• 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!

Stop talking and start doing!!!!!!

DebateChallenge said:

Ex-Military/Warbird, Helicopters for Sale

Browse 8 new and used Ex-Military/Warbird, Helicopters for Sale listed by owners and aircraft brokers. Find Ex-Military/Warbird, Helicopters for Sale near me on GlobalPlaneSearch.
www.globalplanesearch.com www.globalplanesearch.com

RPG7 Rocket Launcher SALE - AtlanticFirearms.com

RPG-7 Rocket Launcher. Fully inert military issue RPG Rocket Propelled Grenade Launcher great for your collection. Gun Kit- RPG 2 , Bazooka .
atlanticfirearms.com atlanticfirearms.com

RPG7 Rocket Launcher SALE - AtlanticFirearms.com

RPG-7 Rocket Launcher. Fully inert military issue RPG Rocket Propelled Grenade Launcher great for your collection. Gun Kit- RPG 2 , Bazooka .
atlanticfirearms.com atlanticfirearms.com
brobible.com

You Can Buy Your Own Aircraft Carrier Starting At The Low Price Of $1.2 Million

Do you have some extra cash lying around and looking for a new toy? Maybe you could purchase a sports car or a yacht. Or you could make a big splash and
brobible.com brobible.com

Ship Sales | Military Ship For Sale

ShipSales.com is a Free Online Directory, Advertise Ships for Sale and Marine Equipment Online Free, Search Ships and Marine Equipment to purchase or charter
shipsales.com
Click to expand...

Only one small problem; try getting live ordnance for them. 😊👍
 
DebateChallenge said:
The purpose of having police is to enforce the law and the purpose of having the military is to protect against foreign invaders.
Click to expand...

If they are just one armed gang among many other equally well armed civilian ones, how are they going to enforce anything? It just becomes a war of a bunch of well-armed gangs trying to impose their freedom on everyone else. The whole phrase “law enforcement” becomes a joke.
 
Last edited:
RF667799 said:
Army, National Guard, Reserves. I would include the Navy and their affiliates as well as the Marines and Air Force, though they often don't like to be called soldiers. But they're almost all citizens.
Click to expand...

Sure- well regulated, screened, and accountable citizens. Those not obeying orders could be court martialed. The idea that citizen soldiers were there to wage insurrection on the federal government anytime any of them felt like it is a dangerous NRA myth created to sell their merchandise.

 
noonereal said:
I played the odds, hedged my bets.
You do realize this, right?
In both cases if I reached for a gun, I'd have forced the gunman to shoot.

Yes luck was involved but I maximized my odds by not carrying a gun and passively resisting.

It also has much to do with how you carry yourself. Another time I was jogging and a guy pulled up next to me and made some small talk as I jogged. I saw a gun on his lap and realized I was carrying my wool hat as I had taken it off during the run.
I lifted it and shook it without breaking stride and said " its only a hat cus, its only a hat." He smiled and drove away.

Honest, don't take this the wrong way but you would not have gotten through all these situations as well as I did with your gun or attitude.
Click to expand...
You seem to forget that my gun is concealed. I have exactly the same ability to beg for mercy and or play the odds as you do. Sadly that's all you have.

Now what would you do if you recognize that someone is about to rob you well enough in advance that you could easily access your firearm and there simply was no way to remove yourself in time?

A customer taking my cwp class told us his story. He pulled into the Walgreens parking lot. He had been arguing with his wife so not in his normal routine. He gets out of the car and heads toward the store entrance without quickly scanning the lot, his normal procedure. As he gets 15ft from the car he finally looks up and he makes eye contact with a "shady looking dude". In his own words he basically said he knew the guy was going to do something. Thinking very fast he stopped, announced slightly louder than normal that he had forgotten his money in the car, and began walking back to the car. He had a gun in the car BTW. As he made a few steps back toward his car the badguy pistol whipped him knocking him down. He then robbed him of his heavy cuban link chain and bracelet worth 5 or 6 grand back then.

Now personally I would have scanned the lot before getting out my vehicle. I see the thug and leave OR enter from a different angle OR phone police and wait. I only stay if my wife or kids meds are inside. Not worth risking anything for a 2 liter of diet coke that costs twice as much as Walmart. IF I had made the same error as my customer and was out in no man's land, I would begin to access my defensive firearm while turning and heading back. At the same time I am watching the thug in my peripheral vision. If he advances and moves to grab for a gun I turn and defend myself. If he advances empty handed I turn while using my body to hide the firearm that is now in my hand. I politely ask him to leave me be. The rest depends on him.

You likely lie sitting in a pool of your own blood with a split wig stripped of your gold. Or you lie dead.

I likely prevent the assault and keep my gold and my wig intact. There is a slight chance that it goes to gunplay and I lose. This risk is preferable to me over dying defenseless and at the thugs mercy. Which is the equally unlikely end for your version.
 
ataraxia said:
Sure- well regulated, screened, and accountable citizens. Those not obeying orders could be court martialed. The idea that citizen soldiers were there to wage insurrection on the federal government anytime any of them felt like it is a dangerous NRA myth created to sell their merchandise.

Click to expand...

Who swear an oath to the Constitution.
 
ataraxia said:
Thank goodness for all the federal regulations on their use that make the manly conservatives feel so safe playing with them.

Connectivity & Products | SGS USA

Enabling better, safer products and services in a more interconnected world.
www.sgsgroup.us.com www.sgsgroup.us.com
Click to expand...
Newsflash, conservatives don't play with tide pods, they just use them what they're supposed to be used for, cleaning clothes.
 
ataraxia said:
If they are just one armed gang among many other equally well armed civilian ones, how are they going to enforce anything? It just becomes a war of a bunch of well-armed gangs trying to impose their freedom on everyone else. The whole phrase “law enforcement” becomes a joke.
Click to expand...
Its called having checks and balances. If military and law enforcement held a monopoly on weapons that would be an imbalance of power, we don't want that in the USA as we believe in checks and balances.
 
DebateChallenge said:
Its called having checks and balances. If military and law enforcement held a monopoly on weapons that would be an imbalance of power, we don't want that in the USA as we believe in checks and balances.
Click to expand...

So you want armed gangs acting as a check and balance on law enforcement?

"Enforcement", by definition, means one side has more force than the other to do the enforcing. How do you see law enforcement working if they are equally matched by those they are trying to enforce the law on?
 
ataraxia said:
So you want armed gangs acting as a check and balance on law enforcement?
Click to expand...
Considering that law enforcement is a gang itself, yes.
ataraxia said:
"Enforcement", by definition, means one side has more force than the other to do the enforcing. How do you see law enforcement working if they are equally matched by those they are trying to enforce the law on?
Click to expand...
Because its those who law enforcement is doing the enforcement on (the common citizen) who has the final say in what the laws are. Should law enforcement become corrupt and overstep its bounds the common citizens can revolt, as a final check and balance.

To give law enforcement greater force then the common citizen would mean a dictatorship.
 
Glitch said:
It is common sense. When leftist filth demand fewer police you can expect civilian shootings to increase on both sides. There will be more criminal shootings and there will be more civilians shooting criminals. The two are directly related. It is just too bad that leftist filth lack the intelligence to grasp that reality.
Click to expand...
The only filth here is from those lacking the intellectual foundations to present a proper rebuttal. Common sense should tell you that! ;)
 
noonereal said:
No reason to get hysterical.
Click to expand...
Classic lol! Classic liberal tactic.....let me expose it again.

You didn't rebut a single point I made, not one. You can't because it's to easy for me to expose your ignorance if you did. So you ignore it. But you are a liberal and allowing the truth to damage your plot, your agenda, is just to much to bear. You have to do something to fix this problem. So you call me hysterical in an attempt to diminish me and thus diminish my truthful and spot on post.

FAIL!!!!!
 
ataraxia said:
If the roads and busy intersections around your house have a lot more traffic accidents and fatalities than other similar neighborhoods, it's probably not well regulated enough and could use a few more speed limit postings and traffic lights.

www.healthdata.org

On gun violence, the United States is an outlier | Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation

When we look exclusively at high-income countries and territories with populations of 10 million or more, the US ranks first for its high levels of gun violence.
www.healthdata.org www.healthdata.org
Click to expand...
This is why it isn't fun playing sometimes. At least challenge me FFS.

Which speed limit signs or traffic lights can stop someone from speeding or running a red light? Damn sure doesn't stop me daily. Those things only affect the law abiding.......getting Deja vu yet?

We have already regulated guns to the point that an ineligible person is violating laws simply by having one. The school shooters violated several gun laws before firing the first shot. Laws just can't stop law breakers. *****THIS DOESN'T MEAN WE DONT WANT GUN LAWS******



The willful violation of gun laws happens with each and every misuse. IT IS MORONIC TO BELIEVE THAT MORE LAWS WILL STOP IT!
 
Toggle Almendro said:
That's because progressives keep preventing people from carrying guns in public. Get rid of progressives and all sorts of lives will start being saved.
Click to expand...
You name me a major problem in this country and the progressives are behind it. Economy, gas prices, illegal immigration, out of control crime, and more.
 
ataraxia said:
It's having increasingly unacceptable consequences. It will get worse with advancing technology. You can never stop technology.

The weapons technology we have today could not be dreamed of by our founding fathers. What we will have in the future will be even more efficient.
Click to expand...

Repeating firearms not dreamed of by our founders lol?

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Click to expand...
This is what Ben Franklin thinks about people like you.
 
DebateChallenge said:
Yes technology advances and our forefathers knew that. They knew that technology advanced from swords to muskets and would further advance. The Right To Keep And Bear Arms applies to whatever the arms of the time are which back when the 2A was written happened to be muskets. Before muskets such a right applied to swords. Today such a right applies to the weapons of today. In the future it will apply to the weapons of the future.

Yes it could, our forefathers weren't stupid and knew that technology would advance including weapon technology. See above.
Click to expand...
What else has advanced? Vests and medical treatments! Lots shot and few die.
 
Rucker61 said:
Multi-shot firearms in existence at ratification:
Belton repeating flintlock, 1777
The Drehling 8-shot, matchlock revolver, circa 1580.
German oval-bore, .67-calibre rifle that fired 16 stacked charges of powder and ball in a rapid "Roman candle" fashion, circa 1600 (manufacturer/inventor unknown).
1625 German-commissioned, breech loading wheellock, with metal cartridges.
The six-or-twelve shot, 17th century, Kalthoff Repeaters.
Lorenzoni and Cookson Flintlock Repeating Pistols, in 7-shot and 9-shot versions, circa 1680.
The Cookson Repeating Rifle (Lorenzoni System), circa 1680: a 12 shot, lever-action breech-loading, repeating flintlock.
The Puckle gun, circa 1718, a tripod-mounted, single-barreled flintlock weapon fitted with a multi-shot revolving cylinder, designed for shipboard use to prevent boarding. Could hold 11 preloaded rounds in a cylinder, and advertised to "fire 63 shots in 7 minutes."
Griffin Breech-loading Flintlock Musket, 1740
I Pendrill Flintlock Breech-loading Rifle, 1760.
Bunney of London four Barreled "Duck's Foot" Flintlock Pistol, 1780.
Flemish 3-barrel, tap-action, .54 bore pistol, 1780.
The rapid-fire, Ferguson Rifle, breech-load flintlock, patented 1777, which improved upon the breech-loading rifle created and patented in 1721 by Isaac de la Chaumette
Girardoni Air Rifle, circa 1780: 22 round magazine, .46 caliber air rifle.

Electronic communication and data storage devices in existence at ratification:

{null set}

Does this mean that the 1st and 4th Amendment protections don’t apply to your cell phone?
Click to expand...
Excellent post but don't confuse the leftists with those pesky facts.

How about the internets advancements including Facebook and twitter.
 
Daddyo said:
You seem to forget that my gun is concealed. I have exactly the same ability to beg for mercy and or play the odds as you do. Sadly that's all you have.

Now what would you do if you recognize that someone is about to rob you well enough in advance that you could easily access your firearm and there simply was no way to remove yourself in time?

A customer taking my cwp class told us his story. He pulled into the Walgreens parking lot. He had been arguing with his wife so not in his normal routine. He gets out of the car and heads toward the store entrance without quickly scanning the lot, his normal procedure. As he gets 15ft from the car he finally looks up and he makes eye contact with a "shady looking dude". In his own words he basically said he knew the guy was going to do something. Thinking very fast he stopped, announced slightly louder than normal that he had forgotten his money in the car, and began walking back to the car. He had a gun in the car BTW. As he made a few steps back toward his car the badguy pistol whipped him knocking him down. He then robbed him of his heavy cuban link chain and bracelet worth 5 or 6 grand back then.

Now personally I would have scanned the lot before getting out my vehicle. I see the thug and leave OR enter from a different angle OR phone police and wait. I only stay if my wife or kids meds are inside. Not worth risking anything for a 2 liter of diet coke that costs twice as much as Walmart. IF I had made the same error as my customer and was out in no man's land, I would begin to access my defensive firearm while turning and heading back. At the same time I am watching the thug in my peripheral vision. If he advances and moves to grab for a gun I turn and defend myself. If he advances empty handed I turn while using my body to hide the firearm that is now in my hand. I politely ask him to leave me be. The rest depends on him.

You likely lie sitting in a pool of your own blood with a split wig stripped of your gold. Or you lie dead.

I likely prevent the assault and keep my gold and my wig intact. There is a slight chance that it goes to gunplay and I lose. This risk is preferable to me over dying defenseless and at the thugs mercy. Which is the equally unlikely end for your version.
Click to expand...

Honest, I don't even want to hear any more "telephone" stories.


You don't even understand what I mean about how one carries themselves and reacts being every
Daddyo said:
Classic lol! Classic liberal tactic.....let me expose it again.

You didn't rebut a single point I made, not one. You can't because it's to easy for me to expose your ignorance if you did. So you ignore it. But you are a liberal and allowing the truth to damage your plot, your agenda, is just to much to bear. You have to do something to fix this problem. So you call me hysterical in an attempt to diminish me and thus diminish my truthful and spot on post.

FAIL!!!!!
Click to expand...

More hysteria.
Like I said, I go with the numbers, you go with emotion.
This is the bottom line
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom