• 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!

Biden rails against access to assault weapons after recent spate of shootings

Okay then.

All guns except for single shot muzzle loaders are hereby banned.

But everyone can own one.

Hmm… so using that ‘logic’, all speech on the internet, telephone, radio and television may be banned. ;)
 
Gee, unless you are going after things like gay marriage. Then this SCOTUS is your best friend in the world.

You'll still be able to marry your friend here in Illinois.
 
Gee, unless you are going after things like gay marriage. Then this SCOTUS is your best friend in the world.
No one is attacking you for your gayness...nor your right to marry...and certainly not in Illinois. If you believe they are you are just another victim of the rat party propoganda. If you dont believe it but are just spewing it, you are just another propagandist.
 
No one is attacking you for your gayness...nor your right to marry...and certainly not in Illinois. If you believe they are you are just another victim of the rat party propoganda. If you dont believe it but are just spewing it, you are just another propagandist.

Clarence Thomas openly admitted the court is itching for a chance to go after same sex marriage.
 
You tell me.

You made the claim. Being fair to you, I assumed you had some relevant information to back up your claim. I guess I won't make that mistake again.
 
Well most trump supporters are idiots as well.

It’s telling though that there are numerous call from left leaning posters and politicians that recommend bypassing due process and I don’t see you having a problem with that.
Just seems like you care when it is trump doing it.
Then you haven't looked. I consistently support the 2nd, regardless of party...as I view and it's interpretation as a single voter.

Not "only" when Trump does it, but when he does it, and his supporters ignore it, then I call out the hypocrisy.
 
Okay then.

All guns except for single shot muzzle loaders are hereby banned.

But everyone can own one.
Sorry.

The Court has held that “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding,” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570, 582 (2008), and that this “Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States,” McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742, 750 (2010).

Caetano v Massachusetts, 2016.
 
You made the claim. Being fair to you, I assumed you had some relevant information to back up your claim. I guess I won't make that mistake again.
I did way back when Covid was an item.
 
I said quote him. Quote the exact words he said that, in your mind, equate to "the court [i.e. not just Thomas] is itching for a chance to go after same sex marriage."

I provided you with direct access to his statement. You not wanting to read is your problem.
 
There's no reason for it not to. None of the features you listed are specific to "assault weapons." Banning them won't save a single life (but it may cost lives).
So if all of those things are available in other weapons, a ban on that style (which reduced crime with that style of weapon during the decade it was banned) shouldn't be an issue.
 
So if all of those things are available in other weapons, a ban on that style (which reduced crime with that style of weapon during the decade it was banned) shouldn't be an issue.
Banning weapons based on cosmetics or accessories didn't reduce crime, which is why it was allowed to fade away when it expired. There is no 'balancing' by that type of law.
 
So if all of those things are available in other weapons, a ban on that style (which reduced crime with that style of weapon during the decade it was banned) shouldn't be an issue.
No, all classes of bearable arms in common use for lawful purposes are protected, regardless of the existence of other weapons.

The previous ban didn't actually take any guns away and allowed AR-15s to be sold. Why do you think it "reduced crime"? "Assault weapons" aren't even used in a significant level of crime.
 
Banning weapons based on cosmetics or accessories didn't reduce crime, which is why it was allowed to fade away when it expired. There is no 'balancing' by that type of law.
Then prove me wrong. You can't. Crime using the banned weapons fell during the decade they were banned.
 
Then prove me wrong. You can't. Crime using the banned weapons fell during the decade they were banned.
Are you saying that mass shootings with AR-15s decreased during the decade of the ban?
 
No evidence on masks except that they don’t work as shown by the states that didn’t mandate them having no more deaths per capita. it is a lie that masks “Work”
Adjusted for population, the Florida-equivalent death toll was:
FL 59,170
CA 39,217
NY 39,551
So states that didn't have governors promoting Covid disinformation and anti-vax propaganda lost far fewer people — the equivalent of ~20K excess than FL.
 
That's good to hear. But if you are looking for news, you won't find it anymore in mainstream media including the usual print media such as The NY Times, WaPo, Businessinsider, and even Fox. You have to scour the internet now and check those stories out, many of which are far more factual than today's mainstream news outlets which are not news, but political and ideological commentary by boisterous individuals, some of whom hate white people like Don Lemon, Joy Reid, and Al Sharpton.

Sorry, but I’ve been reading the Times, the Post and the Wall Street Journal for nearly 50 years. And it has been my experience throughout that time that when the history is written, it will be a synthesis of what they reported. And they’re the ones who usually get it right.

Daily Caller, Gateway Pundit, and the like never have been reliable news sources. They aren’t in journalism. They’re infotainers. And they are well aware that their audiences don’t care if that they say is true or not.

I do not get news from any sort of social media (other than occasionally from this forum). Some Guy on the Internet has no credentials, no record, and no credibility . Same with guys on YouTube. I don’t pay any more attention to them than I did to the John Birchers who used to handout mimeographs on street corners when I was young.
 
Adjusted for population, the Florida-equivalent death toll was:
FL 59,170
CA 39,217
NY 39,551
So states that didn't have governors promoting Covid disinformation and anti-vax propaganda lost far fewer people — the equivalent of ~20K excess than FL.
That is just 3 states and California is far more spread out than Florida plus Florida has many more elderly people because they are a retirement state.
 
Sorry, but I’ve been reading the Times, the Post and the Wall Street Journal for nearly 50 years. And it has been my experience throughout that time that when the history is written, it will be a synthesis of what they reported. And they’re the ones who usually get it right.

Daily Caller, Gateway Pundit, and the like never have been reliable news sources. They aren’t in journalism. They’re infotainers. And they are well aware that their audiences don’t care if that they say is true or not.

I do not get news from any sort of social media (other than occasionally from this forum). Some Guy on the Internet has no credentials, no record, and no credibility . Same with guys on YouTube. I don’t pay any more attention to them than I did to the John Birchers who used to handout mimeographs on street corners when I was young.
I knew that about you and could have written your post for you.
 
Back
Top Bottom