• 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!

Is there anyone here that believes the founders wrote the 2nd Amendment so that America would be the shooting gallery it is today?

Since firearms are optional property with little practical use, restrictions on firearms are indicated.

That's a lie.
Of course. prohibiting men from owning or possessing firearms would go a long way to reducing the problem.

Men would still constitute the overwhelming number of murderers.

Cars are not firearms.

No shit? What was your first clue?

The practicality of cars and the low risk of injury during use far outweigh the risk. Furthermore, extreme efforts are made to improve the safety of vehicular use; not efforts have been made to make firearms safer, since they are inherently dangerous. So, to answer your question, yes, we should pass more car laws if there is a condition that can improve safety in and around vehicles.

Limiting the speeds a car can attain to 25 mph and requiring NASCAR safety gear for all occupants would virtually eliminate traffic fatalities.

That would inconvenience motor vehicle owners though, and I doubt you would support it even though you proposed it above.
 
Thank you.

IMO, there must be a 3 branch solution. Congress to write common sense gun laws (no battlefield weapons in private possession),
This would require an amendment.
Executive to issue Executive orders that drive lower personal possession of firearms,
The executive has no such power.
Courts to recognize that even individual rights are limited, and not all persons in the US should have the right to personal ownership of firearms.
This is already the case.
 
Thanks to @bongsaway for the idea of the format...

Whether you are a gun zealot or would prefer no guns in America, do you believe that the founders wrote the 2nd Amendment anticipating that America would become the most violent developed country in the world?

Congress won't do anything. The courts apparently never understood what a comma means in a phrase. Our only hope for meaningful gun safety in America appears to be in a Democrat President that is willing to grab powers denied to the Executive by law and use them.
Instead of the constant knee jerk reaction to making removal of rights the solution to everything why not figure what has changed socially or culturally in this country and deal with the root cause?
 
Instead of the constant knee jerk reaction to making removal of rights the solution to everything why not figure what has changed socially or culturally in this country and deal with the root cause?
Well violent crime peaked in 96, and then over the next 20 years it went down by over 50%. And during the same period more people became gun owners so it doesn't seem that it's related to the number of guns in the society. There has been an increase in suicides though.
 
They seem to revel in their ignorance and knowledge that is only Hollywood-level deep.
Well someone will say something like we need to ban ghost guns and they just say that these ghost guns are used in crimes and other not. So it's like a fear mongering campaign tied to misinformation.
 
Instead of the constant knee jerk reaction to making removal of rights the solution to everything why not figure what has changed socially or culturally in this country and deal with the root cause?
That would require too much work and doesn't appeal to their inner authoritarian.

What I find interesting is that the ones screaming the loudest for disarmament of civilians are also the same ones screaming that the Federal government is becoming fascist.
 
Thank you.

IMO, there must be a 3 branch solution. Congress to write common sense gun laws (no battlefield weapons in private possession), Executive to issue Executive orders that drive lower personal possession of firearms, Courts to recognize that even individual rights are limited, and not all persons in the US should have the right to personal ownership of firearms.

Btw, the bold alone made me question the knowledge of the issue at hand.

If you mean the "AR style" rifles, they're no different than many hunting rifles except that they have a different "body". But the capacity and parameters are the same.

And now more than ever I do not trust the govt with my safety, that of my family, or to have the interest or capacity to deal with it competently at all. If you want that level of oversite of public safety, they should address vehicles first. The death tolls are similar and injury tolls much higher for vehicles. (And if you look at Europe, no, we dont need the level of private ownership of cars that we have. We could change our usage AND our transportation infrastructure if we """really""" wanted to.)

Previously posted:
That makes the use of vehicles even worse, since people trying to drive safely STILL kill themselves and others regularly. Meaning apparently, vehicles cannot be operated reliably, safely under the normal, current traffic and safety laws without producing a significant death toll.
Accident or not...if laws/regulations/restrictions dont stop traffic deaths...where people are generally INTENDING to obey laws and be safe...why would they work in an environment (gun crime) where the intent is to do harm anyway?​
 
"I want it because I want it... " is the reasoning of children.

You've been given many reasons why Americans want/need guns.

You weren't owed explanations. People were trying to be polite.
 
Again, the anti-liberty side claims that since a small percent of firearms are actually used in defense (in fact it's hundreds of times more prevalent than the left acknowledges) that defense is not relevant.

It is the gun grabber "logic." If this illogic is valid, then that means that since the instance of violence with weapons is minuscule compared to defense, the instance of violence is likewise not relevant.

You want a double standard, I am denying it to you.
Your reasoning is irrational.
Why do you think 520,000 lives saved each year through defensive use of firearms is unacceptable?
Proving what didn't happen is going to be difficult for you.

BTW, 17,000 is not 40,000
Firearm deaths in the USA exceed 40,000 with an estimated 2X non-fatal injuries for an approximate 100,000 causalities yearly.
Recommendation: Stop lying about firearms in your zeal to strip others of civil rights.
Facts always seem like lies to those, such as yourself, you fail to learn, to understand the data, and to pause your entrenched bias.
 
Your reasoning is irrational.

Proving what didn't happen is going to be difficult for you.


Firearm deaths in the USA exceed 40,000 with an estimated 2X non-fatal injuries for an approximate 100,000 causalities yearly.

There you go. Pretend suicides are the same as murders. Let's talk about rope deaths.

Facts always seem like lies to those, such as yourself, you fail to learn, to understand the data, and to pause your entrenched bias.
 
"I want it because I want it... " is the reasoning of children.
Yes you can't honestly represent your opposition. This is a symptom of dishonesty. Also self centered arrogance. So please be condescending and unpleasant it's probably how people in your position have gone absolutely nowhere with your agenda.
 
There you go. Pretend suicides are the same as murders. Let's talk about rope deaths.
Que the dishonest nonsense of claiming you are making an equivalence between ropes and guns but you're actually making an equivalence between death and death.

Right spock do I have the next lines in your script correct?
 
Instead of the constant knee jerk reaction to making removal of rights the solution to everything why not figure what has changed socially or culturally in this country and deal with the root cause?
According to one nutter here the root cause is people are violent. What's your root cause?
 
That would require too much work and doesn't appeal to their inner authoritarian.
Inner authoritaian? Like MAGA supporters?
What I find interesting is that the ones screaming the loudest for disarmament of civilians are also the same ones screaming that the Federal government is becoming fascist.
Amazing! Got proof? Or are you just bloviaiting as is your custom?
 
Inner authoritaian? Like MAGA supporters?

Amazing! Got proof? Or are you just bloviaiting as is your custom?

We may be out of fish, and so your barking efforts are fruitless.
 
Back
Top Bottom