Gun control debate (merged)

#2,051
#2,051
bnhunt said:
But it does affect other people. If you open fire in a public place because you believe you are protecting yourself, whether this is a reasonable belief or not, it does put other law-abiding citizens at risk. This is why we pay people to do this. Under the right's analysis, we should just abolish the police and let all citizens govern themselves ("Wild West" mentality).
Click to expand...
Oh sweet Jesus.
 
#2,052
#2,052
ClearwaterVol said:
The main issue is that the pro gun folks refuse to consider any possible solution with the that won't work refrain and the you're just out to get my guns. Somewhere and at sometime people need to sit down and rationally examine the issues and determine if there is a problem, what the problem is and possible solutions. The unwillingness to even take a look is troubling to me.
Click to expand...

I'm willing to take a look, the issue for me is the ones calling for more restrictions and regulations ONLY want to examine the surface. We have have a violence problem and in none of these discussions is that being addressed at the root level. Start there and I'll work with you all day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,054
#2,054
bnhunt said:
But it does affect other people. If you open fire in a public place because you believe you are protecting yourself, whether this is a reasonable belief or not, it does put other law-abiding citizens at risk. This is why we pay people to do this. Under the right's analysis, we should just abolish the police and let all citizens govern themselves ("Wild West" mentality).
Click to expand...

By the time the police arrive the body count could already be in the 100s. See Paris massacre.

Besides, supreme Court precedent states police have no obligation to protect you (Warren vs district of Columbia)
 
#2,055
#2,055
hog88 said:
By a CC permit holder? By someone legally permitted to have a gun inside a nightclub?
Click to expand...

If the place served alcohol, then it was illegal to have guns in there.

This is from Florida's government website regarding guns.


(12)(a) A license issued under this section does not authorize any person to openly carry a handgun or carry a concealed weapon or firearm into:
1. Any place of nuisance as defined in s. 823.05;
2. Any police, sheriff, or highway patrol station;
3. Any detention facility, prison, or jail;
4. Any courthouse;
5. Any courtroom, except that nothing in this section would preclude a judge from carrying a concealed weapon or determining who will carry a concealed weapon in his or her courtroom;
6. Any polling place;
7. Any meeting of the governing body of a county, public school district, municipality, or special district;
8. Any meeting of the Legislature or a committee thereof;
9. Any school, college, or professional athletic event not related to firearms;
10. Any elementary or secondary school facility or administration building;
11. Any career center;
12. Any portion of an establishment licensed to dispense alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises, which portion of the establishment is primarily devoted to such purpose;
 
#2,057
#2,057
The paradox that is the liberal mind about police
 

Attachments

  • FB_IMG_1454954275083.jpg
    FB_IMG_1454954275083.jpg
    42.3 KB · Views: 0
#2,058
#2,058
ClearwaterVol said:
The main issue is that the pro gun folks refuse to consider any possible solution with the that won't work refrain and the you're just out to get my guns. Somewhere and at sometime people need to sit down and rationally examine the issues and determine if there is a problem, what the problem is and possible solutions. The unwillingness to even take a look is troubling to me.
Click to expand...

Here's the thing about anti-gun folks. They refuse to consider anything short of total bans on complete classes of weapons based on physical feathers rather than true facts. And even though AR15s are involved in less than a percent of shootings nationwide, the anti-gun crowd always jumps straight to "ban!" when discussing it.

So that's a nice double edged sword you tossed out there. They have an unwillingness to look at the facts as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#2,059
#2,059
ClearwaterVol said:
The main issue is that the pro gun folks refuse to consider any possible solution with the that won't work refrain and the you're just out to get my guns. Somewhere and at sometime people need to sit down and rationally examine the issues and determine if there is a problem, what the problem is and possible solutions. The unwillingness to even take a look is troubling to me.
Click to expand...
The left is incapable of rational thought when the word gun is mentioned. Fear overrides any that they might have had.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,060
#2,060
Grand Vol said:
Here's the thing about anti-gun folks. They refuse to consider anything short of total bans on complete classes of weapons based on physical feathers rather than true facts. And even though AR15s are involved in less than a percent of shootings nationwide, the anti-gun crowd always jumps straight to "ban!" when discussing it.

So that's a nice double edged sword you tossed out there. They have an unwillingness to look at the facts as well.
Click to expand...

Anti gun folks also refuse to acknowledge that murder and other violent crime has been on the decline for over 20 years now. The world is just more connected and so we hear about the crimes more.
 
#2,062
#2,062
SpaceCoastVol said:
The left is incapable of rational thought when the word gun is mentioned. Fear overrides any that they might have had.
Click to expand...

It's almost like trying to convince someone that their fear of sharks in a swimming pool is idiotic because sharks don't have access to swimming pools.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,063
#2,063
RollinVol said:
I am white. I grew up pretty close to orange mound. My mom taught at booker t Washington. Memphis fell in love with the democrats and look at it. No one to blame but themselves.
Click to expand...

Believe it or not, our new mayor is white and was GOP-backed. I never thought I'd see the day.
 
#2,070
#2,070
Grand Vol said:
Here's the thing about anti-gun folks. They refuse to consider anything short of total bans on complete classes of weapons based on physical feathers rather than true facts. And even though AR15s are involved in less than a percent of shootings nationwide, the anti-gun crowd always jumps straight to "ban!" when discussing it.

So that's a nice double edged sword you tossed out there. They have an unwillingness to look at the facts as well.
Click to expand...

Please look at the way I phrased what needed to occur. The main problem with left on this issue is the jumping to the conclusion that there is a problem which could be addressed through any gun control measures. That was implicitly acknowledged in my post.

As far as bans on complete classes of weapons... I don't want the general public to have access to anti-aircraft guns and stinger missiles. I am ok with such bans. The assault gun ban was unnecessary and ineffective. Big, scary military rifles don’t kill the vast majority of Americans murdered with guns each year.
 
#2,071
#2,071
ClearwaterVol said:
Please look at the way I phrased what needed to occur. The main problem with left on this issue is the jumping to the conclusion that there is a problem which could be addressed through any gun control measures. That was implicitly acknowledged in my post.

As far as bans on complete classes of weapons... I don't want the general public to have access to anti-aircraft guns and stinger missiles. I am ok with such bans. The assault gun ban was unnecessary and ineffective. Big, scary military rifles don’t kill the vast majority of Americans murdered with guns each year.
Click to expand...

If the people can afford it, they should be privy to the same arms the govt is. If I don't have the right to something, I don't have the authority to appoint people who have those rights.
 
#2,072
#2,072
CNCVol88 said:
If the people can afford it, they should be privy to the same arms the govt is. If I don't have the right to something, I don't have the authority to appoint people who have those rights.
Click to expand...

Lots of individuals the world over can afford to purchase nuclear weapons. Cool with that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2,074
#2,074
CNCVol88 said:
If the people can afford it, they should be privy to the same arms the govt is. If I don't have the right to something, I don't have the authority to appoint people who have those rights.
Click to expand...

I have heard a lot of asinine and ludicrous arguments from the right-wing crazies, but this might take the cake. If a private citizen can afford a WMD, then under your analysis it is okay for them to possess one. There's just no arguing with that logic.
 
#2,075
#2,075
ClearwaterVol said:
Please look at the way I phrased what needed to occur. The main problem with left on this issue is the jumping to the conclusion that there is a problem which could be addressed through any gun control measures. That was implicitly acknowledged in my post.

As far as bans on complete classes of weapons... I don't want the general public to have access to anti-aircraft guns and stinger missiles. I am ok with such bans. The assault gun ban was unnecessary and ineffective. Big, scary military rifles don’t kill the vast majority of Americans murdered with guns each year.
Click to expand...

You said "pro gun" folks. And never addressed the anti side of the house.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top