• 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!

Automatic Weapons

Tensor101

Tensor101

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 19, 2024
Messages
217
Reaction score
132
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
One of the most agregious things about political issues is this thing about protecting opwnership of
automatic weapons for no stated purpose. Nobody needs an automatic weapon that can shoot 600
bullets per minute. There is no sport associated with this weapon. It's simple collusion between
Republicans and the corporations that make them. If you were a law-abiding citizen and had one of
those, what would you do with it besides put 30 bullets into a squirrel? So, the amount of distress of
not being able to own one of them is nothing compared to the kind of destruction and mass murder
someone could do. Vote against this kind of legislation.
 
Hi. Thanks for posting what appears to be a copy/paste with an egregious typo.

As far as banning things based on "need" they shouldn't we also ban ice cream, steak, fast food, junk food, cars, air conditioning, television, cell phones, ankle socks and about a billion other things?
 
What current legislation are you seeing?
 
Tensor101 said:
One of the most agregious things about political issues is this thing about protecting opwnership of
automatic weapons for no stated purpose. Nobody needs an automatic weapon that can shoot 600
bullets per minute. There is no sport associated with this weapon. It's simple collusion between
Republicans and the corporations that make them. If you were a law-abiding citizen and had one of
those, what would you do with it besides put 30 bullets into a squirrel? So, the amount of distress of
not being able to own one of them is nothing compared to the kind of destruction and mass murder
someone could do. Vote against this kind of legislation.
Click to expand...
There's nothing in the 2nd Amendment about "need".
 
Tensor101 said:
One of the most agregious things about political issues is this thing about protecting opwnership of
automatic weapons for no stated purpose. Nobody needs an automatic weapon that can shoot 600
bullets per minute. There is no sport associated with this weapon. It's simple collusion between
Republicans and the corporations that make them. If you were a law-abiding citizen and had one of
those, what would you do with it besides put 30 bullets into a squirrel? So, the amount of distress of
not being able to own one of them is nothing compared to the kind of destruction and mass murder
someone could do. Vote against this kind of legislation.
Click to expand...

What legislation are you referring to?
 
Tensor101 said:
One of the most agregious things about political issues is this thing about protecting opwnership of
automatic weapons for no stated purpose. Nobody needs an automatic weapon that can shoot 600
bullets per minute. There is no sport associated with this weapon. It's simple collusion between
Republicans and the corporations that make them. If you were a law-abiding citizen and had one of
those, what would you do with it besides put 30 bullets into a squirrel? So, the amount of distress of
not being able to own one of them is nothing compared to the kind of destruction and mass murder
someone could do. Vote against this kind of legislation.
Click to expand...

Except for weapons grandfathered in before 1986, it is already illegal to own a totally automatic weapon.

Not exactly sure what the problem is.
 
Lutherf said:
As far as banning things based on "need" they shouldn't we also ban ice cream, steak, fast food, junk food, cars, air conditioning, television, cell phones, ankle socks and about a billion other things?
Click to expand...
Just out of curiosity, how many school kids can one kill in one go using ice cream, steak, fast food, junk food, air conditioners, television, cell phones, ankle socks. Even a car would only be effective outside a school.
I have known you to make some inane comments but that one takes the cake. Whether one is pro gun or anti gun, one could make an argument that at least sounds sane, but making such asinine statements as yours actually doesn't advance your arguments, it just makes you look silly.
 
Lutherf said:
Hi. Thanks for posting what appears to be a copy/paste with an egregious typo.

As far as banning things based on "need" they shouldn't we also ban ice cream, steak, fast food, junk food, cars, air conditioning, television, cell phones, ankle socks and about a billion other things?
Click to expand...

Don't forget cigarettes. They kill more people in a year than guns do in ten.
 
Tensor101 said:
One of the most agregious things about political issues is this thing about protecting opwnership of
automatic weapons for no stated purpose. Nobody needs an automatic weapon that can shoot 600
bullets per minute. There is no sport associated with this weapon. It's simple collusion between
Republicans and the corporations that make them. If you were a law-abiding citizen and had one of
those, what would you do with it besides put 30 bullets into a squirrel? So, the amount of distress of
not being able to own one of them is nothing compared to the kind of destruction and mass murder
someone could do. Vote against this kind of legislation.
Click to expand...

First, there is no putting that genie back in the bottle Tensor101.

Second, I disagree that there is "no need." There has never been more of a need. We live under a cartoonishly corrupt but not-so-comedically tyrannical government at the moment. I believe as many liberals, leftists, anarchists and socialists should buy up as many guns and as much ammunition as possible and train, train, train with them and organize themselves into proper civil militias to protect their communities. If you can get yourself fully automatic weapons, all the better.

You do not want far-right militias, far-right cops and a far-right Federal government to be the only ones with real firepower in the event of civil unrest.
 
SNOWFLAKE said:
Just out of curiosity, how many school kids can one kill in one go using ice cream, steak, fast food, junk food, air conditioners, television, cell phones, ankle socks. Even a car would only be effective outside a school.
I have known you to make some inane comments but that one takes the cake. Whether one is pro gun or anti gun, one could make an argument that at least sounds sane, but making such asinine statements as yours actually doesn't advance your arguments, it just makes you look silly.
Click to expand...
Someone doesn't need an automatic weapon to kill a lot of school kids.
 
SNOWFLAKE said:
Just out of curiosity, how many school kids can one kill in one go using ice cream, steak, fast food, junk food, air conditioners, television, cell phones, ankle socks. Even a car would only be effective outside a school.
I have known you to make some inane comments but that one takes the cake. Whether one is pro gun or anti gun, one could make an argument that at least sounds sane, but making such asinine statements as yours actually doesn't advance your arguments, it just makes you look silly.
Click to expand...

Are you arguing that automatic weapons are being used to kill school kids "in one go"?
 
Felis Leo said:
First, there is no putting that genie back in the bottle Tensor101.

Second, I disagree that there is "no need." There has never been more of a need. We live under a cartoonishly corrupt but not-so-comedically tyrannical government at the moment. I believe as many liberals, leftists, anarchists and socialists should buy up as many guns and as much ammunition as possible and train, train, train with them and organize themselves into proper civil militias to protect their communities. If you can get yourself fully automatic weapons, all the better.

You do not want far-right militias, far-right cops and a far-right Federal government to be the only ones with real firepower in the event of civil unrest.
Click to expand...

And in the meanwhile, the leftists and rightests can enjoy peaceful, wholesome sports using their firearms, while they wait for SHTF.
 
RF667799 said:
Are you arguing that automatic weapons are being used to kill school kids "in one go"?
Click to expand...
First of all I wasn't responding to YOU, 2ndly, maybe you should look up school shootings in the U.S.
 
tharock220 said:
Don't forget cigarettes. They kill more people in a year than guns do in ten.
Click to expand...
The arguments get lamer and lamer. Should I point out to you just how lame THAT argument is?
Ok, since apparently I do, here it is: Someone can choose NOT to smoke, but kids can't choose not to go to school, people can't choose not to go to church, or people could - I suppose - by your argument - not to go to a mall. Want to guess how many mass shootings have happened at those locations.
I honestly - and I DO MEAN THIS - can't fathom what kind of empty headed mind would compare deaths from smoking to deaths by gun, one avoidable by not smoking, the other unavoidable if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time.

All I can say to your argument, is WOW, that one earns a gold star for lameness.
 
SNOWFLAKE said:
So auto weapons were NOT used in school shootings? Yeah, ok :rolleyes:

Click to expand...
Your premise is that automatic weapons are used in school shootings so you link to a list entitled "Examples of mass shootings involving assault weapons and/or large capacity magazines," which lists precisely zero instances of automatic weapons being used in school shootings?

As the kids say, "that's a bold strategy, Cotton."
 
I think people are confused as to what constitutes an Auto weapon.

Or Automatic weapons.
 
Since fully automatic weapons were effectively outlawed by the National Firearms Act in 1934, I believe there have only 2 or 3 incidents involving the use of fully automatic weapons in crime in the United States. 2 or 3 incidents in 93 years is basically a non-existent issue.

There have been a number of incidents of such weapons being stolen in robberies, including from the United States Government. But since they are so expensive, it is believed that they are exported for profit, not used within the United States.

Fully automatic weapons are simply not an issue.

Most crime either involves rifles, which may be single shot or semi-automatic, pistols (mostly semi-auto though there are rare single shot varieties), revolvers or shotguns (some of which are semi-auto). But not fully automatic weapons.
 
I've often wondered about the gun used in the film Robocop.

It's a pistol that fires in ultra-rapid 3 round bursts and is pretty large as pistols go.
Is that pistol actually a thing and is it legal?

robocop.fandom.com

Auto 9

The Auto 9 was a highly advanced select-fire machine pistol with a 50-round magazine. It was holstered in a concealed alcove in RoboCop's thigh, together with at least one reload magazine in storage. The most commonly utilized fire setting was in a three-round burst mode; however, RoboCop had...
robocop.fandom.com robocop.fandom.com
 
SNOWFLAKE said:
Just out of curiosity, how many school kids can one kill in one go using ice cream, steak, fast food, junk food, air conditioners, television, cell phones, ankle socks. Even a car would only be effective outside a school.
I have known you to make some inane comments but that one takes the cake. Whether one is pro gun or anti gun, one could make an argument that at least sounds sane, but making such asinine statements as yours actually doesn't advance your arguments, it just makes you look silly.
Click to expand...
Number of deaths rooted in poor diet > number of deaths from fire arms of any and all kinds.
Number of deaths from auto accidents > number of deaths from fire arms of any and all kinds.
 
Peter said:
I've often wondered about the gun used in the film Robocop.

It's a pistol that fires in ultra-rapid 3 round bursts and is pretty large as pistols go.
Is that pistol actually a thing and is it legal?

robocop.fandom.com

Auto 9

The Auto 9 was a highly advanced select-fire machine pistol with a 50-round magazine. It was holstered in a concealed alcove in RoboCop's thigh, together with at least one reload magazine in storage. The most commonly utilized fire setting was in a three-round burst mode; however, RoboCop had...
robocop.fandom.com robocop.fandom.com
Click to expand...

The Auto 9 is fictional, but based on the real life Beretta 93R, which could be set to either fire a single round or 3 round burst.
 
KevinKohler said:
Number of deaths rooted in poor diet > number of deaths from fire arms of any and all kinds.
Number of deaths from auto accidents > number of deaths from fire arms of any and all kinds.
Click to expand...
The diet is self-controlled, one can't control who will use a semi or auto to kill massive numbers of people.
Autos are a way of life, are you suggesting fire arms are a way of life? Most deaths from autos are "accidents", most deaths from fire arms are deliberate.
Try better arguments, sheesh! :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom