• 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!

Gun control is damn near the equivalent of car control

As I understand things US homicide rate is higher than in similar societies. Quick check shows it’s 7.5 times the rates of other wealthy countries. Look it up for your self.

That's cute. You think the US has a homogeneous society.
 
Look it up and explain my error. “US homicide rate compared to similar countries.” There are of course factors unrelated to guns, but it seems absurd to posit that guns don’t play a part. Why do you think old western towns banned guns? And why do we not allow guns on planes?

So that we may more easily overpower the people we want to overpower.
 
So that we may more easily overpower the people we want to overpower.
We know that's true:

 
Neither are those countries. Adorable that you thought so! 😆

Even more reason it's ridiculous to say they are equivalent societies.

Thanks for the assist.
 
We know that's true:


Then you agree that guns can be used for unjustified violence.
 
I didn't say that. Quit lying.
I guess you lied first by your own standards then in your first post. Maybe add a question mark next time and you won't get the ball spiked back in your direction.
 
I guess you lied first by your own standards then in your first post. Maybe add a question mark next time and you won't get the ball spiked back in your direction.

Then you disagree that guns can be used for unjustified violence?

It really has to be one or the other. You agree or disagree. There's no other choice. The statement is a fact.
 
Then you disagree that guns can be used for unjustified violence?

It really has to be one or the other. You agree or disagree. There's no other choice. The statement is a fact.
I agree all guns are for committing violence. You have literally argued they act as violence multipliers.
 
I agree all guns are for committing violence.

You can't be agreeing with me, as I never said such a thing. It would be silly to believe such a thing, given the existence of near half a billion guns that are never used for that purpose.



You have literally argued they act as violence multipliers.

So? Baseball bats can as well.

I bet I said something more like " they can be used as". I do try to avoid baby talk.
 
You can't be agreeing with me, as I never said such a thing. It would be silly to believe such a thing, given the existence of near half a billion guns that are never used for that purpose.





So? Baseball bats can as well.

I bet I said something more like " they can be used as". I do try to avoid baby talk.
So now guns are no more effective than baseball bats. That's a pretty stupid statement.
 
So now guns are no more effective than baseball bats. That's a pretty stupid statement.

Something else I didn't say, but maybe you wish I had.

Will you write an honest post soon?
 
As I understand things US homicide rate is higher than in similar societies.
What is a similar society and what makes them similar you'd be specific please.
Quick check shows it’s 7.5 times the rates of other wealthy countries. Look it up for your self.
So wealthy countries make them similar societies so we need to try and be more like the UAE?
 
So now guns are no more effective than baseball bats. That's a pretty stupid statement.
No so if the only weapons you can have are the ones you can swing with enough might to hurt people then might equals right. There's a reason why a firearm is called a peacemaker. When being a strong man with a bat is no longer good enough someone who's a paraplegic can stop you that's the idea.
 
No so if the only weapons you can have are the ones you can swing with enough might to hurt people then might equals right. There's a reason why a firearm is called a peacemaker. When being a strong man with a bat is no longer good enough someone who's a paraplegic can stop you that's the idea.
Strong men don't need guns.
 
Look it up and explain my error.
I did. You tried to cherry pick but I won’t let you.
“US homicide rate compared to similar countries.”
Cherry picking.
There are of course factors unrelated to guns, but it seems absurd to posit that guns don’t play a part.
We know empirically that they don’t.
Why do you think old western towns banned guns?
Most didn’t. You’re thinking of the earps who did it to protect their gambling interests.
And why do we not allow guns on planes?
We do allow guns on planes.
 
So women and weaker men should be subservient to strong men. Okay Mao.
God made man and women. Sam Colt made them equal. (Or Glock (except in CA of course)).

 
God made man and women. Sam Colt made them equal. (Or Glock (except in CA of course)).


Yeah you can't get over the reality that might makes. All these police state types are trying to do is make sure you have no might so you can be mean to do whatever they tell you. They are essentially the fascists they are so afraid of. Reminds me of a Friedrich Nietzsche quote.
 
Yeah you can't get over the reality that might makes. All these police state types are trying to do is make sure you have no might so you can be mean to do whatever they tell you. They are essentially the fascists they are so afraid of. Reminds me of a Friedrich Nietzsche quote.
This meme seems more and more appropriate when "debating" the gun control crowd.

IMG_0390.webp
 
Back
Top Bottom