• 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!

The argument for gun control in United States is arrogant

What do we do with the second amendment

  • Any limitation on gun ownership is unconstitutional

  • Its good now, there should be no more incursions than there already are

  • Pro second amendment but more regulations are needed

  • Only weapons for hunting should be allowed and with permits.

  • We do not need guns or the 2nd amendment

Results are only viewable after voting.
TurtleDude said:
seriously. when the government bans stuff that millions want, crime networks take advantage and grow to create black markets to meet that demand
Click to expand...

How many times do I need to tell you of the UK (and Western Europe generally)

In the UK, guns are largely banned and so are hard drugs.

But whilst gun crime is extremely rare, sadly the UK (like most of Western Europe) has a big drugs problem

Proving that guns and drugs* are NOT the same when it comes to banning them.


*Including Alcohol during prohibition, in the USA.
 
American said:
Maybe recreational drug analogies would be easier for him to understand.
Click to expand...

How many times do I need to tell you of the UK (and Western Europe generally)

In the UK, guns are largely banned and so are hard drugs.

But whilst gun crime is extremely rare, sadly the UK (like most of Western Europe) has a big drugs problem

Proving that guns and drugs* are NOT the same when it comes to banning them.


*Including Alcohol during prohibition, in the USA.
 
Rich2018 said:
How many times do I need to tell you of the UK (and Western Europe generally)

In the UK, guns are largely banned and so are hard drugs.

But whilst gun crime is extremely rare, sadly the UK (like most of Western Europe) has a big drugs problem

Proving that guns and drugs* are NOT the same when it comes to banning them.


*Including Alcohol during prohibition, in the USA.
Click to expand...
They have big knife and robbery problems.
 
Rich2018 said:
How many times do I need to tell you of the UK (and Western Europe generally)

In the UK, guns are largely banned and so are hard drugs.

But whilst gun crime is extremely rare, sadly the UK (like most of Western Europe) has a big drugs problem

Proving that guns and drugs* are NOT the same when it comes to banning them.


*Including Alcohol during prohibition, in the USA.
Click to expand...
Claiming that Brits like drugs more than guns doesn't seem particularly relevant to US gun control questions.
 
.
 
Rich2018 said:
We've been through that flawed analogy of "Prohibition proves that a gun ban wouldn't work" several times.
Click to expand...
are you saying that prohibition proves gun bans would WORK?
 
Rich2018 said:
No the reverse. Prohibition (and the failure thereof) does NOT prove that a ban on guns doesn't/won't work.
Click to expand...
well it proves that the last ban failed. The war on drugs also have been a huge failure. so why do you think guns would be any different?
 
TurtleDude said:
well it proves that the last ban failed. The war on drugs also have been a huge failure. so why do you think guns would be any different?
Click to expand...

No, it just proved that a ban on alcohol failed - and would probably fail again

The current War on Drugs shows similar results for hard drugs like Heroin and Cocaine

Neither offer any proof that a ban on drugs would fail.
 
Rich2018 said:
No, it just proved that a ban on alcohol failed - and would probably fail again

The current War on Drugs shows similar results for hard drugs like Heroin and Cocaine

Neither offer any proof that a ban on drugs would fail.
Click to expand...
well you cannot find any example in the USA where a massive ban has worked. and in the case of the war on drugs and prohibition, both caused massive amounts of violence
 
TurtleDude said:
well it proves that the last ban failed. The war on drugs also have been a huge failure. so why do you think guns would be any different?
Click to expand...
Stop claiming the aim is to ban all guns. Reducing the supply of guns to criminals and the mentally ill is not about banning guns. It is beliefs like you profess that makes sensible people think that all gun owners are nuts and maybe the only solution is to ban all of them.
 
TurtleDude said:
well you cannot find any example in the USA where a massive ban has worked. and in the case of the war on drugs and prohibition, both caused massive amounts of violence
Click to expand...

A gun ban has never been tried throughout the USA
But it has been tried and it has worked in many, many other democracies in the Western world.

Indeed has there ever been a gun ban that hasn't worked - in reducing guns/gun violence

And I mean a country, not a US county or city
And I do mean a democracy - so please don't go off on a straw man ramble about the Holocaust.
 
iguanaman said:
Stop claiming the aim is to ban all guns. Reducing the supply of guns to criminals and the mentally ill is not about banning guns. It is beliefs like you profess that makes sensible people think that all gun owners are nuts and maybe the only solution is to ban all of them.
Click to expand...
well you think that guns are mainly used for murder and suicide and let's not kid each other. If the bannerrhoids managed to ban a bunch of guns, and crime didn't go down, what do you think they would do

1) try to repeal the gun ban

2) try to ban more guns?

how do you reduce the supply of guns to people who already are banned from owning them with a 10 year prison sentence in play-without banning honest people from having them

Few posters submissions have demonstrated the amount of dishonesty towards gun ownership and hatred of legal gun ownership than yours.
 
TurtleDude said:
well you think that guns are mainly used for murder and suicide and let's not kid each other. If the bannerrhoids managed to ban a bunch of guns, and crime didn't go down, what do you think they would do

1) try to repeal the gun ban

2) try to ban more guns?

how do you reduce the supply of guns to people who already are banned from owning them with a 10 year prison sentence in play-without banning honest people from having them

Few posters submissions have demonstrated the amount of dishonesty towards gun ownership and hatred of legal gun ownership than yours.
Click to expand...
You know I could care less how many gun owners shoot themselves to death. It is Darwin in action. But what I cannot abide is the attitude that any action made to track guns used in crime or stop strawman purchasers from making a living supplying guns to criminals is an effort to ban guns. It is not. It is an effort to reduce the level of gun violence and make gun owners respectable members of society. You seem to relish being a pariah. I guess that is yet another symptom that explains some peoples obsession with deadly weapons.
 
TurtleDude said:
...how do you reduce the supply of guns to people who already are banned from owning them with a 10 year prison sentence in play-without banning honest people from having them
Click to expand...

You ban the manufacture, shipment, possession and sale of them
 
iguanaman said:
Stop claiming the aim is to ban all guns. Reducing the supply of guns to criminals and the mentally ill is not about banning guns. It is beliefs like you profess that makes sensible people think that all gun owners are nuts and maybe the only solution is to ban all of them.
Click to expand...
Rich wants to ban nearly all guns. Other GCAs here want to ban all guns.
 
iguanaman said:
You know I could care less how many gun owners shoot themselves to death. It is Darwin in action. But what I cannot abide is the attitude that any action made to track guns used in crime or stop strawman purchasers from making a living supplying guns to criminals is an effort to ban guns. It is not. It is an effort to reduce the level of gun violence and make gun owners respectable members of society. You seem to relish being a pariah. I guess that is yet another symptom that explains some peoples obsession with deadly weapons.
Click to expand...
So when GCAs point to the UK and Japan as gun control success stories, and say "not one more" and "end school shootings", they don't understand that a large scale ban would be necessary to achieve those goals?
 
Rucker61 said:
So when GCAs point to the UK and Japan as gun control success stories, and say "not one more" and "end school shootings", they don't understand that a large scale ban would be necessary to achieve those goals?
Click to expand...
The U.S. is not Japan or the UK so what they did is immaterial. The only way something like they did would happen is if there is no other way to control gun violence because of lobbying and pressure from gun makers. There are ways to reduce the number of guns in criminals and mental patients hands without a total ban. If we do that there will be no reason to believe all gun owners are the problem and that most of them are responsible and fair minded. We all need to be on the same side to get an actual reduction in the misuse of firearms. The first step as always is to admit we have a problem. Can you at least admit that?
 
Last edited:
iguanaman said:
The U.S. is not Japan or the UK so what they did is immaterial.
Click to expand...
We keep mentioning that but it's not sticking to the wall.

iguanaman said:
The only way something like they did would happen is if there is no other way to control gun violence because of lobbying and pressure from gun makers. There are ways to reduce the number of guns in criminals and mental patients hands without a total ban.
Click to expand...

And I'm happy to discuss the Constitutionality, efficacy and enforceability of those suggestions.

iguanaman said:
If we do that there will be no reason to believe all gun owners are the problem and that most of them are responsible and fair minded. We all need to be on the same side to get an actual reduction in the misuse of firearms. The first step as always is to admit we have a problem. Can you at least admit that?
Click to expand...
Yes, we have a problem. What we don't have is a commonly accepted goal. Let's presume that we register all guns and impose UBCs. Heck, even "ban" "assault weapons" and pay for tax stamps.

What happens when someone commits a school shooting with one? Or with a pistol? Or with a revolver and pump shotgun (see Santa Fe High School shooting)? How many school shootings per year are acceptable once all of the gun control in the Democratic Party platform is passed?
 
Rich2018 said:
No credible politician would ever suggest banning ALL guns.
Click to expand...
No credible politician would ever suggest banning all of the guns you want to ban.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom