• 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 status poll

Where do you stand on gun legislation restricting firearm ownership?

  • Status Quo - Could use some tweaking but it's generally fine

  • More firearm restrictions needed

  • Less firearm restrictions needed

  • Other

Results are only viewable after voting.
SNOWFLAKE said:
If your defense is "you haven't a clue" the discussion ends, since you prefer insults over a factual debate.
Click to expand...
His defense is you don't know the laws already on the books so how can you possibly tell us we need more restrictions when you don't understand the ones we already have.

Straw purchases are illegal.
Online sales are just as stringent as in person sales with a waiting period and background check.
Define reasonable. Are the laws we have now reasonable? Then why do we need more laws?
 
OpportunityCost said:
His defense is you don't know the laws already on the books so how can you possibly tell us we need more restrictions when you don't understand the ones we already have.

Straw purchases are illegal.
Online sales are just as stringent as in person sales with a waiting period and background check.
Define reasonable. Are the laws we have now reasonable? Then why do we need more laws?
Click to expand...
giffords.org

Trafficking & Straw Purchasing

Universal background checks save lives from gun violence.
giffords.org giffords.org
The percentage of Americans who favor stricter gun laws is on the rise, though significant partisan divisions persist. A Pew Research Center survey conducted in September found that 60% of Americans say gun laws should be tougher, up from 57% last year and 52% in 2017.
www.npr.org

Poll: Number Of Americans Who Favor Stricter Gun Laws Continues To Grow

The overall percentage of Americans who support tougher gun laws is on the rise, even as the partisan divide remains stark, according to a Pew Research Center survey.
www.npr.org www.npr.org
a shame when a Canadian knows more than you do, and when a liberal knows how to use the internet.
 
SNOWFLAKE said:
giffords.org

Trafficking & Straw Purchasing

Universal background checks save lives from gun violence.
giffords.org giffords.org
The percentage of Americans who favor stricter gun laws is on the rise, though significant partisan divisions persist. A Pew Research Center survey conducted in September found that 60% of Americans say gun laws should be tougher, up from 57% last year and 52% in 2017.
www.npr.org

Poll: Number Of Americans Who Favor Stricter Gun Laws Continues To Grow

The overall percentage of Americans who support tougher gun laws is on the rise, even as the partisan divide remains stark, according to a Pew Research Center survey.
www.npr.org www.npr.org
a shame when a Canadian knows more than you do, and when a liberal knows how to use the internet.
Click to expand...

Straw purchases are illegal. Period. It requires you to lie on a firearm purchase form which is against the law. Jesus, make a real argument.
Online purchases require the same waiting period and background check as an onsite purchase.

You didn't even attempt to answer my questions---are the laws we have reasonable? If they are why do we need more?
 
OpportunityCost said:
Straw purchases are illegal. Period. It requires you to lie on a firearm purchase form which is against the law. Jesus, make a real argument.
Online purchases require the same waiting period and background check as an onsite purchase.

You didn't even attempt to answer my questions---are the laws we have reasonable? If they are why do we need more?
Click to expand...
clearly they are illegal but happen, as you can see from the links.
 
Antiwar said:
D. Are there lots of gun control laws?

E. Did (your misinterpretation of) the 2A prevent the government from enacting the laws in D?
Click to expand...
that's evasive nonsense. I am still waiting for you to tell us why the second amendment was a gun CONTROL law.
 
SNOWFLAKE said:
If your defense is "you haven't a clue" the discussion ends, since you prefer insults over a factual debate.
Click to expand...
well you seem not to know what the laws are-yet you want laws you call reasonable. I suggest if you don't know what the current laws are, suggesting changes is specious
 
OpportunityCost said:
Any weapon used in the commission of a crime from a straw purchase results in a felony by the original buyer.

What more do you propose?
Click to expand...
Did you read the links I provided at all?
 
TurtleDude said:
well you seem not to know what the laws are-yet you want laws you call reasonable. I suggest if you don't know what the current laws are, suggesting changes is specious
Click to expand...
in other words, like the NRA, no changes at all, got ya
wonder_40x40.gif
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Believe it or not, the 2A does not stand alone. Rights, described in other places within the constitution up to and including life itself, may be restricted and/or removed by due process of law.
Click to expand...
Shall Not Be Infringed means exactly that.

If you want to take my guns, then DO IT.

Take them.

I'm ready for you. (and gun-grabbers like you).
 
SNOWFLAKE said:
if you can't read, I am truly sorry for that
Click to expand...

I did read your link, but it is full of misstatements. Its already illegal to make straw purchases or sales. Saying some states don't penalize it is false, its illegal at the federal level from the ATF reqs, and federally licensed dealers aren't going to risk their hard fought licensing agreement to allow straw purchases if they have any hint that's what is occurring. It will literally cost their entire life up to that point if they do.

So you going to continue to play appeal to authority or are you capable of producing some thought about what regulations you want to see added?
 
SkyChief said:
The Second Amendment doesn't mention criminally insane people. However, it explicitly tells Congress that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Therefore, any gun-control law that infringes (undermines · erodes · diminishes · weakens · impairs · damages · compromises · limits · checks · places a limit on) on this Right is de facto unconstitutional.

That is my position.
Click to expand...

Right, now is your position that a law that purports to prohibit a criminally insane person who is in involuntary custody after killing 25 people from being able to "keep and bear arms" is "unconstitutional"?

_____ YES​
​
​
_____ NO​
 
Robertinfremont said:
100 percent accurate.
Click to expand...

Right, now is your position that a law that purports to prohibit a criminally insane person who is in involuntary custody after killing 25 people from being able to "keep and bear arms" is "unconstitutional"?


_____ YES​
​
​
_____ NO​
 
SkyChief said:
Shall Not Be Infringed means exactly that.

If you want to take my guns, then DO IT.

Take them.

I'm ready for you. (and people like you).
Click to expand...

WTF? I have no desire for more “gun control” nonsense. My point was simply that rights are restricted or removed upon criminal conviction.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
WTF? I have no desire for more “gun control” nonsense. My point was simply that rights are restricted or removed upon criminal conviction.
Click to expand...

You forgot to add "regardless of whether or not there is any logical connection between the crime committed and the rights restricted or removed" bit.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Right, now is your position that a law that purports to prohibit a criminally insane person who is in involuntary custody after killing 25 people from being able to "keep and bear arms" is "unconstitutional"?


_____ YES​
​
​
_____ NO​
Click to expand...
state law no
federal law-most likely if the second amendment and the tenth amendment were actually enforced
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Right, now is your position that a law that purports to prohibit a criminally insane person who is in involuntary custody after killing 25 people from being able to "keep and bear arms" is "unconstitutional"?


_____ YES​
​
​
_____ NO​
Click to expand...

*waits for the slippery slope argument*
 
TurtleDude said:
state law no
Click to expand...

States may not pass laws that violate the federal constitution.

TurtleDude said:
federal law-most likely if the second amendment and the tenth amendment were actually enforced
Click to expand...

Don't quibble. You were asked for YOUR position and that can be answered with the two options provided.

So, once again, is your position that a law that purports to prohibit a criminally insane person who is in involuntary custody after killing 25 people from being able to "keep and bear arms" is "unconstitutional"?

_____ YES​
​
​
_____ NO​

PS - Yes, I know how embarrassing it is to have to give an answer that is likely to make you look silly regardless of what it is - but I was NOT the one who posted the proposition that YOU posted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom