View Poll Results: Do you Support Assault Weapons Ban?

Voters
3270. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    2,026 61.96%
  • No

    1,244 38.04%
  1. #11801
    Guns are nothing more than tools. By themselves they can perform NO action. They require HUMAN interaction to operate.

    To prove this point here is an easy example...

    Put the most powerful, deadly assault rifle in a room with 100 people, load it with a 100 round magazine, then without anyone touching it watch as it kills everyone in the room. It can't, it requires people to operate it. Rather than making guns the problem, let focus on the real issue at hand. People...

    I do believe that everyone who has an opinion on this matter basically just wants to stop the horrific violence that has plagued our country recently. So here are some realistic, real world ideas that may actually help us.

    1. Tighten gun control laws by mandating Federal guidelines. Too many guns are purchased legally for illegal purposes at gun shows, then transported over state lines. Make a federal minimum guideline that can actually prohibit this from happening.

    2. Require all gun owners to go through a lesser form of the pistol license back round check to be able to possess any firearm at all, pistol, rifle or shotgun. Require all purchases to be processed through the local police station, same as you have to do with pistols right now in NY. This will at first be a very hard pill to swallow, but after the initial problems, maintaining it will be much, much easier.

    3. Require all Mental Health professionals to report all dangerous situations regarding their patients to the local police. Immediately, all legally owned guns of all forms need to be removed from that household until the person in question no longer resides there. Too many disturbed children get the weapons used in these killings from their own household.

    4. Make the penalty for crimes involving weapons so harsh that no one wants to use a gun in a crime. In NY there is a law that mandates 1 yr in jail should you be caught with an illegal gun. Criminals who use guns do so with premeditation, from purchasing the illegal gun, to carrying it, to using it in the crime. Tougher laws will give criminals a moment of pause on whether the crime is worth the punishment. As it stands now the punishment is laughed at by these people. The best proof is if you look up the percentage of repeat offenders.

    Regardless of your position, we as people needs to find realistic ways to stop the violence without infringing on people rights and protecting the public. This is not a time for closed minded positions who don't argue there point but simply keep regurgitating it. Make your point, argue your position, defend it, BUT don't close your mind.

  2. #11802
    Quote Originally Posted by Ehrenpanzer View Post
    In most States you can drink and purchase smokes with military ID, regardless of age..same as in Canada
    What states will sell you Liquor illegally just because you have a military ID?

    ---------- Post added 2013-02-24 at 06:22 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Svifnymr View Post
    (not like you can test for maturity) and not like minors don't drink or smoke.
    You can actually it's called a drivers license/ID.

  3. #11803
    Warchief
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Czech Republic, Euro-Atlantic civilisation
    Posts
    2,049
    One of the principal reasons why there is so much controversy about this issue is the fact that there is no middle ground in this debate. Neither side gains any benefit by compromising with the other one. Just take a look at the 1994 AWB. Did the pro-control lobbies such as Brady Center stop calling for more regulations? No they did not, since there are too many people on both sides that will campaign until all of their demands have been fulfilled. This really is the answer to those who ask why does not NRA, or other pro-gun lobbies attempt to compromise. The answer is brutally simple, because nothing can be achieved by compromising.
    Quote Originally Posted by belfpala View Post
    This law abiding person doesn't consider taking your guns away to be a punishment.
    Quote Originally Posted by Djalil View Post
    Done. Now stop talking to me. Let the ban come now.

  4. #11804
    Quote Originally Posted by lockedout View Post
    You can actually it's called a drivers license/ID.
    I didn't say "verify age", ignoring fake ID's, I said maturity. 18 is old enough to do X, 21 is old enough to do Y, but neither age means the individual is actually mature enough to responsibly drink or smoke. It's just an arbitrary age where society/ government says you're old enough now.

  5. #11805
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamless View Post
    Prohibition outlawed ALL alcohol.

    Assault weapons bans outlaw a SUBSET of guns.

    The two are not analogous at all.
    Well it's cute that you have one anti-gun person comparing them to alcohol, then another saying, "Oh you can't compare them" after I respond. You can't have it both ways, what I said still stands - and it's true for 'bans' on personal freedoms of all kinds, which was my point.

  6. #11806
    If we banned people guns wouldn't kill anyone.

  7. #11807
    The Insane Cattaclysmic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Århus
    Posts
    17,814
    Quote Originally Posted by lockedout View Post
    If we banned people guns wouldn't kill anyone.
    They would - just wouldnt do it as much with guns and it would be harder for them to kill.

  8. #11808
    I don't get why people are getting upset about banning certain kinds of guns. Civilians are barred from owning a plethora of guns and other weapons already. An ICBM is technically an armament and should be covered under the right to bear arms given that logic, no? Shouldn't people be getting upset about getting their right to own automatic weapons and tanks back?
    Quote Originally Posted by Eroginous View Post
    Unfortunately for you, dictionaries are not authorities on the definitions of words.
    Ezekiel 23:20, Ezekiel 16:49-50, Mark 10:25, James 5:1-6, Luke 16:19-31, Matthew 19:21, Numbers 5:11-31

  9. #11809
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,206
    Quote Originally Posted by Cattaclysmic View Post
    They would - just wouldnt do it as much with guns and it would be harder for them to kill.
    Guns would be sentient without people?

  10. #11810
    Immortal mistuhbull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Quel'Thalas
    Posts
    7,045
    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly Willy View Post
    Guns would be sentient without people?
    I suppose a chimp or Orangutan could figure out how to work a gun.

    Not sure about loading it, but probably shoot it
    Theron/Bloodwatcher 2013!

    Quote Originally Posted by Alsompr View Post
    Teasing, misdirection. It's the opposite of a spoiler. People expect one thing? BAM! Another thing happens.

    I'm like M. Night fucking Shamylan.

  11. #11811
    The Insane Cattaclysmic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Århus
    Posts
    17,814
    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly Willy View Post
    Guns would be sentient without people?
    No - would a bomb? Why not allow everyone to have bombs then?

    Guns may not kill people - people kill people. But we don't have to make it easy for them.

  12. #11812
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,206
    Quote Originally Posted by Cattaclysmic View Post
    No - would a bomb? Why not allow everyone to have bombs then?

    Guns may not kill people - people kill people. But we don't have to make it easy for them.
    I'm not sure why you're telling me this.

  13. #11813
    Quote Originally Posted by Cattaclysmic View Post
    They would - just wouldnt do it as much with guns and it would be harder for them to kill.
    I'm pretty sure you misread what he said, and you continue on this train of thought anyway.

  14. #11814


    I didn't think I'd see the day when progressives target people for blocking common sense Gun Reform but there it is. I have to admit the case is quite compelling. He's just repeating the point several, numerous posters have been making. You do not need an AR-15 to go hunting. One Bullet is all it should take. For those who don't know Mitch is up for re-election in 2014.

    Article.

    The Progressive Change Campaign Committee is airing a new ad beginning Monday that targets Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) over his opposition to gun control. The group is spending at least $25,000 to air the ad in several Kentucky markets and Washington, D.C., for one week.

    The ad stars Gary Nutt of Cub Run, Ky., who says, "I am a Vietnam vet and a hunter. I only shot my rifle one time this last season. One shot, one deer. But I'd be a pretty bad hunter if I needed an assault rifle to shoot that buck."

    "I support the plan to ban assault weapons and keep 'em out of the wrong hands," he continues. "Because I know these guns. I know what they can do. The NRA and the gun manufacturers have given a ton of money to Senator Mitch McConnell."

    "And now he's blocking reform. Senator, whose side are you on?" Run says to close the ad.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...p_ref=politics

  15. #11815
    Warchief
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Czech Republic, Euro-Atlantic civilisation
    Posts
    2,049
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post


    I didn't think I'd see the day when progressives target people for blocking common sense Gun Reform but there it is. I have to admit the case is quite compelling. He's just repeating the point several, numerous posters have been making. You do not need an AR-15 to go hunting. One Bullet is all it should take. For those who don't know Mitch is up for re-election in 2014.

    Article.

    The Progressive Change Campaign Committee is airing a new ad beginning Monday that targets Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) over his opposition to gun control. The group is spending at least $25,000 to air the ad in several Kentucky markets and Washington, D.C., for one week.

