ClakarEQ wrote:Leu thinks you should do whatever it takes to stop a crimnal including the loss of more privacy rights.
I never said that.
What I did say is I don't consider someone who places their personal safety above the life of an attacker as insane.
It is not a loss of privacy to have mental health problems come up on a background check for the purposes of firearm purchase. If by law a person with certain mental conditions is restricted from purchasing a fire arm, your supposed privacy rights loss only happens when that person chooses to break the law and attempt to illegally purchase a firearm. Think about this, the whole issue here transcends the issue of banning only handguns, as this is applicable to a rifle or shotgun also.
Raymond S. Kraft wrote:The history of the world is the history of civilizational clashes, cultural clashes. All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and civilization should be like, and the most determined always win.
Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win. The pacifists always lose, because the anti-pacifists kill them.
The only people who are afraid of their privacy being invaded are people who are ashamed of what they do or are people who are breaking laws. Do whatever you need to do to keep people safe, if that means finding out that Clakar fucks young children and beats his wife everynight, good.
Tacks wrote: Do whatever you need to do to keep people safe
I couldn't agree more and we need to start with getting hand guns off the street. It makes me smile to know you agree with me tacks, I really enjoy someone with your abilities to be on my team.
We should go the Chris Rock route. Leave guns alone and make ammunition super expensive. That way you're less likely to use a bullet on someone if its going to cost you $50 to shoot them.
leah wrote:i am forever grateful to my gym teacher for drilling that skill into me during drivers' ed
leah wrote:isn't the only difference the length? i feel like it would take too long to smoke something that long, ha.
Tacks wrote: Do whatever you need to do to keep people safe
I couldn't agree more and we need to start with getting hand guns off the street. It makes me smile to know you agree with me tacks, I really enjoy someone with your abilities to be on my team.
Tacks wrote: Do whatever you need to do to keep people safe
I couldn't agree more and we need to start with getting hand guns off the street. It makes me smile to know you agree with me tacks, I really enjoy someone with your abilities to be on my team.
you sir, have no clue. none. zip. zero. zilch.
this will resolve nothing.
Actually evermore that was me feeding tacks. He is very predictable and that post was made purely to feed him , tacks I know your still hungry, come-on don't prove me wrong now.
However I do agree with my first scentence off that post. This is all about opinions is it not?
Jay wrote:We should go the Chris Rock route. Leave guns alone and make ammunition super expensive. That way you're less likely to use a bullet on someone if its going to cost you $50 to shoot them.
The only component of a bullet that isn't reusable or relatively easy to manufacture yourself is the primer.
Raymond S. Kraft wrote:The history of the world is the history of civilizational clashes, cultural clashes. All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and civilization should be like, and the most determined always win.
Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win. The pacifists always lose, because the anti-pacifists kill them.
Yeah but they could jack up gun powder costs for example. I know my uncle who is a big time gun collector and fan makes all his own rounds, well he used to but in the end it didn't really save much money for the hassle. I don't know all the details but I think he had to get some special approvals and paperwork to have several pounds of gun powder on hand. It wasn't really a powder either, it looked more like micro-bb's.
Tacks wrote: Do whatever you need to do to keep people safe
I couldn't agree more and we need to start with getting hand guns off the street. It makes me smile to know you agree with me tacks, I really enjoy someone with your abilities to be on my team.
you sir, have no clue. none. zip. zero. zilch.
this will resolve nothing.
Actually evermore that was me feeding tacks. He is very predictable and that post was made purely to feed him , tacks I know your still hungry, come-on don't prove me wrong now.
However I do agree with my first scentence off that post. This is all about opinions is it not?
Uh you're gonna have to try harder old man. Do you think I'm serious?
Tacks wrote: Do whatever you need to do to keep people safe
I couldn't agree more and we need to start with getting hand guns off the street. It makes me smile to know you agree with me tacks, I really enjoy someone with your abilities to be on my team.
you sir, have no clue. none. zip. zero. zilch.
this will resolve nothing.
Actually evermore that was me feeding tacks. He is very predictable and that post was made purely to feed him , tacks I know your still hungry, come-on don't prove me wrong now.
However I do agree with my first scentence off that post. This is all about opinions is it not?
lol ok. but i still say that removing the handguns is not the answer.
Jay wrote:We should go the Chris Rock route. Leave guns alone and make ammunition super expensive. That way you're less likely to use a bullet on someone if its going to cost you $50 to shoot them.
The only component of a bullet that isn't reusable or relatively easy to manufacture yourself is the primer.
the primer powder is cake its the centerfire and rimfire casings that pose the issue.
ClakarEQ wrote:Yeah but they could jack up gun powder costs for example. I know my uncle who is a big time gun collector and fan makes all his own rounds, well he used to but in the end it didn't really save much money for the hassle. I don't know all the details but I think he had to get some special approvals and paperwork to have several pounds of gun powder on hand. It wasn't really a powder either, it looked more like micro-bb's.
Raymond S. Kraft wrote:The history of the world is the history of civilizational clashes, cultural clashes. All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and civilization should be like, and the most determined always win.
Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win. The pacifists always lose, because the anti-pacifists kill them.
Tacks of course I don't think you're serious, it's all in fun.
Evermore, it may not be the answer, I have no problems in saying that my thoughts or opinions are 100% the right thing. I just know it is something we've not tried and all the things we have tried, failed.
I'm sure there are hundreds of other ways to skin the cat, I just like the big bang approach of mine
Invariably some children when told not to touch a hot stove will still touch it to find out for themselves that it hurts. Most learn a lesson from this... apparently some don't.
Raymond S. Kraft wrote:The history of the world is the history of civilizational clashes, cultural clashes. All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and civilization should be like, and the most determined always win.
Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win. The pacifists always lose, because the anti-pacifists kill them.
Tacks wrote:The only people who are afraid of their privacy being invaded are people who are ashamed of what they do or are people who are breaking laws. Do whatever you need to do to keep people safe, if that means finding out that Clakar fucks young children and beats his wife everynight, good.
OMFG i can't believe that Tacks and I are 100% in agreement on privacy vs public safety
Hey ClakarEQ...What's the capital of La La Land?...I would really like to have some of those drugs you are on...Drugs are for people who can't handle reality...And this must be where you are coming from...
In the first place banning hand guns are not going to decrease crime...So don't even go there...Secondly do you really think the criminals are going to just hand their hand guns over to a goverment ban?...As a matter of fact I'm sure there are a bunch of people including myself who would instantly become outlaws...You will have to pry my handgun(s) out of my dead cold fingers...
Now let's play a game...You are in your house watching TV in the evening with your family...All of the sudden someone masked come breaking into your house with a gun...your wife and teenage daughter screams...Your teenage son tries to get up and run out of the room...The perp fires his gun and kills him and turns his gun on you...This has all happened within 10 seconds...then orders you daughter to tie you up to the chair binding your hands and legs to the chair...After that he orders her to tie your wifes hands behind her back and orders her to sit on the floor face down...All the time waving his gun at all of you...He then proceeds to have his way with your daughter right in front of you while holding his gun to her head...What would you do?...This has taken place after your handgun band went into effect...Did a lot of good didn't it?...
What a smuck... It is better to arm yourself with a handgun and have it loaded and ready at a moments notice...You never know when this could happen to you...I have everone of my handguns loaded and placed throughout my house...My wife and two daughters, now grown and on their own now, were brought up with the guns and everyone of them were trained on how and more importantly when to use them...They all learned gun safety, proper use, quick fire, when and in what situations to use them and most importantly that guns kill and if you were ever put into a situation where you had to point it at someone you had better be ready and willing to use it...Not to wound but to kill...I now have seven grandchilden...Both daughters own guns themselves and the grandkids are also being taught the proper use of them...There are no trigger locks...never have been and never will be...They are always clean and ready to use as any other tool should be...They are tools used to protect oneself from others whom intent is to harm...If I was in the same La La Land you were in I sure wouldn't limit myself to be foolish enough to think they are only after my money and I wouldn't even know they were there if they broke in at night...That is the stupidist assumption you will ever make...And we all know what happens when you assume...
Now dipshit read this blurb and tell me you still think the same...
The illusion that the English government had protected its citizens by disarming them seemed credible because few realized the country had an astonishingly low level of armed crime even before guns were restricted. A government study for the years 1890-92, for example, found only three handgun homicides, an average of one a year, in a population of 30 million. In 1904 there were only four armed robberies in London, then the largest city in the world. A hundred years and many gun laws later, the BBC reported that England's firearms restrictions "seem to have had little impact in the criminal underworld." Guns are virtually outlawed, and, as the old slogan predicted, only outlaws have guns. Worse, they are increasingly ready to use them.
Nearly five centuries of growing civility ended in 1954. Violent crime has been climbing ever since. Last December, London's Evening Standard reported that armed crime, with banned handguns the weapon of choice, was "rocketing." In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent.
Gun crime is just part of an increasingly lawless environment. From 1991 to 1995, crimes against the person in England's inner cities increased 91 percent. And in the four years from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled. Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police. In a United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations published in July, England and Wales led the Western world's crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people.
This sea change in English crime followed a sea change in government policies. Gun regulations have been part of a more general disarmament based on the proposition that people don't need to protect themselves because society will protect them. It also will protect their neighbors: Police advise those who witness a crime to "walk on by" and let the professionals handle it.
Oh, please. Show me *ONE* news report of that scenario EVER happening within the last 10 years and I'll be surprised. Inventing absolute worst case hypothetical situations that bear little to no resemblance to reality accomplishes nothing. The situation you posit is so ridiculous as to really be laughable.
For one thing, if someone enters the room with a gun already pointed at you, any gun you may have is effectively useless. He has the drop on you, it is far faster for him to pull a trigger than you to retrieve your weapon, aim it and fire it. Besides which, what kind of psychopath sits around watching TV with a loaded gun in their lap? Not even someone as rabidly pro-gun as CHARLETON FUCKING HESTON, President of the NRA does any such idiocy.
How about an ACTUAL statistic for you: "Guns kept in the home for self-protection are 22 times more likely to kill someone you know than they are to kill in self-defense. Kellermann, New England Journal of Medicine, 1997". Gee, I trust a study in one of the top-2 most authoritative medical journals than I trust your retarded overblown rhetoric.
Now, I still don't call in the least for banning handguns in the home or taking them away from people, but I remain adamant against expanding allowing everyone and anyone to carry them around with them in public. But still, someone as fucked in the head as you, "You will have to pry my handgun(s) out of my dead cold fingers"... OK, sure, I'm fine with that...
Arlos...You've missed the point...Yes the hypothetical point I made was ridicules...That was the point...What you are not thinking about or adding into the equation is the fact that this scenario is being produced everyday in movies, songs and other forms on so called entertainment which our kids and the psychos to are viewing everyday...I'm sure somewhere the basic plot was already carried out by some sicko in the world...The point I was trying to make was ClakarEQ was being foolish and blind to reality...And again you assumed I just have my handguns laying around my house on every counter and chair...Not so...They are hide from view but readily accessible...Should someone get the "Drop" on me then I could at least have the ability to protect myself and family from harm...Is this something you could really blame me for wanting to do?...The importance you have missed is called "gun education"...Teaching your family to be prepared to defend themselves against from a less that worthy person is not a crime...Or defending themselves from any other kind of invasion of ones privacy and tranquility...People have been defending themselves and families since the beginning of time...It's a natural instinct to do so...
What I would agree to would be an extensive psychological test of those buying handguns...This is also not the answer but it couldn't hurt...I don't want every mental case or criminal being able to purchase a gun...short or long...It wouldn't stop the carnage but it could reduce it...Not everyone buying a handgun today will be stable tomorrow...Along with the test I would agree to a mandatory class be taken prior to allowing the purchase...A class like the CCW class... My family and I took the class several years ago when I was gung-ho of getting a CCW...The class itself changed my mind on the responsibilities of having one and I chose not to follow through...I think it was a sane and responsible thing to do at that time and I still think I made the right choice today...But if you are still standing on your rights to express your opinion so be it...You have that right...But taking away self defense weapons from a law abiding citizens and allowing the criminal element the ability to continue using them is surely not the answer...
Read the following blurb posted in another current affair here and argue with it...
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun
control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to
defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5
million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945,
A total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend
Themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20
Million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981,
100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979,
300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million 'educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In summation:
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th
Century because of gun control: 56 million.
Vinnie.1 wrote:Arlos...You've missed the point...Yes the hypothetical point I made was ridicules...That was the point...What you are not thinking about or adding into the equation is the fact that this scenario is being produced everyday in movies, songs and other forms on so called entertainment which our kids and the psychos to are viewing everyday...I'm sure somewhere the basic plot was already carried out by some sicko in the world...The point I was trying to make was ClakarEQ was being foolish and blind to reality...And again you assumed I just have my handguns laying around my house on every counter and chair...Not so...They are hide from view but readily accessible...Should someone get the "Drop" on me then I could at least have the ability to protect myself and family from harm...Is this something you could really blame me for wanting to do?...The importance you have missed is called "gun education"...Teaching your family to be prepared to defend themselves against from a less that worthy person is not a crime...Or defending themselves from any other kind of invasion of ones privacy and tranquility...People have been defending themselves and families since the beginning of time...It's a natural instinct to do so...
What I would agree to would be an extensive psychological test of those buying handguns...This is also not the answer but it couldn't hurt...I don't want every mental case or criminal being able to purchase a gun...short or long...It wouldn't stop the carnage but it could reduce it...Not everyone buying a handgun today will be stable tomorrow...Along with the test I would agree to a mandatory class be taken prior to allowing the purchase...A class like the CCW class... My family and I took the class several years ago when I was gung-ho of getting a CCW...The class itself changed my mind on the responsibilities of having one and I chose not to follow through...I think it was a sane and responsible thing to do at that time and I still think I made the right choice today...But if you are still standing on your rights to express your opinion so be it...You have that right...But taking away self defense weapons from a law abiding citizens and allowing the criminal element the ability to continue using them is surely not the answer...
Read the following blurb posted in another current affair here and argue with it...
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, A total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend Themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 Million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million 'educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In summation:
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.
, tacks I know your still hungry, come-on don't prove me wrong now.
