BF2S Forums Still think gun bans prevent gun crime?

kripp wrote:

Gawwad wrote:

Since when has it been forbidden to talk about other countries here?

(good post imortal)

Nobody said its forbidden.  Would you like someone who isnt even from the same country, thousands of miles away in there tiny country, trying to push there own views on you?

I'm not pushing my views on you.
The forum is called Debate and Serious Talk for a reason.

Gawwad wrote:

Parker wrote:

you think thats funny, cause you could never imagine doing something like that.
follow the guy with the stick, he will take you to where the good grass grows.......

You honestly think you can overthrow your goverment supported by the army with hand guns?
And if the army is on the people's side, what do you need the hand guns for?

You seem to forget that this country was made, by that exact way. The people defeated the best army in the world at the time. Many new countries are created by defeating the government in that manner. I really dont appreaciate those not from the USA throwing in their two cents on our society and culture when you dont even know what your talking about. And if you do know, then you must live here, and then youre an american. So please stop arguing about fundemental aspects of our society

Edit: About imortal, He shouldnt give Texas such a liberal name, he is from austin. Dont let his opinions stereotype the rest of Texas! I own too many guns to count!

Last edited by irishtop (2008-03-08 13:32:44)

Parker wrote:

djphetal wrote:

imortal wrote:

Wow.  I feel seriously sorry for you.  I do.  How about being friends with anyone that is pro-life?  Can you stand being near someone who is a staunch Republican?  You let political beliefs choose who you can be friends with?

I know a woman who I went to school with.  She immigrated here from South Africa; just got her citizenship last year.  She left South Africa for the US after having to shoot and kill three people who broke into her home in three different incidents.  She not just carried a gun, she has taken human life with one.  By your standards, she is unworthy of your friendship?

You have the right to not own a gun if you don't like.  You even have the right to be afraid of them.

Oh, by the way, are you sure you don't know anyone that owns a gun?  They might just not tell you.

The willingness and desire to carry a weapon with you wherever you go is frankly concerning. If it were a person of authority, then no... I can understand... but if a citizen wants to walk around with a gun, then I would not want to be around them. And yes... I'm positive none of my friends carry guns. And I never said anything about OWNING a gun. I could be friends with someone who owns a gun... but if they started carrying it, then it would be difficult for me. Guns are evil.

And no, I don't let my political beliefs choose who I'm friends with... I let my moral beliefs determine that.
And finally, about that woman... She is certainly worthy of friendship... I just don't know if I personally could trust her if she were carrying.
You're taking what I said and generalizing it a bit.
I respect a person's right to own a gun, even if I disagree... But I do not condone carrying a firearm.

that might work for you, but for me.....not so much:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_and_ … ,_Missouri

,,, Nevermind...
That's not really a response to what I said at all... rather just another one of those "facts" that stubborn people tend to shove down the throat of people who disagree.
I was simply saying that I find it concerning that people feel the need to carry guns.
Also, maybe I'd have a different opinion if I lived in fucking St. Louis... but I live in the Pacific Northwest.


Gun control debates are dumb. They never go anywhere. Sorry if I pissed anyone off. (Now I'm the weak-minded Liberal though, huh?)

djphetal wrote:

Parker wrote:

djphetal wrote:

The willingness and desire to carry a weapon with you wherever you go is frankly concerning. If it were a person of authority, then no... I can understand... but if a citizen wants to walk around with a gun, then I would not want to be around them. And yes... I'm positive none of my friends carry guns. And I never said anything about OWNING a gun. I could be friends with someone who owns a gun... but if they started carrying it, then it would be difficult for me. Guns are evil.

And no, I don't let my political beliefs choose who I'm friends with... I let my moral beliefs determine that.
And finally, about that woman... She is certainly worthy of friendship... I just don't know if I personally could trust her if she were carrying.
You're taking what I said and generalizing it a bit.
I respect a person's right to own a gun, even if I disagree... But I do not condone carrying a firearm.

that might work for you, but for me.....not so much:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_and_ … ,_Missouri

,,, Nevermind...
That's not really a response to what I said at all... rather just another one of those "facts" that stubborn people tend to shove down the throat of people who disagree.
I was simply saying that I find it concerning that people feel the need to carry guns.
Also, maybe I'd have a different opinion if I lived in fucking St. Louis... but I live in the Pacific Northwest.


Gun control debates are dumb. They never go anywhere. Sorry if I pissed anyone off. (Now I'm the weak-minded Liberal though, huh?)

sure, its a response, you just dont like it.
but thats just what "stubborn people" tend to do....only see what they want.
see how that works?
i was simply saying that while that might work for you, for people like me, its not very practical.

I EVEN SAID "THAT MIGHT WORK FOR YOU, BUT ME NOT SO MUCH.

and your political beliefs dont mean fuck all to me.

Gawwad wrote:

Parker wrote:

Gawwad wrote:

Since when has it been forbidden to talk about other countries here?

(good post imortal)

since you want to dodge this:

what about an insurgency? do you think that the US military would be able to find every single person that would be fighting against them?

i mean, they have tanks and jets, and really big pieces of artillery.

an insurgency SURELY couldnt hold up against something as big and powerful as the united states military, could they?

I'm not dodging, missed it.

I don't think an insurgency could take the military down if most of the military stayed loyal to the goverment.
In a situation like that, you don't care about ethics or collateral damage. If a city has a high amount of resistance, the army could just level it.

I don't see the insurgency killing any of the goverment members either. You simply couldn't get to them.
If you aproached the area where they are, you would get shot no questions asked.

imortal wrote:

And then the next city and the next?  And the reactions of people as city after city gets razed?  That is a very short sited view of any dictator. 

Besides, as I said; the military could, and most likely would, fracture or just plain rebel at a point before that.

Think of something more... insidious.  Like a president declaring a state of emergency, then refusing to leave office.

There is a book out there that might make interesting reading for some people.

It is called "A State of Disobedience" by Tom Kratman, published by Baen books.
https://www.webscription.net/p-403-a-st … ience.aspx

that about sums that up....
thanks imortal.

Last edited by Parker (2008-03-08 13:41:15)

usmarine wrote:

I always wanted to ask this question to gun people.  A lot of us put down other countries for following a "stone-age" religion, yet we are clinging to a reason to own guns from many many years ago that simply do not apply anymore.  If that is the argument, then quite honestly it fails pretty hard.

tell me why our right to own guns fails.

edit:im sorry, thats not what you said.

tell me why the option to overthrow the government fails.

Last edited by Parker (2008-03-08 13:44:05)

usmarine wrote:

Parker wrote:

tell me why the option to overthrow the government fails.

just owning a gun is not an insurgency.

agreed.

but you still havent told me why that fails.

usmarine wrote:

Parker wrote:

usmarine wrote:

just owning a gun is not an insurgency.

agreed.

but you still havent told me why that fails.

because owning a gun does not equal an option to overthrow the govt.

its a tool for that option. if it were ever possible, firearms would be a necessity.
a single person with a firearm doesnt make an insurgency, nor a rebellion, but its a start.

djphetal wrote:

imortal wrote:

Wow.  I feel seriously sorry for you.  I do.  How about being friends with anyone that is pro-life?  Can you stand being near someone who is a staunch Republican?  You let political beliefs choose who you can be friends with?

I know a woman who I went to school with.  She immigrated here from South Africa; just got her citizenship last year.  She left South Africa for the US after having to shoot and kill three people who broke into her home in three different incidents.  She not just carried a gun, she has taken human life with one.  By your standards, she is unworthy of your friendship?

You have the right to not own a gun if you don't like.  You even have the right to be afraid of them.

Oh, by the way, are you sure you don't know anyone that owns a gun?  They might just not tell you.

The willingness and desire to carry a weapon with you wherever you go is frankly concerning. If it were a person of authority, then no... I can understand... but if a citizen wants to walk around with a gun, then I would not want to be around them. And yes... I'm positive none of my friends carry guns. And I never said anything about OWNING a gun. I could be friends with someone who owns a gun... but if they started carrying it, then it would be difficult for me. Guns are evil.

And no, I don't let my political beliefs choose who I'm friends with... I let my moral beliefs determine that.
And finally, about that woman... She is certainly worthy of friendship... I just don't know if I personally could trust her if she were carrying.
You're taking what I said and generalizing it a bit.
I respect a person's right to own a gun, even if I disagree... But I do not condone carrying a firearm.

To me, lawful and responsible carrying of a firearm is the right and the responsibility of a citizen.  Because not everyone in this country or this world is kind and courteous.  Because there are people out there who DO wish harm to you and yours.  Who want what you have.  Or even just want a bit of fun (seen those videos of people getting jumped and beaten for no reason?  Big in England right now, I hear).

The key is responisbility.  Here in Texas, we have the right to carry a concealed weapon, if you have the state-issued permit.  It is a rare, very rare, so-rare-I-challenge-you-to-find-many, incident where a person with a CCW permit comits a crime with a firearm.  Nearly all incidents where a CCW permit holder was involved in a shooting has been deemed self-defense.

Look at it like insurance.  You have car insurance in case something happens to your car.  You have home owners insurance in case something happens to your house.  You have health insurance in case you get sick.  You have life insurance to care for your family in case you die.  But that life insurance does nothing to help you live.  A gun might.  IT would be a very rare instance, perhaps.  But if you are ever in a situation that you need a gun, you REALLY need a gun.

There was a shooting in a Luby's in Killeen, TX a while ago.  A man drove his truck through the window, stepped out, and started killing people.  One of the women killed had a concealed carry permit, but had left her pistol in her vehicle because it was not legal for her to carry it into the resturant.  If she had the firearm with her at the time, perhaps she could have saved the lives of some of those people, and herself.

Believe it or not, it is legal for a CCW permit holder in Texas to carry a firearm into the State council building during session.

We also now have a law we call the 'Castle Docterine,' establishing that a person in theri own home or car does not need to try to escape from an assailant before being permitted to defend themselves.

Parker wrote:

usmarine wrote:

Parker wrote:

its a tool for that option. if it were ever possible, firearms would be a necessity.
a single person with a firearm doesnt make an insurgency, nor a rebellion, but its a start.

it would be a start to a very quick end tbh.

disagree.

if the government cant bring themselves to be heavy handed across the world, they for damn sure wouldnt do it to their own citizens.

not only that, they arent the all powerful entity.
ya, they have hardware, but how hyped would they be to kill their own countrymen?
and thats only one aspect. hell there is a militia two hours from me that has their own fucking tanks.

You're talking about the USA right? Or are you in South America

Parker wrote:

usmarine wrote:

Parker wrote:

its a tool for that option. if it were ever possible, firearms would be a necessity.
a single person with a firearm doesnt make an insurgency, nor a rebellion, but its a start.

it would be a start to a very quick end tbh.

disagree.

if the government cant bring themselves to be heavy handed across the world, they for damn sure wouldnt do it to their own citizens.

not only that, they arent the all powerful entity.
ya, they have hardware, but how hyped would they be to kill their own countrymen?
and thats only one aspect. hell there is a militia two hours from me that has their own fucking tanks.

and the militia would be able to kill their own countrymen?

if I had to picks sides for my own survival, I would choose the govt.

Mek-Izzle wrote:

You're talking about the USA right? Or are you in South America

dont read too much into that.  it is just a bunch of dudes who fire guns and talk tough about the govt on the weekends.  then pay taxes the rest of the week.

usmarine wrote:

I always wanted to ask this question to gun people.  A lot of us put down other countries for following a "stone-age" religion, yet we are clinging to a reason to own guns from many many years ago that simply do not apply anymore.  If that is the argument, then quite honestly it fails pretty hard.

The reasons do not apply at the moment.  "It is better to have and not need, than need and not have."  By that argument, if I have never had a car accident, then I would not see the need in having car insurance.  I assume you are referring to some people's reactions about muslims?  I have never argued for their right to defend themselves.  I have stated long ago that the entire nation of Iraq was in desperate need of anger management courses.  I have even stated that the Iraqi way of running their country seems akin to the mafia in the US.  I even think that many parts of their faith are outmoded in terms of sexual equality and lack of tolerance for the views of others.  I do not see how ay of this contradicts my desire to own or carry a firearm.

And the only way to test your theory that firearms are no longer needed would be to actually take them away and see what happens.  If you are right, all well and good.  But if you are wrong, then there is no way to fix your mistake.  That is not a test I am wiling to endorse.

I am not a psychopath hoping to kill anyone who looks at me funny or busts down my door.  I have a home security system with a nice, alarm.  But I also have a shotgun in case that is not enough.  I keep my shotgun with the magazine full, but the chamber empty.  Why?  Because the sound of a chambering pump-action shotgun is the most recognizable sound in the world.  I do this because I would really rather scare the person off.  If that does not work, however, I am fully prepared to take the life of anyone not sensible enough to take those warnings to heart.

A key personality trait in most gun-owners is a sense of self-reliance.  That is not always possible today; hard to repair your own car nowadays without a computer degree.  But trusting my life to the kindness of strangers and the response of the police is not how I want to go through the day.