How many innocent lives are your guns worth?

Doer

Well-Known Member
so you believe in a living, breathing constitution do you? I didn't think you to be a liberal.
Hey numb-nut, I'm a Che-ist and this document lives and breaths by Amendment.

Guns save, they cost us nothing.

And every Minute Man should have basic machinist capabilities. And tools. I do. Do you think Arms are that difficult to make?

You can't show how these laws, even the felony exclusions have made a bit of difference. It is the modern spread of these weapons that is bringing the crime rate down.
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
In your last line you say "government resources" .... Uh-oh oxymoron alarm is going off. Please explain how you want to get rid of guns, yet fail to address the gun that is used to acquire said (ahem) "resources"
What gun is used to acquire resources Rob? Government acquisition of "your" resources (is where I firmly believe you are headed) is done through the use of sanction and voluntary choice and not weapons. The IRS is not going to come armed to your home and take your things.
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
No I am not - you are making the same error most make. We cannot stop all children from being killed. We can stop the number that are killed at one time and we can do that by slowing down one's rate of fire or making that rate of fire intermittent.

How does passing a law prevent something from happening?

What if a group of "children killers" is firing away and an armed good guy wants to stop them? Wouldn't the armed good guy be better off with higher fire power? Couldn't that SAVE children.
 

Figong

Well-Known Member
No I am not - you are making the same error most make. We cannot stop all children from being killed. We can stop the number that are killed at one time and we can do that by slowing down one's rate of fire or making that rate of fire intermittent.
They have 3-shot burst already.. on the very same premise you just specified.. slowing down rate - how about cars, namely the guy who went through the front of a mall in Alaska with his vehicle, which is effectively a speed-adjustable 1-ton steerable missile? Thankfully there were no fatalities, but it proves that point that anyone can use pretty much anything in some way or another to cause damage/death, whether accidental or not. That said, it goes back to the human manipulating it, not the item itself that makes the difference. Do you see where I'm going with this at all?
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
How does passing a law prevent something from happening?

What if a group of "children killers" is firing away and an armed good guy wants to stop them? Wouldn't the armed good guy be better off with higher fire power? Couldn't that SAVE children.
It might, and your point is that more guns is always better. That being the case, then even better still would be more firepower for everyone - does that make any more sense?
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
No I am not - you are making the same error most make. We cannot stop all children from being killed. We can stop the number that are killed at one time and we can do that by slowing down one's rate of fire or making that rate of fire intermittent.
And that is suppose to lower the gun kill rate of children? It will not. And you know that. You are part of the effort to neuter the 2nd.

All you have is false argument.
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
They have 3-shot burst already.. on the very same premise you just specified.. slowing down rate - how about cars, namely the guy who went through the front of a mall in Alaska with his vehicle, which is effectively a speed-adjustable 1-ton steerable missile? Thankfully there were no fatalities, but it proves that point that anyone can use pretty much anything in some way or another to cause damage/death, whether accidental or not. That said, it goes back to the human manipulating it, not the item itself that makes the difference. Do you see where I'm going with this at all?

Yes, anyone CAN use anything to kill another, sometimes someone can find a way to kill lots of others with something other than a firearm but currently the weapon of choice is... a firearm. When rogue folks with one ton missiles begin to take out schools and churches at an inordinant rate, then we should deal with that. Easy enough though - with steel bumpers and denial devices - ask the secret service about those.
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
What gun is used to acquire resources Rob? Government acquisition of "your" resources (is where I firmly believe you are headed) is done through the use of sanction and voluntary choice and not weapons. The IRS is not going to come armed to your home and take your things.
A self sanctioning entity is not the same as mutual assent is it ? When an entity is self sanctioning their "gun" comes out when you opt to peacefully not participate. You don't seriously deny this do you?
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
And that is suppose to lower the gun kill rate of children? It will not. And you know that. You are part of the effort to neuter the 2nd.

All you have is false argument.
and no regulation on the second amendment is acceptable - the 2nd, the right to keep and bear is the only right that is inviolate right?
My calling for a basis in reduction in gun violence is automaticaly in your eyes an attempt to neuter the 2nd amendment. Great,wonderful, then accept the factt that your attitude will always cost the lives of innocents and stand with that as NLX did in the very first page.

You see, his right to keep and bear is worth any number of innocent deaths.


So is mine.
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
It might, and your point is that more guns is always better. That being the case, then even better still would be more firepower for everyone - does that make any more sense?
No. My point is guns have a self defense use as well as the offensive use employed by thugs and government, but I repeat myself. What makes sense is to leave others alone and those that do not should expect that some will defend themselves. Anyway....you going to use guns to take away guns?
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
A self sanctioning entity is not the same as mutual assent is it ? When an entity is self sanctioning their "gun" comes out when you opt to peacefully not participate. You don't seriously deny this do you?

I seriously deny that I have yet to see a government action upon my person or property enforced with a gun.
 

Figong

Well-Known Member
Yes, anyone CAN use anything to kill another, sometimes someone can find a way to kill lots of others with something other than a firearm but currently the weapon of choice is... a firearm. When rogue folks with one ton missiles begin to take out schools and churches at an inordinant rate, then we should deal with that. Easy enough though - with steel bumpers and denial devices - ask the secret service about those.
The 1-ton missile I was referring to was the car that you put high value on.. it was being driven by an intoxicated member of society.. (used loosely in this instance).
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
No. My point is guns have a self defense use as well as the offensive use employed by thugs and government, but I repeat myself. What makes sense is to leave others alone and those that do not should expect that some will defend themselves. Anyway....you going to use guns to take away guns?

No need for that.
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
Yes, anyone CAN use anything to kill another, sometimes someone can find a way to kill lots of others with something other than a firearm but currently the weapon of choice is... a firearm. When rogue folks with one ton missiles begin to take out schools and churches at an inordinant rate, then we should deal with that. Easy enough though - with steel bumpers and denial devices - ask the secret service about those.
Do you need CPR? I posted that bombings of schools was the mass murder of choice. You think you can prevent what has never been prevented in history? Something that the Taliban today use as a terror tactic? Lock the doors, burn the schools..

Paddles Hot! Clear! OK, blow some smoke up his nose. Feel better?
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
I seriously deny that I have yet to see a government action upon my person or property enforced with a gun.
Okay, YOU'VE never seen a gun used by government against you. What happens when other people peacefully opt not to participate....are they left alone?
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
Off the rocker. If you get evicted, the Sheriff comes armed. If you are stopped for speeding, the law is armed.

So, you are bubble boy, canndo.
 

Figong

Well-Known Member
Off the rocker. If you get evicted, the Sheriff comes armed. If you are stopped for speeding, the law is armed.

So, you are bubble boy, canndo.
Sometimes the law isn't the only one armed during a traffic stop.. always always always announce it, and its location so you don't get your shit splattered all over the dashboard, or have skull / lung chunks sprayed out the passenger side window if they get spooked if you move suddenly, and they catch a glimpse of it. (Depending on in-car mount or on-body holster type)
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
Off the rocker. If you get evicted, the Sheriff comes armed. If you are stopped for speeding, the law is armed.

So, you are bubble boy, canndo.
I have owed the IRS more money than the average person makes in a year - they came at me with no firearm. I have owed child support, they came at me with no firearm. There are other ways and it would seem that you sir may be the one inhabiting that bubble.
 
Top