• 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!

Where is the Problem?

Are guns the problem or is it gun wielders that are the problem?

  • Yes, guns are the problem.

    Votes: 2 5.6%
  • No, gun wielders are the problem.

    Votes: 6 16.7%
  • Both guns and gun wielders are the problem.

    Votes: 7 19.4%
  • Guns in the wrong hands is the problem.

    Votes: 10 27.8%
  • I'm getting a headache.

    Votes: 3 8.3%
  • Other.

    Votes: 8 22.2%

  • Total voters
    36
What do you suppose that he base that on?

The amount of defense you claimed needed to keep criminals at bay. The fear of a random criminal randomly choosing your house and deliberately breaking in knowing you are there because psychopaths who just want to rape and burn are a common site around well armed neighborhoods.
 
That is what statistics show. The neighborhoods that are the best protected against crime receive the least amount of criminals.

Say whu?
Did you just say that criminals are afraid to work in areas where there are lots of guns? BWAHAHAHA. I hope I misunderstood.
 
Guns themselves have nothing to do with a problem; guns are just tools.

Well yeah, they're the "tools" most suited for killing people with ease, so they have to be scrutinized and regulated in society a bit more than say a pair of pliers would be. DERP.

C'mon Neil, this isnt exactly astrophysics.
 
Say whu?
Did you just say that criminals are afraid to work in areas where there are lots of guns? BWAHAHAHA. I hope I misunderstood.
While I am sure there will be exceptions to the rule. It is more statistically likely that crime with guns will occur in poor neighborhoods with no real defense against crime. Where as middle class suburbia or gated communities are not only well armed but have better security in general.

And I doubt the criminals who work areas that have lots of guns are the type to make the mistake of entering a house with an armed occupant. At least not if the criminals want to stay in that profession for long.
 
From my view a certain radical element of the left would enjoy to ban all weapons forgetting that not all people live in an urban area with a fast police response. People in rural areas need guns for protection where by the time a police car would get there in case of a home invasion might be too late. But that does not matter to the elitists living in New York.

On the other side, is laughable to listen to some on the right that mention they want all weapons legal "to fight the big bad government" meanwhile with the cyberwarfare that we are seeing a kid in his mom's basement can hack your computer and shut your power grid down. I am afraid the time of the cowboy is over. Yes, I know it writes it the constitution so I am not even allowed to state my opinion.
 
The debate will go nowhere I know but I voted for the first option. Heres why.

""An inanimate object cannot make a decision, cannot feel hatred or love towards anything. No, an inanimate object only acts as the one who possesses the object decides." Sounds good. Except would that also be true for ICBMs? Apparently not. Nobody has used on in anger...but we keep them pointed at one another, dictators and despots try to acquire them (or their cousin--nuclear explosives without the rocket to deploy them). The very existence causes reactions of others. I have my own quote. "Lawyers are like warheads; they have theirs so I have mine...and when you use them everything gets messy."

The same is true with guns.
 
And I doubt the criminals who work areas that have lots of guns are the type to make the mistake of entering a house with an armed occupant.

LOL. Thats hilarious.

A criminal will eagerly break into a house with or without guns, and will be looking for guns as one of the most stolen items.

Does the presence of guns prevent criminals from wantonly shooting each other in our fabulous metropolitan areas? Think about it.
 
Gun violence, gun ownership, misuse of firearms, it depends on your perspective.

My problem stems from two areas: First, guns being in the wrong hands, and second, people bitching about the right to bear arms.
I don't know how you're gonna stop criminals from obtaining guns. The black market will just supply them. If you doubt this just consider what happened during the days of the Prohibition. It didn't stop drinkers from getting alcohol.
 
I don't know how you're gonna stop criminals from obtaining guns. The black market will just supply them. If you doubt this just consider what happened during the days of the Prohibition. It didn't stop drinkers from getting alcohol.
Same black market applies to illegal drugs.
 
Agreed.

Even many of our fabulous dp Gun Nuts frequently talk about how they pull guns out on people all the time. Also: their wives and girlfriends and kids all carry guns too, and all have pulled guns on people "multiple times". One fella even claimed, if I recall, to have doled out a "9mm colonoscopy" recently? But I think that may have been BS and all talk.
It just seems like these folks are looking MIGHTY hard for someone that needs shot is all I'm saying.
Some posters seem to have a rich fantacy life.
 
I don't know how you're gonna stop criminals from obtaining guns. The black market will just supply them. If you doubt this just consider what happened during the days of the Prohibition. It didn't stop drinkers from getting alcohol.
So what's your point? Are you saying that I believe we can and will keep guns out of criminals hands? If I believed that, I wouldn't be viewing this as a problem.
 
So what's your point? Are you saying that I believe we can and will keep guns out of criminals hands? If I believed that, I wouldn't be viewing this as a problem.
My point is what I stated. If you want to attack the problem a more vigorous approach to severely crippling the black market is necessary. The fact that the Mexican cartels are making billions from it only suggests that politicians aren't serious about tackling the problem.
 
A question about firearms usage.
With great Rights must come equal or better Responsibility.

Gun accidents resulting in injuries or death due to negligence and or just basic gun handling incompetence added to overt intentional gun crimes perpetrated by legal and illegal "gun wielders" are the problem.

I take it, unless the OP says differently, that their "gun wielders" includes all legal owners possessing weapons, all law enforcement officers carrying weapons as part of their duty, as well as all folks illegally in possession of guns.
 
While I am sure there will be exceptions to the rule. It is more statistically likely that crime with guns will occur in poor neighborhoods with no real defense against crime. Where as middle class suburbia or gated communities are not only well armed but have better security in general.

And I doubt the criminals who work areas that have lots of guns are the type to make the mistake of entering a house with an armed occupant. At least not if the criminals want to stay in that profession for long.
Prove this garbage with real data
 
A question about firearms usage.
I'll keep it simple.
Guns do not kill people; people kill people.
Over 300 millions guns are owned in this country.

Anyone can get a gun if they want to threaten or harm people.
Stupid people like Lori Lightfoot in Chicago will blame easy access to guns for the non-stop shootings in her out-of-control South Side. And Chicago and Illinois have strict gun control laws. That is how ridiculous Democratic leaders sound when they try to blame gun deaths and guns and not on the thugs and criminals.
 
The US is the shithole of developed nations at this point, yeah thats pretty much correct IMO.
Violence, bridges falling down, homeless everywhere, people dropping dead left and right from drugs, riots and rebellions from both white supremacists and black supremacists.
No universal healthcare, no universal maternity and parental leave, no universal education.

Shithole. Check.(y) Yes, I said it.
Remind me to not engage in civil and logical conversation with you.
A "Peaceful Warrior" with the JFK face. An angry wolf in sheep's clothing.
 
With great Rights must come equal or better Responsibility.

Gun accidents resulting in injuries or death due to negligence and or just basic gun handling incompetence added to overt intentional gun crimes perpetrated by legal and illegal "gun wielders" are the problem.

I take it, unless the OP says differently, that their "gun wielders" includes all legal owners possessing weapons, all law enforcement officers carrying weapons as part of their duty, as well as all folks illegally in possession of guns.
Good point. I should have added "Lack of proper training" as a choice and provided the multiple votes option.
 
My point is what I stated. If you want to attack the problem a more vigorous approach to severely crippling the black market is necessary. The fact that the Mexican cartels are making billions from it only suggests that politicians aren't serious about tackling the problem.
Agreed. It's mind blowing that the government doesn't go full throttle after this.
 
LOL. Thats hilarious.

A criminal will eagerly break into a house with or without guns, and will be looking for guns as one of the most stolen items.

Does the presence of guns prevent criminals from wantonly shooting each other in our fabulous metropolitan areas? Think about it.
Not actually relevant to what I said which was a thief would not enter a house with an armed occupant. Not as you seem to think a thief will take guns.
 
Not actually relevant to what I said which was a thief would not enter a house with an armed occupant. Not as you seem to think a thief will take guns.
Your uneducated and unsupported opinions carry no weight here
 
if you do not have a gun you cannot shoot a person.....you can stab em, club em, drown em, poison em, hang em, burn em, throw em under a bus or drop em off a building.......but you cannot shoot em
And, if that person is a Russian soldier occupying your country, he will be much safer if all you have is a knife!
 
I've never understood how that makes any sense, or why in the **** it would matter what you call it.

there are WAY too many idiots with guns they shouldn't have in the Gun Nut Nayshun, call it whatever you like.
I'm guessing that President Zelenskyy is wishing that Ukraine had been More of a Gun Nut Nayshun about now.
 
Back
Top Bottom