CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:11
Arguments:7
Total Votes:13
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 My simple answer to saving lives without effecting law abiding gun owners, drinkers, etc (7)

Debate Creator

Cuaroc(8829) pic



My simple answer to saving lives without effecting law abiding gun owners, drinkers, etc

What I am about to suggest will never happen because the Democrat Party and the Left's ultimate goal is takng our guns.

To keep from punishing law abiding gun purchasers, drinkers in bars, etc. while doing our best to save lives from criminals and repeat DWI drivers is this......

We need to put marks on driver licenses or identifications for people who have no driver's license, of criminals, DWI offenders, criminally insane, etc.
In this way law abiding citizens will not be inconvienced when buying guns or alcohol becuase their licences or identification will already be clean.

It would require no action on the part of law abiding citizens, but there would have to be an initial update of every criminal's or DWI offender's drivers licenses or identification, because we would now have to present these identifications when purchasing guns or alcohol.

There would be a huge debate on which crimes would get marks on their licences because we do not want trivial crimes such as Jay walking, etc. etc. included. The Americn people, NOT CORRUPT POLITICIANS, would get a chance to vote on the types of crimes that dictate a mark on the license or identification.

DONE DEAL! Simple solution for all involved but it will never happen because the Left's goal is not about saving lives. It's about ultimately taking our guns.

Republicans and the NRA would be on board becuase law abiding citizens could enjoy their contitutional freedoms of gun ownership without time consuming annoying back ground checks, resgistration of guns, etc. etc.

This could be a compromise that both sides could agree on if it were not for the fact that the Left's ultimate goal is taking our guns, as they have in many European nations and dictatorships around the world.
-FromWithin
Add New Argument
3 points

Agreed, This is called 'gun control', and is what I, as a liberal, have argued for. I don't want guns confiscated - I live in Texas, and want to go boar hunting.

1 point

Eldon,

Agreed, This is called 'gun control', and is what I, as a liberal, have argued for. I don't want guns confiscated - I live in Texas, and want to go boar hunting.

Exactly. Without gun control, you will not hit the boar when you go hunting.

Conservatives are in favor of gun control, too. We just call it good aim.

2 points

We are already required to provide a license for proof of age when buying guns and alcohol. This is a no brianer for anyone not interested in taking our guns.

-FromWithin

0 points

We are already required to provide a license for proof of age when buying guns and alcohol. This is a no brianer for anyone not interested in taking our guns

First of all thank you for reposting this madman's nonsense so that everyone can reply to it. FromWithin has me autobanned from all his threads.

I guess the thing I want to point out is the stupidity of comparing alcohol to guns. It is extremely difficult to rationalise prohibition if one accepts the notion that a person has the right to put what they want into their own bodies. To limit the substances it is acceptable to consume is to make a person's body, in certain circumstances, the property of the state. I cannot logically defend this.

Guns however, are much different. They give a person, regardless of moral intent, the ability to fire highly toxic lumps of lead into another person's body. This is where the line should be drawn because, just as your body is not the property of the sate, neither is it the property of any old dickhead with a firearm.

1 point

I can agree to that marks on the license plan so long as one of the ways you get marks is if your internet banter shows you are an angry old crank whom most others think is a crazy menace.

1 point

It makes sense, except that it would still require the same level of database support as the present system (for when people "lose" or lose their ID/Licenses.)

In the end, it has the same root flaw as the current system: it depends on government functioning properly, which is unlikely.

-

Consider: US gun deaths (2/3 of which are suicides) are roughly the same number as automobile accident fatalities.

I am unclear as to why the left does not also push for tighter restrictions on who is allowed to drive.

For example, there are indications that a significant number of accidents involve drivers who were distracted by texting on their mobile phones. Keep a database of who owns a cell phone, and make it illegal to own a car if you are listed as a cell phone owner in any of the cell phone companies' databases.

Alternately, we could require ID to buy a smart phone. Nobody with a drivers license would be allowed to buy one (because they drive), but people with simple IDs could purchase one, but not if they are in a database that shows they own a car.

Do you see how ridiculous it gets when we expect the government to try to save us from careless or bad intentioned people?

-

We have accepted the car wreck danger, and the fact that government intervention can only do so much to prevent it. It is just a reality of hundreds of millions of people living in our society.

Whether we like it or not, government cannot make us perfectly safe. We depend on people to exercise good judgment and restraint, but not all people do. Once they made murder illegal, the responsibility devolved onto individual citizens.

1 point

I am pro- gun. In fact, I am very pro-gun. Lifetime member of the NRA & the GOA, I conceal carry on a regular basis, and I intend to open a gun store upon leaving the Navy & getting a business degree. And I cannot support this, for one reason: it's just too easy to get a fake license already; getting one with a special mark on it won't be any more difficult. There has to be a system in place, like the current background check system, that you can't simply get around with a fake ID- a central database that functions off of a social security number. Otherwise it's too easy to circumvent. And no one wants rapists, murderers, or the certifiably insane to have easier access to guns than they already do.

Besides, our solution to people having DUIs is not to take away their alcohol, it's to take away their licenses so they can't legally drive. Do people still drive under suspended licenses? Sometimes. Give and enforce stiff penalties for that. Booze is still plenty easy to come by without an ID. I've brewed my own. And if you look old enough nobody's going to do an ID check when you buy alcohol.