frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.


Communities




Does the Second Amendment, belong to the Citizens of the United States?

Debate Information

Or does it, in a sense, maybe belong to, some, of the NRA?

Or does it, in a sense , maybe belong to, some, of the Far Right Pro Gun supporters? 

Or does it, maybe belong to, some, of the pro gun extremists?

And to the U.S. citizens, what are your thoughts on how the current POTUS, is managing, some of the gun violence situations that are currently ongoing, off and on across the country each day? 

Are the voices of the gun violence survivors being heard enough, or are some, maybe making efforts, to downplay their voices? 

The Twitter website, is a great place to educate one's self, on those gun violence survivors voices.

The March For Our Lives organization, has a great website, to educate one's self on those gun violence survivors, as well. 

I'm pro family, and pro safety for the entire Public, and believe that there should be 1000% accountability for all of the 400 million plus guns that are in the country, and as this forum is being written, there is zero accountability for all the guns that exist, in the country.

Like exactly how many illegal guns there are in the United States?  

The Second Amendment should be amended with these changes:

The Death Penalty.

And with an accountability measure, meaning that every gun, legal, and illegal should be accounted for.

This way the new Second Amendment, is fair and equal, to the lawful gun owners, and the rest of the public, that doesn't own a gun, with those new amendments.

Being that if an individual doesn't own a gun, they shouldn't have to buy one, just to keep themselves from being victimized by someone else with a legally owned gun, or with an illegally owned gun?







«1345



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
11%
Margin

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -  
    Another gun violence crime in the news:

    https://ktla-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/ktla.com/2019/08/21/sheriffs-deputy-wounded-in-lancaster-shooting/amp/?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQEKAFwAQ==#aoh=15664804807370&referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://ktla.com/2019/08/21/sheriffs-deputy-wounded-in-lancaster-shooting/ 

    "Gunman at Large After Shooting From Housing for Mentally Ill, Wounding Deputy at Lancaster Sheriff’s Station"


    "Tactical teams were searching an apartment building that houses mentally ill people Wednesday evening in the search for a sniper who opened fire from the structure and wounded a deputy outside the nearby Lancaster sheriff’s station, officials said.

    Deputy Angel Reinosa, 21, was wearing a bulletproof vest in the parking lot of the station at 501 W. Lancaster Blvd. when shots rang out about 2:45 p.m., said Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Capt. Todd Weber."


    The Deputy, didn't deserve to be shot, by an apparent sniper, did he? 

    And again, not one single life lost to any unlawful Gun Violence in the United States is acceptable, is it?

    The Second Amendment needs to be amended, and some, of the NRA, along with some, of the pro gun extremists, and some of the Far Right Gun supporters, need, to please leave the Second Amendment alone, being that it belongs to the Public as a whole, and not, to those other interest groups, treating it, as if it belongs to them, somehow, exclusively? 

    (Apparently there are two separate forms of "Ethics," that exists when it comes to the 400 million plus guns in the United States, some of which, are the illegal guns, that haven't been accounted for? 

    How does one trace a guns accountability, with its Serial Number, having been erased from the frame of a gun? 

    How is that discrepancy, fair, and equal to the rest of the Public, that doesn't own a gun?)

    So those two types of ethics, fall into two separate categories:

    The ethics, of the non gun owners.

    And the ethics, of those who defend those who defend the Second Amendment as its currently written, that isn't supportive of the rest of the Public? 

    IE, The ethics of the pro gun extremists, and the Far Right Pro Gun supporters? 


  • And again, not one single life lost to any unlawful Gun Violence in the United States is acceptable, is it?

    And again, not one single life lost to any unconstitutional use of lethal force in the United Sates is acceptable, is it?

    The Second Amendment needs to be amended, Realistically the 2nd Amendment is to allow a person to hold a armament and ammunition to either assist the Sheriff officer, or to provide the officer with common defense in the event a weapon held is no-longer functionable. Any issue that is mentioned by basic principle in the post does not constitute a mistake in the 2nd Amendment, it is an error in state of the union made on United State, Basic principle, and legal precedent. G = United State. O = Basic principle. D = Legal Precedent. Its an axiom not religion look at it like algebra without the fixed equation.


  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @John_C_87

    Please present a substantial argument.

    US citizens, Police Officers, and civilians alike, shouldn't be getting shot at by anyone. 

    "And again, not one single life lost to any unconstitutional use of lethal force in the United Sates is acceptable, is it?"

    "Realistically the 2nd Amendment is to allow a person to hold a armament and ammunition to either assist the Sheriff officer, or to provide the officer with common defense in the event a weapon held is no-longer functionable."

    "Any issue that is mentioned by basic principle in the post does not constitute a mistake in the 2nd Amendment, it is an error in state of the union made on United State, Basic principle, and legal precedent. G = United State. O = Basic principle. D = Legal Precedent. Its an axiom not religion look at it like algebra without the fixed equation."

    Again, please support your own words, with more than your own opinions? 

    The Police Officers, and the civilians alike, deserve more than your opinion, being used to defend your own argument. 

    Is your argument, maybe, being based on your individual ethical ideals, when it comes to the pro gun crowd stance? 
  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    https://acpinternist.org/archives/2019/05/the-nras-extremist-agenda-endangers-us-all.htm


    The NRA's extremist agenda endangers us all

    Following the controversy of #ThisIsOurLane, ACP's Senior Vice President for Governmental Affairs and Public Policy takes on the National Rifle Association's leadership, which he says advocates for extreme policies that endanger lives.


    "I usually like to stick to the issues when writing about public policy, without characterizing the motives and actions of other organizations, whether they agree with the College or not. When it comes to the National Rifle Association, though, I'll make an exception, because the NRA's extremist, pro-gun, anti-health agenda endangers us all. One simply can't understand gun policy in the United States without acknowledging and understanding the NRA's role in shaping it, pushing policies that contribute to thousands of deaths and injuries each year."

    "It wasn't always so. “For much of the 20th century, the NRA had lobbied and co-authored legislation that was similar to the modern legislative measures the association now characterizes as unconstitutional,” wrote historian Arica L. Coleman in Time magazine in July 2016. “But by the 1970s the NRA came to view attempts to enact gun-control laws as threats to the Second Amendment … Today's NRA could be summed up with words uttered by the Black Panther Party 40 years earlier: “the gun is the only thing that will free us—gain us our liberation.” The NRA today pushes radical policies to block and roll back just about any effort to restrict guns. It pushes a narrative of exaggerated threats that can only be repelled by armed citizens, never mind the evidence that more guns are associated with more deaths and injuries from guns."

    "In case you think my characterizing the NRA's agenda as “radical” and “extremist” is unfair or too harsh, consider a few points."

    "The NRA opposes reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which funds proven programs to protect women from harm at the hands of others, because it makes it harder for domestic violence offenders to obtain guns. It would do this by closing loopholes in the current federal instant background check system."

    "Currently, persons with misdemeanor convictions for domestic violence against a member of their household are prohibited from buying guns. However, those with convictions for domestic violence against a person outside their household (such as persons they've dated) are exempted. Also, under current law, persons with permanent restraining orders are prohibited from buying guns, but those with temporary restraining orders are not. VAWA would close both of these loopholes, as recommended by ACP in its recently updated policy paper on reducing injuries and deaths from firearms. (This is the same ACP policy paper that launched “This Is Our Lane,” the physician movement against gun violence, when the NRA attacked ACP, and Annals of Internal Medicine, which published the paper, telling doctors to “stay in their lane.”) Fortunately, the House of Representatives voted on April 4 to reauthorize VAWA, on a vote of 263-158. However, the NRA will do everything possible to block it in the Republican-controlled Senate."

    "The NRA opposes expanding the federal background check system to include sales of guns at gun shows or through the internet, resulting in sales of guns to persons who otherwise would be prohibited because they have felony convictions, have been involuntarily hospitalized for a mental health condition that makes them a danger to themselves or others, or are otherwise prohibited under current law. Universal background checks are supported by nine out of 10 Americans, including an overwhelming majority of gun owners, yet the NRA opposes them."

    "The NRA advocates for “concealed-carry reciprocity,” which would require states to allow persons from any other state to carry a concealed firearm, preempting a state's right to determine its own conditions for granting concealed-carry permits. It also advocates for “constitutional carry” laws, which would repeal any and all state restrictions on carrying concealed weapons. This would effectively result in virtually no restrictions on concealed carry, anywhere."

    "The NRA opposes banning future sales of military-grade assault rifles and high-capacity magazines, the weapons of choice for mass shooters. For the NRA, it appears there is no type of firearm or ammunition that can be banned, no matter the harm it can inflict, even when there is no reasonable self-defense or recreational need for civilians to own such weapons."

    "The NRA opposes extreme risk protection, otherwise known as red-flag laws. Such laws would allow family members or the police to seek an order from a judge, usually within three days, to remove guns temporarily from people determined to be at imminent risk of using their firearms to harm themselves or others, with due process to have their firearms returned to them if they are no longer a risk."

    "The NRA opposes laws to require guns and ammunition to be stored safely and securely, and separately from each other, to reduce the risk of injuries and deaths when children, or other unauthorized persons, get hold of unsecured and loaded guns."

    "Extreme and radical? How else to characterize an effort to make it easier for domestic violence offenders to buy and possess guns, to allow felons and other restricted persons to buy guns at gun shows or on the internet, to eliminate all concealed-carry restrictions (and to force all states to accept their elimination), to make it impossible to remove guns from persons at imminent risk of harming themselves or others, to oppose requirements for safe storage of firearms and ammunition, and to allow sales of military-style assault weapons? How else?"

    "To be clear, when I call out the NRA for promoting a radical and extreme advocacy agenda, this does not mean I believe that most of its members, or most gun owners, are radical or extreme. Polls show that most gun owners support the policies cited above that the NRA opposes. Yet as long as the NRA's leadership advocates for extreme policies that endanger the lives of the rest of us, ACP will continue to speak up in support of common-sense policies to reduce injuries and deaths from firearms, because protecting patients from harm is very much in physicians' lane."

  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -  
    https://www-nbcnews-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1045076?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQEKAFwAQ==#aoh=15665007012689&referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/disgruntled- employee-had-arsenal-guns-threatened-mass-shooting-california-hotel-n1045076

    "Disgruntled employee had arsenal of guns, threatened mass shooting at California hotel, police say

    The Long Beach, California, police chief said the person who was arrested "had clear plans, intent and the means to carry out an act of violence."

    "By Phil Helsel

    A mass shooting may have been prevented when an employee at a Marriott hotel in Long Beach, California, reported that a disgruntled co-worker had threatened to kill workers and customers at the hotel, police said Wednesday.

    The man, who had several high-powered weapons and hundreds of rounds of ammunition at his Los Angeles-area home, was arrested Tuesday, police said."

    "Rodolfo Montoya, 37, who was arrested at his home in nearby Huntington Beach, communicated the threat to someone he worked with at a Marriott hotel Monday evening, Long Beach police Chief Robert G. Luna said. The chief hailed the worker who helped get police involved, saying the warning likely saved lives.

    "Thank God that employee decided to bring that information forward," Luna said at a news conference Wednesday.

    Download the NBC News app for breaking news and politics

    Police said they seized high-powered firearms, including one described as an assault rifle, hundreds of rounds of ammunition, 38 magazines that hold 30 rounds each and what was described as tactical gear from Montoya's home."

    "Montoya "had clear plans, intent and the means to carry out an act of violence that may have resulted in a mass casualty incident," Luna said.

    Weapons and ammunition seized from a cook at a Los Angeles-area hotel who allegedly threatened a mass shooting. Long Beach Police Department via AP

    Montoya was booked on charges of manufacturing and distributing assault weapons, possession of an assault weapon and making a criminal threat. He is being held in lieu of $500,000 bail, police said. The Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office is expected to decide on what charges he may face.

    Montoya, a cook at the hotel near Long Beach Airport south of downtown Los Angeles, was said to be upset about issues with human resources and told a fellow employee about his anger and plans. The employee notified hotel staff of the threat, and police became involved.

    "He's alleged to have said ... he was going to shoot up fellow employees and people coming into the hotel," Luna said. "So, he had a plan of shooting everybody that he saw in the hotel." 

    "It was not immediately clear if Montoya had an attorney who could speak on his behalf. A phone number listed for a person under that name and age in Huntington Beach could not immediately be found.

    Luna said Montoya does not appear to have any criminal history that would have prevented him from owning firearms, although possession of the gun described as an assault rifle, as well as the 38 30-round magazines allegedly found at his home, may be illegal under state law.

    The chief said it is unclear how far Montoya had gone on his alleged plans. Police are working to determine when and where he acquired the guns and other items.

    "How far away were we from this guy acting out, that's part of the questioning that we’re going through right now," Luna said."

    "In the weeks since back-to-back mass shootings in Texas and Ohio, a growing number of people accused of threatening mass violence have been arrested, including a Las Vegas man who allegedly wanted to attack Jews, an Ohio man who owned two AR-15 weapons and allegedly made threats against a Jewish community center, and an 18-year-old Ohio man who allegedly made online threats and had 15 rifles, 10 handguns and around 10,000 rounds of ammunition.

    On Aug. 3 and 4, gunmen in separate incidents opened fire at an El Paso, Texas, Walmart and in a Dayton, Ohio, entertainment district, killing 31 people in all. Late last month in Gilroy, California, a 19-year-old gunman opened fire at an annual food festival and killed three people, including two children."


    The Second Amendment, needs to be amended, with the Death Penalty language, and with an Accountability Measure, meaning that every gun, legal, and illegal should be accounted for.

    This way the new Second Amendment, is fair and equal, to the lawful gun owners, and the rest of the public, that doesn't own a gun, with those new amendments.

    Being that if an individual doesn't own a gun, they shouldn't have to buy one, just to keep themselves from being victimized by someone else with a legally owned gun, or with an illegally owned gun?

    So, as the Second Amendment is currently written, it's failing, the overall safety of the Public.

    And that failure, should be addressed on a Nationwide level. 

  • @TKDB ;

    I am sure that it is not an opinion TKDB does not preserve American united state constitution.

    The Second Amendment, needs to be amended, with the Death Penalty language, and with an Accountability Measure, meaning that every gun, legal, and illegal should be accounted for. This way the new Second Amendment, is fair and equal, to the lawful gun owners, and the rest of the public, that doesn't own a gun, with those new amendments.

    Focus please. A United State presented as constitutional principle should be ratified as an additional American United State of basic principle and legal precedent, amendment. The Priority of this Amendment may even deserve or require that the list of grievance in amendment to date also be changed. Death Penalty is a political statement not a United State of Constitution, capital punishment is a constitutional right.

    I am at this point not even agreeing or disagreeing with you. The point here is that the basic principle in the state of the union is not legal, punish people who have potential to commit crime by writing  law changing evidence of a crime after the fact is not legal. As a American republic we can ask to buy guns from the public under a condition no additional gun will be purchased to replace those purchased. We can ask to shoot the gun owned by the public. The real fear may be the 2nd Amendment describes a united state as common defense to civil desertion.  

  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -  
    @John_C_87

    I am very focused.

    I'm pro family, and pro Public safety in the face of the Second Amendment, because it's a failure, to the Police Officers, and the civilians, who have been killed by gun violence crimes. 

    And here's your ethically opinionated answer:

    "Focus please. A United State presented as constitutional principle should be ratified as an additional American United State of basic principle and legal precedent, amendment. The Priority of this Amendment may even deserve or require that the list of grievance in amendment to date also be changed. Death Penalty is a political statement not a United State of Constitution, capital punishment is a constitutional right.

    I am at this point not even agreeing or disagreeing with you. The point here is that the basic principle in the state of the union is not legal, punish people who have potential to commit crime by writing  law changing evidence of a crime after the fact is not legal. As a American republic we can ask to buy guns from the public under a condition no additional gun will be purchased to replace those purchased. We can ask to shoot the gun owned by the public. The real fear may be the 2nd Amendment describes a united state as common defense to civil desertion."

    An excerpt from the article that was shared earlier:

    "Police said they seized high-powered firearms, including one described as an assault rifle, hundreds of rounds of ammunition, 38 magazines that hold 30 rounds each and what was described as tactical gear from Montoya's home."

