Gun Control Forum on Facebook Gun Control Forum on Google Plus Gun Control Forum on Twitter

Greetings Gun Control Debater

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

Sign In with Facebook Sign In with Twitter

Popular Gun Control Forum Categories

In this Discussion

Paul McCartney Joins Anti-Gun Violence Efforts

edited August 2015 in Gun Control Debates Posts: 8
Paul McCartney is adding his voice to Tony Bennett's campaign against gun violence. The former Beatle recorded a voice message that's part of a text-to-call operation Wednesday for Bennett's Voices Against Violence campaign. McCartney and others are encouraging Americans to send a text, which will lead to the singer's message and connect the caller to their local Senate office after providing their zip code.


  • Just curious, when Paul McCartney goes in public situations, does he ever have bodyguards?  Are they armed?  Because almost all bodyguards for politicians and celebrities are. I just want to make sure Mr. McCartney follows suit with all the other hypocrites who believe guns cause violence and they are not suitable for self defense ... except when they need to be protected, of course.  It must be nice being a celebrity or politician with armed bodyguards, thinking that your life is worth more than the life of a kid sleeping at night, with a parent who wants to have the option of an effective self-defense tool against home invaders.

    There are already a ton of gun control laws on the books.  You could double them and there will still be law breakers who get them.  Like I posted earlier, you could have bought a gun decades ago through mail order, easier than today to get a gun.  So guns are NOT the problem.

    Stop distracting from the real problem, Mr. McCartney.
    Thanked by 1LilAnn
  • Posts: 22
    There is only one thing that scares me more than gun violence. And that one thing is the idea of not being able to defend my family and myself from some nut-ball that is threatening us with a gun. I obey the laws pretty well. And if I had to turn my gun over to the government I might do it. But the nut-ball threatening us with his gun, isn't going to give it up when I do. Unarming us so that we are helpless against legitimate threats is the EXACT OPPOSITE of a solution.
  • Exactly, LilAnn.  Until someone offers to stand guard outside of my house all night, I can't take them seriously.  Until they manage to get all the firearms from all the bad guys FIRST, I can't take them seriously.  These people would have tried to ban swords back in the day when people were getting cut up like vegetables left and right.
  • Posts: 7
    That is such a curious argument you two have there. While it makes sense for him to have security around him, it certainly does too for every other person to feel safe in their homes. You have nailed the whole point about gun violence right there. 
  • I think all these "gun control" fanatics would change their minds rather quickly if a gun saved them or their family. I wish they could see how senseless their itheir arguments are.
  • The elite always get celebrities to push their agendas, because the masses are so easily brainwashed. They turn people into idols and will listen to whatever they say. Think for yourself.
  • I'm not surprised. This seems like it would be right up his alley. He's one of those people who do this kind of work all the time. Plus after the way Lennon died, why wouldn't he lend his voice for this project? Of course he would, so I'm not mad at him.
  • I think it's a publicity thing.  I think that celebrities and politicians alike, for the most part, are just trying to put themselves out in the public eye, saying, "I care".  Some of them may actually care and think that they are helping.  Mostly, I think they just want to be seen as someone who is "sick of the violence".  Much like how most of Miss Americas' answers are that they want "world peace".
  • Posts: 234
    They can get all the celebrities they want, it still is not going to make it a good idea to ban guns.The anti's and such whether they want to admit it they depend on guns everyday of there life for protection.You can't pick and choose who gets protected and pick who has the right to be protected and the right to protect them self's and that is what they are trying to do.
  • Perhaps it is good to stop saying
    "Gun Violence" and simply say
    Criminal Violence, sometimes a criminal does not use a gun, they kill a victim by kicking them to death, or they rape a victim, or use any number of violent methods to kill, that do not involve use of guns, and yet these criminals are still a great danger to people, many criminals explain they do not use guns at all to avoid getting charged with additional penalties.

    Using the term "Gun Violence" perpetuates the Myth that Guns = Violence.
  • rbower80;

    The anti gun clack makes use of high profile celebrities to make anti gun statements to sway undecided people into favoring more gun control, these celebrities are often hypocritical themselves, because they often own guns, like the anti gun Senator Diane Feinstein, she admitted to having a concealed carry license and guns in spite of always trying to ban guns and trying to introduce anti gun legislation.

    Nobody is picking & choosing anything as far as who should have armed security guards for protection or guns etc.... the law does not allow that anyway, however it is good to know some hypocritical anti gun fool is trying to ban my guns, and they can afford armed private security teams, orin the case of Politicians assigned Secret Service agents.

    Maybe I just will not Vote for hypocritical anti gun Politicians.
    as far as hypocritical anti gun Celebrities, I just will not buy their music or pay to watch their movies, or spend any money on them if I don't want to.
    Thise people benefit from guns yet speak out against guns.
Sign In or Register to comment.