• 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!

K. Harris is what we need to stop gun violence.

She knows the problem and has a plan at hand:



Kamala Harris pitches gun control targeting white nationalists



Kamala Harris Proposes Executive Orders on Gun Control - The New York Times

We definitely need a new sheriff in our country, a gun czar, who will not be intimidated by the pro-gun fanatics/lobby.

We definitely need to beef up:

Background checks
Close Loopholes
Seize firearms for criminals
More severe penalties for law breakers
Create regulations for gun manufacturers.

It is quite a crisis that will likely require executive orders.
We have most of this already.
 
What we need is gun manufacturers to create a weapon that isn't so easy to modify. A weapon that can be easily modified to become an automatic weapon, is no longer by definition a semi-automatic weapon. By definition and law thus, those semi-automatic weapons need to be classified as an automatic weapon and be banned like other automatic weapons.
Ummm that’s been the law since 1934. The National Firearms Act definition of a machine gun is “Firearms within the definition of machinegun include weapons that shoot, are designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot without manual reloading by a single function of the trigger.”
Semi-automatic weapons currently on the market cannot be easily converted to full auto and making/selling any kit that could convert one is considered manufacturing a machine gun.
 
By that logic, people that get lung cancer from cigs, it is there fault completely right?

No tobacco company has ever been successfully sued because cigarettes cause lung cancer. They have been successfully sued for lying and/or misleading consumers about the dangers. There’s a difference
 
Complete nonsense. Literally nothing you wrote there is accurate, except perhaps the pro-cop part. By the way, most cops, except the authoritarian jerks, have no problem with civilians lawfully carrying firearms.

You guys are in for a rude awakening in a few months.
 
You guys are in for a rude awakening in a few months.

If the judge is anything other than a flaming political hack, he'll throw the case out on summary judgment. I wish I could be there for the oral arguments on Remington's motion.
 
For every victim of gun violence, there should 1 lawsuit against a gun manufacturer. Again, drown them into litigation, force them to file bankruptcy.
This is precisely the bull**** that brought about the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act in the first place.

And thank heavens for it. It protects the people who manufacture firearms from crippling lawsuits brought about by ideologically driven imbeciles.
 
Well she is certainly fond of throwing black people in jail, so sure she might help clean up Chicago and Detroit on paper.
Don't forget, she's also fond of fighting against the ability of black people on death row to obtain DNA testing to prove their innocence!
 
The gun lobby has been doing everything in there power to turn the United States in the Wild Wild West.
If this is true, then they've been failing spectacularly. Who knew all it would actually take to do that was some pissed off BLM twatwaffles with "repurposed" barricades and a lax mayor to set up CHOPistan?
 
Not trolling, but think about it. The United States bans kinder eggs because it has a non-nutritive object which can be a potential choking hazard.

Banning toys in chocolate fine but not a gun that can be modified? Ridiculous.

You have a point. I agree that banning toys inside of chocolate eggs is absolutely ridiculous. In today's nanny-state scenario, warning labels are considered to be adequate to manage the health risks for those consumers who might not be aware of the choking hazard. This is how small toy risks are regularly managed.
 
She knows the problem and has a plan at hand:



Kamala Harris pitches gun control targeting white nationalists



Kamala Harris Proposes Executive Orders on Gun Control - The New York Times

We definitely need a new sheriff in our country, a gun czar, who will not be intimidated by the pro-gun fanatics/lobby.

We definitely need to beef up:

Background checks
Close Loopholes
Seize firearms for criminals
More severe penalties for law breakers
Create regulations for gun manufacturers.

It is quite a crisis that will likely require executive orders.

the majority of your list is unconstitutional. There are no loopholes. felons are already prohibited from possessing firearms. gun manufacturers already have regulations.
 
We the people should be able to sue gun manufacturers, particularly victims of gun violence. Just like in 1999 when the government, yes the government sued Tobacco companies on behalf of sick smokers.

Or just like there was a lawsuit against J&J regarding Talcum powder and baby powder which causes ovarian cancer.

The gun industry needs to be held liable.

the gun industry didn't use a firearm in an illegal manner. a criminal did. gun manufacturers can't be held liable for the actions of someone else. Just like ford can't be held liable for someone using their vehicle in a vehicular homicide.
 
By that logic, people that get lung cancer from cigs, it is there fault completely right?

yes. they know prior to lighting that first cigarette, that tobacco smoking can lead to cancer.
 
more politics, politricks, by the gun lobby.

It seems they have brainwashed you good eh?

The fact is in 2005, the gun lobby pressured congress to pass a controversial law to give unprecedented legal immunity to gun manufacturers. It is called blanket immunity. Not even pharmaceuticals or tobacco industries have this type of immunity.

What we need is gun manufacturers to create a weapon that isn't so easy to modify. A weapon that can be easily modified to become an automatic weapon, is no longer by definition a semi-automatic weapon. By definition and law thus, those semi-automatic weapons need to be classified as an automatic weapon and be banned like other automatic weapons.

What we need is mountains and mountains of lawsuits and litigation against gun manufacturers. Bury them in paperwork until they cannot breathe. The more documents unearthed will immobilize the gun lobby and finally turn the tide.

firearms are extremely difficult to modify to full auto. And such modifications are already illegal. you can't sue a manufacturer for someone misusing or illegally using their product.
 
She knows the problem and has a plan at hand:



Kamala Harris pitches gun control targeting white nationalists



Kamala Harris Proposes Executive Orders on Gun Control - The New York Times

We definitely need a new sheriff in our country, a gun czar, who will not be intimidated by the pro-gun fanatics/lobby.

We definitely need to beef up:

Background checks
Close Loopholes
Seize firearms for criminals
More severe penalties for law breakers
Create regulations for gun manufacturers.

It is quite a crisis that will likely require executive orders.

Seize firearms for criminals. Well Bucky I couldn't agree more on that point you make. The rest of it she is pandering for votes from the people like you. UNinformed.
 
=rickc;1072443070]Really

Spends a lot of time watching the Young Turks et al.

How many guns do you own?

Does a cheap ass BB gun count?

How often do you go to a gun range?

Every time he's on You Tube.

Ever been to any of the myriad of gun competitions?

Maybe on You Tube again.

I believe your perception of guns and gun owners is quite warped.

He knows exactly what the anti gun crowd tells him. BOO GUNS BOOOO.
 
Perhaps because I am more cultured. I don't partake in shooting tin cans.

The people that shoot guns probably find enjoyment in watching bugs get zapped in the zapper.

Actually I am more into pulling wings off flies, if you must know.
 
Seize firearms for criminals. Well Bucky I couldn't agree more on that point you make. The rest of it she is pandering for votes from the people like you. UNinformed.

Is it that difficult to support a government that works?
 
That's exactly what a tobacco executive would say!

cigarettes cause harm to the user when used as intended. Firearms do not

its moronic to support someone being able to sue Bushmaster because some nutcase killed an owner of such a rifle and stole the rifle and then killed a bunch of children.
 
cigarettes cause harm to the user when used as intended. Firearms do not

its moronic to support someone being able to sue Bushmaster because some nutcase killed an owner of such a rifle and stole the rifle and then killed a bunch of children.

I have proof firearms do cause harm to the intended user. Just like we have regulations against gambling.

An addicted gambler can sue a casino, why shouldn't a victim of gun violence sue the gun manufacturer?
 
I have proof firearms do cause harm to the intended user. Just like we have regulations against gambling.

An addicted gambler can sue a casino, why shouldn't a victim of gun violence sue the gun manufacturer?

a victim of gun use is not the user of the gun. It is akin to you wanting to sue Miller Brewery because a drunk driver ran someone over. Why don't you just admit that you have an almost inane hatred of private gun ownership and you will support anything that interferes with that no matter what?
 
Back
Top Bottom