• 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!

How to ban guns without firing a single shot!

Spock said:
Look at the historical suicide data and get back to me with your apology.
Click to expand...
Why? Provide your evidence to support your claim.
Spock said:
www.pewresearch.org

Gun suicides have increased in the U.S. in recent years, but gun murders have fallen since 2021

www.pewresearch.org www.pewresearch.org
Click to expand...
Explain why Japan has a higher suicide rate than we do, when they don’t have private ownership of firearms?
Spock said:
How many firearm deaths would there be without firearms?
Click to expand...
meaningless tautology. If you could magically erase the 2nd amendment and ban firearms tomorrow, it would not reduce the amount of firearms by a single one.
 
rahl said:
Why? Provide your evidence to support your claim.
Click to expand...
You are avoiding the data.
rahl said:
Explain why Japan has a higher suicide rate than we do, when they don’t have private ownership of firearms?
Click to expand...
Different countries with different cultures.
rahl said:
meaningless tautology. If you could magically erase the 2nd amendment and ban firearms tomorrow, it would not reduce the amount of firearms by a single one.
Click to expand...
The inevitable conclusion would be that firearms by their unique characteristics cause death and injury increase in the USA.
 
Spock said:
You are avoiding the data.
Click to expand...
I’m crushing you with the data.
Spock said:
Different countries with different cultures.
Click to expand...
Special pleading.
Spock said:
The inevitable conclusion would be that firearms by their unique characteristics cause death and injury increase in the USA.
Click to expand...
Yes, thats the claim you keep making. The FBI and CDC data shows its nonsense. Homicide and violent crime rates have gone down 40%.
 
rahl said:
The Supreme Court,...
Click to expand...
An activist Supreme Court enacted the Heller legislation. Which they claimed was based on the 2nd A. We will eventually have a less activist Supreme Court that will overturn it.

Off-topic here, though. As the OP EXPLICITLY pointed out. If you want to discuss it, the OP provides a link you could use. Doesn't appear like you have the knowledge to challenge it, though. So I understand if you prefer not to go to that topic. But just be aware that here is not the place, and it will be ignored. While THERE it will be properly address.
 
JMB1911A1 said:
They don’t ****ing EXIST becuse it is a made up term.
Click to expand...
So your argument is to deny that "so-called 'cop killing bullets'" exist, huh! And that's the proposal from my list you thought you had the best chance to rebut!

Ok. So let me tell you: ALL terms you have EVER used for ANYTHING are made up! "Table", "car", "desk", "computer",.... somebody made them ALL up, and they stuck. The same way somebody made up "cop-killing bullets", and it stuck. They could have made up the term "rose smelling l bullets", And if THAT had stuck, that would be the name even if they DIDN'T smell like roses. I even included in the OP the qualifier "so-called" so people would know that the argument "they don't exist" is bullshit!

They exist. i just showed you a picture. And you can find online (I will not provide them so as not to promote these sites) where they sell them.

So if your argument is going to be to deny REALITY..... don't bother... not interested.

Let me know if you can think of a REAL argument.
 
Last edited:
rahl said:
Firearms are irrelevant to suicide rates. Japan has no privately owned forearms, but a higher suicide rate than the US.
Click to expand...
To the boys and girls in the audience: see what I was telling you? As people realize that they ran out of arguments, their points become more and more absurd.

Yes! I know YOU know from elementary school that suicide in Japan is, not only acceptable, but even MANDATORY in some circumstances as per some of their primary religious beliefs.

But this person doesn't! I know I know... our education system DOES have tremendous holes. That's why TRUMP is President!
 
Feynman Lives! said:
So your argument is to deny that "so-called 'cop killing bullets'" exist, huh! And that's the proposal from my list you thought you had the best chance to rebut!

Ok. So let me tell you: ALL terms you have EVER used for ANYTHING are made up! "Table", "car", "desk", "computer",.... somebody made them ALL up, and they stuck. The same way somebody made up "cop-killing bullets", and it stuck. They could have made up the term "rose smelling l bullets", And if THAT had stuck, that would be the name even if they DIDN'T smell like roses. I even included in the OP the qualifier "so-called" so people would know that the argument "they don't exist" is bullshit!

They exist. i just showed you a picture. And you can find online (I will not provide them so as not to promote these sites) where they sell them.

So if your argument is going to be to deny REALITY..... don't bother... not interested.

Let me know if you can think of a REAL argument.
Click to expand...
You seem to revel in your ignorance as some point of pride. What your EDITORIAL calls “cop killer bullets” are just run of the mill rifle ammo. It can be bought almost anywhere. Your knowledge of this issue is truly Hollywood film level deep.
 
JMB1911A1 said:
What your EDITORIAL calls “cop killer bullets” ....
Click to expand...
"My" editorial, is not the only one that calls them "cop killer bullets". There are scholarly articles, legislation, .... even just regular folk.... who call them that. It's a term used very often. It's just a "shortcut" name. In the actual legislation they could use some other term. Or none at all and just LIST them. It makes no difference to me or to my point.

You can call them "rose petals" for all I care. Now you know what I'm referring to. I'm not going to waste my time defending a word. I'm here to make proposals that might save lives!

So if the only argument that you could come up with to rebut my proposal is that you don't like the name... Great! That means you don't HAVE a rebuttal to my proposal saving lives. So my task is done.
 
Feynman Lives! said:
So your argument is to deny that "so-called 'cop killing bullets'" exist, huh! And that's the proposal from my list you thought you had the best chance to rebut!

Ok. So let me tell you: ALL terms you have EVER used for ANYTHING are made up! "Table", "car", "desk", "computer",.... somebody made them ALL up, and they stuck. The same way somebody made up "cop-killing bullets", and it stuck. They could have made up the term "rose smelling l bullets", And if THAT had stuck, that would be the name even if they DIDN'T smell like roses. I even included in the OP the qualifier "so-called" so people would know that the argument "they don't exist" is bullshit!

They exist. i just showed you a picture. And you can find online (I will not provide them so as not to promote these sites) where they sell them.

So if your argument is going to be to deny REALITY..... don't bother... not interested.

Let me know if you can think of a REAL argument.
Click to expand...

How about you make a real argument for why they should be banned, rather than depend on a name manufactured as agit prop?

Do you think if we call a certain model of SUV a "Christmas Parade Massacre Machine", that's a good argument to ban it?
 
Feynman Lives! said:
"My" editorial, is not the only one that calls them "cop killer bullets". There are scholarly articles, legislation, .... even just regular folk.... who call them that. It's a term used very often. It's just a "shortcut" name. In the actual legislation they could use some other term. Or none at all and just LIST them. It makes no difference to me or to my point.

You can call them "rose petals" for all I care. Now you know what I'm referring to. I'm not going to waste my time defending a word. I'm here to make proposals that might save lives!

So if the only argument that you could come up with to rebut my proposal is that you don't like the name... Great! That means you don't HAVE a rebuttal to my proposal saving lives. So my task is done.
Click to expand...

You've made no argument to support your proposal. Given no reasoning. In fact, you seem to think a colloquial name IS an argument. A rebuttal can be as simple as "No".
 
Feynman Lives! said:
An activist Supreme Court enacted the Heller legislation. Which they claimed was based on the 2nd A. We will eventually have a less activist Supreme Court that will overturn it.
Click to expand...
Nobody cares what you think. You remain refuted.
Feynman Lives! said:
Off-topic here, though. As the OP EXPLICITLY pointed out. If you want to discuss it, the OP provides a link you could use. Doesn't appear like you have the knowledge to challenge it, though.
Click to expand...
I’ve refuted it. It wasn’t a challenge.
Feynman Lives! said:
So I understand if you prefer not to go to that topic. But just be aware that here is not the place, and it will be ignored. While THERE it will be properly address.
Click to expand...
I accept your concession.
 
Feynman Lives! said:
To the boys and girls in the audience: see what I was telling you? As people realize that they ran out of arguments, their points become more and more absurd.
Click to expand...
Math doesn’t care how you feel. Japan has higher suicide rates despite no privately owned firearms. You remain refuted.
Feynman Lives! said:
Yes! I know YOU know from elementary school that suicide in Japan is, not only acceptable, but even MANDATORY in some circumstances as per some of their primary religious beliefs.

But this person doesn't! I know I know... our education system DOES have tremendous holes. That's why TRUMP is President!
Click to expand...
This is called special pleading.

You remain refuted.
 
Feynman Lives! said:
My argument is the same for ALL my proposals: because they kill. They are DESIGNED to kill.
Click to expand...

Then why the list of irrelevant red herrings?

That's baby talk coupled with your unsupported and uninformed opinion. It isn't much of an argument even if you could support it, because it would apply to all sorts of things there isn't much chance you would advocate for being banned.

My entire post before you butchered it to remove the inconvenient parts:

How about you make a real argument for why they should be banned, rather than depend on a name manufactured as agit prop?

Do you think if we call a certain model of SUV a "Christmas Parade Massacre Machine", that's a good argument to ban it?

Your clumsy attempts to salvage your idiotic arguments are a gift.
 
rahl said:
😂

No. You used the logical fallacy known as special pleading. It’s why you keep struggling so badly in these discussions.
Click to expand...
Apparently you do not understand special pleading.
rahl said:
The CDC and FBI aren’t delusional. It’s just math. You remain refuted.
Click to expand...
I am confident of my reasoning and your fallacies.
 
Spock said:
Apparently you do not understand special pleading.

I am confident of my reasoning and your fallacies.
Click to expand...

A good example is: "Guns should be banned because guns can be used to kill!"

The refusal to apply that to other things meeting the same criteria indicates special pleading.

So far as confidence, I knew a kid who was confident he could jump his motorcycle across a local pond.
 
RF667799 said:
A good example is: "Guns should be banned because guns can be used to kill!"
The refusal to apply that to other things meeting the same criteria indicates special pleading.
Click to expand...
Of course special pleading is about hypocrisy and inconsistency, which is why it does not apply to criticism of firearms. Firearms are a unique category of lethal weapon and are not equivalent to every other type of weapon.
Special pleading would apply to concern about compound bows and no concern about crossbows. Your need to ignore the special characteristics of firearms makes you resort to use of false equivalence fallacies so that fits with your misunderstanding of special pleading.

RF667799 said:
So far as confidence, I knew a kid who was confident he could jump his motorcycle across a local pond.
Click to expand...
and WC Fields had a bit about jumping out of a hot air balloon at 10,000 feet. So what?
 
Spock said:
Of course special pleading is about hypocrisy and inconsistency, which is why it does not apply to criticism of firearms.
Click to expand...
Criticism of firearms is something I enjoy particularly one comes to mind is a hi point C9. That's poorly manufactured it's complicated and it doesn't perform very accurately.

That's criticism of firearms that's not what you're doing.
Spock said:
Firearms are a unique category of lethal weapon and are not equivalent to every other type of weapon.
Click to expand...
And?
Spock said:
Special pleading would apply to concern about compound bows and no concern about crossbows.
Click to expand...
Or suggesting there's false equivalence when saying people killed by things other than guns is a bigger issue
Spock said:
Your need to ignore the special characteristics of firearms makes you resort to use of false equivalence fallacies so that fits with your misunderstanding of special pleading.
Click to expand...
And here we have the special pleading example.

Nobody is comparing nobody ever was comparing particulars of firearms to anything else. They were drawing an equivalence between death and death.

Do you think you're any more dead if you're shot by a pistol then if you're pushed on to subway tracks and killed?
Spock said:
and WC Fields had a bit about jumping out of a hot air balloon at 10,000 feet. So what?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom