Should America have gun control?

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

And you're stalling CYDdharta.

You can have a seat behind your soapbox, and parade these words before the audience to this forum all you want:

"You keep saying that, but you have yet to explain how denying people their rights is pro community, pro second amendment, pro law, pro family, pro education, or pro United States of America. It is, however, pro police state."

What's your position?

How about we start with deciding on reasonable goals. Unfortunate incidents like these are never going to stop. That being the case, the problem with falling for the media hype that accompanies every one of these attacks is that no measure can ever be considered effective. Once we have a goal, the best way to go about achieving it is to

A - deal with criminals more harshly. Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners are rearrested. Project Exile has proven to be quite successful.

B - allow people to more easily defend themselves. Police don't stop crimes from happening. If they're really lucky, they can cut a crime in progress short, but mostly they just write up reports after the fact. People need to be responsible for their own protection, of course to do so they need to have the mean to defend themselves at their disposal.

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

@Zombieguy1987

CYDdharta didn't answer the question.

He answered the question this way:

"How about we start with deciding on reasonable goals. Unfortunate incidents like these are never going to stop. That being the case, the problem with falling for the media hype that accompanies every one of these attacks is that no measure can ever be considered effective. Once we have a goal, the best way to go about achieving it is to

A - deal with criminals more harshly. Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners are rearrested. Project Exilehas proven to be quite successful.

B - allow people to more easily defend themselves. Police don't stop crimes from happening. If they're really lucky, they can cut a crime in progress short, but mostly they just write up reports after the fact. People need to be responsible for their own protection, of course to do so they need to have the mean to defend themselves at their disposal."

Where is your evidence to support you pro police state narrative at?

Because, do you know what you sound like?
A an individual, who when it comes to his weapons, prefers things his way, as he sees them, and on his terms?

What say you CYDdharta?

And where information from the news media outlets?

TTKDB

@Zombieguy1987

Why do you view the below as irrelevant?

CYDdharta didn't answer the question.

He answered the question this way:

"How about we start with deciding on reasonable goals. Unfortunate incidents like these are never going to stop. That being the case, the problem with falling for the media hype that accompanies every one of these attacks is that no measure can ever be considered effective. Once we have a goal, the best way to go about achieving it is to

A - deal with criminals more harshly. Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners are rearrested. Project Exilehas proven to be quite successful.

B - allow people to more easily defend themselves. Police don't stop crimes from happening. If they're really lucky, they can cut a crime in progress short, but mostly they just write up reports after the fact. People need to be responsible for their own protection, of course to do so they need to have the mean to defend themselves at their disposal."

Where is your evidence to support you pro police state narrative at?

Because, do you know what you sound like?
A an individual, who when it comes to his weapons, prefers things his way, as he sees them, and on his terms?

What say you CYDdharta?

And where information from the news media outlets?

@Zombieguy1987

Do you agree with his points of view?

Have you heard any of the national news media outlets, expressing any dialogue in regards to this:

"pro United States of America. It is, however, pro police state."

@Zombieguy1987

@CYDdharta

Or are maybe some of the national news media outlets being biased, with their news media stories, when it comes to the offenders and their illegal gun violence?

Do the two of you have any counter arguments for that hypothetical point of view?

Zombieguy1987

TTKDB said:

@Zombieguy1987

Why do you view the below as irrelevant?

Like other times, your questions are nothing more than to STALL people so they lose interest in the debate

CYDdharta didn't answer the question.

He answered the question this way:

"How about we start with deciding on reasonable goals. Unfortunate incidents like these are never going to stop. That being the case, the problem with falling for the media hype that accompanies every one of these attacks is that no measure can ever be considered effective. Once we have a goal, the best way to go about achieving it is to

A - deal with criminals more harshly. Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners are rearrested. Project Exilehas proven to be quite successful.
B - allow people to more easily defend themselves. Police don't stop crimes from happening. If they're really lucky, they can cut a crime in progress short, but mostly they just write up reports after the fact. People need to be responsible for their own protection, of course to do so they need to have the mean to defend themselves at their disposal."

Where is your evidence to support you pro police state narrative at?

Because, do you know what you sound like?
A an individual, who when it comes to his weapons, prefers things his way, as he sees them, and on his terms?

What say you CYDdharta?

And where information from the news media outlets?

@Zombieguy1987

Do you agree with his points of view?

Have you heard any of the national news media outlets, expressing any dialogue in regards to this:

"pro United States of America. It is, however, pro police state."

@Zombieguy1987

@CYDdharta

Or are maybe some of the national news media outlets being biased, with their news media stories, when it comes to the offenders and their illegal gun violence?

Do the two of you have any counter arguments for that hypothetical point of view?

TTKDB

@Zombieguy1987

"Like other times, your questions are nothing more than to STALL people so they lose interest in the debate"

Do you maybe have any words of condolence for the family in Texas that lost their daughter?

TTKDB

Should America have gun control?

How about some the offenders exercising some pro community common sense?

Zombieguy1987

TTKDB said:

@Zombieguy1987

"Like other times, your questions are nothing more than to STALL people so they lose interest in the debate"

Do you maybe have any words of condolence for the family in Texas that lost their daughter?

How is this relevant to the debate at hand?

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

What national TV news media outlets, like ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, PBS, WHRO, or maybe even NPR?

Has stated in any of it's news media outlet coverage, say in the last 6 months, about this from you?

That the "United States of America. It is, however, pro police state."

Where's your evidence to support your statement?

You can't soundbite someone's quote when you're having a conversation with them, they're going to call you on it. In this case, a proper condensed version of the quote would be "you have yet to explain how denying people their rights is pro United States of America. It is, however, pro police state." The mainstream media has been going on about how denying illegals rights to which they are not entitled is unAmerican, and they've been calling Trump a fascist for trying to get immigration under control.

TTKDB

@Zombieguy1987

The theme of the forum is this:

Should America have gun control?

Then I expressed this to you and CYDdharta both:

Why do you view the below as irrelevant?

CYDdharta didn't answer the question.

He answered the question this way:

"How about we start with deciding on reasonable goals. Unfortunate incidents like these are never going to stop. That being the case, the problem with falling for the media hype that accompanies every one of these attacks is that no measure can ever be considered effective. Once we have a goal, the best way to go about achieving it is to

A - deal with criminals more harshly. Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners are rearrested. Project Exilehas proven to be quite successful.

B - allow people to more easily defend themselves. Police don't stop crimes from happening. If they're really lucky, they can cut a crime in progress short, but mostly they just write up reports after the fact. People need to be responsible for their own protection, of course to do so they need to have the mean to defend themselves at their disposal."

Where is your evidence to support you pro police state narrative at?

Because, do you know what you sound like?
A an individual, who when it comes to his weapons, prefers things his way, as he sees them, and on his terms?

What say you CYDdharta?

And where information from the news media outlets?

@Zombieguy1987

Do you agree with his points of view?

Have you heard any of the national news media outlets, expressing any dialogue in regards to this:

"pro United States of America. It is, however, pro police state."

@Zombieguy1987

@CYDdharta

Or are maybe some of the national news media outlets being biased, with their news media stories, when it comes to the offenders and their illegal gun violence?

Do the two of you have any counter arguments for that hypothetical point of view?

Then your response was this?

"Like other times, your questions are nothing more than to STALL people so they lose interest in the debate."

Was your opinionated response?

So I answered your response with a relevant question.

Do you maybe have any words of condolence for the family in Texas that lost their daughter?

And your response to that revelent question was this?

"How is this relevant to the debate at hand?"

So basically, your response is to, I"m guessing, is to maybe (balk) at any of the questions that you view as irrelevant?

In the face of the theme of the forum:

Should America have gun control?

@Zombieguy1987

Do you maybe have a response to this additional point of view?

How about some the offenders exercising some pro community common sense?

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

@Zombieguy1987

CYDdharta didn't answer the question.

He answered the question this way:

"How about we start with deciding on reasonable goals. Unfortunate incidents like these are never going to stop. That being the case, the problem with falling for the media hype that accompanies every one of these attacks is that no measure can ever be considered effective. Once we have a goal, the best way to go about achieving it is to

A - deal with criminals more harshly. Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners are rearrested. Project Exilehas proven to be quite successful.
B - allow people to more easily defend themselves. Police don't stop crimes from happening. If they're really lucky, they can cut a crime in progress short, but mostly they just write up reports after the fact. People need to be responsible for their own protection, of course to do so they need to have the mean to defend themselves at their disposal."

Where is your evidence to support you pro police state narrative at?

Because, do you know what you sound like?
A an individual, who when it comes to his weapons, prefers things his way, as he sees them, and on his terms?

What say you CYDdharta?

And where information from the news media outlets?

I didn't see that post until just now, I was answer your previous post, which is why I quoted it. I have answered every question you have ask. On the other hand, you haven't answered any of my questions, you just deflect every single time. How about you give me a straight answer, how is denying people their rights pro United States of America? Don't equivocate, don't deflect, don't answer with another question, just answer the question.

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

Or are maybe some of the national news media outlets being biased, with their news media stories, when it comes to the offenders and their illegal gun violence?

It isn't accurate to say some of the national news media outlets are biased against guns, ALL of the mainstream media are anti-gun. They ALL take the same position and echo the same arguments, and it's always "guns bad".

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

Or are maybe some of the national news media outlets being biased, with their news media stories, when it comes to the offenders and their illegal gun violence?

"It isn't accurate to say some of the national news media outlets are biased against guns, ALL of the mainstream media are anti-gun. They ALL take the same position and echo the same arguments, and it's always "guns bad".

So what you're saying is this, you don't have a single piece of evidence to support your above claim?

@CYDdharta

I understand that you're pro second amendment.

But at the same time, given the above statement from you, are you maybe being (anti first amendment) by taking this stance with the national news media/ press?

"It isn't accurate to say some of the national news media outlets are biased against guns, ALL of the mainstream media are anti-gun. They ALL take the same position and echo the same arguments, and it's always "guns bad"."

When it comes to your second amendment views?

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

Or are maybe some of the national news media outlets being biased, with their news media stories, when it comes to the offenders and their illegal gun violence?

"It isn't accurate to say some of the national news media outlets are biased against guns, ALL of the mainstream media are anti-gun. They ALL take the same position and echo the same arguments, and it's always "guns bad".

So what you're saying is this, you don't have a single piece of evidence to support your above claim?

@CYDdharta

I understand that you're pro second amendment.

But at the same time, given the above statement from you, are you maybe being (anti first amendment) by taking this stance with the national news media/ press?

"It isn't accurate to say some of the national news media outlets are biased against guns, ALL of the mainstream media are anti-gun. They ALL take the same position and echo the same arguments, and it's always "guns bad"."

When it comes to your second amendment views?

Screw this, you keep avoiding the question. Not playing that anymore. Every post you make in this thread will receive the same reply until I get an answer;

How is denying people their rights pro United States of America?

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

Your answer, you're pro second amendment.

But you're apparently (anti freedom of speech,) by how you apparently, want to judge the media, when it comes to how they educate the public on the crimes committed against it, by the offenders when they commit their crimes with guns?

And you disagree that news media coverage right?

When the media talks about a police officer being killed in the line of duty, do you maybe disagree with that type of news media coverage as well?

Zombieguy1987

CYDdharta said:

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

Or are maybe some of the national news media outlets being biased, with their news media stories, when it comes to the offenders and their illegal gun violence?

"It isn't accurate to say some of the national news media outlets are biased against guns, ALL of the mainstream media are anti-gun. They ALL take the same position and echo the same arguments, and it's always "guns bad".

So what you're saying is this, you don't have a single piece of evidence to support your above claim?

@CYDdharta

I understand that you're pro second amendment.

But at the same time, given the above statement from you, are you maybe being (anti first amendment) by taking this stance with the national news media/ press?

"It isn't accurate to say some of the national news media outlets are biased against guns, ALL of the mainstream media are anti-gun. They ALL take the same position and echo the same arguments, and it's always "guns bad"."

When it comes to your second amendment views?

Screw this, you keep avoiding the question. Not playing that anymore. Every post you make in this thread will receive the same reply until I get an answer;

How is denying people their rights pro United States of America?

Don't expect @TTKDB to answer any of your question. His tactics are to stall time so people lose interest in the debate and move on... Or just put 4 questions that are all irrelevant to the debate

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

Your answer, you're pro second amendment.

But you're apparently (anti freedom of speech,) by how you apparently, want to judge the media, when it comes to how they educate the public on the crimes committed against it, by the offenders when they commit their crimes with guns?

And you disagree that news media coverage right?

When the media talks about a police officer being killed in the line of duty, do you maybe disagree with that type of news media coverage as well?

How is denying people their rights pro United States of America?

CYDdharta

Zombieguy1987 said:

Don't expect @TTKDB to answer any of your question. His tactics are to stall time so people lose interest in the debate and move on... Or just put 4 questions that are all irrelevant to the debate

That's OK, copying and pasting the question is almost effortless.

Zombieguy1987

CYDdharta said:

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

Your answer, you're pro second amendment.

But you're apparently (anti freedom of speech,) by how you apparently, want to judge the media, when it comes to how they educate the public on the crimes committed against it, by the offenders when they commit their crimes with guns?

And you disagree that news media coverage right?

When the media talks about a police officer being killed in the line of duty, do you maybe disagree with that type of news media coverage as well?

How is denying people their rights pro United States of America?

Expectation:

TTKDB makes a good answer to the question with good sources

Reality:

TTKDB: Adds more off topic questions and claims to be pro USA

TTKDB

@Zombieguy1987

Why don't you debate, instead of downplaying debate questions?

Why don't you create your own debate website?

Zombieguy1987

TTKDB said:

@Zombieguy1987

Why don't you debate, instead of downplaying debate questions?

I do debate, but I can't debate when you
A. Go off topic 95% of the time with questions that are not worth wasting time with.
B. You ignore other people's questions, and shows you want an eco-chamber
C. You're inconsistent. You claim to be pro USA, but you seem to be against things from the U.S

Why don't you create your own debate website? (<--- This right here? is off topic N.E.X.T.!)

Ah, yes... Because as a 17 year old I have the money to afford to run a debate site...

TTKDB

@Zombieguy1987

Should America have gun control?

Politics

@Zombieguy1987

Why don't you debate, instead of downplaying debate questions?

I do debate, but I can't debate when you
A. Go off topic 95% of the time with questions that are not worth wasting time with.
B. You ignore other people's questions, and shows you want an eco-chamber
C. You're inconsistent. You claim to be pro USA, but you seem to be against things from the U.S

Why don't you create your own debate website? (<--- This right here? is off topicN.E.X.T.!)

Ah, yes... Because as a 17 year old I have the money to afford to run a debate site...

The theme of the forum is this:

Should America have gun control?

Then I expressed this to you and CYDdharta both:

Why do you view the below as irrelevant?

CYDdharta didn't answer the question.

He answered the question this way:

"How about we start with deciding on reasonable goals. Unfortunate incidents like these are never going to stop. That being the case, the problem with falling for the media hype that accompanies every one of these attacks is that no measure can ever be considered effective. Once we have a goal, the best way to go about achieving it is to

A - deal with criminals more harshly. Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners are rearrested. Project Exilehas proven to be quite successful.

B - allow people to more easily defend themselves. Police don't stop crimes from happening. If they're really lucky, they can cut a crime in progress short, but mostly they just write up reports after the fact. People need to be responsible for their own protection, of course to do so they need to have the mean to defend themselves at their disposal."

Where is your evidence to support you pro police state narrative at?

Because, do you know what you sound like?
A an individual, who when it comes to his weapons, prefers things his way, as he sees them, and on his terms?

What say you CYDdharta?

And where information from the news media outlets?

@Zombieguy1987

Do you agree with his points of view?

Have you heard any of the national news media outlets, expressing any dialogue in regards to this:

"pro United States of America. It is, however, pro police state."

@Zombieguy1987

@CYDdharta

Or are maybe some of the national news media outlets being biased, with their news media stories, when it comes to the offenders and their illegal gun violence?

Do the two of you have any counter arguments for that hypothetical point of view?

Then your response was this?

"Like other times, your questions are nothing more than to STALL people so they lose interest in the debate."

Was your opinionated response?

So I answered your response with a relevant question.

Do you maybe have any words of condolence for the family in Texas that lost their daughter?

And your response to that revelent question was this?

"How is this relevant to the debate at hand?"

So basically, your response is to, I"m guessing, is to maybe (balk) at any of the questions that you view as irrelevant?

In the face of the theme of the forum:

Should America have gun control?

@Zombieguy1987

Do you maybe have a response to this additional point of view?

How about some the offenders exercising some pro community common sense?

Zombieguy1987

TTKDB said:

@Zombieguy1987

Should America have gun control?
Politics

@Zombieguy1987

Why don't you debate, instead of downplaying debate questions?

I do debate, but I can't debate when you
A. Go off topic 95% of the time with questions that are not worth wasting time with.
B. You ignore other people's questions, and shows you want an eco-chamber
C. You're inconsistent. You claim to be pro USA, but you seem to be against things from the U.S

Why don't you create your own debate website? (<--- This right here? is off topicN.E.X.T.!)

Ah, yes... Because as a 17 year old I have the money to afford to run a debate site...

The theme of the forum is this:

Should America have gun control?

Then I expressed this to you and CYDdharta both:

Why do you view the below as irrelevant?

CYDdharta didn't answer the question.

He answered the question this way:

"How about we start with deciding on reasonable goals. Unfortunate incidents like these are never going to stop. That being the case, the problem with falling for the media hype that accompanies every one of these attacks is that no measure can ever be considered effective. Once we have a goal, the best way to go about achieving it is to

A - deal with criminals more harshly. Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners are rearrested. Project Exilehas proven to be quite successful.
B - allow people to more easily defend themselves. Police don't stop crimes from happening. If they're really lucky, they can cut a crime in progress short, but mostly they just write up reports after the fact. People need to be responsible for their own protection, of course to do so they need to have the mean to defend themselves at their disposal."

Where is your evidence to support you pro police state narrative at?

Because, do you know what you sound like?
A an individual, who when it comes to his weapons, prefers things his way, as he sees them, and on his terms?

What say you CYDdharta?

And where information from the news media outlets?

@Zombieguy1987

Do you agree with his points of view?

Yes, I agree with his PoV

Have you heard any of the national news media outlets, expressing any dialogue in regards to this:

"pro United States of America. It is, however, pro police state."

It would be a police state without the second amendment, because with the civilian populace being armed, the government has zero resistance by the populace

@Zombieguy1987

@CYDdharta

Or are maybe some of the national news media outlets being biased, with their news media stories, when it comes to the offenders and their illegal gun violence?

Do the two of you have any counter arguments for that hypothetical point of view?

Then your response was this?

"Like other times, your questions are nothing more than to STALL people so they lose interest in the debate."

Was your opinionated response?

So I answered your response with a relevant question.

Do you maybe have any words of condolence for the family in Texas that lost their daughter? (<--- also nothing to do with gun control)

And your response to that revelent question was this?

"How is this relevant to the debate at hand?"

So basically, your response is to, I"m guessing, is to maybe (balk) at any of the questions that you view as irrelevant?

No, if the question has nothing to do with gun control, then it's irrelevant. Like some of the where I used (<---) that means it's off topic

In the face of the theme of the forum:

Should America have gun control?

@Zombieguy1987

Do you maybe have a response to this additional point of view?

How about some the offenders exercising some pro community common sense?

Zombieguy1987

@TTKDB ;

I'm going to play your game...

Why don't you answer @CYDdharta question?

How is denying people their rights pro United States of America?

He's asked this question several times yet you've cared to answer, yet he and I have answered your most of your questions

TTKDB

@Zombieguy1987

I do debate, but I can't debate when you
A. Go off topic 95% of the time with questions that are not worth wasting time with.
B. You ignore other people's questions, and shows you want an eco-chamber
C. You're inconsistent. You claim to be pro USA, but you seem to be against things from the U.S

I asked questions that are relevant to the theme of the forum

And my position was stated clearly.

So please refrain from telling me what my position seems to be?

I'm pro community, pro family,, pro law, pro second amendment, pro first amendment, pro freedom of choice, and pro common sense.

And the above positions have been added to the debate, because of how you Zombieguy1987 and CYDdhartda are debating this debate.

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@Zombieguy1987

I do debate, but I can't debate when you
A. Go off topic 95% of the time with questions that are not worth wasting time with.
B. You ignore other people's questions, and shows you want an eco-chamber
C. You're inconsistent. You claim to be pro USA, but you seem to be against things from the U.S

I asked questions that are relevant to the theme of the forum

And my position was stated clearly.

So please refrain from telling me what my position seems to be?

I'm pro community, pro family,, pro law, pro second amendment, pro first amendment, pro freedom of choice, and pro common sense.

And the above positions have been added to the debate, because of how you Zombieguy1987 and CYDdhartda are debating this debate.

How is denying people their rights pro United States of America?

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

How is denying people their rights pro United States of America?

When some of the offenders, kill innocent people with their weapons, aren't they denying their victims, their rights to their own lives, that the offender took from them via the offenders gun violence committed against their victims?

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

How is denying people their rights pro United States of America?

When some of the offenders, kill innocent people with their weapons, aren't they denying their victims, their rights to their own lives, that the offender took from them via the offenders gun violence committed against their victims?

Criminals commit crimes, that's not exactly news, nor is it a reason to deny people their rights.

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

(When some of the offenders, kill innocent people with their weapons, aren't they denying their victims, their rights to their own lives, that the offender took from them via the offenders gun violence committed against their victims?)

"Criminals commit crimes, that's not exactly news, nor is it a reason to deny people their rights.'

So the above is your commentary towards the criminals who killed innocent people with their guns, and they denied their victims their right to their very own life?

So maybe as long as you have your weapons, and when the criminals again make the news because they killed an innocent person, it's maybe just another day, and another news story to some people, right?

Maybe the unspoken word that hasn't been expressed yet, is the one called (empathy?)

Do you maybe feel bad for the victim and, they losing their rights, while you get to have yours?

Think about that? You get to have your rights, while the victim of an offenders gun violance took their rights away from them?

How do you feel about that?

@Zombieguy1987 ;

How do you feel about the above?

Zombieguy1987

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

(When some of the offenders, kill innocent people with their weapons, aren't they denying their victims, their rights to their own lives, that the offender took from them via the offenders gun violence committed against their victims?)

"Criminals commit crimes, that's not exactly news, nor is it a reason to deny people their rights.'

So the above is your commentary towards the criminals who killed innocent people with their guns, and they denied their victims their right to their very own life?

So maybe as long as you have your weapons, and when the criminals again make the news because they killed an innocent person, it's maybe just another day, and another news story to some people, right?

Maybe the unspoken word that hasn't been expressed yet, is the one called (empathy?)

Do you maybe feel bad for the victim and, they losing their rights, while you get to have yours?

Think about that? You get to have your rights, while the victim of an offenders gun violance took their rights away from them?

How do you feel about that?

@Zombieguy1987 ;

How do you feel about the above?

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

(When some of the offenders, kill innocent people with their weapons, aren't they denying their victims, their rights to their own lives, that the offender took from them via the offenders gun violence committed against their victims?)

"Criminals commit crimes, that's not exactly news, nor is it a reason to deny people their rights.'

So the above is your commentary towards the criminals who killed innocent people with their guns, and they denied their victims their right to their very own life?

So maybe as long as you have your weapons, and when the criminals again make the news because they killed an innocent person, it's maybe just another day, and another news story to some people, right?

Maybe the unspoken word that hasn't been expressed yet, is the one called (empathy?)

Do you maybe feel bad for the victim and, they losing their rights, while you get to have yours?

Think about that? You get to have your rights, while the victim of an offenders gun violance took their rights away from them?

How do you feel about that?

@Zombieguy1987 ;

How do you feel about the above?

Empathy?!? If you want to talk about your feelings, go see a shrink or a priest. The law should be about facts and logic, full stop. The fact is, criminals will still commit crimes, and NOTHING you have suggested will keep people from becoming victims of armed offenders.

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

"Empathy?!? If you want to talk about your feelings, go see a shrink or a priest. The law should be about facts and logic, full stop. The fact is, criminals will still commit crimes, and NOTHING you have suggested will keep people from becoming victims of armed offenders."

Do you personally know of anyone having lost their own lives to an offenders gun violance?

Texas deals with it.

Chicago deals with it.

Los Angeles deals with it.

How many of the other neighborhoods, counties, cities, and that maybe don't effect the neighborhood where you live in right?

Empathy, is for the clergy to preach about right?

Or a grieving mom or dad to talk to talk to their shrink about right?

Let the religious individuals and shrinks deal with that empathy word right?

Empathy doesn't hold a candle to the second amendment does it?

TTKDB

How do you feel about that?

@Zombieguy1987 ;

How do you feel about the above?

You aren't familiar with the word empathy?

So having empathy for the victims of gun violance, is something you're not understanding, according to your attached meme?

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

"Empathy?!? If you want to talk about your feelings, go see a shrink or a priest. The law should be about facts and logic, full stop. The fact is, criminals will still commit crimes, and NOTHING you have suggested will keep people from becoming victims of armed offenders."

Do you personally know of anyone having lost their own lives to an offenders gun violance?

Texas deals with it.

Chicago deals with it.

Los Angeles deals with it.

How many of the other neighborhoods, counties, cities, and that maybe don't effect the neighborhood where you live in right?

Empathy, is for the clergy to preach about right?

Or a grieving mom or dad to talk to talk to their shrink about right?

Let the religious individuals and shrinks deal with that empathy word right?

Empathy doesn't hold a candle to the second amendment does it?

Well, you managed to accomplish something, you've pointed out another place empathy has no place; in a debate. Your position that criminals commit crimes so we have to restrict everyone's rights even though that won't stop criminals from committing crimes isn't very convincing.

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

How do you feel about that?

@Zombieguy1987 ;

How do you feel about the above?

You aren't familiar with the word empathy?

So having empathy for the victims of gun violance, is something you're not understanding, according to your attached meme?

Where is your empathy for the people you would make victims of gun violence because they were either denied or were waiting to obtain the means to exercise their right to self-defense?

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

These are your words:

"Well, you managed to accomplish something, you've pointed out another place empathy has no place; in a debate. Your position that criminals commit crimes so we have to restrict everyone's rights even though that won't stop criminals from committing crimes isn't very convincing."

So are you maybe, saying that the deaths from gun violence, and the kids killed by gun violance don't count in this very debate?

The criminals and their violent gun crimes, they don't count either, I'm guessing as well right?

But your second amendment right, matters more than the above apparently does?

@CYDdharta

Are you weapons owner extremist?

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

"Where is your empathy for the people you would make victims of gun violence because they were either denied or were waiting to obtain the means to exercise their right to self-defense?"

I feel sad and sorrowful, for those kids and teachers, who have been affected by gun violance over the years.

I feel sad and sorrowful, for the Vegas victims and their families.

I feel sad and sorrowful, for the thousands of innocent people harmed, and their families affected by the gun violance.

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

These are your words:

"Well, you managed to accomplish something, you've pointed out another place empathy has no place; in a debate. Your position that criminals commit crimes so we have to restrict everyone's rights even though that won't stop criminals from committing crimes isn't very convincing."

So are you maybe, saying that the deaths from gun violence, and the kids killed by gun violance don't count in this very debate?

The criminals and their violent gun crimes, they don't count either, I'm guessing as well right?

But your second amendment right, matters more than the above apparently does?

@CYDdharta

Are you weapons owner extremist?

No, you just allow your emotion to cloud your judgement to the point where it blinds you. NOTHING YOU HAVE SUGGESTED WILL STOP CRIMINALS FROM COMMITTING CRIMES. But, if you want emotionalism, why are those people's lives worth more then the people who would be victimized by your restrictions because they were either denied or were waiting to obtain the means to exercise their right to self-defense? Why do you ignore them in this debate? They don't count for anything in your world?!? The only thing that matters to you is advancing the power of the police state. Are you a fascist?

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

It's amazing, that some of the ex convicts, who are on parole, are maybe with a certain probability, walking around the country, with a hot or stolen weapon on their person.

So to them, if they haven't been caught with a firearm on them, then they haven't broken any laws yet, until they break another law, right, second amendment enthusiasts?

Hot, meaning it lacks a serial number.

But hey, (the pro community, pro family, pro law, pro second amendment, and pro first amendment,) don't worry over the offenders, who might be walking around illegally armed, because some of the second amendment enthusiasts, maybe say so?

Is the above maybe how some of the second amendment enthusiasts, and some of their logic works?

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

It's amazing, that some of the ex convicts, who are on parole, are maybe with a certain probability, walking around the country, with a hot or stolen weapon on their person.

So to them, if they haven't been caught with a firearm on them, then they haven't broken any laws yet, until they break another law, right, second amendment enthusiasts?

Hot, meaning it lacks a serial number.

But hey, (the pro community, pro family, pro law, pro second amendment, and pro first amendment,) don't worry over the offenders, who might be walking around illegally armed, because some of the second amendment enthusiasts, maybe say so?

Is the above maybe how some of the second amendment enthusiasts, and some of their logic works?

Incorrect, there is already a law against felons having guns. There is already a law against removing serial numbers from a gun. Criminals don't follow the law. Passing even more laws that criminals won't follow won't help. All you're doing is proving the weakness of your position.

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

"Incorrect, there is already a law against felons having guns. There is already a law against removing serial numbers from a gun. Criminals don't follow the law. Passing even more laws that criminals won't follow won't help. All you're doing is proving the weakness of your position."

Those criminals have, and are showing the public, and the families of the victims killed by the offenders, via their actions, that your individual pro weapons points of view, apparently aren't good enough as well?

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

"Incorrect, there is already a law against felons having guns. There is already a law against removing serial numbers from a gun. Criminals don't follow the law. Passing even more laws that criminals won't follow won't help. All you're doing is proving the weakness of your position."

Those criminals are showing the public, and the families of the victims killed by the offenders by their actions, that your individual pro weapons, points of view aren't good enough CYDdharta.

The problem is that you offer nothing better, TTKDB

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

And apparently neither do you.

Are your weapons rights, maybe more important to you, than those lives lost to an offenders gun violence?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/oct/02/america-mass-shootings-gun-violence

From the article:

"Mass shootings in the US: there have been 1,624 in 1,870 days

No other developed nation comes close to the rate of US gun violence. Americans own an estimated 265m guns, more than one gun for every adult.

Data from the Gun Violence Archive reveals there is a mass shooting – defined as four or more people shot in one incident, not including the shooter – nine out of every 10 days on average"

The latest on the Florida school shooting

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

And apparently neither do you.

Are your weapons rights, maybe more important to you, than those lives lost to an offenders gun violence?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/oct/02/america-mass-shootings-gun-violence

From the article:

"Mass shootings in the US: there have been 1,624 in 1,870 days
No other developed nation comes close to the rate of US gun violence. Americans own an estimated 265m guns, more than one gun for every adult.
Data from the Gun Violence Archive reveals there is a mass shooting – defined as four or more people shot in one incident, not including the shooter – nine out of every 10 days on average"
The latest on the Florida school shooting

FAIL!! You have YET to demonstrate how forcing gun owners and would-be gun owners to give up their rights will stop mass shootings and other attacks sensationalized by the media.

If you want a possibly constructive debate, give up these idiotic appeal to emotion logic fallacies and start at the beginning with a reasonable and reachable goal.

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

No, you're failing, because you're acting like someone is non existingly trying to take any gun owners rights away from them.

Kids and adults have been murdered by offenders abusing the laws in the United States, and you're arguing over a non existent point of view.

"FAIL!! You have YET to demonstrate how forcing gun owners and would-be gun owners to give up their rights will stop mass shootings and other attacks sensationalized by the media.

If you want a possibly constructive debate, give up these idiotic appeal to emotion logic fallacies and start at the beginning with a reasonable and reachable goal."

Kids and adults being killed by an offenders gun violence, isn't idiotic trying to appeal to some emotional logic driven fallacies.

But I'm learning plenty about you, and your pro weapons points of view.

If you want a possibly constructive debate, give up these idiotic appeal to emotion logic fallacies and start at the beginning with a reasonable and reachable goal.

Are you trying to push your pro weapons politics on the forum with the above rhetoric?

Is this your goal: Hey pro community, pro family, pro law public, give you the benefit of doubt that you're apparently lobbying for, and just live with gun violence because the gun toting offenders are going to hurt, maim, cripple, and kill innocent people, and there's nothing, that you the pro family, and pro communities, can't I guess, do anything about the criminals and their crimes, being committed with their guns, right CYDdhartda?

Just ignore what the biased news media coverage says in regards to the gun violence murders, and nationwide gun violence, right CYDdhartda?

See all of the above, from your mindset, and do what you want, right CYDdhartda?

Isn't that what you're lobbying for?

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

No, you're failing, because you're acting like someone is non existingly trying to take any gun owners rights away from them.

Kids and adults have been murdered by offenders abusing the laws in the United States, and you're arguing over a non existent point of view.

"FAIL!! You have YET to demonstrate how forcing gun owners and would-be gun owners to give up their rights will stop mass shootings and other attacks sensationalized by the media.

If you want a possibly constructive debate, give up these idiotic appeal to emotion logic fallacies and start at the beginning with a reasonable and reachable goal."

Kids and adults being killed by an offenders gun violence, isn't idiotic trying to appeal to some emotional logic driven fallacies.

But I'm learning plenty about you, and your pro weapons points of view.

If you want a possibly constructive debate, give up these idiotic appeal to emotion logic fallacies and start at the beginning with a reasonable and reachable goal.

Are you trying to push your pro weapons politics on the forum with the above rhetoric?

Is this your goal: Hey pro community, pro family, pro law public, give you the benefit of doubt that you're apparently lobbying for, and just live with gun violence because the gun toting offenders are going to hurt, maim, cripple, and kill innocent people, and there's nothing, that you the pro family, and pro communities, can't I guess, do anything about the criminals and their crimes, being committed with their guns, right CYDdhartda?

Just ignore what the biased news media coverage says in regards to the gun violence murders, and nationwide gun violence, right CYDdhartda?

See all of the above, from your mindset, and do what you want, right CYDdhartda?

Isn't that what you're lobbying for?

Once again, try to read and comprehend; you have YET to demonstrate how forcing gun owners and would-be gun owners to give up their rights will stop mass shootings and other attacks sensationalized by the media.

TTKDB

https://amp-cnn-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/01/01/us/texas-drive-by-shooting-mother/index.html?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQECAFYAQ==#referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/01/us/texas-drive-by-shooting-mother/index.html 

If anyone on the website, is from the Houston Texas area, and you have any information that could help the family, and help the local police solve this case, please reach out to them.

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

"Once again, try to read and comprehend; you have YET to demonstrate how forcing gun owners and would-be gun owners to give up their rights will stop mass shootings and other attacks sensationalized by the media."

Your pro gun points of view seem to point to this unstated by you?

You're using your pro gun stance to lobby to the pro community citizens, and the pro family citizens to do things your way?

Apparently regardless, of how many innocent people have been killed via an offenders gun violence?

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

"Once again, try to read and comprehend; you have YET to demonstrate how forcing gun owners and would-be gun owners to give up their rights will stop mass shootings and other attacks sensationalized by the media."

Your pro gun points of view seem to point to this unstated by you?

You're using your pro gun stance to lobby to the pro community citizens, and the pro family citizens to do things your way?

Apparently regardless, of how many innocent people have been killed via an offenders gun violence?

You have YET to demonstrate how forcing gun owners and would-be gun owners to give up their rights will stop mass shootings and other attacks sensationalized by the media.

Do some research, come back with facts and sources, we'll debate.

TTKDB

@CYDdharta

Show me, one instance where I said, what you're stating below?

I haven't said one word, about forcing gun owners, or would be gun owners to give up their rights, have I?

"You have YET to demonstrate how forcing gun owners and would-be gun owners to give up their rights will stop mass shootings and other attacks sensationalized by the media.

Do some research, come back with facts and sources, we'll debate."

Now, you have some research to do.

And you pay plenty of rhetoric service to your own gun owner rights, don't you?

CYDdharta

TTKDB said:

@CYDdharta

Show me, one instance where I said, what you're stating below?

I haven't said one word, about forcing gun owners, or would be gun owners to give up their rights, have I?

"You have YET to demonstrate how forcing gun owners and would-be gun owners to give up their rights will stop mass shootings and other attacks sensationalized by the media.

Do some research, come back with facts and sources, we'll debate."

Now, you have some research to do.

And you pay plenty of rhetoric service to your own gun owner rights, don't you?

So far, the only measure that you've promoted was requiring a psychological evaluation prior to a weapons purchase. There is no such requirement in the 2nd Amendment, so anyone who would be turned down, rightly or wrongly, would have to give up their right. Beyond that, who pays for that evaluation? If you expect the perspective gun buyer to pay for it, you're adding a burden to the poor and elderly, people who are already disproportionately victimized but crime. How can you trust the people doing the evaluations to be fair? The medical community has a long history of antagonism against private ownership of firearms. As I have stated previously, that would deter gun owners and prospective gun owners from trying to get medical help when they need it lest their doctor decides to use it against them if and when they try to purchase a gun. And as always, that wouldn't stop mass shootings and other attacks sensationalized by the media.

frame

Howdy, Stranger!

Communities

4/29: CBS Evening News

In this Debate

Should America have gun control?

Debra AI Prediction

Arguments

Should America have gun control?

Should America have gun control?

Should America have gun control?

Politics

Should America have gun control?

Should America have gun control?

Politics

Should America have gun control?

"Mass shootings in the US: there have been 1,624 in 1,870 days

"Mass shootings in the US: there have been 1,624 in 1,870 days

Back To Top

foot

DebateIsland.com

Contact us

Get In Touch