Gun Debate

191012141525

Comments

  • InkdaubInkdaub Posts: 235
    I guess my relationship with guns has always been nonexistent. What I mean is that I can take them or leave them. I have never been all that interested in them...in owning one myself...but I don't mind other people owning them. I also wouldn't mind if noone owned them. I like them in movies but I like many things in movies that I wouldn't want anything to do with in real life.

    I don't know. I can see the anti-gun side of the coin but I always seem to focus on the human aspect. When I think about VT I don't really think about the guns themselves. Instead I think about the fucked up kid who used them to kill 32 people.
  • tooferztooferz Posts: 135
    this doesn't reflect my opinion...it just kinda fit in here. from a local news site yesterday......

    Homeowner Shot By Own Gun In Home Invasion

    Posted By: Neil Relyea
    A Fairfield Township man is recovering after being shot by his own gun.

    Investigators say someone broke into his home on Milton Street.

    Police say the homeowner, Douglas Wright, was sleeping on the couch with his handgun sitting on the coffee table.

    When the intruder saw the gun, he grabbed it and shot Wright in the shoulder.

    "People have the right to have a handgun in their home for their own protection," said Fairfield Twp. Police Chief Richard St. John.

    "Whether it was the smartest thing to have a gun sitting out on the coffee table, right next to him, while he fell asleep on the couch," said St. John. "That's another story."

    Detectives are still looking for the suspect.

    They say he didn't steal anything from the house.

    Police say Wright was treated and released from the hospital.
    http://www.wcpo.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=156027c4-3696-4085-8fc9-b365f175a156
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    tooferz wrote:
    this doesn't reflect my opinion...it just kinda fit in here. from a local news site yesterday......

    Homeowner Shot By Own Gun In Home Invasion

    Posted By: Neil Relyea
    A Fairfield Township man is recovering after being shot by his own gun.

    Investigators say someone broke into his home on Milton Street.

    Police say the homeowner, Douglas Wright, was sleeping on the couch with his handgun sitting on the coffee table.

    When the intruder saw the gun, he grabbed it and shot Wright in the shoulder.

    "People have the right to have a handgun in their home for their own protection," said Fairfield Twp. Police Chief Richard St. John.

    "Whether it was the smartest thing to have a gun sitting out on the coffee table, right next to him, while he fell asleep on the couch," said St. John. "That's another story."

    Detectives are still looking for the suspect.

    They say he didn't steal anything from the house.

    Police say Wright was treated and released from the hospital.
    http://www.wcpo.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=156027c4-3696-4085-8fc9-b365f175a156

    Oops.. so much for responsible gun owning and a gun keeping you safe....

    I think one cannot fail but understand that the intruder, committing the crime, did not have a gun with him... So one could argue that this would have been one less shooting if guns were not readily available to the general, law abiding, citizen.....
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    zstillings wrote:
    I have known people who hunt wild boar with handguns. I also have known people who compete with pistols. There are other uses for guns if someone is sane. When I was in my college town, the biggest tragedy was a kid running down nine other students in his car. Maybe they should have disallowed cars in the country after that insane fuck decided to selfishly take the lives of other human beings.

    nicely spun...

    let see...a car's main purpose is transportation...a gun's main purpose is to kill...

    since you bring up cars...I'm pretty sure one has to take a test to obtain a license to drive a car, they pay yearly to keep that car registered, the car is inspected once a year, one has to pay insurance on that said car....

    how about doing the same for guns...?
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    69charger wrote:

    Eat it.

    man, I loved that Weird Al song....
  • jeffbrjeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    dunkman wrote:
    no they werent.. they were invented by a courtier of a French King who wanted the gun to be able to subjugate his subjects

    What sweet irony, then, that they became the tools with which to overthrow tyrany.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • UKDaveUKDave Posts: 5,557
    This is actual quite simple although it gets caught up in so many petty arguments...

    Human nature - yes there are people that are on the margins of society or feel disassociated, angry or mentally unstable, there always has been there always will be. Fact is we do little to address this and reality is we would never totally irradicate it even if we tried harder, it's here to stay

    Guns - are made for killing, whichever way you look at it whether it's hunting, competitions, crime whatever, that is their primary function. There is no other "product" which is so singularly designed for this purpose and available for public consumption.

    Combine the two and you have a powder keg ready to go off at any moment, knifes, cars etc stupid arguments, they are designed for other functions and could be abused yes, so could anything, you could effectively make a weapon out of anything you choose, desist in this argument it only exaggerates your stupidity.

    Any society that allows such easy access to guns is always going to suffer the way that America does with this. If they are so stupid that they can't bring in a system to better restrict access or take guns off the streets then leave them to it. They obviously can't learn anything from the rest of the world, and don't want to.

    Guns are unfortuneatley used to settle things when all logic and intellect has failed, somewhat like the argument that "it's our constitutional right".

    And as for rednecks... I would have thought listening to a little Skynyrd may have helped "hand guns are made for killing, ain't no good for nuthin else"...
    Astoria Crew
    Troubled souls unite, we got ourselves tonight...
    Astoria, Dublin, Reading 06
    Katowice, Wembley 07
    SBE, Manchester, O2 09
    Hyde Park 10
    Manchester 1&2 12
    This is just g'bye for now...
  • jeffbrjeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    redrock wrote:
    Oops.. so much for responsible gun owning and a gun keeping you safe....

    I think one cannot fail but understand that the intruder, committing the crime, did not have a gun with him... So one could argue that this would have been one less shooting if guns were not readily available to the general, law abiding, citizen.....

    I can post articles all day long where someone with a firearm defended themselves or someone else. Maybe that will be a fun hijack for the day.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • dunkmandunkman Posts: 19,646
    jeffbr wrote:
    What sweet irony, then, that they became the tools with which to overthrow tyrany.

    tell that to the people in the Sudan or in Rwanda a few years back...

    guns were invented to kill... not protect freedom... thats an "inalienable" fact
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • dunkmandunkman Posts: 19,646
    jeffbr wrote:
    I can post articles all day long where someone with a firearm defended themselves or someone else. Maybe that will be a fun hijack for the day.

    thats not the point and you know it... the moron got shot by his own gun... for every story you post guessing when someones life was saved with a gun i'll post 3 showing someones brains on their wallpaper
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • UKDaveUKDave Posts: 5,557
    jeffbr wrote:
    I can post articles all day long where someone with a firearm defended themselves or someone else. Maybe that will be a fun hijack for the day.

    Against someone else wielding a fire arm perhaps?
    Astoria Crew
    Troubled souls unite, we got ourselves tonight...
    Astoria, Dublin, Reading 06
    Katowice, Wembley 07
    SBE, Manchester, O2 09
    Hyde Park 10
    Manchester 1&2 12
    This is just g'bye for now...
  • UKDave wrote:
    This is actual quite simple although it gets caught up in so many petty arguments...

    Human nature - yes there are people that are on the margins of society or feel disassociated, angry or mentally unstable, there always has been there always will be. Fact is we do little to address this and reality is we would never totally irradicate it even if we tried harder, it's here to stay

    Guns - are made for killing, whichever way you look at it whether it's hunting, competitions, crime whatever, that is their primary function. There is no other "product" which is so singularly designed for this purpose and available for public consumption.

    Combine the two and you have a powder keg ready to go off at any moment, knifes, cars etc stupid arguments, they are designed for other functions and could be abused yes, so could anything, you could effectively make a weapon out of anything you choose, desist in this argument it only exaggerates your stupidity.

    Any society that allows such easy access to guns is always going to suffer the way that America does with this. If they are so stupid that they can't bring in a system to better restrict access or take guns off the streets then leave them to it. They obviously can't learn anything from the rest of the world, and don't want to.

    Guns are unfortuneatley used to settle things when all logic and intellect has failed, somewhat like the argument that "it's our constitutional right".

    And as for rednecks... I would have thought listening to a little Skynyrd may have helped "hand guns are made for killing, ain't no good for nuthin else"...

    Sigh....let me bold part of your post and then ask you the same question I've asked elsewhere:

    What are you going to use to enforce a ban on guns?
  • UKDaveUKDave Posts: 5,557
    Sigh....let me bold part of your post and then ask you the same question I've asked elsewhere:

    What are you going to use to enforce a ban on guns?

    How else do you enforce any law? not via the general public but by the correct authorities, do you distrust your own government / authorities so much that you can't trust them to enforce this?
    Astoria Crew
    Troubled souls unite, we got ourselves tonight...
    Astoria, Dublin, Reading 06
    Katowice, Wembley 07
    SBE, Manchester, O2 09
    Hyde Park 10
    Manchester 1&2 12
    This is just g'bye for now...
  • UKDave wrote:
    How else do you enforce any law?

    With guns, of course. Which should make you consider this:

    "Guns are unfortuneatley used to settle things when all logic and intellect has failed, somewhat like the argument that "it's our constitutional right"."
    not via the general public but by the correct authorities, do you distrust your own government / authorities so much that you can't trust them to enforce this?

    Trust is not my issue. Respect is my issue. I do not respect someone who will legally disarm his neighbor, arm himself at his neighbor's cost, and then use his neighbor's weakness against him.
  • dunkmandunkman Posts: 19,646
    What are you going to use to enforce a ban on guns?


    *yawns and generally acts sanctimonious*

    we have had a gun ban in Scotland (and the UK) and yet there is no policemen in Scotland who carry a gun... we enforce it with the actual law...
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • UKDaveUKDave Posts: 5,557
    With guns, of course. Which should make you consider this:

    "Guns are unfortuneatley used to settle things when all logic and intellect has failed, somewhat like the argument that "it's our constitutional right"."

    Trust is not my issue. Respect is my issue. I do not respect someone who will legally disarm his neighbor, arm himself at his neighbor's cost, and then use his neighbor's weakness against him.

    So you don't believe in an organised society which enforces it's democratically agreed laws?

    So you either want anarchy or the right to take your government down with guns? why not just VOTE the fuckers out, think of the lives it would save... :rolleyes:
    Astoria Crew
    Troubled souls unite, we got ourselves tonight...
    Astoria, Dublin, Reading 06
    Katowice, Wembley 07
    SBE, Manchester, O2 09
    Hyde Park 10
    Manchester 1&2 12
    This is just g'bye for now...
  • dunkman wrote:
    *yawns and generally acts sanctimonious*

    we have had a gun ban in Scotland (and the UK) and yet there is no policemen in Scotland who carry a gun... we enforce it with the actual law...

    Hehe...you cannot enforce law with "actual law". That makes no sense. You enforce the law with force. In other words, you use violence. And you use force greater than the force you are being faced with, which explains why Scotland's no-gun police forces will soon be a thing of the past.
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    inmytree wrote:
    nicely spun...

    let see...a car's main purpose is transportation...a gun's main purpose is to kill...

    since you bring up cars...I'm pretty sure one has to take a test to obtain a license to drive a car, they pay yearly to keep that car registered, the car is inspected once a year, one has to pay insurance on that said car....

    how about doing the same for guns...?

    Guns and cars don't have "purpose". They have function.
    Correctly, the function of a gun is to fire a projectile.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • UKDave wrote:
    So you don't believe in an organised society which enforces it's democratically agreed laws?

    I do believe in those things. They exist in many places. You didn't make them up.
    So you either want anarchy or the right to take your government down with guns? why not just VOTE the fuckers out, think of the lives it would save... :rolleyes:

    I want neither anarchy in the sense you mean it, nor do I want to "take my government down with guns". All I want is for my government not to take me down with guns.
  • UKDaveUKDave Posts: 5,557
    I do believe in those things. They exist in many places. You didn't make them up.

    I want neither anarchy in the sense you mean it, nor do I want to "take my government down with guns". All I want is for my government not to take me down with guns.

    When did I suggest I made them up? :confused:

    And having a gun to defend you from your own government is your defence for gun ownership????
    Astoria Crew
    Troubled souls unite, we got ourselves tonight...
    Astoria, Dublin, Reading 06
    Katowice, Wembley 07
    SBE, Manchester, O2 09
    Hyde Park 10
    Manchester 1&2 12
    This is just g'bye for now...
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    Hehe...you cannot enforce law with "actual law". That makes no sense. You enforce the law with force. In other words, you use violence. And you use force greater than the force you are being faced with, which explains why Scotland's no-gun police forces will soon be a thing of the past.

    I've got to disagree with you here. Or, at least with the speculation that Scotland's no-gun police will soon be a thing of the past. Why do you think so? And why do you assume that law enforcement is always violent?

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • dunkmandunkman Posts: 19,646
    which explains why Scotland's no-gun police forces will soon be a thing of the past.

    no they wont :)
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    UKDave wrote:

    And having a gun to defend you from your own government is your defence for gun ownership????

    yes. why should the government be allowed to have guns and not me? then they could point the gun at me and tell me to do whatever they say, no thanks
  • dunkmandunkman Posts: 19,646
    All I want is for my government not to take me down with guns.


    they wont use guns.. bombs, jets, nuclear weapons... but not guns.

    they also will not take you down anyway.... you live in a modern democracy... why would your govt ever, ever, plan on attacking its own people... thats crazy talk mr koresh
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • redrockredrock Posts: 18,341
    You enforce the law with force. In other words, you use violence. .
    So when you obey the law by stopping at a red light, you do it because you are FORCED to by someone using violence against you? Sounds silly, doesn't it? In this case (and many others) the law is enforced (ie applied, which is a synonym for enforced) voluntarily, by you. Because you choose to do so...
  • UKDave wrote:
    When did I suggest I made them up? :confused:

    You asked me if I believed in them. I do believe in them in the sense that they are not made up.
    And having a gun to defend you from your own government is your defence for gun ownership????

    No. My defense for gun ownership is that I have a right to free exchange. And the only way you can stop me from exchanging freely with others is to point a gun at me and threaten my livelihood. So what's your defense for gun ownership, since having guns is the only way you'll stop me from having one?
  • redrock wrote:
    So when you obey the law by stopping at a red light, you do it because you are FORCED to by someone using violence against you? Sounds silly, doesn't it?

    It does sound silly because, in that case, it isn't true. I stop at red lights because I don't want to get hit by oncoming traffic.
    In this case (and many others) the law is enforced (ie applied, which is a synonym for enforced) voluntarily, by you. Because you choose to do so...

    Yes, that is very true. I will always choose to follow laws that are in my best interest.
  • dunkmandunkman Posts: 19,646
    jlew24asu wrote:
    then they could point the gun at me and tell me to do whatever they say, no thanks

    when does this ever happen?? :confused:

    and if you had a gun would you point it back at a policeman who was asking you to put your hands on your head


    man you guys live in a box of fear... get out and enjoy your life
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • UKDaveUKDave Posts: 5,557
    jlew24asu wrote:
    yes. why should the government be allowed to have guns and not me? then they could point the gun at me and tell me to do whatever they say, no thanks

    ...and that paranoia is the root cause of your problem

    Fact is non of these guns are used against the government, it's an excuse not a reason...
    Astoria Crew
    Troubled souls unite, we got ourselves tonight...
    Astoria, Dublin, Reading 06
    Katowice, Wembley 07
    SBE, Manchester, O2 09
    Hyde Park 10
    Manchester 1&2 12
    This is just g'bye for now...
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    Sigh....let me bold part of your post and then ask you the same question I've asked elsewhere:

    What are you going to use to enforce a ban on guns?

    I'm not sure about others...but I'm not for a ban...I'm for making it very difficult to obtain a handgun or assault weapon....

    it seems that when this debate is raised...those who are pro-gun assume that everyone wants to ban guns...

    nope, just make if f-n hard to own one...and when you get caught with one, ba-bye for a very long time....

    how about when a gun is manufactured...the gun is tracked somehow, via a database perhaps...how about treating bullets like presciption drugs...(yeah, I know, not a 100% foolproof, but it's an idea...
Sign In or Register to comment.