Gun Debate

Options
1…1516182021…38

Comments

  • UKDave
    UKDave 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...
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    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?
  • UKDave
    UKDave Posts: 5,557
    farfromglorified wrote:
    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...
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    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.
  • dunkman
    dunkman Posts: 19,646
    farfromglorified wrote:
    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.
  • UKDave
    UKDave Posts: 5,557
    farfromglorified wrote:
    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...
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    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_barium
    gue_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.
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    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.
  • UKDave
    UKDave Posts: 5,557
    farfromglorified wrote:
    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_barium
    gue_barium Posts: 5,515
    farfromglorified wrote:
    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.
  • dunkman
    dunkman Posts: 19,646
    farfromglorified wrote:
    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.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu 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
  • dunkman
    dunkman Posts: 19,646
    farfromglorified wrote:
    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.
  • redrock
    redrock Posts: 18,341
    farfromglorified wrote:
    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...
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    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?
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    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.
  • dunkman
    dunkman 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.
  • UKDave
    UKDave 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...
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    farfromglorified wrote:
    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...

Categories