• 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!

An interesting read concerning the predicted DNC push for gun control

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
262,478
Reaction score
80,935
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2018/...a_By4C7w_yFMTv3lPQDacq1JsI3BfKXXANNhc60672DHk

from the article

[FONT=&quot]The Democrats have made it no secret that they plan to push through an agenda heavy on gun control when they take control of the House of Representatives in January. It’s also no secret that they have no chance in hell of any of the bills they pass going anywhere after it leaves their chamber of Congress.
[/FONT]

this article discusses why the dems are pushing laws they know won't get past the current senate
 

Xelor

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2018
Messages
10,257
Reaction score
4,161
Location
Washington, D.C.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2018/...a_By4C7w_yFMTv3lPQDacq1JsI3BfKXXANNhc60672DHk

from the article

[FONT=&quot]The Democrats have made it no secret that they plan to push through an agenda heavy on gun control when they take control of the House of Representatives in January. It’s also no secret that they have no chance in hell of any of the bills they pass going anywhere after it leaves their chamber of Congress.
[/FONT]

this article discusses why the dems are pushing laws they know won't get past the current senate

Red:
Be that as it may, to the extent the measures that pass align with overall national popular sentiments, it puts senators in a precarious position, especially McConnell if he doesn't allow the measure onto the floor for a vote.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
262,478
Reaction score
80,935
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Red:
Be that as it may, to the extent the measures that pass align with overall national popular sentiments, it puts senators in a precarious position, especially McConnell if he doesn't allow the measure onto the floor for a vote.

depends on the state. pro rights voters tend to be far more committed than those who support the anti rights coalition. another variable is the Courts. I think one of the things that really helped Obama in 2008 was the Heller decision. I heard at least 8 union members who also belong to the NRA saying they were going to vote with "their union" for Obama because Heller meant that they didn't have to worry about Obama banning their guns. If Heller had gone the other way, most of them said-they would have voted for McCain
 

Lutherf

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
40,466
Reaction score
46,906
Location
Tucson, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2018/...a_By4C7w_yFMTv3lPQDacq1JsI3BfKXXANNhc60672DHk

from the article

[FONT="]The Democrats have made it no secret that they plan to push through an agenda heavy on gun control when they take control of the House of Representatives in January. It’s also no secret that they have no chance in hell of any of the bills they pass going anywhere after it leaves their chamber of Congress.
[/FONT]

this article discusses why the dems are pushing laws they know won't get past the current senate

I REALLY hope Democrats keep running on gun control. It's the one issue that's a guaranteed fail for them.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
262,478
Reaction score
80,935
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I REALLY hope Democrats keep running on gun control. It's the one issue that's a guaranteed fail for them.

especially in states like Ohio, PA and Michigan
 

Oborosen

Doctor D
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
21,988
Reaction score
4,955
Location
In your head
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2018/...a_By4C7w_yFMTv3lPQDacq1JsI3BfKXXANNhc60672DHk

from the article

[FONT="]The Democrats have made it no secret that they plan to push through an agenda heavy on gun control when they take control of the House of Representatives in January. It’s also no secret that they have no chance in hell of any of the bills they pass going anywhere after it leaves their chamber of Congress.
[/FONT]

this article discusses why the dems are pushing laws they know won't get past the current senate

Yeah, this issue has been on the rise with the democrats for a while now.

I wonder when they'll realize that their forms of gun laws only serve to make things worse for actual, law abiding citizens.
 

Arby

Deplorable
Joined
Nov 15, 2017
Messages
497
Reaction score
190
Location
PA.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Clinton said that “the Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment, and I am going to make that case every chance I get.”
That statement (among a few others) and the thought of her appointing Supreme Court justices were 2 main reasons she lost in PA.
 

Kobie

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 17, 2013
Messages
48,281
Reaction score
25,273
Location
Western NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Gun worship: a case study -- this thread
 

RabidAlpaca

Engineer
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
22,399
Reaction score
29,116
Location
American Refugee in Europe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
depends on the state. pro rights voters tend to be far more committed than those who support the anti rights coalition. another variable is the Courts. I think one of the things that really helped Obama in 2008 was the Heller decision. I heard at least 8 union members who also belong to the NRA saying they were going to vote with "their union" for Obama because Heller meant that they didn't have to worry about Obama banning their guns. If Heller had gone the other way, most of them said-they would have voted for McCain

This isn't a "pro-rights" vs. "anti-rights" question. Virtually all mainstream politicians on both sides support the fundamental right of law-abiding Americans to own guns. However ALL rights have limits, and you're one of the fringe radicals that believes that gun ownership should have no rules whatsoever and a complete free-for-all. You automatically attack ANY gun regulation at the federal level as a fundamental violation of our rights, with no consideration of what is actually being proposed.

The American people as a whole understand that all rights do have limits and should be regulated to some degree, and luckily over the past few decades we've taken more and more steps towards that. Most Americans disagree with you that violent criminals should have unfettered access to machine guns. This is a battle you're losing, and your hysterical fear-mongering isn't making you look more credible.
 
Last edited:

Rucker61

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
15,620
Reaction score
6,652
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
This isn't a "pro-rights" vs. "anti-rights" question. Virtually all mainstream politicians on both sides support the fundamental right of law-abiding Americans to own guns. However ALL rights have limits, and you're one of the fringe radicals that believes that gun ownership should have no rules whatsoever and a complete free-for-all. You automatically attack ANY gun regulation at the federal level as a fundamental violation of our rights, with no consideration of what is actually being proposed.

The American people as a whole understand that all rights do have limits and should be regulated to some degree, and luckily over the past few decades we've taken more and more steps towards that. Most Americans disagree with you that violent criminals should have unfettered access to machine guns. This is a battle you're losing, and your hysterical fear-mongering isn't making you look more credible.

What limits on the powers of government to restrict firearms are there? Can government simply pass any gun control measure that they wish?
 

Common Sense 1

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
12,875
Reaction score
7,161
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
This isn't a "pro-rights" vs. "anti-rights" question. Virtually all mainstream politicians on both sides support the fundamental right of law-abiding Americans to own guns. However ALL rights have limits, and you're one of the fringe radicals that believes that gun ownership should have no rules whatsoever and a complete free-for-all. You automatically attack ANY gun regulation at the federal level as a fundamental violation of our rights, with no consideration of what is actually being proposed.

The American people as a whole understand that all rights do have limits and should be regulated to some degree, and luckily over the past few decades we've taken more and more steps towards that. Most Americans disagree with you that violent criminals should have unfettered access to machine guns. This is a battle you're losing, and your hysterical fear-mongering isn't making you look more credible.


"Most Americans disagree with you that violent criminals should have unfettered access to machine guns."

You know or you should know that violent criminals do not have unfettered access to machine guns!



To legally own a fully-automatic weapon requires three things: money, time, and an absolutely pristine criminal record.

Anyone who wants one must first…

Understand the difference between semi-automatic and fully-automatic guns: While a semi-automatic gun shoots a single bullet with a single pull of the trigger, a fully-automatic firearm shoots multiple, repeated rounds with a single trigger squeeze.

Have a raft of cash: When Reagan made owning a fully-automatic weapon manufactured after 1986 illegal, the federal government capped the supply making the guns left in circulation prohibitively expensive. For instance, while a brand new semi-automatic AR-15 can cost as little as $450, fully-automatic weapon cost tens of thousands of dollars regardless of their condition. At the Weekly Standard, Lowe writes that the guns can cost upwards of $20,000.

Any gun for sale must have been manufactured before 1986 and must be registered with the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Records database. There are less than 500,000 full-auto weapons in circulation as opposed to the millions of semi-auto rifles.

Find a licensed dealer: Back in the 1930's machine guns, big belt-fed machines like those fired in the First World War, could be ordered through the mail. That's not possible today. Anyone who wants to own a fully-automatic weapon must find a dealer who possesses not only a Federal Firearms License, they have to find a dealer who has gone through additional background checks and who pays increased licensing fees.

"These dealers are referred to as FFL/SOT (special occupational tax) or Class 3 FFL dealers," Davis explains over the Federalist. "It is a lengthy and burdensome process that requires extensive investigation by ATF."

Have a clean record: Before buying a fully-automatic weapon, a person must pay a $200-dollar tax and register an application with the federal government. That means filling out a 12-page application, submitting fingerprints, and sending photos to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

Are you a felon? Are you or have you ever been committed to a mental institution? Are you a domestic abuser? Then good luck getting approval. Other than a few parking tickets, are you a citizen in good standing? Also, good luck getting approval. A record of civic responsibility isn't a guarantee of immediate approved.

Have a lot of patience: Every application apparently varies but the average time seems to be between 9 months and a year. The good folks at the ATF take their time because they make certain that applicants dot their I's cross their T's and are considered safe and responsible to own the fully automatic firearm.

Abide by local, state, and federal gun regulations: Assuming one has the record and the patience to pass the background check along with the actual cash to purchase the firearm, that person now finds themselves subject to a host of new regulations.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/its-still-legal-to-own-a-machine-gun-its-also-extremely-difficult-and-especially-expensive
 

holbritter

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
14,602
Reaction score
6,465
Location
NY
Gender
Female
This isn't a "pro-rights" vs. "anti-rights" question. Virtually all mainstream politicians on both sides support the fundamental right of law-abiding Americans to own guns. However ALL rights have limits, and you're one of the fringe radicals that believes that gun ownership should have no rules whatsoever and a complete free-for-all. You automatically attack ANY gun regulation at the federal level as a fundamental violation of our rights, with no consideration of what is actually being proposed.

The American people as a whole understand that all rights do have limits and should be regulated to some degree, and luckily over the past few decades we've taken more and more steps towards that. Most Americans disagree with you that violent criminals should have unfettered access to machine guns. This is a battle you're losing, and your hysterical fear-mongering isn't making you look more credible.



Fear-mothering is right, on your part. NO ONE wants violent criminals to have access to machine guns.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
262,478
Reaction score
80,935
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
This isn't a "pro-rights" vs. "anti-rights" question. Virtually all mainstream politicians on both sides support the fundamental right of law-abiding Americans to own guns. However ALL rights have limits, and you're one of the fringe radicals that believes that gun ownership should have no rules whatsoever and a complete free-for-all. You automatically attack ANY gun regulation at the federal level as a fundamental violation of our rights, with no consideration of what is actually being proposed.

The American people as a whole understand that all rights do have limits and should be regulated to some degree, and luckily over the past few decades we've taken more and more steps towards that. Most Americans disagree with you that violent criminals should have unfettered access to machine guns. This is a battle you're losing, and your hysterical fear-mongering isn't making you look more credible.

you're lying. I have long said that state governments should have the power to regulate how firearms are used. I have said states certainly have the power to ban felons from owning any type of firearms.

You all lose because you constantly lie about us and you all lie about what you all really want.
 

dogboy49

Active member
Joined
Dec 23, 2017
Messages
337
Reaction score
146
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
You automatically attack ANY gun regulation at the federal level as a fundamental violation of our rights, with no consideration of what is actually being proposed.

Well, any gun regulation at the federal level that imposes restrictions on law-abiding adults, anyway.

Most Americans disagree with you that violent criminals should have unfettered access to machine guns.

????? Me? Can you clarify, since I don't know who you are talking about. Personally, I don't know anyone who believes that, and I know a boatload of gun-rights enthusiasts.

This is a battle you're losing, and your hysterical fear-mongering isn't making you look more credible.

???? Criminals are in jail. The only people I know who support giving out guns in jail to criminals are....other criminals. Yes, I agree with you that these guys probably don't look very credible, but I never saw that as being much of an issue.

For law-abiding adults, though, I believe that there is no reason gun rights should be restricted. Luckily for us, the federal courts are increasingly coming to the same conclusion. The fear-mongering anti-gunners are now being shown to have no real solutions in their arguments other than some impractical and unconstitutional form of civilian disarmament.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
262,478
Reaction score
80,935
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
What limits on the powers of government to restrict firearms are there? Can government simply pass any gun control measure that they wish?

looks like it was a drive by posting with no follow up. after the claim that I support criminals having unfettered access to machine guns, one has dug a hole they cannot get out of
 

RabidAlpaca

Engineer
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
22,399
Reaction score
29,116
Location
American Refugee in Europe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
[/B]
Fear-mothering is right, on your part. NO ONE wants violent criminals to have access to machine guns.


Then that requires some kind of regulation. Calling all regulation "gun-grabbing" and infringing on freedom is silly.

you're lying. I have long said that state governments should have the power to regulate how firearms are used. I have said states certainly have the power to ban felons from owning any type of firearms.
You all lose because you constantly lie about us and you all lie about what you all really want.

You say that, yet when it's done at the federal level in any form, you scream at the top of your lungs with hyperbole about "they're gun grabbers! they want to ban ALL guns!" You all lose because you constantly lie about us and you all lie about what you all really want.

You can't keep machine guns out of violent criminals hands, as you claim you want, without a little regulation. Hyperventilating and exaggerating every time a regulation is suggested doesn't match that stance.

looks like it was a drive by posting with no follow up. after the claim that I support criminals having unfettered access to machine guns, one has dug a hole they cannot get out of

Except you do, because you throw a hissy fit literally time ANY regulation is suggested. No regulation can be tame enough to not get its own little whine thread from DP's resident Turtle.

What limits on the powers of government to restrict firearms are there? Can government simply pass any gun control measure that they wish?

There are plenty of limits, the Constitution being one of them. If someone came out and proposed a bill banning all guns for everyone, it would certainly be struck down. If someone came out with a bill proposing everyone can have any gun, no restrictions at all, that also wouldn't work. There's something in the middle, and when people like Turtle Dude exaggerate and pretend everyone's trying to ban all guns, it just makes him look stupid and desperate.
 
Last edited:

Rucker61

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
15,620
Reaction score
6,652
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
There are plenty of limits, the Constitution being one of them. If someone came out and proposed a bill banning all guns for everyone, it would certainly be struck down. If someone came out with a bill proposing everyone can have any gun, no restrictions at all, that also wouldn't work. There's something in the middle, and when people like Turtle Dude exaggerate and pretend everyone's trying to ban all guns, it just makes him look stupid and desperate.

What about banning some guns for law abiding citizens? What SCOTUS decisions would come into play at that point?

Edit: Given that NFA 1934 with regards to regulation of machine guns seemed to be working, what was the purpose of the Hughes Amendment?
 

DebateChallenge

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 30, 2017
Messages
9,628
Reaction score
2,258
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2018/...a_By4C7w_yFMTv3lPQDacq1JsI3BfKXXANNhc60672DHk

from the article

[FONT="]The Democrats have made it no secret that they plan to push through an agenda heavy on gun control when they take control of the House of Representatives in January. It’s also no secret that they have no chance in hell of any of the bills they pass going anywhere after it leaves their chamber of Congress.
[/FONT]

this article discusses why the dems are pushing laws they know won't get past the current senate
I would think that the big push for more gun control would've come during the Obama administration when the Democrats held the cards, and if Hillary had won the presidency there would be a really big push.
 

DebateChallenge

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 30, 2017
Messages
9,628
Reaction score
2,258
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
especially in states like Ohio, PA and Michigan

PA is one of the strongest gun rights states out there, in sharp contrast to their neighbor to the east NJ, no way are they going to push for more gun control.
 

smallvoice

Classic Liberal
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2018
Messages
8,550
Reaction score
1,437
Location
God's country
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
..and Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Wyoming, Utah, and on and on....QUOTE=TurtleDude;1069458575]especially in states like Ohio, PA and Michigan[/QUOTE]
 

DebateChallenge

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 30, 2017
Messages
9,628
Reaction score
2,258
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Most Americans disagree with you that violent criminals should have unfettered access to machine guns.

Violent criminals don't have legal access to any kind of gun, let alone machine guns. If you're a convicted felon you can't have access to anything that's classified as a firearm.
 

Spartacus FPV

Better You = Better World
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Messages
14,870
Reaction score
7,127
Location
Your Echochamber
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I REALLY hope Democrats keep running on gun control. It's the one issue that's a guaranteed fail for them.

Every million that Bloomberg wastes on a Gun Control campaign always brings a smile to my face.
 

RabidAlpaca

Engineer
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
22,399
Reaction score
29,116
Location
American Refugee in Europe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Violent criminals don't have legal access to any kind of gun, let alone machine guns. If you're a convicted felon you can't have access to anything that's classified as a firearm.

Yep, thank god we've been able to push at least THAT much gun control regulation. Nevertheless, there are many nuts in this country that criticize ALL regulation, no matter the content. You can not claim to support keeping guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them and be against all regulation. These two stances are incompatible.

What about banning some guns for law abiding citizens? What SCOTUS decisions would come into play at that point?
Edit: Given that NFA 1934 with regards to regulation of machine guns seemed to be working, what was the purpose of the Hughes Amendment?

The courts have also ruled you don't have the right to ANY kind of gun. You don't have a right to a nuke, or a gatlin gun. Point being there are limits to every right, and a balance can certainly be found.

I would think that the big push for more gun control would've come during the Obama administration when the Democrats held the cards, and if Hillary had won the presidency there would be a really big push.

Yeah, it's almost like the Republicans screaming "THEY'RE COMING FOR YOUR GUNS!!! THEY'RE COMING FOR YOUR GUNS!!!" were completely full of **** and playing your emotions like a fiddle.
 

Rucker61

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
15,620
Reaction score
6,652
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
The courts have also ruled you don't have the right to ANY kind of gun.

Please provide such a ruling.

You don't have a right to a nuke, or a gatlin gun. Point being there are limits to every right, and a balance can certainly be found.

I can own a Gatling gun. "Balance" isn't the objective. "Compromise" isn't the goal. Limiting governmental power to Constitutional limits is the goal.
 

RabidAlpaca

Engineer
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
22,399
Reaction score
29,116
Location
American Refugee in Europe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Please provide such a ruling.
I can own a Gatling gun. "Balance" isn't the objective. "Compromise" isn't the goal. Limiting governmental power to Constitutional limits is the goal.

If you need me to convince you it's not legal in the US to own any gun on the planet, you're not worth wasting my time explaining it further. Adios.
 
Top Bottom