• 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!

[W:606]Do you support Rep. Eric Salwell's gun control idea?

Do you support this gun control idea?

  • Total voters
    94
ttwtt78640 said:
That concept does not explain why those guns were sold initially, completely legally, by FFL dealers (thus in common use for lawful purposes). If congress can initiate a recall on scary black rifles (and jail folks for non-compliance) then what is to prevent congress from doing the same for any gun capable of accepting a "high capacity" magazine? Could that be the purpose of the 2A?
Click to expand...

That is a matter for the duly elected government of the American people who decide what type of society that they want within the framework of the Constitution.
 
pinqy said:
Why not? What are you defining as an assault weapon and what makes it inherently more dangerous than any other semi-automatic rifle?

Oh, and keep in mind that except maybe with a couple of rare exceptions I can’t think of, the U.S. Military does NOT use anything that would have been designated as an assault weapon. The Army uses assault rifles (M16/M4), battle rifles (M14), machine guns, and bolt action sniper rifles. I know there is (was) an auto loading sniper rifle but I don’t remember if it is semi-auto or select fire.
Click to expand...

that is a matter of the duly elected representatives of the American people to decide within the boundaries of the US Constitution.
 
haymarket said:
That is a matter for the duly elected government of the American people who decide what type of society that they want within the framework of the Constitution.
Click to expand...

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"
 
haymarket said:
I voted for the idea. There are simply weapons that no citizen has any business owning in a supposedly civilized society which has proven to have a real problem with such weapons and too many innocent people pay the ultimate price for other peoples toys.
Click to expand...

I canceled out your vote.
 
haymarket said:
That is a matter for the duly elected government of the American people who decide what type of society that they want within the framework of the Constitution.
Click to expand...

Converting the lawfully purchased property of the people into a federal crime is not within the framework of the constitution.
 
No, if police are trained to use them in certain situations, every citizen, including mentally ill, should have them, ideally IN schools to protect the kids!!!
Am I doing this rite??? Obama sure was wrong, they don't cling to the gunzzzz!
 
haymarket said:
I never supported banning handguns.
Click to expand...
You did when you said "There are simply weapons that no citizen has any business owning in a supposedly civilized society which has proven to have a real problem with such weapons and too many innocent people pay the ultimate price for other peoples toys."

What sense does it make to ban "assault weapons" which cause less than 2% of murders but not handguns which cause 46% of murders, plus 51% of suicides, about 22,000/year?

Have you thought this through?
 
humbolt said:
Nope. Not a chance in hell. I would give consideration to a complete ban on Eric Salwell, though.
Click to expand...

Now that bad would have my support, and I'm sure would result in a much improved nation.
 
Mycroft said:
I wonder...

Has anyone ever asked Swalwell what part of "infringed" he doesn't understand?
Click to expand...

I suspect the entire concept, that government is restricted from doing something, regardless of what, is a foreign concept to him.
 
Mach said:
No, if police are trained to use them in certain situations, every citizen, including mentally ill, should have them, ideally IN schools to protect the kids!!!
Am I doing this rite??? Obama sure was wrong, they don't cling to the gunzzzz!
Click to expand...

The bad guys aren't going to turn their guns in. Therein lies the problem.
 
apdst said:
The bad guys aren't going to turn their guns in. Therein lies the problem.
Click to expand...

Even the good guys aren't going to turn in their whatevers that Salwell is trying to outlaw.
 
apdst said:
The bad guys aren't going to turn their guns in. Therein lies the problem.
Click to expand...
Sufficiently comprehensive and strict gun laws, including enforcement, would dramatically reduce the availability of firearms, and the number of gun deaths in the country, from all sources (criminal or accidental or otherwise).

Furthermore, over time, stockpile reductions would similarly be reduced. People die, their estate finds the stockpile, they have incentive to gun buy-back. People do this all the time finding grandpas firearms.

Bunch of clinging to guns is all that prevents it, everyone knows it.
 
Mach said:
Sufficiently comprehensive and strict gun laws, including enforcement, would dramatically reduce the availability of firearms, and the number of gun deaths in the country, from all sources (criminal or accidental or otherwise).

Furthermore, over time, stockpile reductions would similarly be reduced. People die, their estate finds the stockpile, they have incentive to gun buy-back. People do this all the time finding grandpas firearms.

Bunch of clinging to guns is all that prevents it, everyone knows it.
Click to expand...

Like drugs? Have the bad guys turned in their drugs? Have the stockpiles been reduced?

Bunch of clinging to guns is all that prevents it, everyone knows it.
Click to expand...

Thank the Lord, too.
 
apdst said:
Like drugs? Have the bad guys turned in their drugs? Have the stockpiles been reduced?
Click to expand...
Guns are not drugs, and don't serve the same purpose as drugs.
So no, nothing like drugs.

Unless you do a lot of drugs, then it's just like drugs.
 
Mach said:
Guns are not drugs, and don't serve the same purpose as drugs.
So no, nothing like drugs.

Unless you do a lot of drugs, then it's just like drugs.
Click to expand...

No, they're even better than drugs. They give the person using it ultimate superiority over someone who is unarmed. The drug dealers use gun to protect their drugs and their drug markets.

The same people who want to ban guns also want open borders. The cartels will build their own machineshops, produce their own gun, then walk (not smuggle) them across the border to every crook in The United States.
 
haymarket said:
I voted for the idea. There are simply weapons that no citizen has any business owning in a supposedly civilized society which has proven to have a real problem with such weapons and too many innocent people pay the ultimate price for other peoples toys.
Click to expand...
And, yet, they actually kill a very small percentage of people killed by guns.
 
Saladin4 said:
He is taking a brave approach...Standing up to the NRA and the angry white men that worship guns....Way to go Eric
Click to expand...
And when the number of gun deaths barely budges - then what?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
That concept does not explain why those guns were sold initially, completely legally, by FFL dealers (thus in common use for lawful purposes). If congress can initiate a recall on scary black rifles (and jail folks for non-compliance) then what is to prevent congress from doing the same for any gun capable of accepting a "high capacity" magazine? Could that be the purpose of the 2A?
Click to expand...
If they come after "scary black rifles" I'd paint my pink.
 
haymarket said:
I never supported banning handguns.
Click to expand...
How does that make sense when handguns are used in the vast majority of murders? Are you more interested in symbolic nonsense or actual gun death reductions?
 
Mach said:
Sufficiently comprehensive and strict gun laws, including enforcement, would dramatically reduce the availability of firearms, and the number of gun deaths in the country, from all sources (criminal or accidental or otherwise).

Furthermore, over time, stockpile reductions would similarly be reduced. People die, their estate finds the stockpile, they have incentive to gun buy-back. People do this all the time finding grandpas firearms.

Bunch of clinging to guns is all that prevents it, everyone knows it.
Click to expand...
Problem is the ones doing most of the killing don't give crap about laws, no matter how strict or comprehensive they are.
 
I think we should be allowed to own handguns, and rifles. Complete gun ban I'm against with. Plus what is there definition of an "assault weapon"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom