• 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!

Should We Have a 28th Amendment The Right To Survive Attacks By Deranged Gun Owners

paul342160

DP Veteran
Joined
May 20, 2020
Messages
541
Reaction score
212
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
When are private citizens living in highly populated areas going to be protected from deranged gun owners
who obtained guns illegally or who obtained gun when they were not mentally ill?

I believe that U.S. citizens have the right to live a long life as long as they are in good health.
 
When are private citizens living in highly populated areas going to be protected from deranged gun owners
who obtained guns illegally or who obtained gun when they were not mentally ill?

I believe that U.S. citizens have the right to live a long life as long as they are in good health.

Yep, such a right could be protected by having laws against shooting (or shooting) at another person. Oh wait… we already have those.

BTW, why should this ‘protection’ be limited to those “living in highly populated areas”?
 
When are private citizens living in highly populated areas going to be protected from deranged gun owners
who obtained guns illegally or who obtained gun when they were not mentally ill?
They can be.

Buy a weapon.

But in the mean time let the gang bangers work on decreasing the unworthy from world population.
 
When are private citizens living in highly populated areas going to be protected from deranged gun owners
who obtained guns illegally or who obtained gun when they were not mentally ill?

I believe that U.S. citizens have the right to live a long life as long as they are in good health.
The only answer is more guns and no restrictions. Just ask the gun nut assholes.
 
When are private citizens living in highly populated areas going to be protected from deranged gun owners
who obtained guns illegally or who obtained gun when they were not mentally ill?

I believe that U.S. citizens have the right to live a long life as long as they are in good health.

Sadly, I think it's highly unlikely that guns will ever be banned or that we'll ever had significant gun control in the USA.
 
When are private citizens living in highly populated areas going to be protected from deranged gun owners
who obtained guns illegally or who obtained gun when they were not mentally ill?

I believe that U.S. citizens have the right to live a long life as long as they are in good health.
I've moved on my strategy. Repeal or amend the 2005 PLCAA. Let the market drive them out of business.
 
They can be.

Buy a weapon.

But in the mean time let the gang bangers work on decreasing the unworthy from world population.
Your racism is noted.

More guns does not equal safety from crimes.

Hemenway noted that one commonly cited statistic about guns—that 2.5 million people use them each year to defend themselves or their property — is based on faulty analysis from a 1990s study. A more reliable source of information, the National Crime Victimization Survey, pegs the number of people who use guns in this manner at roughly 100,000, according to Science Vs podcast host Wendy Zukerman. Hemenway added that there is no good evidence that using a gun in self-defense reduces the likelihood of injury. There is some evidence that having a gun may reduce property loss, “but the evidence is equally compelling that having another weapon, such as mace or a baseball bat, will also reduce the likelihood of property loss,” he said.


Addressing gun lobby assertions that crime is deterred when more law-abiding citizens carry guns, Hemenway said the evidence says otherwise. He said that even though more and more Americans are carrying concealed guns each year—the result of more states passing ‘right-to-carry’ laws—research has not uncovered a direct cause-and-effect relationship between the prevalence of guns and the U.S. crime rate. However, he noted, the presence of more guns does make crimes more violent. “What guns do is make hostile interactions—robberies, assaults—much more deadly,” he said.
 
More guns does not equal safety from crimes.


Very true. Increasing the number of privately owned firearms does not lower crime rates. Nor does increasing the number of privately owned firearms increase the crime rate. In fact, it does not matter whether you increase or decrease the number of privately owned firearms, it will have absolutely no effect on crime rates.
 
Very true. Increasing the number of privately owned firearms does not lower crime rates. Nor does increasing the number of privately owned firearms increase the crime rate. In fact, it does not matter whether you increase or decrease the number of privately owned firearms, it will have absolutely no effect on crime rates.
Too many guns make you unsafe, so more guns are not going to make it better.
 
Who are you to have dedicated enemies?
The anti-American Democratic Party is the dedicated enemy of every real American, and has been since their inception in 1828. The Democratic Party has already killed more Americans than all the foreign wars the US has ever fought - combined. That alone is sufficient reason to be well armed.
 
Too many guns make you unsafe, so more guns are not going to make it better.
That does not match reality. I have owned and operated firearms for 62 years without ever being unsafe. Furthermore, the number of privately owned firearms has only increased in the US, while the murder rate has decreased during that same period. You might want to take another look at those statistics, because what you are saying is not even remotely true.
 
A gun likely saved me and Mrs VySky from grave harm in a home invasion.

So, speak for yourself please.
Keep them at home where they belong, and not for walking around Target or Safeway.
 
Keep them at home where they belong, and not for walking around Target or Safeway.
You wouldn't know I had one on in target or safeway
 
You wouldn't know I had one on in target or safeway
You don't need one in public if you don't work in some form, of public safety or protection career. The very people who claim to need one in public are the kind of people who should not have a weapon.
 
You don't need one in public if you don't work in some form, of public safety or protection career. The very people who claim to need one in public are the kind of people who should not have a weapon.
Your opinion is noted.

What if I don't want to put my life in the hands of another person with a gun?

Especially when they are in no way legally obligated to come to my aid?
 
For significant gun control, repeal the 2nd Amendment.
IRL, when do you suppose you can reach levels of support required to repeal, or even amend, the 2nd Amendment?

Depending on any number of variables, D's could have the level of support needed to follow my path in January 2025.
 
Smells like bait.
 
IRL, when do you suppose you can reach levels of support required to repeal, or even amend, the 2nd Amendment?

Depending on any number of variables, D's could have the level of support needed to follow my path in January 2025.

As I said in post#5:

I think it's highly unlikely that guns will ever be banned or that we'll ever had significant gun control in the USA.
 
Sure...why not. Jump on that.
 
You don't need one in public if you don't work in some form, of public safety or protection career. The very people who claim to need one in public are the kind of people who should not have a weapon.
Why do leftists always feel obligated to tell others what they need or don't need? Concern yourself with your own needs, and allow others to determine their needs. Only delusional fascist pieces of shit think they know the needs of others.
 
Why do leftists always feel obligated to tell others what they need or don't need? Concern yourself with your own needs, and allow others to determine their needs. Only delusional fascist pieces of shit think they know the needs of others.
Because we live in a very interconnected society, so the actions of others impact the lives of everyone around them. This is not the wild west.

Calling me a fascist piece of shit is a classy touch. I thought that I was your favorite leftist trash. :rolleyes:
 
Back
Top Bottom