Here it comes - gun control!!!

Dr Kynes said:
by Man Up, i mean be less of an old woman and stop whimpering and crying into your babushka over every incidence of violence in the world.

nobody HAS to have a gun, shit i dont give a fuck if you want one or not, or if you are terrified of the prospect of even their existence, but you dont get to tell me i cannot have a gun

you snivel out the same pathetic retorts all gun banners resort to. you accuse anyone with a gun of being scared of his own shadow, and hiding in a closet hugging his knees if his gun isnt right there to provide comfort, next up will be a "because you have small/no penis issues", followed immediately by an implication that youre too smart to need a gun cuz youre so evolved.

did i miss any of your bullet points?

nice move Steve Kangas, youre running the same cycle as you did in your last incarnation.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think anyone has suggested banning guns. That is the epitome of a strawman, but look at you get on with your bad self!
 
Doer said:
No one will say the Atlantic is anything but anti-nuts. But, they have the facts straight.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business...-gun-death-policy-ending-the-drug-war/266505/

THE GUN NUMBERS TO FOCUS ON

Any gun control we enact will have a limited effect. But this should not be cause for despair. Much of the recent hysteria over gun deaths is misplaced.

A lot of people have been citing a recent report, "American Gun Deaths to Exceed Traffic Fatalities by 2015." The article shows that gun deaths in America are slowly rising, and now stand at 32,000 per year -- a staggering toll. Now, 32,000 deaths per year is a lot of death, and I'd never minimize that. But what the article's authors fail to mention is that gun murders comprise less than a third of that total -- about 9,000 per year in recent years. With accidental gun deaths steady at around 500-600 per year, the bulk of those 32,000 "gun deaths" are suicides.


In fact, murder by gun has been falling steadily since the early 1990s.
Click to expand...

Reading more in this article, they mention Japan as this wonderful place. No guns. Right, if you are not Yazuka. If you are not the illegal Chinese immigrants, that are preyed up by Yazuka. Does anyone know the suicide rate in Japan? Did anyone see the Prime Minister murdered on stage with a kodachi or perhaps wakizashi blade? 1980 or so?

Japan has a declining population and has no social safety net to speak of. Sepuku is the choice for the aging if they have no family and no means. Street crime is not allowed by Yazuka.
 
doublejj said:
You know the 2nd ammendment was written the the 1700's, maybe we should apply it only to guns that existed at that time?
That pretty much solves it.
Click to expand...

But it was written for perpetuity. Don't dismiss it; amend it. My proposal for a rewritten 2nd:

"The right of the individual citizen to own, possess, buy, sell, operate, carry, give and bequeath any projectile weapon shall be held inviolate, excepting detained felons and he mentally and physically incompetent." cn
 
cannabineer said:
But it was written for perpetuity. Don't dismiss it; amend it. My proposal for a rewritten 2nd:

"The right of the individual citizen to own, possess, buy, sell, operate, carry, give and bequeath any projectile weapon shall be held inviolate, excepting detained felons and he mentally and physically incompetent." cn
Click to expand...

What?? And dissolve the delicious ambiguity? :) "....shall not be abridged..." We gotta keep that, right??
 
doublejj said:
You know the 2nd ammendment was written the the 1700's, maybe we should apply it only to guns that existed at that time?
That pretty much solves it.
Click to expand...

The 14th amendment was ratified in 1868 . Should we only apply it to people that existed at the time?
 
cannabineer said:
But it was written for perpetuity. Don't dismiss it; amend it. My proposal for a rewritten 2nd:

"The right of the individual citizen to own, possess, buy, sell, operate, carry, give and bequeath any projectile weapon shall be held inviolate, excepting detained felons and he mentally and physically incompetent." cn
Click to expand...

Sign me up for a Howitzer. I'll buy some land on the other side of your house and do some target practice.... God damn, I love Liberty.
 
doublejj said:
I'd say we leave it as written & give everybody a Musket!
Click to expand...

I'll take one such; thank you. cn

images
 
Beefbisquit said:
Sign me up for a Howitzer. I'll buy some land on the other side of your house and do some target practice.... God damn, I love Liberty.
Click to expand...

You are legally allowed to purchase a howitzer, except in some states.

But to practice with it, you'll need a safe range. Parts of Nevada and Alaska might do. And oy, the cost per round!! cn
 
cannabineer said:
You are legally allowed to purchase a howitzer, except in some states.

But to practice with it, you'll need a safe range. Parts of Nevada and Alaska might do. And oy, the cost per round!! cn
Click to expand...

Black powder, bowling ball mortar. No problem with that. And a nice winter hobby when the feral cats are hungry. Only need a couple of hundred yards.
 
Beefbisquit said:
Cars require licensing and are used daily, so people are quite practiced at using them. They are a fundamental requirement of society, that's to say society would cease to exist as we know it, without them.

I can't say the same thing about guns.
Click to expand...

Cars are not protected by the Constitution.
You advocate proper training and yearly recertification of gun owners. If it's such a good idea, why aren't applicants for drivers licenses tested beyond the most basic of requirements? And after acquiring the license, are not tested again? You seem to be more worried about misuse of a firearm than the more common occurrence of misuse of a vehicle. How many innocent children have been killed because somebody was acting in an irresponsible manner while operating a vehicle?
It makes me laugh every time there is a shooting incident, like in AZ when Giffords was shot, they start out with... "why is it easier to get a gun than a drivers license?" I ask, "Why is it so easy to get a drivers license and becoming so hard to own a weapon?"
You can pass all the laws you think are necessary to make society act in the manner you see fit but in the end it all comes down to, law abiding citizens are not the problem, criminals care not what laws are in place. You can make all the requirements for training, storage and use but at the end of the day, the criminal has the edge because he does not play by the same rules as you and I.
I also get the impression that you view the 2nd A as protecting gun ownership only for the hunter/recreational shooter or collector. Hence the more prominent argument that "who really NEEDS to own a semi-automatic weapon?" The second amendment was written at a time when the citizenry had access to the same arms as the military and they were engaged in a war against an oppressive government. Based on the historical context of the times when it was written, I can see no other reason for being included in the Constitution except for protection from an oppressive government, foreign OR domestic.
 
Beefbisquit said:
Ever been in a live fire exercise? It's fucking nerve racking when you're trained for it, let alone when you take a 20 min online, or 2 hour minor safety course to get your CCW every 5 years.
Click to expand...
thats becuz ur a puss that should not have a ccw then. if u have done live fire exercises than u should have trained urself to be used to the gunfire and bangs and shit thats kinda why they were designed. so u can train urself to react without all of ur surroundings affecting ur judgement and reaction.
 
Doer said:
Black powder, bowling ball mortar. No problem with that. And a nice winter hobby when the feral cats are hungry. Only need a couple of hundred yards.
Click to expand...
When we were kids we would make small pipe bombs and try them out on the local playground equipment,let us just say we destroyed a steel slide. Blackpowder was easy to get. easy to make too.
 
Beefbisquit said:
Sorry for any confusion, I'll try to explain the scenario better and you can tell me the outcome.

Person A is getting robbed by person B.
Person A shoots and kills person B, and accidentally shoots and kills me as well.

Would person A, or person B, be charged with murder?
Click to expand...

Neither, that is not a murder. Just because someone gets in the way of a bullet does not make it a murder.
 
Mr Neutron said:
Cars are not protected by the Constitution.
You advocate proper training and yearly recertification of gun owners. If it's such a good idea, why aren't applicants for drivers licenses tested beyond the most basic of requirements? And after acquiring the license, are not tested again? You seem to be more worried about misuse of a firearm than the more common occurrence of misuse of a vehicle. How many innocent children have been killed because somebody was acting in an irresponsible manner while operating a vehicle?
Click to expand...

So, now you're arguing for tougher vehicle licensing laws?

It makes me laugh every time there is a shooting incident, like in AZ when Giffords was shot, they start out with... "why is it easier to get a gun than a drivers license?" I ask, "Why is it so easy to get a drivers license and becoming so hard to own a weapon?"
Click to expand...

It's not?
You can pass all the laws you think are necessary to make society act in the manner you see fit but in the end it all comes down to, law abiding citizens are not the problem, criminals care not what laws are in place. You can make all the requirements for training, storage and use but at the end of the day, the criminal has the edge because he does not play by the same rules as you and I.
Click to expand...

The rules at least put an extra hurdle in the way of criminals. Stolen guns are illegal guns, make them harder to steal, make them harder for criminals to get.

I also get the impression that you view the 2nd A as protecting gun ownership only for the hunter/recreational shooter or collector. Hence the more prominent argument that "who really NEEDS to own a semi-automatic weapon?" The second amendment was written at a time when the citizenry had access to the same arms as the military and they were engaged in a war against an oppressive government. Based on the historical context of the times when it was written, I can see no other reason for being included in the Constitution except for protection from an oppressive government, foreign OR domestic.
Click to expand...

I agree... except fore the part about semi-automatic weapons. I love my Semi-autos. One bullet per trigger pull is one bullet per trigger pull. I can see the rationalization in pinning the magazines on semi-automatic weapons though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top