Deleted
Joined on: Sept 28, 2024 2:22:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2013 16:23:06 GMT -5
-99 babes Was -100 at the time -_- -98 now -100 You're welcome.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Jan 14, 2013 16:27:40 GMT -5
<3
|
|
|
Post by BCizzle on Jan 14, 2013 23:48:55 GMT -5
I'd like to thank all the gun nuts in this thread for pushing me over to -100 karma Nobody ever changed the world without somebody trying to stop them. There were people who were totally FOR slavery back in the day. People who were totally FOR segregation and no vote for women and no vote for blacks, etc etc. Then again, it was you guy who were taxing our tea! My Karma is super low because I had the gall to ask about Karma, not once, not twice, but thrice. It doesn't mean a damn thing. I like you. I gave ya plus one! Or is that not what you wanted? Gun control and karma are both confusing.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Jan 15, 2013 1:56:11 GMT -5
I'd like to thank all the gun nuts in this thread for pushing me over to -100 karma Nobody ever changed the world without somebody trying to stop them. There were people who were totally FOR slavery back in the day. People who were totally FOR segregation and no vote for women and no vote for blacks, etc etc. Then again, it was you guy who were taxing our tea! My Karma is super low because I had the gall to ask about Karma, not once, not twice, but thrice. It doesn't mean a damn thing. I like you. I gave ya plus one! Or is that not what you wanted? Gun control and karma are both confusing. Are you seriously comparing slave owners and segregationists to people who like guns?
|
|
|
Post by BCizzle on Jan 15, 2013 12:45:04 GMT -5
Nobody ever changed the world without somebody trying to stop them. There were people who were totally FOR slavery back in the day. People who were totally FOR segregation and no vote for women and no vote for blacks, etc etc. Are you seriously comparing slave owners and segregationists to people who like guns? NO. I was talking about how public sentiment can change. I was talking about amendments to the Constitution. Then again, you are the guy who laps up whatever bunk Kliquid is spewing so whatever.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Jan 15, 2013 18:03:49 GMT -5
Are you seriously comparing slave owners and segregationists to people who like guns? NO. I was talking about how public sentiment can change. I was talking about amendments to the Constitution. Then again, you are the guy who laps up whatever bunk Kliquid is spewing so whatever. You never mentioned the Constitution in your post though. I don't care what Kliquid is spewing. In fact, I never quoted him or anything in this thread. I don't even remember the last time I talked to him.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Jan 16, 2013 12:24:09 GMT -5
Question to anyone opposing gun laws: if stronger background checks and a ban on assault weapons saved 100 people's lives (i.e. 3 or 4 mass shootings), would you go for them?
|
|
|
Post by Quanthor on Jan 16, 2013 16:16:06 GMT -5
This is quickly escalating into one of the biggest issues America faces, and yet there seems to be no viable way to solve it. I don't think banning guns is the answer, though I'm certainly no advocate for the "arm everyone" argument that the NRA often poses either. It just almost seems like an unsolvable problem, quite honestly. No matter how much we improve our awareness and treatment of mental health issues, there's always going to be people who fly under the radar and do these things. No matter how many sanctions we put on firearms, people are always going to find a way to get them, legally or illegally, in order to commit these heinous acts. It just seems impossible to solve. I think one of the first places to start is to hold gun owners responsible for their weapons, to an extreme degree. For example, if you're a gun owner who keeps his/her weapons unlocked, and your child takes them and shoots up his/her school, the parents should be held accountable in serious fashion. At the very least, if the consequences are laid out, that may eliminate some concern. I find this to be pretty reasonable. Most everyone is either 100% for or 100% against, but this is right in the middle. Liberties and freedoms are an amazing gift. We should always do right by them in order to protect them. Unfortunately I don't think we've done our due diligence to protect these rights. We've become irresponsible thus why they're at risk. When we're on par with 3rd world nations in terms of gun homicides..you know maybe it's time for a change? That's the conundrum though. What change will make a difference? I like holding people accountable if their guns are used in crimes whether they're the perpetrator or not. It's not a "cure all" but I think people would probably go about guns differently knowing that they would shoulder some of the blame for the crimes that are committed with their gun. They might not be so quick to let others know they have firearms. The majority of illegal gun acquistions that are used in crimes are rooted in the fact that guns are legal. Either they are stolen from homes, illegally bought from licensed gun dealers or somebody with a good record buys guns on the persons behalf. In most cases they are not being obtained from some international smuggler or a manufacturing warehouse. So, if you can to the people that are allowing their guns into peoples hands who use them in crimes I do think that would help alleviate(not eliminate) part of the problem. The issue though, in order to do this we'd have to give up some rights. It's not 2nd amendment that's at risk either(not that people are using that correctly anyhow). I don't know why people keep bringing that up. It's the 4th amendment. To have the necessary database to track the weapons your 4th amendment would be infringed. I'd hate to see that happen but the other two alternatives are the oxymoron "everyone needs guns" or the naive "no guns for anyone". Those two are options are two extreme.
|
|
500DaysofNight
Main Eventer
Joined on: Dec 30, 2001 10:19:35 GMT -5
Posts: 4,639
|
Post by 500DaysofNight on Jan 16, 2013 16:46:16 GMT -5
There's no "fixing" this problem. All the possible solutions are like putting a bunch of tiny band-aids over a big, nasty wound.
Personally, I think a hefty gun tax could work over time. If a person wants a gun THAT bad, they should have no problem paying extra money for it. I know it's technically our "right" to own a gun, but it should be considered more of a privilege.
|
|
|
Post by BCizzle on Jan 16, 2013 22:56:39 GMT -5
There's no "fixing" this problem. All the possible solutions are like putting a bunch of tiny band-aids over a big, nasty wound. Personally, I think a hefty gun tax could work over time. If a person wants a gun THAT bad, they should have no problem paying extra money for it. I know it's technically our "right" to own a gun, but it should be considered more of a privilege. My problem with this is that it doesn't address the millions of guns that are already out there. Why are Americans so obsessed with ownership of guns? Why is it tied so tightly to the idea of freedom? I've never owned a gun - I don't feel less free because of it. So the idea of owning a gun for self-defense and the idea of being free to own a gun are too separate things that some people seem to confuse into one entity. And the more I think about it, saying the only way to stop "bad guys" with gun is "good guys" with guns sounds like the words of a child.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Specific on Jan 16, 2013 23:29:14 GMT -5
There's no "fixing" this problem. All the possible solutions are like putting a bunch of tiny band-aids over a big, nasty wound. Personally, I think a hefty gun tax could work over time. If a person wants a gun THAT bad, they should have no problem paying extra money for it. I know it's technically our "right" to own a gun, but it should be considered more of a privilege. My problem with this is that it doesn't address the millions of guns that are already out there. Why are Americans so obsessed with ownership of guns? Why is it tied so tightly to the idea of freedom? I've never owned a gun - I don't feel less free because of it. So the idea of owning a gun for self-defense and the idea of being free to own a gun are too separate things that some people seem to confuse into one entity. And the more I think about it, saying the only way to stop "bad guys" with gun is "good guys" with guns sounds like the words of a child. Just because you don't want a gun for what ever reason, it does not mean others are 'obsessed'. Sure it can be an obsession just like any hobby can become, but for most of us it's for self defense, for a hobby, or for hunting or for all or some of those things. I have guns for a) Self defense, and B) for a hobby because I enjoy it like any other bobby is enjoyed. It is my RIGHT as a honest law abiding citizen to own guns and use them legally. I did not do anything wrong so I do not deserve to have my right abolished and my guns restricted or taken from me. If someone uses a baseball bat to bash someones head in and kill them should the government step in and take all baseball bats away from everyone? And as far as 'Good Guys' with legal firearms stopping the 'Bad Guys' with their illegal firearms, any argument there is just plain hypocrisy. We go to war, we (the good guys) try and stop them (the bad guys) with what? Potato Peelers? I think not. The President, his wife, and his kids are protected by Secret Service Agents with what? Spitballs? Of course not. They all have firearms. And why do they have firearms? To stop the 'bad guys'. Owning firearms by honest citizens for what ever reason and being free to bear this right are NOT two separate things, they are one in the same. All I say is LEAVE US ALONE we did not do anything wrong to deserve our protection and our hobby to be restricted or taken away. We do not want to be defenseless. We do not want criminals to have free reign on us because now we the honest law abiding innocent citizens can no longer defend ourselves and our family. Take appropriate action and remove the illegal firearms and criminals off the streets. Protect our children with armed guards and/or armed police in schools. JS
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Jan 17, 2013 5:33:35 GMT -5
Edit: No reason to start trolling -HR
I don't see how it was trolling. I wasn't calling him out - I was using his own words against him to show how I felt that he was ignoring the original point of this argument - the fact that a mass shooting occured. I wasn't baiting him, merely making a point in more creative terms than just saying "yeah but you're ignoring the point".
|
|
Kasper.ca
Superstar
Joined on: Apr 6, 2012 13:02:10 GMT -5
Posts: 764
|
Post by Kasper.ca on Jan 17, 2013 5:51:26 GMT -5
Yeah, I agree. More guns are going to lower the number of shootings - makes perfect sense. I'm from Canada, so obviously not a big proponent of guns... but one of my best friends is from Texas originally. He says this: "If you are going to walk into an area to rob someone or commit violence, would you do it in: A) A place where nobody has a gun B) A place where everyone has a gun C) A place where lots of people will have guns You obviously wouldn't pick the last 2. If you arm everyone, then as backwards as it sounds... gun violence would go down because you have no idea if you pull your gun, who else is gonna pull theirs. The fear or uncertainty makes people NOT want to try anything.
|
|
|
Post by BCizzle on Jan 17, 2013 21:22:16 GMT -5
If someone uses a baseball bat to bash someones head in and kill them should the government step in and take all baseball bats away from everyone? And as far as 'Good Guys' with legal firearms stopping the 'Bad Guys' with their illegal firearms, any argument there is just plain hypocrisy. We go to war, we (the good guys) try and stop them (the bad guys) with what? Potato Peelers? I think not. The President, his wife, and his kids are protected by Secret Service Agents with what? Spitballs? Of course not. They all have firearms. And why do they have firearms? To stop the 'bad guys'. Wow, you're really lapping up the stupidity the NRA is spewing. There is a difference between having armed guards for the president and having armed everybody everywhere. I am not against the military having weapons - that's just dumb. Who said that? Nobody has said that at all. Hypocrisy? I think you're a little confused. I know you're pro-gun and think they are good for self defense - my brother has two guns now for self-defense. But I have just as much right to think that throwing more guns at the problem only makes things worse and that the 2nd amendment sucks. I don't care that they put in it the Bill of Rights 200+ plus years ago - I don't like it and all these folks rushing out to buy more guns scares me. What are they loading up for, to fight the 2nd Civil War? And I want to know where guns are illegal and criminals have "free reign" over the citizens? Chicago is plagued with gun crime and has harsh laws - but it's criminals fighting criminals there. What is it with this paranoia about crime?
|
|
|
Post by BCizzle on Jan 17, 2013 21:30:05 GMT -5
As a fellow American, I don't share you feelings about freedom at all. And I don't think the people in the UK are being unknowingly oppressed, either. Then what are your feelings of freedom? I feel like you have to fight for the right to party. Anything else would be uncivilized.
|
|
|
Post by HR2X on Jan 17, 2013 21:33:25 GMT -5
If someone uses a baseball bat to bash someones head in and kill them should the government step in and take all baseball bats away from everyone? And as far as 'Good Guys' with legal firearms stopping the 'Bad Guys' with their illegal firearms, any argument there is just plain hypocrisy. We go to war, we (the good guys) try and stop them (the bad guys) with what? Potato Peelers? I think not. The President, his wife, and his kids are protected by Secret Service Agents with what? Spitballs? Of course not. They all have firearms. And why do they have firearms? To stop the 'bad guys'. Wow, you're really lapping up the stupidity the NRA is spewing. There is a difference between having armed guards for the president and having armed everybody everywhere. I am not against the military having weapons - that's just dumb. Who said that? Nobody has said that at all. Hypocrisy? I think you're a little confused. I know you're pro-gun and think they are good for self defense - my brother has two guns now for self-defense. But I have just as much right to think that throwing more guns at the problem only makes things worse and that the 2nd amendment sucks. I don't care that they put in it the Bill of Rights 200+ plus years ago - I don't like it and all these folks rushing out to buy more guns scares me. What are they loading up for, to fight the 2nd Civil War? And I want to know where guns are illegal and criminals have "free reign" over the citizens? Chicago is plagued with gun crime and has harsh laws - but it's criminals fighting criminals there. What is it with this paranoia about crime? Well those are your opinions, and you're entitled to them under the first amendment, just as we are entitled to arms as per the second. Again, states like AZ and Texas (with fewer restrictions) have less crime than those with heavy laws. And to the point about criminals fighting criminals, well sometimes a good person is in the wrong place at the wrong time.. and they should be able to defend themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Quanthor on Jan 17, 2013 22:38:53 GMT -5
Perhaps I'm wrong but isn't Arizona one of the most violent states in the nation? I'm pretty sure I read that they have more fatalities by guns than by auto accidents.
