If I wanted some facts, I'd visit the NRA website. The people that protect us on the streets, not jeffbr, are against it because they realize that more guns equals more crime. You can give me all the "facts" and percentages fit your side of the argument. I side with the cops. You know what protects me from violent crime? Not walking around with a gun. I'm a whole lot more likely not to be shot (not to mention the people I'm driving with) if I don't point a gun at the hoodlum who wants to steal my car than if I point it at him. There's no need to be a hero over things material.
Since you are not interested in facts, your argument must be based on your own hatred for firearms as the statistics how you have no valid reason against the Right to Carry.
Of course cops don't want you to have guns! Only they should have guns, right? The cops did a great job of protecting the citizens of New Orleans now didn't they?
All your other "rights" mean jack squat without the right to defend those rights.
If I wanted some facts, I'd visit the NRA website. The people that protect us on the streets, not jeffbr, are against it because they realize that more guns equals more crime. You can give me all the "facts" and percentages fit your side of the argument. I side with the cops. You know what protects me from violent crime? Not walking around with a gun. I'm a whole lot more likely not to be shot (not to mention the people I'm driving with) if I don't point a gun at the hoodlum who wants to steal my car than if I point it at him. There's no need to be a hero over things material.
If ignoring facts helps you get through the day I will try not to disabuse you of your fantasies.
But for the rest of us who look at facts and statistics, right to carry states have lower crime rates. Period. Regardless of what the cops want you to think.
And I completely agree with you about your hoodlum stealing a car scenario. Save the use of deadly force for when the lives of you and/or your loved ones are in mortal danger.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
But it is a check against them amassing more power too quickly. So instead we have the situation where we're lulled into complacency while they continually erode our rights and liberties. As long as we stay awake and stay vigilant we can keep the government in check.
Those with the guns are killing off each other and keeping the rest in line thus ensuring the corrupt govt remains in power. I don't think the govt has a care in the world about our guns being used against them....they flourish in the fact that the guns keep us separate and at odds.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
they flourish in the fact that the guns keep us separate and at odds.
Guns keep us seperate? Are you kidding? That's like saying "forks keep us fat" or "hammers build houses". Why does the anti-gun crowd gloss over personal responsibility and choose to blame inanimate objects for our problems?
Guns keep us seperate? Are you kidding? That's like saying "forks keep us fat" or "hammers build houses". Why does the anti-gun crowd gloss over personal responsibility and choose to blame inanimate objects for our problems?
no, guns bring us all together...my bad.
I'm talking about reality here...what is actually happening, not just some ideal.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
It doesn't matter. You can't go against the 2nd ammendment! If you want your rights, you'll have to live with the ammendments you don't like. Otherwise you can just reap off the benefits of the ones you pick out, and then throw away the ones you dissaprove of. It solely depends on the person with the gun. If they choose to use guns to go kill people, well, you're allowed to have a gun to kill that person when they attack you.
They can and they have and they are far less dangerous than cars, yet I don't see you posting a thread suggesting we ban cars. Maybe the police should be the only ones with cars also?
They can and they have and they are far less dangerous than cars, yet I don't see you posting a thread suggesting we ban cars. Maybe the police should be the only ones with cars also?
Guns are not necessary nearly as much as cars are. Do people use guns in everyday life? Who needs a gun everyday besides police? And even police could get by with traquilizers and stun guns....there's no need to have potentially fatal weapons when there are reasonable alternatives.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I agree, at least with the part about it being outdated. If the defense of our "freedoms and liberties" ever comes down to the US Army vs. a bunch of rednecks with deer rifles, freedom and liberty are fucked.
It's working pretty well for the Iraqi insurgents.
Without the 2nd ammendment we'd have no ammendments left. The people who try to deny or rewrite the 2nd ammendment are the people who will be responsible for even more rapid erosions of the liberties we still enjoy.
How is it working well for the insurgents? The U.S. took over their country with ease and are in control of it and the government. Just because a small bomb goes off every day or so, doesn't mean it's working well.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
How is it working well for the insurgents? The U.S. took over their country with ease and are in control of it and the government. Just because a small bomb goes off every day or so, doesn't mean it's working well.
Do you believe order has been restored to the country? Why are we still there? Why haven't we turned it over to the Iraqi defense forces?
If you read the thread you'll see that I said Shock & Awe worked perfectly. We cut through the military like a hot knife through butter. If our goal was the total annihilation of the population our military could take the country in weeks. But things are much more complicated than that, and because the citizens are armed, we can't simply walk the streets ensuring order. This is a protracted fight in the streets and alleys precisely because the citizenry is armed.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
the founding fathers' intentions are clear when you read their writings. the people are the 4th branch of government. we "police" the government. this completes the checks and balances our government is founded on.
as far as iraq; if the iraqis had the right to bear arms; they would have over-thrown the tyrant and we wouldn't be there. think about that.
Yeah I did. You said only police should have guns and then you said maybe they should just have stun guns or tranquilizers.
So where does that leave the general population? Where does that leave the person waiting for the police to arrive? Where does that leave the people waiting when the police WON'T arrive (like New Orleans)?
Yeah I did. You said only police should have guns and then you said maybe they should just have stun guns or tranquilizers.
So where does that leave the general population? Where does that leave the person waiting for the police to arrive? Where does that leave the people waiting when the police WON'T arrive (like New Orleans)?
Completely defenseless.
agreed. police are for clean-up only. police are rarely at the comission of a crime. if the police only carry stun guns; then they are going to a gunfight with a knife; so to speak. the criminals will always have guns. i saw a program the other day which stated that the easiest way to sneek a nuke into the country is to put it in a bale of pot.
a man with a gun is a citizen. a man without a gun is a subject.
A majority of gun-related crimes or murders are committed with illegal weapons. Weapons obtained on the black market (which means stolen or brought into the country) illegally.
Law abiding citizens who buy weapons through legal means, rarely get involved in any criminal activity.
You people who have this idealistic vision of a country (world) without guns, are not living in reality. The reality is that those with criminal dispositions and intent would still get their hands on guns.
There would be an awful amount of criminals with guns, and if you think your local police would arrive in time to save your asses; you're seriously deluted and watching way too many cop shows and movies.
In the real world, it rarely works out that way. If ever.
The Police for the most part arrive after people have already been killed by a criminal.
Let's say that in an idealistic fantasy world the government did abolish all guns and put a complete stop to all guns entering the country. Criminals would then attack you and your family with knives, axes or any other sharp object they could get their hands on. What then? Outlaw all knives, forks, and lawn care/wood working tools? But wait, then there's ice picks, letter openers, turkey therometers, pencils, pens...etc...etc.
What now? Outlaw all sharp objects?
But wait, there's more. How about blunt objects that can be used for crushing another human being's skull? Outlaw all heavy blunt objects?
Rocks? Outlaw all rocks! Clean up the landscape of any potentially dangerous rocks!!!
Shall we all live with nothing but wicker and straw furniture, eating with our hands?
Essentially, the agrument is not what other use do guns provide. It's about how guns are used and how any other object is used (knives, screwdrivers, an axe, a letter opener, scissors, garden shears...etc)
Ultimately, history has shown that just about anything can be used to kill a human being. So just about any sharp, blunt or remotely dense and heavy object can be used to kill; and human beings have proven for thousands of years that when they want to kill, even the bone from an animal carcass will suffice.
A majority of gun-related crimes or murders are committed with illegal weapons. Weapons obtained on the black market (which means stolen or brought into the country) illegally.
Law abiding citizens who buy weapons through legal means, rarely get involved in any criminal activity.
You people who have this idealistic vision of a country (world) without guns, are not living in reality. The reality is that those with criminal dispositions and intent would still get their hands on guns.
There would be an awful amount of criminals with guns, and if you think your local police would arrive in time to save your asses; you're seriously deluted and watching way too many cop shows and movies.
In the real world, it rarely works out that way. If ever.
The Police for the most part arrive after people have already been killed by a criminal.
Let's say that in an idealistic fantasy world the government did abolish all guns and put a complete stop to all guns entering the country. Criminals would then attack you and your family with knives, axes or any other sharp object they could get their hands on. What then? Outlaw all knives, forks, and lawn care/wood working tools? But wait, then there's ice picks, letter openers, turkey therometers, pencils, pens...etc...etc.
What now? Outlaw all sharp objects?
But wait, there's more. How about blunt objects that can be used for crushing another human being's skull? Outlaw all heavy blunt objects?
Rocks? Outlaw all rocks! Clean up the landscape of any potentially dangerous rocks!!!
Shall we all live with nothing but wicker and straw furniture, eating with our hands?
Essentially, the agrument is not what other use do guns provide. It's about how guns are used and how any other object is used (knives, screwdrivers, an axe, a letter opener, scissors, garden shears...etc)
Ultimately, history has shown that just about anything can be used to kill a human being. So just about any sharp, blunt or remotely dense and heavy object can be used to kill; and human beings have proven for thousands of years that when they want to kill, even the bone from an animal carcass will suffice.
exactly! i have many guns and not one has gone off on it's own and killed anything. the hunting arrow; also called broadhead arrow; is the deadliest weapon known besides bombs and wmds. they are also silent. shall we put them on the ban list too?
Comments
Since you are not interested in facts, your argument must be based on your own hatred for firearms as the statistics how you have no valid reason against the Right to Carry.
Of course cops don't want you to have guns! Only they should have guns, right? The cops did a great job of protecting the citizens of New Orleans now didn't they?
All your other "rights" mean jack squat without the right to defend those rights.
If ignoring facts helps you get through the day I will try not to disabuse you of your fantasies.
But for the rest of us who look at facts and statistics, right to carry states have lower crime rates. Period. Regardless of what the cops want you to think.
And I completely agree with you about your hoodlum stealing a car scenario. Save the use of deadly force for when the lives of you and/or your loved ones are in mortal danger.
Those with the guns are killing off each other and keeping the rest in line thus ensuring the corrupt govt remains in power. I don't think the govt has a care in the world about our guns being used against them....they flourish in the fact that the guns keep us separate and at odds.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Guns keep us seperate? Are you kidding? That's like saying "forks keep us fat" or "hammers build houses". Why does the anti-gun crowd gloss over personal responsibility and choose to blame inanimate objects for our problems?
no, guns bring us all together...my bad.
I'm talking about reality here...what is actually happening, not just some ideal.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
They can and they have and they are far less dangerous than cars, yet I don't see you posting a thread suggesting we ban cars. Maybe the police should be the only ones with cars also?
Guns are not necessary nearly as much as cars are. Do people use guns in everyday life? Who needs a gun everyday besides police? And even police could get by with traquilizers and stun guns....there's no need to have potentially fatal weapons when there are reasonable alternatives.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
What is a reasonable alternative when faced with a potentially fatal threat? Slap fighting? Asking nicely for them to stop?
The Iraqi's seem to be doing ok.
Did you read my post?
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
How is it working well for the insurgents? The U.S. took over their country with ease and are in control of it and the government. Just because a small bomb goes off every day or so, doesn't mean it's working well.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Do you believe order has been restored to the country? Why are we still there? Why haven't we turned it over to the Iraqi defense forces?
If you read the thread you'll see that I said Shock & Awe worked perfectly. We cut through the military like a hot knife through butter. If our goal was the total annihilation of the population our military could take the country in weeks. But things are much more complicated than that, and because the citizens are armed, we can't simply walk the streets ensuring order. This is a protracted fight in the streets and alleys precisely because the citizenry is armed.
as far as iraq; if the iraqis had the right to bear arms; they would have over-thrown the tyrant and we wouldn't be there. think about that.
Yeah I did. You said only police should have guns and then you said maybe they should just have stun guns or tranquilizers.
So where does that leave the general population? Where does that leave the person waiting for the police to arrive? Where does that leave the people waiting when the police WON'T arrive (like New Orleans)?
Completely defenseless.
agreed. police are for clean-up only. police are rarely at the comission of a crime. if the police only carry stun guns; then they are going to a gunfight with a knife; so to speak. the criminals will always have guns. i saw a program the other day which stated that the easiest way to sneek a nuke into the country is to put it in a bale of pot.
a man with a gun is a citizen. a man without a gun is a subject.
This a cool quote!
Law abiding citizens who buy weapons through legal means, rarely get involved in any criminal activity.
You people who have this idealistic vision of a country (world) without guns, are not living in reality. The reality is that those with criminal dispositions and intent would still get their hands on guns.
There would be an awful amount of criminals with guns, and if you think your local police would arrive in time to save your asses; you're seriously deluted and watching way too many cop shows and movies.
In the real world, it rarely works out that way. If ever.
The Police for the most part arrive after people have already been killed by a criminal.
Let's say that in an idealistic fantasy world the government did abolish all guns and put a complete stop to all guns entering the country. Criminals would then attack you and your family with knives, axes or any other sharp object they could get their hands on. What then? Outlaw all knives, forks, and lawn care/wood working tools? But wait, then there's ice picks, letter openers, turkey therometers, pencils, pens...etc...etc.
What now? Outlaw all sharp objects?
But wait, there's more. How about blunt objects that can be used for crushing another human being's skull? Outlaw all heavy blunt objects?
Rocks? Outlaw all rocks! Clean up the landscape of any potentially dangerous rocks!!!
Shall we all live with nothing but wicker and straw furniture, eating with our hands?
Essentially, the agrument is not what other use do guns provide. It's about how guns are used and how any other object is used (knives, screwdrivers, an axe, a letter opener, scissors, garden shears...etc)
Ultimately, history has shown that just about anything can be used to kill a human being. So just about any sharp, blunt or remotely dense and heavy object can be used to kill; and human beings have proven for thousands of years that when they want to kill, even the bone from an animal carcass will suffice.
exactly! i have many guns and not one has gone off on it's own and killed anything. the hunting arrow; also called broadhead arrow; is the deadliest weapon known besides bombs and wmds. they are also silent. shall we put them on the ban list too?