thats the problem with the american attitude. they are always "dodging the bullet"
Azilius is Canadian.
Your interpretation of American gun culture is hilarious. Have you ever met anyone that owns a gun?
Also, where was all of this outrage and moves to ban assault weapons after the Aurora Colorado movie theatre massacre? Oh right, there was an election coming up.
I still had the mindset that gun laws needed to be changed then and even before then. Its got nothing to do with "gun culture" at all. "Gun culture" is just an excuse for allowing guns. No matter how many times this happens you will still support the right to "kill people if you so wish".
Joined: Mar 2008 Posts: 2147 Location: Dead.(No Longer With Us)
Please penfold, we get it, you're the end all. You have ultimate wisdom and the highest understanding of logic. I concede, your views align perfectly with the geniuses in Washington, so my opinion on the matter must be wrong. Forgive this lesser man for even arguing with such an intellectual as yourself. So I beg you my good sir, make this madness end!-- We need THREAD CONTROL!!
"Gun culture" is just an excuse for allowing guns. No matter how many times this happens you will still support the right to "kill people if you so wish".
You really can't be this ignorant. Not one person in this thread has condoned murder. The fact that someone advocates gun ownership doesn't mean that they are fine with 20 children and 6 teachers being slaughtered. Get your head out of your ass.
with the current rules on guns you are increasing the chance of these things happening. Again im not saying guns need to be outlawed but just better controlled.
we have already said if a guy is intent to kill he will find a way to get a gun. But that doesnt mean he should just go to walmart and get it handed to him over the counter. also the majority of gun killings arent from mass murdering one off rampages. Some people need to think twice about shooting a gun. Americans gun laws allow you to take someones life before thinking about it once let alone twice.
An argument could be made that by buying a gun over the counter at walmart, as opposed to some black market sort of deal, is actually beneficial to society. Because in buying that gun from a company, he's helping them financially, which in turns allows them to hire more people.
So, if I had to choose between a black martket or some guy buying a gun at walmart, I'd prefer the latter. Because the result is the same, only the black market does nothing to help out the community as a whole.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken.
Oh Dear... I'm Very, Very Sorry. But I Just want to post something.
Quote:
Five shot dead in Albuquerque, teen charged
New Mexico police on Sunday identified the teenager accused of killing five people in an Albuquerque home as Nehemiah Griego, the son and brother of the victims.
Griego, 15, used multiple weapons, including an assault rifle, to kill his family on Saturday night, police said. Griego is charged with two counts of murder and three counts of child abuse leading to death, said Aaron Williamson, a Bernalillo County Sheriff's Department deputy.
Greg Griego, the brother of former state Senator Eric Griego was killed, along with his wife Sarah and three of their children.
All victims had multiple gunshot wounds, Williamson said.
Assault weapons are legal in New Mexico, though state lawmakers are considering proposals to expand gun control laws and require background checks for nearly anyone buying a firearm.
Clearly the weapon wasn't the problem. The fact that the state is fine with selling firearms to people without a background check is the problem.
Wow, havent been here in a while, didnt expect this to still be up
Fiction wrote:
... Nobody is saying, "oh well life's a bitch"... TheDrop, you're being narrow minded, and emotional. You want to take guns away from millions of responsible gun owners, just because .00001% of legal gun owners go off the deep end.
The point I was making with the inner city crime, if a bunch of kids with no schooling can get a hold of a fully automatic AK47, how would banning semi-autos from non-criminals workout? Surely that white kid can find himself a gun easy enough, legal or illegal, to commit mass murder.
Also, I can tell you're just like penfold, don't have a clue about firearms other than playing FPS and reading headlines... You're scared of guns, because you've never actually been around them. You're being just as bad as a white person who hates black people, with your narrow minded BS and generalizing everyone as a redneck or hillbilly or whatever the hell your little imagination can think up to label people you disagree with...
Well, fist of all, stop calling me emotional, kind of makes you look like a cold hearted *. I'm sorry my response to seeing 5 year olds getting gunned down is to resort to thinking of solutions to solve the problem. Rather than just going "oh well, lifes a bitch", or even worse, cling to my guns and cry about being discriminated against. Its funny that if any of these mass shootings were committed by an immigrant or a black person, conservatives would be going up in arms with their hate filled emotional response, rather than the supposed calm, logical approach they tried to take in this case (and gave up, after the Fuhrer Obama suggested any action). Now about being scared about guns 'cause i have never been around one. Well my uncle was a police officer and we used to live together, so thats wrong; but that in nepal so it doesn't matter. But suggesting that only people who have use guns should have any say on the matter is stupid. we all know guns kill, we know what semi automatic means, and many of these public shootings (not those from gangs) are committed with legally purchased guns (usually including semi auto rifles). If these background checks on legal purchases were very hard, and buying gun criminally so easy, then these mass shooters would have just bought em illegal. (simple logic)
Now that theres a obvious difference between the killing power of guns vs. potatoes, these people think the 2nd amendment is there in order to oppose some kind of tyrant takeover. First of all, you'd have to buy guns illegally anyways if there was some kind of government take over. +If you really think that your semi-automatic rifles and pistols would be able to stop the US military.. Which comes to the main point. I think that because the 2nd amendment is apparently there to oppose some kind of tyrant takeover of America, in order to save us from ourselves and our own military, ordinary citizens should have access to automatic rifles, RPGs, apache helicopters, aircraft carriers, et, while also getting military style training, to erm, keep ourselves safe from our own military.
I havent read the whole thread yet, but if anyone supported the NRA's idea of armed guards at every school, that should have probably ended the thread.
_________________ let it gooooo let it gooooOoOooOOOOOO
Let her suck my pistol She open up her mouth and then I blow her brains out
Assault weapons are legal in New Mexico, though state lawmakers are considering proposals to expand gun control laws and require background checks for nearly anyone buying a firearm.
Clearly the weapon wasn't the problem. The fact that the state is fine with selling firearms to people without a background check is the problem.
yes that is correct. Before we put blame solely on the weapon we do need to discuss the reason that weapon is in someones hand. In this case the background check was not up to standard and that needs to be resolved, its not about removing guns its about reducing the risk of people not thinking about what they are doing. If america cant get background checks sorted they will have no hope upholding a law about types of guns.
Everything needs to be taken into account depending on the situation, guns are far too easily obtained by those people who wish to commit murders. If no one was intent on murdering then no one would need a gun to prevent a murderer murdering.
Joined: Mar 2008 Posts: 2147 Location: Dead.(No Longer With Us)
Spoiler!
TheDrop wrote:
Wow, havent been here in a while, didnt expect this to still be up
Fiction wrote:
... Nobody is saying, "oh well life's a bitch"... TheDrop, you're being narrow minded, and emotional. You want to take guns away from millions of responsible gun owners, just because .00001% of legal gun owners go off the deep end.
The point I was making with the inner city crime, if a bunch of kids with no schooling can get a hold of a fully automatic AK47, how would banning semi-autos from non-criminals workout? Surely that white kid can find himself a gun easy enough, legal or illegal, to commit mass murder.
Also, I can tell you're just like penfold, don't have a clue about firearms other than playing FPS and reading headlines... You're scared of guns, because you've never actually been around them. You're being just as bad as a white person who hates black people, with your narrow minded BS and generalizing everyone as a redneck or hillbilly or whatever the hell your little imagination can think up to label people you disagree with...
Well, fist of all, stop calling me emotional, kind of makes you look like a cold hearted *. I'm sorry my response to seeing 5 year olds getting gunned down is to resort to thinking of solutions to solve the problem. Rather than just going "oh well, lifes a bitch", or even worse, cling to my guns and cry about being discriminated against. Its funny that if any of these mass shootings were committed by an immigrant or a black person, conservatives would be going up in arms with their hate filled emotional response, rather than the supposed calm, logical approach they tried to take in this case (and gave up, after the Fuhrer Obama suggested any action). Now about being scared about guns 'cause i have never been around one. Well my uncle was a police officer and we used to live together, so thats wrong; but that in nepal so it doesn't matter. But suggesting that only people who have use guns should have any say on the matter is stupid. we all know guns kill, we know what semi automatic means, and many of these public shootings (not those from gangs) are committed with legally purchased guns (usually including semi auto rifles). If these background checks on legal purchases were very hard, and buying gun criminally so easy, then these mass shooters would have just bought em illegal. (simple logic)
Now that theres a obvious difference between the killing power of guns vs. potatoes, these people think the 2nd amendment is there in order to oppose some kind of tyrant takeover. First of all, you'd have to buy guns illegally anyways if there was some kind of government take over. +If you really think that your semi-automatic rifles and pistols would be able to stop the US military.. Which comes to the main point. I think that because the 2nd amendment is apparently there to oppose some kind of tyrant takeover of America, in order to save us from ourselves and our own military, ordinary citizens should have access to automatic rifles, RPGs, apache helicopters, aircraft carriers, et, while also getting military style training, to erm, keep ourselves safe from our own military.
I havent read the whole thread yet, but if anyone supported the NRA's idea of armed guards at every school, that should have probably ended the thread.
I don't know what was said in this, but rest assure I don't care, and your point got across completely. This thread is fail, and I wish it would just end... Everyone wants guns gone, nobody wants them, they're evil, we all get that. Please, everyone that has been anti-gun has already said the same thing at least 10 times, give it a rest... You're not going to get any more right...
penfold1992 wrote:
yes that is correct. Before we put blame solely on the weapon we do need to discuss the reason that weapon is in someones hand. In this case the background check was not up to standard and that needs to be resolved, its not about removing guns its about reducing the risk of people not thinking about what they are doing. If america cant get background checks sorted they will have no hope upholding a law about types of guns.
Everything needs to be taken into account depending on the situation, guns are far too easily obtained by those people who wish to commit murders. If no one was intent on murdering then no one would need a gun to prevent a murderer murdering.
... I just have to say this... I can tell you know very little about the states, and it's annoying to see you trying and explain every situation, yet you are so ignorant... Arizona has so many illegal immigrants bringing guns over the border, they don't need to by a gun from a Farking store... A background check on a 15 year old kid? 15 year old kids can't even buy spray paint... lol I'm sorry, but you're stupid.
you blame americas problems on my ignorance? why dont you control your boarders better to prevent guns from flooding in? the UK still gets a few in but obviously not on the scale that happens in america! Also if the 15 year old has a close relative with a gun, he can get his hands on it easily by just taking it... if there wasnt and he got a gun by some sort of illegal trade some how then what made that kid go out of his was to obtain a fire arm? (unless he payed an adult to get him one like kids often do to get alcohol, stand outside a liquor store and ask adults to buy it for them)
again im not anti gun and wouldnt want to see a ban on guns in america i think thats a bad idea.
Quote:
again im not anti gun and wouldnt want to see a ban on guns in america i think thats a bad idea.
I think that because the 2nd amendment is apparently there to oppose some kind of tyrant takeover of America, in order to save us from ourselves and our own military, ordinary citizens should have access to automatic rifles, RPGs, apache helicopters, aircraft carriers, et, while also getting military style training, to erm, keep ourselves safe from our own military.
LOL... I love this part...I said the same thing earlier in the thread but you made it way more funny and interesting and most importantly...true.... It really puts the second amendment in perspective..which is that it's utterly useless...and even more useless to use it as an argument to support gun rights.....(I was avoiding this thread like the plague but this quote was too funny)
I think the right to defend yourselves from some intruder coming to your home is reasonably valid....You just don't need a gun rack with several high capacity rifles to do it...A single pistol that is confined to the home (and to the range for practice) and kept safe in the home (as per the law) is adequate...
And again to all the pro gun advocates....no one here is really wanting your "rights" removed...just simply better controlled...Your blood just boils as you go all out thinking the rest of society wants to take away your precious toys when that's not really the case... (well if It were possible (if) and up to me no one would own a gun not a single soul...so ya..I guess your blood should boil..just a little though since it's not gonna happen)
_________________
_________________________________________________ BOWFull STR Fire level 102 -- ON A LONG BREAK..POSSIBLY FOREVER
I think that because the 2nd amendment is apparently there to oppose some kind of tyrant takeover of America, in order to save us from ourselves and our own military, ordinary citizens should have access to automatic rifles, RPGs, apache helicopters, aircraft carriers, et, while also getting military style training, to erm, keep ourselves safe from our own military.
LOL... I love this part...I said the same thing earlier in the thread but you made it way more funny and interesting and most importantly...true.... It really puts the second amendment in perspective..which is that it's utterly useless...and even more useless to use it as an argument to support gun rights.....(I was avoiding this thread like the plague but this quote was too funny)
I think the right to defend yourselves from some intruder coming to your home is reasonably valid....You just don't need a gun rack with several high capacity rifles to do it...A single pistol that is confined to the home (and to the range for practice) and kept safe in the home (as per the law) is adequate...
And again to all the pro gun advocates....no one here is really wanting your "rights" removed...just simply better controlled...Your blood just boils as you go all out thinking the rest of society wants to take away your precious toys when that's not really the case... (well if It were possible (if) and up to me no one would own a gun not a single soul...so ya..I guess your blood should boil..just a little though since it's not gonna happen)
Being condescending and calling them 'precious toys' is a real great way to ruin your argument..
The amendment can easily be considered useless now, but not for good reasons. Fact is the government SHOULD fear the population, however through systematic control and abuse the government really has nothing to fear. Does this mean we should get rid of the second amendment? Not in the slightest. If anything it means total reform..The solution ISN'T to take guns away or limit them (psychiatric evaluations/background checks aside), the solution is to find out why the Amendment is no longer needed and then fix that.
Giving up freedoms has become commonplace in the US though and I'm fairly certain it won't change any time soon. To me it appears like it will be a parabola of freedoms. You start off with a large amount (when rights were first introduced), slowly but surely you lose most of them (aka right now) and eventually when the population becomes more intelligent and demanding your rights go back up. It's an entirely different argument though and I (personally) find it hard to convey my thoughts on it.
Being wrong ruins one's argument...not being condescending:
Since having a few vanilla flavor AR15s won't help you against a military/government takeover...and since you can stop criminals with a hand gun....Why not settle with just a hand gun?... You're rights are still in tact isn't it? But no wait!...that's not the issue...the issue is more symbolic....partially infringing on your rights is just as bad right?..because it could lead to other infringements right?....Why such a big fuss over this particular right though??? weren't there far more important rights that were/are being infringed upon??? Where was/is the huge fuss over these ones???...
How about this....I vote for all gun lovers to have any gun they want..even RPGs...I'm serious...Military grade if you want...but all these weaponry are kept at a facility where you go there and use them to your hearts content...they're yours you just can't take them home....That way you get to enjoy your hobby...plus you still get to keep your hand guns at home...Would this be good enough?... *awaits the wrath*
_________________
_________________________________________________ BOWFull STR Fire level 102 -- ON A LONG BREAK..POSSIBLY FOREVER
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
Crumpets for Pres