• 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!

Charlize Theron Is An Idiot

Lursa said:
CC permits arent even required in several states now.

But of course I'm bothered that prohibited persons carry illegally.
Click to expand...

Is it a "right" or not?
 
DebateChallenge said:
Charlize Theron has said that more guns is not the solution and that the idea of arming teachers is outrageous. She is saying this because she "lost her father to gun violence," although under the circumstances I wouldn't say that's the best way to put it. Her dad was a drunk and this one time when he was drunkedly attacking her mom, her mom shot him in self defense. If anything I would say its a good thing her mom was armed in that situation. Charlize lost her dad not because of guns but because her dad was a drunken loser. Her dad did this to himself and she should blame him not guns.
Click to expand...

The people who are idiots are those that think arming teachers is the answer. They ignore the fact that just bringing the gun into the school will increase the risk of a gun related incident, likely far more than the odds of a school shooting happening, or the even need for that gun. It ignores the already seen incidents of guns misfiring, students getting hold of gun, even safety instructors and cops have had the gun go off accidentally. .Or the fact even trained cops didn't approach the heavily armed kid in the last shooting, you think an underpaid, overworked teacher is suddenly going to be rambo and save the day. Jesus christ, what do you people want, the wild wild west with OK corral shootouts everywhere. YOu arm teachers, you are putting the kids are risk and its guaranteed a teacher will shoot a student, student will get a hold of the gun, and accidental misfire

Sorry, not sure why you can call someone an idiot when they have facts, logic and reasoning and you make the dumb argument that more guns is the answer. WE have so many guns, and that's why we have so much gun violence. Duh.

Arming teachers is about as dumb of a thing anybody can come up with
 
ecofarm said:
People who are off the ledge about guns almost always are so because they lost a loved one to gun violence.

I'm glad her father was shot.
Click to expand...

Or the people that have hard on for guns do so because they are complete cowards scared of boogie men around every corner. And most of the time they live in the safest bumblefork areas there can be
 
Sampson Simpson said:
The people who are idiots are those that think arming teachers is the answer. They ignore the fact that just bringing the gun into the school will increase the risk of a gun related incident, likely far more than the odds of a school shooting happening, or the even need for that gun. It ignores the already seen incidents of guns misfiring, students getting hold of gun, even safety instructors and cops have had the gun go off accidentally. .Or the fact even trained cops didn't approach the heavily armed kid in the last shooting, you think an underpaid, overworked teacher is suddenly going to be rambo and save the day. Jesus christ, what do you people want, the wild wild west with OK corral shootouts everywhere. YOu arm teachers, you are putting the kids are risk and its guaranteed a teacher will shoot a student, student will get a hold of the gun, and accidental misfire

Sorry, not sure why you can call someone an idiot when they have facts, logic and reasoning and you make the dumb argument that more guns is the answer. WE have so many guns, and that's why we have so much gun violence. Duh.

Arming teachers is about as dumb of a thing anybody can come up with
Click to expand...

Well, Utah teachers have been able to conceal carry for 15 years, and as far as I know, there's only been one incident when a teacher accidentally shot herself in the leg a few years ago. One accident in 15 years. Where is all this "risk" you're talking about?
 
Sampson Simpson said:
The people who are idiots are those that think arming teachers is the answer. They ignore the fact that just bringing the gun into the school will increase the risk of a gun related incident, likely far more than the odds of a school shooting happening, or the even need for that gun. It ignores the already seen incidents of guns misfiring, students getting hold of gun, even safety instructors and cops have had the gun go off accidentally. .Or the fact even trained cops didn't approach the heavily armed kid in the last shooting, you think an underpaid, overworked teacher is suddenly going to be rambo and save the day. Jesus christ, what do you people want, the wild wild west with OK corral shootouts everywhere. YOu arm teachers, you are putting the kids are risk and its guaranteed a teacher will shoot a student, student will get a hold of the gun, and accidental misfire

Sorry, not sure why you can call someone an idiot when they have facts, logic and reasoning and you make the dumb argument that more guns is the answer. WE have so many guns, and that's why we have so much gun violence. Duh.

Arming teachers is about as dumb of a thing anybody can come up with
Click to expand...

we will put you down as a supporter of safe work places for active shooters since that is what those stupid gun free zones are. I think what anti gun activists are most afraid of are mass shooting being stopped by an armed teacher-such an incident would be a double bitch-slap against the anti gunners' propaganda
 
Lursa said:
I dont believe in natural rights.
Click to expand...

which is fair but you cannot properly understand the constitution and the bill of rights without understanding what the FOUNDERS believed and intended. Gun banners like Jet pretend that the second amendment doesn't stop gun bans by arguing that natural rights don't exist. Its a straw man argument and irrelevant.
 
TurtleDude said:
which is fair but you cannot properly understand the constitution and the bill of rights without understanding what the FOUNDERS believed and intended. Gun banners like Jet pretend that the second amendment doesn't stop gun bans by arguing that natural rights don't exist. Its a straw man argument and irrelevant.
Click to expand...

I know what they believed. I believe that the Constitution and BOR stand on their own without resorting to that however.
 
Gaius46 said:
Self defense is a natural right.
Click to expand...

So, not allowing someone - anyone - to own a gun for any reason violates his or her "natural rights".
 
Lursa said:
I know what they believed. I believe that the Constitution and BOR stand on their own without resorting to that however.
Click to expand...

but when gun banners claim that the founders only intended to give states the power to arm their own militias, its important to realize that this completely contradicts what the founders believed in. That is why understanding whaat the founders believed allows one to accurately destroy the revisionist nonsense gun banners try to spew
 
jet57 said:
So, not allowing someone - anyone - to own a gun for any reason violates his or her "natural rights".
Click to expand...

yes, but as intelligent people understand, you can lose your rights through due process of law and children's rights can be curtailed by government as well
 
TurtleDude said:
but when gun banners claim that the founders only intended to give states the power to arm their own militias, its important to realize that this completely contradicts what the founders believed in. That is why understanding whaat the founders believed allows one to accurately destroy the revisionist nonsense gun banners try to spew
Click to expand...

Rights are a completely man-made concept, I dont care how you label them.

We are justified in our 2A rights as much as in our right to due process. Is due process a 'natural right?'
 
Lursa said:
Rights are a completely man-made concept, I dont care how you label them.

We are justified in our 2A rights as much as in our right to due process. Is due process a 'natural right?'
Click to expand...

Yes it is.

By the way.. you do believe in natural rights.
 
Lursa said:
Rights are a completely man-made concept, I dont care how you label them.

We are justified in our 2A rights as much as in our right to due process. Is due process a 'natural right?'
Click to expand...

I think you are missing my point as gun banners do too

the issue is not whether "natural rights" exist. Arguing about their existence is a way gun banners divert. Natural rights exist the same way "catholicism" or buddhism exists. And when you try to interpret the intent of the founders, you have to understand what they believed in
 
the issue is not whether "natural rights" exist
Click to expand...

Finally! an admittance that they do not exist.
 
Lursa said:
There is no such thing as due process in nature.
Click to expand...

true, sort of reminds me of John Wayne's response to a liberal journalist in THE GREEN BERETS after the soldiers had interrogated a VietCong Spy.

Out here due process is a bullet!
 
jet57 said:
So, not allowing someone - anyone - to own a gun for any reason violates his or her "natural rights".
Click to expand...

Yes. That's indisputable as far as I'm concerned. The only open question is if/when that right can be restricted.
 
Lursa said:
Rights are a completely man-made concept, I dont care how you label them.

We are justified in our 2A rights as much as in our right to due process. Is due process a 'natural right?'
Click to expand...

Are they man made or simply recognized by man? "LIfe" isn't a right granted by the US legal system. It's a right inherent in people.
 
Gaius46 said:
Yes. That's indisputable as far as I'm concerned. The only open question is if/when that right can be restricted.
Click to expand...

Well, if it can be restricted, then it's not a right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom