My post suggested that that one person had a wrong take on the realities of the society we live in. That you rush out to call me a "drama queen" because you couldn't even take the time to understand my post before hitting "reply", and then turn my specific argument against a single person's perception of society into being an attack on everyone, to which you quickly take up arms, does nothing but suggest that you're way too eager for a confrontation, and that you need to sit down, take a deep breath, and assume a more calm disposition.lowing wrote:
Not really sure why ya think I am "all excited" over your post.mikkel wrote:
I don't quite get you here. I replied to a post suggesting that if people were armed, the world would be a safer place. That is -precisely- suggesting that people carry guns around, expecting the need to defend themselves. That is delusional paranoia.lowing wrote:
No I think the delusion is yours, if you think we all live our lives in America owning guns, EXPECTING at any minute, to have to draw down on someone and defend ourselves for our lives. Believe it or not the vast majority of us gun owners go about our daily lives having never seen our guns for months, and only then to go out and target shoot or hunt. We are not "paranoid", we have taken it upon ourselves to have the means to defend ourselves and not rely on the govt. to do it for us. My guns are there if I need them for defense ( and I doubt I ever will) and locked away until I decide to out and shoot clay pigeons.
You drama queens are wayyyyyyyyyy over reacting about gun ownership. Just because you were stupid enough to give up yours to your govt. Do not expect us to follow you.
I know that you're quick to jump at everyone who even hints at anything you think you might somehow disagree with, but at least do me the favour of reading my posts and understanding them fully before calling me delusional for thinking something that I in the very same post am actually calling delusional paranoia. It is obviously not my perception when I'm arguing how ridiculous that would be.
Calm down, lowing.
Your post suggests that we all think this is a mob ruled society in 1750 and you had to reassure us that it is not. THAT is your delusion I speak of. SO once again, stop being a drama queen, as it would apppear, YOU are the excitable one.
So you want guns in society, thuly giving criminals both the opportinity (most guns in the hands of criminals were originaly legally owned by private citizens) and motivation to arm themselves (to defend themselves against the law abiding armed folks), then don't even bother carrying a gun around to protect yourself and others?! Serously if you're going to absolutly definately have to have civillian gun ownership with all the problems that come associated with it, you'd think you'd actually want to have the benefits too.lowing wrote:
Nope because like I said, we are not paranoid gun owners, we do not all carry our guns on us wherever we go. I said, usually they are locked in the house in a gun safe. The majority of crimes commited are not on people who are packing. The reason we are not packing 24/7 is because we are not as paranoid as you want to portrait us, and can and have been caught with our gaurd down.PureFodder wrote:
We're happy having about one percent of you gun crime rate over here. Clearly gun ownership for defence doesn't work since homicide, rape and violent crime are all so much higher in the US. Shouldn't you all be defending yourselves successfully against these attacks as you have guns?lowing wrote:
No I think the delusion is yours, if you think we all live our lives in America owning guns, EXPECTING at any minute, to have to draw down on someone and defend ourselves for our lives. Believe it or not the vast majority of us gun owners go about our daily lives having never seen our guns for months, and only then to go out and target shoot or hunt. We are not "paranoid", we have taken it upon ourselves to have the means to defend ourselves and not rely on the govt. to do it for us. My guns are there if I need them for defense ( and I doubt I ever will) and locked away until I decide to out and shoot clay pigeons.
You drama queens are wayyyyyyyyyy over reacting about gun ownership. Just because you were stupid enough to give up yours to your govt. Do not expect us to follow you.
Nope again,PureFodder wrote:
So you want guns in society, thuly giving criminals both the opportinity (most guns in the hands of criminals were originaly legally owned by private citizens) and motivation to arm themselves (to defend themselves against the law abiding armed folks), then don't even bother carrying a gun around to protect yourself and others?! Serously if you're going to absolutly definately have to have civillian gun ownership with all the problems that come associated with it, you'd think you'd actually want to have the benefits too.lowing wrote:
Nope because like I said, we are not paranoid gun owners, we do not all carry our guns on us wherever we go. I said, usually they are locked in the house in a gun safe. The majority of crimes commit ed are not on people who are packing. The reason we are not packing 24/7 is because we are not as paranoid as you want to portrait us, and can and have been caught with our guard down.PureFodder wrote:
We're happy having about one percent of you gun crime rate over here. Clearly gun ownership for defence doesn't work since homicide, rape and violent crime are all so much higher in the US. Shouldn't you all be defending yourselves successfully against these attacks as you have guns?
you tried to portrait us all as paranoid and I showed you we are not, so now your argument goes the other direction to the opposite extreme and suggests that if we are not paranoid then we really do not need or should want our guns in the first place.
We own guns for a lot of reasons, protection, hunting, target shooting. We have the right to do so and we exercise it. If someone broke into my house I have the opportunity to defend my home and my family. I did not say that everyone that owns guns succeed in doing so. So lets get real and recognize the 100,000,000 different "what ifs" you can hit me with and also recognize that I have the same number of reasons to counter them. You gave up your guns, so you live with it. As Americans we did not nor will we ever do the same, and you will simply have to live with that as well.
If the inaccurate portrayal of us being paranoid mad men itching to gun down one another is the only way you can justify your point of view then you already lost the argument for disarming our citizens.
Just pointing out the vast chasm of incosistency in the argument. People want guns for protection then don't use them for protection. Also noting the issue that it appears that despite arguing that people want guns for protection it ultimately endangers them as opposed to protecting them as seen in the abnormally high violent crime figures that the US has.lowing wrote:
Nope again,PureFodder wrote:
So you want guns in society, thuly giving criminals both the opportinity (most guns in the hands of criminals were originaly legally owned by private citizens) and motivation to arm themselves (to defend themselves against the law abiding armed folks), then don't even bother carrying a gun around to protect yourself and others?! Serously if you're going to absolutly definately have to have civillian gun ownership with all the problems that come associated with it, you'd think you'd actually want to have the benefits too.lowing wrote:
Nope because like I said, we are not paranoid gun owners, we do not all carry our guns on us wherever we go. I said, usually they are locked in the house in a gun safe. The majority of crimes commit ed are not on people who are packing. The reason we are not packing 24/7 is because we are not as paranoid as you want to portrait us, and can and have been caught with our guard down.
you tried to portrait us all as paranoid and I showed you we are not, so now your argument goes the other direction to the opposite extreme and suggests that if we are not paranoid then we really do not need or should want our guns in the first place.
If somehow it turned out that collecting stamps indirectly caused vast amounts of violent crime and death I'm sure you wouldn't find philatelists saying they'd fight to the death to save their hobby. Legal gun ownership causes large amounts of problems for society and 'but it's my hobby' is a lame excuse. Go do something else.lowing wrote:
We own guns for a lot of reasons, protection, hunting, target shooting.
So that's protection, hunting and hobbies shown to be failed arguments, anything else?
People in your country also have the right to ammend the constitution to remove that right. It is a democracy after all.lowing wrote:
We have the right to do so and we exercise it.
I wasn't aware conservatives possessed the power of clairvoyancy. Anything can change. There's a large percentage of Americans who would favour the removal of these rights so don't believe that this could never occur.lowing wrote:
As Americans we did not nor will we ever do the same, and you will simply have to live with that as well.
Conveniently I a) didn't make that arguement and b) have plenty of arguements. Now if you could go back and try to argue against the points i did make that would be nice.lowing wrote:
If the inaccurate portrayal of us being paranoid mad men itching to gun down one another is the only way you can justify your point of view then you already lost the argument for disarming our citizens.
Let's get to the root of the matter: unnecessary deaths.
Here's a good solid average year in the United States (2005):
Major Cardiovascular Diseases 936,923 - caused mostly by piss poor diet, sitting around playing video games, and smoking.
Chronic Lower Respiratory Dis. 122,009 - basically emphysema and COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), again, smoking.
Diabetes Mellitus 69,301 - shitty diet, too much alcohol, not enough exercise, etc., etc., etc...
Motor Vehicle Accidents 43,354 - couldn't we all just take public transportation?
and now all the way down to:
Firearms 28,663 - In the United States the hippies have rigged the stats such that (and you can check this yourself online) your death is included as firearm related if there was a firearm involved, meaning that if you have a gun and you are robbing a bank and you have a car crash, it's not attributed to the car wreck, it's a firearm related death because of the commission of a crime with the gun, If you have a gun and are protecting yourself from a robber who has a knife, and he knifes you, it's a gun death.
Falls 13,322 - Holy crap. Nearly half as many people died from falling as died from the evil firearm culture in this country. We must immediately remove steps from all edifices, and gather in Lubbock, Texas, flattest place in America.
The truth of the matter is that even with your headline grabbing, shocking, country rallying murders, guns are nearly an insignificant cause of death in this country. Preventable? Sure, but so are the deaths from car wrecks. There wouldn't be ANY car related deaths if EVERYONE took the bus or the subway, or the train. You could certainly get rid of WELL MORE than the number of gun related deaths if you simply illegalized alcohol.
How about that: All you anti-gun folks who are all gung-ho about saving lives, let's see you get on the "ban alcohol" bandwagon. You'd save many, many, many more lives by getting rid of alcohol than you would by getting rid of guns. What do you say to that?
Here's a good solid average year in the United States (2005):
Major Cardiovascular Diseases 936,923 - caused mostly by piss poor diet, sitting around playing video games, and smoking.
Chronic Lower Respiratory Dis. 122,009 - basically emphysema and COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), again, smoking.
Diabetes Mellitus 69,301 - shitty diet, too much alcohol, not enough exercise, etc., etc., etc...
Motor Vehicle Accidents 43,354 - couldn't we all just take public transportation?
and now all the way down to:
Firearms 28,663 - In the United States the hippies have rigged the stats such that (and you can check this yourself online) your death is included as firearm related if there was a firearm involved, meaning that if you have a gun and you are robbing a bank and you have a car crash, it's not attributed to the car wreck, it's a firearm related death because of the commission of a crime with the gun, If you have a gun and are protecting yourself from a robber who has a knife, and he knifes you, it's a gun death.
Falls 13,322 - Holy crap. Nearly half as many people died from falling as died from the evil firearm culture in this country. We must immediately remove steps from all edifices, and gather in Lubbock, Texas, flattest place in America.
The truth of the matter is that even with your headline grabbing, shocking, country rallying murders, guns are nearly an insignificant cause of death in this country. Preventable? Sure, but so are the deaths from car wrecks. There wouldn't be ANY car related deaths if EVERYONE took the bus or the subway, or the train. You could certainly get rid of WELL MORE than the number of gun related deaths if you simply illegalized alcohol.
How about that: All you anti-gun folks who are all gung-ho about saving lives, let's see you get on the "ban alcohol" bandwagon. You'd save many, many, many more lives by getting rid of alcohol than you would by getting rid of guns. What do you say to that?
You forgot terrorism! Please put on there how many Americans were killed by terrorism in 2005. You should also put on there how many deaths on US soil occured from attacks by radical Muslims. Just sayin'...Dersmikner wrote:
Let's get to the root of the matter: unnecessary deaths.
Here's a good solid average year in the United States (2005):
Major Cardiovascular Diseases 936,923 - caused mostly by piss poor diet, sitting around playing video games, and smoking.
Chronic Lower Respiratory Dis. 122,009 - basically emphysema and COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), again, smoking.
Diabetes Mellitus 69,301 - shitty diet, too much alcohol, not enough exercise, etc., etc., etc...
Motor Vehicle Accidents 43,354 - couldn't we all just take public transportation?
and now all the way down to:
Firearms 28,663 - In the United States the hippies have rigged the stats such that (and you can check this yourself online) your death is included as firearm related if there was a firearm involved, meaning that if you have a gun and you are robbing a bank and you have a car crash, it's not attributed to the car wreck, it's a firearm related death because of the commission of a crime with the gun, If you have a gun and are protecting yourself from a robber who has a knife, and he knifes you, it's a gun death.
Falls 13,322 - Holy crap. Nearly half as many people died from falling as died from the evil firearm culture in this country. We must immediately remove steps from all edifices, and gather in Lubbock, Texas, flattest place in America.
The truth of the matter is that even with your headline grabbing, shocking, country rallying murders, guns are nearly an insignificant cause of death in this country. Preventable? Sure, but so are the deaths from car wrecks. There wouldn't be ANY car related deaths if EVERYONE took the bus or the subway, or the train. You could certainly get rid of WELL MORE than the number of gun related deaths if you simply illegalized alcohol.
How about that: All you anti-gun folks who are all gung-ho about saving lives, let's see you get on the "ban alcohol" bandwagon. You'd save many, many, many more lives by getting rid of alcohol than you would by getting rid of guns. What do you say to that?
As far as gun bans, I like target practice. I was top shooter on varsity 2 years in a highschool in PA, and I can't imaging my favorite sport not existing.
On the other hand, I've lived in Europe for the last 9 years and am amazed at just how little I miss being worried walking down the street in a poor neighborhood at 2am in a city of 6 million people. Violent crime here is almost non-existent. People here own guns anyways, but knowing that the gun is illegal makes them keep it hidden or only use it for normal purpose in the countryside (hunting on your own land generally).
The 2nd Amendment was put in place so that the other rights could be protected, but strangely, the most ardent 2nd Amendment supporters don't seem to give a rats ass when their other rights are suspended by a tyrranical government. As far as I'm concerned, they might as well lose that right as well if they don't care about the others.
So, I'm torn, I know full well the purpose of the 2nd (in Thomas Jefferson's own words), but I've seen the absolute benefit in living in (nearly) gun-free societies. I also loved my M249 more than my dog and my hot German girlfriend put together when I was in the Army...go figure.
Because we live in a safe country and we do not feel the need to pack 24/7. And still bad things happen to, yes, even gun owners, that does not negate our desire to have them. The odds of anything happening to a single family home is pretty slim. However, there is a chance and we may own a gun. I also said people like to hunt, so they to, own guns, I also said people like to target shoot so, they to own guns. You really expect me to accept your argument of "Get a new hobby" as a reason for taking away peoples guns. Sorry, you are going to have to do wayy better than that. It is also a pretty smug thing to say to a person, when it isn't YOUR hobby. These are the things we enjoy and we are going to enjoy them. Why you ask? Because we are FREE to do so.PureFodder wrote:
Just pointing out the vast chasm of incosistency in the argument. People want guns for protection then don't use them for protection. Also noting the issue that it appears that despite arguing that people want guns for protection it ultimately endangers them as opposed to protecting them as seen in the abnormally high violent crime figures that the US has.lowing wrote:
Nope again,PureFodder wrote:
So you want guns in society, thuly giving criminals both the opportinity (most guns in the hands of criminals were originaly legally owned by private citizens) and motivation to arm themselves (to defend themselves against the law abiding armed folks), then don't even bother carrying a gun around to protect yourself and others?! Serously if you're going to absolutly definately have to have civillian gun ownership with all the problems that come associated with it, you'd think you'd actually want to have the benefits too.
you tried to portrait us all as paranoid and I showed you we are not, so now your argument goes the other direction to the opposite extreme and suggests that if we are not paranoid then we really do not need or should want our guns in the first place.If somehow it turned out that collecting stamps indirectly caused vast amounts of violent crime and death I'm sure you wouldn't find philatelists saying they'd fight to the death to save their hobby. Legal gun ownership causes large amounts of problems for society and 'but it's my hobby' is a lame excuse. Go do something else.lowing wrote:
We own guns for a lot of reasons, protection, hunting, target shooting.
So that's protection, hunting and hobbies shown to be failed arguments, anything else?People in your country also have the right to ammend the constitution to remove that right. It is a democracy after all.lowing wrote:
We have the right to do so and we exercise it.I wasn't aware conservatives possessed the power of clairvoyancy. Anything can change. There's a large percentage of Americans who would favour the removal of these rights so don't believe that this could never occur.lowing wrote:
As Americans we did not nor will we ever do the same, and you will simply have to live with that as well.Conveniently I a) didn't make that arguement and b) have plenty of arguements. Now if you could go back and try to argue against the points i did make that would be nice.lowing wrote:
If the inaccurate portrayal of us being paranoid mad men itching to gun down one another is the only way you can justify your point of view then you already lost the argument for disarming our citizens.
You may wanna recheck you copy of the Constitution I do not think you will find any amendments that TAKE AWAY rights and freedoms. The only exception arguably would be making alcohol illegal which was soon thereafter repealed.
Bottom line is this, if you have to hit the extremes of both ends of the spectrum to insist we should not own guns, then your argument is flawed. Now if you excuse me I gotta strap on my holster because I gotta run to the store, then pick up my boys in time to go rob a bank.
Um... you're equating civil rights with taking away a right... That doesn't make much sense.PureFodder wrote:
Roll back 60 years and any politician who hinted at giving full equal rights to black people would have been assassinated, that shouldn't and didn't stop them.Turquoise wrote:
Have you ever been to America?... If you were a politician and even hinted at implementing a policy like that, you'd get assassinated -- as you should, to be quite frank.Scorpion0x17 wrote:
The military go from house to house... And they remove any guns they find... And then they destroy them... Any guns that turn up after that, are removed and destroyed.... And continue... Yes, it would take some time... Yes, it would require a lot of manpower... Yes, it would really piss a lot of people off... But it could be done.... If there were the political will (in both the politicians and the electorate).
Seriously, man... Don't you think your plan sounds a bit fascist?...
The only practical solution to remove firearms from American society is a slow phasing out of which types of firearms can legally be owned and limitations on the numbers of guns that can be owned with a state buy-back scheme followed by gun amnesties, before getting anywhere near a total ban. Any even remotely reasonable plan would take most likely a couple of decades to impliment and would therefore require massive bi-partisain support which is obviously not ever going to happen. This kind of thing has happened in some countries but America seems a little overly obsessed by their desire to have guns to ever get the support that would be needed.
lol!stryyker wrote:
Good thing the Spetz weren't all up in that.
Headline before: 9 dead, gunman detained
Headline after: 52 dead, 1,040 wounded, gunman shot 93 times
That's not a reason for taking away peoples guns, did you read what I said? It's a poor reason for keeping them. There's a large difference. The reason for getting rid of them is the large increase in violent crime. Only if there were no unfavourable results for keeping guns would your arguement would. Try to keep up.lowing wrote:
Because we live in a safe country and we do not feel the need to pack 24/7. And still bad things happen to, yes, even gun owners, that does not negate our desire to have them. The odds of anything happening to a single family home is pretty slim. However, there is a chance and we may own a gun. I also said people like to hunt, so they to, own guns, I also said people like to target shoot so, they to own guns. You really expect me to accept your argument of "Get a new hobby" as a reason for taking away peoples guns. Sorry, you are going to have to do wayy better than that.
That is the obvious one, the not so obvious but massive ones include the freedom to have slaves, the freedom to prevent people using goods and services based on their skin colour, the freedom to consume certain mind altering drugs. The freedom to smoke wherever you want. All freedoms that the American people decided were best to give up for the benefit of society as a whole.lowing wrote:
It is also a pretty smug thing to say to a person, when it isn't YOUR hobby. These are the things we enjoy and we are going to enjoy them. Why you ask? Because we are FREE to do so.
You may wanna recheck you copy of the Constitution I do not think you will find any amendments that TAKE AWAY rights and freedoms. The only exception arguably would be making alcohol illegal which was soon thereafter repealed.
So you agree that gun ownership fails whichever way you look at it?lowing wrote:
Bottom line is this, if you have to hit the extremes of both ends of the spectrum to insist we should not own guns, then your argument is flawed.
We are not a paranoid society hell bent on gunning each other down, so your argument that taking away the guns out of our paranoid society to make us safer is bullshit.PureFodder wrote:
That's not a reason for taking away peoples guns, did you read what I said? It's a poor reason for keeping them. There's a large difference. The reason for getting rid of them is the large increase in violent crime. Only if there were no unfavourable results for keeping guns would your arguement would. Try to keep up.lowing wrote:
Because we live in a safe country and we do not feel the need to pack 24/7. And still bad things happen to, yes, even gun owners, that does not negate our desire to have them. The odds of anything happening to a single family home is pretty slim. However, there is a chance and we may own a gun. I also said people like to hunt, so they to, own guns, I also said people like to target shoot so, they to own guns. You really expect me to accept your argument of "Get a new hobby" as a reason for taking away peoples guns. Sorry, you are going to have to do wayy better than that.That is the obvious one, the not so obvious but massive ones include the freedom to have slaves, the freedom to prevent people using goods and services based on their skin colour, the freedom to consume certain mind altering drugs. The freedom to smoke wherever you want. All freedoms that the American people decided were best to give up for the benefit of society as a whole.lowing wrote:
It is also a pretty smug thing to say to a person, when it isn't YOUR hobby. These are the things we enjoy and we are going to enjoy them. Why you ask? Because we are FREE to do so.
You may wanna recheck you copy of the Constitution I do not think you will find any amendments that TAKE AWAY rights and freedoms. The only exception arguably would be making alcohol illegal which was soon thereafter repealed.So you agree that gun ownership fails whichever way you look at it?lowing wrote:
Bottom line is this, if you have to hit the extremes of both ends of the spectrum to insist we should not own guns, then your argument is flawed.
So you turn toward an argument that is based on us not being paranoid and gun owners still get killed even if they own guns is so full of bullshit holes ya can't even count them.
You ask why we own guns, I told you, and that is pretty much it. If you don't want one than don't get one, oh wait never mind, you are not free to defend yourself I forgot. Apparantly you are not free to hunt either, or even go clay pigion shooting.YOu guys get in fights and kill each other over soccer, yup I said SOCCER, ( not football, football is reserved for America) so when do you take away all of your soccer balls? I mean wouldn't your streets be safer WITHOUT all of you drunken soccer fans tearing through your streets when you win or loose by a nail biting 1-0 lose or win?
I will let you show me the AMMENDMENT to the constituion that ALLOWS slavery.
Soccer ...that's a sport the Americans play isn't it? We play FOOTBALL here in Europe, you might know the sport ...it's the one you play with your FEET!lowing wrote:
We are not a paranoid society hell bent on gunning each other down, so your argument that taking away the guns out of our paranoid society to make us safer is bullshit.PureFodder wrote:
That's not a reason for taking away peoples guns, did you read what I said? It's a poor reason for keeping them. There's a large difference. The reason for getting rid of them is the large increase in violent crime. Only if there were no unfavourable results for keeping guns would your arguement would. Try to keep up.lowing wrote:
Because we live in a safe country and we do not feel the need to pack 24/7. And still bad things happen to, yes, even gun owners, that does not negate our desire to have them. The odds of anything happening to a single family home is pretty slim. However, there is a chance and we may own a gun. I also said people like to hunt, so they to, own guns, I also said people like to target shoot so, they to own guns. You really expect me to accept your argument of "Get a new hobby" as a reason for taking away peoples guns. Sorry, you are going to have to do wayy better than that.That is the obvious one, the not so obvious but massive ones include the freedom to have slaves, the freedom to prevent people using goods and services based on their skin colour, the freedom to consume certain mind altering drugs. The freedom to smoke wherever you want. All freedoms that the American people decided were best to give up for the benefit of society as a whole.lowing wrote:
It is also a pretty smug thing to say to a person, when it isn't YOUR hobby. These are the things we enjoy and we are going to enjoy them. Why you ask? Because we are FREE to do so.
You may wanna recheck you copy of the Constitution I do not think you will find any amendments that TAKE AWAY rights and freedoms. The only exception arguably would be making alcohol illegal which was soon thereafter repealed.So you agree that gun ownership fails whichever way you look at it?lowing wrote:
Bottom line is this, if you have to hit the extremes of both ends of the spectrum to insist we should not own guns, then your argument is flawed.
So you turn toward an argument that is based on us not being paranoid and gun owners still get killed even if they own guns is so full of bullshit holes ya can't even count them.
You ask why we own guns, I told you, and that is pretty much it. If you don't want one than don't get one, oh wait never mind, you are not free to defend yourself I forgot. Apparantly you are not free to hunt either, or even go clay pigion shooting.YOu guys get in fights and kill each other over soccer, yup I said SOCCER, ( not football, football is reserved for America) so when do you take away all of your soccer balls? I mean wouldn't your streets be safer WITHOUT all of you drunken soccer fans tearing through your streets when you win or loose by a nail biting 1-0 lose or win?
I will let you show me the AMMENDMENT to the constituion that ALLOWS slavery.
We don't have that many football riots here in Europe you know lowing, certainly not as many as the number of firearm homicides in the US so your point is pretty much moot.
Sorry we found soccer so boring that hardly anyone here plays it. I guess the thought of sitting and watching a ball get kicked around a field without a any scoring for 2 hours is just more than any of us can bare.Braddock wrote:
Soccer ...that's a sport the Americans play isn't it? We play FOOTBALL here in Europe, you might know the sport ...it's the one you play with your FEET!lowing wrote:
We are not a paranoid society hell bent on gunning each other down, so your argument that taking away the guns out of our paranoid society to make us safer is bullshit.PureFodder wrote:
That's not a reason for taking away peoples guns, did you read what I said? It's a poor reason for keeping them. There's a large difference. The reason for getting rid of them is the large increase in violent crime. Only if there were no unfavourable results for keeping guns would your arguement would. Try to keep up.lowing wrote:
Because we live in a safe country and we do not feel the need to pack 24/7. And still bad things happen to, yes, even gun owners, that does not negate our desire to have them. The odds of anything happening to a single family home is pretty slim. However, there is a chance and we may own a gun. I also said people like to hunt, so they to, own guns, I also said people like to target shoot so, they to own guns. You really expect me to accept your argument of "Get a new hobby" as a reason for taking away peoples guns. Sorry, you are going to have to do wayy better than that.
That is the obvious one, the not so obvious but massive ones include the freedom to have slaves, the freedom to prevent people using goods and services based on their skin colour, the freedom to consume certain mind altering drugs. The freedom to smoke wherever you want. All freedoms that the American people decided were best to give up for the benefit of society as a whole.
So you agree that gun ownership fails whichever way you look at it?
So you turn toward an argument that is based on us not being paranoid and gun owners still get killed even if they own guns is so full of bullshit holes ya can't even count them.
You ask why we own guns, I told you, and that is pretty much it. If you don't want one than don't get one, oh wait never mind, you are not free to defend yourself I forgot. Apparantly you are not free to hunt either, or even go clay pigion shooting.YOu guys get in fights and kill each other over soccer, yup I said SOCCER, ( not football, football is reserved for America) so when do you take away all of your soccer balls? I mean wouldn't your streets be safer WITHOUT all of you drunken soccer fans tearing through your streets when you win or loose by a nail biting 1-0 lose or win?
I will let you show me the AMMENDMENT to the constituion that ALLOWS slavery.
We don't have that many football riots here in Europe you know lowing, certainly not as many as the number of firearm homicides in the US so your point is pretty much moot.
My point isn't moot. I am being told that removing guns from law abiding citizens will make us safer. So I say banning soccer in Europe and Asia would also make you guys safer.
You have no problem trying to tell us that taking away one of our rights is no big deal. Fine, well compared to that, you banning a boring ass sport should be even less of a problem. It might save a referees family from getting killed for making a bad call. Or a player getting killed for missing a goal or allowing one. Should be well worth it based on your argument.
PS watching Eurotrash soccer is as about as exciting as watching Canadian CURLING.
Last edited by lowing (2007-08-01 02:09:54)
We're talking about basic cause and effect here lowing, the guns themselves fire bullets, which can seriously injure or kill people. The hooligans don't beat each other up with the game of soccer itself.lowing wrote:
Sorry we found soccer so boring that hardly anyone here plays it. I guess the thought of sitting and watching a ball get kicked around a field without a any scoring for 2 hours is just more than any of us can bare.Braddock wrote:
Soccer ...that's a sport the Americans play isn't it? We play FOOTBALL here in Europe, you might know the sport ...it's the one you play with your FEET!lowing wrote:
We are not a paranoid society hell bent on gunning each other down, so your argument that taking away the guns out of our paranoid society to make us safer is bullshit.
So you turn toward an argument that is based on us not being paranoid and gun owners still get killed even if they own guns is so full of bullshit holes ya can't even count them.
You ask why we own guns, I told you, and that is pretty much it. If you don't want one than don't get one, oh wait never mind, you are not free to defend yourself I forgot. Apparantly you are not free to hunt either, or even go clay pigion shooting.YOu guys get in fights and kill each other over soccer, yup I said SOCCER, ( not football, football is reserved for America) so when do you take away all of your soccer balls? I mean wouldn't your streets be safer WITHOUT all of you drunken soccer fans tearing through your streets when you win or loose by a nail biting 1-0 lose or win?
I will let you show me the AMMENDMENT to the constituion that ALLOWS slavery.
We don't have that many football riots here in Europe you know lowing, certainly not as many as the number of firearm homicides in the US so your point is pretty much moot.
My point isn't moot. I am being told that removing guns from law abiding citizens will make us safer. So I say banning soccer in Europe and Asia would also make you guys safer.
You have no problem trying to tell us that taking away one of our rights is no big deal. Fine, well compared to that, you banning a boring ass sport should be even less of a problem. It might save a referees family from getting killed for making a bad call. Or a player getting killed for missing a goal or allowing one. Should be well worth it based on your argument.
PS watching Eurotrash soccer is as about as exciting as watching Canadian CURLING.
Soccer could also only be argued as a contributing factor in hooligan violence, remove the sport and the hooligans can still find another reason to fight. Guns are tools for the violence itself and not simply a contributing factor ...remove the guns and you have removed one of the means with which to inflict devastating damage. If there were no weapons at all someone would just have to use their fists and feet and would have a much more limited means for inflicting damage.
BTW football (or 'the beautiful game' as it's known) is generally considered by pretty much the entire world outside the US to be the greatest game on earth. And btw the tight scoring in football is one of the reasons I like it; I get bored to tears watching Basketball teams run end to end racking up treble figures. Goals in football are very special, it is quite an incredible feeling lowing to score a goal in an important match.
Or baseball or American football or basketball. Three of the most boring sports in existence.lowing wrote:
PS watching Eurotrash soccer is as about as exciting as watching Canadian CURLING.
PS Curling is Scottish.
PPS Soccer is the biggest sport in the entire world - played from the jungles of Brazil to the foothills of the Himalayas.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-08-01 02:32:45)
That's pretty bad. "At least" it is only 9 and not 30 something though..
Cause and effect, soccer a reason for getting together in the streets to celebrate, effect drunken violence. Do away with the reason to celebrate in the streets and thus do away with the violence. Simple.Braddock wrote:
We're talking about basic cause and effect here lowing, the guns themselves fire bullets, which can seriously injure or kill people. The hooligans don't beat each other up with the game of soccer itself.lowing wrote:
Sorry we found soccer so boring that hardly anyone here plays it. I guess the thought of sitting and watching a ball get kicked around a field without a any scoring for 2 hours is just more than any of us can bare.Braddock wrote:
Soccer ...that's a sport the Americans play isn't it? We play FOOTBALL here in Europe, you might know the sport ...it's the one you play with your FEET!
We don't have that many football riots here in Europe you know lowing, certainly not as many as the number of firearm homicides in the US so your point is pretty much moot.
My point isn't moot. I am being told that removing guns from law abiding citizens will make us safer. So I say banning soccer in Europe and Asia would also make you guys safer.
You have no problem trying to tell us that taking away one of our rights is no big deal. Fine, well compared to that, you banning a boring ass sport should be even less of a problem. It might save a referees family from getting killed for making a bad call. Or a player getting killed for missing a goal or allowing one. Should be well worth it based on your argument.
PS watching Eurotrash soccer is as about as exciting as watching Canadian CURLING.
Soccer could also only be argued as a contributing factor in hooligan violence, remove the sport and the hooligans can still find another reason to fight. Guns are tools for the violence itself and not simply a contributing factor ...remove the guns and you have removed one of the means with which to inflict devastating damage. If there were no weapons at all someone would just have to use their fists and feet and would have a much more limited means for inflicting damage.
BTW football (or 'the beautiful game' as it's known) is generally considered by pretty much the entire world outside the US to be the greatest game on earth. And btw the tight scoring in football is one of the reasons I like it; I get bored to tears watching Basketball teams run end to end racking up treble figures. Goals in football are very special, it is quite an incredible feeling lowing to score a goal in an important match.
Remove the guns and people could turn toward baseball bats as a primary weapon so I guess the next step would be to ban all baseball bats.
"I get bored to tears watching Basketball teams run end to end racking up treble figures" <------ couldn't agree more.
Of course I know my argument for doing away with football is absurd. However, equally absurd is the notion that taking away all of the guns from everyone but the criminals is going to make us safer. It was proven during prohibition, our govt, trid to legislate morality on the AMerican public by taking away all alcohol, instantly speak easies popped up and gangland violence erupted along with bootlegging of booze. Anyone that wanted a drink could still get one. But rest assured someone probably died trying to deliver it.
Banning guns does nothing except disarm a law abiding society and gives the upper hand to the criminal element in that society. I also wonder what difference an armed militia in the European countries in WW2 coulda made again Germany. The average citizen, around every corner in the city with the ability to help defend that city.
If you ban baseball bats you'd get rid of that God-awful game baseball too ...win win situationlowing wrote:
Cause and effect, soccer a reason for getting together in the streets to celebrate, effect drunken violence. Do away with the reason to celebrate in the streets and thus do away with the violence. Simple.Braddock wrote:
We're talking about basic cause and effect here lowing, the guns themselves fire bullets, which can seriously injure or kill people. The hooligans don't beat each other up with the game of soccer itself.lowing wrote:
Sorry we found soccer so boring that hardly anyone here plays it. I guess the thought of sitting and watching a ball get kicked around a field without a any scoring for 2 hours is just more than any of us can bare.
My point isn't moot. I am being told that removing guns from law abiding citizens will make us safer. So I say banning soccer in Europe and Asia would also make you guys safer.
You have no problem trying to tell us that taking away one of our rights is no big deal. Fine, well compared to that, you banning a boring ass sport should be even less of a problem. It might save a referees family from getting killed for making a bad call. Or a player getting killed for missing a goal or allowing one. Should be well worth it based on your argument.
PS watching Eurotrash soccer is as about as exciting as watching Canadian CURLING.
Soccer could also only be argued as a contributing factor in hooligan violence, remove the sport and the hooligans can still find another reason to fight. Guns are tools for the violence itself and not simply a contributing factor ...remove the guns and you have removed one of the means with which to inflict devastating damage. If there were no weapons at all someone would just have to use their fists and feet and would have a much more limited means for inflicting damage.
BTW football (or 'the beautiful game' as it's known) is generally considered by pretty much the entire world outside the US to be the greatest game on earth. And btw the tight scoring in football is one of the reasons I like it; I get bored to tears watching Basketball teams run end to end racking up treble figures. Goals in football are very special, it is quite an incredible feeling lowing to score a goal in an important match.
Remove the guns and people could turn toward baseball bats as a primary weapon so I guess the next step would be to ban all baseball bats.
"I get bored to tears watching Basketball teams run end to end racking up treble figures" <------ couldn't agree more.
Of course I know my argument for doing away with football is absurd. However, equally absurd is the notion that taking away all of the guns from everyone but the criminals is going to make us safer. It was proven during prohibition, our govt, trid to legislate morality on the AMerican public by taking away all alcohol, instantly speak easies popped up and gangland violence erupted along with bootlegging of booze. Anyone that wanted a drink could still get one. But rest assured someone probably died trying to deliver it.
Banning guns does nothing except disarm a law abiding society and gives the upper hand to the criminal element in that society. I also wonder what difference an armed militia in the European countries in WW2 coulda made again Germany. The average citizen, around every corner in the city with the ability to help defend that city.
I actually think America has lived too long swamped with guns ...to the point where banning them now would be logistically so difficult it would be pretty much impossible to retrieve all weapons among the public. We had enough trouble getting an armistice to do any good here in Ireland where we don't have many guns at all, multiply that difficulty by God knows how much for an American equivalent. Any kind of solution would have to be long term and well thought out.
In the short term though It does seem like there could be a lot of tightening up done on gun laws and restrictions in certain American States and the bigger heavy duty guns should be banned (I mean for God's sake who needs an M16 for home defense? B.A. Baracus?).
Last edited by Braddock (2007-08-01 02:58:22)
The only real solution is to enforce existing laws and stop coddling the criminal element in society. Make punishment HURT. Make prison so bad it is the last place a person wants to go. Other than that, good luck trying to take an Americans gun from him. There will litetally be a revolution.Braddock wrote:
If you ban baseball bats you'd get rid of that God-awful game baseball too ...win win situationlowing wrote:
Cause and effect, soccer a reason for getting together in the streets to celebrate, effect drunken violence. Do away with the reason to celebrate in the streets and thus do away with the violence. Simple.Braddock wrote:
We're talking about basic cause and effect here lowing, the guns themselves fire bullets, which can seriously injure or kill people. The hooligans don't beat each other up with the game of soccer itself.
Soccer could also only be argued as a contributing factor in hooligan violence, remove the sport and the hooligans can still find another reason to fight. Guns are tools for the violence itself and not simply a contributing factor ...remove the guns and you have removed one of the means with which to inflict devastating damage. If there were no weapons at all someone would just have to use their fists and feet and would have a much more limited means for inflicting damage.
BTW football (or 'the beautiful game' as it's known) is generally considered by pretty much the entire world outside the US to be the greatest game on earth. And btw the tight scoring in football is one of the reasons I like it; I get bored to tears watching Basketball teams run end to end racking up treble figures. Goals in football are very special, it is quite an incredible feeling lowing to score a goal in an important match.
Remove the guns and people could turn toward baseball bats as a primary weapon so I guess the next step would be to ban all baseball bats.
"I get bored to tears watching Basketball teams run end to end racking up treble figures" <------ couldn't agree more.
Of course I know my argument for doing away with football is absurd. However, equally absurd is the notion that taking away all of the guns from everyone but the criminals is going to make us safer. It was proven during prohibition, our govt, trid to legislate morality on the AMerican public by taking away all alcohol, instantly speak easies popped up and gangland violence erupted along with bootlegging of booze. Anyone that wanted a drink could still get one. But rest assured someone probably died trying to deliver it.
Banning guns does nothing except disarm a law abiding society and gives the upper hand to the criminal element in that society. I also wonder what difference an armed militia in the European countries in WW2 coulda made again Germany. The average citizen, around every corner in the city with the ability to help defend that city.
I actually think America has lived too long swamped with guns ...to the point where banning them now would be logistically so difficult it would be pretty much impossible to retrieve all weapons among the public. We had enough trouble getting an armistice to do any good here in Ireland where we don't have many guns at all, multiply that difficulty by God knows how much for an American equivalent. Any kind of solution would have to be long term and well thought out.
In the short term though It does seem like there could be a lot of tightening up done on gun laws and restrictions in certain American States and the bigger heavy duty guns should be banned (I mean for God's sake who needs an M16 for home defense? B.A. Baracus?).
I have an assault rifle,( semi auto AK-47) it is fun to shoot and I use it to shoot targets. For home defense I have a remington 870 tactical shotgun, I shoot clay pigions with it, also fun to shoot. Iam not a criminal, why are you insisting on punishing me? Why don't you turn your legislation suggestions against the criminals??
Keep the heavy artillery at the gun range I say (maybe you do already?). I agree with you that the prison system shouldn't be as cosy as it is. My point of view is coloured by the fact that if I get mugged in this country (and I have been in the past) the chances of a gun being pulled on me are remote and an increase in the circulation of legal firearms among the population would increase those chances. I can appreciate your point of view, which I presume is that if you were mugged the chances of a gun being pulled would be quite high and you like the ability of being able to have a level playing field by carrying or owning your own firearm? I'm sure you can understand my desire to maintain a gun free society in the same way as I can understand your point of view. I would like for the US to have a situation like Ireland vis a viz firearms but it would be impossible to get it to that stage as there are already too many guns out there and too much of a gun culture present in society (I'd say 90% of the Irish public have never fired a gun!).lowing wrote:
The only real solution is to enforce existing laws and stop coddling the criminal element in society. Make punishment HURT. Make prison so bad it is the last place a person wants to go. Other than that, good luck trying to take an Americans gun from him. There will litetally be a revolution.Braddock wrote:
If you ban baseball bats you'd get rid of that God-awful game baseball too ...win win situationlowing wrote:
Cause and effect, soccer a reason for getting together in the streets to celebrate, effect drunken violence. Do away with the reason to celebrate in the streets and thus do away with the violence. Simple.
Remove the guns and people could turn toward baseball bats as a primary weapon so I guess the next step would be to ban all baseball bats.
"I get bored to tears watching Basketball teams run end to end racking up treble figures" <------ couldn't agree more.
Of course I know my argument for doing away with football is absurd. However, equally absurd is the notion that taking away all of the guns from everyone but the criminals is going to make us safer. It was proven during prohibition, our govt, trid to legislate morality on the AMerican public by taking away all alcohol, instantly speak easies popped up and gangland violence erupted along with bootlegging of booze. Anyone that wanted a drink could still get one. But rest assured someone probably died trying to deliver it.
Banning guns does nothing except disarm a law abiding society and gives the upper hand to the criminal element in that society. I also wonder what difference an armed militia in the European countries in WW2 coulda made again Germany. The average citizen, around every corner in the city with the ability to help defend that city.
I actually think America has lived too long swamped with guns ...to the point where banning them now would be logistically so difficult it would be pretty much impossible to retrieve all weapons among the public. We had enough trouble getting an armistice to do any good here in Ireland where we don't have many guns at all, multiply that difficulty by God knows how much for an American equivalent. Any kind of solution would have to be long term and well thought out.
In the short term though It does seem like there could be a lot of tightening up done on gun laws and restrictions in certain American States and the bigger heavy duty guns should be banned (I mean for God's sake who needs an M16 for home defense? B.A. Baracus?).
I have an assault rifle,( semi auto AK-47) it is fun to shoot and I use it to shoot targets. For home defense I have a remington 870 tactical shotgun, I shoot clay pigions with it, also fun to shoot. Iam not a criminal, why are you insisting on punishing me? Why don't you turn your legislation suggestions against the criminals??
Perhaps this is why I shouldn't bother trying to argue an anti-gun position for the US as the European and US situations are totally different. The kind of story mentioned in the OP is still somewhat of a freak occurrence here.
that´s what happens, when every idiot can get a gun...
Yup I am a gun owner, and yes if I were walking down the street and got mugged by a person with a gun there wouldn't be a whole hell of a lot I could do about it. Since like I said before, my guns are locked up in my house and I do not have nor feel the need for a carrying permit. I also feel my chances of getting mugged are so remote that it doen't even come into play for me. Could it happen? sure could. I could also get killed by a drunk driver, but you are not endorsing taking away my car. Which is just as realistic as trying to take away my guns. I think you guys over there must watch too many American westerns or somethingBraddock wrote:
Keep the heavy artillery at the gun range I say (maybe you do already?). I agree with you that the prison system shouldn't be as cosy as it is. My point of view is coloured by the fact that if I get mugged in this country (and I have been in the past) the chances of a gun being pulled on me are remote and an increase in the circulation of legal firearms among the population would increase those chances. I can appreciate your point of view, which I presume is that if you were mugged the chances of a gun being pulled would be quite high and you like the ability of being able to have a level playing field by carrying or owning your own firearm? I'm sure you can understand my desire to maintain a gun free society in the same way as I can understand your point of view. I would like for the US to have a situation like Ireland vis a viz firearms but it would be impossible to get it to that stage as there are already too many guns out there and too much of a gun culture present in society (I'd say 90% of the Irish public have never fired a gun!).lowing wrote:
The only real solution is to enforce existing laws and stop coddling the criminal element in society. Make punishment HURT. Make prison so bad it is the last place a person wants to go. Other than that, good luck trying to take an Americans gun from him. There will litetally be a revolution.Braddock wrote:
If you ban baseball bats you'd get rid of that God-awful game baseball too ...win win situation
I actually think America has lived too long swamped with guns ...to the point where banning them now would be logistically so difficult it would be pretty much impossible to retrieve all weapons among the public. We had enough trouble getting an armistice to do any good here in Ireland where we don't have many guns at all, multiply that difficulty by God knows how much for an American equivalent. Any kind of solution would have to be long term and well thought out.
In the short term though It does seem like there could be a lot of tightening up done on gun laws and restrictions in certain American States and the bigger heavy duty guns should be banned (I mean for God's sake who needs an M16 for home defense? B.A. Baracus?).
I have an assault rifle,( semi auto AK-47) it is fun to shoot and I use it to shoot targets. For home defense I have a remington 870 tactical shotgun, I shoot clay pigions with it, also fun to shoot. Iam not a criminal, why are you insisting on punishing me? Why don't you turn your legislation suggestions against the criminals??
Perhaps this is why I shouldn't bother trying to argue an anti-gun position for the US as the European and US situations are totally different. The kind of story mentioned in the OP is still somewhat of a freak occurrence here.
Or the guys over 'here' read the news about mass murders, Kids getting a hold of guns and taking revenge on their fellow pupils?lowing wrote:
Yup I am a gun owner, and yes if I were walking down the street and got mugged by a person with a gun there wouldn't be a whole hell of a lot I could do about it. Since like I said before, my guns are locked up in my house and I do not have nor feel the need for a carrying permit. I also feel my chances of getting mugged are so remote that it doen't even come into play for me. Could it happen? sure could. I could also get killed by a drunk driver, but you are not endorsing taking away my car. Which is just as realistic as trying to take away my guns. I think you guys over there must watch too many American westerns or somethingBraddock wrote:
Keep the heavy artillery at the gun range I say (maybe you do already?). I agree with you that the prison system shouldn't be as cosy as it is. My point of view is coloured by the fact that if I get mugged in this country (and I have been in the past) the chances of a gun being pulled on me are remote and an increase in the circulation of legal firearms among the population would increase those chances. I can appreciate your point of view, which I presume is that if you were mugged the chances of a gun being pulled would be quite high and you like the ability of being able to have a level playing field by carrying or owning your own firearm? I'm sure you can understand my desire to maintain a gun free society in the same way as I can understand your point of view. I would like for the US to have a situation like Ireland vis a viz firearms but it would be impossible to get it to that stage as there are already too many guns out there and too much of a gun culture present in society (I'd say 90% of the Irish public have never fired a gun!).lowing wrote:
The only real solution is to enforce existing laws and stop coddling the criminal element in society. Make punishment HURT. Make prison so bad it is the last place a person wants to go. Other than that, good luck trying to take an Americans gun from him. There will litetally be a revolution.
I have an assault rifle,( semi auto AK-47) it is fun to shoot and I use it to shoot targets. For home defense I have a remington 870 tactical shotgun, I shoot clay pigions with it, also fun to shoot. Iam not a criminal, why are you insisting on punishing me? Why don't you turn your legislation suggestions against the criminals??
Perhaps this is why I shouldn't bother trying to argue an anti-gun position for the US as the European and US situations are totally different. The kind of story mentioned in the OP is still somewhat of a freak occurrence here.
I don't think anyone over 'here' thinks of American westerns, they think of all the news which has been reported, all the gun crime recorded about America.
Taking away guns would be a bonus. Imo anyway.