Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPoint/Counterpoint: We should talk about gun control vs. Im going to shoot your liberal face
https://www.duffelblog.com/2017/10/gun-control-point-counter/
The following is a point/counterpoint discussion regarding the regulation of guns in the United States. James Bethel, a former Army infantryman who served in Afghanistan, will present the point. Alvin Rodriguez, a former Army infantryman who served in Afghanistan, will present the counterpoint.
POINT: I remember the first time I handled an assault rifle. Shortly after my entry into Army basic training, the drill sergeants explained that this weapon, an M4 rifle, would need to be with me at all times. We were taught everything about it, from how to use it, how to clean it, and of course, how to shoot it. And when I went to Afghanistan, I did plenty of that. But I dont really know whether this same type of weapon belongs on American streets, especially in the wake of deadly massacres in Las Vegas, Orlando, and sadly, so many other places.
COUNTERPOINT: Look at this stupid liberal snowflake right here. I can tell hes a stupid communist-sympathizing Killary supporter just by reading his first sentence, where he mentions assault rifle. That term is completely made up. No one would call an M4, or an AR-15, an assault rifle except for a liberal piece of shit like this guy, of course. Did you even serve?
POINT: Like so many of my fellow Americans, I watched what happened in Las Vegas with absolute horror. That one man can acquire dozens of high-powered rifles and thousands of rounds of ammunition, and then unleash it on unsuspecting concertgoers, should give all Americans pause. We still dont know why he did what he did, but we do know that he had a large cache of weaponry.
Could this have been prevented? Could lawmakers pass laws that may prevent similar episodes in the future, such as a ban on so-called bump fire stocks that allow fully-automatic fire? Perhaps we can have a discussion about limiting the number of guns a person can have, or we can implement a system to flag people like Stephen Paddock if they purchase large amounts of weapons and ammo.
COUNTERPOINT: You know, I served my country and protected everyones freedom especially their 2nd Amendment right to bear arms when I was fighting in Afghanistan. And I cannot believe this liberal piece of shit is trying to take everyones guns away.
Let me explain something to you. Most American gun owners are nice, law-abiding people. All they want is to use their guns for hunting, personal protection, or, just to shoot for fun. The founders of our country enshrined gun ownership in the Constitution so that we could rise up and overthrow the government if it ever became oppressive.
And you know what other oppressive governments did? Before they took over their countries, Pol Pot, Stalin, and Hitler all confiscated guns from their citizens. So you agree with Hitler, huh?
POINT: Like many Americans, I dont really think that banning guns is the answer. There are simply too many guns in circulation, and the fact is, most gun owners are responsible and law-abiding. But I do think that we can probably agree that something like preventing mentally-ill people from purchasing guns or requiring background checks before everyone buys a gun are reasonable steps to have in place.
These small steps probably would not have stopped the shooter in Las Vegas, but perhaps, it would have made it a little bit harder for him to acquire some of his weapons. Regardless, these small moves would very likely minimize other deadly incidents in the future, just as the 1934 National Firearms Act has made the thought of using machine guns in crimes virtually unheard of.
COUNTERPOINT: As a veteran, Im appalled by this liberal snowflakes ridiculous logic. If you pass a law against guns, its only going to affect the people who actually obey the laws. Criminals wont care about it, and theyll get their guns some other way. Oh, and by the way, theres this pesky thing called the Constitution which, I think its quite obvious, you completely despise.
But dont worry. Ill be here to defend it from demon-crats like you.
See Also: Military Drawing Up Plans For Nationwide Gun Confiscations
The following is a point/counterpoint discussion regarding the regulation of guns in the United States. James Bethel, a former Army infantryman who served in Afghanistan, will present the point. Alvin Rodriguez, a former Army infantryman who served in Afghanistan, will present the counterpoint.
POINT: I remember the first time I handled an assault rifle. Shortly after my entry into Army basic training, the drill sergeants explained that this weapon, an M4 rifle, would need to be with me at all times. We were taught everything about it, from how to use it, how to clean it, and of course, how to shoot it. And when I went to Afghanistan, I did plenty of that. But I dont really know whether this same type of weapon belongs on American streets, especially in the wake of deadly massacres in Las Vegas, Orlando, and sadly, so many other places.
COUNTERPOINT: Look at this stupid liberal snowflake right here. I can tell hes a stupid communist-sympathizing Killary supporter just by reading his first sentence, where he mentions assault rifle. That term is completely made up. No one would call an M4, or an AR-15, an assault rifle except for a liberal piece of shit like this guy, of course. Did you even serve?
POINT: Like so many of my fellow Americans, I watched what happened in Las Vegas with absolute horror. That one man can acquire dozens of high-powered rifles and thousands of rounds of ammunition, and then unleash it on unsuspecting concertgoers, should give all Americans pause. We still dont know why he did what he did, but we do know that he had a large cache of weaponry.
Could this have been prevented? Could lawmakers pass laws that may prevent similar episodes in the future, such as a ban on so-called bump fire stocks that allow fully-automatic fire? Perhaps we can have a discussion about limiting the number of guns a person can have, or we can implement a system to flag people like Stephen Paddock if they purchase large amounts of weapons and ammo.
COUNTERPOINT: You know, I served my country and protected everyones freedom especially their 2nd Amendment right to bear arms when I was fighting in Afghanistan. And I cannot believe this liberal piece of shit is trying to take everyones guns away.
Let me explain something to you. Most American gun owners are nice, law-abiding people. All they want is to use their guns for hunting, personal protection, or, just to shoot for fun. The founders of our country enshrined gun ownership in the Constitution so that we could rise up and overthrow the government if it ever became oppressive.
And you know what other oppressive governments did? Before they took over their countries, Pol Pot, Stalin, and Hitler all confiscated guns from their citizens. So you agree with Hitler, huh?
POINT: Like many Americans, I dont really think that banning guns is the answer. There are simply too many guns in circulation, and the fact is, most gun owners are responsible and law-abiding. But I do think that we can probably agree that something like preventing mentally-ill people from purchasing guns or requiring background checks before everyone buys a gun are reasonable steps to have in place.
These small steps probably would not have stopped the shooter in Las Vegas, but perhaps, it would have made it a little bit harder for him to acquire some of his weapons. Regardless, these small moves would very likely minimize other deadly incidents in the future, just as the 1934 National Firearms Act has made the thought of using machine guns in crimes virtually unheard of.
COUNTERPOINT: As a veteran, Im appalled by this liberal snowflakes ridiculous logic. If you pass a law against guns, its only going to affect the people who actually obey the laws. Criminals wont care about it, and theyll get their guns some other way. Oh, and by the way, theres this pesky thing called the Constitution which, I think its quite obvious, you completely despise.
But dont worry. Ill be here to defend it from demon-crats like you.
See Also: Military Drawing Up Plans For Nationwide Gun Confiscations
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 1705 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (2)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Point/Counterpoint: We should talk about gun control vs. Im going to shoot your liberal face (Original Post)
IronLionZion
Oct 2017
OP
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)1. Break out the popcorn and beer!
Kingofalldems
(38,456 posts)2. Look out below!