• 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!

Civilian owned firearms make American society safer: True or False

?

  • Total voters
    54
PeacefulWarrior said:
Oooo....clever! I see what you did there! By posting really dumb stuff on the internet....you just "won" and you accepted my "concession"! That is precious! never seen that before!

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Did you? Lol
 
Winston said:
Safer than a society that bans civilians from owning guns
Click to expand...

In my humble opinion it all depends on the civilian and the problem is, we are not creating GOOD civilian gun owners, we're just creating gun owners, so it's like saying Ford, for example, either cranks out a lot of shit cars or they crank out lots of really GOOD cars and only a few duds.

So you might say that "quality is NOT Job One" when it comes to the caliber OF our citizen gun owners, there is zero attention paid to that whatsoever.
We have to learn to live with the astounding number of guns in private hands because the sheer amount makes it impossible to erase, so it would behoove us to make bold and decisive moves to foster a much larger sense of responsibility with all those guns.

We do not get to have the luxury of just ignoring the fact that whackos get access.
It's costing us too much.
 
PeacefulWarrior said:
Foreign countries are skeered to try a land invasion of the USA because they know JoeBob and Cletus-Sue have AR15s. LMAO. Spectacularly stupid concept imo. :LOL:
Click to expand...

I really think foreign countries are more worried about aircraft carriers ariving on their coast and giving them a good kicking than they are about the armed populace.

Let's just for a second imagine the US is someone miraculously invaded and occupied.
The new occupiers are going to know you have lots of guns as it's not a secret and they're going to round up anyone who poses even the mildest threat and they aren't going to be polite. If any force is capable of invading the US a bunch of civilians with guns is not going to be a problem.
Are you in a so called safe house with a bunch of mates with guns?
Well, lets see how you fare against special forces and an attack helicopter as an invader won't play nice and will crush all opposition.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Safer than if only criminals and government agents would be armed.
Click to expand...
thats a definite no from me
ttwtt78640 said:
Countries with civilian gun bans include North Korea and Somalia.

Countries Where Guns Are Illegal 2023

worldpopulationreview.com
Click to expand...
i never really put much stock in comparing us to other countries because its basically meaningless in this regard. Certain things are pretty worthless to compare

what happens if you take civilian ownership away in country A vs Coutry B can be completely different based on government, people, time, other laws, geography, police, amount of guns present etc etc
 
AGENT J said:
thats a definite no from me

i never really put much stock in comparing us to other countries because its basically meaningless in this regard. Certain things are pretty worthless to compare

what happens if you take civilian ownership away in country A vs Coutry B can be completely different based on government, people, time, other laws, geography, police, amount of guns present etc etc
Click to expand...

Things are definitely different in the few countries which currently ban civilian gun ownership.
 
Winston said:
Well?

Not going to load the 1st post with evidence for my opinion. I will let the poll speak for itself.
Click to expand...
Just imagine how bad it would be if only criminals had guns. That's what will happen if the libs are successful. All the legal gun will be confiscated and all the criminals will keep their guns. Anyone who thinks the crooks are going to turn in their guns is not thinking straight. So any crook could just force his way into your home because he would know he was pretty safe in doing so. As it is now, there's a good chance that if you do that you are going to get shot.
 
Integrityrespec said:
Just imagine how bad it would be if only criminals had guns. That's what will happen if the libs are successful. All the legal gun will be confiscated and all the criminals will keep their guns. Anyone who thinks the crooks are going to turn in their guns is not thinking straight. So any crook could just force his way into your home because he would know he was pretty safe in doing so. As it is now, there's a good chance that if you do that you are going to get shot.
Click to expand...
Would it be like japan?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Safer than if only criminals and government agents would be armed. Countries with civilian gun bans include North Korea and Somalia.

Countries Where Guns Are Illegal 2023

worldpopulationreview.com
Click to expand...


Having a gun in the house makes those living there statistically more likely to get shot. That's not my idea of safer.
Most people not having guns, means criminals don't need to arm themselves in response.
 
I feel that the way the gun lobbyists want things to work, civilians with firearms with no regulations is what we have today: high crime rates, mass shootings, etc.

Everyday, the myth that if everyone were armed and had CCW, crime would go down is debunked by criminals and those who are mentally unstable.

The crazy thing is that it doesn't have to be that way. We could have a populace that has the freedom and access to firearms...and drive down crime if the right and the gun lobbyists were actually willing to help develop programs and regulations that would help to do just that.

But I guess profit is more important than curating an important right for the American people.
 
They definitely make it freer.
 
No, the huge number of civilian-owned firearms in the US do not make our society safer.
 
PeacefulWarrior said:
Foreign countries are skeered to try a land invasion of the USA because they know JoeBob and Cletus-Sue have AR15s. LMAO. Spectacularly stupid concept imo. :LOL:
Click to expand...
Not according to Admiral Yamamoto, reported to have stated that he would never want to invade the US mainland because "There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass".

Not according to Antonin Kalashnikov (the AK in AK47). After the wholesale slaughter of Russians by the German Army, he determined to make his gun cheap, simple and reliable, in the hope that his government would provide one to every Russian household. The object was to have a more respectable kill ratio in the next German invasion. Had this been done, every Ukrainian home would also have had one, and the invasion of Ukraine would have been more costly to the aggressor. Of course, Russia does not work that way, and his guns were instead handed out like Cracker Jack prizes to Mid-East and African terrorists. That is a fault of government, not of guns.
 
Removing the criminal element from society makes American society safer.
 
Winston said:
Well?

Not going to load the 1st post with evidence for my opinion. I will let the poll speak for itself.
Click to expand...

IMO I'd go more with "legally-owned" firearms make society more safe.

But yes, some lawful citizens do choose to commit crimes with firearms or are irresponsible with storage, and that includes cops and veterans.

Guns in criminal hands are do not make society more safe. By definition, crimes dont make society safer.
 
Ishm said:
Do you seriously think that any enemy today who is targeting America is going to roll up on the beaches and fight a small arms war? The country will be mostly a nuclear wasteland before that happens. The argument that an armed civilian population was going to stop an enemy attacking disappeared when nukes arrived.
Click to expand...

Do you really believe that personally-owned 'small arms' are the means with which any such conflict would be fought?

Are our wars today fought and won by small arms? No...they are carried for personal protection for our military. The battles are fought with drones, bombs, hacking, even asymmetrical warfare.

And that would be the case in what you seem to describe...fighters would have personal arms for self-defense...the actual battles would be fought on a completely different level.
 
Safer than...what?

Law abiding citizens do not present a threat to the country. There are 140-160 million law abiding citizens that safely and responsibly carry firearms. Estimates vary from the extremely conservative number of 85,000 to the high end of 2.5 million times a year when private citizens use firearms to prevent crimes.

There are 1.2 million violent crimes every year...with only a minority of those involving firearms of any type.

More people are killed with blunt objects (496) than ANY type of rifle (364).

In the last week, we have seen news stories involving a 'man' that killed and literally dismembered a 2 year old child...of 4 teens that shot and killed a father because he took away one of their tablets...a 31 year old Connecticut man choked, stabbed, and dismembered his 11 month old baby. A 36 year old woman in Chicago killed her landlord and stuffed her in a freezer. 5 people were arrested and charged after kidnapping, beating and raping a woman and stuffing her in a dog cage. 4 College kids were stabbed to death in a brutal slaying in Idaho. This stuff isnt even that uncommon. If you are still bothering to read this do you get the ****ing point?

Guns dont create violence. Guns dont make people violent. You want to study violence...you REALLY want to make a difference? Examine what society has done over the last say...50 years to dehumanize life and make this kind of shit commonplace.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PoS
I'm sorry...I have to add one more because even though it's pretty ****ing demented...you kind of have to laugh.

news.yahoo.com

5 suspects assault monk in Nashville Buddhist temple robbery

A monk was assaulted by five suspects during a robbery at a Buddhist temple in South Nashville, Tennessee. Police are searching for one man and four women, including one seen carrying a toddler, who attacked a Buddhist monk at Wat Lao Buddhist Temple on Old Hickory Boulevard at around 9 a.m. on...
news.yahoo.com news.yahoo.com

And if you watch the video, you see that 1 asshole literally brings his baby to the robbery and assault.

So...if you are just ****ing hell bent on trying to demonize firearms for your sick pathetic cause...you probably will never see just how ****ing stupid the question posed in the OP really is.
 
Dead voters and gun rights.

You can’t make this up.
 
I know a Colorado lawyer who used to work as a PD. He told me that there have been countless instances of law abiding citizens who's lives have been saved when they used a gun in self-defense, but these incidents never make it on the news. I'll take his word over some lib anti-gun moron anytime.
 
Winston said:
Well?

Not going to load the 1st post with evidence for my opinion. I will let the poll speak for itself.
Click to expand...
A gun used in self defense doesn’t make one ‘safe’. It’s used when one’s safety is in jeopardy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom