• 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!

Democrat and Republican approaches to gun control

SgtRock

Cancel Cancel Culture and Woke Supremacy
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
7,025
Reaction score
2,896
Location
Deep in the Heart of Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Democrats want to confiscate guns from law abiding citizens. Republicans want judges to use red flag laws to confiscate guns from people who have not broken the law but may in the future. Both are unconstitutional. #ShallNotBeInfringed
 
Yeah, all rights have limits. The Constitution in no way, shape, or form says that any American, regardless of his criminal history, should have access to every type of weapon ever made. Reasonable restrictions on what types of weapons that can be bought (No tanks, no nuclear weapons, no gatlin guns, etc.) and who can buy those weapons (no murderers, rapists, diagnosed severely mentally ill, etc.) have been applied since the beginning. Neither party wants all guns banned and both support the right of the average law-abiding citizen to have regular firearms. Where we draw the line is absolutely up for debate and completely constitutional.
 
Red flag laws could remove guns from people who have clean records. This violates the 4th and 2nd amendments.
 
Do you really believe that Democrats do not want a total ban?
 
Red flag laws could remove guns from people who have clean records. This violates the 4th and 2nd amendments.

Of course, if we tell rapists they can't buy tanks, it's clearly violating the 2nd amendment!! :lamo People like you that believe there should be no restrictions of any kind for any reason are luckily a vanishingly small and irrelevant minority.

Do you really believe that Democrats do not want a total ban?

No mainstream Democrat has called for an outright gun ban. This is pure paranoia by extremists like yourself that see any limits of any kind as an attack on the entire right itself. Feel free to point to hard evidence of an outright gun ban. You won't because you can't.
 
Of course, if we tell rapists they can't buy tanks, it's clearly violating the 2nd amendment!! :lamo People like you that believe there should be no restrictions of any kind for any reason are luckily a vanishingly small and irrelevant minority.



No mainstream Democrat has called for an outright gun ban. This is pure paranoia by extremists like yourself that see any limits of any kind as an attack on the entire right itself. Feel free to point to hard evidence of an outright gun ban. You won't because you can't.

Interesting qualifier there...you left yourself an out.

How do you define mainstream?
 
Interesting qualifier there...you left yourself an out.

How do you define mainstream?

It's not really an out. Making absolute statements is rarely successful. If someone said "No Republican politician diddles kids", they'd be wrong because there are plenty of examples like Hastert. Instead a more accurate statement would be "No even remotely significant number of Republican politicians diddle kids".

None of you can point to one single example of an outright gun ban getting any even remotely significant support from any party and nor has anyone called for it. You hyperbolize because it's easier to argue against strawmen than their actual positions. Is there a Dem congressman out there who wants one? Might be. If so he's never tried it, nobody in the party has supported it, it isn't in the party platform, and thus has absolutely no significance.

If you want to claim like the OP that the Dems want an outright gun ban, provide that evidence right here and now. You won't because you can't.
 
Democrats want to confiscate guns from law abiding citizens. Republicans want judges to use red flag laws to confiscate guns from people who have not broken the law but may in the future. Both are unconstitutional. #ShallNotBeInfringed

And the IRS shall turn over trump's tax returns. Seems the word shall means different things in different situations.
 
Do you really believe that Democrats do not want a total ban?

More than you believe they do. I've been hearing this sad song for decades. So far how many folks do you know who have had their firearms confiscated?
 
Do you think Democrats will allow open juvenile records for background checks?

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
It's not really an out. Making absolute statements is rarely successful. If someone said "No Republican politician diddles kids", they'd be wrong because there are plenty of examples like Hastert. Instead a more accurate statement would be "No even remotely significant number of Republican politicians diddle kids".

None of you can point to one single example of an outright gun ban getting any even remotely significant support from any party and nor has anyone called for it. You hyperbolize because it's easier to argue against strawmen than their actual positions. Is there a Dem congressman out there who wants one? Might be. If so he's never tried it, nobody in the party has supported it, it isn't in the party platform, and thus has absolutely no significance.

If you want to claim like the OP that the Dems want an outright gun ban, provide that evidence right here and now. You won't because you can't.

I think its a slippery slope argument to make.

Too many carry the label "mainstream" and are anything but....trump has one foot in the Westborough church and the other at a Nationalist convention; too easy to derail the discussion with the Scotsman arguments.
 
I think its a slippery slope argument to make.
Too many carry the label "mainstream" and are anything but....trump has one foot in the Westborough church and the other at a Nationalist convention; too easy to derail the discussion with the Scotsman arguments.

I see. So neither you nor the OP can provide one single shred of evidence that the Democrats want a full gun ban, you're just here to distract from the actual topic with nonsensical and pointless ramblings.
 
I see, because I am a constitutionalist I am an extremist. BTW, is this how you typically debate by insulting and name calling?
 
I see, because I am a constitutionalist I am an extremist. BTW, is this how you typically debate by insulting and name calling?

If you think rapists and murderers have a right to buy tanks and nuclear weapons, yes, you're a ****ing extremist with no comprehension of the Constitution and absolutely in the minority.
 
I see. So neither you nor the OP can provide one single shred of evidence that the Democrats want a full gun ban, you're just here to distract from the actual topic with nonsensical and pointless ramblings.

Democrats as in all? No...some, yes.

But the point I am making is it makes more sense to state "this politician ( R or D ) advocates for xyz...I do not agree" rather than attempting to qualify what represents a mainstream section of any party.

There is a lot of fringe on both sides.
 
Did I say rapist and murderers have a right to buy tanks? Please do not put words in my mouth. Lets try to be civil and debate without insults please.
 
Democrats as in all? No...some, yes.
But the point I am making is it makes more sense to state "this politician ( R or D ) advocates for xyz...I do not agree" rather than attempting to qualify what represents a mainstream section of any party.
There is a lot of fringe on both sides.

Fringe by definition can not be "a lot".

Your inability to provide even one example of a Democrat that has called for an outright gun ban is duly noted and strengthens my point, thanks.

Did I say rapist and murderers have a right to buy tanks? Please do not put words in my mouth. Lets try to be civil and debate without insults please.

Wait, so you're saying the government CAN limit who can have what kind of weapon??? :shock: I thought you said that is explicitly against the Constitution! Why do you hate the Constitution and our freedoms, gun-grabber?
 
Democrats want to confiscate guns from law abiding citizens. Republicans want judges to use red flag laws to confiscate guns from people who have not broken the law but may in the future. Both are unconstitutional. #ShallNotBeInfringed

While the pure Constitutional argument may be on your side, we have too many examples of limitations on the 2nd Amendment (and other Amendments) suggesting interpretations between then and now are very different.

We can argue all day about any one restriction, or any one interpretation from the Courts, but the reality is not a one of our Constitutional rights are absolute.
 
Last edited:
This thread is about Dems and Republican approach to gun control and the constitutionality of those proposals. The SCOTUS has ruled on limitations on 2A. Lets discuss red flag laws and confiscation. Red flag laws are a slippery slope. Thought crimes comes to mind and 4A rights.
 
This thread is about Dems and Republican approach to gun control and the constitutionality of those proposals. The SCOTUS has ruled on limitations on 2A. Lets discuss red flag laws and confiscation. Red flag laws are a slippery slope. Thought crimes comes to mind and 4A rights.

You made this thread about a lot more than that. You made the claim the Democrats want to ban all guns but neither you nor anyone else here has been able to point to one single Democrat or proposal for an outright ban on guns. DEBUNKED.

Further we proved that it actually is Constitutional for the government to limit certain people from having certain types of weapons, and that by your own definition you're a Constitution-hating gun-grabber for also supporting that.

You can't limit rapists from buying tanks without background checks and regulations on weapons sales.
 
This thread is about Dems and Republican approach to gun control and the constitutionality of those proposals. The SCOTUS has ruled on limitations on 2A. Lets discuss red flag laws and confiscation. Red flag laws are a slippery slope. Thought crimes comes to mind and 4A rights.

We can derive any number of things from your OP.

Arguably, red flag laws still involve going in front of a judge which means due process has been addressed. May not be the traditional sense but that is how we ended up with secret courts for mass domestic spying, someone did have their day in court even if they did not know about it.

Democrats are looking for various gun restrictions by type (and other things,) and I am not convinced how the Supreme Court (given current leans) would handle a challenge to that.
 
I agree, however there is imo a possibility for abuse. Not all judges are impartial. And not all witnesses are honest. That is why imo red flag laws are dangerous.
 
I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and Constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.


Thomas Jefferson
 
Just to toss a fly in the ointment, lol.
 
Back
Top Bottom