• 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 carry this sign in your geographic area, in public?

Would you publicly hold a "Ban Assault Weapons" sign.

  • Yes, I am against assault weapons, and I would hold that sign.

    Votes: 3 9.7%

  • No, I don't oppose assault weapons.

    Votes: 26 83.9%

  • No, I oppose assault weapons, but I'm afraid of possible violent retaliation.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • No, I oppose assault weapons, but I would not hold that sign for other reasons.

    Votes: 2 6.5%
  • Total voters
    31
Media_Truth

Media_Truth

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
11,375
Reaction score
2,650
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Ban_Assault_Weapons_Sign.JPG
 
TurtleDude said:
of course not-it would suggest I am mentally incapacitated. BTW "assault weapon" is a undefined term bannerrhoid politicians use to attack lots of different kinds of firearms.
Click to expand...

Yup. Assault rifle=a select fire rifle that fires an intermdiatly powered round (between that of a battle rifle and a pistol round)

Assault weapon=ficticious name for a firearm that looks scary to people that are scared of inanimate objects.
 
Besides baiting the rabid 2nd A strokers I don't see much use to such 'polls'.

I do like the tired ol' crap about assault weapon vs assault rifle (never mind AR is a made-up word as well) any rifle can assault, the term in no way describes the difference between it and either a 'battle rifle' (again another 'made-up' word for a WIDE variety of rifles) or one that fires a pistol round (and again that description covers a WIDE variety of rounds)

Just for the record I wouldn't carry a sign, not for or against any type of weapon... got a few more important things to do... :peace
 
Media_Truth said:
67213674d1486608506-would-you-carry-sign-your-geographic-area-public-ban_assault_weapons_sign-jpg
Click to expand...

This sign suffers from a distinct lack of definitions.

Which of mankind's weapons cannot be used for assault? None that I can think of, as they all can be used for assault.

So really, you are proposing a ban on anything that could be used to harm people. That includes the knife and fork at the dinner table.

A little bit ridiculous?

In the UK, where all guns are banned and / or very strictly controlled, there's an epidemic of criminal knifings. Ban those, and they'll use cricket bats or screw drivers.

It's an ill thought out proposal. Better, I think, would be to dedicate efforts in improving people's coping skills so they don't want to commit assault.
 
No. Half the people who saw me would pretend they hadn't, half would point and laugh and the rest would ask me to pose for selfies with them.
 
anonymous polls like this suck!
 
Depends on how much you pay me. It would take some serious money.


Of course I'd go around and tell all the neighbors that I didn't mean it and was just doing it for money. Not that they'd hurt me, but I wouldn't want them to think badly of me. :lamo
 
Sweden said:
My 'geographical area' is Sweden. I would not carry the sign because they are already banned and there is probably not one Swede in a hundred - make that in a thousand - who wants them unbanned.
Click to expand...

Switzerland guns: Living with firearms the Swiss way - BBC News
Although it is still possible for a former soldier to buy his firearm after he finishes military service, he must provide a justification for keeping the weapon and apply for a permit.
Click to expand...
And how hard can that be in a country that rates about 3rd. on gun ownership?
 
Even before the federal ban on assault weapons, around 90% of all gun deaths were via handgun.
 
Media_Truth said:
View attachment 67213674
Click to expand...

I live in New Zealand one of the few areas where the police routinely go unarmed. We also have a unique approach to fire arms that would render such a sign pointless.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_New_Zealand
Gun laws in New Zealand are notably more liberal than other countries in the Pacific and focus mainly on vetting firearm owners, rather than registering firearms or banning certain types of firearms
Click to expand...
The sign for my region would have to read, ban the guy who wants to kill people with assault rifles.
 
I would not carry any sign for free.
 
Nope. Then again, I can't think of any sign I would carry, so there's that.
 
Media_Truth said:
View attachment 67213674
Click to expand...

I do not support assault weapons bans. So I would never protest against assault weapons.Maybe if I was down on my luck and needed some cash I would do it.

BTW seeing how you support assault weapons bans can you tell me which is an assault weapon and which isn't under the Brady Assault weapons ban and why the one defined as an assault weapon is more dangerous than the one that isn't?
Which is an assault weapon.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom