• 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!

...............guns...............

I got it. What you're suggesting is that all victims of the Holocaust were shot. There's no analogy here.

That's not what he's saying at all.

Guns equal power over others. Either power to protect your rights from those that would infringe upon them... or power to take those rights from others. Whether the trigger is pulled is arbitrary.
 
That's not what he's saying at all.

Guns equal power over others. Either power to protect your rights from those that would infringe upon them... or power to take those rights from others. Whether the trigger is pulled is arbitrary.
So arbitrary as to allow no distinction between a bullet hole and Zyklon B? It was a poor analogy, plain and simple.

I know what a deterrent is. Yet this particular deterrent seems not quite so effective, given the stats.
 
So arbitrary as to allow no distinction between a bullet hole and Zyklon B? It was a poor analogy, plain and simple.

I know what a deterrent is. Yet this particular deterrent seems not quite so effective, given the stats.

Guns aren't the problem. Society is. Dissolution of the family is. Disintegration of the neighborhood, village, town and city is. Fix those things and you reduce all crime, increase literacy, reduce abortions, drug use, etc, etc, etc.
 
Guns aren't the problem. Society is. Dissolution of the family is. Disintegration of the neighborhood, village, town and city is. Fix those things and you reduce all crime, increase literacy, reduce abortions, drug use, etc, etc, etc.
That's very simplistic. Guns are the medium of expression. Hence the term 'gun crime'. Murder couldn't be so frequent, were it not so simple. As for the socioeconomic angle, America is hardly unique.
 
That's very simplistic. Guns are the medium of expression. Hence the term 'gun crime'. Murder couldn't be so frequent, were it not so simple. As for the socioeconomic angle, America is hardly unique.

It's not simplistic at all. It's a complex problem stated simply. I assume my readers are intelligent to know that and the difference.

I see... do instead of addressing the root cause of all our social ills and be proactive, you'd rather be reactionary and infringe our necessary and protected human rights?

Look, you cannot infringe the second. Not even a little. Believe me, I wish the reasons for that didn't exist... that gov'ts always progress to oppression, or allow an elite to oppress. It's a historical constant of human nature. It is the RULE rather than the exception.

That path to reducing gun crime is closed. But it can be accomplished, and so much more via another path. A path that delivers to both sides of the debate, not one position exclusive of the other.

But by all means, keep playing your part in the open venue of political theater.
 
I got it. What you're suggesting is that all victims of the Holocaust were shot. There's no analogy here.

I'm pretty sure you don't got it, and I don't think I could make it any clearer, so you have yourself a good day.
 
It's not simplistic at all. It's a complex problem stated simply. I assume my readers are intelligent to know that and the difference.

I see... do instead of addressing the root cause of all our social ills and be proactive, you'd rather be reactionary and infringe our necessary and protected human rights?

Look, you cannot infringe the second. Not even a little. Believe me, I wish the reasons for that didn't exist... that gov'ts always progress to oppression, or allow an elite to oppress. It's a historical constant of human nature. It is the RULE rather than the exception.

That path to reducing gun crime is closed. But it can be accomplished, and so much more via another path. A path that delivers to both sides of the debate, not one position exclusive of the other.

But by all means, keep playing your part in the open venue of political theater.
You're right. The venue in question being so much more decorous. It's protagonists so much less given to histrionics.

In fact, so simple was your summary, that it allows for nothing beyond acknowledgement of existence per se. Which is nice enough, I suppose; we could take a brief interlude and swap golf scores. How proactive is a gun? By definition, where you're about to use it, it's reactionary, unless you're committing murder. Self-defence necessitates an attacker (or at least the assumption of one). A gun cannot address such as poverty or patterns of inequality.

While I certainly agree that government must be constrained, there is no innate drive to oppress. Rather, that society exists at all is testament to humanity's natural inclination towards cohesion, co-operation and generally gregarious behaviour. Even the most cursory treatment of Anthropology leaves no doubt. That we're capable of dispensing with pleasantries, only means that we can act against our own best interests.

I don't see much common ground here, nor any possibility of there being any, while gun nuts insist that firearms are merely teddy bears with smiley faces. That bullets are slightly ticklish and behave like vitamin C.
 
I'm pretty sure you don't got it, and I don't think I could make it any clearer, so you have yourself a good day.
It's clear enough. It's simply inapplicable as an analogy, that's all.

Top of the evening to you. *doffs cap*
 
What you don't realize is that the mass shooting most of this hysteria is responding to is the horrific sandy hook shooting, I am deeply saddened by this, and this is why i don't believe Obama should be using it for political gain. What he doesn't realize is that Lanza the perpetrator of this crime would not in any way be restricted by any gun law ever, due to the fact that HE STOLE THE WEAPONS!! If his mother had not had the guns(RIP) he is so bent out of shape by our countries mental health system, that he would have found a way to obtain a firearm.
 
Back
Top Bottom