• 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!

'Good guys with guns' hinder police

Except I have seen people say "sorry, your dead kids don't trump my gun rights", I think at that point I have right to ask callous people in the gun rights movement are.

Joe The Plumber: 'Your Dead Kids Don't Trump My Constitutional Rights' To Have Guns

If you can't bothered to even try to come with a solution to a devastating problem like mass shootings , then I find your moral outrage about your gun rights without merit. I think your movement has no real solution to that problem and frankly I am of the belief that politics is about finding solutions to problems, rather then just shrugging in the face of a real problem that takes human lives.

Believe what you want, but again, what is going to stop the next mass shooting and the one after that and the one after that? It seems like doing what we are doing is not doing anything to prevent these massacres and frankly doing the same things, over and over again, expecting different results, is madness.
I have seen and heard things on videos to. At first I thought you actually heard(as in person)the comment. But also take into account how it was used.
 
suggestion-if you want to discuss gun issues with people who are experts, you don't have to become an expert but at least you should have some clue about the issues.

Thanks for the advice, but I think you confuse dogma with wisdom and frankly I think you are an ideologue who simply won't budge on certain issues and I think you are confusing your moral opinions with universal wisdom, you can disagree with my findings if you wish, but I do not care about you condescending suggestion and attempt at a victory lap and I have no time for your conspiracy theory about how I don't care about victims of these massacres and just want to slight you personally. I see no profit in arguing with zealots.
 
Thanks for the advice, but I think you confuse dogma with wisdom and frankly I think you are an ideologue who simply won't budge on certain issue and I think you are confusing your moral opinions with universal wisdom, you can disagree with my findings if you wish, but I do not care about you condescending suggestion and attempt at a victory lap and I have no time for your conspiracy theory about how I don't care about victims of these massacres and just want to slight you personally. I see no profit in arguing with zealots.

wrong, you post utter idiocy-such as thinking automatic weapons had anything to do with SandyHook and on top of that blatant stupidity, you try to make us gun owners who don't buy into the group guilt nonsense feel ashamed by not engaging in self -flagellation every time some asshole kills others despite capital murder sentences or LWOP consequences. and then you get upset when we note your assertions are based on lies, ignorance and faux concern for the victims. face it, the biggest problems people like you have in debating the issue is that you know nothing about the issue. You come to complain about gun ownership because you don't like the politics of many gun owners and you want to attack us for that by pretending it has something to do with some homicidal scumbag. Your argument is pathetically lacking in facts and honesty and even more dishonest is your obvious real motivations, motivations that you try to conceal with a copious shedding of crocodile tears
 
=Yes_Minister;1067820285]So when the next mass shooting happens should people just shrug their shoulders? Imagine if someone suggested such an attitude about terrorism, people would flip their wigs. Murders still happen despite laws against murder, do we make murder legal because it has not prevented all murders?
OH you must mean the TSofA.Well they caught a guy in dirty underwear(they claim). What exactly have they really done except piss air travelers off?
Murders? Of course it's against the law. I don't plan on murdering anyone do you?My guess is no. So who does that leave? THAT'S right the ones that don't abide by the law. Are you saying all gun owners are killers or just potential ones,so off with their heads?

Okay, what about the Swiss, they have fair amount guns, with fewer mass shootings, what's up with that?
Good question and my guess is they have better family values and if someone needs help they get it without the stigma attached to it.
Does Canada have gun confiscation? If so, when did that happen?
Such as go door to door or hand them in or else? What Canada does Canada does. But I do know they are limited in what they can own and I believe they need permiso.
 
Last edited:
wrong, you post utter idiocy-such as thinking automatic weapons had anything to do with SandyHook and on top of that blatant stupidity, you try to make us gun owners who don't buy into the group guilt nonsense feel ashamed by not engaging in self -flagellation every time some asshole kills others despite capital murder sentences or LWOP consequences. and then you get upset when we note your assertions are based on lies, ignorance and faux concern for the victims. face it, the biggest problems people like you have in debating the issue is that you know nothing about the issue. You come to complain about gun ownership because you don't like the politics of many gun owners and you want to attack us for that by pretending it has something to do with some homicidal scumbag. Your argument is pathetically lacking in facts and honesty and even more dishonest is your obvious real motivations, motivations that you try to conceal with a copious shedding of crocodile tears

That's a lot of gall to assume just because I do not agree with your position that all my good intentions are lies and I have some personal vendetta against you, you do not know me and I will thank you not make such assumptions. Also you do not seem to understand I was making a broad analogy with that point, I did not directly say an automatic weapon was used in that attack. I know my intentions better then you, you can assume what you want, but I do not have to talk someone who so wrapped in ideology in they see sinister motives in everyone who challenges their world view.

