Total Posts:95|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

6 ways to reduce gun violence

beng100
Posts: 1,055
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2016 6:41:01 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/16/2016 6:22:51 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
http://www.vox.com...

Agree these are good ideas and would reduce gun violence but why not ho further and increase controls for gun ownership and ban carrying firearms in public?
tajshar2k
Posts: 2,382
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2016 8:52:12 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/16/2016 7:01:40 PM, famousdebater wrote:
You only need 1. Ban guns.

Not going to work.
"In Guns We Trust" Tajshar2k
Fly
Posts: 2,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2016 8:53:46 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/16/2016 6:22:51 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
http://www.vox.com...

That is a good article-- it not only makes suggestions, it shows how they have worked and even taken drawbacks into account. As far as lessening alcohol consumption goes, I would just add that there are conflicting financial interests in lessening liquor stores and increasing alcohol tax. It is very telling, though, that high crime areas tend to have the most liquor stores.

The good news: violent crime has been decreasing for over 20 years.
The bad news: we don't really know how we have accomplished this and therefor are unable to know what to do more of and what to do less of in order to improve or at least assure the pattern continues...
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
famousdebater
Posts: 3,940
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2016 8:55:04 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/16/2016 8:52:12 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 2/16/2016 7:01:40 PM, famousdebater wrote:
You only need 1. Ban guns.

Not going to work.

Gun violence includes suicides, accidents, etc.
"Life calls the tune, we dance."
John Galsworthy
tajshar2k
Posts: 2,382
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2016 8:59:19 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/16/2016 8:55:04 PM, famousdebater wrote:
At 2/16/2016 8:52:12 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 2/16/2016 7:01:40 PM, famousdebater wrote:
You only need 1. Ban guns.

Not going to work.

Gun violence includes suicides, accidents, etc.

If you count that, then I don't really care to be honest. If you suicide, that's your fault. You took a gun and made the decision to kill yourself. Obviously, we as society should discourage acts like that, but banning guns because of a person's individual choice is stupid.

And banning guns wouldn't solve that anyways, since a person could get a gun illegally very easily.
"In Guns We Trust" Tajshar2k
tajshar2k
Posts: 2,382
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2016 9:00:44 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/16/2016 6:41:01 PM, beng100 wrote:
At 2/16/2016 6:22:51 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
http://www.vox.com...

Agree these are good ideas and would reduce gun violence but why not ho further and increase controls for gun ownership and ban carrying firearms in public?

What would that accomplish?

It's very easy to just see something at first glance, and come to conclusions. From a quick view, what you said would be the most common sense solution, but that's not the case.

Chicago for example has one of the strictest gun laws in the country, and even actually went as far as banning them altogether. Yet, North Chicago remains crime rate is 10 for 100,000 while South Chicago's crime rate is 40 for 100,000 both places have the same laws, yet one place is dramatically more dangerous. Proof gun control won't solve anything.
"In Guns We Trust" Tajshar2k
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,292
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2016 9:01:09 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/16/2016 7:01:40 PM, famousdebater wrote:
You only need 1. Ban guns.

Lol. Are you actually serious, bro?
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2016 9:20:12 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/16/2016 6:22:51 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
http://www.vox.com...

I agree with everything except banning people from drinking alcohol. That's a bit too far and definitely wouldn't be effective
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2016 9:20:49 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/16/2016 7:01:40 PM, famousdebater wrote:
You only need 1. Ban guns.

Yea, how are your gun free zones going so far?
tajshar2k
Posts: 2,382
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2016 9:23:58 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/16/2016 9:20:12 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/16/2016 6:22:51 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
http://www.vox.com...

I agree with everything except banning people from drinking alcohol. That's a bit too far and definitely wouldn't be effective

They never said that in the article. They said they were against it citing the prohibition.
"In Guns We Trust" Tajshar2k
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2016 9:27:03 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/16/2016 9:23:58 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 2/16/2016 9:20:12 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/16/2016 6:22:51 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
http://www.vox.com...

I agree with everything except banning people from drinking alcohol. That's a bit too far and definitely wouldn't be effective

They never said that in the article. They said they were against it citing the prohibition.

I meant where the editor cited SD's program where they brethalyze alcohol offenders twice a day and don't allow them to drink alcohol.
beng100
Posts: 1,055
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2016 9:49:11 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/16/2016 9:00:44 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 2/16/2016 6:41:01 PM, beng100 wrote:
At 2/16/2016 6:22:51 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
http://www.vox.com...

Agree these are good ideas and would reduce gun violence but why not ho further and increase controls for gun ownership and ban carrying firearms in public?

What would that accomplish?

It's very easy to just see something at first glance, and come to conclusions. From a quick view, what you said would be the most common sense solution, but that's not the case.

Chicago for example has one of the strictest gun laws in the country, and even actually went as far as banning them altogether. Yet, North Chicago remains crime rate is 10 for 100,000 while South Chicago's crime rate is 40 for 100,000 both places have the same laws, yet one place is dramatically more dangerous. Proof gun control won't solve anything.

The key benefits are preventing people with mental health issues obtaining firearms, setting a better example to young people, reducing the feeling for people to feel they need to carry a gun because everyone else has them, reducing the risk of a dispute or fight between two gun carriers ending up a shootout, making it easier for police to identify criminals amongst the general population, ensuring people are capable of operating safely firearms they own, reduce gun crime and reduce the risk of spur of the moment shootings where anger held by a gun carrier results in a rash decision that injurs or kills someone.
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2016 9:52:45 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/16/2016 9:49:11 PM, beng100 wrote:
At 2/16/2016 9:00:44 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 2/16/2016 6:41:01 PM, beng100 wrote:
At 2/16/2016 6:22:51 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
http://www.vox.com...

Agree these are good ideas and would reduce gun violence but why not ho further and increase controls for gun ownership and ban carrying firearms in public?

What would that accomplish?

It's very easy to just see something at first glance, and come to conclusions. From a quick view, what you said would be the most common sense solution, but that's not the case.

Chicago for example has one of the strictest gun laws in the country, and even actually went as far as banning them altogether. Yet, North Chicago remains crime rate is 10 for 100,000 while South Chicago's crime rate is 40 for 100,000 both places have the same laws, yet one place is dramatically more dangerous. Proof gun control won't solve anything.

The key benefits are preventing people with mental health issues obtaining firearms, setting a better example to young people, reducing the feeling for people to feel they need to carry a gun because everyone else has them, reducing the risk of a dispute or fight between two gun carriers ending up a shootout, making it easier for police to identify criminals amongst the general population, ensuring people are capable of operating safely firearms they own, reduce gun crime and reduce the risk of spur of the moment shootings where anger held by a gun carrier results in a rash decision that injurs or kills someone.

How do you define "mental health issues?"

Obama thinks that rape victims are mentally ill and his proposal would not allow them to protect themselves with a firearm against possible future attempts at rape. I also don't see why you think carrying or owning a gun is a bad thing and should be discouraged.
beng100
Posts: 1,055
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2016 10:52:36 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/16/2016 9:52:45 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/16/2016 9:49:11 PM, beng100 wrote:
At 2/16/2016 9:00:44 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 2/16/2016 6:41:01 PM, beng100 wrote:
At 2/16/2016 6:22:51 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
http://www.vox.com...

Agree these are good ideas and would reduce gun violence but why not ho further and increase controls for gun ownership and ban carrying firearms in public?

What would that accomplish?

It's very easy to just see something at first glance, and come to conclusions. From a quick view, what you said would be the most common sense solution, but that's not the case.

Chicago for example has one of the strictest gun laws in the country, and even actually went as far as banning them altogether. Yet, North Chicago remains crime rate is 10 for 100,000 while South Chicago's crime rate is 40 for 100,000 both places have the same laws, yet one place is dramatically more dangerous. Proof gun control won't solve anything.

The key benefits are preventing people with mental health issues obtaining firearms, setting a better example to young people, reducing the feeling for people to feel they need to carry a gun because everyone else has them, reducing the risk of a dispute or fight between two gun carriers ending up a shootout, making it easier for police to identify criminals amongst the general population, ensuring people are capable of operating safely firearms they own, reduce gun crime and reduce the risk of spur of the moment shootings where anger held by a gun carrier results in a rash decision that injurs or kills someone.

How do you define "mental health issues?"

Obama thinks that rape victims are mentally ill and his proposal would not allow them to protect themselves with a firearm against possible future attempts at rape. I also don't see why you think carrying or owning a gun is a bad thing and should be discouraged.

Im from the uk so im used to a cultute where gun carrying in public has been illegal for many decades and the sight of someone carrying a gun in public would cause a UK citizen to fear for their life as the individual in question is likely a dangerous criminal who needs reporting to the police for breaking the law. In the uk everybody agrees carrying guns in public should be illegal and tight controls are needed on gun ownership. This includes people with right wing political views like me.

I appreciate things are very different in the USA and you are used to openly carrying guns in public, walking into shops to buy firearms and also feel guns are part of America's culture and history with the right to bear arms famously part of the constitution.

I define mentally Ill as someone diagnosed with a mental health problem by a doctor or other medical professional. Surely preventing these people obtaining firearms is a good idea?

In my view carrying a dangerous firearm in public is an overreaction to a low threat of being attacked or threatened by a criminal. To me it is giving the impression that the dangers are greater then they really are. You see other people carrying guns and feel you need to as well. The presence of guns in public settings also gives a bad impression to children as they grow up with the feeling guns are normal and Necessary. Arguments between individuals carrying firearms that may result in fist fights in normal circumstances may develop into gun fights if firearms are present. Criminals are also able to hide in amongst law abiding citizens more easily.

I'm in favour of very heavy punishment for crime and in my view any man who attacks and rapes a woman should receive the death penalty. It's sad a woman would feel the need to carry a gun to be safe. If my unique ideas on criminal justice were applied I am absolutely convinced crime, especially violent crime would reduce significantly. I won't bother listing those ideas here though as I've made other threads about it in the past and it's a very long list.
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,292
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2016 12:01:40 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/16/2016 10:03:03 PM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/16/2016 7:01:40 PM, famousdebater wrote:
You only need 1. Ban guns.

Do you actually support a total gun ban?
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2016 12:21:34 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/17/2016 12:01:40 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/16/2016 10:03:03 PM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/16/2016 7:01:40 PM, famousdebater wrote:
You only need 1. Ban guns.

Do you actually support a total gun ban?

yes, they have no practical use anymore besides sport. But lives outweigh sport
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,292
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2016 12:23:21 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/17/2016 12:21:34 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:01:40 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/16/2016 10:03:03 PM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/16/2016 7:01:40 PM, famousdebater wrote:
You only need 1. Ban guns.

Do you actually support a total gun ban?

yes, they have no practical use anymore besides sport. But lives outweigh sport

So, you believe hunting, in its entirety, should be disallowed?
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
Dark-one
Posts: 211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2016 12:23:25 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/16/2016 10:52:36 PM, beng100 wrote:
At 2/16/2016 9:52:45 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 2/16/2016 9:49:11 PM, beng100 wrote:
At 2/16/2016 9:00:44 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 2/16/2016 6:41:01 PM, beng100 wrote:
At 2/16/2016 6:22:51 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
http://www.vox.com...

Agree these are good ideas and would reduce gun violence but why not ho further and increase controls for gun ownership and ban carrying firearms in public?

What would that accomplish?

It's very easy to just see something at first glance, and come to conclusions. From a quick view, what you said would be the most common sense solution, but that's not the case.

Chicago for example has one of the strictest gun laws in the country, and even actually went as far as banning them altogether. Yet, North Chicago remains crime rate is 10 for 100,000 while South Chicago's crime rate is 40 for 100,000 both places have the same laws, yet one place is dramatically more dangerous. Proof gun control won't solve anything.

The key benefits are preventing people with mental health issues obtaining firearms, setting a better example to young people, reducing the feeling for people to feel they need to carry a gun because everyone else has them, reducing the risk of a dispute or fight between two gun carriers ending up a shootout, making it easier for police to identify criminals amongst the general population, ensuring people are capable of operating safely firearms they own, reduce gun crime and reduce the risk of spur of the moment shootings where anger held by a gun carrier results in a rash decision that injurs or kills someone.

How do you define "mental health issues?"

Obama thinks that rape victims are mentally ill and his proposal would not allow them to protect themselves with a firearm against possible future attempts at rape. I also don't see why you think carrying or owning a gun is a bad thing and should be discouraged.

Im from the uk so im used to a cultute where gun carrying in public has been illegal for many decades and the sight of someone carrying a gun in public would cause a UK citizen to fear for their life as the individual in question is likely a dangerous criminal who needs reporting to the police for breaking the law. In the uk everybody agrees carrying guns in public should be illegal and tight controls are needed on gun ownership. This includes people with right wing political views like me.

I appreciate things are very different in the USA and you are used to openly carrying guns in public, walking into shops to buy firearms and also feel guns are part of America's culture and history with the right to bear arms famously part of the constitution.

I define mentally Ill as someone diagnosed with a mental health problem by a doctor or other medical professional. Surely preventing these people obtaining firearms is a good idea?

In my view carrying a dangerous firearm in public is an overreaction to a low threat of being attacked or threatened by a criminal. To me it is giving the impression that the dangers are greater then they really are. You see other people carrying guns and feel you need to as well. The presence of guns in public settings also gives a bad impression to children as they grow up with the feeling guns are normal and Necessary. Arguments between individuals carrying firearms that may result in fist fights in normal circumstances may develop into gun fights if firearms are present. Criminals are also able to hide in amongst law abiding citizens more easily.

I'm in favour of very heavy punishment for crime and in my view any man who attacks and rapes a woman should receive the death penalty. It's sad a woman would feel the need to carry a gun to be safe. If my unique ideas on criminal justice were applied I am absolutely convinced crime, especially violent crime would reduce significantly. I won't bother listing those ideas here though as I've made other threads about it in the past and it's a very long list.

What you your citizens use to defend themselves?
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2016 12:27:15 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/17/2016 12:23:21 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:21:34 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:01:40 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/16/2016 10:03:03 PM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/16/2016 7:01:40 PM, famousdebater wrote:
You only need 1. Ban guns.

Do you actually support a total gun ban?

yes, they have no practical use anymore besides sport. But lives outweigh sport

So, you believe hunting, in its entirety, should be disallowed?

BB guns are cool. There are so few people that rely on hunting to survive, and they can use traps, domesticate animals, and use BB guns.
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,292
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2016 12:31:03 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/17/2016 12:27:15 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:23:21 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:21:34 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:01:40 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/16/2016 10:03:03 PM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/16/2016 7:01:40 PM, famousdebater wrote:
You only need 1. Ban guns.

Do you actually support a total gun ban?

yes, they have no practical use anymore besides sport. But lives outweigh sport

So, you believe hunting, in its entirety, should be disallowed?

BB guns are cool. There are so few people that rely on hunting to survive, and they can use traps, domesticate animals, and use BB guns.

I see. But, simply because people don't *have* to *rely* on hunting for survival, why can't they have fresh meat from their 300 acres that they own? Why should they have to buy processed meat from the store, when they have it in their own backyard?
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2016 12:34:18 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/17/2016 12:31:03 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:27:15 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:23:21 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:21:34 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:01:40 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/16/2016 10:03:03 PM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/16/2016 7:01:40 PM, famousdebater wrote:
You only need 1. Ban guns.

Do you actually support a total gun ban?

yes, they have no practical use anymore besides sport. But lives outweigh sport

So, you believe hunting, in its entirety, should be disallowed?

BB guns are cool. There are so few people that rely on hunting to survive, and they can use traps, domesticate animals, and use BB guns.

I see. But, simply because people don't *have* to *rely* on hunting for survival, why can't they have fresh meat from their 300 acres that they own? Why should they have to buy processed meat from the store, when they have it in their own backyard?

Because the lives of millions of people outweigh the desire for "fresh meat"
Torton
Posts: 988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2016 12:37:08 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/17/2016 12:21:34 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:01:40 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/16/2016 10:03:03 PM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/16/2016 7:01:40 PM, famousdebater wrote:
You only need 1. Ban guns.

Do you actually support a total gun ban?

yes, they have no practical use anymore besides sport. But lives outweigh sport
Self-defense isn't a practical use?
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,292
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2016 12:39:23 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/17/2016 12:34:18 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:31:03 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:27:15 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:23:21 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:21:34 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:01:40 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/16/2016 10:03:03 PM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/16/2016 7:01:40 PM, famousdebater wrote:
You only need 1. Ban guns.

Do you actually support a total gun ban?

yes, they have no practical use anymore besides sport. But lives outweigh sport

So, you believe hunting, in its entirety, should be disallowed?

BB guns are cool. There are so few people that rely on hunting to survive, and they can use traps, domesticate animals, and use BB guns.

I see. But, simply because people don't *have* to *rely* on hunting for survival, why can't they have fresh meat from their 300 acres that they own? Why should they have to buy processed meat from the store, when they have it in their own backyard?

Because the lives of millions of people outweigh the desire for "fresh meat"

Banning guns doesn't necessarily save millions of lives.
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,292
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2016 12:42:23 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/17/2016 12:34:18 AM, Hayd wrote:
Also, you should read some of what myself and Taj say in this thread... [http://www.debate.org...]
I'm actually legitimately interested in why you think there should be a total gun ban.
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
Torton
Posts: 988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2016 12:45:17 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/17/2016 12:27:15 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:23:21 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:21:34 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:01:40 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/16/2016 10:03:03 PM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/16/2016 7:01:40 PM, famousdebater wrote:
You only need 1. Ban guns.

Do you actually support a total gun ban?

yes, they have no practical use anymore besides sport. But lives outweigh sport

So, you believe hunting, in its entirety, should be disallowed?

BB guns are cool. There are so few people that rely on hunting to survive, and they can use traps, domesticate animals, and use BB guns.
Depending on how big of the game we're talking about, you won't be taking them out with a BB gun.
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2016 12:47:57 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/17/2016 12:45:17 AM, Torton wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:27:15 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:23:21 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:21:34 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/17/2016 12:01:40 AM, ColeTrain wrote:
At 2/16/2016 10:03:03 PM, Hayd wrote:
At 2/16/2016 7:01:40 PM, famousdebater wrote:
You only need 1. Ban guns.

Do you actually support a total gun ban?

yes, they have no practical use anymore besides sport. But lives outweigh sport

So, you believe hunting, in its entirety, should be disallowed?

BB guns are cool. There are so few people that rely on hunting to survive, and they can use traps, domesticate animals, and use BB guns.
Depending on how big of the game we're talking about, you won't be taking them out with a BB gun.

Hunting big game comes with risks of its own then too (attacks). You can probably surivive off domesticated animals, fishing, and trapping, and hunting small animals. Even if you can't, the lives of millions of people outweigh this.