View Poll Results: Do you Support Assault Weapons Ban?

Voters
4168. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    2,522 60.51%
  • No

    1,646 39.49%
  1. #11801
    The Lightbringer Zoranon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Czech Republic, Euro-Atlantic civilisation
    Posts
    3,893
    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 b2121945 View Post
    Don't see what's wrong with fighting alongside Nazi Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by JfmC View Post
    someone who disagrees with me is simply wrong.

  2. #11802
    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.

  3. #11803
    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.

  4. #11804
    If we banned people guns wouldn't kill anyone.
    https://i.redditmedia.com/P8UE8DAGeB...c1ef120404fdbd
    Quote Originally Posted by PRE 9-11 View Post
    This term isn't far off, though it would need the word "scientific" in front of it.
    Quote Originally Posted by PRE 9-11 View Post
    Accessibility, ownership, availability; these are all essentially the same thing.

  5. #11805
    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.

  6. #11806
    Merely a Setback Butter Emails's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Smashing Trumpkins
    Posts
    29,063
    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?
    "Nazis are like cats. If they like you, it's probably because you're feeding them." -John Oliver
    "How do Trump's people keep forgetting that they met with Russians?" -Trevor Noah
    Quote Originally Posted by TheOne01 View Post
    Read the rest of the thread. One is aloud to make an error..

  7. #11807
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,207
    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?

  8. #11808
    Immortal mistuhbull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Quel'Thalas
    Posts
    7,035
    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.

  9. #11809
    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.

  10. #11810
    Old God Grizzly Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Kenosha, Wisconsin
    Posts
    10,207
    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.

  11. #11811
    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.

  12. #11812


    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

  13. #11813
    The Lightbringer Zoranon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Czech Republic, Euro-Atlantic civilisation
    Posts
    3,893
    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 b2121945 View Post
    Don't see what's wrong with fighting alongside Nazi Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by JfmC View Post
    someone who disagrees with me is simply wrong.

  14. #11814
    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.

  15. #11815
    The Lightbringer Zoranon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Czech Republic, Euro-Atlantic civilisation
    Posts
    3,893
    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 b2121945 View Post
    Don't see what's wrong with fighting alongside Nazi Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by JfmC View Post
    someone who disagrees with me is simply wrong.

  16. #11816
    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.

  17. #11817
    The Undying Didactic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    So much for the tolerant left.
    Posts
    35,237
    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.
    Do no harm, but take no shit.

  18. #11818
    The Lightbringer Zoranon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Czech Republic, Euro-Atlantic civilisation
    Posts
    3,893
    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 b2121945 View Post
    Don't see what's wrong with fighting alongside Nazi Germany
    Quote Originally Posted by JfmC View Post
    someone who disagrees with me is simply wrong.

  19. #11819
    Quote Originally Posted by Didactic View Post
    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.
    I'm not sure what talking points you are suggesting. Just because I agree with a certain AD You don't need an assault weapon to go hunting sprays dozens of bullets. Are you not the same person who I repeated numerous times to accept reality that the Supreme Court COULD hear the case and you refused to do so. Also accused me of pulling things out of my ass.

    Well I deeply regret to disturb you on this issue. But This is not a losing battle. Country is dived and there has never been a time like now. When the guy blew away 10 peoples at the movies. That didn't change anything. When a kid killed 20 kids and 7 adults. Now that seriously woke something up and changed the attitude about these type of weapons.

    Again you are welcome to you're own point of view. However as Mitt Romney said to Obama in in the second debates. You're not entitled to make up you're own facts. An example of states including sandy hook already passing tighter gun control WITHOUT federal actions and the dozens of articles I've posted on the front page like on CNN article thousands marching on Washington for Gun Control is an example of my larger point.

    Sandy Hook changed Americas attitude to assault weapons.

    As for the poster above me. No need to lay threat to ignore me. It's quite obviously when you asked why I posted the video in the first place. You lost the entire point of my post. You ignored the Poll showing Mitch having a massive disadvantage in his own state. You rejected the one bullet at a time argument. No need to ignore me. I'll just kindly ignore you.

    Again I do not have a problem with a debate. At all. But when you honestly can see WHY I posted an AD. When I link an article, with a poll. It's not my responsibility to make sure you understand its quite obvious.
    Last edited by FusedMass; 2013-02-25 at 02:24 PM.

  20. #11820
    The Undying Didactic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    So much for the tolerant left.
    Posts
    35,237
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    I'm not sure what talking points you are suggesting. Just because I agree with a certain AD You don't need an assault weapon to go hunting sprays dozens of bullets. Are you not the same person who I repeated numerous times to accept reality that the Supreme Court COULD hear the case and you refused to do so. Also accused me of pulling things out of my ass.
    "100 rounds a second", "30 round magazines". You keep repeating them as though they help your argument, when they have no relevance at all.

    The Supreme Court -could- hear a case a lot of things. Whether or not they find a case in your favor is up in the air.

    Well I deeply regret to disturb you on this issue. But This is not a losing battle. Country is dived and there has never been a time like now. When the guy blew away 10 peoples at the movies. That didn't change anything. When a kid killed 20 kids and 7 adults. Now that seriously woke something up and changed the attitude about these type of weapons.
    Tripe. This is the -exact- same mood people experienced in the wake of things like Columbine and Virginia Tech. It's a matter of cyclical event framing; gun control is the 'in thing' to talk about at present. Any reforms that come about as a result of this will be transitory at most, since the gun culture is socially and constitutionally firmly rooted in the United States.

    Again you are welcome to you're own point of view. However as Mitt Romney said to Obama in in the second debates. You're not entitled to make up you're own facts. An example of states including sandy hook already passing tighter gun control WITHOUT federal actions and the dozens of articles I've posted on the front page like on CNN article thousands marching on Washington for Gun Control is an example of my larger point.
    Malcontents, and idiots, the lot of them. What they are doing is passing token measures designed to mollify an angry mob, nothing more.

    Sandy Hook changed Americas attitude to assault weapons.
    Nope. It framed an issue, one that will cycle out just like Columbine.
    Do no harm, but take no shit.

Posting Permissions

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