|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On July 21 2012 21:52 Ezod wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2012 21:42 Roman666 wrote:On July 21 2012 21:24 Ezod wrote:On July 21 2012 21:19 hifriend wrote:On July 21 2012 21:12 Ezod wrote:
This is very simple. Good people don't do mass shootings. Gun laws only affect law abiding citizens. Other countries allow guns other than the USA which proves the gun murders have more to do with culture than the actual use of guns. HERE'S A SIMPLE TRUTH - SINCE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO EVER EVER EVER REMOVE THE GUNS FROM THIS EARTH, YOU MUST ACCEPT THE FACT THAT UNTIL THEY ALL CAN ALL BE REMOVED/DESTROYED BAD PEOPLE WILL HAVE GUNS. AND GOOD PEOPLE WITH GUNS are THE ONY WAY TO STOP THE BAD PEOPLE WITH GUNS. Please don't try to say that "our goverment is nice and wouldn't hurt us etc. etc." because this is irrelevant. Power and money corrupt - the founding fathers understood this - ARMED CITIZENS ARE THE ONLY WAY TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE FROM TYRANICAL GOVERNMENTS. So even if you think ANY goverment in the world shits flowers and cupcakes...give it time....because history has shown again and again that sometimes the good guys gotta stand up to evil to protect human rights and freedom. Magical fairy land: guns do not exist. Reality: good people need the ability to defend themselves until bad people go away. Everytime in history a goverment was tyranical evil communist (millions dead) etc... the VERY FIRST THING THEY DO IS DISARM THE POPULATION. THINK ABOUT IT. and google it. None of that will matter one bit if the government has the military on its side. It has mattered tons of time throughout history and didn't a few mid-eastern countries recently overthrow goverments with huge armed resistances little while back ya know I heard something about it.....Lerbia, Egykt... I forget....OH WELL BACK TO VIDEO GAMES AND HOT POCKETS TORLOLOLOLOLOL While 20 years ago whole Eastern Europe liberated itself without major military clashes. In Poland during transformation no shots were fired at all, those were fired 10 years earlier during martial law. And it weren't the citizens who did the shooting, but militia did by firing on unarmed miners. While it mattered tons of time throughout history, there are other ways. Thank You for posting something with substance. This is 100% correct. and in every single situation we EVER encounter it should always be resolved without violence. diplomacy is ALWAYS the best option. But in reality after diplomacy fails what do you do then? Violence should be the LAST option but also you have to realize it doesn't always work. It's like the fire extinguisher in your house. Most of them are never ever used, but you have them "just in case". This is exactly why the founding fathers made the constitution the way they did. That's why America has always been a beacon of freedom and liberty. it's very hard to oppress America because of that document. The ability to remove tryanical goverments is built into the very fabric of America.
So the annual school, workplace or public mass shooting sprees that occur in the US are because of it's culture? Tell me again about the beacon of liberty stuff.
It just seems a bit mad to me to give people easy access to weapons that can kill lots of other people very quickly and easily. Because peppered among law abiding citizens are lunatics and psychopaths.
EDIT: Also I should point out that gun laws do not affect only law abiding citizens. In most countries with no right to bear arms, it's much rarer for criminals to have guns and gun crime is much, much more absent. I live in a town of 250,000 people on the outskirts of London and gun crime is unheard of here. Even in north London where I did live it's a rarity. Admittedly the criminals have knives but hey, at least they can't run into a cinema and spray knives around indiscriminately.
|
imhp, the problem in usa with guns in threefold: a.) a culture which glorifies violence (yes, it matters, people) b.) the fact that many people in our country have no power or wealth and no real hope of getting either c.) acting gangster (aka cowboy), reckless rule-breaking and a general sense that the individual knows better than society
i don't own a gun and i live in a wealthy suburb (whatever that's worth in terms of safety) but sometimes when i see the way things are going in this country i start to wish i could live in europe. because i can't, i googled local gun stores...no joke
|
On July 21 2012 23:11 The KY wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2012 21:52 Ezod wrote:On July 21 2012 21:42 Roman666 wrote:On July 21 2012 21:24 Ezod wrote:On July 21 2012 21:19 hifriend wrote:On July 21 2012 21:12 Ezod wrote:
This is very simple. Good people don't do mass shootings. Gun laws only affect law abiding citizens. Other countries allow guns other than the USA which proves the gun murders have more to do with culture than the actual use of guns. HERE'S A SIMPLE TRUTH - SINCE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO EVER EVER EVER REMOVE THE GUNS FROM THIS EARTH, YOU MUST ACCEPT THE FACT THAT UNTIL THEY ALL CAN ALL BE REMOVED/DESTROYED BAD PEOPLE WILL HAVE GUNS. AND GOOD PEOPLE WITH GUNS are THE ONY WAY TO STOP THE BAD PEOPLE WITH GUNS. Please don't try to say that "our goverment is nice and wouldn't hurt us etc. etc." because this is irrelevant. Power and money corrupt - the founding fathers understood this - ARMED CITIZENS ARE THE ONLY WAY TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE FROM TYRANICAL GOVERNMENTS. So even if you think ANY goverment in the world shits flowers and cupcakes...give it time....because history has shown again and again that sometimes the good guys gotta stand up to evil to protect human rights and freedom. Magical fairy land: guns do not exist. Reality: good people need the ability to defend themselves until bad people go away. Everytime in history a goverment was tyranical evil communist (millions dead) etc... the VERY FIRST THING THEY DO IS DISARM THE POPULATION. THINK ABOUT IT. and google it. None of that will matter one bit if the government has the military on its side. It has mattered tons of time throughout history and didn't a few mid-eastern countries recently overthrow goverments with huge armed resistances little while back ya know I heard something about it.....Lerbia, Egykt... I forget....OH WELL BACK TO VIDEO GAMES AND HOT POCKETS TORLOLOLOLOLOL While 20 years ago whole Eastern Europe liberated itself without major military clashes. In Poland during transformation no shots were fired at all, those were fired 10 years earlier during martial law. And it weren't the citizens who did the shooting, but militia did by firing on unarmed miners. While it mattered tons of time throughout history, there are other ways. Thank You for posting something with substance. This is 100% correct. and in every single situation we EVER encounter it should always be resolved without violence. diplomacy is ALWAYS the best option. But in reality after diplomacy fails what do you do then? Violence should be the LAST option but also you have to realize it doesn't always work. It's like the fire extinguisher in your house. Most of them are never ever used, but you have them "just in case". This is exactly why the founding fathers made the constitution the way they did. That's why America has always been a beacon of freedom and liberty. it's very hard to oppress America because of that document. The ability to remove tryanical goverments is built into the very fabric of America. So the annual school, workplace or public mass shooting sprees that occur in the US are because of it's culture? Tell me again about the beacon of liberty stuff. It just seems a bit mad to me to give people easy access to weapons that can kill lots of other people very quickly and easily. Because peppered among law abiding citizens are lunatics and psychopaths.
This argument is so stupid. If you think someone planning to go and kill a bunch of people can't get weapons illegally then you should really reevaluate your position... America is the news hub of the world, it also has 360 million people in it... BAD SHIT happens, negating the gun law or not won't help that.
Do you know why the right to bear arms exists? It exists so that the population has the ability to defend itself and throw over oppressive government bodies, Swiitzerland has one of the LOWEST crime rates, and most civilians have an AR-15 laying in there house... Don't be so naive to think "gun laws" cause violence or create a scenario where it is easier. You want to kill someone? A lot of people? There are a shit ton of ways, I doubt those bottled explosives he planted were bought at a store, yet there he is... setting them up. And if you want a gun? How do you think the hoodrats and kids in the ghetto get there hands on guns? They don't have a gun permit.
I
|
If guns are illegal it would be more difficult for everyone, including criminals and crazy people, to get guns.
I realy dont see how people can deny this lol.
"He would get these weapons no matter how illegal weapons in the US have been"
NO! Why keep people insisting on this false claim?
Off course there are some people who would have gotten the gun regardless of the laws, but there are also manny people (including crazy people and criminals) for who the law and the easy availablitity of guns will make a difference in them getting one, and the time it takes them to get one.
|
On July 21 2012 23:18 NeMeSiS3 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2012 23:11 The KY wrote:On July 21 2012 21:52 Ezod wrote:On July 21 2012 21:42 Roman666 wrote:On July 21 2012 21:24 Ezod wrote:On July 21 2012 21:19 hifriend wrote:On July 21 2012 21:12 Ezod wrote:
This is very simple. Good people don't do mass shootings. Gun laws only affect law abiding citizens. Other countries allow guns other than the USA which proves the gun murders have more to do with culture than the actual use of guns. HERE'S A SIMPLE TRUTH - SINCE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO EVER EVER EVER REMOVE THE GUNS FROM THIS EARTH, YOU MUST ACCEPT THE FACT THAT UNTIL THEY ALL CAN ALL BE REMOVED/DESTROYED BAD PEOPLE WILL HAVE GUNS. AND GOOD PEOPLE WITH GUNS are THE ONY WAY TO STOP THE BAD PEOPLE WITH GUNS. Please don't try to say that "our goverment is nice and wouldn't hurt us etc. etc." because this is irrelevant. Power and money corrupt - the founding fathers understood this - ARMED CITIZENS ARE THE ONLY WAY TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE FROM TYRANICAL GOVERNMENTS. So even if you think ANY goverment in the world shits flowers and cupcakes...give it time....because history has shown again and again that sometimes the good guys gotta stand up to evil to protect human rights and freedom. Magical fairy land: guns do not exist. Reality: good people need the ability to defend themselves until bad people go away. Everytime in history a goverment was tyranical evil communist (millions dead) etc... the VERY FIRST THING THEY DO IS DISARM THE POPULATION. THINK ABOUT IT. and google it. None of that will matter one bit if the government has the military on its side. It has mattered tons of time throughout history and didn't a few mid-eastern countries recently overthrow goverments with huge armed resistances little while back ya know I heard something about it.....Lerbia, Egykt... I forget....OH WELL BACK TO VIDEO GAMES AND HOT POCKETS TORLOLOLOLOLOL While 20 years ago whole Eastern Europe liberated itself without major military clashes. In Poland during transformation no shots were fired at all, those were fired 10 years earlier during martial law. And it weren't the citizens who did the shooting, but militia did by firing on unarmed miners. While it mattered tons of time throughout history, there are other ways. Thank You for posting something with substance. This is 100% correct. and in every single situation we EVER encounter it should always be resolved without violence. diplomacy is ALWAYS the best option. But in reality after diplomacy fails what do you do then? Violence should be the LAST option but also you have to realize it doesn't always work. It's like the fire extinguisher in your house. Most of them are never ever used, but you have them "just in case". This is exactly why the founding fathers made the constitution the way they did. That's why America has always been a beacon of freedom and liberty. it's very hard to oppress America because of that document. The ability to remove tryanical goverments is built into the very fabric of America. So the annual school, workplace or public mass shooting sprees that occur in the US are because of it's culture? Tell me again about the beacon of liberty stuff. It just seems a bit mad to me to give people easy access to weapons that can kill lots of other people very quickly and easily. Because peppered among law abiding citizens are lunatics and psychopaths. This argument is so stupid. If you think someone planning to go and kill a bunch of people can't get weapons illegally then you should really reevaluate your position... America is the news hub of the world, it also has 360 million people in it... BAD SHIT happens, negating the gun law or not won't help that. Do you know why the right to bear arms exists? It exists so that the population has the ability to defend itself and throw over oppressive government bodies, Swiitzerland has one of the LOWEST crime rates, and most civilians have an AR-15 laying in there house... Don't be so naive to think "gun laws" cause violence or create a scenario where it is easier. You want to kill someone? A lot of people? There are a shit ton of ways, I doubt those bottled explosives he planted were bought at a store, yet there he is... setting them up. And if you want a gun? How do you think the hoodrats and kids in the ghetto get there hands on guns? They don't have a gun permit. I
Addressed this in the edit, to a point. I'm not saying it's like 'no one is allowed guns now we live in paradise yaaaay'.
The point is, do you know how the hoodrats over here get their hands on guns? Most of the time, they don't. It should be obvious that it's easier to illegally purchase a firearm in a country where it is easy to legally acquire one.
As for stupid arguments, 'there are other ways to kill multiple people' seems to qualify.
|
On July 21 2012 23:11 The KY wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2012 21:52 Ezod wrote:On July 21 2012 21:42 Roman666 wrote:On July 21 2012 21:24 Ezod wrote:On July 21 2012 21:19 hifriend wrote:On July 21 2012 21:12 Ezod wrote:
This is very simple. Good people don't do mass shootings. Gun laws only affect law abiding citizens. Other countries allow guns other than the USA which proves the gun murders have more to do with culture than the actual use of guns. HERE'S A SIMPLE TRUTH - SINCE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO EVER EVER EVER REMOVE THE GUNS FROM THIS EARTH, YOU MUST ACCEPT THE FACT THAT UNTIL THEY ALL CAN ALL BE REMOVED/DESTROYED BAD PEOPLE WILL HAVE GUNS. AND GOOD PEOPLE WITH GUNS are THE ONY WAY TO STOP THE BAD PEOPLE WITH GUNS. Please don't try to say that "our goverment is nice and wouldn't hurt us etc. etc." because this is irrelevant. Power and money corrupt - the founding fathers understood this - ARMED CITIZENS ARE THE ONLY WAY TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE FROM TYRANICAL GOVERNMENTS. So even if you think ANY goverment in the world shits flowers and cupcakes...give it time....because history has shown again and again that sometimes the good guys gotta stand up to evil to protect human rights and freedom. Magical fairy land: guns do not exist. Reality: good people need the ability to defend themselves until bad people go away. Everytime in history a goverment was tyranical evil communist (millions dead) etc... the VERY FIRST THING THEY DO IS DISARM THE POPULATION. THINK ABOUT IT. and google it. None of that will matter one bit if the government has the military on its side. It has mattered tons of time throughout history and didn't a few mid-eastern countries recently overthrow goverments with huge armed resistances little while back ya know I heard something about it.....Lerbia, Egykt... I forget....OH WELL BACK TO VIDEO GAMES AND HOT POCKETS TORLOLOLOLOLOL While 20 years ago whole Eastern Europe liberated itself without major military clashes. In Poland during transformation no shots were fired at all, those were fired 10 years earlier during martial law. And it weren't the citizens who did the shooting, but militia did by firing on unarmed miners. While it mattered tons of time throughout history, there are other ways. Thank You for posting something with substance. This is 100% correct. and in every single situation we EVER encounter it should always be resolved without violence. diplomacy is ALWAYS the best option. But in reality after diplomacy fails what do you do then? Violence should be the LAST option but also you have to realize it doesn't always work. It's like the fire extinguisher in your house. Most of them are never ever used, but you have them "just in case". This is exactly why the founding fathers made the constitution the way they did. That's why America has always been a beacon of freedom and liberty. it's very hard to oppress America because of that document. The ability to remove tryanical goverments is built into the very fabric of America. So the annual school, workplace or public mass shooting sprees that occur in the US are because of it's culture? Tell me again about the beacon of liberty stuff. It just seems a bit mad to me to give people easy access to weapons that can kill lots of other people very quickly and easily. Because peppered among law abiding citizens are lunatics and psychopaths.
you answered your own question. psycopaths do this stuff. the culture i'm speaking about is gang related activities...ghettos etc. lack of government aid to low income areas etc. where most of the gun violence is. random acts of crazy are just that. no constitution stops that.....norway shootings for example. freedom and liberty is different than magic that makes life cupcakes and rainbows. bad things happen. If those things only happened in the USA then there would be merit to that argument, there have been a few school shooting in canada too and it is illegal to carry firearms. i.e. it has nothing to do with the guns themselves. don't assume guns are the only way bad people can hurt lots of people. there are explosives available on the market too. people can just go to home hardware visit a few webpages and SHAZAAM you have a bomb that can kill LOTS of people. Why don't bombs go off everyday everywhere? BECAUSE THIS STUFF IS ONLY DONE BY PSYCOPATHS. Access to guns doesn't mean people just start murdering the crap out of everything they see...how about driving a delivery truck through a crowd of people? It sucks, but realistically if guns didn't even exist...psycopaths could find 948379487 different ways to hurt a LOT of people. Removing guns does not remove the crazies...
|
I don't understand why this movie theatre shooting triggered this discussion again. This guy was clearly prepared, and was a psycho. (it seems)
He would get these weapons no matter how illegal weapons in the US have been. Just look at the terrorist in Norway last year. Norway is a country where guns are strictly regulated, but he still managed to get them.
That being said, I do not think that America has the proper laws of guns, and by making stricter rules you will get a lot less killings. But this guy would still get his weapons and shoot the people he did.
|
On July 21 2012 23:22 Ezod wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2012 23:11 The KY wrote:On July 21 2012 21:52 Ezod wrote:On July 21 2012 21:42 Roman666 wrote:On July 21 2012 21:24 Ezod wrote:On July 21 2012 21:19 hifriend wrote:On July 21 2012 21:12 Ezod wrote:
This is very simple. Good people don't do mass shootings. Gun laws only affect law abiding citizens. Other countries allow guns other than the USA which proves the gun murders have more to do with culture than the actual use of guns. HERE'S A SIMPLE TRUTH - SINCE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO EVER EVER EVER REMOVE THE GUNS FROM THIS EARTH, YOU MUST ACCEPT THE FACT THAT UNTIL THEY ALL CAN ALL BE REMOVED/DESTROYED BAD PEOPLE WILL HAVE GUNS. AND GOOD PEOPLE WITH GUNS are THE ONY WAY TO STOP THE BAD PEOPLE WITH GUNS. Please don't try to say that "our goverment is nice and wouldn't hurt us etc. etc." because this is irrelevant. Power and money corrupt - the founding fathers understood this - ARMED CITIZENS ARE THE ONLY WAY TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE FROM TYRANICAL GOVERNMENTS. So even if you think ANY goverment in the world shits flowers and cupcakes...give it time....because history has shown again and again that sometimes the good guys gotta stand up to evil to protect human rights and freedom. Magical fairy land: guns do not exist. Reality: good people need the ability to defend themselves until bad people go away. Everytime in history a goverment was tyranical evil communist (millions dead) etc... the VERY FIRST THING THEY DO IS DISARM THE POPULATION. THINK ABOUT IT. and google it. None of that will matter one bit if the government has the military on its side. It has mattered tons of time throughout history and didn't a few mid-eastern countries recently overthrow goverments with huge armed resistances little while back ya know I heard something about it.....Lerbia, Egykt... I forget....OH WELL BACK TO VIDEO GAMES AND HOT POCKETS TORLOLOLOLOLOL While 20 years ago whole Eastern Europe liberated itself without major military clashes. In Poland during transformation no shots were fired at all, those were fired 10 years earlier during martial law. And it weren't the citizens who did the shooting, but militia did by firing on unarmed miners. While it mattered tons of time throughout history, there are other ways. Thank You for posting something with substance. This is 100% correct. and in every single situation we EVER encounter it should always be resolved without violence. diplomacy is ALWAYS the best option. But in reality after diplomacy fails what do you do then? Violence should be the LAST option but also you have to realize it doesn't always work. It's like the fire extinguisher in your house. Most of them are never ever used, but you have them "just in case". This is exactly why the founding fathers made the constitution the way they did. That's why America has always been a beacon of freedom and liberty. it's very hard to oppress America because of that document. The ability to remove tryanical goverments is built into the very fabric of America. So the annual school, workplace or public mass shooting sprees that occur in the US are because of it's culture? Tell me again about the beacon of liberty stuff. It just seems a bit mad to me to give people easy access to weapons that can kill lots of other people very quickly and easily. Because peppered among law abiding citizens are lunatics and psychopaths. you answered your own question. psycopaths do this stuff. the culture i'm speaking about is gang related activities...ghettos etc. lack of government aid to low income areas etc. where most of the gun violence is. random acts of crazy are just that. no constitution stops that.....norway shootings for example. freedom and liberty is different than magic that makes life cupcakes and rainbows. bad things happen. If those things only happened in the USA then there would be merit to that argument, there have been a few school shooting in canada too and it is illegal to carry firearms. i.e. it has nothing to do with the guns themselves. don't assume guns are the only way bad people can hurt lots of people. there are explosives available on the market too. people can just go to home hardware visit a few webpages and SHAZAAM you have a bomb that can kill LOTS of people. Why don't bombs go off everyday everywhere? BECAUSE THIS STUFF IS ONLY DONE BY PSYCOPATHS. Access to guns doesn't mean people just start murdering the crap out of everything they see...how about driving a delivery truck through a crowd of people? It sucks, but realistically if guns didn't even exist...psycopaths could find 948379487 different ways to hurt a LOT of people. Removing guns does not remove the crazies...
Does this kind of thing not happen in the US more frequently? Certainly it seems like it.
On one thing we agree, ghettos, lack of social mobility and lack of aid to the poor is the main problem.
|
I'm curious as to what are the reasons to keep guns. I mean if you were to ban bycycles there would be a drop in bycycle related injuries. If you ban guns there would be a drop in gun related crimes/deaths/injuries.
So what are the reasons to keep the guns?
|
Honestly if guns do their job even without firing a single shot, I'm all for it.
This year around Valentines Day there was a bunch of robberies where I live out of nowhere, and the people living right across from me got broken into, with the robbers using my neighbors' Jesus statue to bust open 2-3 of the windows to get in and steal everything they could carry while my neighbors were in the house. I'm definitely thinking that with a weapon, even one without any ammo, things would have gone a lot better and any damage would just be fixed. If not, maybe at least stall the robbers a bit.
And I think gun laws are more for the law-abiding side of the fence. If we ban cocaine, cokeheads will still find a way to get it. If we ban guns, criminals will still find someone to sell them one. So it's just a matter of how much we trust our average Joe with a gun of his own.
|
On February 20 2012 03:30 Hertzy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2012 03:25 MerdaPura wrote:Owning a gun gives you the option of slef defense, but IMO martial arts do that job pretty well. And also, the worst part about having a gun, is that you may want to use it. And from there on countless things may happen, good or bad, impossible to know. Finishing: Learn kung-fu  The problem with your argument becomes apparent when your assailant has a weapon, a size advantage or just more experience in fights.
Depends on the weapon, other then that ? If you learn martial arts, size should not be an issue because it teaches you leverage and the ability to use an opponents weight and power against themselves. Experience? The whole idea of learning martial arts is that you will have that experience to defend yourself.
So yes, if they have a gun you have an issue, anything else? You should be able to disarm them if you've taken enough training, Krav Maga for instance. And size is a non issue in a fight if you've trained enough along with experience.
|
So what are the reasons to keep the guns?
Self-defence, culture/tradition, and the fact that bearing arms is a "god given right" in the constitution.
|
On July 21 2012 23:22 The KY wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2012 23:18 NeMeSiS3 wrote:On July 21 2012 23:11 The KY wrote:On July 21 2012 21:52 Ezod wrote:On July 21 2012 21:42 Roman666 wrote:On July 21 2012 21:24 Ezod wrote:On July 21 2012 21:19 hifriend wrote:On July 21 2012 21:12 Ezod wrote:
This is very simple. Good people don't do mass shootings. Gun laws only affect law abiding citizens. Other countries allow guns other than the USA which proves the gun murders have more to do with culture than the actual use of guns. HERE'S A SIMPLE TRUTH - SINCE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO EVER EVER EVER REMOVE THE GUNS FROM THIS EARTH, YOU MUST ACCEPT THE FACT THAT UNTIL THEY ALL CAN ALL BE REMOVED/DESTROYED BAD PEOPLE WILL HAVE GUNS. AND GOOD PEOPLE WITH GUNS are THE ONY WAY TO STOP THE BAD PEOPLE WITH GUNS. Please don't try to say that "our goverment is nice and wouldn't hurt us etc. etc." because this is irrelevant. Power and money corrupt - the founding fathers understood this - ARMED CITIZENS ARE THE ONLY WAY TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE FROM TYRANICAL GOVERNMENTS. So even if you think ANY goverment in the world shits flowers and cupcakes...give it time....because history has shown again and again that sometimes the good guys gotta stand up to evil to protect human rights and freedom. Magical fairy land: guns do not exist. Reality: good people need the ability to defend themselves until bad people go away. Everytime in history a goverment was tyranical evil communist (millions dead) etc... the VERY FIRST THING THEY DO IS DISARM THE POPULATION. THINK ABOUT IT. and google it. None of that will matter one bit if the government has the military on its side. It has mattered tons of time throughout history and didn't a few mid-eastern countries recently overthrow goverments with huge armed resistances little while back ya know I heard something about it.....Lerbia, Egykt... I forget....OH WELL BACK TO VIDEO GAMES AND HOT POCKETS TORLOLOLOLOLOL While 20 years ago whole Eastern Europe liberated itself without major military clashes. In Poland during transformation no shots were fired at all, those were fired 10 years earlier during martial law. And it weren't the citizens who did the shooting, but militia did by firing on unarmed miners. While it mattered tons of time throughout history, there are other ways. Thank You for posting something with substance. This is 100% correct. and in every single situation we EVER encounter it should always be resolved without violence. diplomacy is ALWAYS the best option. But in reality after diplomacy fails what do you do then? Violence should be the LAST option but also you have to realize it doesn't always work. It's like the fire extinguisher in your house. Most of them are never ever used, but you have them "just in case". This is exactly why the founding fathers made the constitution the way they did. That's why America has always been a beacon of freedom and liberty. it's very hard to oppress America because of that document. The ability to remove tryanical goverments is built into the very fabric of America. So the annual school, workplace or public mass shooting sprees that occur in the US are because of it's culture? Tell me again about the beacon of liberty stuff. It just seems a bit mad to me to give people easy access to weapons that can kill lots of other people very quickly and easily. Because peppered among law abiding citizens are lunatics and psychopaths. This argument is so stupid. If you think someone planning to go and kill a bunch of people can't get weapons illegally then you should really reevaluate your position... America is the news hub of the world, it also has 360 million people in it... BAD SHIT happens, negating the gun law or not won't help that. Do you know why the right to bear arms exists? It exists so that the population has the ability to defend itself and throw over oppressive government bodies, Swiitzerland has one of the LOWEST crime rates, and most civilians have an AR-15 laying in there house... Don't be so naive to think "gun laws" cause violence or create a scenario where it is easier. You want to kill someone? A lot of people? There are a shit ton of ways, I doubt those bottled explosives he planted were bought at a store, yet there he is... setting them up. And if you want a gun? How do you think the hoodrats and kids in the ghetto get there hands on guns? They don't have a gun permit. I Addressed this in the edit, to a point. I'm not saying it's like 'no one is allowed guns now we live in paradise yaaaay'. The point is, do you know how the hoodrats over here get their hands on guns? Most of the time, they don't. It should be obvious that it's easier to illegally purchase a firearm in a country where it is easy to legally acquire one. As for stupid arguments, 'there are other ways to kill multiple people' seems to qualify.
Doesn't work that way. Prohibition enables the illegal market... Drugs? It is ridiculously easy to get your hands on any drug. Liquor? Well back in the days of prohibition, liquor was the main cause of the mafia rise through boot legging, giving them the funds to control districts (and states). So you ask me why is it not easy in London? No idea, but in the States (even in Canada) as long as you go looking, you'll find what you want, and if it becomes illegal? The market increases because the demand increases, and supply has to match it (basic economics)
|
On July 21 2012 23:24 Arnstein wrote:
I don't understand why this movie theatre shooting triggered this discussion again. This guy was clearly prepared, and was a psycho. (it seems)
He would get these weapons no matter how illegal weapons in the US have been. Just look at the terrorist in Norway last year. Norway is a country where guns are strictly regulated, but he still managed to get them.
That being said, I do not think that America has the proper laws of guns, and by making stricter rules you will get a lot less killings. But this guy would still get his weapons and shoot the people he did.
Your logic doesn't really quite add up good sir.
I would agree with the latter of your contradicting points; more strict gun control laws lowers instances of shootings. Why would you be 100% sure that James would get the weapons he needed if gun control laws in the U.S. are like the ones in China? He could, but it's not a sure thing by a LONG shot.
|
NeMeSiS3 Canada. July 21 2012 23:30. Posts 1134
Thats just nonsense.
The demand wont increase because you make the suply illegal?
The amount of people who stop with the activity because it is illegal is way bigger then the amount that starts with it because it now is illegal
Making something illegal will decrease that activity,by making it more difficult.
Thats the whole point of law enforcement.
If this was not the case then we should just stop funding the police.
Off course people will always find what the look for, the point is to make them look harder.
Make them look so hard that manny of them will give up looking.
|
On July 21 2012 23:30 Rassy wrote:
So what are the reasons to keep the guns?
Self-defence, culture/tradition, and the fact that bearing arms is a "god given right" in the constitution.
"The Second Amendment to the Constitution of The United States reads as follows:
'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'
Now the issue here it seems is largely what is meant by 'Militia' but before I address that consider this. When the amendments were written and passed by congress they and the constitution they amended were intended to be read in conjunction with and to provide the means to defend both the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.
The drafters of the Declaration of Independence had experience of the use of a standing army to oppress the people.
A standing army is a tool of government and can be used by a government to enforce its rule in defiance of the wishes of the people.
A standing army tends to be distanced from the people and its members are often not from the locality in which they are stationed. They do not have much of a connection with the locals making their use against the local population much easier.
The drafters of the second amendment were fully aware of this. They had seen standing armies in Europe used against their own people when those people objected to government oppression or indifference.
Their intention was that there would be no standing army in their new country to prevent a future government using such an army against its own people.
The defence of the country was to be carried out by the armed citizens who would form a Militia as and when needed for that purpose. And should a government become oppressive to the people, to provide the means for the people to remove the government and replace it.
So despite arguments to the contrary from some. The term 'Militia' does not mean the National Guard nor does it mean the regular military forces which are under the direct control of the federal government.
The meaning of 'Militia' intended by the drafters of the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution of The United States, and The Bill of Rights, of which the Second Amendment is a part is, literally, THE PEOPLE. The individuals who make up the population of the United States.
When the Second Amendment is read, as it should be read, in conjunction with the Declaration of Independence and The Constitution of The United States. The meaning of the word 'Militia' intended by the founders of the United States is clear and unambiguous.
Brian Thwaites LL.B (Hons)
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_did_the_founding_fathers_include_the_Second_Amendment#ixzz21HOtuNoP"
|
You need a driver's license to drive a car. You should also need a gun license to own a gun. If you had to pass a mandatory exam + psychological test to own a gun we'd see a lot less problems.
|
Blaming all violence and crime on guns possession is indeed scapegoating and not dealing with the problems themselves. These could be poverty, plain psychosis or who knows what.
But claiming more acccesable guns would or prevent tragedies like these is plain insanity. It's like saying, we don't want children get bullied on the schoolyard, lets arm them with knives so the playing field is leveled! Bullies will now think twice when they know everyone is carrying!
|
On July 21 2012 21:12 Ezod wrote:
This is very simple. Good people don't do mass shootings. Gun laws only affect law abiding citizens. Other countries allow guns other than the USA which proves the gun murders have more to do with culture than the actual use of guns. HERE'S A SIMPLE TRUTH - SINCE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO EVER EVER EVER REMOVE THE GUNS FROM THIS EARTH, YOU MUST ACCEPT THE FACT THAT UNTIL THEY ALL CAN ALL BE REMOVED/DESTROYED BAD PEOPLE WILL HAVE GUNS. AND GOOD PEOPLE WITH GUNS are THE ONY WAY TO STOP THE BAD PEOPLE WITH GUNS. Please don't try to say that "our goverment is nice and wouldn't hurt us etc. etc." because this is irrelevant. Power and money corrupt - the founding fathers understood this - ARMED CITIZENS ARE THE ONLY WAY TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE FROM TYRANICAL GOVERNMENTS. So even if you think ANY goverment in the world shits flowers and cupcakes...give it time....because history has shown again and again that sometimes the good guys gotta stand up to evil to protect human rights and freedom. Magical fairy land: guns do not exist. Reality: good people need the ability to defend themselves until bad people go away. Everytime in history a goverment was tyranical evil communist (millions dead) etc... the VERY FIRST THING THEY DO IS DISARM THE POPULATION. THINK ABOUT IT. and google it.
Stupidest thing I've ever read.
|
On July 21 2012 23:36 Rassy wrote:
NeMeSiS3 Canada. July 21 2012 23:30. Posts 1134
Thats just nonsense.
The demand wont increase because you make the suply illegal?
The amount of people who stop with the activity because it is illegal is way bigger then the amount that starts with it because it now is illegal
Making something illegal will decrease that activity,by making it more difficult.
Thats the whole point of law enforcement.
If this was not the case then we should just stop funding the police.
Off course people will always find what the look for, the point is to make them look harder.
Make them look so hard that manny of them will give up looking.
You obviously have no idea how the last 50-60 years has went. Every attempt at prohibiting something has increased it's demand. You can't bring a single example that say's that's not the case. Hell even the war on terror which is comparable has seen a massive increase since it's inception. War on drugs? same thing, alcohol prohibition? same thing...
You are now saying prohibit weapons, the only people being hurt are the people who want to legally obtain something to defend themselves, how ignorant can you be to think "bad guys won't get it" -.-
"make them look so hard that many of them will give up looking" <---- Not a single example in history has ever proven this true. There is a reason I can walk downtown where I live and find cocaine/crack/bath salts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
