• 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!

Mapping the Dead: Gun Deaths Since Sandy Hook [W:83]

TheDemSocialist said:
I dont know if would of stopped Sandy Hook or any massacre but i believe it would of made it harder for other criminals to get weapons or acquire a weapon illegally.
Click to expand...

So bringing up Sandy Hook to push for it is grandstanding. You want "policy change" that wouldn't help the problem you yourself trumpeted.
 
Manc Skipper said:
There was never a year in the last century or this, when America did not have armed boots on the ground in a foreign country with malice aforethought.
Click to expand...

The same ould be said about the Brits for the past few centuries. Be that as it may, the world is a better place because of American involvement.
 
Manc Skipper said:
There was never a year in the last century or this, when America did not have armed boots on the ground in a foreign country with malice aforethought.
Click to expand...

Yes, and your dues for the DP America Haterz Klub are paid for the week. :roll: PeteEU and Maximus Zeebra will be pleased.
 
LiberalAvenger said:
I care "for whom the bell tolls".
Click to expand...

Why aren't you calling for the same restrictions on Liquid Plumber, because more kids die in this country from accidental poisoning than from gun shot wounds.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Let's knock off the personal attacks and stick to the topic - or else.
 
apdst said:
Why aren't you calling for the same restrictions on Liquid Plumber, because more kids die in this country from accidental poisoning than from gun shot wounds.
Click to expand...

I don't have the time.
 
joko104 said:
The OP is another radical liberal sobbing over the deaths of would-be murderers, rapists and attacking home invaders.

WHY do they do desperately want to protect murders, rapists and criminals from being hurt SOOOOOO much?
Click to expand...

That's the side on which the far wrong have always been. Those on that side have always pursued policies that are beneficial to criminal and tyrants and parasites, and detrimental to honest people. Gun control is just one example out of many.
 
Manc Skipper said:
If guns don't kill anyone, then nukes don't either. Iran having a nuke is no problem then.
Click to expand...

Faulty logic/bad argument. The UK has nukes as well.....are you comparing the UK to an extremist state? Has the UK sworn to remove another country from the map lately?
 
MaggieD said:
It's quite obvious that law enforcement and our justice system has done a lousy job of enforcing the myriad laws on our books. Take it up with them.
Click to expand...

DING! DING! DING! The lady is a winner! *Hands her a digital stuffed bear*
 
CanadaJohn said:
According to CDC statistics for 2009, about 13,000 people die from lung cancer in the US every month - that would be about 40,000 people dying from lung cancer in the same time period you note. Considering that almost 90% of lung cancer deaths are due to smoking tobacco, about 36,000 of the number above, where's your similar outrage about cigarettes and the future carnage it's causing among youth who are now increasing taking up smoking as a habit at a very young age?

And remember, cigarette smoke doesn't just affect those who smoke - it's a slow action weapon against those whom smokers live with and those who find themselves in the company of smokers.

If you think guns are responsible for shooting themselves, you must also think cigarettes are responsible for smoking themselves and if you want to ban/restrict/limit access to guns you must also campaign to end the sale and access to cigarettes.
Click to expand...

A large number of gun crimes and suicide by firearms is associated with alcohol....we need to investigate further restrictions on alcohol consumption as well....
 
BretJ said:
Faulty logic/bad argument. The UK has nukes as well.....are you comparing the UK to an extremist state? Has the UK sworn to remove another country from the map lately?
Click to expand...

Thank you for prefacing the rambling nonsense with a warning of what was coming.
 
Manc Skipper said:
By your own definition, America shouldn't have nukes either.
Click to expand...

Or the UK for that regard....oh wait...your country already does not trust people with the right to protect themselves....it must be absolutely filled with criminals....actually, compared to other members of the EU, it is....
 
Manc Skipper said:
Please refer to post 83.
Click to expand...

Post 83 has nothing to do with what he wrote. You can either answer his question or you can avoid it. It seems as though you have taken the latter.
 
LiberalAvenger said:
I don't have the time.
Click to expand...

So you don't really care about protecting kids. You seem to care more about taking guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens than stopping kids from dying unnecessarily.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Im in favor of an assault weapons ban, universal background checks, closing the gun-show loophole, and a magazine limit.
Click to expand...

What is the supposed gun-show loophole that universal background checks does not cover? Or are you discussing things that you do not understand fully perhaps....
 
BretJ said:
Perfectly legal to own them already...find another argument.
Click to expand...

I am unaware of any civilian police Department using fragmentation grenades against criminals. now I recall Philadelphia bombing the black anarchists called MOVE years ago. I don't know if it was a bomb designed to actually blow up the anarchists or like the case of Robbie Matthews (the aryan bank robber whose hideout was blown up by the FBI when tear gas ignited during the firefight) it was an unintentional explosion
 
BretJ said:
What is the supposed gun-show loophole that universal background checks does not cover? Or are you discussing things that you do not understand fully perhaps....
Click to expand...

when someone claims there is a gun show loophole I immediately write the claimant off as someone who is completely ignorant of the existing laws or is dishonest about the current legal environment
 
Manc Skipper said:
If guns don't kill anyone, then nukes don't either. Iran having a nuke is no problem then.
Click to expand...

did you just compare a gun to a nuclear weapon? LMAO well thats pure dishonesty if i have ever seen it

but you are right, nukes dont kill anybody :shrug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom