• 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!

FL Open Carry

I already provided you that info. But let’s try again.

Venues were the government provides armed security and there are means to prevent unauthorized entrance by those carrying firearms illegally (metal detectors and pat downs). That’s it.

Our children should be as well or better protected than our politicians. Do you agree?
You did not answer previously you ran. Said something about how you weren't going to play my gotcha. Which is very interesting in and of itself.

But it is very, very interesting that you are for restricting the rights of gun owners in certain situations.
 
You did not answer previously you ran. Said something about how you weren't going to play my gotcha. Which is very interesting in and of itself.

But it is very, very interesting that you are for restricting the rights of gun owners in certain situations.
There you are again trying to play the gotcha game again. I am debating in good faith here. You are not.

You are saying that I am for restricting rights. I am saying that carry, and just carry, may, repeat may, be restricted where the government is willing to do the due diligence to assume the safety of its citizens. No guns signs by themself are useless and do nothing to protect folks. Someone has to do the work.

That is a called a compromise.

Debating with dishonest leftists is the crux of what Charlie Kirk wanted and the left killed him for doing so.
 
There you are again trying to play the gotcha game again. I am debating in good faith here. You are not.

You are saying that I am for restricting rights. I am saying that carry, and just carry, may, repeat may, be restricted where the government is willing to do the due diligence to assume the safety of its citizens. No guns signs by themself are useless and do nothing to protect folks. Someone has to do the work.

That is a called a compromise.

Debating with dishonest leftists is the crux of what Charlie Kirk wanted and the left killed him for doing so.
What you are saying is the government has the right to restrict firearms in certain places.

If that's a gotcha for you then maybe grab a mirror.
 
What you are saying is the government has the right to restrict firearms in certain places.

If that's a gotcha for you then maybe grab a mirror.
Do you want to debate honestly?

What criteria would you use to restrict the right to carry? Please be specific. I offered my opinion in good faith.
 
Back
Top Bottom