By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - Call your Congressman tomorrow as Obama is giving his speech!

Ckmlb1 on 16 January 2013
kain_kusanagi said:
Ckmlb1 said:
JoeTheBro said:

About 70% of America is strongly against these gun laws, we will not let it pass!

Wrong! 6 in 10 Americans support tougher gun laws. 


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-34222_162-57564252-10391739/poll-6-in-10-favor-tougher-gun-laws/

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/16/cnn-poll-majority-approve-of-obama-biden-in-advance-of-gun-control-announcement/

Anyone too dumb to hang up on an interupting polster doesn't represent the common sense of general public. I say no thanks to every poll phone call and ask to never be called again. Excuse me if I don't trust the stats collected from who too stupid or loney to hang up.

Lol! This is a new reasoning I've never heard before. If the poll had said the opposite that 60% were against the gun laws I'm sure you'd view them differently. How about the fact that we just had an election where the guy won by over 5 million votes? Or is that because only stupid people vote instead of being smart and staying away from the polls?



XBL Gamertag: ckmlb, PSN ID: ckmlb

Around the Network
NobleTeam360 on 16 January 2013
Mr Khan said:
NobleTeam360 said:
MDMAlliance said:
I think many people here (and in the video that was shown) are missing the point of the high-capacity ammunition ban.

The whole argument how there's only a .5 second difference in two 10 rounds vs 1 20 round isn't exactly accurate for all cases. The trial he ran was pretty much a bare minimum of the difference, and it assumes many things.

Generally, though, if you have to bring more magazines to have more shots, it is an inconvenience for you unless you want to get caught. So what will happen with the ban is that it makes it more difficult to hold more ammunition with you, therefore the gunman will have less shots creating a situation that makes it more difficult for mass shootings to be even more deadlier if they had the higher capacity magazines.

To say it makes no difference or the difference doesn't matter is kind of dumb, as Obama is really more trying to save as many lives as he can, whether it's one or one hundred. The ban isn't going to do THAT much for those who do it for sport, considering they don't have to worry as much about carrying all those things with them.

Also, I think it's kind of dumb to say crime will happen anyway because that's really not the point. I actually looked up that stabbing incident in China and I realized that bringing that one up is kind of dumb too when the Sandy shooting had 26 dead, the stabbing had 23 wounded (not dead). The deadliness of the two are on totally different levels. You can't possibly say that 26 dead is about the same as 23 wounded.

Lol protect who? He isn't trying to save lives criminals will still have guns and thus resulting in more preventable crime. Guess what else if criminals know their aren't any guns to stop them they can do whatever they want. Do you think the police will stop them? the victims will be long dead by time they get their. How is it dumb to say crime will happen anyway? That is a major point for everyone to be allowed to own guns. Glad I live in a state that will block any federal laws that are put in place. 

States CANNOT overrule federal law. You live in no such state.

Yeah any state can make up their own laws regarding guns they don't have to follow what the federal government does. Why do you think their is so many differnet gun laws in different states? Duh



sc94597 on 16 January 2013

 

Where have you explained it? You've only mentioned that you'd use said "inferior" weapons against military grade weapons in an attempt to hijack a nuclear device, with no thought of the government perhaps having control of setting it off beforehand/during the attempted hijack.


Check the countless other gun control threads. I'm not explaining it again. 



Soleron on 16 January 2013
NobleTeam360 said:

Obama has broke so many laws domestic and internationally that he should of been impeached a long time ago. 

Basically every politician does this. International law doesn't exist because you can't punish countries effectively.



Ckmlb1 on 16 January 2013
Mr Khan said:
killerzX said:
Mr Khan said:
killerzX said:
 

 

And where are you wandering around that you need a hell of a lot of bullets? Isn't the gun alone supposed to be the deterrent?

You're preparing for things that nobody should need to prepare for.

It's in case your home is invaded by dozens upon dozens of criminals, gangsters, communists and spies like in a Chuck Norris movie. You need to shoot 100 bullets in minutes for self defense! 



XBL Gamertag: ckmlb, PSN ID: ckmlb

Around the Network
MDMAlliance on 16 January 2013
NobleTeam360 said:
MDMAlliance said:
I think many people here (and in the video that was shown) are missing the point of the high-capacity ammunition ban.

The whole argument how there's only a .5 second difference in two 10 rounds vs 1 20 round isn't exactly accurate for all cases. The trial he ran was pretty much a bare minimum of the difference, and it assumes many things.

Generally, though, if you have to bring more magazines to have more shots, it is an inconvenience for you unless you want to get caught. So what will happen with the ban is that it makes it more difficult to hold more ammunition with you, therefore the gunman will have less shots creating a situation that makes it more difficult for mass shootings to be even more deadlier if they had the higher capacity magazines.

To say it makes no difference or the difference doesn't matter is kind of dumb, as Obama is really more trying to save as many lives as he can, whether it's one or one hundred. The ban isn't going to do THAT much for those who do it for sport, considering they don't have to worry as much about carrying all those things with them.

Also, I think it's kind of dumb to say crime will happen anyway because that's really not the point. I actually looked up that stabbing incident in China and I realized that bringing that one up is kind of dumb too when the Sandy shooting had 26 dead, the stabbing had 23 wounded (not dead). The deadliness of the two are on totally different levels. You can't possibly say that 26 dead is about the same as 23 wounded.

Lol protect who? He isn't trying to save lives criminals will still have guns and thus resulting in more preventable crime. Guess what else if criminals know their aren't any guns to stop them they can do whatever they want. Do you think the police will stop them? the victims will be long dead by time they get their. How is it dumb to say crime will happen anyway? That is a major point for everyone to be allowed to own guns. Glad I live in a state that will block any federal laws that are put in place. 

I don't recall saying "protect."  

Saying criminals will still have guns is a really dumb argument when I'm not arguing that this law will take guns away from criminals.  It's equally dumb to assume only criminals kill people with guns, so not everyone who's going to kill someone with a gun will be a part of that group.  Think about who the mass shooting culprits were.  Were they criminals?  Not usually.

It's dumb to say the crime will happen anyway because it's obviously not the point of the law, the law isn't saying "we will stop all gun-related crimes."  They are just testing the waters with laws to help prevent gun-violence.  The reason action was taken is because gun violence is too high in America.

Everyone having guns is also kind of dumb, as a LOT of people are NOT responsible with guns, and it will cost MUCH more to try to teach everyone how to be responsible with guns when we have a hard enough time teaching people to be responsible with alcohol.



Soleron on 16 January 2013
NobleTeam360 said:
...



States CANNOT overrule federal law. You live in no such state.

Yeah any state can make up their own laws regarding guns they don't have to follow what the federal government does. Why do you think their is so many differnet gun laws in different states? Duh

They can make it more restrictive than the government but not less. So if there is a federal ban on assault weapons then no state can legalise them.



Mr Khan on 16 January 2013
NobleTeam360 said:
Mr Khan said:
NobleTeam360 said:
MDMAlliance said:
I think many people here (and in the video that was shown) are missing the point of the high-capacity ammunition ban.

The whole argument how there's only a .5 second difference in two 10 rounds vs 1 20 round isn't exactly accurate for all cases. The trial he ran was pretty much a bare minimum of the difference, and it assumes many things.

Generally, though, if you have to bring more magazines to have more shots, it is an inconvenience for you unless you want to get caught. So what will happen with the ban is that it makes it more difficult to hold more ammunition with you, therefore the gunman will have less shots creating a situation that makes it more difficult for mass shootings to be even more deadlier if they had the higher capacity magazines.

To say it makes no difference or the difference doesn't matter is kind of dumb, as Obama is really more trying to save as many lives as he can, whether it's one or one hundred. The ban isn't going to do THAT much for those who do it for sport, considering they don't have to worry as much about carrying all those things with them.

Also, I think it's kind of dumb to say crime will happen anyway because that's really not the point. I actually looked up that stabbing incident in China and I realized that bringing that one up is kind of dumb too when the Sandy shooting had 26 dead, the stabbing had 23 wounded (not dead). The deadliness of the two are on totally different levels. You can't possibly say that 26 dead is about the same as 23 wounded.

Lol protect who? He isn't trying to save lives criminals will still have guns and thus resulting in more preventable crime. Guess what else if criminals know their aren't any guns to stop them they can do whatever they want. Do you think the police will stop them? the victims will be long dead by time they get their. How is it dumb to say crime will happen anyway? That is a major point for everyone to be allowed to own guns. Glad I live in a state that will block any federal laws that are put in place. 

States CANNOT overrule federal law. You live in no such state.

Yeah any state can make up their own laws regarding guns they don't have to follow what the federal government does. Why do you think their is so many differnet gun laws in different states? Duh

They can only make their own laws when it doesn't conflict with federal law. If it does; federal law wins.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

MDMAlliance on 16 January 2013
Soleron said:
NobleTeam360 said:

Obama has broke so many laws domestic and internationally that he should of been impeached a long time ago. 

Basically every politician does this. International law doesn't exist because you can't punish countries effectively.


International Laws are broken all the time because they aren't the same as regular laws.  They have no one to really enforce them.  Also, an individual doesn't break International Law, countries do.  



NobleTeam360 on 16 January 2013
MDMAlliance said:
NobleTeam360 said:
MDMAlliance said:
I think many people here (and in the video that was shown) are missing the point of the high-capacity ammunition ban.

The whole argument how there's only a .5 second difference in two 10 rounds vs 1 20 round isn't exactly accurate for all cases. The trial he ran was pretty much a bare minimum of the difference, and it assumes many things.

Generally, though, if you have to bring more magazines to have more shots, it is an inconvenience for you unless you want to get caught. So what will happen with the ban is that it makes it more difficult to hold more ammunition with you, therefore the gunman will have less shots creating a situation that makes it more difficult for mass shootings to be even more deadlier if they had the higher capacity magazines.

To say it makes no difference or the difference doesn't matter is kind of dumb, as Obama is really more trying to save as many lives as he can, whether it's one or one hundred. The ban isn't going to do THAT much for those who do it for sport, considering they don't have to worry as much about carrying all those things with them.

Also, I think it's kind of dumb to say crime will happen anyway because that's really not the point. I actually looked up that stabbing incident in China and I realized that bringing that one up is kind of dumb too when the Sandy shooting had 26 dead, the stabbing had 23 wounded (not dead). The deadliness of the two are on totally different levels. You can't possibly say that 26 dead is about the same as 23 wounded.

Lol protect who? He isn't trying to save lives criminals will still have guns and thus resulting in more preventable crime. Guess what else if criminals know their aren't any guns to stop them they can do whatever they want. Do you think the police will stop them? the victims will be long dead by time they get their. How is it dumb to say crime will happen anyway? That is a major point for everyone to be allowed to own guns. Glad I live in a state that will block any federal laws that are put in place. 

I don't recall saying "protect."  

Saying criminals will still have guns is a really dumb argument when I'm not arguing that this law will take guns away from criminals.  It's equally dumb to assume only criminals kill people with guns, so not everyone who's going to kill someone with a gun will be a part of that group.  Think about who the mass shooting culprits were.  Were they criminals?  Not usually.

It's dumb to say the crime will happen anyway because it's obviously not the point of the law, the law isn't saying "we will stop all gun-related crimes."  They are just testing the waters with laws to help prevent gun-violence.  The reason action was taken is because gun violence is too high in America.

Everyone having guns is also kind of dumb, as a LOT of people are NOT responsible with guns, and it will cost MUCH more to try to teach everyone how to be responsible with guns when we have a hard enough time teaching people to be responsible with alcohol.


Ok, Im not even going to argue/debate you because you either repeat yourself or deny something by saying it was a dumb argument.