I may make mistakes sometimes, maybe I was a little harsh towards you, but I am not going to concede to you anything, when you can't see zealot like arguments you put, forward that any attempts to talk about gun control is seen as an attack on your person, I don't have to take this abuse from you, have a nice night.
 
That's a lot of gall to assume just because I do not agree with your position that all my good intentions are lies and I have some personal vendetta against you, you do not know me and I will thank you not make such assumptions. Also you do not seem to understand I was making a broad analogy with that point, I did not directly say an automatic weapon was used in that attack. I know my intentions better then you, you can assume what you want, but I do not have to talk someone who so wrapped in ideology in they see sinister motives in everyone who challenges their world view.

I may make mistakes sometimes, maybe I was a little harsh towards you, but I am not going to concede to you anything, when you can't see zealot like arguments you put, forward that any attempts to talk about gun control is seen as an attack on your person, I don't have to take this abuse from you, have a nice night.

so you want to stick with your claim that automatic weapons had something to do with sandy hook?
anyone who tries to smear honest gun owners with the crimes committed by scumbags is going to get his silly arguments shredded by me.
 
so you want to stick with your claim that automatic weapons had something to do with sandy hook?
anyone who tries to smear honest gun owners with the crimes committed by scumbags is going to get his silly arguments shredded by me.

That was an analogy, I did not say that an automatic weapon is being used in Sandy Hook, I was using that make a broader point, that gun rights adovocates seem to care more about what kind of guns they can shoot on a range, then doing anything to try to stop these massacres, you are so obsessed with technical aspects, you are missing the bigger picture. At this point, I do not care if think that is an unfair characterization of gun owners, not all of them are like that, but people who buy into NRA group think seem to be.

And I am right, you see any arguments about gun control as an attack on your person, which means I do not think you rationally argue this issue. I am not trying to be mean, but that's what I see,

I am tired of debating you, leave me be. Maybe as I harsh on you, but frankly I do not care, I do not have to take anymore cheap shots here.
 
That was an analogy, I did not say that an automatic weapon is being used in Sandy Hook, I was using that make a broader point, that gun rights adovocates seem to care more about what kind of guns they can shoot on a range, then doing anything to try to stop these massacres, you are so obsessed with technical aspects, you are missing the bigger picture. At this point, I do not care if think that is an unfair characterization of gun owners, not all of them are like that, but people who buy into NRA group think seem to be.

And I am right, you see any arguments about gun control as an attack on your person, which means I do not think you rationally argue this issue. I am not trying to be mean, but that's what I see,

I am tired of debating you, leave me be. Maybe as I harsh on you, but frankly I do not care, I do not have to take anymore cheap shots here.

whining about gun owners is not doing anything to stop these massacres. IN fact, those who pass BS feel good gun laws that they pretend are designed to stop vicious criminals when the real goal is to harass people who don't vote for them, is worse than doing nothing. You keep saying you are leaving yet you continue to post nonsense and get upset when I point out its nonsense. Its obvious what really upsets you is the politics of the NRA and not armed criminals. You whine about gun owners but not vicious killers. obviously, honest gun owners are the people you hate
 
whining about gun owners is not doing anything to stop these massacres. IN fact, those who pass BS feel good gun laws that they pretend are designed to stop vicious criminals when the real goal is to harass people who don't vote for them, is worse than doing nothing. You keep saying you are leaving yet you continue to post nonsense and get upset when I point out its nonsense. Its obvious what really upsets you is the politics of the NRA and not armed criminals. You whine about gun owners but not vicious killers. obviously, honest gun owners are the people you hate

Yes, I am Dr. Doom and I am personally trying to pass these laws just to promote suffering, because I am evil super villain who wants to see you suffer for no good reason. I have no motive for this beyond being evil and clearly not because I think its for purpose that I think may save lives, because I am just a cartoonish super villain who does evil things for no reason.

Happy now?
 
Yes, I am Dr. Doom and I am personally trying to pass these laws just to promote suffering, because I am evil super villain who wants to see you suffer for no good reason. I have no motive for this beyond being evil and clearly not because I think its for purpose that I think may save lives, because I am just a cartoonish super villain who does evil things for no reason.

Happy now?

your entire posting history on gun issues is to blame honest gun owners for the actions of criminals.
 
=Yes_Minister;1067820339]The bump stock made the gun in the Vegas shooting in a defacto automatic weapon. You are splitting hairs.
The bump stock made it a semi auto with a bump stock.
You are no position to call anyone shameful, when your solution to these mass shootings is to shrug and agree with the guy who says his gun rights should trump dead children.
You and your type are the ones dancing on the dead children. You listen to the politicians tug at the old heart strings and try it yourselves. It sounds cheap.
I was making a broad analogy rather then referring to you in particular, in regards to automatic weapons.
Your broad analogy shows you don't know straight up about firearms. Automatic weapons in particular.
I am saying if your side is going to say your gun rights trump those dead children, then why should take your moral outrage seriously? Why should I care about it[/?
If your still going on about that video and dead children. Maybe I'm wrong but I think your moral outrage is a front as are a lot of the other anti gun people. Is this what you think or what you want the crowd(anti gun) to think?
Again, if you had a solution that keep the same gun rights and stop the mass shootings, I would listen, you have presented nothing, which makes me think this issue is not taken seriously, if you take this issue seriously then prove it. Otherwise I think you are being callous in regards to those killed by these mass shootings.
The answer is plain it's always been right there. Uphold gun laws.Not more.Stop all the freebies along with mental health care that doesn't mean shut up a state hospital somewhere to be let out at some prescribed date but actual help. Money and power= politicians. Politicians that will do anything to stay entrenched in office,a life they have become used to.Both sides.
If you think you have no obligation to even attempt an solution, then I have no obligation to think you are serious about this issue.
See above.
 
Last edited:
BOTUSA Playbook; A) Cowardly run to and hide behind the first responders with pre planned praise; B) Express Phony Condolences; C) State that now is not the time to talk about WMD guns, Weapons of Massacre and Death;

D) Repeat after NAtrump that it's about mental health exclusive of gun WMDs, E) Accuse the left of Dancing on Graves; F) Vomit Alex Jones type CTs; G) Pass 'Voodoo' Economics Tax Cuts for their Billionaire bag men ,,,
 
Yes, I am Dr. Doom and I am personally trying to pass these laws just to promote suffering, because I am evil super villain who wants to see you suffer for no good reason. I have no motive for this beyond being evil and clearly not because I think its for purpose that I think may save lives, because I am just a cartoonish super villain who does evil things for no reason.

Happy now?
Well I am.
 
=NIMBY;1067820501]BOTUSA Playbook; A) Cowardly run to and hide behind the first responders with pre planned praise;
AH yeah sure sounds good.I think.
B) Express Phony Condolences;
It's been done...a lot. I think.
C) State that now is not the time to talk about WMD guns, Weapons of Massacre and Death;
"Weapons of Massacre and Death" yeah I knew that all along.
D) Repeat after NAtrump that it's about mental health exclusive of gun WMDs,
I admit I'm spinning my wheels here.
E) Accuse the left of Dancing on Graves;
YES one I agree on. Even know what I;m agreeing to.
F) Vomit Alex Jones type CTs;
OK yeah not the Alex Jones type.
G) Pass 'Voodoo' Economics Tax Cuts for their Billionaire bag men ,,,
WTF?

Is this NIMBY off the wall or somewhere way back does it connect.
 
you should go to many of our inner cities and tell all the people who wear "don't be a snitch" t-shirts that. and btw, most good criminal defense attorneys, indeed many judges who actually respect the fourth, fifth and sixth amendments often HINDER the police. and I say God bless them for that
.


Believe whatever you want to believe.It will have no effect on reality.

"Don't do the crime if you can't do the time."
 
Los Vegas and Colorado were not made up scenarios, in both cases people were watching the events they came to see, not looking around for shooters. the Vegas shooter also was aiming from a hotel at the crowd at the concert, how could a good guy with a gun have made the difference against him?

In which case, any person with a lick of common sense would tell you that the cops in the crowd were just as ineffective.

You love cherry picking this crappola, ......................meanwhile the average gun confrontation is within 20-30 feet.
 
I'm not finding an NRA response to the story 'Good guys with guns hinder police' yet.
For the record, if they say the sky is blue, I will agree with them. (duh)

But I did find this 08.05.2016 Salon article relating to the topic.

The war between police and the NRA: Open carry laws make cops’ jobs virtually impossible
...
Forty-five states permit open carry of guns. ... Earlier this month, on the heels of the Dallas shooting that left five officers dead, Police Chief David Brown suggested that open carry had made the task of identifying the shooter harder.

"We're trying as best we can as a law enforcement community to make it work so that citizens can express their Second Amendment rights," Brown said at a recent media event. “But it’s increasingly challenging when people have AR-15s slung over their shoulder and they’re in a crowd. We don’t know who the good guy is versus the bad guy when everyone starts shooting.”
...
Norm Stamper, a 34-year veteran police officer and former chief of the Seattle police department, says open carry can add an element of confusion to police work, hampering suspect IDs at crucial moments.
...
“Not a single one of these people carrying firearms out there in [Dallas] caught this guy in what he was doing,” Bob Gualtieri of the Florida Sheriffs Association told Reuters. “It drained law enforcement resources and subjected citizens to being unnecessarily taken into custody, and I think we should all be very grateful that nobody else got hurt.”
...
Police in a number of cities have been less easy to shut down, pushing back on open carry when the issue arises. During the legislative debate over a proposed open carry bill in Florida last year, the Fraternal Order of Police expressed its unanimous opposition to the legislation, and the Florida Sheriffs Association made sure legislators were aware that 70 percent of its membership was against the law. The bill died earlier this year. When Texas was considering an open carry law last year, the Texas Police Chiefs Association pointed to a study that showed 75 percent of respondents gave the pending legislation a thumbs down. (In total, about one-fifth of the state’s police chiefs responded to the poll.) Perhaps most surprising, former Texas governor Rick Perry expressed apprehension about the pending law at the time, telling the Texas Tribune he was “not necessarily all that fond of this open carry concept.” That bill was signed into law by current Texas governor Greg Abbott in June 2015.
...
Similarly, in Milwaukee, Wis., police at every level have made multiple attempts to push back on open carry laws. The state has longstanding, lenient gun legislation, including open carry, though police were still disarming open carrying citizens and charging them with disorderly conduct as recently as 2009. In response, the state attorney general issued an advisory reiterating the practice’s legality, to the dismay of police across the state. “It's going to be like the Wild West, where they have the holster strapped down to their leg,” Detective Dala Milosavljevic of the Cudahy Police Department told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel at the time.
...

I'm glad California isn't open carry.* I'm fine with weapons in the homes, but open carry seems crazy to me.

*California expands its ban on the open carry of rifles

...
The law was requested by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department to expand state law that already bans openly carrying handguns in areas outside cities.
...
Supporters note the law does not prevent carrying rifles in rural hunting grounds. “This action does not in any way alter the dozens of current provisions of law that allow gun owners to open carry long guns in common everyday situations,” Brown said. “Nor does the bill prevent local cities and counties from determining via ordinance where discharge of a firearm is permissible.”
...
 
Believe whatever you want to believe.It will have no effect on reality.

"Don't do the crime if you can't do the time."

non responsive. just because you want to respond even if you have nothing logical to post, doesn't mean you have to
 
I'm not finding an NRA response to the story 'Good guys with guns hinder police' yet.
For the record, if they say the sky is blue, I will agree with them. (duh)

But I did find this 08.05.2016 Salon article relating to the topic.

The war between police and the NRA: Open carry laws make cops’ jobs virtually impossible


I'm glad California isn't open carry.* I'm fine with weapons in the homes, but open carry seems crazy to me.

*California expands its ban on the open carry of rifles

its hilarious seeing progressives complaining about a freedom that bothers some of the control freak members of police departments. We will keep that in mind when the Antifa and other rent a riots are engaging in civil unrest
 
non responsive. just because you want to respond even if you have nothing logical to post, doesn't mean you have to


Those who interfere with the police may be breaking the law,depending upon the type and level of the interference.
 
Back
Top Bottom