• 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!

My $0.02 On Gun Regulation

AGENT J said:
Lots of gun threads so Ill just post the same thing


In a vacuum, if I could just invent a country where no one lived until I open the doors I might regulate guns very tightly but the cat is already out of the bag so thats always my main concern . . .

if I could just wave a magic wand first and for most i'd compromise . . Id instate universal background checks in exchange for EVRY STATE being open carry and CWP being national just like a drivers license

after that we need to already fully enforce all the laws on the books and Id support any new laws that passed my own personal test . .

Will it punish criminals with guns?
Will it punish criminal activity with guns?
Will it punish the illegal transportation, manufacturing, distribution of guns?
Will it actually make people safer?
Will it NOT punish law-abiding citizens?
Will it NOT empower criminals?

the more yeses the more likely id support it
Click to expand...
Here's an analogy of how gun control "compromises" usually work. I have 10 cupcakes. The gun control people come by and say "I'm going to take 5 of your cupcakes and give you nothing." When I refuse, they say, "OK, let's compromise. I'll only take 4 of your cupcakes and give you nothing." Then the next year it's "You still have 6 cupcakes? I'm going to take 3 of them and give you nothing again." And people wonder why gun owners don't want to "compromise".

A real compromise is when in order to get what they want, one party gives the other party something they want. Here's how a real compromise would work:

The "gun show loophole", like most anti-gun terms, is a propaganda lie. Gun shows have nothing to do with it, it means private sales between individuals should be outlawed. And it's not a loophole. It's not something that was overlooked or some underhanded workaround. When the Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed, the gun controllers wanted all sales to go through a federally licensed dealer with a background check, but the couldn't get the votes. So it was deliberately left up to the states to decide whether to allow private sales without a dealer or not.

Going to Universal Background Checks would mean having the Federal government override state control of background checks. If you are going to override state control over guns, how about making all 50 states "must issue" for concealed carry licenses? Want something? - Give something. That's how a REAL compromise works.

See any compromises in the Biden agenda? No. It's the same old, take as much as you can, the constitution be damned and then next year take some more. Case in point - the "Instant" check turned into the 3 day wait, which will turn into the 10 day wait.
 
just read where the New York Post, owned by Murdoch supports Bidens banning of weapons of war.....good for them!!
 
natman said:
Here's an analogy of how gun control "compromises" usually work. I have 10 cupcakes. The gun control people come by and say "I'm going to take 5 of your cupcakes and give you nothing." When I refuse, they say, "OK, let's compromise. I'll only take 4 of your cupcakes and give you nothing." Then the next year it's "You still have 6 cupcakes? I'm going to take 3 of them and give you nothing again." And people wonder why gun owners don't want to "compromise".

A real compromise is when in order to get what they want, one party gives the other party something they want. Here's how a real compromise would work:

The "gun show loophole", like most anti-gun terms, is a propaganda lie. Gun shows have nothing to do with it, it means private sales between individuals should be outlawed. And it's not a loophole. It's not something that was overlooked or some underhanded workaround. When the Gun Control Act of 1968 was passed, the gun controllers wanted all sales to go through a federally licensed dealer with a background check, but the couldn't get the votes. So it was deliberately left up to the states to decide whether to allow private sales without a dealer or not.

Going to Universal Background Checks would mean having the Federal government override state control of background checks. If you are going to override state control over guns, how about making all 50 states "must issue" for concealed carry licenses? Want something? - Give something. That's how a REAL compromise works.

See any compromises in the Biden agenda? No. It's the same old, take as much as you can, the constitution be damned and then next year take some more. Case in point - the "Instant" check turned into the 3 day wait, which will turn into the 10 day wait.
Click to expand...
Gun law loopholes are not a lie. Despite strict gun control regulations Detroit has disproportionate rates of death from guns. Why is that? Because you can simply go across the border to Indiana, take advantage of their weak gun laws, and buy pretty much whatever you want and bring it back, whatever your status. That is a loophole which needs closing.
 
Last edited:
snakestretcher said:
You already have tens of thousands of gun-related deaths every year. How many more do you want? Your 'freedoms' count for nothing in the highly unlikely event that government decides to turn on you. Your guns would equally count for nothing; a bunch of fat, unfit and disorganised weekend warriors against a highly trained military? What, exactly do you suppose would happen?
Click to expand...

dude our governmment has been against us in many ways for some time now. for now, they're ok with increasing their bankroll and as much power as they can muster.. although they do seem to be looking to snag more power. its just a matter of whether we stay divided and how far they try to take it or not as to what happens.
 
NatMorton said:
The part that leads to piles of dead bodies when mentally unstable people legally acquire weapons far beyond the scope of the Second Amendment.
Click to expand...

Dont care.
 
Wayne Jr said:
Carry permits. Magazine capacity limits. Universal background checks. That and more were in-force yesterday, none prevented the shooting.
Click to expand...
Well, you know what they say. If at first you don't succeed, **** it. 🙄
 
nvflash said:
No one I know has ever been killed by a gun that they themselves did fire, and I have tons of people I know, and we all carry guns, even my mom carries a gun.
Click to expand...
I'm sure that makes the daily slaughters easier for you to ignore.

And, interestingly, some hardcore gun rights advocates change their attitude once it's their own kids whose brains are splattered on the sidewalk. It's easy to ignore the daily stuff until then.
 
snakestretcher said:
Gun law loopholes are not a lie. Despite strict gun control regulations Detroit has disproportionate rates of death from guns. Why is that? Because you can simply go across the border to Indiana, take advantage of their weak gun laws, and buy pretty much whatever you want and bring it back, whatever your status. That is a loophole which needs closing.
Click to expand...
What you are proposing is banning private sales. The lie is that banning private sales has nothing to do with gun shows (they follow the same laws as everywhere else) and it isn't a loophole (it's a deliberate part of the law). If you want to ban private sales, then call it that.

Oh, BTW, you can only LEGALLY buy a long gun outside your state of residence, and then only if the transaction is legal in BOTH states. Handguns can only LEGALLY be bought in your own state of residence. Private sales are only legal between residents of the SAME state. So Detroit residents can't just hop over to Indiana and legally buy something there they can't legally buy in Detroit.
 
NatMorton said:
The part that leads to piles of dead bodies when mentally unstable people legally acquire weapons far beyond the scope of the Second Amendment.
Click to expand...
then the question to ask is "why do we have so many unstable people that want to kill others". perhaps you should try to solve that issue, then guns would not be a problem. do other countries NOT have so many people that want to do that or is it just that they can't due to what... no guns? what about bombs , knives, etc, etc...?
 
Hypothetical said:
then the question to ask is "why do we have so many unstable people that want to kill others". perhaps you should try to solve that issue, then guns would not be a problem. do other countries NOT have so many people that want to do that or is it just that they can't due to what... no guns? what about bombs , knives, etc, etc...?
Click to expand...

Solving that issue would require better access to mental healthcare, which would require some form of universal healthcare, which Right Libertarians also hate.
 
donhughesmusic said:
The 2nd amendment states that a "well regulated militia" shall not be infringed upon. One man with an arsenal does not constitute a "well regulated militia".
Click to expand...

You require remedial english. The militia has no bearing on the command that the RKBA shall not be infringed.
 
Questerr said:
Solving that issue would require better access to mental healthcare, which would require some form of universal healthcare, which Right Libertarians also hate.
Click to expand...
i am all for it as long as it rationally applies to only our citizenry so as not to further hinder our economy.
 
donhughesmusic said:
The 2nd amendment states that a "well regulated militia" shall not be infringed upon. One man with an arsenal does not constitute a "well regulated militia".
Click to expand...
snakestretcher said:
I don't believe there's a single 'militia' in the US, 'well-regulated' or otherwise.
Click to expand...
Held:
1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
SCOTUS, DC v Heller page 1 [emphasis added]
 
snakestretcher said:
Your right Holy Guns over people's right to their lives? Figures when you're a conservative.
Click to expand...

I am not a conservative, and my rights trump their fears and ineptitude.
 
Hypothetical said:
i am all for it as long as it rationally applies to only our citizenry so as not to further hinder our economy.
Click to expand...

Have you ever been to another country with universal healthcare? It applies to everyone. Even tourists. At most a non-citizen might pay a few extra fees, but they are still pennies on the dollar compared to the US.
 
Questerr said:
Have you ever been to another country with universal healthcare? It applies to everyone. Even tourists. At most a non-citizen might pay a few extra fees, but they are still pennies on the dollar compared to the US.
Click to expand...
You may not even have to pay at all...
www.nhs.uk

Applying for healthcare cover abroad (GHIC and EHIC)

Find out if you're eligible to apply for a new UK EHIC or UK Global Health Insurance Card (GHIC).
www.nhs.uk www.nhs.uk
Isn't UHC awful?
 
Hypothetical said:
then the question to ask is "why do we have so many unstable people that want to kill others". perhaps you should try to solve that issue, then guns would not be a problem. do other countries NOT have so many people that want to do that or is it just that they can't due to what... no guns? what about bombs , knives, etc, etc...?
Click to expand...
That’s just it. In most counties with more restrictive gun laws we see far fewer homicides — and certainly fewer gun-related homicides. And it’s not because they’ve found a cure mental health issues that’s eluded us. The reason is ... get ready for it ... the relative lack of guns.
 
NatMorton said:
And that is where we differ. I do.
Click to expand...

Your caring means nothing when it comes to the rights of people to have the ability arm themselves as they see fit. It is nothing more than a pitiful display of virtue signaling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom