• 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!

"Democrats will take away everyone's guns"

A

Antiwar

Green Party progressive
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 4, 2020
Messages
27,138
Reaction score
4,765
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Part of a Republican Congresswoman's argument against impeachment.
 
Antiwar said:
She's selling fear of an irrelevant and misrepresented position as a reason to not impeach.
Click to expand...

Of course, the lady Congressman who wants to wear her Glock and objects to having to go through a metal detector proclaims "Nancy's Communism"
 
Rogue Valley said:
When you have nothing else, peddle the false notion that a Democrat government will take your guns away.

Republicanism 101.
Click to expand...
Let's be honest about it though, Nancy pelosi was banging that drum a few years back, and O'Rourke was as well.

I don't believe most Democrats want to ban guns because if they did they would have but some absolutely do. I think it's nine times out of 10 just hot air. Some random politician gets a bee in their bonnet gets nowhere typically.

It seems like it's good political capital from time to time to either party.
 
Tlrmln said:
One need only look at NYC and DC before Heller to know where Democrats want to go with gun control.
Click to expand...

Which is ???

Why do you suppose the Democrats want to ban guns ?
Just to spoil your fun ?
Or let me guess, set up a communist dictatorship in the USA and we all know that the first thing dictators do is ban guns.
 
Rich2018 said:
Which is ???

Why do you suppose the Democrats want to ban guns ?
Just to spoil your fun ?
Or let me guess, set up a communist dictatorship in the USA and we all know that the first thing dictators do is ban guns.
Click to expand...

You desperately need to be more precise in the way you write. I honestly have no idea what you are actually asking me, so I'll answer in the way that makes most sense to me:

I suppose that Democrats want to ban guns because they have done so in the past, and have campaigned on doing it again. They claim they want to do this because it will make us safer, except that's obviously bullshit because nothing about the laws they have proposed to ban certain types of guns will actually make us safer. So I can't even begin to guess at their motives. The most generous interpretation I can come up with is that they're doing it to create a wedge issue to get votes from people who are ignorant about guns but generally dislike them, while fooling these people into thinking they're trying to do something useful when they really aren't.
 
Tlrmln said:
You desperately need to be more precise in the way you write. I honestly have no idea what you are actually asking me, so I'll answer in the way that makes most sense to me:
Click to expand...

Then you admit to not knowing what you were actually saying

I suppose that Democrats want to ban guns because they have done so in the past, and have campaigned on doing it again.
Click to expand...

So you put Democrat policies on banning guns down to tradition ?


They claim they want to do this because it will make us safer, except that's obviously bullshit because nothing about the laws they have proposed to ban certain types of guns will actually make us safer.
Click to expand...

So if it's BS, are you denying that the entire Democrat Caucus is incapable of seeing the flaws in their proposals, or are you suggesting that the Democrats intentions are malicious at heat ?
Please answer with a mind that politicians promote policies that they think will benefit the country (though a cynical commentator might suggest that certain wealthy politicians' policies have their respective bank balances as a goal)

So I can't even begin to guess at their motives.
Click to expand...

The moment when you're capable of doing so, you will be capable of balanced debate, until then you're just demonizing the Democrats and you don't know why


The most generous interpretation I can come up with is that they're doing it to create a wedge issue to get votes from people who are ignorant about guns but generally dislike them, while fooling these people into thinking they're trying to do something useful when they really aren't.
Click to expand...

But if there truly is a demographic who genuinely don't know anything about guns - which I doubt - wouldn't they be equally persuaded to accept a pro-gun stance by the Democrats ?
You really need to learn both sides of the gun debate, right now you are firmly fixed in one camp with no idea of the rationale in the other

Such a mindset does not make for a sound debate.
 
Rich2018 said:
Then you admit to not knowing what you were actually saying
Click to expand...

No. I said that I didn't know what YOU were saying, because of your general lack of clarity. If you feel that anything I wrote was not responsive, feel free to clarify.

As for the rest of your post, I have a rule that I tend to follow most of the time: As soon as I hit a wall of blatant bullshit, I stop reading, on the assumption that reading further will be an even bigger waste of time.

If you would care to respond again and attempt to be even a little honest, maybe I'll read it and respond. Then again, maybe not.
 
Tlrmln said:
No. I said that I didn't know what YOU were saying, because of your general lack of clarity. If you feel that anything I wrote was not responsive, feel free to clarify.

As for the rest of your post, I have a rule that I tend to follow most of the time: As soon as I hit a wall of blatant bullshit, I stop reading, on the assumption that reading further will be an even bigger waste of time.

If you would care to respond again and attempt to be even a little honest, maybe I'll read it and respond. Then again, maybe not.
Click to expand...

Or in other words, you have no response

The word for that, in debate, is concession. Or if you prefer, surrender

I accept your "sword"
 
Rich2018 said:
Or in other words, you have no response

The word for that, in debate, is concession. Or if you prefer, surrender

I accept your "sword"
Click to expand...

Don't stab yourself. Somehow I doubt there was anything to rebut. Your comments tend to be self-rebutting.
 
noonereal said:
seriously?

Which nutcase was this, specifically?
Click to expand...
Seriously. Does that surprise you? Qballs were elected!

I don't remember. One of the new younger House members. Probably a Qball. You search; I'll search.
 
How about a compromise; The Left leave the 2nd amendment alone and the right do the same for women's right to choose. These are red meat issues that both parties use to divide the moderates and control us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lwf
Antiwar said:
Seriously. Does that surprise you? Qballs were elected!

I don't remember. One of the new younger House members. Probably a Qball. You search; I'll search.
Click to expand...

Marjorie Greene of GA.

Not the Colorado Q ball.
 
craig said:
How about a compromise; The Left leave the 2nd amendment alone and the right do the same for women's right to choose. These are red meat issues that both parties use to divide the moderates and control us.
Click to expand...


Would you accept a pro-life amendment in the Constitution in return for a repeal of the 2nd Amendment ?
 
craig said:
How about a compromise; The Left leave the 2nd amendment alone and the right do the same for women's right to choose. These are red meat issues that both parties use to divide the moderates and control us.
Click to expand...

Red meat issues?

OMFG

We have Covid, riots, unemployment setting records... and you think these trite issues "red meat?"

This is exactly teh trouble with Trumpists, their priorities are in the toilet.
 
noonereal said:
Red meat issues?

OMFG

We have Covid, riots, unemployment setting records... and you think these trite issues "red meat?"

This is exactly teh trouble with Trumpists, their priorities are in the toilet.
Click to expand...
“Red meat” is rhetoric on an issue used to inflame supporters. It is often associated with populist ideas and campaigns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom