• 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!

At least three killed, 11 injured in mass shooting in Philadelphia

but every state allows him to possess at 18. If you don't think there aren't 18 year olds handling guns in new york or california.....i got some news for you
Not true........for sure 18 year olds are not allowed to buy an AR15 in FL. In fact I think most States do not allow hand gun ownership for this under 18. In fact I think that is the case in TX...may be wrong
 
No, every state would not have allowed him to buy that gun at 18 years old nor would every state allow him to legally walk down the road with it. In every state in the union it is illegal to murder someone, yet people still murder people....so, does that mean we should legalize murder? Cause they are going to murder anyway?
It was illegal for him to brandish it, to shoot at people, to take it in a school. Not to mention reckless driving. People were already calling the police when he wrecked his car and started walking to the school with a rifle. He committed a number of felonies before he even reached the door. Do you really think an additional misdemeanor for possession of a weapon would have made any difference?
 
Nope. A barbershop owner privately gave him the gun to use. There was no approved dealer, no background check, and its rumoured that it has no seriel number.

in texas, all of that is legal. in new york, it is not.
She was talking about "the shooter" - I assume that to be the 18 year old committing the crimes here. (Although technically there were a number of 'shooters' here.)
 
Mental health is only part of the problem.....and specifically what aspect of mental health should be addressed? All of it? There is no such thing as gun specific mental illness.

There are all sorts of gun violence, suicide, domestic violence, gang violence and the slaughter of innocents in public places. One is no more important than the other. None have the same root cause. None have the same solution. They only have one thing in common....easy access to guns by people who have no business possessing them.
Well that exposes why gun violence is an invalid statistic.
Would you rather live in a community that has one murder per 1000 people but it's with a firearm..( 100% gun death rate)
Or a community that has 100 murders per 1000 people but none with a firearm.? ( 0% gun death rate). Please answer.
As far as mental health? All aspects of mental health..which reduce suicides..( and not just " gun deaths).. reduces drug use. Reduces domestic violence( not just those with a gun)..and reduces mass killing ( not just those with a gun).

It's so sad that anti gun folks can't see past their irrational fear of guns.
 
It's so sad that anti gun folks can't see past their irrational fear of guns.
I have no fear of guns. I have fear of guns in the hands of people that ought not to have them....from gang members to nutbars who seek to slaughter innocents, to violent spouses, to those who seek to take their own life. It's not a gun problem it is an easy access to guns problem.
 
So you're saying that black lives don't matter because they are engaged in "mutual combat" on the streets, as idiot Lori Lightfoot (Chicago Mayor ) once stated.?

How about when criminals on the streets kill innocent bystanders while engaging in their form of territorial conquest? Does that make it more relevant to your sense of crime prevention?
Lol. You people are relentless with your incessant, "So when you said that mixing red and yellow makes orange I decided that you meant that orange chicken is Panda Express's worst dish." In-freaking-sane.

What I hear you saying is that the victims of mass shootings don't matter cuz lame stream media.
 
No. I don't. Maybe you can take the time to explain it to me and others anxious to hear your opinion.
How do you establish a correlation between fewer highways deaths and fewer shooting deaths because the age for drinking is raised to 21 and the age to buy a firearm is raised to 21?


You must be very pleased with yourself sitting over there on your high moral pedestal wagging your finger at those crazy Americans in possession of 400 million guns.
The Second Amendment was created so that your country wouldn't come over here to try to conquer us again. And it worked!
If the federal government imposed a minimum drinking age because too many young people were dying or killing while driving drunk, then why can't it impose a minimum age to buy guns? If your answer is going to be that the Second Amendment prohibits it, keep in mind that the federal government already imposes a minimum age to buy guns. Does it make more sense to restrict gun purchases to individuals at least 21 years old or lower the legal drinking age to 18?
 
Different ...

You know what that is, it's an excuse for not doing shit.
I agree we have to do something but addressing the root cause is different for each of those situations
 
I have no fear of guns. I have fear of guns in the hands of people that ought not to have them....from gang members to nutbars who seek to slaughter innocents, to violent spouses, to those who seek to take their own life. It's not a gun problem it is an easy access to guns problem.
Sure you have fear of guns. .. you say you don't fear them
But you do...
We already have laws in the us that prevent a person adjudicated as mentally defective or a criminal or that has a domestic violence charge or restraining order from legally owning or obtain a firearm.
In Canada..the restrictions on handguns are massive. The restrictions on shotguns and rifles is minimal.
The firearm most used in crime in Canada? Handguns.
Face it..you have restricted the law abiding citizen to the point it's extremely hard for a law abiding citizen to own a handgun.. yet criminals in Canada seem to have zero problem
 
It was Democrats that proposed national health care.
Proposed but not passed despite having congress and the presidency.
And the proposal was not an upgrade in mental health.
 
If the federal government imposed a minimum drinking age because too many young people were dying or killing while driving drunk, then why can't it impose a minimum age to buy guns? If your answer is going to be that the Second Amendment prohibits it, keep in mind that the federal government already imposes a minimum age to buy guns. Does it make more sense to restrict gun purchases to individuals at least 21 years old or lower the legal drinking age to 18?
I don't care if the federal government restricts gun purchases to those at least 21 years of age. I don't have a dog in that fight.
If it shuts up people who are screaming DO SOMETHING!! then that is a good outcome. Let them get back to "thoughts and prayers" because there will be lots of opportunities for that.
 
I agree we have to do something but addressing the root cause is different for each of those situations
We don't know how to get to the 'root cause' and if we did, our state and city governments are too cowardly to deal with root causes.
 
Proposed but not passed despite having congress and the presidency.
And the proposal was not an upgrade in mental health.
Yes, because 2 Democrats consistently vote with Republicans....we did manage to pass ACA something that Republicans try to destroy. Also, Abbott has yet to send the money requested by Uvalde to address mental health in the aftermath of the shooting...but he does want to send more guns with his thoughts and fake prayers
 
Yes, because 2 Democrats consistently vote with Republicans....we did manage to pass ACA something that Republicans try to destroy. Also, Abbott has yet to send the money requested by Uvalde to address mental health in the aftermath of the shooting...but he does want to send more guns with his thoughts and fake prayers
Yes. The democrats have done better than Republicans on healthcare in general.
That's obvious.
My point is that after every mass shooting..the democrats cry..
" WE NEED BACKGROUND CHECKS.
When the mass shooter passed a background check or got around it by stealing a firearm etc.
They cry " WE NEED TO RAISE THE AGE TO BUY A GUN"
Though the average age of mass shooters is 33.
They cry " WE NEED TO BAN ASSAULT WEAPONS"
When most of the time the shooter uses a handgun..

So nothing ..nothing when it comes to firearms they propose will consistently do a God darn thing.

Yet it seems almost without fail we here of a mental health issue and how someone reported that he had a problem but.."He wasn't a danger to himself or others" so nothing could be done to help him.

No one..including democrats seem to ask why in the hell someone has to BECOME A DANGER..before health services can be brought in.

Now yes.republicans don't seem to want to address it.

But democrats seem to want to waste a shoot ton of money and resources on gun control that we all know doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell at doing anything except harass legal law abiding gun owners.
 
I agree we have to do something but addressing the root cause is different for each of those situations
Doing something, when you don't know the root cause, isn't always the good thing.
There is plenty to do that don't revolve around banning some inanimate objects in the hopes that it fixes , what root cause exactly?
The gun is a simple tool. It REQUIRES an active person to use it. What root cause are you attempting to fix by banning a gun?
 
Not true........for sure 18 year olds are not allowed to buy an AR15 in FL. In fact I think most States do not allow hand gun ownership for this under 18. In fact I think that is the case in TX...may be wrong
You can own a handgun or long gun at any age. You can't buy a handgun under the age of 21 from an FFL, and you can't buy a long gun under the age of 18 from an FFL. Those are the only age related restrictions.
 
If the federal government imposed a minimum drinking age because too many young people were dying or killing while driving drunk, then why can't it impose a minimum age to buy guns? If your answer is going to be that the Second Amendment prohibits it, keep in mind that the federal government already imposes a minimum age to buy guns. Does it make more sense to restrict gun purchases to individuals at least 21 years old or lower the legal drinking age to 18?
it only imposes an age restriction on FFL's. They can not prohibit a person under 18 from buying or inheriting one. That is a violation of the 2nd amendment.
 
Does rationality include comparing total number of gun deaths to per-capita numbers?
STATEHOMICIDE RATE per 100,000
Mississippi20.5
Louisiana19.9
Alabama14.2
Missouri14
Arkansas13
South Carolina12.7
Tennessee11.5
Maryland11.4
Illinois11.2
New Mexico10.7
The moral of this story is people commit suicide and not kill each other

Their body their choice
 
So what do we have like 15 days left until the next mass shooting?
 
The good guy with the gun was 19 children too late. If he had been required to have a sponsor when buying his first weapon this would not have happened
No requirement is necessarily going to be a deterrent to someone intent on committing a crime.
 
No requirement is necessarily going to be a deterrent to someone intent on committing a crime.
I understand that, however if a first time gun buyer, especially under 21, had to provide a sponsor people like the Ulvade shooter would not have been able to buy that AR15. May he have found a different way....maybe. Just because it might not work all the doesn't mean it won't work at all especially for spur of the moment purchases.

Seeking out a sponsor doesn't interfere with your right to own a weapon but if someone is not balanced and approaches someone to sponsor them that person likely has some notion of their character and mental stability.
 
it only imposes an age restriction on FFL's. They can not prohibit a person under 18 from buying or inheriting one. That is a violation of the 2nd amendment.
Stay in school.

 
We don't know how to get to the 'root cause' and if we did, our state and city governments are too cowardly to deal with root causes.
One of the root causes is bad parenting so there's that.
 
Back
Top Bottom