    "Montoya "had clear plans, intent and the means to carry out an act of violence that may have resulted in a mass casualty incident," Luna said."

    "Weapons and ammunition seized from a cook at a Los Angeles-area hotel who allegedly threatened a mass shooting. Long Beach Police Department via AP "

    Care to comment John? 
  • Care to comment John? 
    The little picture is still lethal force. Does the 2nd Amendment place a united state on lethal force? I understand the united state to be a no answer.

    "The Second Amendment, needs to be amended, with the Death Penalty language, and with an Accountability Measure, meaning that every gun, legal, and illegal should be accounted for. This way the new Second Amendment, is fair and equal, to the lawful gun owners, and the rest of the public, that doesn't own a gun, with those new amendments."
    This was all TKDB.
    John_ Addressed this accusation made against united state and constitution with this statement. Focus please. A United State presented as constitutional principle should be ratified as an additional American United State of basic principle and legal precedent, amendment. The Priority of this Amendment may even deserve or require that the list of grievance in amendment to date also be changed. Death Penalty is a political statement not a United State of Constitution, capital punishment is a constitutional right.

    In other words. Writing an additional amendment in basic principle may be necessary to re-arrange amendments by priority that come after American United State Constitution.

  • Care to comment John? 

    You do understand that as a bad cook a person can easily be greater threat to the public then they ever would be with the gun's. Again lethal force is a basic priciple i'm not here to make you look foolish Im just here to preervre united state consitutioin. Please, please, please stop tempting me.
  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @John_C_87

    @The NRA.

    @The pro gun extremists crowd.

    @The Far Right Pro Gun supporters.


    Another gun violence crime in the news:

    https://ktla-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/ktla.com/2019/08/21/sheriffs-deputy-wounded-in-lancaster-shooting/amp/?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQEKAFwAQ==#aoh=15664804807370&referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://ktla.com/2019/08/21/sheriffs-deputy-wounded-in-lancaster-shooting/ 

    "Gunman at Large After Shooting From Housing for Mentally Ill, Wounding Deputy at Lancaster Sheriff’s Station"


    "Tactical teams were searching an apartment building that houses mentally ill people Wednesday evening in the search for a sniper who opened fire from the structure and wounded a deputy outside the nearby Lancaster sheriff’s station, officials said.

    Deputy Angel Reinosa, 21, was wearing a bulletproof vest in the parking lot of the station at 501 W. Lancaster Blvd. when shots rang out about 2:45 p.m., said Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Capt. Todd Weber."

    @John_C_87

    @The NRA.

    @The pro gun extremists crowd.

    @The Far Right Pro Gun supporters.


    The Deputy, didn't deserve to be shot, by an apparent sniper, did he? 

    And again, not one single life lost to any unlawful Gun Violence in the United States is acceptable, is it? 


    The Second Amendment, needs to be amended, with the Death Penalty language, and with an Accountability Measure, meaning that every gun, legal, and illegal should be accounted for.

    This way the new Second Amendment, is fair and equal, to the lawful gun owners, and the rest of the public, that doesn't own a gun, with those new amendments.

    Being that if an individual doesn't own a gun, they shouldn't have to buy one, just to keep themselves from being victimized by someone else with a legally owned gun, or with an illegally owned gun?

    So, as the Second Amendment is currently written, it's failing, the overall safety of the Public.

    And that failure, should be addressed on a Nationwide level.  




  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1823 Pts   -  

    This article seems to be written just for you;

    Suppose an otherwise bright and promising young person told you she was terrified of food. She was having difficulty sleeping at night. Every meal time was a source of anguish. She couldn’t stop thinking about choking to death on food. Fear of choking to death was interfering with her relationships, making it difficult for her to do her job, warping her life.

    You would advise such a person to seek counseling, or counsel her yourself. You would tell her to look at the numbers. You would point out that it’s highly unlikely she will die of choking on food. What you would not do is encourage her to be afraid of food, publicize her views, put her on talk shows and magazine covers, or make her a national spokesperson on the dangers of choking on food.

    And yet that is exactly what the media, from the New York Times on down, do when it comes to mass shootings. You are three times as likely to die of choking on food as in a mass shooting. (According to one commonly cited chart) You are far more likely to die in a pedestrian accident, in a motor-vehicle accident, or in an assault with a sharp object. You are far more likely to die of carbon-monoxide poisoning. Definitions of mass shootings vary, but in a worse-than-average year, some 50 people in the U.S. die in one, according to a study recently publicized by Joe Biden. That’s one in 6 million. These are lottery-ticket odds.
    https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/08/media-should-stop-encouraging-mass-shooting-phobias/

  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @CYDdharta

    You love the Second Amendment as its written, and you love your guns, I'm guessing? 

    How do you feel about the NRA?  

    Probably as much a those families, who had their family members, taken from them by a mass shooters gun violence crimes? 

    "The Media Should Stop Encouraging Mass-Shooting Phobias"

    People gather for a vigil to remember victims of the mass shootings in Dayton and El Paso at Grand Army Plaza in Brooklyn, N.Y., August 5, 2019. (Eduardo Munoz/Reuters) "

    @CYDdharta

    The media didn't do anything.

    Are you blaming the media for the two below individuals, who made the news all by themselves?

    A sniper in California made the news yesterday, because they shot a Police Officer, from a distance.

    And another individual with a mass of firearms was found out, below is the excerpt:

    An excerpt from the article that was shared earlier:

    "Police said they seized high-powered firearms, including one described as an assault rifle, hundreds of rounds of ammunition, 38 magazines that hold 30 rounds each and what was described as tactical gear from Montoya's home."

    "Montoya "had clear plans, intent and the means to carry out an act of violence that may have resulted in a mass casualty incident," Luna said."

    "Weapons and ammunition seized from a cook at a Los Angeles-area hotel who allegedly threatened a mass shooting. Long Beach Police Department via AP " 

    Care to comment @CYDdharta?
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1823 Pts   -  
    TKDB said:
    @CYDdharta

    You love the Second Amendment as its written, and you love your guns, I'm guessing? 

    How do you feel about the NRA?  

    Probably as much a those families, who had their family members, taken from them by a mass shooters gun violence crimes? 

    "The Media Should Stop Encouraging Mass-Shooting Phobias"





    People gather for a vigil to remember victims of the mass shootings in Dayton and El Paso at Grand Army Plaza in Brooklyn, N.Y., August 5, 2019. (Eduardo Munoz/Reuters) "

    @CYDdharta

    The media didn't do anything.

    Are you blaming the media for the two below individuals, who made the news all by themselves?

    A sniper in California made the news yesterday, because they shot a Police Officer, from a distance.

    And another individual with a mass of firearms was found out, below is the excerpt:

    An excerpt from the article that was shared earlier:

    "Police said they seized high-powered firearms, including one described as an assault rifle, hundreds of rounds of ammunition, 38 magazines that hold 30 rounds each and what was described as tactical gear from Montoya's home."

    "Montoya "had clear plans, intent and the means to carry out an act of violence that may have resulted in a mass casualty incident," Luna said."

    "Weapons and ammunition seized from a cook at a Los Angeles-area hotel who allegedly threatened a mass shooting. Long Beach Police Department via AP " 

    Care to comment @CYDdharta?


    Appeal to Emotion

    (also known as: argument by vehemence, playing on emotions, emotional appeal, for the children)

    Description: This is the general category of many fallacies that use emotion in place of reason in order to attempt to win the argument.  It is a type of manipulation used in place of valid logic. There are several specifically emotional fallacies that I list separately in this book, because of their widespread use.  However, keep in mind that you can take any emotion, precede it with, “appeal to”, and you have created a new fallacy, but by definition, the emotion must be used in place of a valid reason for supporting the conclusion.
    https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/29/Appeal_to_Emotion

    Plaffelvohfen
  • @TKDB ;

    The Deputy, didn't deserve to be shot, by an apparent sniper, did he?  And again, not one single life lost to any unlawful Gun Violence in the United States is acceptable, is it? 

    Again. basic principle's TKDB.
    A United State of Lethal force has been created. This has nothing to do with the distribution of legal obligation of independently keeping, holding, and maintaining weapons as armament. You are making general interpretation on what should be basic principle. Constitution dictates stay in the basic, period or you are not preserving United State constitution. The Idea of kill is addressed in American United State Constitution preamble not the 2nd Amendment. Killing is a basic principle, basic common action kill, or be killed is the process. What you are asking for is a Amendment on the American Declaration of Independence. The American United States Constitution is the 1st Article of Amendment to American Declaration of Independence.

    Basic! Basically! The truth is we do not know if anyone deserves to be shot unless all details are known. A deputy is always more likely to be shot and as united state in basic principle removal of all gun or gun's will not change that. You are using complex mathematics and not basic principle to say something is right to perform a criminal act which is wrong against preservation of American constitution. Not that you care as we are presume innocent until  this display takes place in court of law. 
     
  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @CYDdharta

    Appeal to emotion?

    How many guns does it take to pacify a pro gun extremist?

    2, 3, 5, 10, 50 guns?

    I'd say that anything over 2 guns, is a, probable pro gun extremist, self appealling to his paranoid addiction to purchasing excessive amounts of guns?

    This is what pro gun extremists gun addiction looks like @CYDdharta.

    "Police said they seized high-powered firearms, including one described as an assault rifle, hundreds of rounds of ammunition, 38 magazines that hold 30 rounds each and what was described as tactical gear from Montoya's home."

    "Montoya "had clear plans, intent and the means to carry out an act of violence that may have resulted in a mass casualty incident," Luna said."

    "Weapons and ammunition seized from a cook at a Los Angeles-area hotel who allegedly threatened a mass shooting. Long Beach Police Department via AP."

    You're giving the Public, a good education @CYDdharta
    CYDdharta
  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @John_C_87

    Your argument is disproportionate.

    The Second Amendment, as it's written, puts millions of non gun owners, as the risk of being killed by, some of, the lawful, and illegal gun owners.

    Is the Second Amendment, as its written, worth the lives that have already been taken by the gun violence crimes?

    No, its not worth those lives, but apparently that's how some of pro gun owners, view it, through their pro gun rhetoric views?

    The Public deserves an amended, Second Amendment.
  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @John_C_87

    @CYDdharta

    https://amp-theatlantic-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/272734/?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQEKAFwAQ==#aoh=15666038102537&referrer=https://www.google.com&amp_tf=From %1$s&ampshare=https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/01/why-the-citizen-militia-theory-is-the-worst-pro-gun-argument-ever/272734/

    "Why the 'Citizen Militia' Theory Is the Worst Pro-Gun Argument Ever"


    "Two out of three Americans see the Second Amendment as a safeguard against tyranny. What?""

    "The notion that an individual right to bear arms guarantees the American people against government tyranny is of course an old one. Given its apparent validation in the Second Amendment of the. Constitution itself, it's not surprising that the notion has survived in some way through to the 21st century. Given its defiance of history and common sense, though, what should be surprising is that it's survived to remain so widespread.

    If America experienced a widespread political uprising today, it would bear little resemblance to Lexington and Concord in 1775, with well-disciplined minutemen assembling on the town square to defend liberty against the redcoats. It would more likely be a larger scale reenactment of the "Bleeding Kansas" revolt of 1854 to 1861, when small bands of armed zealots unleashed an orgy of inter-communal violence, unbounded by any laws of war or human decency."

    "There is, we all know, a Second Amendment right to gun ownership. Under our constitutional form of government, the Supreme Court has the authority to decide what the Constitution means, and after decades of judicial ambiguity, in District of Columbia v. Heller a majority of the justices found an individual right to gun ownership, unrelated to membership in a state militia. But the Heller decision also makes it clear that this is not an unlimited right, and that it may be subject to extensive government regulation.

    A citizen uprising today would probably not involve like-minded constitutionalists taking up arms to defend democracy and liberty.

    However, in recent years, the belief in widespread gun ownership as a defense against tyrannical government has become an alluring idea, gaining traction with members of Congress as well as fringe conspiracy theorists. As Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma put it just last week, "The Second Amendment wasn't written so you can go hunting, it was to create a force to balance a tyrannical force here." And if this is insufficiently incendiary, one only need look to the doctrine of the "Three Percenters,"with its ominous warning that "all politics in this country now is just dress rehearsal for civil war." 

    "It is easy to ridicule such rhetoric as just overindulgence in Red Dawn fantasies about resourceful and brave citizens resisting a modern army with nothing more than small arms and their wits. Even individual Americans armed with military-style assault rifles could hardly pose any serious resistance to any future tyrannical central government supported by overwhelmingly powerful military capabilities. But many otherwise sensible people seem willing to concede that gun ownership could one day play some role in preserving democracy. Just this month, a Rasmussen poll reported that 65 percent of Americans see gun rights as a protection against tyranny."


    "There are two primary pillars to this shaky intellectual edifice. The first is a cottage industry of academics and lawyers who have scoured ancient political tracts and common law to establish that in the distant English past that there was a constitutional right to bear arms as a defense against tyranny. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has given some credence to this view: In his majority opinion for Hellerhe asserted that "the Stuart Kings Charles II and James II succeeded in using select militias loyal to them to suppress political dissidents, in part by disarming their opponents." This line of reasoning ignores the fact that, in 21st century America, the prospect of monarchs and their select militias oppressing the populace is reasonably remote. It also ignores the fact that the common law evolves and is subordinate to acts of the legislature. Other nations built on English common law have all enacted strict regulation of gun ownership, with no perceptible diminution of political liberties."


    "The second pillar has fewer scholarly pretensions, but it employs even more historically dubious arguments. It suggests, for example, that the Holocaust could have been avoided if Germany's miniscule Jewish population had been better armed. It also argues that Ukrainian peasants could have defeated the Stalinist regime, backed by the NKVD and the Red Army, if they had possessed individual firearms. But these counterfactual interpretations of history are wildly speculative -- and downright implausible.

    To understand how misguided these kinds of arguments truly are, it's best to begin where their adherents generally do: the Battle of Lexington and Concord. Any comparison between the American revolutionaries and today's would-be freedom fighters is seriously flawed. Eighteenth century colonial society was dramatically less organized than 21st century America. The Minutemen and other colonial militias were formed by farmers and tradesmen who possessed individual firearms. But they were organized into disciplined companies under the authority of the Massachusetts Provisional Congress, the successor to a legally established provincial assembly. Even though the British had abrogated its charter, the structure of the assembly still remained."


    "In other words, when these militias assembled in Lexington and Concord to resist British troops, they were subject to formal lines of command and control under a legitimate authority, and they had the broad support of their political communities. Colonial Massachusetts also enjoyed a degree of social cohesion and agreement on basic political principles far greater than we have in 21st century America.

    Despite the colonial victory at Concord, the Minutemen and other local militias played a minor role in the eventual American defeat of King George III. The decisive factors in America's War of Independence were the battlefield victories of organized colonial armies acting under the authority of the Continental Congress and state-organized militias. The financial and military support of America's European allies also played a crucial role. 

    Guerrilla warfare waged by small bands of partisans was not militarily important to America's defense of its liberty. One possible exception was the partisan warfare against the British and their Tory allies in South and North Carolina. However, in the Southern theater, guerilla bands were often more dedicated to plunder and inflicting harm on their domestic enemies than fighting in conventional battles."

    CYDdharta
  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @CYDdharta

    @John_C_879

    @ZeusAres42

    @Vaulk

    At the NRA, 

    At the Far Right Pro Gun supporters.

    Your apparent individual ethical views, are disproportionate towards the rest of the Public, that doesn't want to own a gun, or doesn't own a gun altogether.

    So that they won't become victimized by a lawful gun owner, or by an unlawful gun owner? 

    The Second Amendment needs to be amended, so that it's proportionate towards the rest of the Public. 


    CYDdharta
  • TKDB 

    Your argument is disproportionate.

    The Second Amendment, as it's written, puts millions of non gun owners, as the risk of being killed by, some of, the lawful, and illegal gun owners.

    In truth, in liberty and in justice for all.  It is the Declaration of independence and the people themselves who place their own lives along with others at risk. The grievance in basic principle is saying the declaration of Independence and not united state in America  by constitutional union needs amendment.  I do not see where accusing all people as inept is deserving.

    The 2nd Amendment does not describe in basic principle and legal precedent any detail about American dependence as a general interpretation. It is specific Militia. There is no law that states a person who owns and maintains armament must use the weapon kept as armament in united state. There is not legal reason to refuse the common responsibility of ownership and storage of a gun. The personal reason of fear is not a legal justification as it is assigning the burden to others, some-one else.

    The united state of being shot by the evidence presented does not ever take place, being shot and united state of only owning a gun never happen, not even, in times of War. If a law had been pasted stating that a citizen must own a gun, must be in the Military, Congressional Armed Services, Presidential Armed Service, or Presadera Armed Service. There would be reason to remove guns as the government is stating the weapon must be used by order.

    A dependence argument of this kind is expected from a child not adult.

  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -  
    @John_C_87

    You're argument is disproportionate.

    Being that's it's made biased, by your own biased opinion.

    And the same can be said towards:

    @ZeusAres42

    @Vaulk

    @CYDdharta

    And the NRA, and the Far Right Pro Gun supporters.

    CYDdharta
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1823 Pts   -  
    TKDB said:
    @John_C_87

    You're argument is disproportionate.

    Being that's it's made biased, by your own biased opinion.

    And the same can be said towards:

    @ZeusAres42

    @Vaulk

    @CYDdharta

    And the NRA, and the Far Right Pro Gun supporters.


    The irony of you, of all people, making such a statement shows a complete and total lack of self-awareness.
    TKDBZeusAres42
  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @CYDdharta

    Tell the Public, what you mean?

    Define your pro gun argument, through the very lens of your pro gun ethics?

    "The irony of you, of all people, making such a statement shows a complete and total lack of self-awareness."

    My ethics, are pro family, and pro Public safety.

    In the face of the Second Amendment, as it's disproportionately written. 
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1823 Pts   -  
    TKDB said:
    @CYDdharta

    Tell the Public, what you mean?

    Define your pro gun argument, through the very lens of your pro gun ethics?

    "The irony of you, of all people, making such a statement shows a complete and total lack of self-awareness."

    My ethics, are pro family, and pro Public safety.

    In the face of the Second Amendment, as it's disproportionately written. 
    The Public knows exactly what I mean.  The fact that you don't just further proves my point.
  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -  
    @CYDdharta

    "The Public knows exactly what I mean.  The fact that you don't just further proves my point."

    The Public, is getting educated by your disproportionate pro gun ethics. 


    Spell it out, @CYDdharta


    I'll spell it out for you.

    400 million guns in the United States, outnumbering the 329 million citizens in the country.

    And some of those guns, are unaccounted for.

    And thousands have been murdered, by some of those Guns.

    Police Officers, and civilians alike.

    Kid's, teenagers, students, parents, grand parents, senior citizens, in various parts of the country for decades now.

    Both by some of the lawful gun owners, and by the unlawful gun owners.

    Do you know how many illegal guns, are on the streets?

    Lacking Serial numbers?

    Again spelling it out, my Ethics are pro family, and pro Public safety. 

    I don't see you defending anything but your own biased pro gun ethics?

    CYDdharta
  • CYDdharta said:
    TKDB said:
    @CYDdharta

    Tell the Public, what you mean?

    Define your pro gun argument, through the very lens of your pro gun ethics?

    "The irony of you, of all people, making such a statement shows a complete and total lack of self-awareness."

    My ethics, are pro family, and pro Public safety.

    In the face of the Second Amendment, as it's disproportionately written. 
    The Public knows exactly what I mean.  The fact that you don't just further proves my point.
    You do realize that whatever you say to this guy he will continue to deflect it. The trouble is that unlike the rest of us that if we were to look in the mirror we would recognize ourselves whereas he would be like the Chimpanzee attacking the mirror.
    CYDdharta



  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -  
    https://www.apnews.com/1610816361014918ab6019cf93bfefef

    "9,000 firearms and counting: Illegal guns flood Chicago"

    By SHARON COHENDecember 11, 2018

    "CHICAGO (AP) — Ke’Shon Newman’s daily routine is guided by guns — the hundreds of illegal pistols, revolvers and other firearms that torment his South Side neighborhood.

    He walks on brightly lit streets, the ones lined with Jamaican jerk and seafood joints, minimarkets, the White Castle, a Shell gas station. If shooting erupts, he wants witnesses — and, if necessary, help. He listens to music with one earbud, to hear approaching footsteps, and avoids clothing with hoods that might block his peripheral vision.

    These are the rituals of a street-smart 16-year-old who knows the cruel meaning of wrong place, wrong time. His stepbrother, Randall Young, then 16, was killed in crossfire two years ago while walking his girlfriend to a bus stop. “Nine shots,” Newman says, words that need no embroidery. “I’m making sure my mom doesn’t have to lose another child.”

    The Auburn Gresham neighborhood is flooded with illegal guns: .40-caliber pistols, .380 semi-automatics, .38-caliber revolvers. Police recover as many as they can, searching apartments, stopping cars, cornering people on the street. A buy-back in June brought in hundreds of firearms. And in September, the mayor and other dignitaries gathered to mark a milestone: Police in the 6th District had recovered their 1,000th gun this year."

    In this photo provided by the Chicago Police Department, forensic firearms examiners inspect weapons turned in by residents in a gun buy-back program held with New Life Covenant Church. (CPD via AP)

    "It was a triumphant moment, but it also offered a glimpse into the overwhelming task faced by law enforcement — and the wounds inflicted on just one Chicago community — when guns are readily available and violence so common that, one study found, an estimated 1 in 2 young men had at some time carried firearms, almost always illegally. Most did so to stay safe.

    “I tell people all the time we don’t have post-traumatic stress. We have PRESENT-traumatic stress,” says the Rev. Michael Pfleger, the activist priest at St. Sabina Church who was the inspiration for a character in Spike Lee’s “Chi-Raq.” ″We’re still in the war. We’re not coming home from it. We live it.”

    Chicago’s gun violence has captured the national spotlight in recent years and President Donald Trump has, at various times, blamed the Democratic leadership, threatened to send in federal troops and breezily called the problem “very easily fixable.”

    Those who battle this daily in the 6th District see it much differently. Guns not only shatter families, they determine what time people leave their houses, the streets and stores they avoid, whether a church should have a metal detector, even whether a Ferris wheel operator feels it’s safe enough to install a ride for a festival."

    Demeatreas Whatley
    With an anti-violence sign in the foreground, Demeatreas Whatley looks outside from his office in Chicago. Whatley is a supervisor for Cure Violence, a group that works to stem gang violence on the South Side. (AP Photo/Nam Y. Huh)

    "Residents in the community often know who’s behind shootings — there’ve been nearly 600 since 2016 — but the threat of gang retaliation has created an almost impenetrable code of silence. Many of the guns police seize belong to repeat offenders, who may be back on the street in days.

    St. Sabina has tried to break through, handing out $5,000 rewards 28 times in the last decade or so to help solve murders. The church is offering another to help find the killer of 21-year-old Oceanea Jones, who was with her boyfriend in July when they were chased by a group of men. She was shot in the back; he suffered minor injuries. “SPEAK UP FOR ME!” beseeches a poster on a church window featuring Jones’ hopeful smile."

    For Pfleger, solving murders like this and seizing guns don’t address the real problem.

    “Until we deal with easy access, they can pick up another 1,000 and another 1,000,” says the priest, who decades ago lost his foster son in gang crossfire. “It’s like water pouring on the floor and you keep mopping it up, but nobody’s shut off the faucet.”

    Chicago police regularly recover more illegal firearms than officials in larger New York and Los Angeles. Last year, the citywide haul was 7,932 firearms. The 2018 tally exceeds 9,100, and police say it could surpass 10,000 by year’s end.

    Police seize an illegal weapon about once every hour, most connected to gangs on the South and West sides. Authorities cite two reasons for the heavy gun traffic: Penalties for carrying these firearms aren’t considered a deterrent and, according to police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi, suspects tell officers they “would rather be caught by police with a gun ... than caught by a rival gang without one.”

    The department’s 6th District, one of 22 in all, leads the city in guns recovered, accounting for almost 15 percent so far in 2018. District Commander William Bradley sees progress in those numbers, measuring success in the smallest increments.

    “Every gun that (officers) get, I get excited about that because that’s a gun that can’t be used against them or a law-abiding citizen,” he says. “I don’t look at it as a grain of salt or a drop in the bucket.”

    The 6th District is an 8-square-mile stretch of overwhelmingly black working-class neighborhoods. A densely populated area, it’s thick with apartment buildings and brick bungalows, neat lawns, a busy bus route, a business strip with mom-and-pa stores and the prestigious all-boys Leo Catholic High. Every school graduate in the last eight years has been accepted to college.

    The community also bears visible signs of despair: weed-filled lots, boarded-up houses, wary fast-food workers and clerks hunkered down behind protective partitions in storefronts with thick metal security gates. Gang rivalries are fierce. On the district’s eastern edge, members of an organization called Cure Violence prowl the streets as “interrupters” to keep the peace, even if it’s something as simple as arranging safe passage for someone to go to a store in another gang’s territory.

    “These guys are living in their own little world of survival,” says Demeatreas Whatley, a Cure Violence supervisor. “Their enemies are not even two blocks away.”

    The 6th District polices 30 different gang factions — each with anywhere from 20 to 100 members — that account for 75 percent of the area’s gun violence. The gang presence is so ordinary, the turf so defined, that everyone from pastors to grade-schoolers can tell you, for instance, which streets are controlled by the Killer Ward faction and which are run by the G-Ville faction of the Gangster Disciples.

    Tracking gang guns is especially difficult because they move from one faction to another, and when police finally seize them, they’re rarely in the hands of the purchaser. “Gangs use guns like timeshares,” says Andrew Papachristos, a sociology professor at Northwestern University. “They stay in circulation.”

    Once guns move from the legal to the illegal market, they can bounce around the city with no rhyme or reason, says Celinez Nunez, special agent in charge of the Chicago office of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. She says one gun now being investigated has been used in more than 30 crimes, including homicides and assaults.

    Last year, the ATF formed the Chicago Crime Gun Strike Force, a multiagency unit to combat gun crimes, and added 20 agents. The U.S. attorney’s office also has put more prosecutors on gun cases.

    But the gun problem isn’t limited to gangs. A recent Urban Institute survey of young people in four neighborhoods with high levels of violence, including Auburn Gresham, found half the young men had carried a gun, though for most it wasn’t routine. Protection was the overwhelming reason.

    Tommie Bosley knows that may sound strange. He runs Strong Futures, a jobs-mentoring program at St. Sabina for young adults, many with criminal pasts. His 18-year-old son, Terrell, was fatally shot in 2006 while unloading musical instruments in a church parking lot. Bosley appreciates how all-consuming fear is for law-abiding people.

    “A lot of these guys are carrying weapons because they’re scared,” he says. “They feel that they cannot leave their house, go to work, whatever, unless they have a gun. They feel that at any time someone can be shooting at them and the gun — it makes them feel like they have a chance, which in my world is, ‘Are you kidding me?’ But that is the reality.”

    The community has rallied to rid itself of guns. Members of New Life Covenant Church Southeast held a buy-back in coordination with police, who gave $100 gift cards to anyone who turned in a firearm. It took four hours to gather the weapons as the line snaked around the block.

    At day’s end, 292 handguns and 132 rifles were out of circulation, but the event didn’t soothe the frayed nerves of some congregation members.

    “There’s a constant crisis state of mind,” says Shammrie Brown, the church’s community relations manager. “Elders who are supposed to have some level of peace are traumatized to the point where they’re rushing to get home before it’s night. ... There’s anxiety about going to the grocer, anxiety to go inside the church. ... They want security at the park. ... They want surveillance for every move that they make.”

    Shammarie BrownShammrie Brown stands for a portrait in front of New Life Covenant Church. Working with the Chicago police, he helped organize a gun buy-back program that brought in hundreds of guns. (AP Photo/Nam Y. Huh)

    As the church prepares to move into a new building, one looming question is whether to include a permanent metal detector.

    Three miles west at St. Sabina Church, from a basement room one floor below a mural of a black Jesus beckoning with outstretched hands, Lamar Johnson is trying to shepherd the next generation of his community to speak out against gun violence.

    Johnson, 28, is a counselor for B.R.A.V.E. Youth Leaders, training kids as young as 6 on how to be social justice activists. At one recent gathering of 10- to 12-year-olds, he listened as the children talked about hearing gunshots while walking to school or having to hit the ground to avoid an errant bullet while shopping with their parents.

    “They talked about it as if it were an everyday thing, which it is,” Johnson says. “It makes them numb, but if something happens to you over and over, eventually you adjust.”

    Johnson warns that seizing guns alone won’t transform a community long victimized by segregation and neglect.

    “If you’re taking guns off the street, what are you putting in those communities for those young people who use guns? What resources are you adding? We need everything. Businesses. Jobs. Schools. This isn’t something that just started in 2018. It’s happened over decades.”

    Carlos Nelson, director of the Greater Auburn-Gresham Development Corporation, is just as frustrated at the dearth of so much that would improve the community. He ticks off some of the businesses and services in the area: Currency exchanges. Quick loan shops. Dialysis and methadone clinics.

    “The businesses that you would find in an area with a good quality of life, you would be hard-pressed to find them here,” he says. “The investment has not been made in our community to build the economic base. ... It is being made to police the community and to deal with issues like taking the guns off the street.”

    That singular focus has repercussions.

    In September, Nelson was planning the 79th Street Renaissance Festival — a peaceful event for 13 years — when a Ferris wheel operator returned the group’s check, citing the violence. Though Nelson calls that “ridiculous,” he knows gun statistics that sound “like the Wild West” have taken their toll.

    The community, in which 60 percent of residents are homeowners, has shrunk from about 60,000 to about 47,000 over the last 15 or so years.

    “We don’t want this violence,” Nelson says. “We have a choice. The choice for many is to move out.”

    Veronica Parker has remained, even though her 27-year-old son, Korey, was fatally shot around the corner from her house on July 4, 2012. She believes he was selling marijuana and might have been targeted in a turf battle.

    Veronica ParkerVeronica Parker holds a photo of her son, Korey, who was gunned down near her home in 2012. The killing remains unsolved. (AP Photo/Nam Y. Huh)

    "In September, police tape cordoned off Parker’s street as officers investigated another killing. Cornelius Jackson had turned his life around, completing the Strong Futures program after a five-year prison stint for gun possession. He was newly married, working and had moved from his old neighborhood, which he described in a promotional video as a place that resulted in jail or death. On a return visit to Auburn Gresham, a gunman stepped from a car and shot the 29-year-old in the head.

    Both shootings remain unsolved, one of the more unsettling realities in places awash in guns. Bradley, who grew up in the area, understands how fear of gangs stifles cooperation. Chicago’s murder clearance rate in the last two years was 38 percent."

    “If I come forward ... and nothing is done, I put myself and my family at risk,” he says. “If these witnesses to crimes don’t say anything, we can’t do anything. I don’t have a real solution.”

    Parker is a member of Purpose Over Pain, a support group for parents who’ve lost children to guns. They’re determined to find ways to curb the violence but, she concedes, “there’s a void in my life that will never be filled.”

    Parker last spoke with the detective investigating her son’s case three years ago. “It’s like they just forgot him,” she says. When she’s out in the community these days, she’s dismayed by what she sometimes hears.

    “Young guys (are) saying they’ve made it to age 30 without getting shot or killed, and they think they’ve accomplished something. It’s heartbreaking.”

    Parker applauds police for going after guns but harbors no illusions.

    “If they get 100 or 1,000, others are still out there. As soon as the police pick up the guns, they’ll just go and get them somewhere else.”

    By December, the 6th District had recovered more than 1,200 guns."

    __

    Read more here about some of the myths and truths regarding the flow of guns in Chicago. 



    A stark article, about Guns, illegally owned Guns, and the lose of life, because of those illegal Guns, that are one the streets, EVERY day.

    The Second Amendment, needs to be changed, so that's is updated wording, is ethically equal to the lawful gun owners, those citizens, without guns, and to the criminals, and offenders, and first time offenders, who kill people with their lawfully owned gun, and give them the Death Penalty.

    For their crimes, and 1000% accountability for All of the Guns, in the United States.

    The article above, shows how much Accountability needs to be done, via an amended Second Amendment. 

    That would be ethically Fair, and Equal to the entire Public of the country.

    Because the current Second Amendment, is unfair and unequal, ethically. 

  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1823 Pts   -  
    CYDdharta said:
    TKDB said:
    @CYDdharta

    Tell the Public, what you mean?

    Define your pro gun argument, through the very lens of your pro gun ethics?

    "The irony of you, of all people, making such a statement shows a complete and total lack of self-awareness."

    My ethics, are pro family, and pro Public safety.

    In the face of the Second Amendment, as it's disproportionately written. 
    The Public knows exactly what I mean.  The fact that you don't just further proves my point.
    You do realize that whatever you say to this guy he will continue to deflect it. The trouble is that unlike the rest of us that if we were to look in the mirror we would recognize ourselves whereas he would be like the Chimpanzee attacking the mirror.

    Yes, of course.  I've trod this very same hamster wheel with @TKDB before.  My replies are for my own satisfaction, and on the off chance that someone else, such as yourself, is reading the thread.
  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -  
    @ZeusAres42

    I'm trying to figure out your thinking?

    Are you maybe trying to deflect the fact that there have been Police Officers, and citizens murdered by illegal guns?

    What are you basing your, pro gun ethics off of?

    Maybe you used your pro gun ethics to come up with you below statement? 

    What's your Truth @ZeusAres42?

    "You do realize that whatever you say to this guy he will continue to deflect it. The trouble is that unlike the rest of us that if we were to look in the mirror we would recognize ourselves whereas he would be like the Chimpanzee attacking the mirror."

    "The trouble is that unlike the rest of us that if (WE?? Do you mean, some of the, pro gun crowd participants) to look in the mirror, we would recognize ourselves, whereas, he would be like the (Where's your EVIDENCE, that you've seen a Chimpanzee attacking the mirror.)"
  • TKDB said:
    @ZeusAres42

    I'm trying to figure out your thinking?

    Are you maybe trying to deflect the fact that there have been Police Officers, and citizens murdered by illegal guns?

    What are you basing your, pro gun ethics off of?

    Maybe you used your pro gun ethics to come up with you below statement? 

    What's your Truth @ZeusAres42?

    "You do realize that whatever you say to this guy he will continue to deflect it. The trouble is that unlike the rest of us that if we were to look in the mirror we would recognize ourselves whereas he would be like the Chimpanzee attacking the mirror."

    "The trouble is that unlike the rest of us that if (WE?? Do you mean, some of the, pro gun crowd participants) to look in the mirror, we would recognize ourselves, whereas, he would be like the (Where's your EVIDENCE, that you've seen a Chimpanzee attacking the mirror.)"
    Do you know how ridiculous you sound? Oh! Wait, you can't; you're like the Chimp who thinks he is seeing another animal in the mirror.



  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @ZeusAres42

    And your disproportionate pro gun ethics are on display:

    With your arguments:

    CYDdharta said:
    The Public knows exactly what I mean.  The fact that you don't just further proves my point.
    "You do realize that whatever you say to this guy he will continue to deflect it. The trouble is that unlike the rest of us that if we were to look in the mirror we would recognize ourselves whereas he would be like the Chimpanzee attacking the mirror."

    @ZeusAres42


    (I'm trying to figure out your thinking?

    Are you maybe trying to deflect the fact that there have been Police Officers, and citizens murdered by illegal guns?

    What are you basing your, pro gun ethics off of?

    Maybe you used your pro gun ethics to come up with you below statement? 

    What's your Truth @ZeusAres42?

    "You do realize that whatever you say to this guy he will continue to deflect it. The trouble is that unlike the rest of us that if we were to look in the mirror we would recognize ourselves whereas he would be like the Chimpanzee attacking the mirror."

    "The trouble is that unlike the rest of us that if (WE?? Do you mean, some of the, pro gun crowd participants) to look in the mirror, we would recognize ourselves, whereas, he would be like the (Where's your EVIDENCE, that you've seen a Chimpanzee attacking the mirror.)" )

    @ZeusAres42

    Here's your Truth:

    "Do you know how ridiculous you sound? Oh! Wait, you can't; you're like the Chimp who thinks he is seeing another animal in the mirror."

    @ZeusAres42

    Thank you for your disproportionate pro gun ethics lesson. 



  • TKDB said:
    @ZeusAres42

    And your disproportionate pro gun ethics are on display:

    With your arguments:

    CYDdharta said:
    The Public knows exactly what I mean.  The fact that you don't just further proves my point.
    "You do realize that whatever you say to this guy he will continue to deflect it. The trouble is that unlike the rest of us that if we were to look in the mirror we would recognize ourselves whereas he would be like the Chimpanzee attacking the mirror."

    @ZeusAres42


    (I'm trying to figure out your thinking?

    Are you maybe trying to deflect the fact that there have been Police Officers, and citizens murdered by illegal guns?

    What are you basing your, pro gun ethics off of?

    Maybe you used your pro gun ethics to come up with you below statement? 

    What's your Truth @ZeusAres42?

    "You do realize that whatever you say to this guy he will continue to deflect it. The trouble is that unlike the rest of us that if we were to look in the mirror we would recognize ourselves whereas he would be like the Chimpanzee attacking the mirror."

    "The trouble is that unlike the rest of us that if (WE?? Do you mean, some of the, pro gun crowd participants) to look in the mirror, we would recognize ourselves, whereas, he would be like the (Where's your EVIDENCE, that you've seen a Chimpanzee attacking the mirror.)" )

    @ZeusAres42

    Here's your Truth:

    "Do you know how ridiculous you sound? Oh! Wait, you can't; you're like the Chimp who thinks he is seeing another animal in the mirror."

    @ZeusAres42

    Thank you for your disproportionate pro gun ethics lesson. 




    Why do you always assume there are only two options? Pro gun or anti-gun? What about those us that are none of these things?



  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5967 Pts   -  
    The First and the Second Amendments are some of the greatest legislative pieces in the history of mankind, and the people who established them exhibited great foresight. They by no means should be abolished or amended in any way other than one that further limits the governmental influence in the respective areas.

    Does the NRA capitalise on them? Obviously. But then, we all capitalise on the existing laws to our own gain. Someone profiting off the law is a good thing, not a bad thing, and if anything, the NRA should be commended for adapting to the economical system of the US so well.

    People interact with the NRA voluntarily. If people do not want NRA to exist, then they will not pay the membership fees, and the NRA will fall apart. So yes, as long as NRA exists, whatever belongs to it belongs also to the US citizens. There is no distinction here; the NRA is composed of the US citizens, after all.
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5967 Pts   -  
    TKDB said:

    How do you feel about the NRA?  

    Probably as much a those families, who had their family members, taken from them by a mass shooters gun violence crimes? 
    How do you feel about kitchen knife producer associations? Probably as much as those families, who had their family members taken from them by mass knife violence crimes?

    The legal system is not supposed to cater to people's emotions; in fact, the very reason it exists is because the alternative - letting people do their own vision of justice however their heart desires - leads to violent chaos.


    ZeusAres42Vaulk
  • MayCaesar said:
    TKDB said:

    How do you feel about the NRA?  

    Probably as much a those families, who had their family members, taken from them by a mass shooters gun violence crimes? 
    How do you feel about kitchen knife producer associations? Probably as much as those families, who had their family members taken from them by mass knife violence crimes?

    The legal system is not supposed to cater to people's emotions; in fact, the very reason it exists is because the alternative - letting people do their own vision of justice however their heart desires - leads to violent chaos.


    If the legal system catered towards the emotions of people it would be chaotic.


    MayCaesar




  • Also, the idea that you think everyone in the US that holds a gun should be sentenced to death as a penalty is evil, and sounds like something out of the dark ages. This viewpoint is in complete contrast to being pro-humanity or any other of those things you mentioned.



  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -  
    @ZeusAres42

    I don't own a gun either.

    But those Police Officers, and citizens getting killed alike, is still a disproportionate treatment of those individuals, whether you, or I, own a gun, or not?

    True or not? 

    While the lawful gun owners, and the criminals, and offenders unlawfully own their guns.

    I'm not going to play the Second Amendment as its written is proportionate, and fair to the rest of the Public that doesn't own a gun, Card?

    Just to, I guess defend the gun owners, the pro gun extremists, and so forth, with your I'm not a gun owner, Argument Card?

    I'm not going to defend, the pro gun extremists, or the Far Right Pro Gun support, or the NRA, they aren't worth the hassle, of they, getting in the countries way of meddling with the Second Amendment, as it's currently written, just to hear about more Police Officers, or citizen's, being killed by, disproportionate gun violence crimes, IE mass shootings, and the like? 

    "Why do you always assume there are only two options? Pro gun or anti-gun? What about those us that are none of these things?"

  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -  
    @MayCaesar

    Call your local Police Department up, and see, if ANY of them will CATER to your below argument?

    "How do you feel about kitchen knife producer associations? Probably as much as those families, who had their family members taken from them by mass knife violence crimes?
     
    The legal system is not supposed to cater to people's emotions; in fact, the very reason it exists is because the alternative - letting people do their own vision of justice however their heart desires - leads to violent chaos."

    Thank you for educating the Public, on your pro gun ethics? 
  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @ZeusAres42

    "Also, the idea that you think everyone in the US that holds a gun should be sentenced to death as a penalty is evil, and sounds like something out of the dark ages. This viewpoint is in complete contrast to being pro-humanity or any other of those things you mentioned."

    Thank you, please continue to educate the Public, with your continued ethics lesson? 

    I'm pro family, pro Public safety, but if an individual is inhumane enough to kill someone with a gun, outside of proven self defense, then they deserve the Death Penalty.

    They should have observed their self awareness more, and they should have observed their self respect more, and they should have respected other's more, shouldn't they? 

    And if they had held themselves accountable for their own actions, they wouldn't have committed any of their gun violence crimes, now would they?

    But because they abused their self awareness, their self accountability, and their own self respect, and their own humanity, they are their own VICTIM, and they deserve to live with that reality, they earned it through their gun violence crimes.

    I'm pro unborn baby, and pro adoption, in the face of abortion.

    Because two people have consensual intercourse, and neglecting OTC birth control, is mindful laziness.

    So then the correct response is abortion? 

    Outside the situations, or rape, or incest? 


    Millions of individuals across the United States, want to adopt babies.

    It makes you wonder, how many of those people killed by a criminals, or an offenders gun violence crimes, were maybe adopted, by a parent, or parents, who got lucky enough to adopt a baby, that was given up for adoption, instead of being aborted?

    I took your argument, and taught myself a lesson, because of how you arranged your counter argument.

    Thank you again, for teaching the Public, through another one of your ethics lessons. 





  • @TKDB

    I'm speaking to you; not the public. I don't know about the general education of anyone in the public. 

    It's abundantly clear that you yourself do need educating based on how you engage in debating here however.



  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @ZeusAres42

    "I'm speaking to you; not the public. I don't know about the general education of anyone in the public. 

    It's abundantly clear that you yourself do need educating based on how you engage in debating here however."

    @ZeusAres42

    There are 2 Billion plus computers world wide.

    I'm speaking to the Public, and INVITE them all to partake in this Public forum.

    However you want to view the Public, they're getting an education on your individual ethics.

    If you want, invite the NRA, to this forum?

    You can Google their website, can't you?

    Bring them with you, and lets really educate the Public? 
  • @TKDB ;
    I don't own a gun either.
    But those Police Officers, and citizens getting killed alike, is still a disproportionate treatment of those individuals, whether you, or I, own a gun, or not?
    True or not? 

    Not true, it is an unappropriated lethal force. It is an Amendment to the American Declaration of Independence and has nothing to do with the American United State Constitution.

  • TKDB said:
    @John_C_87

    You're argument is disproportionate.
    Being that's it's made biased, by your own biased opinion.
    And the same can be said towards:
    the NRA, and the Far Right Pro Gun supporters.

    The translation is based on preservation of United State Constitution not human interpretation. Basic Priciple, the basic priciple of regulated united state independence. Lethal force is the argument it has a direct conection as united state, gun's do not share the basic priciple of killing and death as a united state with lethal force. By the way lethal force does not describe only crime as a united state.

  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -  
    @Vaulk

    @ZeusAres42

    @CYDdharta

    @MayCaesar

    @John_C_87


    If you want, invite the NRA, to this forum?

    Bring them with you, and lets really educate the Public? 


    https://contact.nra.org/

    "Contact Us

    • Press: Please visit our Press Inquiries Page
    • Legislative and Political Questions: Please visit our Contact NRA-ILA Page
    • Mailing Address and Magazine Subscription Updates: Please visit our NRA Member Services page
    • Contact NRA by Mail: National Rifle Association of America, 11250 Waples Mill Road, Fairfax, VA 22030
    • Contact the NRA by Phone: (800) 672-3888 "


  • jesusisGod777jesusisGod777 115 Pts   -  
    Listen.

    This is like arguing church and state.

    Did the founding fathers collectively define Christianity as religion and should the interpretation of the freedom to practice religion only specifically relate to Christianity?

    The founding fathers we're evil men.

    I reject the founding fathers.

    When your talking about gun laws, it's tricky.

    The right to bear arms is based on ensuring the citizens aren't powerless to defend themselves in case of government tyranny.

    The law is for public safety from government force.

    Jesus is Lord.
  • @TKDB

    So why do you think everyone in the usa that owns a gun should be barbarically sentenced to death?


    Are you hearing voices telling you such things?



  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 5967 Pts   -  
    TKDB said:
    @MayCaesar

    Call your local Police Department up, and see, if ANY of them will CATER to your below argument?
    I do not need to call them; enforcing the existing law and ignoring the emotional component is precisely what they are hired to do. If you ever find the police officer who says that emotional arguments should win over the book of the law, then you will be a good citizen to report him/her to the FBI, because he/her obviously is corrupt and unable to do his/her job.
  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @ZeusAres42

    Why haven't you invited the NRA, to the forum, so they could be educated on how you debate?

    "So why do "you think everyone in the usa that owns a gun" should be barbarically sentenced to death?
    (Show the Public, the above statement from you, is what I said?)

    (Where's the quotation?)

    Here's my whole original quotation:

    (The Second Amendment should be amended with these changes:

    The Death Penalty.

    And with an accountability measure, meaning that every gun, legal, and illegal should be accounted for.

    This way the new Second Amendment, is fair and equal, to the lawful gun owners, and the rest of the public, that doesn't own a gun, with those new amendments.

    Being that if an individual doesn't own a gun, they shouldn't have to buy one, just to keep themselves from being victimized by someone else with a legally owned gun, or with an illegally owned gun?)

    @ZeusAres42

    "Are you hearing voices telling you such things?"

    How do you think that they might view your debate style? 

    Those Mass shooters who have, killed people with their Guns, wasn't a barbaric way, to kill those innocent people, through their gun violence crimes? 


  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @MayCaesar

    In other word's, you don't have a non "MayCaesar" argument to use as a counter argument? 

    You're relying on your own Opinion, to self support your argument?

    MayCaesar, didn't call the Police because MayCaesars argument is based on this below mindset? 

    "I do not need to call them; enforcing the existing law and ignoring the emotional component is precisely what they are hired to do. If you ever find the police officer who says that emotional arguments should win over the book of the law, then you will be a good citizen to report him/her to the FBI, because he/her obviously is corrupt and unable to do his/her job."

    This argument, coming from the individual who is pro illegal immigrant, or illegal alien, and is against a Border wall, or barrier, right MayCaesar? 


    @MayCaesar

    A whole new question, comes to mind, in wondering, if some of the 22 million illegal immigrants, or aliens, might be an owner, of an illegal gun, while illegally being in the United States? 


  • @TKDB

    How on earth is a lawful gun owner guilty of a crime if they're lawful?

    Do you not know what lawful means?



  • TKDBTKDB 694 Pts   -   edited August 2019
    @ZeusAres42

    "How on earth is a lawful gun owner guilty of a crime of a crime they're lawful?

    Do you not know what lawful means?"

    Nicholas Cruz, was a lawful gun owner.

    The Vegas Mass shooter, Stephen Paddock, was a lawful gun owner, who murdered innocent people with his guns.

    Please, continue to educate the Public, with your brand of ethics? 
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2023 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch