shooting in omaha mall

[Martrae]

I didn't make the law....I'm just reporting it.

Sack up and join the argument, lady.

Nah....not an argument that interests me that much.

[10sun]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=409_1176853869

Hippies be warned. You look stupid enough already.

its blocked here what is it?

Penn & Teller's Bullshit - Gun Control
Season 3 Episode 9

[Evermore]

"The best way to address the firepower concern is therefore not to try to outlaw or license many millions of older and perfectly legitimate firearms (which would be a licensing effort of staggering proportions) but to prohibit the possession of high capacity magazines. By a simple, complete, and unequivocal ban on large capacity magazines, all the difficulty of defining "assault rifles" and "semi-automatic rifles" is eliminated. The large capacity magazine itself, separate or attached to the firearm, becomes the prohibited item. A single amendment to Federal firearms laws could prohibit their possession or sale and would effectively implement these objectives."

"no honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun…"

-William Ruger 1989

makes a bit more sense doesn't it?

[Zanchief]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=409_1176853869

Hippies be warned. You look stupid enough already.

Is that a link to an argument you made yourself?

Oh right, nevermind then.

[Zanchief]

So Evermore, you would feel safer if everyone single person over the age of 18 had a gun. You think the country would be a safer place?

Deterrence hardly seems like a legitimate argument since the statistics vary in such a small degree how can you solely equate that to hand gun laws? Add to that the number if accidental deaths from "responsible" citizens and it hardly seems valid.

Again, what's wrong with non-lethal means of self-defense? Just because you don't get a boner from a taser doesn't mean it isn't a practical means of self-defense.

chief why do you insist on going to extremes? where did i state that i would feel safer if everyone over 18 has a gun? those facts are in response to one of your statements. You are being stupid now. There is nothing wrong with non-lethal self-defence. never said there was. unfort it isnt a truely viable option at the moment is it? no.

But your argument in favor of firearms is that more guns make people safer. How am I contradicted the crux of your argument? If the threat of being killed was the real reason bad men didn't kill people, if every single person in the country was carrying a gun, the threat to those evil doers would be very large and people would be much safer.

I say you take the steps necessary to ensure every man women and child is packing heat.

[Harrison]

Why waste my time arguing with ignorant fools about a subject we've beaten to death 5+ times in the history of these boards, when I can post a completely legitimate and pre-made argument that parallels my own entirely?

You want to wait around for superman to save you when shit hits the fan, great. I prefer to take matters of my own protection and that of those I love into my own hands rather than be a victim (again) while expecting superman to protect me.

[10sun]

I would have shot the kid in a Halloween costume if I had a concealed carry permit.

MACHETES!!!

[Zanchief]

You want to wait around for superman to save you when shit hits the fan, great. I prefer to take matters of my own protection and that of those I love into my own hands rather than be a victim (again) while expecting superman to protect me.

So what's wrong with non-lethal weapons?

Funny you should mentioned love ones when your more likely to put your loved ones in danger if you keep a gun in the house than actual help them with it.

Your John Wayne delusions of heroism are actually hurting your family.

[Arlos]

Evermore, the problem with your statistics is that it's not involving a random sampling of individuals. Given the difficulty of obtaining a concealed carry permit and the necessary hoops you have to jump through, you have a self-selected special group with them. Relying on those statistics as applicable to the general population would be like conducting a fitness test solely on professional basketball players and concluding that the entire US population is generally in great shape. Realistically, I think statistics like the one Lyion quoted, about how households with a gun for "protection" are about 3 times as likely to be harmed by THAT gun than they are by an intruder are far more telling than statistics about a pre-selected and non-representative sample.

I repeat my objection to universal arming: people cannot be trusted in all circumstances. For example, I have a friend, Steve, whom I would trust with my life or any member of my family's life... when he is sober. When he is drunk, however, he gets a very short temper and is prone to physical outbursts. He once lost a job and an apartment because, while drunk, he went after a neighbor who antagonized him, and attacked his locked door with a broadsword. (Steve is in the SCA and has a collection of medieval weaponry). If he'd had a gun instead of a sword, I shudder to think of what might have happened. I am sure most everyone has encountered the typical drunken fratboy type who picks fights while drunk, etc. How many bar fights would go from fisticuffs now to murder if more of that kind of person were packing lethal weaponry?

I repeat, however, I am in no way advocating taking away anyone's right to own firearms. I object solely to that which it makes it trivial to kill groups of PEOPLE. I can certainly agree with limiting magazine sizes to 10 rounds, though I think that rifle CLIPS should be max 5 rounds, due to the ease of swapping them in and out. Manually refilling an internal magazine round by round takes far longer than just swapping clips.

Oh, and Harrison, I've been around firearms all my life. Growing up, my dad had a pair of deer hunting rifles, a carbine that dates from the late 1800s, and a pair of duck-hunting 12 gauge shotguns. Both I and my brother were taught gun safety at a young age, and it was made quite clear that if we EVER mishandled any of those items in anything resembling a dangerous fashion, punishment would be exceedingly draconian. When we were too young to be able to responsibly handle them, every single firearm had its firing mechanism removed and stored under lock & key in a separate location from the guns themselves, so there was literally no chance we could've hurt ourselves or anyone else with them. Hell, later on, when I was 19-20 or so, I took one of the shotguns with me to college, and used it to go target shooting. Next item you're going to talk out your ass about?

-Arlos

[Zanchief]

I would have shot the kid in a Halloween costume if I had a concealed carry permit.

MACHETES!!!

Exactly. Shit like that happens all the time, even to card carrying members of the sainthood of the NRA.

Carry non-leathal weapons, stop going to gun shows, cancel your subscription to guns and ammo and start actually protected yourself instead of perpetuating an attitude that is making you one of the most violent countries in the world.

[Evermore]

Exactly. Shit like that happens all the time, even to card carrying members of the sainthood of the NRA.

Carry non-leathal weapons, stop going to gun shows, cancel your subscription to guns and ammo and start actually protected yourself instead of perpetuating an attitude that is making you one of the most violent countries in the world.

Please inform us, oh wise one, how do you plan on actually defending yourself against an armed intruder then? Phaser on stun?

[Zanchief]

...non...lethal...weapons...

How am I not clear on this?

Think Mel Gibson and Danny Glover only the opposite.

[Arlos]

Taser? Pepper spray? Lock the bedroom door, hide out of direct line of fire from the door, and call 911?

Hell, if I'm THAT paranoid about the rather small chance of armed home invasions, I'll get an alarm and security system + contract with someone like Brinks, who will dispatch armed security guards to my house while they simultaneously call 911 for me.

About the furthest I'd go towards arming myself is a shotgun with very small pellets such that they're not going to blow through internal drywall walls. Hell, maybe I'd even load it with nonlethal rounds, like rock salt or something.

-Arlos

[Evermore]

because....your....non.....lethal....weapons...are...not.....truely...available...and....they...have...the....same....drawbacks....as....lethal....ones....


how do you not understand this?

[Gaazy]

Im going to save everyone the time from having to post here again and summarize what the remainder of this thread will be with just Zanchief and Harrison.


"Guns are bad"
"No, guns r real good and makes me safer"
"You all obsessed Americans"
"You dont even live in America so you dont know what its like here"
"Your stupid"
"Your = you're?"
"You're stupid"
"NO, YOU"






This board really new topics to debate instead of the same old shit on different days. At least pick something that will give a surprise or something. Everyone already knows where everyone stands on everything, and theres not many people who actually will care about anyone elses opinion on anything anyway.

[Evermore]

Taser? Pepper spray? Lock the bedroom door, hide out of direct line of fire from the door, and call 911? Shotgun loaded with rock salt?

-Arlos

the best answer out of all of this is the hide. the rest arent feaseable due to one thing. it would require you to get the jump on the intruder. that doesnt always happen. Even the hide has this weakness. how many 911 calls have you heard people get killed on while the cops were responding. there was one from georga yesterday where a 61 yr old man shot 2 intruders to death while he was on the phone. You heard him say HEy You're Dead and the shotgun fire 2x.

[Arlos]

How about the security contract, where a company like Brinks sends armed guards to my house upon receiving the alert while at the same time calling 911 for me? Many such companies provide a panic button you can push that handles all of that automatically. Sure, it costs, but guns aren't exactly cheap either, not for good ones anyway.

-Arlos

[Martrae]

Yeah, hiding in a closet worked out really well for those kids in Utah (or wherever the hell it was that part-time cop snapped and shot up an apartment full of teens).

[Harrison]

You want to wait around for superman to save you when shit hits the fan, great. I prefer to take matters of my own protection and that of those I love into my own hands rather than be a victim (again) while expecting superman to protect me.

So what's wrong with non-lethal weapons?

Funny you should mentioned love ones when your more likely to put your loved ones in danger if you keep a gun in the house than actual help them with it.

Your John Wayne delusions of heroism are actually hurting your family.

I don't know where you pulled that imaginary fabrication from, but I'm officially done rehashing this argument to people I care nothing about, never mind hold any respect of their opinion on this matter. You floating around up in the middle of nowhere and comment on people living where the threat of someone breaking into your home and killing you is very real, is rather retarded. I am not surprised in the least.

http://www.morganquitno.com/cit05a.pdf

Violent crime rates in 2005 (they've risen since, to my knowledge, about 2% in N.B. but I'm not in the mood to find exact changes in the measly 2 years since this data to prove a point to an ignorant foreigner)

Higher than Newark, NJ.
Higher than LA
Higher than NY City
Higher than oh fuck, just about every fucking city with a population over 50,000. Considering we were fucking 57th highest in the nation that year...

[Zanchief]

Taser? Pepper spray? Lock the bedroom door, hide out of direct line of fire from the door, and call 911? Shotgun loaded with rock salt?

-Arlos

the best answer out of all of this is the hide. the rest arent feaseable due to one thing. it would require you to get the jump on the intruder. that doesnt always happen. Even the hide has this weakness. how many 911 calls have you heard people get killed on while the cops were responding. there was one from georga yesterday where a 61 yr old man shot 2 intruders to death while he was on the phone. You heard him say HEy You're Dead and the shotgun fire 2x.

How would a gun help then?

[Evermore]

How about the security contract, where a company like Brinks sends armed guards to my house upon receiving the alert while at the same time calling 911 for me? Many such companies provide a panic button you can push that handles all of that automatically. Sure, it costs, but guns aren't exactly cheap either, not for good ones anyway.

-Arlos

getting better.

[Zanchief]

I don't know where you pulled that imaginary fabrication from, but I'm officially done rehashing this argument to people I care nothing about, never mind hold any respect of their opinion on this matter.

Cool beans, but for the sake of fun I'll continue without you.

Keeping loaded weapons in your house puts your family in danger. They are more likely to hurt themselves with them, then actually help you.

So, because you have inadequacy issues and are trying to overcompensate by living out childhood fantasies about gunslinging heroes, you are actually putting your family in danger. It's even more ridiculous to claim you're doing all of this in some misguided effort to keep them safe.

[Zanchief]

How about the security contract, where a company like Brinks sends armed guards to my house upon receiving the alert while at the same time calling 911 for me? Many such companies provide a panic button you can push that handles all of that automatically. Sure, it costs, but guns aren't exactly cheap either, not for good ones anyway.

-Arlos

getting better.

Still, how is owning a firearm a valid solution?

What Arlos and I are saying is that owning a firearm isn't a proper means of self defense, so why bother? Other means are just as effective and in most cases much more so.

The argument that making certain weapons illegal is only going to take them away from innocent people is all well and good, but innocent people have no need for them, so who is it hurting?

[Evermore]

How about the security contract, where a company like Brinks sends armed guards to my house upon receiving the alert while at the same time calling 911 for me? Many such companies provide a panic button you can push that handles all of that automatically. Sure, it costs, but guns aren't exactly cheap either, not for good ones anyway.

-Arlos

getting better.

Still, how is owning a firearm a valid solution?

What Arlos and I are saying is that owning a firearm isn't a proper means of self defense, so why bother? Other means are just as effective and in most cases much more so.

The argument that making certain weapons illegal is only going to take them away from innocent people is all well and good, but innocent people have no need for them, so who is it hurting?

Gaazy is correct. its useless trying to talk with you and yes it is most certainly a proper means of self defense, but you keep living in your fantasy world and dancing around the real crux of the issue.

[Zanchief]

Gaazy is correct. its useless trying to talk with you and yes it is most certainly a proper means of self defense, but you keep living in your fantasy world and dancing around the real crux of the issue.

What fantasy world? You mean the one where the only way to properly defend yourself is with an assault rifle?

Feel free to tell me what you are alluding to with all this deception and I'll be sure to tell you why you're wrong.

Address my arguments if they are so silly, Evermore.