• 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 Talk To Anti Gun People

There is room for improvement.
Every time they want to pass another gun law be it fed or state that is pretty much what they say "just give us this one little improvement" and it never ends.
Large majorities of Americans are in favor of various gun control measures that would tighten up the laws, get rid of loopholes etc.
Large majorities are lied to and fed the same BS over and over and where are these polls taken? Who tabulates the numbers
because it always seems it's 90% though once in a while it's changed up to 80%.
Yep always another law waiting to tighten things up. And you gotta really love all those "loopholes" don't you? Every "loophole" begets another one, there's always a "loophole" around the corner. Who dreams that shit up?
P.S. etc. = another "loophole".
 
I agree. Gun safety should start early.
But anti gunners don't want children to be taught how to be safe .
Naturally. A child that is educated about firearms is far less likely to accidentally harm themselves or others, which is exactly the opposite of what the anti-gun crowd want. The anti-gun crowd WANT as many children to die as possible through firearms. Which is why they created these massacre magnets they call "Gun Free School Zones."
 
No, not really.

Which gun control advocates opinion is not?

You don't seem to know what their opinions are, you were wrong about their opinions in your previous post.



No, actually most Americans are for it.

Polling is clear: Americans want gun control​


That is the nuance I was talking about. Why your 'all or nothing' stance is nonsense.

The details can be worked out.


No the vast majority of Americans want universal background checks with no exceptions.
I don't know what fantasy world you are living in, but the vast majority of Americans already know that Universal Background Checks violate the US Constitution since the Supreme Court said so in 1997. Get a clue.
 
Every time they want to pass another gun law be it fed or state that is pretty much what they say "just give us this one little improvement" and it never ends.
Yes our laws are constantly being adjusted. Added to, sometimes removed. It's been that way from day one. By design. That is what the constitution designed the legislative branch to do.

Large majorities are lied to and fed the same BS over and over and where are these polls taken? Who tabulates the numbers
Yeah it's all a big deep state conspiracy.

Here's your hat.
 

Attachments

  • 6174PsFWJSL.jpg
    6174PsFWJSL.jpg
    123.1 KB · Views: 0
The science does show that.
Again..the Uvalde shooter..the parkland shooter..heck many of the mass shooters passed a background check or got around it.
Explain to me your logic of how they work then.
I wish he would explain it. But what the anti gun "people" never seem to talk about or bring up is the fact that the Parkland
shooter used 10 round magazines and not their high capacity 30 or really just standard capacity.
 
No, not really.

Which gun control advocates opinion is not?

You don't seem to know what their opinions are, you were wrong about their opinions in your previous post.



No, actually most Americans are for it.

Polling is clear: Americans want gun control​


That is the nuance I was talking about. Why your 'all or nothing' stance is nonsense.

The details can be worked out.


No the vast majority of Americans want universal background checks with no exceptions.
1. Yes actually really.
2. Well..the gun control opinions expressed here on this board..by you and others.
For example that more guns equals more crime.
As pointed out by the evidence as gun sales soared..crime went down.
Or that it's an issue with gun culture..
As the study showed..concealed weapons license holders were more law abiding.

3. No..its not clear.
If Americans truly wanted more gun control..we would have it.
But they don't. Which is evidence by when the details of your gun control comes to light..it gets killed.
Like I said..if you ask people..
Do you support increased gun control to keep guns out of the hands of the criminally insane..
Of course tge majority will say.." yes"..
Then ask them if the support making every gun owner undergo a psychological evaluation every year to see if they can continue to own guns..
And the vast vast majority that said yes to more gun control..
Will say " no".

The fact is..your nuance idea is what's nonsense.
Look..lets prove it.
You say you want to decrease gun accidents. Evidence shows that children that are given gun safety training in hunters education are less likely to have accidents.
Do you support mandatory gun safety training for school children ?
 
Yes our laws are constantly being adjusted. Added to, sometimes removed. It's been that way from day one. By design. That is what the constitution designed the legislative branch to do.


Yeah it's all a big deep state conspiracy.

Here's your hat.
Let there be a drive by in Chicago or some other [D] held city and a little kid is shot well eight out 10 times the media is all over it. However let a defensive gun use (DGU) and it's kind of oh well some one else will cover it. As in local news even if it's on the block over from mentioned drive by. Keep your hat it goes good with those rose colored glasses you got.
 
Sure. And it would make it easy for law abiding gun owners to identify them so we know who we can sell to etc.
Why should all law abiding citizens have to be kept in a database and tracked.
Rather than simply identify those ineligible. ?
There are a couple of issues, not constitutional problems, just issues. Such as, they would be identifying themselves as convicted felons whenever they were required to present an ID. Personally, I don't have a problem with that. If they didn't want to be outted as a convicted felon every time they are carded, they shouldn't have committed the crime.

There would need to be a uniform standard for all State-issued drivers licenses, which Congress has the authority to establish under Article IV, Section 1 of the US Constitution. States would need to require proof of identity before a driver's license is issued. A birth certificate must be a requirement at the minimum in order to obtain a State-issued driver's license.

I am also compelled to point out that it is not foolproof. All my firearm purchases and sales have been through private parties, and the only thing that we exchanged was cash, not our IDs. I refuse to buy firearms from those who hold unconstitutional FFLs.
 
Last edited:
Yes our laws are constantly being adjusted. Added to, sometimes removed. It's been that way from day one. By design. That is what the constitution designed the legislative branch to do.


Yeah it's all a big deep state conspiracy.

Here's your hat.

Soo..if you claim it's so popular..
Why was the assault weapons ban allowed to expire. ? Why is it that any Democrat that supports gun control in a purple state usually loses?
Why haven't there been a plethora of gun bans in the us???
 
2. Well..the gun control opinions expressed here on this board..by you and others.
Now you are just lying.

I stopped there. Didnt read the rest.

I already told you that you got my position wrong.

Now here you are saying you know my position and I don't.

If you are going to make up things for me to say, you don't need me, you are arguing with a srwaw man.

Keep lying and we are done.

 
Last edited:
There are a couple of issues, not constitutional problems, just issues. Such as, they would be identifying themselves as convicted felons whenever they were required to present an ID. Personally, I don't have a problem with that. If they didn't want to be outted as a convicted felon every time they are carded, they shouldn't have committed the crime.

There would need to be a uniform standard for all State-issued drivers licenses, which Congress has the authority to establish under Article IV, Section 1 of the US Constitution. States would need to require proof of identity before a driver's license is issued. A birth certificate must be a requirement at the minimum in order to obtain a State-issued driver's license.
Well not just felons are ineligible to own firearms.
And anyone who would be looking at I'd for purposes like employment etc..would be doing a background check anyway.

As as proof of identity. I don't know a state that doesn't require proof of identity.
 
Now you are just lying.

i stopped there. Didnt read the rest.

I already told you that you got my position wrong.

Now here you are saying you know my position and I don't.

If you are going to make up things for me to say, you don't need me, you are arguing with a srwaw man.

Keep lying and we are done.
Nope. No lie. You asked about gun control people not just specifically yourself. I answered.
But you are welcome to explain how you differ substantially from the other gun control advocates here on this board.

But face it..you won't because..well it's highly doubtful you differ substantially.

In addition you already know that the facts simy don't support gun control that most gun advocates propose..like universal background checks.
Or registration.
Or gun bans..etc..

Look we get it..you don't want to debate facts and logic.
When you want to give it a try..I'll be here.
 
Well not just felons are ineligible to own firearms.
And anyone who would be looking at I'd for purposes like employment etc..would be doing a background check anyway.
True, but bars and liquor stores are just verifying someone's age, not their criminal background. But, like I said, I don't really consider that a problem. It may be embarrassing for the convicted felon, but I don't care. It is the product of their stupid life choices.

On the other hand, it would also stop convicted felons from voting illegally if IDs were required and they included an indication that the individual was a convicted felon.

As as proof of identity. I don't know a state that doesn't require proof of identity.
I know of at least two, New York and California. Both States issue drivers licenses to illegal aliens, requiring no identification, and then they also register them to vote through their State Motor Voter law.
 
Nope. No lie.

Yeah. A lie.

You keep telling me what I think, and claiming to speak for all the other people whose positions you disagree with.

Text book straw man. Suggests you can't handle people's real positions and can't refute them.

See you. Since you know everyone's positions better than they do, just continue fighting your straw men.

Get back to me if you ever think you can handle it.
 
True, but bars and liquor stores are just verifying someone's age, not their criminal background. But, like I said, I don't really consider that a problem. It may be embarrassing for the convicted felon, but I don't care. It is the product of their stupid life choices.

On the other hand, it would also stop convicted felons from voting illegally if IDs were required and they included an indication that the individual was a convicted felon.


I know of at least two, New York and California. Both States issue drivers licenses to illegal aliens, requiring no identification, and then they also register them to vote through their State Motor Voter law.
NY requires proof of identity.

So does California.
 
NY requires proof of identity.

So does California.
No, they do not. Which is why they cannot be used to board interstate flights. Neither State complies with the REAL ID requirements established by Congress. The New York DMV even states this fact right up front: Standard licenses and permits are not federally compliant and will be marked "NOT FOR FEDERAL PURPOSES."

Those IDs would also not cut the mustard in Alaska either. You would have 30 days to replace them with a valid Alaska driver's license, which does require a birth certificate and only issues driver's licenses to US citizens and lawful resident non-citizens.
 
Yeah. A lie.

You keep telling me what I think, and claiming to speak for all the other people whose positions you disagree with.

Text book straw man. Suggests you can't handle people's real positions and can't refute them.

See you. Since you know everyone's positions better than they do, just continue fighting your straw men.

Get back to me if you ever think you can handle it.
Nope ..not telling you what you think.
In fact I JUST ASKED YOU TO PROVIDE HOW YOUR POSITIONS DIFFER SUBSTANTIALLY FROM THE OTHER GUN CONTROL ADVOCATES ON THIS FORUM.

Yet instead of stating your position. As I asked you to do.. ..you went on a strawman rant.
When you want to debate facts and logic I will be here.

Let's hear it..I most certainly can handle it. It's not like you are the first...lol..
 
No, they do not. Which is why they cannot be used to board interstate flights. Neither State complies with the REAL ID requirements established by Congress. The New York DMV even states this fact right up front: Standard licenses and permits are not federally compliant and will be marked "NOT FOR FEDERAL PURPOSES."
Yes they do require proof if identity.
And most states don't fully comply with real id..they often have a state driver's license to drive..and then issue an enhanced one that meets the federal requirements.
Both require proof of identity. It's simply that real id requirements are much more stringent..
 
Yes they do require proof if identity.
And most states don't fully comply with real id..they often have a state driver's license to drive..and then issue an enhanced one that meets the federal requirements.
Both require proof of identity. It's simply that real id requirements are much more stringent..
We are not talking about the same thing.

Alaska's DMV: "You must bring documents to verify your name, lawful status, and physical address."
California DMV: "What's your name?"

Asking someone their name is not proof of identity no matter how you try to spin it.
 
Now you are just lying.
How would you know since you didn't read it?
I stopped there. Didnt read the rest.
Now it's becoming clear why you seem to be off topic. You read one or two sentences and call it good and reply.
I already told you that you got my position wrong.
Says he that answers without reading.
Now here you are saying you know my position and I don't.
Shit I bet you don't even read my reply. I would say your position is you're against private firearm ownership and want to ramp up gun laws since they aren't going away. Is that your position? Or did I read somewhere you had a .357 or something?
If you are going to make up things for me to say, you don't need me, you are arguing with a srwaw man.
You said you didn't read it so how would you know? Quite frankly if I wrote/typed that piece I'd be pissed.
Keep lying and we are done.
See above.
 

How To Talk To Anti Gun People​


Why should we have to?
 
We are not talking about the same thing.

Alaska's DMV: "You must bring documents to verify your name, lawful status, and physical address."
California DMV: "What's your name?"

Asking someone their name is not proof of identity no matter how you try to spin it.
Proof of your name is proof of your name.
I was born in NY. I had a ny drivers license well before any " REAL ID" was proposed and I had to show documents proving my identity..they didn't just .." ask me my name". As you claim.

By tge way..the atf does not require a person to have a star card as proof of identity either when buying a firearm.
 
How would you know since you didn't read it?

Now it's becoming clear why you seem to be off topic. You read one or two sentences and call it good and reply.

Says he that answers without reading.

Shit I bet you don't even read my reply. I would say your position is you're against private firearm ownership and want to ramp up gun laws since they aren't going away. Is that your position? Or did I read somewhere you had a .357 or something?

You said you didn't read it so how would you know? Quite frankly if I wrote/typed that piece I'd be pissed.

See above.
Lol.

You jumped in too late. The exchange didn't start with that post.

If you are going to jump in at least familiarize yourself with the conversation first.....you know.....so you don't make a fool of yourself.

But I am sure he appreciates your 'big brother' protection though.
 
Lol.

You jumped in too late. The exchange didn't start with that post.

If you are going to jump in at least familiarize toyrself with the conversation first.....you know.....so you don't make a fool of yourself.

But i amm sure he appreciates your big brother backing though.
I am ready any time you are..
Lets hear how your position differs substantially from any of the gun control advocates that have posted on dp.
 
We are not talking about the same thing.

Alaska's DMV: "You must bring documents to verify your name, lawful status, and physical address."
California DMV: "What's your name?"

Asking someone their name is not proof of identity no matter how you try to spin it.
Sounds like OR. I get reams of paperwork and the illegal is basically asked just that. Gotta get them voters registered.
 
Back
Top Bottom