• 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!

Why do you have to be a gun geek to have an opinion on gun control?

I'm getting so tired of right wingers telling me I need to educate myself on guns in order to have an opinion on gun legislation. I don't care anything about learning about those awful killing machines any more than I care about learning about medieval torture devices. I couldn't care less what the difference is between a semi-automatic and an automatic or what the difference between the Child Killer 6000 and the Arab Impaler 7500 guns. Honestly, what does it matter?

Haven't we gone too far when we can own weapons that kill 50 people?

If Omar Mateen had had one of those guns that go POW! click-click POW! click-click POW! could he have killed 50 people? Could Adam Lanza have shot a classroom full of children with a gun like that?

The kind of guns that go ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta and fire lots of bullets really quickly need to go. You don't need it to hunt and you don't need it to defend your home. These guns are for killing and should not be in the possession of civilians!

We liberal's lack of knowledge of guns is just a red herring.

Because you are arguing on a topic you know nothing about, you can be anti gun and still be educated on firearms, but you can't debate firearms if you know nothing about firearms without looking like a fool.


There is always someone smarter than you in a debate, but no smart person makes it their goal to be the dumbest in a debate.
 
Because you are arguing on a topic you know nothing about, you can be anti gun and still be educated on firearms, but you can't debate firearms if you know nothing about firearms without looking like a fool.


There is always someone smarter than you in a debate, but no smart person makes it their goal to be the dumbest in a debate.

*Polite golf clap*
 
Because without knowing what you are talking about you look like an idiot. The AR-15 used doesn't go ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta it goes pow pow pow every time you pull the trigger just like any other legal rifle or hand gun. So to answer your own question yes if Omar Mateen had had one of those guns that go pow pow pow he could have killed 50 people and he did. He could have done that with a hand gun too or even a shotgun. He had the hostages for several hours, he could have killed them all with a box cutter.



Adonis is confused-of course he can have an OPINION

what he cannot have unless he is educated is one that merits any respect. the problem with gun banners is-almost all of them spew opinions based on their hatred of the pro gun culture and they never bothered actually learning about the subject matter. so their opinions are nothing more than ignorant hate
 
Nonetheless the AR-15 was designed specifically for military use--meaning killing numerous people. IMO: I do not see anyone in the civilian life needing that kind of firepower.


If it is any handgun or shotgun that I own he would definitely need to reload. And I doubt if he could have killed 50 people with a box cutter without people at that place jumping him and taking him down.

see this is what happens when you opine and you have no clue about the subject matter

the AR 15 was designed originally for military use. It was not designed to KILL but rather to INFLICT casualties. Its cartridge is far less likely to be fatal but since a soldier could carry 270 rounds of 556 M193 ball instead of 160 rounds a 762 NATO, his chances of INFLICTING more casualties was much higher Secondly the weapon was far more controllable in full auto mode meaning the weapon was more useful for either providing suppressive fire or for breaking contact in case of an ambush.

what someone as ignorant of guns says others need has absolutely no value. Did you that the most popular hunting rifle in the world is essentially the same thing as the standard issue German Battle rifle of WWI and WWII and certainly has caused more casualties than the M16

if cops need such firepower in our civilian environment, then other civilians ought to be able to own it
 
In a panic situatation where I just shot 10 people running for thier lives I'd like to see someone try to take me out before I can change a magazine.

you can carry and conceal four GLOCK 17 with 17 round magazines easier than an AR 15 with one magazine of 30. USMS deputies I used to work with often carried 3 GLOCKS routinely-a 17 on a belt, a 19 in a small of the back holster and a 26 in an ankle holster=all three could take 17 round magazines. and the only reason why I knew they were carrying is because I know what to look for and one of them asked me how many GLOCKS did he think I was carrying.
 
Because you are arguing on a topic you know nothing about, you can be anti gun and still be educated on firearms, but you can't debate firearms if you know nothing about firearms without looking like a fool.


There is always someone smarter than you in a debate, but no smart person makes it their goal to be the dumbest in a debate.

can you think of any of the gun banners on this board who actually have a clue about firearms? we have everything from claims that a "ten round magazine is only useful for warfare" to the brilliant assertion that buying a firearm alone shows "Criminal intent"
 
I'm getting so tired of right wingers telling me I need to educate myself on guns in order to have an opinion on gun legislation. I don't care anything about learning about those awful killing machines any more than I care about learning about medieval torture devices. I couldn't care less what the difference is between a semi-automatic and an automatic or what the difference between the Child Killer 6000 and the Arab Impaler 7500 guns. Honestly, what does it matter?

Haven't we gone too far when we can own weapons that kill 50 people?

If Omar Mateen had had one of those guns that go POW! click-click POW! click-click POW! could he have killed 50 people? Could Adam Lanza have shot a classroom full of children with a gun like that?

The kind of guns that go ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta-ta and fire lots of bullets really quickly need to go. You don't need it to hunt and you don't need it to defend your home. These guns are for killing and should not be in the possession of civilians!

We liberal's lack of knowledge of guns is just a red herring.

Trying to turn a discussion about public policy on guns into something technical is an old stand by strategy of the far right of the gun issue. Its trying desperately to place themselves in a stronger position in the discussion so they want to discuss technical specifics. You did a great job of exposing the tactic.

Good post.
 
Trying to turn a discussion about public policy on guns into something technical is an old stand by strategy of the far right of the gun issue. Its trying desperately to place themselves in a stronger position in the discussion so they want to discuss technical specifics. You did a great job of exposing the tactic.

Good post.

You say all that like it's a bad thing.
 
Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one and most of them stink.

The issue is whether the opinion is valid or not. What makes an opinion valid is information, and the more informed one is, the more valid and important the opinion.

If you're tired of being told something why not try doing what they suggest?

I guess ignorance really is bliss

I do NOT want people driving through my neighborhood sub division going 65 miles per hours.

I do not want people allowed to drive drunk.

I do not want people to keep their drivers license after a certain number of violations for driving violations.

Now despite being born and raised and living my whole life in the Detroit area - I have very little technical information about how an engine actually operates or how a drive train works or how a brake system functions or any number of automotive technical issues that car geeks and shop rats may be far far far more familiar with than I am.

But I still am entitled to have an opinion as an American citizen about speed limits and the other things related to operating a motor vehicle.

And the same is true for guns and the issues of public policy with them.

It is a dishonest fraud of a tactic to try to see if a person knows the secret handshake as one of your own and then criticizing them if they do not.
 
Trying to turn a discussion about public policy on guns into something technical is an old stand by strategy of the far right of the gun issue. Its trying desperately to place themselves in a stronger position in the discussion so they want to discuss technical specifics. You did a great job of exposing the tactic.

Good post.

�� Seriously? It was the gun haters that started the technical arguments but it backfired when your ignorance derailed your agenda. Feinstein took the cake on looking like a blathering moron.
 
�� Seriously? It was the gun haters that started the technical arguments but it backfired when your ignorance derailed your agenda. Feinstein took the cake on looking like a blathering moron.
:lamo will any one ever top Democratic Rep. Diana DeGette
“I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those know they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”
 
:lamo will any one ever top Democratic Rep. Diana DeGette
“I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those know they’re going to shoot them, so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot and there won’t be any more available.”

that dumb buzzard should have been committed to the loony bin for that bit of idiocy. How anyone could vote for someone that stupid is beyond reason
 
�� Seriously? It was the gun haters that started the technical arguments but it backfired when your ignorance derailed your agenda. Feinstein took the cake on looking like a blathering moron.

yes - seriously. One does not need to be a technical expert to have an opinion as an American citizen about matters of public policy which impact them.
 
Only the ignorant would try to paint the expectation of knowledge as unfair.

For over a dozen years I have seen people here who have no experience as teachers tell me about their views on public education.

So spare me the sanctimonious preaching about ignorance.
 
Trying to turn a discussion about public policy on guns into something technical is an old stand by strategy of the far right of the gun issue. Its trying desperately to place themselves in a stronger position in the discussion so they want to discuss technical specifics. You did a great job of exposing the tactic.

Good post.

Most of the things in gun debates don't require a technical expertise in.There is nothing technical about knowing what a semi-automatic firearm and a automatic firearm are, or knowing that many semi-automatic hunting rifles use the same rounds as a AR-15.Anyone with internet access can easily look these things up. Surely through out the years on gun debates you might have picked up some of this basic firearm knowledge by now.
 
For over a dozen years I have seen people here who have no experience as teachers tell me about their views on public education.

So spare me the sanctimonious preaching about ignorance.

Interesting. Do property taxes go to pay for guns to arm citizens?

If you have children going to public school and you have to help pay for public school, there is a distinct possibility they may want some say in that education. I guess that's why we have local school boards. Your analogy is somewhat flawed.
 
Interesting. Do property taxes go to pay for guns to arm citizens?

If you have children going to public school and you have to help pay for public school, there is a distinct possibility they may want some say in that education. I guess that's why we have local school boards. Your analogy is somewhat flawed.

My analogy is spot on but your belief system and tactics refuse to accept it as it exposes a major defect in your approach.
 
My analogy is spot on but your belief system and tactics refuse to accept it as it exposes a major defect in your approach.

Of course it is. So you claim to know my belief system. There is no defect in my approach as it is logical rather than emotional. Please refrain from supposed mind reading to make an appeal to closure, it makes your arguments look stupid.

Your analogy is terrible. As is your rebuttal.

Tell us again how public school funding is the same as gun control.
 
Of course it is. So you claim to know my belief system. There is no defect in my approach as it is logical rather than emotional. Please refrain from supposed mind reading to make an appeal to closure, it makes your arguments look stupid.

Your analogy is terrible. As is your rebuttal.

Tell us again how public school funding is the same as gun control.

Both are matter of public policy which impact a citizen.

You miss the point in your ardor and zeal to constantly attack me since you have identified me as an enemy of your belief system. And the point is simple: and American citizen has a right to an opinion on matters of public policy and need to pass or satisfy no test of technical knowledge that you or anyone else wants to throw out there as a way to discredit them and silence them from voicing a contrary opinion to theirs.

People with no formal education or even knowledge of public education do it all the time on issues of teachers and education and it does not stop them.

But when it comes to guns, a few of you try to make it some test of the technical aspect of guns and we get this derision about people not knowing the difference between as ASSAULT RIFLE and an ASSAULT WEAPON and then you all snicker and roll your eyes.

The far right gun techies should stop that sort of thing as it does their side no service.
 
Both are matter of public policy which impact a citizen.

You miss the point in your ardor and zeal to constantly attack me since you have identified me as an enemy of your belief system. And the point is simple: and American citizen has a right to an opinion on matters of public policy and need to pass or satisfy no test of technical knowledge that you or anyone else wants to throw out there as a way to discredit them and silence them from voicing a contrary opinion to theirs.

People with no formal education or even knowledge of public education do it all the time on issues of teachers and education and it does not stop them.

But when it comes to guns, a few of you try to make it some test of the technical aspect of guns and we get this derision about people not knowing the difference between as ASSAULT RIFLE and an ASSAULT WEAPON and then you all snicker and roll your eyes.

The far right gun techies should stop that sort of thing as it does their side no service.

Except in one case a property owner is forced to participate and fund it.

In the other case unless and until a citizen becomes a criminal no one else is impacted.

Ardor and zeal, funny, my posts are fairly emotionless. Yours are filled with emotionally driven taunts, jabs, caps locking and nicknames for those you oppose. I think you need to stop projecting and just stick with the topic.

The topic is that before you can craft a law that impacts something, you ought to know about that something first.
 
Except in one case a property owner is forced to participate and fund it.

In the other case unless and until a citizen becomes a criminal no one else is impacted.

Ardor and zeal, funny, my posts are fairly emotionless. Yours are filled with emotionally driven taunts, jabs, caps locking and nicknames for those you oppose. I think you need to stop projecting and just stick with the topic.

The topic is that before you can craft a law that impacts something, you ought to know about that something first.

We all live in the society and are thus "forced" by law to have our lives impacted by the laws that arise from matters of public policy.

In the other case unless and until a citizen becomes a criminal no one else is impacted.

False - we are all impacted by the laws and policies regarding guns.

Ardor and zeal, funny, my posts are fairly emotionless. Yours are filled with emotionally driven taunts, jabs, caps locking and nicknames for those you oppose. I think you need to stop projecting and just stick with the topic.

And to me it appears that it is you who are doing he projecting.

The topic is that before you can craft a law that impacts something, you ought to know about that something first.

And it is the "SOMETHING" that is in dispute and upon which there will never be agreement especially when the gun side tries to make it technical as some sort of the test to see if people know the secret handshake.
 
We all live in the society and are thus "forced" by law to have our lives impacted by the laws that arise from matters of public policy.



False - we are all impacted by the laws and policies regarding guns.



And to me it appears that it is you who are doing he projecting.



And it is the "SOMETHING" that is in dispute and upon which there will never be agreement especially when the gun side tries to make it technical as some sort of the test to see if people know the secret handshake.

Only you would try to make ignorance a virtue then argue it is when shown why it is not. To accomplish your stated goals, you should know about what you are trying to get rid of. Further before you impose on someone else's rights, you should make sure the narrow government need accomplishes that need. This requires knowledge and specificity.

I am not projecting anything, I am not attempting to characterize the opposition by portraying their argument in a certain way. Ardor and zeal?
 
I don't care anything about learning about those awful killing machines .........

'Those awful killing machines'.
Now that gave me the best laugh out loud moment of the entire day.

AtlantaAdonis,
No offense intended, my precious snowflake, but when I think of awful killing machines, I think of automobiles on the highways and side roads, cruising along at 65 miles an hour, with their dim-witted drivers blissfully texting their moron friends.
THAT's a killing machine.
And it gets worse every day.


A gun, on the other hand, is simply a tool.
In that it is a tool, it can be used for a wide variety of purposes.
It can be used for sport, it can be used for hunting and feeding the family, and it can be used for exterminating woodland creatures who might venture into the yard and threaten the safety of the house pets and smaller family members.

The founding fathers believed that it could be used to assist the citizens in keeping an out-of-control, power-hungry government from overstepping their boundaries.

A gun can also be used to murder other human beings.
Statistically speaking though, the vast majority of lawful, licensed gun-owners do not use a gun for this purpose.

Rather, most gun-related homicides are committed by criminals who
a. aren't licensed to carry
b. obtained the gun illegally
c. who don't obey existing laws, let alone proposed gun laws
and
d. who would just as likely kill with a ball bat, a crow-bar, or a knife, if they hadn't illegally obtained an unregistered handgun or rifle.

I hate it that you bristle so at others telling you how you should think or feel.
I myself support you remaining ignorant on matters relating to guns.
Because it's your choice as a taxpaying citizen to be ignorant, if you so choose to be ignorant.

In this country, currently anyway, you are still free to both be ignorant, and express your opinion on matters you haven't taken the time to study.
What a great concept!
Free to be you and me.

Much love, and have a nice day.
I have to go mow the grass now, and then get ready to work the night shift.

Remember, I have your back, buddy.
;)
 
Back
Top Bottom