Deleted
Joined on: Sept 27, 2024 11:18:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2015 21:21:11 GMT -5
It's honestly just americans that are the issue. Not guns or anything else. We're the issue.
|
|
|
Post by HR2X on Aug 30, 2015 21:45:09 GMT -5
I hate how immediately, in response to an incident like this, the idea is always "well we need more gun control" when that couldn't be further from the truth. The truth is, that a.) the media needs to stop glorifying these people and b.) the government needs to enforce the laws already on the books.
My favorite is when politicians (Hilary for instance) come out and say "we need universal background checks". Well what does that actually mean? Technically, we already have had universal background (NICS) checks since 1998 which are run by the FBI. (it was signed into law in 1993) Yes, people will tout the "gun show loophole" but think about it, every gun purchased legally in the last 17 years has gone through a NICS check. If people are selling those guns to people that shouldn't have them, well then they should be prosecuting the sellers. While I'm no detective, it's actually fairly easy to track down the buyer of a gun with the serial number, especially if you have a federal badge.
I saw somewhere in this thread that people automatically thought gun owners were irresponsible.. that couldn't be further from the truth. In my experience, I've found them to be some of the most responsible people out there.
Then again, what the hell do I know, I just work for a firearms manufacturer, have over 100 hours logged doing firearms training and work part time as a gunsmith.
|
|
|
Post by screech on Aug 30, 2015 22:34:09 GMT -5
It's honestly just americans that are the issue. Not guns or anything else. We're the issue. Americans are not the issue. The minority of evil Americans that commit violent acts are the issue, along with the underlying reasons that make them commit evil acts such as gang culture that perpetuates most of our gun violence. Americans as a whole are not collectively guilty for the actions of a minority few people. You say "we're the issue" as if you, yourself hold some personal guilt for gun violence. Hey, that's fine. You can feel as guilty as you want, but I'm sane and realize that I hold absolutely no responsibility for the actions of some maniac.
|
|
|
Post by 0,Y on Aug 31, 2015 0:45:41 GMT -5
Thanks for ignoring two thirds of my post.
Then explain to me why there are almost no massacres involving nail bombs, crockpots and other stuff in other democracies. You act like taking away the right to own guns would turn the USA into a dictatorship oppressing the people. And also this (for a lack of a better word) hatred towards the evil government: Are you this passionate when the NSA and government violate the personal rights of billions of people around the world every second? Do you use Google, Facebook, Apple products and so on? But God forbid somebody wants to take away guns in order to reduce the amount of innocent people dieing. Billions of rights getting violated and nobody gives a , taking away the right to bear arms in order to actually save lives and you and many others fear dictatorship. Hypocrisy at it's finest.
But as I've said before the core of the problem is unfixable at this point.
I ignore the first part of your post because you're trying to compare countries that have anywhere between 30-50 million people with a country that legit has 318 millions. Gun deaths are going to be higher there if nothing else just because of the number of people. More people die in car wrecks every single year then they do from gun violence. So should we do away with cars? And again, the United States isnt a democracy...Its a Republic. It even states it in our Pledge of Allegiance when we say "...and to the Republic, for which it stands, on Nation, Under God...." but I digress. You ask why people dont use crock pot bombs in France or Italy or Germany...its simple...No offense, but nobody cares about those countries. Different countries, religions and just evil people have outright jealousy, envy and hatred for the United States. The United States is THE super power in the world. Dont get me wrong, I sincerely hope it never happens but if some terrorist sets off a WMD in Costa Rica or Denmark both of which are democracies...the world in general would barely blink an eye. However you knock down 2 buildings with a couple planes in NYC the world stops. Its really hard to compare the United States to the rest of the world because we're not the rest of the world. You ask me if Im passionate about the NSA spying on people...Yes I am, but that's not part of this topic. On average there are 32,000 deaths from gun violence every year. 60% of them are from Suicide, that's roughly 19,200. Now most of us know that if a person is going to take their lives, they're going to take it. Its a sad reality but when you're in that position and nobody has or can help you. It happens. Why are left wingers not stomping their feet more on suicide prevention? So of that 32k we can remove 19200 because guns wont stop that. So you're looking at 12,800 deaths per year by gun violence. 3% of that is accidental deaths (cleaning it goes off, shoots in the leg bleed to death). Accidents happen its a sad fact. If you want to argue that "well we shouldnt have guns so those accidents dont happen" please go up to my first paragraph about cars. So 3% of your 12800 is roughly 400 more deaths per year. Which Im willing to bet if you listed accidental causes of death, it would be extremely low on your list. So that leaves 12,400 deaths by gun homicide. Now that we have the number narrowed down to actual gun violence. Of roughly (Im rounding numbers) 12,400 deaths per year...80% of them are by gangs. You know, criminals...people who steal guns. People who wont abide by the laws. People who if the Gov't told you to hand in your guns...WOULDN'T! So 80% of your 12400 deaths being gang related brings our number to 2480 deaths per year. Now, here is the best part. Nobody wants to talk gun control until there is a mass murder or someone is shot on tv or there is something to sensationalize it. Mass murder deaths account for less then 1% of gun violence. That leaves you with roughly 2450 people dying from random acts of gun violence. Now on average about 500 people per year are killed in justifiable homicide. Which is a cop killing a criminal or someone breaking into you house and, gasp, you shoot them to protect your family. That leaves around 2000 deaths per year which are just flat out evil people killing other people which is only about 6 people per day. But see, this is where the problem lies with gun violence arguments. People dont study and break down numbers. And yes my numbers wont be 100% accurate because I took from multiple websites which used data from different year and I rounded numbers so I didnt have 2467..but the fact is when something like 2 innocent lives are taken. Anti gun people throw the 32000 number out and start yelling "They're killing everyone with guns" when in reality, if you look at the numbers. Its much much less. Ive lost the link to the site, ill try to find it again but we are a much less violent country now they we where in the 80s & 90s and believe it or not..Even in the 40s...which blew me away. linklinklink
Wow. I'm actually shocked that this is really what you think. The United States of America not being a democracy is the funniest part. Then that patriotism of nobody caring about anybody else than the superpower USA lol. You seriously think that the world would keep on turning if a terrorist group dropped a nuclear bomb on a country like Denmark? You can't be serious but the sad part is that you are. This whole first paragraph really amazes me and basically you lost all your credibility right there for making these claims.
I'm not gonna discuss this topic anymore as I can't take you serious after that first paragraph. I know you will look at it like I'm retreating because I'm running out of arguments but this discussion is pointless at this point. No matter how many times you claim that the rate of gun violence is going down (where you're right) it doesn't change the fact that the US has the highest amount of deaths and homicides due to guns in comparison to any modern democracy (yes the US is a democracy) in the world. And I'll say it again even though or because you've ignored that part constantly: Taking away the right to bear arms now wouldn't do anything.
Criticism is allowed but a strong response should be expected when the criticism is filled with fallacies, deals with our (and not their) right to protect ourselves and ultimately is coming from someone that the issue concerns in absolutely no way outside of their compassion fueled by misinformation. The fact is that the gun violence rates have steadily been going down for years now. This fact can not be ignored regardless of how many mass shootings in gun-free zones are promoted endlessly by the media to give a false illusion. Mass shootings are still relatively rare and hardly attribute to gun violence numbers outside of the gang shootings that are categorized as such. The gun violence numbers are way too high either way but nobody can ignore that it's mostly criminals attacking criminals and it's not hoards of innocents being slaughtered like the false narrative suggests. Again ignoring the fact that most gun violence involves criminals shooting criminals and not innocent people, you suggest if there was never a Second Amendment then there wouldn't be a similar number of innocent people being killed. There is absolutely no proof to suggest that we would live in a much more peaceful society if guns were always illegal here. Drugs have been illegal here for a long time and do you know how freely they flow throughout the states while mostly coming from foreign sources? If there were no guns being manufactured here from the start, what proof is there that they wouldn't have made their way in from foreign sources when our war on drugs fails because of that very reason? Also with the way violence is promoted in our culture, who's to say that there wouldn't be as many innocent people violated and/or killed without guns in the picture anyways? I believe it would be even worse here without the Second Amendment. Guns would have made their way in easily through the black market like drugs do and into the hands of criminals. Without the counterbalance of armed citizens, criminals would then thrive and the only solution out of the chaos/to prevent chaos would be to rely solely on the government for protection. Most people enjoy that our freedoms grant us protection from government intrusion and reliance in many ways so it would have severely altered that aspect of the unique American lifestyle if there had been a reliance on government for protection from its inception. The reason there's a low probability for most legal gun owners getting attacked is because areas with high legal gun ownership statistically have very low crime rates. That correlation cannot be ignored. Criminals ignore areas where they know they could meet opposition and possibly their death. The facts show that more gun ownership (by law-abiding citizens) results in lower crime rates no matter how much you want to ignore a person's free will and ultimately place blame on the gun's existence instead. Anyone who does speak in ways that suggests they need to constantly keep an eye open is just someone that uses common sense. Those that are always truly fearful of an attack probably live in an area that has a higher crime rate or they watch the local news too much which loves to report on these things and scare people. Regardless of government measures like police departments and a justice system, crime obviously still occurs in high enough numbers that even foreigners want to give their opinions on how to reduce it here. I'm not trying to be condescending but clearly the police cannot (and shouldn't be expected to) save every single life that is placed in danger. There are quite a few people here that live in rural areas where it would take police a long time to respond to a call. For the majority of rural areas, the citizens solve this problem themselves by having a high gun ownership rate thus preventing criminal activity and a reliance on slow police response. Outside of police protection, laws and the judicial system certainly can't help a dead person either even if they bring justice to their killer. Regardless of what area you live in, it's simply being smart to be cautious about reality. It's pointless to even question someone's reasoning for owning a firearm if they claim it's for protection when that is the main reason our right to own a gun is granted to us in the first place. Billions of rights getting violated and nobody gives a , taking away the right to bear arms in order to actually save lives and you and many others fear dictatorship. Hypocrisy at it's finest. I disagree with your statement when most pro-gun people understand that our Second Amendment was put in place to protect all of our other rights from being taken away. Secondly, I'm not exactly sure what you're referring to when you claim there are "billions of rights getting violated and nobody gives a ****". You keep referencing the NSA so I'll assume you mean that. I would agree that not enough care about that issue (like most issues) but it's been a national debate topic for quite a while now and is hardly something that "nobody gives a ****" about. "Taking away the right to bear arms in order to actually save lives" is making a false suggestion that a total gun confiscation would result in fewer deaths in the US. Why will nobody address the issue of criminals not turning in their guns if they did abolish the Second Amendment as you suggest? Please tell us how this full gun grab would be achieved when the people who commit the gun crimes don't turn their guns in at the local police station like the law-abiding citizens who never commit crimes. Is the solution that police be allowed to enter every single home to do a full search in hopes of picking up every last gun? If you think that's the right idea, it proves everyone who is pro-gun correct in their assumption that the Second Amendment holds up other rights because the direct action of unlawfully searching private property to enact this confiscation plan would directly violent everyone's Fourth Amendment rights in the process. (Protection from unlawful searches and seizures.) You seem to realize there is absolutely no way that there could be a full gun confiscation that picked up every last gun but still are suggesting that it would result in less gun deaths if implemented. (Which again gun violence has statistically declined for years anyways.) The reason your assumption is completely wrong is because people who follow laws would obey the new law and turn in their guns (a few would resist) while criminals would disobey the law (as always) and keep theirs. The ratio of criminals owning guns to law-abiding citizens owning guns would be radical considering how many guns already exist and are in the hands of criminals plus how many good people would turn their guns in fear of government reprisal. When that ratio is so radical, common sense suggests that criminals would thrive in that environment and crime of all types would rise. Comparing the US with other countries in terms of guns is pointless given the circumstances. I have to say Nivro™ 's post pretty much explained it perfectly (as have all of his posts) but I would also add our border with Mexico as another reason why the comparisons are pointless. Here in the US we have very strict policies on drugs yet Mexican drug cartels thrive with importing illegal drugs into the US black market. Anyone who believes that enacting a gun ban and confiscation (you did write "take away the right to bare arms in order to actually save lives") wouldn't result in a huge black market fueled by Mexican drug cartels and ultimately increase crime rates is highly mistaken.
Well at least your post isn't full of 'MURICA F*CK YEAH'. Even if it was criminals killing other criminals, that still doesn't make it right. Yes gun violence rates are going down and yet the rate is incredibly high (no matter if it's criminals shooting criminals or innocent people). If guns were illegal in the US from the start I assume the same thing that happened in many other countries like France, UK, Germany, Japan and so on would have happened. It seems logical that crime rates in those certain areas are lower but as I've said before the need to protect yourself with a gun comes from the fact that the Second Amendment makes crimes involving guns a lot more likely than if guns were illegal. And owning a gun is not the only way of being cautious. I would consider myself cautious for example as I lock my door whenever I leave the house or even when I'm at home. Don't need a gun to be cautious.
The point I was trying to make when referencing the NSA disaster is that many pro-gun people act like restricting access to certain types of firearm would be the start of a dictatorship as it violates constitutional rights but when constitutional rights are violated on a daily basis nothing happens. It's a national debate and yet nothing has and probably nothing will change soon.
I've stated numerous times that I'm not in favor of total confiscation as it won't do anything so I don't know why we even talk about this. I said that a ban of guns from the beginning which means back in the day when the Constitution was written and put in place would lead to a number of deaths as high as in any other modern democracy where guns are not legal to own. I'm not talking about a gun-ban today. That ship has sailed and the problems would still remain if you took away guns now (as I've said like 25 times by now). The quote you bolded was actually focused on the dictatorship and hypocrisy part but I realize that it might come off like I think taking away guns now would result in less deaths. Constitutional rights getting violated in form of the NSA spying on everybody and everything for no apparent reason ... not a big deal. Somebody suggesting to take away guns ... huge s#itstorm on how that would be the beginning of dictatorship.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 27, 2024 11:18:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2015 6:25:58 GMT -5
It's honestly just americans that are the issue. Not guns or anything else. We're the issue. Americans are not the issue. The minority of evil Americans that commit violent acts are the issue, along with the underlying reasons that make them commit evil acts such as gang culture that perpetuates most of our gun violence. Americans as a whole are not collectively guilty for the actions of a minority few people. You say "we're the issue" as if you, yourself hold some personal guilt for gun violence. Hey, that's fine. You can feel as guilty as you want, but I'm sane and realize that I hold absolutely no responsibility for the actions of some maniac. We're the issue because we glorify this type of violence. Whether it's through the media or in other ways, these criminals go down in history. And we can blame our selves for letting this gun control issue go on for way to long. Defenders of it could sit there and try to rattle off fake statistics and that they feel protected by a piece of steel. but in reality, we have the worst gun violence stats in the world, that is not religously driven. And it's a shame that it will never change. Republicans have gun owners fearing "the man" will kick down their door and take their hunting rifels. While other people are thinking they're going to be heroes and get an open carry permit. It's an issue that all of us as americans, need to step back and realize that it has to be fixed.
|
|
|
Post by Nivro™ on Aug 31, 2015 10:53:53 GMT -5
I ignore the first part of your post because you're trying to compare countries that have anywhere between 30-50 million people with a country that legit has 318 millions. Gun deaths are going to be higher there if nothing else just because of the number of people. More people die in car wrecks every single year then they do from gun violence. So should we do away with cars? And again, the United States isnt a democracy...Its a Republic. It even states it in our Pledge of Allegiance when we say "...and to the Republic, for which it stands, on Nation, Under God...." but I digress. You ask why people dont use crock pot bombs in France or Italy or Germany...its simple...No offense, but nobody cares about those countries. Different countries, religions and just evil people have outright jealousy, envy and hatred for the United States. The United States is THE super power in the world. Dont get me wrong, I sincerely hope it never happens but if some terrorist sets off a WMD in Costa Rica or Denmark both of which are democracies...the world in general would barely blink an eye. However you knock down 2 buildings with a couple planes in NYC the world stops. Its really hard to compare the United States to the rest of the world because we're not the rest of the world. You ask me if Im passionate about the NSA spying on people...Yes I am, but that's not part of this topic. On average there are 32,000 deaths from gun violence every year. 60% of them are from Suicide, that's roughly 19,200. Now most of us know that if a person is going to take their lives, they're going to take it. Its a sad reality but when you're in that position and nobody has or can help you. It happens. Why are left wingers not stomping their feet more on suicide prevention? So of that 32k we can remove 19200 because guns wont stop that. So you're looking at 12,800 deaths per year by gun violence. 3% of that is accidental deaths (cleaning it goes off, shoots in the leg bleed to death). Accidents happen its a sad fact. If you want to argue that "well we shouldnt have guns so those accidents dont happen" please go up to my first paragraph about cars. So 3% of your 12800 is roughly 400 more deaths per year. Which Im willing to bet if you listed accidental causes of death, it would be extremely low on your list. So that leaves 12,400 deaths by gun homicide. Now that we have the number narrowed down to actual gun violence. Of roughly (Im rounding numbers) 12,400 deaths per year...80% of them are by gangs. You know, criminals...people who steal guns. People who wont abide by the laws. People who if the Gov't told you to hand in your guns...WOULDN'T! So 80% of your 12400 deaths being gang related brings our number to 2480 deaths per year. Now, here is the best part. Nobody wants to talk gun control until there is a mass murder or someone is shot on tv or there is something to sensationalize it. Mass murder deaths account for less then 1% of gun violence. That leaves you with roughly 2450 people dying from random acts of gun violence. Now on average about 500 people per year are killed in justifiable homicide. Which is a cop killing a criminal or someone breaking into you house and, gasp, you shoot them to protect your family. That leaves around 2000 deaths per year which are just flat out evil people killing other people which is only about 6 people per day. But see, this is where the problem lies with gun violence arguments. People dont study and break down numbers. And yes my numbers wont be 100% accurate because I took from multiple websites which used data from different year and I rounded numbers so I didnt have 2467..but the fact is when something like 2 innocent lives are taken. Anti gun people throw the 32000 number out and start yelling "They're killing everyone with guns" when in reality, if you look at the numbers. Its much much less. Ive lost the link to the site, ill try to find it again but we are a much less violent country now they we where in the 80s & 90s and believe it or not..Even in the 40s...which blew me away. linklinklink
Wow. I'm actually shocked that this is really what you think. The United States of America not being a democracy is the funniest part. Then that patriotism of nobody caring about anybody else than the superpower USA lol. You seriously think that the world would keep on turning if a terrorist group dropped a nuclear bomb on a country like Denmark? You can't be serious but the sad part is that you are. This whole first paragraph really amazes me and basically you lost all your credibility right there for making these claims.
I'm not gonna discuss this topic anymore as I can't take you serious after that first paragraph. I know you will look at it like I'm retreating because I'm running out of arguments but this discussion is pointless at this point. No matter how many times you claim that the rate of gun violence is going down (where you're right) it doesn't change the fact that the US has the highest amount of deaths and homicides due to guns in comparison to any modern democracy (yes the US is a democracy) in the world. And I'll say it again even though or because you've ignored that part constantly: Taking away the right to bear arms now wouldn't do anything.
Criticism is allowed but a strong response should be expected when the criticism is filled with fallacies, deals with our (and not their) right to protect ourselves and ultimately is coming from someone that the issue concerns in absolutely no way outside of their compassion fueled by misinformation. The fact is that the gun violence rates have steadily been going down for years now. This fact can not be ignored regardless of how many mass shootings in gun-free zones are promoted endlessly by the media to give a false illusion. Mass shootings are still relatively rare and hardly attribute to gun violence numbers outside of the gang shootings that are categorized as such. The gun violence numbers are way too high either way but nobody can ignore that it's mostly criminals attacking criminals and it's not hoards of innocents being slaughtered like the false narrative suggests. Again ignoring the fact that most gun violence involves criminals shooting criminals and not innocent people, you suggest if there was never a Second Amendment then there wouldn't be a similar number of innocent people being killed. There is absolutely no proof to suggest that we would live in a much more peaceful society if guns were always illegal here. Drugs have been illegal here for a long time and do you know how freely they flow throughout the states while mostly coming from foreign sources? If there were no guns being manufactured here from the start, what proof is there that they wouldn't have made their way in from foreign sources when our war on drugs fails because of that very reason? Also with the way violence is promoted in our culture, who's to say that there wouldn't be as many innocent people violated and/or killed without guns in the picture anyways? I believe it would be even worse here without the Second Amendment. Guns would have made their way in easily through the black market like drugs do and into the hands of criminals. Without the counterbalance of armed citizens, criminals would then thrive and the only solution out of the chaos/to prevent chaos would be to rely solely on the government for protection. Most people enjoy that our freedoms grant us protection from government intrusion and reliance in many ways so it would have severely altered that aspect of the unique American lifestyle if there had been a reliance on government for protection from its inception. The reason there's a low probability for most legal gun owners getting attacked is because areas with high legal gun ownership statistically have very low crime rates. That correlation cannot be ignored. Criminals ignore areas where they know they could meet opposition and possibly their death. The facts show that more gun ownership (by law-abiding citizens) results in lower crime rates no matter how much you want to ignore a person's free will and ultimately place blame on the gun's existence instead. Anyone who does speak in ways that suggests they need to constantly keep an eye open is just someone that uses common sense. Those that are always truly fearful of an attack probably live in an area that has a higher crime rate or they watch the local news too much which loves to report on these things and scare people. Regardless of government measures like police departments and a justice system, crime obviously still occurs in high enough numbers that even foreigners want to give their opinions on how to reduce it here. I'm not trying to be condescending but clearly the police cannot (and shouldn't be expected to) save every single life that is placed in danger. There are quite a few people here that live in rural areas where it would take police a long time to respond to a call. For the majority of rural areas, the citizens solve this problem themselves by having a high gun ownership rate thus preventing criminal activity and a reliance on slow police response. Outside of police protection, laws and the judicial system certainly can't help a dead person either even if they bring justice to their killer. Regardless of what area you live in, it's simply being smart to be cautious about reality. It's pointless to even question someone's reasoning for owning a firearm if they claim it's for protection when that is the main reason our right to own a gun is granted to us in the first place. I disagree with your statement when most pro-gun people understand that our Second Amendment was put in place to protect all of our other rights from being taken away. Secondly, I'm not exactly sure what you're referring to when you claim there are "billions of rights getting violated and nobody gives a ****". You keep referencing the NSA so I'll assume you mean that. I would agree that not enough care about that issue (like most issues) but it's been a national debate topic for quite a while now and is hardly something that "nobody gives a ****" about. "Taking away the right to bear arms in order to actually save lives" is making a false suggestion that a total gun confiscation would result in fewer deaths in the US. Why will nobody address the issue of criminals not turning in their guns if they did abolish the Second Amendment as you suggest? Please tell us how this full gun grab would be achieved when the people who commit the gun crimes don't turn their guns in at the local police station like the law-abiding citizens who never commit crimes. Is the solution that police be allowed to enter every single home to do a full search in hopes of picking up every last gun? If you think that's the right idea, it proves everyone who is pro-gun correct in their assumption that the Second Amendment holds up other rights because the direct action of unlawfully searching private property to enact this confiscation plan would directly violent everyone's Fourth Amendment rights in the process. (Protection from unlawful searches and seizures.) You seem to realize there is absolutely no way that there could be a full gun confiscation that picked up every last gun but still are suggesting that it would result in less gun deaths if implemented. (Which again gun violence has statistically declined for years anyways.) The reason your assumption is completely wrong is because people who follow laws would obey the new law and turn in their guns (a few would resist) while criminals would disobey the law (as always) and keep theirs. The ratio of criminals owning guns to law-abiding citizens owning guns would be radical considering how many guns already exist and are in the hands of criminals plus how many good people would turn their guns in fear of government reprisal. When that ratio is so radical, common sense suggests that criminals would thrive in that environment and crime of all types would rise. Comparing the US with other countries in terms of guns is pointless given the circumstances. I have to say Nivro™ 's post pretty much explained it perfectly (as have all of his posts) but I would also add our border with Mexico as another reason why the comparisons are pointless. Here in the US we have very strict policies on drugs yet Mexican drug cartels thrive with importing illegal drugs into the US black market. Anyone who believes that enacting a gun ban and confiscation (you did write "take away the right to bare arms in order to actually save lives") wouldn't result in a huge black market fueled by Mexican drug cartels and ultimately increase crime rates is highly mistaken.
Well at least your post isn't full of 'MURICA F*CK YEAH'. Even if it was criminals killing other criminals, that still doesn't make it right. Yes gun violence rates are going down and yet the rate is incredibly high (no matter if it's criminals shooting criminals or innocent people). If guns were illegal in the US from the start I assume the same thing that happened in many other countries like France, UK, Germany, Japan and so on would have happened. It seems logical that crime rates in those certain areas are lower but as I've said before the need to protect yourself with a gun comes from the fact that the Second Amendment makes crimes involving guns a lot more likely than if guns were illegal. And owning a gun is not the only way of being cautious. I would consider myself cautious for example as I lock my door whenever I leave the house or even when I'm at home. Don't need a gun to be cautious.
The point I was trying to make when referencing the NSA disaster is that many pro-gun people act like restricting access to certain types of firearm would be the start of a dictatorship as it violates constitutional rights but when constitutional rights are violated on a daily basis nothing happens. It's a national debate and yet nothing has and probably nothing will change soon.
I've stated numerous times that I'm not in favor of total confiscation as it won't do anything so I don't know why we even talk about this. I said that a ban of guns from the beginning which means back in the day when the Constitution was written and put in place would lead to a number of deaths as high as in any other modern democracy where guns are not legal to own. I'm not talking about a gun-ban today. That ship has sailed and the problems would still remain if you took away guns now (as I've said like 25 times by now). The quote you bolded was actually focused on the dictatorship and hypocrisy part but I realize that it might come off like I think taking away guns now would result in less deaths. Constitutional rights getting violated in form of the NSA spying on everybody and everything for no apparent reason ... not a big deal. Somebody suggesting to take away guns ... huge s#itstorm on how that would be the beginning of dictatorship.
Well you're wrong on pretty much every level...but bye.
|
|
|
Post by screech on Aug 31, 2015 16:34:00 GMT -5
Americans are not the issue. The minority of evil Americans that commit violent acts are the issue, along with the underlying reasons that make them commit evil acts such as gang culture that perpetuates most of our gun violence. Americans as a whole are not collectively guilty for the actions of a minority few people. You say "we're the issue" as if you, yourself hold some personal guilt for gun violence. Hey, that's fine. You can feel as guilty as you want, but I'm sane and realize that I hold absolutely no responsibility for the actions of some maniac. We're the issue because we glorify this type of violence. Whether it's through the media or in other ways, these criminals go down in history. And we can blame our selves for letting this gun control issue go on for way to long. Defenders of it could sit there and try to rattle off fake statistics and that they feel protected by a piece of steel. but in reality, we have the worst gun violence stats in the world, that is not religously driven. And it's a shame that it will never change. Republicans have gun owners fearing "the man" will kick down their door and take their hunting rifels. While other people are thinking they're going to be heroes and get an open carry permit. It's an issue that all of us as americans, need to step back and realize that it has to be fixed. Again, we? I don't glorify violence. Some twisted people do. The media surely does promote it in a lot of ways in their relentless press of small minority evil people that commit these evil acts. Certain movies, tv shows and music promote violence in ways but people who enjoy those types of violent media choose to consume it and the majority of those consumers have common sense to distinguish between reality and entertainment. So these types of things could possibly be underlying issues that provoke the tiny minority of evil doers, but the only people that are actually responsible for gun violence are the actual people who commit the acts and not any type of movie or perceived inspiration from the relentless press coverage of a different whacko's crimes. But once again, we are all not collectively guilty for the actions of a small minority of people's illegal actions. You can blame yourself if you want, but I won't because I know that's insane. Gang culture seems to drive the majority of the gun violence and I know for a fact that I am not in any way, shape or form responsible for that (or anyone's singular choice to commit a crime for that matter) but perhaps you are since you feel so guilty about somehow allowing it to continue. Gangs are going to continue to thrive and gang culture will just continue to spread as our population grows unless there is a cultural shift in those communities. Maybe if someone had productive ideas that would fix the economy and create tons of prosperous jobs, then we could see a cultural shift that further continues the decline of gun violence, but in a much bigger way. Is the fact that gun violence has statistically decreased one of those "fake statistics" you claim are being rattled off? You are correct that it will never change because nobody offers any productive ideas that would actually create a change. New gun control legislation isn't going to prevent anyone who disobeys laws from further disobeying the law. Like I already mentioned, our horrible economy needs to be fixed and cultural rebuilding tackling gang culture could be extremely beneficial. While some republican figureheads may have some people fooled into believing the government is after their most basic hunting rifles, I could easily counter that statement by suggesting a lot of democratic figureheads have their constituents fooled into believing gun violence is more active than ever in history. From my perspective as an independent, there are way more dems fooled into believing gun violence is at an all time high than there are republicans that 100% truly believe the government is stirring up a full gun confiscation scheme and hostile takeover. A lot of these people believe there is a possibility of some sort of gun bun / confiscation because it's been suggested by multiple legislators in regards to "assault weapon" bans. Most common sense people don't believe the government wants to take away every single gun including basic hunting rifles, but when senators like Diane Feinstein make comments that suggest she would love to see it happen if it were ever possible, then it's not far off for people to think that other democratic legislatures would follow suit if the opportunity ever would arise. You act like anyone who doesn't support new gun control measures denies that there's a gun violence issue at all and needs a wake up call. Everyone knows and realizes that. Nobody debates that the numbers are still too high. They debate the solution to the problem and realize that criminals won't obey new any laws.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 27, 2024 11:18:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2015 16:40:01 GMT -5
We're the issue because we glorify this type of violence. Whether it's through the media or in other ways, these criminals go down in history. And we can blame our selves for letting this gun control issue go on for way to long. Defenders of it could sit there and try to rattle off fake statistics and that they feel protected by a piece of steel. but in reality, we have the worst gun violence stats in the world, that is not religously driven. And it's a shame that it will never change. Republicans have gun owners fearing "the man" will kick down their door and take their hunting rifels. While other people are thinking they're going to be heroes and get an open carry permit. It's an issue that all of us as americans, need to step back and realize that it has to be fixed. Again, we? I don't glorify violence. Some twisted people do. The media surely does promote it in a lot of ways in their relentless press of small minority evil people that commit these evil acts. Certain movies, tv shows and music promote violence in ways but people who enjoy those types of violent media choose to consume it and the majority of those consumers have common sense to distinguish between reality and entertainment. So these types of things could possibly be underlying issues that provoke the tiny minority of evil doers, but the only people that are actually responsible for gun violence are the actual people who commit the acts and not any type of movie or perceived inspiration from the relentless press coverage of a different whacko's crimes. But once again, we are all not collectively guilty for the actions of a small minority of people's illegal actions. You can blame yourself if you want, but I won't because I know that's insane. Gang culture seems to drive the majority of the gun violence and I know for a fact that I am not in any way, shape or form responsible for that (or anyone's singular choice to commit a crime for that matter) but perhaps you are since you feel so guilty about somehow allowing it to continue. Gangs are going to continue to thrive and gang culture will just continue to spread as our population grows unless there is a cultural shift in those communities. Maybe if someone had productive ideas that would fix the economy and create tons of prosperous jobs, then we could see a cultural shift that further continues the decline of gun violence, but in a much bigger way. Is the fact that gun violence has statistically decreased one of those "fake statistics" you claim are being rattled off? You are correct that it will never change because nobody offers any productive ideas that would actually create a change. New gun control legislation isn't going to prevent anyone who disobeys laws from further disobeying the law. Like I already mentioned, our horrible economy needs to be fixed and cultural rebuilding tackling gang culture could be extremely beneficial. While some republican figureheads may have some people fooled into believing the government is after their most basic hunting rifles, I could easily counter that statement by suggesting almost a lot of democratic figureheads have their constituents fooled into believing gun violence is more active than ever in history. From my perspective as an independent, there are way more dems fooled into believing gun violence is at an all time high than there are republicans that 100% truly believe the government is stirring up a full gun confiscation scheme and hostile takeover. A lot of these people believe there is a possibility of some sort of gun bun / confiscation because it's been suggested by multiple legislators in regards to "assault weapon" bans. Most common sense people don't believe the government wants to take away every single gun including basic hunting rifles, but when senators like Diane Feinstein make comments that suggest she would love to see it happen if it were ever possible, then it's not far off for people to think that other democratic legislatures would follow suit if the opportunity ever would arise. You act like anyone who doesn't support new gun control measures denies that there's a gun violence issue at all and needs a wake up call. Everyone knows and realizes that. Nobody debates that the numbers are still too high. They debate the solution to the problem and realize that criminals won't obey new any laws. I'm not writing a lengthy response, because it's useless. So since "criminals won't obey new laws" it's pointless to create stronger laws? I don't know why it still surprises me how many people on here are soo right wing.
|
|
|
Post by screech on Aug 31, 2015 16:52:02 GMT -5
Again, we? I don't glorify violence. Some twisted people do. The media surely does promote it in a lot of ways in their relentless press of small minority evil people that commit these evil acts. Certain movies, tv shows and music promote violence in ways but people who enjoy those types of violent media choose to consume it and the majority of those consumers have common sense to distinguish between reality and entertainment. So these types of things could possibly be underlying issues that provoke the tiny minority of evil doers, but the only people that are actually responsible for gun violence are the actual people who commit the acts and not any type of movie or perceived inspiration from the relentless press coverage of a different whacko's crimes. But once again, we are all not collectively guilty for the actions of a small minority of people's illegal actions. You can blame yourself if you want, but I won't because I know that's insane. Gang culture seems to drive the majority of the gun violence and I know for a fact that I am not in any way, shape or form responsible for that (or anyone's singular choice to commit a crime for that matter) but perhaps you are since you feel so guilty about somehow allowing it to continue. Gangs are going to continue to thrive and gang culture will just continue to spread as our population grows unless there is a cultural shift in those communities. Maybe if someone had productive ideas that would fix the economy and create tons of prosperous jobs, then we could see a cultural shift that further continues the decline of gun violence, but in a much bigger way. Is the fact that gun violence has statistically decreased one of those "fake statistics" you claim are being rattled off? You are correct that it will never change because nobody offers any productive ideas that would actually create a change. New gun control legislation isn't going to prevent anyone who disobeys laws from further disobeying the law. Like I already mentioned, our horrible economy needs to be fixed and cultural rebuilding tackling gang culture could be extremely beneficial. While some republican figureheads may have some people fooled into believing the government is after their most basic hunting rifles, I could easily counter that statement by suggesting almost a lot of democratic figureheads have their constituents fooled into believing gun violence is more active than ever in history. From my perspective as an independent, there are way more dems fooled into believing gun violence is at an all time high than there are republicans that 100% truly believe the government is stirring up a full gun confiscation scheme and hostile takeover. A lot of these people believe there is a possibility of some sort of gun bun / confiscation because it's been suggested by multiple legislators in regards to "assault weapon" bans. Most common sense people don't believe the government wants to take away every single gun including basic hunting rifles, but when senators like Diane Feinstein make comments that suggest she would love to see it happen if it were ever possible, then it's not far off for people to think that other democratic legislatures would follow suit if the opportunity ever would arise. You act like anyone who doesn't support new gun control measures denies that there's a gun violence issue at all and needs a wake up call. Everyone knows and realizes that. Nobody debates that the numbers are still too high. They debate the solution to the problem and realize that criminals won't obey new any laws. I'm not writing a lengthy response, because it's useless. So since "criminals won't obey new laws" it's pointless to create stronger laws? I don't know why it still surprises me how many people on here are soo right wing. Did you even read my reply? I'm an independent. I back up my reasoning for being pro-gun using logic and facts and not some "right wing" bias. I have yet to hear a suggestion for a stronger law that even remotely sounds like a good idea. theMOESIAH 's idea for a completely voluntary gun buyback program is the only thing I've read that would possibly help but only when mixed with cultural rebuilding in gang influenced areas. New gun control measures are promoted in the wake of "mass shooting" events that wouldn't have even been prevented by the gun control measures that are suggested in response to them. What type of stronger law needs to be implemented in your opinion? What specific laws would you implement that would have prevented the shootings like the one at Sandy Hook and in Charleston that are used as backdrops for these new gun control measures?
|
|
futureisrollins
Mid-Carder
Joined on: Dec 29, 2014 23:02:17 GMT -5
Posts: 239
|
Post by futureisrollins on Aug 31, 2015 17:01:05 GMT -5
Wow. I'm actually shocked that this is really what you think. The United States of America not being a democracy is the funniest part. Then that patriotism of nobody caring about anybody else than the superpower USA lol. You seriously think that the world would keep on turning if a terrorist group dropped a nuclear bomb on a country like Denmark? You can't be serious but the sad part is that you are. This whole first paragraph really amazes me and basically you lost all your credibility right there for making these claims.
I'm not gonna discuss this topic anymore as I can't take you serious after that first paragraph. I know you will look at it like I'm retreating because I'm running out of arguments but this discussion is pointless at this point. No matter how many times you claim that the rate of gun violence is going down (where you're right) it doesn't change the fact that the US has the highest amount of deaths and homicides due to guns in comparison to any modern democracy (yes the US is a democracy) in the world. And I'll say it again even though or because you've ignored that part constantly: Taking away the right to bear arms now wouldn't do anything.
Well at least your post isn't full of 'MURICA F*CK YEAH'. Even if it was criminals killing other criminals, that still doesn't make it right. Yes gun violence rates are going down and yet the rate is incredibly high (no matter if it's criminals shooting criminals or innocent people). If guns were illegal in the US from the start I assume the same thing that happened in many other countries like France, UK, Germany, Japan and so on would have happened. It seems logical that crime rates in those certain areas are lower but as I've said before the need to protect yourself with a gun comes from the fact that the Second Amendment makes crimes involving guns a lot more likely than if guns were illegal. And owning a gun is not the only way of being cautious. I would consider myself cautious for example as I lock my door whenever I leave the house or even when I'm at home. Don't need a gun to be cautious.
The point I was trying to make when referencing the NSA disaster is that many pro-gun people act like restricting access to certain types of firearm would be the start of a dictatorship as it violates constitutional rights but when constitutional rights are violated on a daily basis nothing happens. It's a national debate and yet nothing has and probably nothing will change soon.
I've stated numerous times that I'm not in favor of total confiscation as it won't do anything so I don't know why we even talk about this. I said that a ban of guns from the beginning which means back in the day when the Constitution was written and put in place would lead to a number of deaths as high as in any other modern democracy where guns are not legal to own. I'm not talking about a gun-ban today. That ship has sailed and the problems would still remain if you took away guns now (as I've said like 25 times by now). The quote you bolded was actually focused on the dictatorship and hypocrisy part but I realize that it might come off like I think taking away guns now would result in less deaths. Constitutional rights getting violated in form of the NSA spying on everybody and everything for no apparent reason ... not a big deal. Somebody suggesting to take away guns ... huge s#itstorm on how that would be the beginning of dictatorship.
Well you're wrong on pretty much every level...but bye. He's not. For one, your first paragraph that he's talking about is complete blasphemy. The fact that you think the USA is not a democracy, and that the bombing of Denmark for example would be scoffed at, or even that the USA is a total superpower still is just unbelievable. People are so quick to defend the 2nd amendment and the constitution but forget that it was written over 200 years ago. The right to arms stems from the aspect of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution that states if the government is unjust, the people have the right to usurp it. And don't forget, this was a time when food needed to be hunted. Both of those things are of no concern and it is outdated. People think the 2nd amendment was written for them to have entertainment but it wasn't and it surely wasn't written during a time with the concerns we have now. It is a different time, the Constitution is not gospel and should not be above revision as times change. I'm not saying they should be totally banned, I know it wouldn't work anyway. But anyone who thinks that more things can't be done to regulate them better, is lying to themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Nivro™ on Aug 31, 2015 17:25:29 GMT -5
Well you're wrong on pretty much every level...but bye. He's not. For one, your first paragraph that he's talking about is complete blasphemy. The fact that you think the USA is not a democracy, and that the bombing of Denmark for example would be scoffed at, or even that the USA is a total superpower still is just unbelievable. People are so quick to defend the 2nd amendment and the constitution but forget that it was written over 200 years ago. The right to arms stems from the aspect of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution that states if the government is unjust, the people have the right to usurp it. And don't forget, this was a time when food needed to be hunted. Both of those things are of no concern and it is outdated. People think the 2nd amendment was written for them to have entertainment but it wasn't and it surely wasn't written during a time with the concerns we have now. It is a different time, the Constitution is not gospel and should not be above revision as times change. I'm not saying they should be totally banned, I know it wouldn't work anyway. But anyone who thinks that more things can't be done to regulate them better, is lying to themselves. US is a Republic. Sorry to hit you with more facts. Like I said there is a thin line between a Democracy & a Republic but it IS a Republic. I guess people should educate themselves more on the difference of both. Simply put, until we dont have a Congress & Senate and Joe Chill is making up the laws...We're a Republic. www.thisnation.com/question/011.htmlAnd yes, the United States IS a super power if it wasn't people wouldnt be so concerned with everything we do. Gun control is a domestic issue for Americans that will be dealt with by Americans. If foreigners dont care about us so much, why do they feel the need to give their opinions. We've never asked for it before. And I never said that a bombing of Denmark or any other Democratic country would simply be "scoffed" at. It would be a story on the news for about a week maybe 2 and then people would move on. Prime example? London Bombings & Madrid Bombings. Im willing to bet that unless you're from England or Spain, your average person couldnt even tell you the year in which those happen little less the day/month or a death total...or who was responsible.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 27, 2024 11:18:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2015 18:03:22 GMT -5
Guns aren't dangerous. People are.
|
|
|
Post by Nivro™ on Aug 31, 2015 19:20:13 GMT -5
How ironic that a crazy guy with a knife went to the WWE Performance Center to cause harm to someone/something only to be stopped by a man with a gun. Crazy how that works huh?
|
|
|
Post by 0,Y on Sept 1, 2015 3:12:25 GMT -5
He's not. For one, your first paragraph that he's talking about is complete blasphemy. The fact that you think the USA is not a democracy, and that the bombing of Denmark for example would be scoffed at, or even that the USA is a total superpower still is just unbelievable. People are so quick to defend the 2nd amendment and the constitution but forget that it was written over 200 years ago. The right to arms stems from the aspect of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution that states if the government is unjust, the people have the right to usurp it. And don't forget, this was a time when food needed to be hunted. Both of those things are of no concern and it is outdated. People think the 2nd amendment was written for them to have entertainment but it wasn't and it surely wasn't written during a time with the concerns we have now. It is a different time, the Constitution is not gospel and should not be above revision as times change. I'm not saying they should be totally banned, I know it wouldn't work anyway. But anyone who thinks that more things can't be done to regulate them better, is lying to themselves. US is a Republic. Sorry to hit you with more facts. Like I said there is a thin line between a Democracy & a Republic but it IS a Republic. I guess people should educate themselves more on the difference of both. Simply put, until we dont have a Congress & Senate and Joe Chill is making up the laws...We're a Republic.
Sorry to jump in again but that is just plain wrong. Yes the USA are a (Federal) Republic which is one form of democracy. There are many forms of democracy and a Federal Republic like the US is one just like the UK with it's parliamentary constitutional monarchy is a democracy. Stating otherwise just shows that you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. What you and that link you posted mean is direct democracy (another form of democracy) which is partly used for example in Switzerland.
Even though all 3 countries I mentioned use different forms of political systems all 3 are democracies and stating otherwise is wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 27, 2024 11:18:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2015 3:14:34 GMT -5
This is all true. Very true. Too many people drinking the koolaid instead of looking for facts. I have a black colleague that I consider a friend who regularly posts online about the "hate crimes" and shootings. I showed him less than a handful of crimes not involving guns or a crazy guy that wasn't white and he completely changed his views. As for guns, if there's a will, there's a way. If a human being is crazy enough to desire killing people, not having a gun isn't going to stop them. They'll just drive a mac truck through a church on Sunday morning or bomb a building full of people. This country has a people problem. Not guns, not racism, PEOPLE. This trend will only get worse if parents don't start raising their damn kids right, too. Peanut butter or chocolate chip? Chocolate chip! And I agree, the world isnt evil...there are just evil people in the world. Banning guns just isnt going to stop that. My dad posted this (below) on his facebook. While I dont necessarily agree everyone needs religion, everyone needs to be taught morals and right from wrong now days. And this is 100% accurate. banning guns wont stop people from killing other people. Homie, bringing religion in is opening a whole new can of worms. For example, God killed far more people than Satan in the bible. Evil exists regardless of religious beliefs, and sometimes because of them. The Crusades just to name one.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Sept 27, 2024 11:18:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2015 7:26:27 GMT -5
Chocolate chip! And I agree, the world isnt evil...there are just evil people in the world. Banning guns just isnt going to stop that. My dad posted this (below) on his facebook. While I dont necessarily agree everyone needs religion, everyone needs to be taught morals and right from wrong now days. And this is 100% accurate. banning guns wont stop people from killing other people. Homie, bringing religion in is opening a whole new can of worms. For example, God killed far more people than Satan in the bible. Evil exists regardless of religious beliefs, and sometimes because of them. The Crusades just to name one. You are conflating God with religion. God and religion are 2 separate things. Religion is a man-made construct. It is given to the same imperfections as any other man made construct. You are also mistaken about the Crusades. It wasn't a religious war. It was a war fought over finite resources. The Muslims used their religion as a justification for their expansionist policies. They invaded fertile lands and took them over. Once the Christians realized they no longer could get access to those lands they used religion as a justification to re-take them. They claimed they were going to liberate those lands from the Muslims and return control to the previous owners. Instead they maintained control for themselves, which is something men often do.
|
|
|
Post by SmithyPlayz on Sept 1, 2015 7:29:42 GMT -5
It seems weird that in this world stuff like this seems and feels normal... which is a disgrace
|
|
|
Post by Nivro™ on Sept 1, 2015 13:10:41 GMT -5
Chocolate chip! And I agree, the world isnt evil...there are just evil people in the world. Banning guns just isnt going to stop that. My dad posted this (below) on his facebook. While I dont necessarily agree everyone needs religion, everyone needs to be taught morals and right from wrong now days. And this is 100% accurate. banning guns wont stop people from killing other people. Homie, bringing religion in is opening a whole new can of worms. For example, God killed far more people than Satan in the bible. Evil exists regardless of religious beliefs, and sometimes because of them. The Crusades just to name one. I understand what you're trying to get at but if you read what I wrote along with it, you see I said I didnt agree with people needing religion as much as people needing morals.
|
|
|
Post by BCizzle on Sept 1, 2015 13:14:00 GMT -5
Guns aren't dangerous. People are. So it would be okay for kids to play with guns? They're not dangerous or anything. What a stupid ass thing to say.
|
|
|
Post by theMOESIAH on Sept 1, 2015 13:45:48 GMT -5
This is all true. Very true. Too many people drinking the koolaid instead of looking for facts. I have a black colleague that I consider a friend who regularly posts online about the "hate crimes" and shootings. I showed him less than a handful of crimes not involving guns or a crazy guy that wasn't white and he completely changed his views. As for guns, if there's a will, there's a way. If a human being is crazy enough to desire killing people, not having a gun isn't going to stop them. They'll just drive a mac truck through a church on Sunday morning or bomb a building full of people. This country has a people problem. Not guns, not racism, PEOPLE. This trend will only get worse if parents don't start raising their damn kids right, too. Peanut butter or chocolate chip? Chocolate chip! And I agree, the world isnt evil...there are just evil people in the world. Banning guns just isnt going to stop that. My dad posted this (below) on his facebook. While I dont necessarily agree everyone needs religion, everyone needs to be taught morals and right from wrong now days. And this is 100% accurate. banning guns wont stop people from killing other people. I've agreed with most of the things you've said up until this point. I'm sure there are a lot of law abiding, life-respecting atheists who would take issue with that.
|
|