|
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 February 20 2012 09:35 teddyoojo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2012 09:28 NeMeSiS3 wrote:
ridiculous ... I'd rather see someone dying from an accidental gun shot then a drunk driver killing 3 kids and 2 parents... Try to think with your head... what difference does it makes if a person dies by a gunshot or by drunk driving? exactly, none. guns are there to shoot people. alcohol isnt there to drunkdrive kill someone. you cant forbid planes because some terrorists use them to fly into stuff. you can forbid guns because [b]some criminals[/b ]use them to kill innocent people.
fyp
oh.. wait
|
On February 20 2012 09:55 teddyoojo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2012 09:48 clementdudu wrote:On February 20 2012 09:47 Nagano wrote:On February 20 2012 09:45 clementdudu wrote:On February 20 2012 09:43 Nagano wrote:On February 20 2012 09:16 Domus wrote:On February 20 2012 09:09 Nagano wrote:On February 20 2012 09:00 Domus wrote:
Hey, I don't give a shit man. If you want guns to "protect" yourself, then go ahead. All I am showing you is that your cure is worse than the disease. Most countries in the world do just fine without having guns in every house.
Guns don't make your safer, they make you less safe.
Also, the main goal of alcohol is not to increase your safety. But the big argument for guns is that they increase safety... You're entitled to your opinion. But I would suggest you, and along with other pro gun control believers, actually do some research on the topic. The major scientific hard hitting studies do not actually support the belief that less guns makes a society more safe. Extensive google-ing of the topic will confirm this. Gun control is very counter-intuitive and I don't blame most people for being for it. I am not a pro gun control believer. I live in the Netherlands, no guns allowed. No need to spend another thought on it  . I am not less free, I am not less safe, I don't feel so scared that I need to arm myself in my own house. I don't mind that you have guns in your hand, or in your house. Geographically it is impossible for you to hit me with it :p. And I quote: Guns don't make your[sic] safer, they make you less safe. I'm pretty sure that means you're on the gun control side of the argument? Unless I'm just high and don't know what I'm talking about. Motive is what kills; a gun is a tool. Like a hammer, or nail-gun, or a knife, or words. And as far as motives go, poverty is a big one and has proved time and time again to be the main culprit behind crime, not guns. so what do you say when we present you with areas poorer,with gun control,where the murder rate is so much lower? I'm sorry, I don't understand your sentence. Could you rephrase this? there are areas a lot poorer in the western world,in countries with gun control. the murder rate in those areas is a lot lower than in the us. poverty is the reason,guns are the tools.get rid of the tools,you still get crime,just not murder;) poverty isnt the reason, its a reason. there are plenty other reasons to it. too lazy to list some of them now~ in the end guns are not suitable for the US. not gonna post here anymore gn8
Well, I'm so glad the guy from Germany knows exactly what is and is not suitable for the US.
Is owning a gun necessary if you are a middle class citizen living in suburban America in a homogenized environment? Probably not. Is owning a gun necessary when you live in downtown Detroit with 2 children? Try convincing those people that their lives would be easier if they defended their possessions with fists and words.
|
people who would want to carry guns should not be allowed to ironically enough imo
|
On February 20 2012 09:48 clementdudu wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2012 09:47 Nagano wrote:On February 20 2012 09:45 clementdudu wrote:On February 20 2012 09:43 Nagano wrote:On February 20 2012 09:16 Domus wrote:On February 20 2012 09:09 Nagano wrote:On February 20 2012 09:00 Domus wrote:
Hey, I don't give a shit man. If you want guns to "protect" yourself, then go ahead. All I am showing you is that your cure is worse than the disease. Most countries in the world do just fine without having guns in every house.
Guns don't make your safer, they make you less safe.
Also, the main goal of alcohol is not to increase your safety. But the big argument for guns is that they increase safety... You're entitled to your opinion. But I would suggest you, and along with other pro gun control believers, actually do some research on the topic. The major scientific hard hitting studies do not actually support the belief that less guns makes a society more safe. Extensive google-ing of the topic will confirm this. Gun control is very counter-intuitive and I don't blame most people for being for it. I am not a pro gun control believer. I live in the Netherlands, no guns allowed. No need to spend another thought on it . I am not less free, I am not less safe, I don't feel so scared that I need to arm myself in my own house. I don't mind that you have guns in your hand, or in your house. Geographically it is impossible for you to hit me with it :p. And I quote: Guns don't make your[sic] safer, they make you less safe. I'm pretty sure that means you're on the gun control side of the argument? Unless I'm just high and don't know what I'm talking about. Motive is what kills; a gun is a tool. Like a hammer, or nail-gun, or a knife, or words. And as far as motives go, poverty is a big one and has proved time and time again to be the main culprit behind crime, not guns. so what do you say when we present you with areas poorer,with gun control,where the murder rate is so much lower? I'm sorry, I don't understand your sentence. Could you rephrase this? there are areas a lot poorer in the western world,in countries with gun control. the murder rate in those areas is a lot lower than in the us. poverty is the reason,guns are the tools.get rid of the tools,you still get crime,just not murder;)
And if you get rid of the poverty instead, you get rid of both the non-violent crime and the violent crime. Getting rid of poverty solves all the problems, AND people still get to keep their guns for hunting and recreational shooting.
|
On February 20 2012 09:54 Nagano wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2012 09:52 Djzapz wrote:On February 20 2012 09:43 Nagano wrote:
Motive is what kills; a gun is a tool. Like a hammer, or nail-gun, or a knife, or words. And as far as motives go, poverty is a big one and has proved time and time again to be the main culprit behind crime, not guns.
You may have a motive for nailing two planks together, but if you don't have a hammer, you may decide not to do it with your hands. It would be too hard. Yes, but we have to take the whole problem into context. The US will never be able to rid itself of firearms, and attempting to do so now has proven to only aggravate the problem. So while there may be countries like Finland or S. Korea where there are little to no gun-related deaths, that may only work for them because they have never had a prevalent firearm carrying population in the first place.
Yep, the whole ordeal is quite unfortunate.
|
On February 20 2012 10:07 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2012 09:48 clementdudu wrote:On February 20 2012 09:47 Nagano wrote:On February 20 2012 09:45 clementdudu wrote:On February 20 2012 09:43 Nagano wrote:On February 20 2012 09:16 Domus wrote:On February 20 2012 09:09 Nagano wrote:On February 20 2012 09:00 Domus wrote:
Hey, I don't give a shit man. If you want guns to "protect" yourself, then go ahead. All I am showing you is that your cure is worse than the disease. Most countries in the world do just fine without having guns in every house.
Guns don't make your safer, they make you less safe.
Also, the main goal of alcohol is not to increase your safety. But the big argument for guns is that they increase safety... You're entitled to your opinion. But I would suggest you, and along with other pro gun control believers, actually do some research on the topic. The major scientific hard hitting studies do not actually support the belief that less guns makes a society more safe. Extensive google-ing of the topic will confirm this. Gun control is very counter-intuitive and I don't blame most people for being for it. I am not a pro gun control believer. I live in the Netherlands, no guns allowed. No need to spend another thought on it . I am not less free, I am not less safe, I don't feel so scared that I need to arm myself in my own house. I don't mind that you have guns in your hand, or in your house. Geographically it is impossible for you to hit me with it :p. And I quote: Guns don't make your[sic] safer, they make you less safe. I'm pretty sure that means you're on the gun control side of the argument? Unless I'm just high and don't know what I'm talking about. Motive is what kills; a gun is a tool. Like a hammer, or nail-gun, or a knife, or words. And as far as motives go, poverty is a big one and has proved time and time again to be the main culprit behind crime, not guns. so what do you say when we present you with areas poorer,with gun control,where the murder rate is so much lower? I'm sorry, I don't understand your sentence. Could you rephrase this? there are areas a lot poorer in the western world,in countries with gun control. the murder rate in those areas is a lot lower than in the us. poverty is the reason,guns are the tools.get rid of the tools,you still get crime,just not murder;) And if you get rid of the poverty instead, you get rid of both the non-violent crime and the violent crime. Getting rid of poverty solves all the problems, AND people still get to keep their guns for hunting and recreational shooting.
but this thread is not about poverty,but guns!
|
On February 20 2012 10:10 clementdudu wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2012 10:07 Millitron wrote:On February 20 2012 09:48 clementdudu wrote:On February 20 2012 09:47 Nagano wrote:On February 20 2012 09:45 clementdudu wrote:On February 20 2012 09:43 Nagano wrote:On February 20 2012 09:16 Domus wrote:On February 20 2012 09:09 Nagano wrote:On February 20 2012 09:00 Domus wrote:
Hey, I don't give a shit man. If you want guns to "protect" yourself, then go ahead. All I am showing you is that your cure is worse than the disease. Most countries in the world do just fine without having guns in every house.
Guns don't make your safer, they make you less safe.
Also, the main goal of alcohol is not to increase your safety. But the big argument for guns is that they increase safety... You're entitled to your opinion. But I would suggest you, and along with other pro gun control believers, actually do some research on the topic. The major scientific hard hitting studies do not actually support the belief that less guns makes a society more safe. Extensive google-ing of the topic will confirm this. Gun control is very counter-intuitive and I don't blame most people for being for it. I am not a pro gun control believer. I live in the Netherlands, no guns allowed. No need to spend another thought on it . I am not less free, I am not less safe, I don't feel so scared that I need to arm myself in my own house. I don't mind that you have guns in your hand, or in your house. Geographically it is impossible for you to hit me with it :p. And I quote: Guns don't make your[sic] safer, they make you less safe. I'm pretty sure that means you're on the gun control side of the argument? Unless I'm just high and don't know what I'm talking about. Motive is what kills; a gun is a tool. Like a hammer, or nail-gun, or a knife, or words. And as far as motives go, poverty is a big one and has proved time and time again to be the main culprit behind crime, not guns. so what do you say when we present you with areas poorer,with gun control,where the murder rate is so much lower? I'm sorry, I don't understand your sentence. Could you rephrase this? there are areas a lot poorer in the western world,in countries with gun control. the murder rate in those areas is a lot lower than in the us. poverty is the reason,guns are the tools.get rid of the tools,you still get crime,just not murder;) And if you get rid of the poverty instead, you get rid of both the non-violent crime and the violent crime. Getting rid of poverty solves all the problems, AND people still get to keep their guns for hunting and recreational shooting. but this thread is not about poverty,but guns!
Guns are indeed much more badass than poverty.
|
Certain people should be allowed to. I sleep well at night knowing my 90-year old grandma has a gun in her nightstand, living on a farm in a small town 7 miles away from any other person, and no cellphone service or Internet.
|
On February 20 2012 10:10 clementdudu wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2012 10:07 Millitron wrote:On February 20 2012 09:48 clementdudu wrote:On February 20 2012 09:47 Nagano wrote:On February 20 2012 09:45 clementdudu wrote:On February 20 2012 09:43 Nagano wrote:On February 20 2012 09:16 Domus wrote:On February 20 2012 09:09 Nagano wrote:On February 20 2012 09:00 Domus wrote:
Hey, I don't give a shit man. If you want guns to "protect" yourself, then go ahead. All I am showing you is that your cure is worse than the disease. Most countries in the world do just fine without having guns in every house.
Guns don't make your safer, they make you less safe.
Also, the main goal of alcohol is not to increase your safety. But the big argument for guns is that they increase safety... You're entitled to your opinion. But I would suggest you, and along with other pro gun control believers, actually do some research on the topic. The major scientific hard hitting studies do not actually support the belief that less guns makes a society more safe. Extensive google-ing of the topic will confirm this. Gun control is very counter-intuitive and I don't blame most people for being for it. I am not a pro gun control believer. I live in the Netherlands, no guns allowed. No need to spend another thought on it . I am not less free, I am not less safe, I don't feel so scared that I need to arm myself in my own house. I don't mind that you have guns in your hand, or in your house. Geographically it is impossible for you to hit me with it :p. And I quote: Guns don't make your[sic] safer, they make you less safe. I'm pretty sure that means you're on the gun control side of the argument? Unless I'm just high and don't know what I'm talking about. Motive is what kills; a gun is a tool. Like a hammer, or nail-gun, or a knife, or words. And as far as motives go, poverty is a big one and has proved time and time again to be the main culprit behind crime, not guns. so what do you say when we present you with areas poorer,with gun control,where the murder rate is so much lower? I'm sorry, I don't understand your sentence. Could you rephrase this? there are areas a lot poorer in the western world,in countries with gun control. the murder rate in those areas is a lot lower than in the us. poverty is the reason,guns are the tools.get rid of the tools,you still get crime,just not murder;) And if you get rid of the poverty instead, you get rid of both the non-violent crime and the violent crime. Getting rid of poverty solves all the problems, AND people still get to keep their guns for hunting and recreational shooting. but this thread is not about poverty,but guns!
I understand, and so is my point. My point is that guns are not the real problem, poverty is. Get rid of the poverty, and all crime goes down, whereas getting rid of guns only reduces* gun crime.
*in theory it reduces gun crime. In practice there are many more factors that contribute to gun crime than simply the availability of guns.
|
so we can agree that poverty is the real problem but guns are still bad.good enough for me!
|
I am completely in favor of public open carry for law abiding citizens who don't work with children. And See absolutely no reason not to be allowed to have a firearm in the home for self defense.
|
The less guns there is in circulation the more difficult it will be to get one.
Because a simple gun is rather hard to find and most importantly very expensive not any crack addict can buy one.
There are some areas dangerous, but 95% aren't. And therefor 95% of the population have no use in guns(I would say 99% on TL forums...). There are just fantasizing over the FOX news and thinking they are fucking Jack Bauer (season 1 xD).
If your family were to be harm, 99% chance it wouldn't be in your home and gun or not there will sadly be nothing you can do about it. People don't come to your home thinking, I'm going to rape his daughter in front of the dad 'cause it's fun. Non-sense. If they come to steal you, they will do it when there is nobody in the house. And if they come when you are there, swallow your american hero pride, and let them take your stuff. Your family safety is more important.
If you want to be a good father and good husband just take care of your wife and your kids, do your dad/husband job right. And no guns are necessary for this.
EDIT: I guess arguing makes no sense with all those pro RDA and all their crap of american cow boy hero jack bauer protecting his land saving his family from the usual serial killer coming to your home, there are difficult areas all over the world. In Europe as well, and the rest of the world is showing through stats that strict gun control lowers murders rate, even in poor areas.
And for your culture, the famous founding fathers. If they wanted guns for all it was to kick the brits from the US. That's it, 300y later I don't think it's relevant anymore.
|
On February 20 2012 10:21 clementdudu wrote:
so we can agree that poverty is the real problem but guns are still bad.good enough for me!
Well, I don't agree that they're bad. I do agree that in a perfect world we wouldn't NEED them, but also in a perfect world we would be allowed to have them since they can be pretty fun at the range or for hunting. Or even just collecting; there are some really cool historical guns I hope to own if I ever get the money.
|
On February 20 2012 10:21 clementdudu wrote:
so we can agree that poverty is the real problem but guns are still bad.good enough for me!
I guess the whole "guns are bad" idea only happens when your only exposure to it is from the movies or the news. I know many people who own firearms without giving it another thought. It's like someone discussing the "problem" of knives. Some of us don't even give the knives in our kitchen a second thought. It's the same for guns. It's not a big deal at all if you've been exposed to it.
|
Because women love men who are too much of a pussy to stand up for their family when a real threat comes around? No
|
On February 20 2012 10:32 TanTzoR wrote:
The less guns there is in circulation the more difficult it will be to get one.
Because a simple gun is rather hard to find and most importantly very expensive not any crack addict can buy one.
There are some areas dangerous, but 95% aren't. And therefor 95% of the population have no use in guns(I would say 99% on TL forums...). There are just fantasizing over the FOX news and thinking they are fucking Jack Bauer (season 1 xD).
If your family were to be harm, 99% chance it wouldn't be in your home and gun or not there will sadly be nothing you can do about it. People don't come to your home thinking, I'm going to rape his daughter in front of the dad 'cause it's fun. Non-sense. If they come to steal you, they will do it when there is nobody in the house. And if they come when you are there, swallow your american hero pride, and let them take your stuff. Your family safety is more important.
If you want to be a good father and good husband just take care of your wife and your kids, do your dad/husband job right. And no guns are necessary for this.
Whether or not I am around is inconsequential. If I own a gun, my family can just as easily defend themselves as I can defend them. If there is a gun in the house, I don't have to be there to defend them, they can do it themselves. Even if it's some hulking monster of a human being the size of a refrigerator, a bullet will still stop him.
|
Deleted... I know this isn't specifically american politics but i figured it's in the ballpark.
|
I think the problem lies with the US culture itself. The US is already a violent nation, and is already a nation in which gun ownership is immensely prevalent. I still think removing guns would make for a lot less deaths and violence, but the problem lies deeper than that.
It's not even poverty, There are many many many poor countries that don't have a fraction of the violence there is on the US. I'd really have to dig deeper to throw a conclusion as to why there's so much violence in the US.
|
On February 20 2012 10:27 stokes17 wrote:
I am completely in favor of public open carry for law abiding citizens who don't work with children. And See absolutely no reason not to be allowed to have a firearm in the home for self defense.
Yeah, happens to me every week that some dude invades my home and tries to kill me, right?
Additionally I always wear a bullet proof west, a helmet, full skater protection on hands, arms and legs when I leave the house, only drive 20km/h with my car AT MAX and never forget to put on my surgical mask because one day that freaking swine flu could come and get me right by my balls...
The world is fucking dangerous man, best thing is to build a bunker and never leave it again.
|
On February 20 2012 10:32 TanTzoR wrote:
The less guns there is in circulation the more difficult it will be to get one.
Because a simple gun is rather hard to find and most importantly very expensive not any crack addict can buy one.
There are some areas dangerous, but 95% aren't. And therefor 95% of the population have no use in guns(I would say 99% on TL forums...). There are just fantasizing over the FOX news and thinking they are fucking Jack Bauer (season 1 xD).
If your family were to be harm, 99% chance it wouldn't be in your home and gun or not there will sadly be nothing you can do about it. People don't come to your home thinking, I'm going to rape his daughter in front of the dad 'cause it's fun. Non-sense. If they come to steal you, they will do it when there is nobody in the house. And if they come when you are there, swallow your american hero pride, and let them take your stuff. Your family safety is more important.
If you want to be a good father and good husband just take care of your wife and your kids, do your dad/husband job right. And no guns are necessary for this.
EDIT: I guess arguing makes no sense with all those pro RDA and all their crap of american cow boy hero jack bauer protecting his land saving his family from the usual serial killer coming to your home, there are difficult areas all over the world. In Europe as well, and the rest of the world is showing through stats that strict gun control lowers murders rate, even in poor areas.
And for your culture, the famous founding fathers. If they wanted guns for all it was to kick the brits from the US. That's it, 300y later I don't think it's relevant anymore.
Mexico has super strict gun laws. Mexico also has some of the highest crime rates on Earth. Washington DC has strict gun laws. DC also has extremely high crime rates.
Strict gun laws do not stop violent crime. You claim its statistically supported, but people, including myself, have shown that the complete opposite is statistically supported. Poverty correlates directly with crime, gun control does not.
On February 20 2012 10:46 FliedLice wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2012 10:27 stokes17 wrote:
I am completely in favor of public open carry for law abiding citizens who don't work with children. And See absolutely no reason not to be allowed to have a firearm in the home for self defense. Yeah, happens to me every week that some dude invades my home and tries to kill me, right? Additionally I always wear a bullet proof west, a helmet, full skater protection on hands, arms and legs when I leave the house, only drive 20km/h with my car AT MAX and never forget to put on my surgical mask because one day that freaking swine flu could come and get me right by my balls... The world is fucking dangerous man, best thing is to build a bunker and never leave it again.
Do you own a fire-alarm? Yes?
Why? do you think your house is going to burn down? Does that happen often? No? Then why own the fire-alarm?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
