• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • 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!

What to do about the mass shootings in the US

What do we do about mass shootings in the US?

  • Ban US citizens from owning any firearm - confiscate those already purchased

    Votes: 7 5.7%

  • Ban US citizens from owning certain kinds of firearms (explain)

    Votes: 21 17.1%

  • Don't ban firearms at all

    Votes: 23 18.7%

  • Institutionalize the violent and mentally ill

    Votes: 29 23.6%

  • Something else

    Votes: 71 57.7%
  • Total voters
    123
BahamaBob said:
The solution is not to harass and punish innocent people. The solution is to go into the areas where these problem lie and root them out. Mental illness is an area to start. Trump is addressing this. Any real solution needs a bipartisan platform. The Dims are stuck on the ban gun bandwagon because it pulls in donations to their campaigns. Any real solution would hurt the coffers. The lemming base sucks that up instead of asking for a workable solution. In the mean time, the number one cause of death for a young black man is gun violence. Almost all of which were committed by illegally owned firearms.
Click to expand...

Sounds great.


Now show me where that plan is working.


Hint....you can't
 
bongsaway said:
And again I ask you for solutions. And I also would like to ask, where are all these good armed citizens stopping these killers? My guess is if an armed citizen got involved in trying to take down a mass killer, that person would probably also be killed by the police. Ever notice the people fleeing mostly have their hands in the air? What do you think cops would do if they saw a person with a gun? Shoot first, ask questions later. With all your talk of training, I've never seen so many cowardly cops who kill people because they felt threatened, even when the person was trying to run away from them. Training doesn't quell hatred of others.
Click to expand...

Let me educate you about active shooters. Active shooters want to kill as many people as possible. Active shooters are not concerned about the legal repercussions of their actions. Many intend to die or know it is a highly probable outcome. They are not deterred by laws against murder, mayhem, felonious assault, carrying weapons, discharging weapons, inducing panic etc.

There is only one way to stop an active shooter. that is to physically prevent him from carrying out his plans. In some cases, this can take place before an active shooter begins his attack-such as someone hearing him talk about his planned attack and notifying the police or a parent or roommate discovering weapons and plans in the living area occupied by the would be active shooter.

Such cases are rare. Most active shooters are only discovered after they start killing. And since the vast majority of them choose areas where they are unlikely to encounter immediate armed resistance (Orlando, SandyHook, Aurora, and several of the other schools), they are able to kill a bunch of people before armed response appears.

Obviously, one of the best ways to prevent active shooting massacres, is for people to pay attention and alert authorities of behavior that is indicative of someone likely to engage in an active shooting. There really isn't any legislation that can cause citizens to be more observant and pro active. The second thing is making sure that the data bases that contain lists of those who have been adjudicated incompetent to legally possess firearms are properly and maintained and constantly updated. AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, If someone is prohibited from legally possessing firearms, then they must be investigated and most likely prosecuted, if they lie on form 4473 (meaning they said they were not banned, but the background check determines that they are).

Finally, citizens should seek training on how to deal with active shooting. Both as armed citizens and those who do not wish to carry firearms.
 
BahamaBob said:
The solution is not to harass and punish innocent people. The solution is to go into the areas where these problem lie and root them out. Mental illness is an area to start. Trump is addressing this. Any real solution needs a bipartisan platform. The Dims are stuck on the ban gun bandwagon because it pulls in donations to their campaigns. Any real solution would hurt the coffers. The lemming base sucks that up instead of asking for a workable solution. In the mean time, the number one cause of death for a young black man is gun violence. Almost all of which were committed by illegally owned firearms.
Click to expand...

Dims want to harass people who vote against them and many Dims actually don't want to take steps that are tougher on criminals. So they push gun bans to cover up their soft on crime attitudes
 
Parrish said:
And that's okay as long as you can keep your weapons. Good to know.
Click to expand...

This is a constant dishonest theme from leftwing gun banners. That being that if we gun owners don't agree to stupid laws that infringe on our rights-but do nothing to reduce crime-than we must be responsible for crime. That is as stupid as saying that if you don't oppose gay rights, you are responsible for people dying of AIDS or suffering the many STDS that gays suffer.
 
BahamaBob said:
Already discussed and disproven.
Click to expand...

The only way those things "work" is to do exactly as they are intended to do-harass lawful gun ownership and convince the weak minded that such schemes are an appropriate response to violent criminals.
 
TurtleDude said:
Dims want to harass people who vote against them and many Dims actually don't want to take steps that are tougher on criminals. So they push gun bans to cover up their soft on crime attitudes
Click to expand...

/// and many Dims actually don't want to take steps that are tougher on criminals //// <------ He makes the same unproven positive claim yet again, but cannot/will not support this asinine positive claim because intellectually dishonesty seems to be more important than proving said claim holds one iota of actual truth. Same unsubstantiated claim as put forth in post # 948 and throughout numerous other threads here in the gun forum....No substance to the claim whatsoever. Request for Burden of Proof ignored yet again.
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
This is a constant dishonest theme from leftwing gun banners. That being that if we gun owners don't agree to stupid laws that infringe on our rights-but do nothing to reduce crime-than we must be responsible for crime. That is as stupid as saying that if you don't oppose gay rights, you are responsible for people dying of AIDS or suffering the many STDS that gays suffer.
Click to expand...

I'm not the one who is dishonest. I'm a gun owner, btw.
 
TurtleDude said:
The only way those things "work" is to do exactly as they are intended to do-harass lawful gun ownership and convince the weak minded that such schemes are an appropriate response to violent criminals.
Click to expand...

Lemmings are gullible. In 2008 they told them they had the answer to all their healthcare problems. How did that work out? Now they tell them they will give them a free college education, a thousand dollars a month for life, open borders, free healthcare for illegals, reparation for slavery, and best of all another healthcare program. Even better not one of the lemmings is asking how are we going to pay for this?
 
Parrish said:
I'm not the one who is dishonest. I'm a gun owner, btw.
Click to expand...

Ammosexuals will never offer solutions. Because this is not a problem for them.

For them mass shootings are a positive
 
marke said:
How many people must be slaughtered before some people want to do something? Democrats controlled the House, the Senate, the Presidency and the city administration in Chicago for two years in 2009 and 2010. What steps did they take to stop the mass murders there? How many people died in Chicago in those two years from gun violence? Two thousand? How many people died in Chicago during those two years from white supremacist mass murders? None? How many people died in Chicago from white shooters? How many people died in Chicago during those two years at the hands of black gunmen?

Do democrats just talk about violence while doing nothing to stop it? Do they even know what the real problems are and can they fix the problems if they keep misidentifying the problem and the real roots of the problem?

At last check, the big problem with gun violence in Chicago was not white nationalists, but black killers, who account for 71% of the gun murders there.
Click to expand...

More murders are committed by black gunmen in Chicago in one year than are killed in all the mass shootings across the country in 10 years.
 
vegas giants said:
Not working
Click to expand...

Your brain is what is not working. This clown is in jail. No one is dead and his weapons have been compensated. Can't work much better than that.
 
Logician Man said:
/// and many Dims actually don't want to take steps that are tougher on criminals //// <------ He makes the same unproven positive claim yet again, but cannot/will not support this asinine positive claim because intellectually dishonesty seems to be more important than proving said claim holds one iota of actual truth. Same unsubstantiated claim as put forth in post # 948 and throughout numerous other threads here in the gun forum....No substance to the claim whatsoever. Request for Burden of Proof ignored yet again.
Click to expand...

more idiocy. when the NRA supported actions by some states or city governments to send cases of violent felons caught with guns to the US Attorneys (where a federal sentence is usually far more severe than state penalties), several major leftwing groups including the NAACP and the ACLU opposed this get tough on armed criminals tactic.

Most of those who push for gun control laws, claim those laws are the most effective method to deal with armed criminals and violent gun crime. There is no evidence whatsoever that crap like waiting periods, magazine limits, "assault weapons bans" or how many guns an honest citizen can buy in a month does anything to reduce violent crime. Plus, the time and effort wasted in enacting and enforcing those idiotic laws, deprive resources from actually prosecuting real criminals.
 
BahamaBob said:
Your brain is what is not working. This clown is in jail. No one is dead and his weapons have been compensated. Can't work much better than that.
Click to expand...

I think confiscated is the term you want :mrgreen:
 
BahamaBob said:
Your brain is what is not working. This clown is in jail. No one is dead and his weapons have been compensated. Can't work much better than that.
Click to expand...

Didn't work too well in el paso.


Oh wait it worked great for you. You guys love mass shootings
 
TurtleDude said:
I suspect spell check is responsible
Click to expand...

Sometimes I type stuff on my phone and send it off before realizing the phone edited my message and turned it into something totally off the wall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom