• 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!

jaeger19 said:
Well let’s start with defining an assault weapon.
Explain in detail exactly what one is.
Click to expand...
Not a problem! I have sent it no less than ten times to this thread. But when you have the facts on your side, you have no problem repeating them over and over.

Here you go. This would be the LEGAL definition. It's ONE possible definition. It can be "tweaked" (and it probably will be in the final law) But... it's enough to give an idea.

Now... do you have ANYTHING to rebut any of my proposals? Because THAT is what this thread is about. And, so far, you're falling short.
 
Spock said:
Start with comparable countries and get back with your own opinion.
Click to expand...

Demands I support his argument.

Argument rejected on that basis.
 

Props open door to slide the goalposts down a slippery slope at a later point.

Rejected on that basis.
 
Feynman Lives! said:
What???? You're telling me there are things you can do with an assault weapon that you can't do with a... knife, a rope, an iron bar, a car,.... or something like that?

Oh.... the shock!
Click to expand...

And there's things you can't do with it also. Isn't it amazing?
 
Feynman Lives! said:
If you're talking about something related to the Heller legislation's misuse of the 2nd A, that's a different topic.
Click to expand...
I’m not aware of any legislation passed by Congress called “heller legislation”. I’m referring to numerous suprmeme court rulings.
Feynman Lives! said:
BTW, my FAVORITE topic in the whole world... by far. But if you want to discuss that, start here.
Click to expand...
Refuted already.
Feynman Lives! said:
In any case, the Heller legislation has not impeded any of my proposals to be adopted at a state level by many states.
Click to expand...
Please provide the bill passed by Congress names “heller legislation”.
Feynman Lives! said:
But, if it does, it can be un-passed just like it was passed. Maybe not today. But one day we will once again have a majority of justices who rule based on EXISTING law, and will not be that obsessed with legislating themselves.
Click to expand...
Judges can’t legislate. There is no mechanism for them to do so. And when you say such silly and stupid shit like this, you just embarrass yourself.
Feynman Lives! said:
Off-topic here, though. Feel free to comment where it IS the topic. Or I can move your response there because, as I said, it's very much my favorite topic.
Click to expand...
Why would being wrong on constitutional law be your favorite topic?
 
Great . Explain how semi automatic assault rifles function nechanically different than a semi automatic rifle that is NOT an assault rifle.
Surely you can explain why they are mechanically different and thus they should be treated differently.

As far as your proposals?
Surely you have a better way of enforcing your magazine sales ban than relying on wives to inform on their husbands?
Perhaps you could explain how a wife would know it’s a high capacity magazine since they look identical.
Explain how she knows it was sold and who it was sold to ?
 
rahl said:
I’m not aware of any legislation passed by Congress called “heller legislation”.
Click to expand...
Because it wasn't. It was passed by the Supreme Court. And, BTW, the Supreme Court CAN pass legislation. We just wish they didn't. And only the most activist ones (and the Roberts Supreme Court is probably the most activist of all) actually do it. But there is nothing to impede it.

Anyway.... you have the link. If you have anything to comment about that topic, do it there. If you just want to rant about it here... you're on your own.
 
jaeger19 said:
Only because you articulate this fear you have of something you call “ the gun violence crisis “.

Well so what? According to you they have nothing to fear , nor do you so what’s the big deal?
Click to expand...
You now finally are being honest about the underlying motivation of firearm promotion.
You seem to have difficulty with reading. Firearms represent a risk factor that need to be modulated by better law.
jaeger19 said:
How do we know it’s irrational? Because despite your claim there is a “vicious cycle of violence” causing a crisis”?
You feel perfectly safe going out and about in the us.
Click to expand...
Yep. I feel safe and choose de-escalation rather than senseless aggression.
Firearms have made interpersonal conflict more dangerous in America. Everyone (almost) with impulse control, paranoia or general angst can now express their inner struggle with a firearm.
jaeger19 said:
You cannot see your intellectual disconnect . But we all do.
Click to expand...
Those who cannot understand the impact of firearms on Americans are clearly those who are disconnected.
 
jaeger19 said:
Great . Explain how semi automatic assault rifles function nechanically different than a semi automatic rifle that is NOT an assault rifle.
Surely you can explain why they are mechanically different and thus they should be treated differently.
Click to expand...
Defined in federal regulation. Do your reading.
If you cannot understand the concept of assault weapon, learn about tactical rifle or MSR (modern sporting rifle).
However, the only thing we can depend upon is that you will try to blur the differences as a method of promotion of firearms that are the favorite of mass, rampage shooters.
 
Feynman Lives! said:
Because it wasn't.
Click to expand...
Then when you say heller legislation, you are just trying to look silly.
Feynman Lives! said:
It was passed by the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...
You need to go back and take a 6th grade civics class.
Feynman Lives! said:
And, BTW, the Supreme Court CAN pass legislation.
Click to expand...

I’ve refuted your position on that already.
 
Spock said:
You now finally are being honest about the underlying motivation of firearm promotion.
Click to expand...
What the heck are you talking about,
?
You first day there is this “ crisis” of people being in danger.
Then you say that there is nothing to fear. Which is it
Spock said:
You seem to have difficulty with reading. Firearms represent a risk factor that need to be modulated by better law.
Click to expand...
Which is it? Do they represent a danger to you so they need to be regulated more .
If so, then why do you say you feel safe and having fear of someone with a firearm is irrational?

Spock said:
Yep. I feel safe and choose de-escalation rather than senseless aggression.
Click to expand...
Great. So if you feel safe and are safe. Why are you so worried about whether I and millions of law abiding Americans have firearms.???

Spock said:
Firearms have made interpersonal conflict more dangerous in America. Everyone (almost) with impulse control, paranoia or general angst can now express their inner struggle with a firearm.
Click to expand...
Yet you say you are safe. So apparently people are NOT “ expressing their inner struggle” with a firearm.
Spock said:
Those who cannot understand the impact of firearms on Americans are clearly those who are disconnected.
Click to expand...
Well . Perhaps the people who are trying to explain this “ impact “
Didn’t refute their own arguments by stating first firearms make the us less safe and then the next minute say they feel safe in a country with tens of millions of firearms owners and firearms.

You can imagine I question a patient who says they need pain medication because their back is hurting terribly.
Then with every test of their back they say. “ nope my back doesn’t hurt. I don’t have any pain in my back”.

Lmao.
 
Spock said:
You now finally are being honest about the underlying motivation of firearm promotion.
Click to expand...
What the heck are you talking about,
?
You first day there is this “ crisis” of people being in danger.
Then you say that there is nothing to fear. Which is it
Spock said:
You seem to have difficulty with reading. Firearms represent a risk factor that need to be modulated by better law.
Click to expand...
Which is it? Do they represent a danger to you so they need to be regulated more .
If so, then why do you say you feel safe and having fear of someone with a firearm is irrational?

Spock said:
Yep. I feel safe and choose de-escalation rather than senseless aggression.
Click to expand...
Great. So if you feel safe and are safe. Why are you so worried about whether I and millions of law abiding Americans have firearms.???

Spock said:
Firearms have made interpersonal conflict more dangerous in America. Everyone (almost) with impulse control, paranoia or general angst can now express their inner struggle with a firearm.
Click to expand...
Yet you say you are safe. So apparently people are NOT “ expressing their inner struggle” with a firearm.
Spock said:
Those who cannot understand the impact of firearms on Americans are clearly those who are disconnected.
Click to expand...
Well . Perhaps the people who are trying to explain this “ impact “
Didn’t refute their own arguments by stating first firearms make the us less safe and then the next minute say they feel safe in a country with tens of millions of firearms owners and firearms.

You can imagine I question a patient who says they need pain medication because their back is hurting terribly.
Then with every test of their back they say. “ nope my back doesn’t hurt. I don’t have any pain in my back”.

Lmao
 
Spock said:
Defined in federal regulation. Do your reading.
If you cannot understand the concept of assault weapon, learn about tactical rifle or MSR (modern sporting rifle).
Click to expand...
Nope not defined in the reading. Please explain the mechanical operation difference between a semi automatic rifle and this “ assault rifle.
All I see are cosmetic differences.
Spock said:
However, the only thing we can depend upon is that you will try to blur the differences as a method of promotion of firearms that are the favorite of mass, rampage shooters.
Click to expand...
Mass shooters seem to prefer handguns.
“Notably, most individuals who engaged in mass shootings used handguns (77.2%), and 25.1% used assault rifles in the commission of their crimes”

Public Mass Shootings: Database Amasses Details of a Half Century of U.S. Mass Shootings with Firearms, Generating Psychosocial Histories

Persons who committed public mass shootings in the U.S. over the last half century were commonly troubled by personal trauma before their shooting incidents, nearly always in a state of crisis at the time, and, in most cases, engaged in leaking their plans before opening fire. Most were insiders...
nij.ojp.gov

Facts are just not your friend Spock.
 
Try to stay on topic rather than introducing irrelevant conditions or statements.
Let's simplify this fear issue that you seem to struggle with:
Why to people possess firearms for self-defense?
Rampage shootings are not just any shooting with 5 dead or injured, which is the common mass shooting definition. I am addressing the rampage attacks- high volume multiple dead and injured often involving strangers.
"weapon of choice" is a generic and illustrative term that captures the best available tool for those intent on rampage shootings
I am sure that handguns are used more often for any multiple causality situation.
Are you concerned about handguns or just intent on quibbling?

The AR-15 is the Weapon of Choice for Mass Shooters. It’s Time to Reinstate the Bipartisan Congressional Assault Weapons Ban.

Moms Demand Action and Students Demand Action Volunteers Holding Mothers Day Events This Weekend Calling for Reinstating Assault Weapons Ban New Everytown Polling Shows 65% of Americans Support Assault Weapons …
www.everytown.org
 

You're concerned about what may be the rarest category of murders...which are already rare.

 
jaeger19 said:
Nope not defined in the reading. Please explain the mechanical operation difference between a semi automatic rifle and this “ assault rifle.
All I see are cosmetic differences.
Click to expand...
Look at the statute.
I cannot and will not rationalize your confusion. If you really cannot make the distinction, you should not object to banning assault weapons as defined.

 
Last edited:
RF667799 said:
You're concerned about what may be the rarest category of murders...which are already rare.
Click to expand...
In other words, you think that hundreds of preventable deaths and injuries is acceptable.
 
Spock said:
In other words, you think that hundreds of preventable deaths and injuries is acceptable.
Click to expand...

Satisfying your personal bias is no way to prevent them.

However, we do accept even millions of deaths and injuries when the alternative is to give up Constitutional rights, civil liberties, and the many benefits of useful consumer items.
 
Now that SCOTUS has ruled that lower courts can't stop executive orders that infringe on the constitution, this is all going to get way more entertaining, next dem administration.
 
Hamish Howl said:
Now that SCOTUS has ruled that lower courts can't stop executive orders that infringe on the constitution, this is all going to get way more entertaining, next dem administration.
Click to expand...

It's not already entertaining to watch several successive lower courts alternate between "Nope Unconstitutional" and "Yep. Constitutional"?
 
RF667799 said:
Satisfying your personal bias is no way to prevent them.

However, we do accept even millions of deaths and injuries when the alternative is to give up Constitutional rights, civil liberties, and the many benefits of useful consumer items.
Click to expand...
In other words, no amount of preventable death and injury or cost would justify actions to reduce firearm access that might lead to rampage killings?
 
Spock said:
In other words, no amount of preventable death and injury or cost would justify actions to reduce firearm access that might lead to rampage killings?
Click to expand...

Strawman fallacious argument, often signalled by "in other words". Rejected on that basis.

How about you stick to my words?
 
Spock said:
Try to stay on topic rather than introducing irrelevant conditions or statements.
Let's simplify this fear issue that you seem to struggle with:
Why to people possess firearms for self-defense?
Click to expand...
I possess them mainly to protect my livestock from coyotes and wolves and the occasional mountain lion.
I also use them for self protection from bears when I am archery hunting.
Occasionally I will carry when I am going to stay late in a clinic in a sketchy neighborhood where there has been knife attacks.
So what?
You claimed the weapon of choice was an “ assault weapon”
When the data shows mass shooters far and away choose handguns by a huge margin.
Spock said:
I am sure that handguns are used more often for any multiple causality situation.
Are you concerned about handguns or just intent on quibbling?
Click to expand...
Just pointing out how your irrational fear of weapons you call “ assault weapons” is further unfounded.
Everytown is lying as the data shows
 
It's sort of been proven that Semi Auto firearms are more accurate than Automatics per 100 rounds fired.
Bolt Action more accurate than Semi-Automatic per 100 rounds fired.
Wait for it. Yep Single round fired firearm is most accurate per 100 rounds fired, except for,
................................................. ............... ......................... .......... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .. .. .. .. . . "wait for it" ----- Was 100?

Was Lee Harvey Oswald the first public assassin with a bolt-action rifle a Texan?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…