|
|
|
Post by BCizzle on Jan 18, 2013 0:53:01 GMT -5
All I say is LEAVE US ALONE we did not do anything wrong to deserve our protection and our hobby to be restricted or taken away. We do not want to be defenseless. We do not want criminals to have free reign on us because now we the honest law abiding innocent citizens can no longer defend ourselves and our family. Take appropriate action and remove the illegal firearms and criminals off the streets. Protect our children with armed guards and/or armed police in schools. JS After thinking over this some, I think I figured out where our difference of opinion lies. You feel safer with you having a weapon. I would feel safer with you NOT having a weapon. My brother has two guns now - but I don't feel like he is safer with two guns in his house - I feel like they increase the chance something goes wrong. He has a wife and three kids - I don't feel safer with him having two guns along with them. There doesn't seem to be an easy answer to this. I think basically I have a negative view of people and don't really feel good about the vast majority of them having weapons which make it easier to murder. I don't have a great deal of trust for cops, but ultimately I would feel safer with them being the armed defenders than random citizens. To me, guns escalate situations - others feel like they defuse situations. I think we need to approach this situation with compassion and reason and a little less paranoia.
|
|
|
Post by HR2X on Jan 18, 2013 1:02:21 GMT -5
All I say is LEAVE US ALONE we did not do anything wrong to deserve our protection and our hobby to be restricted or taken away. We do not want to be defenseless. We do not want criminals to have free reign on us because now we the honest law abiding innocent citizens can no longer defend ourselves and our family. Take appropriate action and remove the illegal firearms and criminals off the streets. Protect our children with armed guards and/or armed police in schools. JS After thinking over this some, I think I figured out where our difference of opinion lies. You feel safer with you having a weapon. I would feel safer with you NOT having a weapon. My brother has two guns now - but I don't feel like he is safer with two guns in his house - I feel like they increase the chance something goes wrong. He has a wife and three kids - I don't feel safer with him having two guns along with them. There doesn't seem to be an easy answer to this. I think basically I have a negative view of people and don't really feel good about the vast majority of them having weapons which make it easier to murder. I don't have a great deal of trust for cops, but ultimately I would feel safer with them being the armed defenders than random citizens. To me, guns escalate situations - others feel like they defuse situations. I think we need to approach this situation with compassion and reason and a little less paranoia. Funny you should mention cops, because one of the reasons that I feel safer knowing I can protect myself is because a.) cops cannot be everywhere and b.) SCOTUS actually ruled that Cops are not bound by duty to protect citizens.
|
|
Dat guy ova der
Main Eventer
WF 10 Year Member
Dah What?
Joined on: May 16, 2005 19:43:50 GMT -5
Posts: 3,085
|
Post by Dat guy ova der on Jan 18, 2013 1:52:56 GMT -5
All I say is LEAVE US ALONE we did not do anything wrong to deserve our protection and our hobby to be restricted or taken away. We do not want to be defenseless. We do not want criminals to have free reign on us because now we the honest law abiding innocent citizens can no longer defend ourselves and our family. Take appropriate action and remove the illegal firearms and criminals off the streets. Protect our children with armed guards and/or armed police in schools. JS I think we need to approach this situation with compassion and reason and a little less paranoia. I agree with your last statement there, however pro-gun and anti-gun people will read that statement differently. An anti-gun person will say that there's no real need for guns and that the gun owner shouldn't be so paranoid about imaginary attackers and evil governments. A pro-gun person will say that there's no reason to take away guns from them since they aren't doing anything wrong with them, and that someone who wants to take their gun away should be less paranoid about the majority of gun owners. Thinking that the gun owners want to go kill everyone/make their guns accessible to a would-be-killer.
|
|