• 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!

Just another mass shooting.

noonereal said:
That is my point. You can't shoot back if someone is holding a gun to your head already. Duh
The criminal knows he is going to victimize you so he is at the ready before you know what time it is.

The idea that your gun protects you is so ****in stupid. If it would, I'd carry one. Duh

But I base decisions on intellectual.
Click to expand...
That makes no sense and is a gut buster on top of that
 
Spirit of The Millennium said:
Well there is the problem that many murderers have never committed a felony before (or at least, never been caught) and there are also people who bought a gun when they were of sound mind, but their mental health declined. Background checks don't catch these people. But mental health in particular deserves the strictest protections of privacy. So ... no solution from me. Just outlining a problem.

It may surprise you to know I support Florida's three strike law. I don't usually support heavy escalation of charges, but where a gun is involved it is justified to save lives.
Click to expand...
In a free society, some crimes might occur that would not in a dictatorship. But dictatorships kill far more people
 
TurtleDude said:
funny that you want to blame me for gun deaths and you argue the crap you want to enact is sensible when all it does is protect violent criminals. For someone who has IIRC-glorified recreational drug use, I would note that those buying narcotics (and if you never claimed to have done that I will apologize in advance), I would note that contributes far more to violence than lawful gun ownership

I won't defend people who deserved to be shot. and I won't accept any blame for wrongful shootings since I have never done that
Click to expand...
I don't blame you for gun deaths, I said you defend them as your right to own a gun. I used to do heroin, did I ever tell you the story of how I was robbed at gunpoint by two cops or the story of my cop cousin who was so methed up he hung himself up on a fence chasing a 'criminal'? I'll have you know in my over twenty years of drug addiction, not once did I ever hurt anyone, mostly I worked for my money.

I don't blame you for shooting people, I blame you for your unwillingness to change anything about firearms because of your beloved second amendment. Guns before lives.
 
noonereal said:
That is my point. You can't shoot back if someone is holding a gun to your head already. Duh
Click to expand...
Non sequitur
noonereal said:
The criminal knows he is going to victimize you so he is at the ready before you know what time it is.

The idea that your gun protects you is so ****in stupid. If it would, I'd carry one. Duh

But I base decisions on intellectual.
Click to expand...
Your argument is weak. In most mass shootings the shooter shoots at random, he doesn't hold a gun to anyone's head.
 
TurtleDude said:
It doesn't bother me at all-it shows me that you have nothing to add and are incapable of actually arguing a point. You clearly think posting all these pictures is going to shame gun owners. Sorry, I don't take blame for stuff I didn't do. We punish murder rather harshly in the USA. The killer is dead.
Click to expand...
Notice how he always runs pictures of pretty little blonds shot by a boyfriend, or some wife shot by her husband? But yet never a picture of a wife that shot an abusive husband.
 
Spirit of The Millennium said:
It's absolutely not. Gun rights people are always reminding us that mass shootings are a small percentage of all shootings, and we shouldn't make gun law based on trying to minimize mass shootings.

So why would you possibly object to @CaughtInThe trying to provide some balance now?

Because you don't want anyone talking about shootings at all, perhaps?

Or maybe @CaughtInThe got in before you could say "mass shootings are quite rare, and over sensationalized" ...
Click to expand...
Because he does it lop sided.
 
zsu2357 said:
Notice how he always runs pictures of pretty little blonds shot by a boyfriend, or some wife shot by her husband? But yet never a picture of a wife that shot an abusive husband.
Click to expand...
Meh. Are your fingers broken?
 
noonereal said:
That is my point. You can't shoot back if someone is holding a gun to your head already. Duh
The criminal knows he is going to victimize you so he is at the ready before you know what time it is.

The idea that your gun protects you is so ****in stupid. If it would, I'd carry one. Duh

But I base decisions on intellectual.
Click to expand...
A lot of good that "intellectual" does you leaking out on the ground/floor or splattered on a wall.
 
zsu2357 said:
Or the wife or girl friend that "gunned" down him down in self-defense.
Click to expand...
if you can find those i encourage you to post them as well. it would be interesting to compare.
 
Bullseye said:
And how'd it go for the folks that didn't shoot back. Fact is that security guard MAY have prevents others from being shot.
Click to expand...

There is no reason to think for one second people who were just SHOPPING should be even remotely criticized for not having guns.

The only victim who did anything wrong obviously was the one who DID shoot back. :mad:

When will you e4ver care about the victims and their families?
 
zsu2357 said:
Notice how he always runs pictures of pretty little blonds shot by a boyfriend, or some wife shot by her husband? But yet never a picture of a wife that shot an abusive husband.
Click to expand...
or a crack ho who shot her pimp?
 
Patriotic Voter said:
There is no reason to think for one second people who were just SHOPPING should be even remotely criticized for not having guns.

The only victim who did anything wrong obviously was the one who DID shoot back. :mad:

When will you e4ver care about the victims and their families?
Click to expand...
so you are saying the guard who shot back did something wrong? wow that is really warped
 
noonereal said:
We need more guns then we can have more impressive casualty numbers.
Click to expand...

Yeah, we might even get to something like an alcohol-level death toll.
 
bongsaway said:
What do you think you accomplish with your staunch support of firearms? I've said it before and I'll say it again, as far as you are concerned, your second amendment rights trump any amount of shooting deaths in your mind. Any attempt at gun control to you is an affront to your rights no matter how sensible. You will defend a gun before you defend a human shot by one.
Click to expand...

How many people have to die because of alcohol before you'll agree that it's time to repeal the 21st amendment?
 
TurtleDude said:
funny that you want to blame me for gun deaths and you argue the crap you want to enact is sensible when all it does is protect violent criminals. For someone who has IIRC-glorified recreational drug use, I would note that those buying narcotics (and if you never claimed to have done that I will apologize in advance), I would note that contributes far more to violence than lawful gun ownership

I won't defend people who deserved to be shot. and I won't accept any blame for wrongful shootings since I have never done that
Click to expand...

People who buy narcotics are contributing to gun violence and deserve to be shot?

That's so wrong. The government which bans recreational drugs — denying traffickers and dealers legal protection when violent criminals rob them or try to extract protection money from them — are to blame for the violence. Drug users would obviously prefer to buy drugs in a shop than to deal with criminals.

America should learn from the experience of the Netherlands, where legalization in too small a country with open borders led to an influx of crime. Drugs should be legalized NATIONALLY not state by state.
 
Spirit of The Millennium said:
People who buy narcotics are contributing to gun violence and deserve to be shot?

That's so wrong. The government which bans recreational drugs — denying traffickers and dealers legal protection when violent criminals rob them or try to extract protection money from them — are to blame for the violence. Drug users would obviously prefer to buy drugs in a shop than to deal with criminals.

America should learn from the experience of the Netherlands, where legalization in too small a country with open borders led to an influx of crime. Drugs should be legalized NATIONALLY not state by state.
Click to expand...
wow. a swing and a big MISS
 
Patriotic Voter said:
There is no reason to think for one second people who were just SHOPPING should be even remotely criticized for not having guns.
Click to expand...
Nope, no uncalled for criticism intended, But if state laws allowed it a few shoots thrown back at the shooter might have had an effect.
Patriotic Voter said:
The only victim who did anything wrong obviously was the one who DID shoot back. :mad:

When will you e4ver care about the victims and their families?
Click to expand...
I care every damn time. Particularly when local posturing officials, bragging on "gun control measures" cost citizens their lives.
 
Tlrmln said:
Yeah, we might even get to something like an alcohol-level death toll.
Click to expand...

How alcohol-related deaths are measured is controversial. They are huge by any measure though.
 
TurtleDude said:
wow. a swing and a big MISS
Click to expand...

Make your case for Philippines style "war on druggies" then.

The only people who deserve to be shot are those committing a serious crime. Buying drugs for one's own consumption is not a serious crime and in some states isn't a crime at all.

Also consider that alcohol is by medical definition a recreational drug. OK to shoot up a bar, then?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom