• 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!

Father arrested after ordering son, 4, to shoot at officers in McDonald's drive-thru, police say

RabidAlpaca said:
No, but some of them are scummy enough to come into this thread and try to defend this behavior.
Click to expand...

I haven't read the thread.

Are there actually people defending citizens shooting at cops?
 
code1211 said:
I haven't read the thread.

Are there actually people defending citizens shooting at cops?
Click to expand...
Looking at all the attempts to distract from what happened and the attacks on liberals and gun control, it sure seems like it. You'd think in this situation they could just admit the person is a monster that needs to be locked up instead of whining about "liberals".
 
PeacefulWarrior said:
Its obviously an ardent believer in "gun rights" Code, connect the dots.:unsure:
Click to expand...

A believer in gun rights and a follower of the of gun safety instruction offered by the NRA are vastly different things.
 
Sadaat Shamille Johnson.

Lets call it profiling...I'll own that...but probably NOT a good 'redneck' name, and probably NOT an NRA member...

Since the OP is wanting to attach labels and make bigoted statements about all gun owners and NRA members based on the actions of this individual, what kind of stereotypes might also be placed on a minority male...especially in regard to criminal behaviors and fatherhood?
 
Last edited:
RabidAlpaca said:
Looking at all the attempts to distract from what happened and the attacks on liberals and gun control, it sure seems like it. You'd think in this situation they could just admit the person is a monster that needs to be locked up instead of whining about "liberals".
Click to expand...
The OP introduced gun control in his OP, so it's fair game to criticize and debate.
 
PeacefulWarrior said:
nah. I know you are but what am I?
:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yeah...your dumb**** OP is about that level. May as well paint all car drivers as maniacs because the one dude used one to run over parade participants in Waukesha, using your idiotic premise.
 
Last edited:
Fishking said:
Yeah...your dumb**** OP is about that level. May as well paint all car drivers as maniacs because the one dude used one to run over parade participants in Waukesha, using your idiotic premise.
Click to expand...

I perceive that you want to lash out at me in anger.

the guy is an American gun owner. The violence is epidemic in that demographic.

Do facts make you uncomfortable?
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Looking at all the attempts to distract from what happened and the attacks on liberals and gun control, it sure seems like it. You'd think in this situation they could just admit the person is a monster that needs to be locked up instead of whining about "liberals".
Click to expand...

I have noticed in various topic areas that the actual descriptions of crime seem to be pushed aside and the criminal's skin color or other topics seem to be moved forward.

5 or 10 people seem to be murdered every weekend in Chicago, but their deaths, the circumstances of their deaths and the killers are ignored by our media.

The deaths that "get the press" are cherry picked to conform to familiar sensationalized treatments rising out of topics of the day and goals of political groups.

Our "news reporting" is nothing more than propaganda intended to shape opinions and attitudes. Could be that comments posted in this forum follow that example.
 
Ishm said:
Before you can say the father 'stole' the childs gun, you have to determine the childs right to 'possess' the gun. So, back to the original question please
Click to expand...
The constitution does not set an age limit on possessing a gun. This is basic.
 
Metric Mouse said:
The constitution does not set an age limit on possessing a gun. This is basic.
Click to expand...
That's what I thought too. So why are some people so OK with children not having the effective right to carry a gun, while defending to death the rights of adults who behave like children to carry one?
 
Ishm said:
That's what I thought too. So why are some people so OK with children not having the effective right to carry a gun, while defending to death the rights of adults who behave like children to carry one?
Click to expand...
Because children, as whole, are not developed mentally or physically enough to grasp the concept and ramifications, as well as perform the actions, of self defense.

This is pretty basic... Did you not explore these concepts in middle school civics/social studies?
 
Metric Mouse said:
Because children, as whole, are not developed mentally or physically enough to grasp the concept and ramifications, as well as perform the actions, of self defense.

This is pretty basic... Did you not explore these concepts in middle school civics/social studies?
Click to expand...
I know children that I would prefer to see with a gun rather than many adults. However, that is not really the point. What I am questioning is how some people point to the literal interpretation of a small select group of words from 2A as the justification for 1000's of needless deaths each year, then happily support ignoring those same words when it suits their 'logic'.

I am not suggesting that children be armed, rather just pointing out the hypocrisy that puts guns in the hands of millions of people that either shouldn't have them, or have limited concept of safe ownership.
 
Ishm said:
I know children that I would prefer to see with a gun rather than many adults. However, that is not really the point. What I am questioning is how some people point to the literal interpretation of a small select group of words from 2A as the justification for 1000's of needless deaths each year, then happily support ignoring those same words when it suits their 'logic'.

I am not suggesting that children be armed, rather just pointing out the hypocrisy that puts guns in the hands of millions of people that either shouldn't have them, or have limited concept of safe ownership.
Click to expand...
It seems that there are very few deaths and injuries if there are indeed millions of adults who have guns who shouldn't.

Perhaps you are missing the nuance of the 2nd amendment, and certainly constitutional rights as a whole, if you think that a father removing a gun from a 4 year old son would violate his rights. No one is arguing that every person should have guns, so your strawmen starting position is probably part of the problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom