• 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!

First sweeping federal gun crime report in 20 years released

jaeger19 said:
Nope I assumed you knew they had less guns which is why you brought them up.
My bad..
Should have known you were full of it.
Click to expand...
But you SAID they have fewer guns.....right?
 
brianpatrick said:
No. I threw three darts and all of them landed. Damn I’m good. First try too!
Click to expand...

Your post was refuted, and you have no substance in your response. Your post is the internet equivalent of a slack jawed idiot who doesn't quite know that he is wearing his underwear on the outside of his pants, but chooses to grin along with everyone else.
 
RF667799 said:
Your post was refuted, and you have no substance in your response. Your post is the internet equivalent of a slack jawed idiot who doesn't quite know that he is wearing his underwear on the outside of his pants, but chooses to grin along with everyone else.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the confirmation.
 
Maidenrules29 said:
I think it's common sense that one should alert the authorities if their gun is stolen, but even if they didn't, what control does a gun owner have once that firearm is stolen and out of his or her hands?
Click to expand...

They don't, but the point is they try. I'm not under the illusion that one law or two or three will make a difference; there's a multitude of policies, rules, regulations, and laws that we should implement to reduce the number of guns in circulation.

Maidenrules29 said:
Unless you actually have some video or a description of the people who stole your gun, how are the police going to track it down? A robbery victim being liable for a crime involving his/her stolen property is a slippery slope.....
Click to expand...

It's not a slippery slope; 11 states already have such laws. More should join them. The laws by themselves would have limited impact. They would have more impact in conjunction with mandatory registration in a federal registration database, gun buyback programs, requiring liability insurance, and other measures that can be done and that are constitutional, regardless of whatever bullshit tripe the current illegitimate SCOTUS majority opines.
 
multivita-man said:
They don't, but the point is they try. I'm not under the illusion that one law or two or three will make a difference; there's a multitude of policies, rules, regulations, and laws that we should implement to reduce the number of guns in circulation.



It's not a slippery slope; 11 states already have such laws. More should join them. The laws by themselves would have limited impact. They would have more impact in conjunction with mandatory registration in a federal registration database, gun buyback programs, requiring liability insurance, and other measures that can be done and that are constitutional, regardless of whatever bullshit tripe the current illegitimate SCOTUS majority opines.
Click to expand...

How many guns will you have to randomly remove in order to achieve your desired results, and considering that only a very tiny portion of guns are used in crime to begin with?
 
multivita-man said:
11 states already have such laws.
Click to expand...
What laws?
multivita-man said:
They would have more impact in conjunction with mandatory registration in a federal registration database, gun buyback programs, requiring liability insurance, and other measures that can be done and that are constitutional, regardless of whatever bullshit tripe the current illegitimate SCOTUS majority opines
Click to expand...
What???!
 
RF667799 said:
Run along. You don't know how to play.
Click to expand...
Oh come on… have we not noticed that the only threads you post in are gun control/gun enthusiast threads? Does this not tell us something about you? Have we not read and countered your posts for years? Have you not come with the latest 2A talking points we hear when we hear the “Pew-Pew” guy on a podcast, the same semantic gymnastics as the interpretation of the sentence itself? Do we really not know what you’re doing?
Really?!

Ha ha. Sure.

The US was done when it decided that innocent gun homicide victims were an acceptable loss, because it’s profitable.
 
RF667799 said:
How many guns will you have to randomly remove in order to achieve your desired results, and considering that only a very tiny portion of guns are used in crime to begin with?
Click to expand...

Ideally, I'd like to see our numbers more in line with other developed countries. Instead of more than 1 gun per capita, I'd like to see half that number.
 
Maidenrules29 said:
What laws?

What???!
Click to expand...

Given the premise of a random removal of guns, it's obvious the intent is to have a greater effect on peaceful people than on violent miscreants.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom