• 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!

DNC Platform Committee Member: No One Should Have A Gun

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,861
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Tell me again how the Democrats don't want to take away the guns? On a positive note, at least this woman is honest about her feelings and intentions.

DNC Platform Committee Member: No One Should Have A Gun

DNC platform committee member Bonnie Schaefer, a Clinton supporter, said she doesn't think "anyone should have a gun" at a meeting with fellow members in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday.

"I do believe that you’re absolutely correct – not just keeping the guns out of mentally ill people and criminals, but I really don’t personally think anyone should have a gun. I mean, that’s just my own philosophy. Nothing is ever solved when you have a gun in your hand except the worst possible scenario," said Wednesday.
 
As much as I dislike defending the Democratic Party, she does say it is just her own personal philosophy. It isn't the platform of the Democratic Party. And if the Democrats put that in their platform, well, I will be trashing them about it right along with you.
 
DNC platform committee member Bonnie Schaefer, a Clinton supporter, said she doesn't think "anyone should have a gun" at a meeting with fellow members in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday.

"I do believe that you’re absolutely correct – not just keeping the guns out of mentally ill people and criminals, but I really don’t personally think anyone should have a gun. I mean, that’s just my own philosophy. Nothing is ever solved when you have a gun in your hand except the worst possible scenario," said Wednesday.

As opposed to the philosophy that everyone should have a gun. Somewhere in the middle is the answer.
 
Tell me again how the Democrats don't want to take away the guns? On a positive note, at least this woman is honest about her feelings and intentions.


she should put a big sign on her front door saying the home is disarmed

I hope no police officers are tasked with defending her either
 
As opposed to the philosophy that everyone should have a gun. Somewhere in the middle is the answer.

find someone who thinks everyone should have a gun. I certainly don't those who lose control of their bladders or bowels over the thought of someone else owning a gun, should own a firearm

here is the difference-people like you are OK with banning ten million honest people from owning guns if you think it disarms one or two criminals

I understand in a free society, some criminals will be armed but I am not willing to disarm 10 million good people in the HOPE it might deter a couple unambitious criminals
 
Tell me again how the Democrats don't want to take away the guns? On a positive note, at least this woman is honest about her feelings and intentions.

Doesn't fill me with confidence that in the long runn the Democratic party is inclined to observe and support the 2nd amendment.

As much as I dislike defending the Democratic Party, she does say it is just her own personal philosophy. It isn't the platform of the Democratic Party. And if the Democrats put that in their platform, well, I will be trashing them about it right along with you.

So OK, right now it's a personal philosophy. Next time around it may very well be part of the party platform.

I suppose there really is something to the conspiratorial theories that floating around.
 
find someone who thinks everyone should have a gun. I certainly don't those who lose control of their bladders or bowels over the thought of someone else owning a gun, should own a firearm

here is the difference-people like you are OK with banning ten million honest people from owning guns if you think it disarms one or two criminals

I understand in a free society, some criminals will be armed but I am not willing to disarm 10 million good people in the HOPE it might deter a couple unambitious criminals


Whoa, hold on nelly....that's not what I said or think.

To answer your question....you...you think everyone should have a gun. Your philosophy is the exact opposite and every bit as extreme as Bonnie Schaefer's.

Like I said...somewhere in the middle is the answer.

15sidesdrawntwo.jpg
 
Last edited:
Whoa, hold on nelly....that's not what I think or said.

To answer your question....you...you think everyone should have a gun. Your philosophy is the exact opposite and every bit as extreme as Bonnie Schaefer's.

Like I said...somewhere in the middle is the answer.

15sidesdrawntwo.jpg

where have I ever said everyone should own a gun.

JOE BIDEN shouldn't own a gun for example
 
I have REALLY tried to understand the constant loud claims by gun owners/advocates that their rights are being undermined.
But to no avail.

The facts prove that all this pro-gun lobbying is overkill.
The US Constitution protects gun ownership. The US contains tens of millions of guns of every type -- enough to outfit several armies.
The US leads the world in gun-related deaths, murders, accidental shootings, children killed by firearms, and mass shootings in public places.

What more does the gun-loving citizens of this nation want from the rest of us? What will it take for the NRA members to be satisfied?

A gun in every hand, in every school, in every office, in every school and shopping mall? Many of us think America has lost its collective mind as we fight for more gun access.
 
Tell me again how the Democrats don't want to take away the guns? On a positive note, at least this woman is honest about her feelings and intentions.

So one lady who doesnt think people should have guns who happens to be a democrat means all democrats feel the same way? LMAO brilliant. Thats just as retarded as saying all republicans are against equal rights because I can find one that wants gay marriage to be illegal.

Try making a post that is honest and less biased fallacy.
 
As opposed to the philosophy that everyone should have a gun. Somewhere in the middle is the answer.

what if everyone (who's legal to own one) wanted one? then should the answer still be in the middle?
 
I have REALLY tried to understand the constant loud claims by gun owners/advocates that their rights are being undermined.
But to no avail.

The facts prove that all this pro-gun lobbying is overkill.
The US Constitution protects gun ownership. The US contains tens of millions of guns of every type -- enough to outfit several armies.
The US leads the world in gun-related deaths, murders, accidental shootings, children killed by firearms, and mass shootings in public places.

What more does the gun-loving citizens of this nation want from the rest of us? What will it take for the NRA members to be satisfied?

A gun in every hand, in every school, in every office, in every school and shopping mall? Many of us think America has lost its collective mind as we fight for more gun access.

No, we don't want a gun in every hand, school office, etc. just stop proposing new laws would satisfy most of us.

no one has proposed putting a gun everywhere, just allowing those of us who ALREADY authorized via license to carry in 95% of public places to be permitted to carry in a handful more.

your statistics are not correct, we do not lead the world in gun deaths, or any of those categories.
 
So one lady who doesnt think people should have guns who happens to be a democrat means all democrats feel the same way? LMAO brilliant. Thats just as retarded as saying all republicans are against equal rights because I can find one that wants gay marriage to be illegal.

Try making a post that is honest and less biased fallacy.

all democrats do not need to feel that way, but when all the democrats in the top positions of the party are fully committed to the democratic cause with no debate on that position permitted then the difference between "all" and "some" democrats is a meaningless one.

There's not enough pro-gun democrats left to make a difference in the party.
 
The DNC, Clinton nor her supporters will adopt any of Bernie's platform aspirations.
Let alone with they pick him to be her running-mate.
Let alone throw Sanders or his supporters ANY bone.
The posters on this forum have made that clear.
WHY SHOULD HE OR HIS SUPPORTERS GIVE A SHRED OF A **** ABOUT THE DNC (LET ALONE SUPPORT THEM OR THEIR FUHRER!?)

The time to revolt against the Inner and Outer Parties is NOW.

**** THE OLIGARCHS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
**** OCEANIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
what if everyone (who's legal to own one) wanted one? then should the answer still be in the middle?

What if everyone who was mentally insane, or a stalker, or a violent felon, or home grown terrorist wanted one? If the answer is no...then that would be a good start toward the middle.
 
What if everyone who was mentally insane, or a stalker, or a violent felon, or home grown terrorist wanted one? If the answer is no...then that would be a good start toward the middle.
violent felons and the insane are not permitted to buy firearms already. stalker and homegrown terrorists are loose terms with little actual definition, too much so to prohibit from a civil right without a criminal conviction.
 
all democrats do not need to feel that way, but when all the democrats in the top positions of the party are fully committed to the democratic cause with no debate on that position permitted then the difference between "all" and "some" democrats is a meaningless one.

There's not enough pro-gun democrats left to make a difference in the party.

SO then the OP is factually not true

also again that is your OPINION and its subjective, i could make the same statement with just as much evidence that you can produce for your statment about equal rights and gays for republicans but I never would because that wouldnt be honest.

In real life I dont know anybody that feels nobody should own a gun . .
in real life most the republicans i know support equal rights
 
There's a minority that take that absolutist stance, but it's nowhere near a sizable minority, let alone a majority.

However, even most of the time, vanilla Democrats tend to be too lured at the prospect of going after firearms in lieu of another solution or viable non-actions.
 
violent felons and the insane are not permitted to buy firearms already. stalker and homegrown terrorists are loose terms with little actual definition, too much so to prohibit from a civil right without a criminal conviction.

Call them what you want, I'm not going to quibble semantics with you.
 
Call them what you want, I'm not going to quibble semantics with you.

law is semantics in case you didn't know.

then don't quibble, you just got proven wrong, if you call that quibbling then good for you.
 
What if everyone who was mentally insane, or a stalker, or a violent felon, or home grown terrorist wanted one? If the answer is no...then that would be a good start toward the middle.

why would you need anything more =those people are already banned from possessing firearms

what do we get back from gun banners for saying-yeah,if you are violent felon you are punished for merely touching a firearm

I was part of a trial team where a three time convicted robber got 15 years for possessing a firearm for 15 seconds. He didn't even intend to use the gun, he saw a guy being chased by the Po-Po ditch a weapon and he picked it up and tried to throw it over a wall so the cops wouldn't find it. another cop-he didn't see saw him pick it up-run a few yards and try to chuck it over the wall. the mope didn't see a chain link fence on top the wall which caused the weapon to bounce back. (and allowed the cop to retrieve it)

he's still in prison and might well die there-he was late fifties when he got popped. and no one even suggested he was intending on keeping the weapon or using it
 
SO then the OP is factually not true

also again that is your OPINION and its subjective, i could make the same statement with just as much evidence that you can produce for your statment about equal rights and gays for republicans but I never would because that wouldnt be honest.

In real life I dont know anybody that feels nobody should own a gun . .
in real life most the republicans i know support equal rights

strictly speaking it is not true.

In real life, there's little difference, since the majority of democratic elected officials will vote yes on every gun control measure brought before them. and the democratic nominee for president wants to overturn the second amendment. so what's the difference? in real life I do not need absolutes, 70% there will do.
 
The DNC, Clinton nor her supporters will adopt any of Bernie's platform aspirations.
Let alone with they pick him to be her running-mate.
Let alone throw Sanders or his supporters ANY bone.
The posters on this forum have made that clear.
WHY SHOULD HE OR HIS SUPPORTERS GIVE A SHRED OF A **** ABOUT THE DNC (LET ALONE SUPPORT THEM OR THEIR FUHRER!?)

The time to revolt against the Inner and Outer Parties is NOW.

**** THE OLIGARCHS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
**** OCEANIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Guns are an area where Sanders is more moderate than Clinton and could help steer the platform in a more gun-friendly direction .
 
strictly speaking it is not true.

In real life, there's little difference, since the majority of democratic elected officials will vote yes on every gun control measure brought before them. and the democratic nominee for president wants to overturn the second amendment. so what's the difference? in real life I do not need absolutes, 70% there will do.

70% isnt accurate either lmao

again replace democrat with republican and make the issue equal rights for gays :shrug:

they are both dishonest hyperbolic partisan that nobody honest will take seriously.
 
Back
Top Bottom