• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • 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!

Its Just a FORM nonsense

Rucker61 said:
I believe we were comparing mass shooting data between the US and Europe. Keep moving the goal posts.
Click to expand...

You introduced the relative European terrorism figures and I showed the US gun figures over the same period so please try to keep up
 
flogger said:
You introduced the relative European terrorism figures and I showed the US gun figures over the same period so please try to keep up
Click to expand...

Terrorists and spree killers using guns in mass shootings in Europe since 2014 outnumber our spree and terrorist mass shootings since 2014.
 
Rucker61 said:
We know that registration won't work here in the US.
Click to expand...

Of course it would work were it made nationwide. Other nations clearly demonstrate this

I'm curious about your definition of "ban all second hand gun sales". Does this mean that a lawful gun owner will never be able to sell a gun to anyone else, that he/she must sell it to a licensed gun dealer, or that all such sales must go through a gun dealer for a background check? Is there a different meaning that I'm missing?
Click to expand...

No it just means they can't sell their guns to anyone

Did any other developed country start with one gun per person and a Constitution that protects the individual right to keep and bear arms? Did any of these countries start with the same culture that the US has?
Click to expand...

No they started out by acknowledging the inherent lethality of firearms and sanity took over from there
 
TurtleDude said:
so what you are saying is that right now guns cannot be banned YET, but you want to start the process of getting close to that being a reality

so why should any gun owner agree to anything you suggest when it comes to our rights?
Click to expand...

People like you want the legal facility to end life more easily than we can so I guess you are right
 
Last edited:
Checking my ammo count now for the upcoming disaster that may hit. Nothing crazy. Just 3 mags of 9 and a box of 25 for my .357. Plus 5 buckshot 20 gauge and a lot of birdshot for 20 and 12 gauge:

Everything is in working order. Don't think I will need it. But there are some ****ty people out there.




The crowd is not the sum of its parts.

I am a republican who did not vote for Trump (Or Hillary).
Click to expand...
 
flogger said:
Of course it would work were it made nationwide. Other nations clearly demonstrate this
Click to expand...

Not Canada. Not Germany. Not the UK. They all had registration efforts that failed to comprehensively register firearms. We've already seen that gun owners in the bluest of states, Connecticut and New York, refused to comply with registration under threat of severe punishment. It's unlikely that the red states would be more compliant, and very unlikely that state and local law enforcement would enforce that law.

No it just means they can't sell their guns to anyone
Click to expand...

Still ambiguous: can't sell to "just anyone" or can never ever sell a firearm once purchased?

No they started out by acknowledging the inherent lethality of firearms and sanity took over from there
Click to expand...

We know that guns are lethal. We have a constitutional right to own them that's unique in the world. We know that the laws you suggest for the US aren't Constitutional, effective, enforceable or would be enforced. I remember that you've admitted that the Canadian model would work best for the US, so please stop comparing the US to the UK or anyone else in Europe. Compare our laws to their laws, and our crime to their crime, if you're honest enough to.
 
flogger said:
People like you want the legal facility to end life more easily than we can so I guess you are right
Click to expand...

By the same token we can protect life more easily.
 
flogger said:
People like you want the legal facility to end life more easily than we can so I guess you are right
Click to expand...

which is why cops carry handguns isn't it? Yes, one of the uses of a firearm is to allow someone who is smaller, weaker, or outnumbered to be able to defend themselves from a violent, life threatening attack. We note you want criminals to be safe from their victims being able to counter attack
 
Rucker61 said:
By the same token we can protect life more easily.
Click to expand...

He never seems to be able to admit, let alone understand, that gun bans are MOST likely to disarm victims and LEAST likely to disarm criminals who already break OTHER laws. Given how many times he has been educated on that fact, the only rational conclusion is that he wants criminals to be safer
 
vegas giants said:
But why have a driver's license at all? Can you prove they reduce accidents?
Click to expand...

They don't reduce accidents and that was not their primary intention, in fact, vehicle registration preceded driver registration.

Traffic management, road maintenance, expanded police departments, and new construction ate up large segments of municipal budgets, and cities looked for new sources of revenue to cope with the presence of motor vehicles.
Click to expand...

America on the Move | Licensing Cars and Drivers
 
vegas giants said:
They why do people have to take a practical AND written test to get one?
Click to expand...

To show that they have a basic understanding of traffic rules, can see well enough to drive and have the physical skills (of a ten year old?) to operate a car. Like most "user fees" they are mainly just a source of revenue for the government. Note that retesting is rarely required so what you knew up to 40 or 50 years ago with some more cash, of course, is generally good enough to renew a driver's license for life.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
To show that they have a basic understanding of traffic rules, can see well enough to drive and have the physical skills (of a ten year old?) to operate a car. Like most "user fees" they are mainly just a source of revenue for the government. Note that retesting is rarely required so what you knew up to 40 or 50 years ago with some more cash, of course, is generally good enough to renew a driver's license for life.
Click to expand...

So you think that is done not to reduce accidents? Why are the military and LEO's required to be trained and qualify on a weapon but it is self explanatory for everyone else?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
To show that they have a basic understanding of traffic rules, can see well enough to drive and have the physical skills (of a ten year old?) to operate a car. Like most "user fees" they are mainly just a source of revenue for the government. Note that retesting is rarely required so what you knew up to 40 or 50 years ago with some more cash, of course, is generally good enough to renew a driver's license for life.
Click to expand...

I got my first driver's license in 1977. I've never taken another one, nor been required to. I can use that license to drive cars capable of surpassing 200 mph on any highway in any state in the US 40 years after being testing to drive. If I bought a gun in 1979 when I turned 18, could I use that 4473 to continue to buy any gun? Could I use the results of a BGC in 1999 to buy any gun without further checks?
 
Rucker61 said:
I got my first driver's license in 1977. I've never taken another one, nor been required to. I can use that license to drive cars capable of surpassing 200 mph on any highway in any state in the US 40 years after being testing to drive. If I bought a gun in 1979 when I turned 18, could I use that 4473 to continue to buy any gun? Could I use the results of a BGC in 1999 to buy any gun without further checks?
Click to expand...

Your drivers license is rebewed every five years and it is checked at that time for any suspensions or revocations
 
vegas giants said:
So you think that is done not to reduce accidents? Why are the military and LEO's required to be trained and qualify on a weapon but it is self explanatory for everyone else?
Click to expand...

Government agency liability. Training reduces that. Why do you need something that basic explained?
 
vegas giants said:
Your drivers license is rebewed every five years and it is checked at that time for any suspensions or revocations
Click to expand...

Driver's license is a red herring in this discussion, its a privilege not a guaranteed right.
 
vegas giants said:
So you think that is done not to reduce accidents? Why are the military and LEO's required to be trained and qualify on a weapon but it is self explanatory for everyone else?
Click to expand...

The same reason that a homeowner can buy and use many "professional" tools without any special formal training yet government agencies and many private companies instruct and/or train their employees on preferred tool use techniques. Safety is one of many aspects of tool use training but tool inspection and maintenance of company tools are also stressed.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The same reason that a homeowner can buy and use many "professional" tools without any special formal training yet government agencies and many private companies instruct and/or train their employees on preferred tool use techniques. Safety is one of many aspects of tool use training but tool inspection and maintenance of company tools are also stressed.
Click to expand...

Everyone using a gun for the first time needs training. Everyone. That is a simple fact. To suggest they are self explanatory and hope you just get it on your own is ridiculous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom