• 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 real reason the anti gun crowd has a problem with armed self defense with a gun!

P_T said:
What the point is it is always a wise choice to rent a firearm at a indoor range !
you get to experience the real options of wonderful firearms.
Only dumb asses don't respect the optional firearms they get to range with !
I know some owners choose to take their arms to the range in Airport roll around Carts.
But it is also even wiser to just rent the firearms the range offers as a really wise choice.
Some of it is about the belief of I got a bigger motor on my fishing boat than you got, crapolla !
Click to expand...

Come again?
Can you repeat in English ?
 
↑ he wants to argue about everything. No wonder his neighbors slam their back doors hard constantly !
 
P_T said:
↑ he wants to argue about everything. No wonder his neighbors slam their back doors hard constantly !
Click to expand...

Speak for yourself...and if you worked as often as you post, you wouldn't have to go begging for a bottle of milk.
 
Daddyo said:
As I debate with the anti gun folks something continues to surface that I simply can't figure out.

Why do they have a problem with us carrying a firearm for the defense of ourselves and family?

As concealed carriers they can't be upset by the sight of the gun.....it's hidden.

Surly they can't have a problem with the reason for carrying.....to save self and family from an armed killer.

We know that they are aware of the fact that the vast majority of gun crime is being committed by recidivists and drug and gang players which are essentially a minority of gun owners in general.

So why? Why have an issue with law abiding gun owners in general and those who carry a firearm daily for self defense specifically?

I believe I have the answer. As you know the anti gunners are almost always liberals. Liberals almost always run from responsibility and rarely focus on personal responsibility always blaming something for their failures. Some of their positions include "it was poverty" "it was a failed education" "society made them do it" or the current one "it's because they are black". The lack of personal responsibility. So then it hits me......bingo!

Since the anti gun liberal is to afraid or otherwise unwilling to protect themselves they are jealous of those of us who do. Simple envy is behind their fervent disagreement with our concealed carry for self defense and likely in our private ownership of guns aswell. They are jealous!
Click to expand...


I DO have a problem with the excuse of personal safety.

And NO I am sure as **** not jealous.

If your society is so potently wracked with crime that you have to arm yourself, then NO ONE should be allowed guns. Ever. Wyatt Earp knew that.

Look, the figures speak for themselves. The "free" USA has the most gun deaths of any industrialized country. You try to reduce crime by assassinating criminals, and it ain't working. The incarceration & Recidivism rates are the highest in the world. At best primitive statistics.
 
Fearandloathing said:
I DO have a problem with the excuse of personal safety.

And NO I am sure as **** not jealous.

If your society is so potently wracked with crime that you have to arm yourself, then NO ONE should be allowed guns. Ever. Wyatt Earp knew that.

Look, the figures speak for themselves. The "free" USA has the most gun deaths of any industrialized country. You try to reduce crime by assassinating criminals, and it ain't working. The incarceration & Recidivism rates are the highest in the world. At best primitive statistics.
Click to expand...

The people wracking society with crime are-for the most part- not allowed to have guns.

Wyatt Earp was a fan of disarming his enemies under color of law, while staying armed and allowing his friends to stay armed as well. That clever tactic worked not at all in Tombstone.
 
Fearandloathing said:
I DO have a problem with the excuse of personal safety.

And NO I am sure as **** not jealous.

If your society is so potently wracked with crime that you have to arm yourself, then NO ONE should be allowed guns. Ever. Wyatt Earp knew that.
Click to expand...
We "don't allow" any criminals to have guns. Banning civilian ownership will still leave criminals in possession of guns. Wyatt Earp lost one brother and had another crippled finding that out.
Fearandloathing said:
Look, the figures speak for themselves. The "free" USA has the most gun deaths of any industrialized country. You try to reduce crime by assassinating criminals, and it ain't working. The incarceration & Recidivism rates are the highest in the world. At best primitive statistics.
Click to expand...
Repeal the Second and Fourth Amendments then.
 
Fearandloathing said:
I DO have a problem with the excuse of personal safety.

And NO I am sure as **** not jealous.

If your society is so potently wracked with crime that you have to arm yourself, then NO ONE should be allowed guns. Ever. Wyatt Earp knew that.

Look, the figures speak for themselves. The "free" USA has the most gun deaths of any industrialized country. You try to reduce crime by assassinating criminals, and it ain't working. The incarceration & Recidivism rates are the highest in the world. At best primitive statistics.
Click to expand...
we aren't assassinating criminals. Now that might be something that would actually cut down on crime. In the last day, 8-10 scum bags rushed into an upscale Louie Vuitton store in a mall in a wealthy area of town and stole over 400K worth of goods as the unarmed security guard stood by helplessly. Now I think such a planned attack would justify storekeepers shooting the looters. In fact I would like to see more good citizens shooting those engaged in active felonies

Now that would start decreasing crime
 
Rucker61 said:
We "don't allow" any criminals to have guns. Banning civilian ownership will still leave criminals in possession of guns. Wyatt Earp lost one brother and had another crippled finding that out.

Repeal the Second and Fourth Amendments then.
Click to expand...
its all about politics-it has nothing to do with making society safer
 
Daddyo said:
As I debate with the anti gun folks something continues to surface that I simply can't figure out.

Why do they have a problem with us carrying a firearm for the defense of ourselves and family?

As concealed carriers they can't be upset by the sight of the gun.....it's hidden.

Surly they can't have a problem with the reason for carrying.....to save self and family from an armed killer.

We know that they are aware of the fact that the vast majority of gun crime is being committed by recidivists and drug and gang players which are essentially a minority of gun owners in general.

So why? Why have an issue with law abiding gun owners in general and those who carry a firearm daily for self defense specifically?

I believe I have the answer. As you know the anti gunners are almost always liberals. Liberals almost always run from responsibility and rarely focus on personal responsibility always blaming something for their failures. Some of their positions include "it was poverty" "it was a failed education" "society made them do it" or the current one "it's because they are black". The lack of personal responsibility. So then it hits me......bingo!

Since the anti gun liberal is to afraid or otherwise unwilling to protect themselves they are jealous of those of us who do. Simple envy is behind their fervent disagreement with our concealed carry for self defense and likely in our private ownership of guns aswell. They are jealous!
Click to expand...
you make good points however imo they know that with all the hand wringing and pretty speeches and legislation presented that there is nothing they can do.......they and conservatives also are sickened with the gun carnage in our nation.....they want it stopped or at least reigned in.......yet they know there is essentially nothing that can be done.......I am liberal and I own firearms and most of my liberal friends do also and none of us would accept repealing the 2nd amendment .......no one wants to give up their guns and the truth is the slaughter would be curtailed if we did......but it would be at the expense of we law abiding citizens...... all that being said we may have to face this reality some day.......I thought when a madman murdered 20 little kids at school we would be so sickened as to make a change......but no
 
Indydave said:
you make good points however imo they know that with all the hand wringing and pretty speeches and legislation presented that there is nothing they can do.......they and conservatives also are sickened with the gun carnage in our nation.....they want it stopped or at least reigned in.......yet they know there is essentially nothing that can be done.......I am liberal and I own firearms and most of my liberal friends do also and none of us would accept repealing the 2nd amendment .......no one wants to give up their guns and the truth is the slaughter would be curtailed if we did......but it would be at the expense of we law abiding citizens...... all that being said we may have to face this reality some day.......I thought when a madman murdered 20 little kids at school we would be so sickened as to make a change......but no
Click to expand...
What change should the tragedy at Sandy Hook have driven? Would we have needed the government to ignore the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and SCOTUS?
 
TurtleDude said:
we aren't assassinating criminals. Now that might be something that would actually cut down on crime. In the last day, 8-10 scum bags rushed into an upscale Louie Vuitton store in a mall in a wealthy area of town and stole over 400K worth of goods as the unarmed security guard stood by helplessly. Now I think such a planned attack would justify storekeepers shooting the looters. In fact I would like to see more good citizens shooting those engaged in active felonies

Now that would start decreasing crime
Click to expand...
Bullshit. Shoplifting / theft are not capitol crimes
 
Rucker61 said:
What change should the tragedy at Sandy Hook have driven? Would we have needed the government to ignore the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and SCOTUS?
Click to expand...
that's the point.....the only change which SH might have instigated would have been gun control via repeal of the 2nd which none of us want yet is the only real solution seen by gun control advocates ...... and therein lies their frustration because they know it just aint gonna happen.....one of the victims of the Las Vegas massacre was from my hometown
 
Indydave said:
that's the point.....the only change which SH might have instigated would have been gun control via repeal of the 2nd which none of us want yet is the only real solution seen by gun control advocates ...... and therein lies their frustration because they know it just aint gonna happen.....one of the victims of the Las Vegas massacre was from my hometown
Click to expand...
So the murder of 20 school children should have driven the US to repeal the 2nd Amendment, give up a right, and have all kinds of ineffective, unenforceable laws shoved upon us. Is that what you think should have happened? GCAs were calling for UBCs because of Sandy Hook. They were calling for "assault weapons" bans even though the rifle used at Sandy Hook wasn't an "assault weapon" under the 1994 law and even though every single existing "assault weapon" would have been grandfathered.

Parents murder 300 of their own children every single year using bare hands in strangulation, drowning, smothering and beating homicides. Objectively, 300 worse than 20 in a single tragic event. Should we repeal the 4th Amendment to allow constant government surveillance to reduce that number?
 
Rucker61 said:
What change should the tragedy at Sandy Hook have driven? Would we have needed the government to ignore the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and SCOTUS?
Click to expand...
I believe most gun banners what to be told what to do and how and when. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if there aren't those that would beg, roll over and play dead.
 
Was it yesterday a Florida Sheriff says It's your home, just shoot the Mother and we can just sweep / clean the area.
 
SMTA said:
Bullshit. Shoplifting / theft are not capitol crimes
Click to expand...
a gang raids a store. I believe the store keeper should be able to shoot the looters. Its not shoplifting-it's looting. You should know that using force to stop looting is not the same as a sentence or a verdict. Assault is not a capital offense nor is rape but in both cases, if someone violently assaults you or tries to rape you you can shoot them and if they die. them's the breaks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom