• 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!

America’s gun-culture madness[W:30]

mmi

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 30, 2014
Messages
4,810
Reaction score
2,250
Location
is everything
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Mass killings are now regular events here, but they're still rare in Canada. It's time that we asked ourselves why.

In California, people 70 and up must renew their driver’s licenses in person to be interviewed, take a vision test, make a practice run and pass a written quiz.

And yet the state gave Elliot Rodger, who’d been mentally ill for years and openly posted threats to the public on YouTube and Facebook, a gun license that allowed him to buy semiautomatic guns that helped him to slaughter six innocent people.

Nationally, Homeland Security has the power to hold, question and search suspected terrorists, and yet the American homeland remains vulnerable to those among our own citizens who are psychotic — not religiously motivated — and can buy guns more readily than Sudafed.

It’s time America looks up to Canada, where anyone can own a gun — but licensing is properly managed with a process that takes weeks, requires applicants to show up in person and includes background checks and a personal safety-training course.

In 2012, Canada, had 172 gun homicides. The U.S., with 314 million people, had 6,371 — four times as many per capita.

There are mass killings in Canada, including two mass stabbings this year by mentally ill persons, but far fewer than in the U.S.

A big reason why is that Canada provides mental health care (and drugs and financial support) for all its residents, and enforces proper gun controls to protect the public.

Canada catches mentally ill people in its health care net, because it has one. Rodger would almost surely have been turned down for a gun license in Canada, given his history — and if he had posted threats online, he would likely have been taken to a hospital by police and kept there for diagnosis.

Too many Americans have no access and cannot afford help or medications — a hole budget cuts have widened. Canada also has a larger share of psychiatrists than America, and the number is rising in the Great White North even as it’s declining south of the border. What’s annoying is the Second Amendment nonsense spouted by the NRA and its allies. As my social studies teacher once explained about liberty and its responsibilities, freedom is the right to swing your arm but not to hit anybody else with it.

This applies to everything in life except, in the United States, guns. The right to bear arms by militias, established in the 18th century, has been stretched and corrupted by litigators and inept judges to effectively allow anyone anywhere in the U.S. to use semiautomatic weaponry at will.

Americans aren’t so much more violent than Canadians. They are just far more likely to use guns — which account for nearly three-fifths of all murders in the U.S., compared to just one-third north of the border — and thus far more likely to see violent incidents end with fatal results.

Americans, like Canadians, realize that guns, like cars or prescription drugs, should be carefully regulated and licensed. No one should shoot a gun, or drive a car, without proving to the public he or she can safely and responsibly do so.

Perhaps Americans need Homeland Security to protect them from craven commercial interests, incompetent politicians and government officials as well as terrorists. — New York Daily News, May 30, 2014​
 
If you would actualy count mass shootings you would notice that they are not releated to the availability of firearms but to other factors.

One thing people also often forget is the population difference and that homicide rates are not just simply counting crimes, but counting the crimes per 100 000 population.

Poland has a higher homicide rate than the US.
 
Mass killings are now regular events here, but they're still rare in Canada. It's time that we asked ourselves why.

In California, people 70 and up must renew their driver’s licenses in person to be interviewed, take a vision test, make a practice run and pass a written quiz.

And yet the state gave Elliot Rodger, who’d been mentally ill for years and openly posted threats to the public on YouTube and Facebook, a gun license that allowed him to buy semiautomatic guns that helped him to slaughter six innocent people.

Nationally, Homeland Security has the power to hold, question and search suspected terrorists, and yet the American homeland remains vulnerable to those among our own citizens who are psychotic — not religiously motivated — and can buy guns more readily than Sudafed.

It’s time America looks up to Canada, where anyone can own a gun — but licensing is properly managed with a process that takes weeks, requires applicants to show up in person and includes background checks and a personal safety-training course.

In 2012, Canada, had 172 gun homicides. The U.S., with 314 million people, had 6,371 — four times as many per capita.

There are mass killings in Canada, including two mass stabbings this year by mentally ill persons, but far fewer than in the U.S.

A big reason why is that Canada provides mental health care (and drugs and financial support) for all its residents, and enforces proper gun controls to protect the public.

Canada catches mentally ill people in its health care net, because it has one. Rodger would almost surely have been turned down for a gun license in Canada, given his history — and if he had posted threats online, he would likely have been taken to a hospital by police and kept there for diagnosis.

Too many Americans have no access and cannot afford help or medications — a hole budget cuts have widened. Canada also has a larger share of psychiatrists than America, and the number is rising in the Great White North even as it’s declining south of the border. What’s annoying is the Second Amendment nonsense spouted by the NRA and its allies. As my social studies teacher once explained about liberty and its responsibilities, freedom is the right to swing your arm but not to hit anybody else with it.

This applies to everything in life except, in the United States, guns. The right to bear arms by militias, established in the 18th century, has been stretched and corrupted by litigators and inept judges to effectively allow anyone anywhere in the U.S. to use semiautomatic weaponry at will.

Americans aren’t so much more violent than Canadians. They are just far more likely to use guns — which account for nearly three-fifths of all murders in the U.S., compared to just one-third north of the border — and thus far more likely to see violent incidents end with fatal results.

Americans, like Canadians, realize that guns, like cars or prescription drugs, should be carefully regulated and licensed. No one should shoot a gun, or drive a car, without proving to the public he or she can safely and responsibly do so.

Perhaps Americans need Homeland Security to protect them from craven commercial interests, incompetent politicians and government officials as well as terrorists. — New York Daily News, May 30, 2014​

typical mindless anti gun garbage based on a disgusting combination of lies, half truths and a political agenda.

1) anything one can do with a gun that harms another person is highly illegal

2) laws that limit the type of firearm one can own only impact honest people. Those with records or even those who intend to do harm with a firearm are banned from possessing any type of gun

3) the Second amendment clearly recognized the natural right of citizens to be armed. Given that absolute truth combined with the fact that the founders did not delegate any proper authority to the federal government to regulate small arms, your rant about militias is a pure and shining lie

4) your desire is to cut off peoples' arms rather than merely regulate how they swing it

your attitude is that people who rob or kill will be more restrained if we ban guns and that people who do not currently misuse firearms need more laws applied to them do they won't do what they have never done
 
The car analogy? :roll:

Why do gun grabbers fail to understand the distinction between a right and a privilege? Why must they be so ignorant of history when they suggest registration, confiscation or prohibition?

**** that and **** you, violent crime and mass shootings are declining despite increasing populations and increasing numbers of guns in circulation. The problem is solving itself, we don't need your bad ideas that violate our rights.
 
The car analogy? :roll: Why do gun grabbers fail to understand the distinction between a right and a privilege? Why must they be so ignorant of history when they suggest registration, confiscation or prohibition? **** that and **** you, violent crime and mass shootings are declining despite increasing populations and increasing numbers of guns in circulation. The problem is solving itself, we don't need your bad ideas that violate our rights.
Well good. Maybe you're cold, dead hands will be free do something else more productive once the unlimited privilege of carrying tools made and used specifically to kill living things is scaled back.
 
How does the privilege of a driver's license have anything to do with the right to self defense?
 
Well good. Maybe you're cold, dead hands will be free do something else more productive once the unlimited privilege of carrying tools made and used specifically to kill living things is scaled back.

Yeah? Who is going to kill me? You? Come and try, I'll PM you my address so you can attempt to confiscate my guns yourself; If you have the balls.

How the **** are you a libertarian? Do you even know what the non-aggression principle is?

Just because something is designed to kill doesn't mean thats a bad thing, we need to kill to eat, sometimes we need to kill to protect lives and sometimes, we just want to shoot at paper targets; Which is our RIGHT.

Also, its YOUR not YOU'RE you product of the Department of Education.
 
One thing people also often forget is the population difference and that homicide rates are not just simply counting crimes, but counting the crimes per 100 000 population.

This is addressed by the author and included in what I cited (the complete article):

In 2012, Canada, had 172 gun homicides. The U.S., with 314 million people, had 6,371 — four times as many per capita.​

That figure is for handguns. The number for all firearms was 8,855.

anything one can do with a gun that harms another person is highly illegal

The issue in this thread is guns and mental illness.

>>laws that limit the type of firearm one can own only impact honest people.

There is no mention here of "the type of firearm one can own."

>>your rant about militias is a pure and shining lie

I offered no opinion about militias.

>>your desire is to cut off peoples' arms rather than merely regulate how they swing it

The intent is to make it more difficult for mentally ill people to obtain firearms.

>>your attitude is that people who rob or kill will be more restrained if we ban guns

Robbery and gun bans are not addressed in this thread.

Yer comment might be best described as "typical mindless gun-nut garbage based on a disgusting combination of lies, half truths and a political agenda."

Why do gun grabbers fail to understand the distinction between a right and a privilege?

"Gun grabbing" is not addressed in this thread

>>Why must they be so ignorant of history when they suggest registration, confiscation or prohibition?

Why must you be so ignorant of the use of firearms by mentally ill people in homicides?

>>**** that and **** you

Just the type of response I expect from gun nuts.

>>violent crime and mass shootings are declining despite increasing populations and increasing numbers of guns in circulation. The problem is solving itself

Not as quickly as it could be.

>>we don't need your bad ideas that violate our rights.

You'll get them nonetheless.

Wow, another baseless anti gun thread. Who woulda figured.

A defence by gun nuts of allowing mentally ill people to obtain firearms. I woulda figured.

How does the privilege of a driver's license have anything to do with the right to self defense?

No right is absolute.
 
No right is absolute.

Spoken only by those opposed to our rights.

"Congress shall make no law" and "shall not be infringed" still mean something.

You'll get them nonetheless.

And you'll keep losing, I bet you blame the sand in your vagina on the NRA too? How'd that Machin Toomey bill work out for you gun grabbers?

Loser.
 
Yeah? Who is going to kill me? You? Come and try, I'll PM you my address so you can attempt to confiscate my guns yourself; If you have the balls.

How the **** are you a libertarian? Do you even know what the non-aggression principle is?

Just because something is designed to kill doesn't mean thats a bad thing, we need to kill to eat, sometimes we need to kill to protect lives and sometimes, we just want to shoot at paper targets; Which is our RIGHT.

Also, its YOUR not YOU'RE you product of the Department of Education.
So many ways to murder paper targets, why just limit it to guns? Besides, there's nothing better than helping advance the NRA’s mission of responsibility with firearms.
 
This is addressed by the author and included in what I cited (the complete article):

In 2012, Canada, had 172 gun homicides. The U.S., with 314 million people, had 6,371 — four times as many per capita.​

That figure is for handguns. The number for all firearms was 8,855.

So you adress one point and ignore the others?

Have u ever considered that there are other factors contributing to the low homicide rate in Canada? Factors that contribute to social stability like low unemployment?

I listed that homicide rates In Poland are higher than in the US and that the US homicide rate is ruthly at the rate that France has.

The availability of guns is not what triggers gun violence or increase homicide rates.

It is true that there is more crime in the southern US, but also more poverty, lower education, higher unemployment numbers and a proximity to drug trafficing.

And everywhere that we find those factors, we find an increase in violent crimes.

Besides all that, most homicides are not due to mass shootings or even organised crime.

Most homicides are the domestic stuff, like the drunkard abusive husband who beats his wife to death, or the Junky mum who puts her baby into a microwave.

And concerning homicides and murder weapons, did you know that criminologists nickname the knife as a murderweapons as "the destinctive European".
 
This is addressed by the author and included in what I cited (the complete article):

In 2012, Canada, had 172 gun homicides. The U.S., with 314 million people, had 6,371 — four times as many per capita.​

That figure is for handguns. The number for all firearms was 8,855.



The issue in this thread is guns and mental illness.

>>laws that limit the type of firearm one can own only impact honest people.

There is no mention here of "the type of firearm one can own."

>>your rant about militias is a pure and shining lie

I offered no opinion about militias.

>>your desire is to cut off peoples' arms rather than merely regulate how they swing it

The intent is to make it more difficult for mentally ill people to obtain firearms.

>>your attitude is that people who rob or kill will be more restrained if we ban guns

Robbery and gun bans are not addressed in this thread.

Yer comment might be best described as "typical mindless gun-nut garbage based on a disgusting combination of lies, half truths and a political agenda."



"Gun grabbing" is not addressed in this thread

>>Why must they be so ignorant of history when they suggest registration, confiscation or prohibition?

Why must you be so ignorant of the use of firearms by mentally ill people in homicides?

>>**** that and **** you

Just the type of response I expect from gun nuts.

>>violent crime and mass shootings are declining despite increasing populations and increasing numbers of guns in circulation. The problem is solving itself

Not as quickly as it could be.

>>we don't need your bad ideas that violate our rights.

You'll get them nonetheless.



A defence by gun nuts of allowing mentally ill people to obtain firearms. I woulda figured.



No right is absolute.



no right is absolute but unless a government has a proper power to interfere with the right than your comment is specious.

you have already made it clear you are a hater of gun owners

its all about nibbling away at a right you despise.

you gun banners never explain where it all ends

we already have laws making it illegal for those who are adjudicated mentally unstable to own or possess weapons

just like those who have been addicted to drugs or indicted or convicted of a crime

we don't bar people merely because they once smoked dope or perhaps contemplated a crime

and we don't bar people merely because someone thinks they have mental issues.

I have explained why there there are problems in expanding the prohibitions to people who merely seek treatment. The chilling impact it will have
may well cause far more problems than it will solve

and your Post rants about gun ownership in generally

you want all gun owners to have to submit to all sorts of infringements of their rights

and you spew this mindless garbage about the 2A being limited to militias

so your rant about its only mental illness is a bald faced LIE

I am curious, you never did tell us your background or profession
 
Well good. Maybe you're cold, dead hands will be free do something else more productive once the unlimited privilege of carrying tools made and used specifically to kill living things is scaled back.

another interesting libertarian comment. Your posts demonstrate you have no concept of either the natural right the 2A recognizes or the concept of limited government. Too much Chicago pollution of freedom perhaps?
 
Well good. Maybe you're cold, dead hands will be free do something else more productive once the unlimited privilege of carrying tools made and used specifically to kill living things is scaled back.

Killing people is a subset of the things that guns are designed to do. Not the entire set.
 
Spoken only by those opposed to our rights.

Spoken over and over by SCOTUS and anyone with a valid understanding of the Constitution.

>>"Congress shall make no law" and "shall not be infringed" still mean something.

Not what you think. Ever hear of "yelling 'Fire!' in a crowded theatre?

>>And you'll keep losing

Gun nuttery will recede, like all forms of mass hysteria

>>I bet you blame the sand in your vagina on the NRA too?

I see you suffer from gender confusion as well. Not unexpected.

>>Loser.

As others who have debated me in this forum about guns have found, I want to assure you that I will not run and complain to the staff about yer name-calling. I don't want to upset you.
 
Killing people is a subset of the things that guns are designed to do. Not the entire set.

and even if true so what. cops carry guns for what purpose? security guards carry them for what purpose

I own lots of guns. most I buy for competitive purposes. There are lots of different competitions I enjoy

sporting clays
ISU skeet
NSSA skeet
ISU Trap
ATA Trap
USPSA-IPSC-unlimited, limited, single stack and limited ten
Steel event
etc etc

so most of the guns I own are designed for specific types of target events

when people spew the "designed for killing" its the same attempt to appeal to the emotobabbling of gun haters
 
Spoken over and over by SCOTUS and anyone with a valid understanding of the Constitution.

>>"Congress shall make no law" and "shall not be infringed" still mean something.

Not what you think. Ever hear of "yelling 'Fire!' in a crowded theatre?

>>And you'll keep losing

Gun nuttery will recede, like all forms of mass hysteria

>>I bet you blame the sand in your vagina on the NRA too?

I see you suffer from gender confusion as well. Not unexpected.

>>Loser.

As others who have debated me in this forum about guns have found, I want to assure you that I will not run and complain to the staff about yer name-calling. I don't want to upset you.


like most gun banners, you confuse use restrictions with blanket possession bans

YOU CAN YELL FIRE IN A CROWDED theater in some cases.


gun nuttery is really applicable to people like you who hate gun owners because we aren't socialists
 
and even if true so what. cops carry guns for what purpose? security guards carry them for what purpose

I own lots of guns. most I buy for competitive purposes. There are lots of different competitions I enjoy

sporting clays
ISU skeet
NSSA skeet
ISU Trap
ATA Trap
USPSA-IPSC-unlimited, limited, single stack and limited ten
Steel event
etc etc

so most of the guns I own are designed for specific types of target events

when people spew the "designed for killing" its the same attempt to appeal to the emotobabbling of gun haters

Yes. Hunting, skeet shooting, tournaments, etc. are all other purposes for having guns (and as you point out, specific types of guns at that).
 
Yes. Hunting, skeet shooting, tournaments, etc. are all other purposes for having guns (and as you point out, specific types of guns at that).

what matters is the intent of the owner. Lots of people buy pistols designed for the military or police for target shooting. same with AR 15 rifles-
 
Mass killings are now regular events here, but they're still rare in Canada. It's time that we asked ourselves why.

In California, people 70 and up must renew their driver’s licenses in person to be interviewed, take a vision test, make a practice run and pass a written quiz.

And yet the state gave Elliot Rodger, who’d been mentally ill for years and openly posted threats to the public on YouTube and Facebook, a gun license that allowed him to buy semiautomatic guns that helped him to slaughter six innocent people.

Nationally, Homeland Security has the power to hold, question and search suspected terrorists, and yet the American homeland remains vulnerable to those among our own citizens who are psychotic — not religiously motivated — and can buy guns more readily than Sudafed.

It’s time America looks up to Canada, where anyone can own a gun — but licensing is properly managed with a process that takes weeks, requires applicants to show up in person and includes background checks and a personal safety-training course.

In 2012, Canada, had 172 gun homicides. The U.S., with 314 million people, had 6,371 — four times as many per capita.

There are mass killings in Canada, including two mass stabbings this year by mentally ill persons, but far fewer than in the U.S.

A big reason why is that Canada provides mental health care (and drugs and financial support) for all its residents, and enforces proper gun controls to protect the public.

Canada catches mentally ill people in its health care net, because it has one. Rodger would almost surely have been turned down for a gun license in Canada, given his history — and if he had posted threats online, he would likely have been taken to a hospital by police and kept there for diagnosis.

Too many Americans have no access and cannot afford help or medications — a hole budget cuts have widened. Canada also has a larger share of psychiatrists than America, and the number is rising in the Great White North even as it’s declining south of the border. What’s annoying is the Second Amendment nonsense spouted by the NRA and its allies. As my social studies teacher once explained about liberty and its responsibilities, freedom is the right to swing your arm but not to hit anybody else with it.

This applies to everything in life except, in the United States, guns. The right to bear arms by militias, established in the 18th century, has been stretched and corrupted by litigators and inept judges to effectively allow anyone anywhere in the U.S. to use semiautomatic weaponry at will.

Americans aren’t so much more violent than Canadians. They are just far more likely to use guns — which account for nearly three-fifths of all murders in the U.S., compared to just one-third north of the border — and thus far more likely to see violent incidents end with fatal results.

Americans, like Canadians, realize that guns, like cars or prescription drugs, should be carefully regulated and licensed. No one should shoot a gun, or drive a car, without proving to the public he or she can safely and responsibly do so.

Perhaps Americans need Homeland Security to protect them from craven commercial interests, incompetent politicians and government officials as well as terrorists. — New York Daily News, May 30, 2014​

Lots of conclusions, but nothing that supports them. If Canada had Mexico on it's border and the drug and illegal immigration issues that come with it, they'd have a lot more gun related killings. If Canada had the glorification of the gang culture being acceptable in it's poorest communities, they'd have a lot more gun related killings. Drop out those three issues from the gun violence statistics and you'd be seeing a whole different story. NONE of which has anything to do with gun registration or mental healthcare.
 
Honest question for those that do not agree with the second amendment. Lets say that the US banned all personal firearms today as some would like see happen. Do you really think that we would no longer have guns in the country? I mean we have tens of millions of them in the hands of citizens. I know I personally would hide mine and I would refuse to hand them over to the authorities because I feel it is my right to own and posses them regardless of what Washington may decide. I feel I am not alone in this. Guns will be around this country for a very very long time no matter what bureaucrats or law enforcement decide or do.

Let us also consider current criminals that already break the law, do you think they are going to hand theirs in? I do not believe so. Those that are willing to hand their guns into the government will be defenseless against all the current criminals and the predators know this. You think crime is bad now wait until the day comes when a criminal could assume that a homeowner is gunless.

So we are going to be left with many many guns still in the possession of US citizens only you are going to make criminals out of otherwise law abiding people. It sounds like a lot of negatives and not many positives to me. If the US had banned guns from the countries inception it may have made a substantial difference but I believe that boat sailed long ago.
 
Lots of conclusions, but nothing that supports them. If Canada had Mexico on it's border and the drug and illegal immigration issues that come with it, they'd have a lot more gun related killings. If Canada had the glorification of the gang culture being acceptable in it's poorest communities, they'd have a lot more gun related killings. Drop out those three issues from the gun violence statistics and you'd be seeing a whole different story. NONE of which has anything to do with gun registration or mental healthcare.

the rates of gun violence of white americans is lower than that of white europeans and similar to that of white canadians
 
Honest question for those that do not agree with the second amendment. Lets say that the US banned all personal firearms today as some would like see happen. Do you really think that we would no longer have guns in the country? I mean we have tens of millions of them in the hands of citizens. I know I personally would hide mine and I would refuse to hand them over to the authorities because I feel it is my right to own and posses them regardless of what Washington may decide. I feel I am not alone in this. Guns will be around this country for a very very long time no matter what bureaucrats or law enforcement decide or do.

Let us also consider current criminals that already break the law, do you think they are going to hand theirs in? I do not believe so. Those that are willing to hand their guns into the government will be defenseless against all the current criminals and the predators know this. You think crime is bad now wait until the day comes when a criminal could assume that a homeowner is gunless.

So we are going to be left with many many guns still in the possession of US citizens only you are going to make criminals out of otherwise law abiding people. It sounds like a lot of negatives and not many positives to me. If the US had banned guns from the countries inception it may have made a substantial difference but I believe that boat sailed long ago.

the goal of the gun banners is to get rid of the power groups like the NRA have during elections. Make guns illegal and most people will no longer remain members of gun groups. that's what the anti gun scum in congress want to do
 
the rates of gun violence of white americans is lower than that of white europeans and similar to that of white canadians

HEY! I love ya Turtle, but as a non-white, I still blame white people for the war on drugs which is the cause of most brown-skinned violence.

AND the suicides which combined make up the bulk of our gun violence. WE don't kill ourselves at the rates that you do, and the gun grabbers use the numbers from your white suicides just as much as they use our brown gang violence #'s.
 
Back
Top Bottom