    The ad stars Gary Nutt of Cub Run, Ky., who says, "I am a Vietnam vet and a hunter. I only shot my rifle one time this last season. One shot, one deer. But I'd be a pretty bad hunter if I needed an assault rifle to shoot that buck."

    "I support the plan to ban assault weapons and keep 'em out of the wrong hands," he continues. "Because I know these guns. I know what they can do. The NRA and the gun manufacturers have given a ton of money to Senator Mitch McConnell."

    "And now he's blocking reform. Senator, whose side are you on?" Run says to close the ad.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...p_ref=politics
    What is exactly the point of bringing this up? Hunting forms only part of the second amendment defence as you well know, besides, with a budget of 25 grand, this initiative can at the best be described as irrelevant.
    Quote Originally Posted by belfpala View Post
    This law abiding person doesn't consider taking your guns away to be a punishment.
    Quote Originally Posted by Djalil View Post
    Done. Now stop talking to me. Let the ban come now.

  16. #11816
    Quote Originally Posted by Zoranon View Post
    What is exactly the point of bringing this up? Hunting forms only part of the second amendment defence as you well know, besides, with a budget of 25 grand, this initiative can at the best be described as irrelevant.
    The point is

    A: Mitch is up for re-election in 2014. 55 percent of people in his own state do not approve of his is job. It's quite transparent he will lose to a Dem in an upcoming election

    B: You don't need an AR-15 to go hunting. One Bullet is all you need. Shooting more into an open area in my humble point of view is reckless.

    C: It shows the progressive action now starting to target those who are blocking common sense gun reform. Instead of hoping they will pass something. They are targeting people who are blocking it up

    D: Money does not equal how a measure will pass. If that was true. Romney outspent Obama yet still lost the election despite a large gap in money.

    I'm not sure why the money matters. But you asked so the purpose of bringing it up.

  17. #11817
    Warchief
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Czech Republic, Euro-Atlantic civilisation
    Posts
    2,049
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    The point is

    A: Mitch is up for re-election in 2014. 55 percent of people in his own state do not approve of his is job. It's quite transparent he will lose to a Dem in an upcoming election

    B: You don't need an AR-15 to go hunting. One Bullet is all you need. Shooting more into an open area in my humble point of view is reckless.

    C: It shows the progressive action now starting to target those who are blocking common sense gun reform. Instead of hoping they will pass something. They are targeting people who are blocking it up

    D: Money does not equal how a measure will pass. If that was true. Romney outspent Obama yet still lost the election despite a large gap in money.

    I'm not sure why the money matters. But you asked so the purpose of bringing it up.
    Tell me are you a far seer? Because otherwise claiming year and half in advance that he will loose his seat is absolutely ridiculous.

    What the hell does this have to do with anything, as I already wrote, hunting is only a part of 2nd rights.

    The last time guns played a major role in elections, it cost the dems the house and even many dem representatives who were reckoned to win lost their seats, including the standing speaker of the house, why should 2014 be any different?
    Quote Originally Posted by belfpala View Post
    This law abiding person doesn't consider taking your guns away to be a punishment.
    Quote Originally Posted by Djalil View Post
    Done. Now stop talking to me. Let the ban come now.

  18. #11818
    Quote Originally Posted by Zoranon View Post
    Tell me are you a far seer? Because otherwise claiming year and half in advance that he will loose his seat is absolutely ridiculous.

    What the hell does this have to do with anything, as I already wrote, hunting is only a part of 2nd rights.

    The last time guns played a major role in elections, it cost the dems the house and even many dem representatives who were reckoned to win lost their seats, including the standing speaker of the house, why should 2014 be any different?
    It's obvious to see the Republicans are facing a long losing battle. Denying this is to deny reality. Unless they change their message. Proof of that is transparent. You do see the thread titled "What do Republicans have to do to become relevant again" If that's not enough again a poll out right now shows 55 percent of people do not approve of his job.

    Guess who is going step in race against him a highly popular Hollywood figure. Ashley Judd. It's not "Absolutely Ridiculous" It's logical.

    Hunting is part of 2nd rights. I am not disputing that. You do not seem to be understanding the point of the AD. It says you only need one bullet at a time to fire. Not a dozen.

    Yes the last time it did. However I been repeating this numerous times along with dozens of people across the country. Sandy Hook was a game changer. All those attempts in the past. Wipe the slate clean. Sandy woke up America that's why you see such an intense debate about it because something is actually getting done. It was THE moment in history when people look back to how we pased common sense Gun Reform.

    Again you do not have to like or agree with my answers. But they are logical. I even have a poll to back up what I'm saying about Mitch. What makes you think he will win re-election.

  19. #11819
    The Insane Didactic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Blorch - Home of the Slaughtering Rat People
    Posts
    15,642
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    It's obvious to see the Republicans are facing a long losing battle. Denying this is to deny reality. Unless they change their message. Proof of that is transparent. You do see the thread titled "What do Republicans have to do to become relevant again" If that's not enough again a poll out right now shows 55 percent of people do not approve of his job.

    Guess who is going step in race against him a highly popular Hollywood figure. Ashley Judd. It's not "Absolutely Ridiculous" It's logical.

    Hunting is part of 2nd rights. I am not disputing that. You do not seem to be understanding the point of the AD. It says you only need one bullet at a time to fire. Not a dozen.

    Yes the last time it did. However I been repeating this numerous times along with dozens of people across the country. Sandy Hook was a game changer. All those attempts in the past. Wipe the slate clean. Sandy woke up America that's why you see such an intense debate about it because something is actually getting done. It was THE moment in history when people look back to how we pased common sense Gun Reform.

    Again you do not have to like or agree with my answers. But they are logical. I even have a poll to back up what I'm saying about Mitch. What makes you think he will win re-election.
    What you have been repeating is talking points with no actual relevance to the issue at hand. People spouted the exact same tripe after Columbine.

    The fact of the matter is this; gun control is only an issue at present because so much media attention is focused upon it. Another year or two and most people will forget about Sandy Hook.
    Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.
    - Thucydides

    There is a modern myth that people have always tended towards democracy, constitutions, electoral rights; but in truth, love of freedom has never been the predominant note of popular politics. At most times, popular demand has been for a strong government.
    - Eugen Weber

  20. #11820
    Warchief
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Czech Republic, Euro-Atlantic civilisation
    Posts
    2,049
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    It's obvious to see the Republicans are facing a long losing battle. Denying this is to deny reality. Unless they change their message. Proof of that is transparent. You do see the thread titled "What do Republicans have to do to become relevant again" If that's not enough again a poll out right now shows 55 percent of people do not approve of his job.

    Guess who is going step in race against him a highly popular Hollywood figure. Ashley Judd. It's not "Absolutely Ridiculous" It's logical.

    Hunting is part of 2nd rights. I am not disputing that. You do not seem to be understanding the point of the AD. It says you only need one bullet at a time to fire. Not a dozen.

    Yes the last time it did. However I been repeating this numerous times along with dozens of people across the country. Sandy Hook was a game changer. All those attempts in the past. Wipe the slate clean. Sandy woke up America that's why you see such an intense debate about it because something is actually getting done. It was THE moment in history when people look back to how we pased common sense Gun Reform.

    Again you do not have to like or agree with my answers. But they are logical. I even have a poll to back up what I'm saying about Mitch. What makes you think he will win re-election.
    Stop sprouting the one bullet for hunting drivel you are not speaking at to your fellow anti-fun people here. I am going to repeat myself for the third time, if you fail to understand it again, as your post history suggest I will ignore you from there on: Hunting is only part of the second amendment rights, there is also self defence, where one bullet might not be enough, capiche?

    You are mistaking the mood around you for mood all around the country, if you look back at the 1994 awb, there were claims of final victory over pro-gun lobby, etc. After each school shooting there is a short term surge of popular support for gun control. But if you think sandy hook will still be relevant in 2014, you are deluding yourself.
    Quote Originally Posted by belfpala View Post
    This law abiding person doesn't consider taking your guns away to be a punishment.
    Quote Originally Posted by Djalil View Post
    Done. Now stop talking to me. Let the ban come now.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •