty. but I note that those who know the least generally want more restrictions. and generally those who want more restrictions on individuals want more power for the government. You know-people who state they are socialist or progressive
 
If there is 85% to 90% support for anything not allowed by the Constitution, then there would be no difficulty getting the Constitution amended to allow it.

There is simply no need for an Amendment since there is only a small percentage that believe background checks are an infringement of 2nd Amendment rights.
 
Isn't the idea of a constitutional republic supposed to be that the rights of the minority are protected against the whims of the majority? What if 90% of people were in favor of quartering soldiers in people's homes?

At some point a majority had no problems with slavery or restricting women from voting...
 
At some point a majority had no problems with slavery or restricting women from voting...

Precisely. Nothing precludes the majority from supporting an unethical position. It's not as if the will of the majority is always magically right and just.

Any position must be judged on its merits, and saying "The majority supports this position" is completely irrelevant to its ethical legitimacy.
 
Precisely. Nothing precludes the majority from supporting an unethical position. It's not as if the will of the majority is always magically right and just.

Any position must be judged on its merits, and saying "The majority supports this position" is completely irrelevant to its ethical legitimacy.

At one point we had a majority of idiots vote to make booze illegal - just sayin'...
 
One's support for this nonsense tends to be inversely proportional to one's understanding of the issue
 
One's support for this nonsense tends to be inversely proportional to one's understanding of the issue



troll-450x450.jpg
 
its interesting. those who support such checks include the posters who are most ignorant about guns and gun laws

those who oppose it are mainly those who have demonstrated the most expertise on guns and gun laws.

what does that tell you?
#lowinformationvoters
 
Universal background checks moving closer to a Senate vote:

"Senate Democrats said Thursday they will take up gun control immediately after a two-week Easter vacation, and said the bill they’ll bring to the chamber floor will include universal background checks for all firearms sales and a crackdown on gun trafficking and straw purchases.

The background checks are the biggest sticking point — Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he will include a strict measure written by Sen. Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat, rather than wait for a bipartisan compromise to emerge.

Mr. Reid said he is open to substituting that compromise if it’s reached in time, but said the Senate bill will expand background checks either way.

“I want to be clear: In order to be effective, any bill that passes the Senate must include background checks,” he said.

He began the process of bringing the bill to the Senate floor Thursday, even as the chamber was debating its fiscal 2014 budget."

Stage set for Senate gun control debate; background checks are sticking point - Washington Times
 
Back
Top Bottom