|
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 December 23 2012 07:30 KwarK wrote:
There are those who argue that guns are a great equaliser because they mean your poor frail old grandmother can stand up to some gangster trying to stab her and defend herself.
Only a culture of guns would consider this to be logical.
ANd imo a culture of guns is what is the problem in the first place.
|
On December 23 2012 07:30 KwarK wrote:
There are those who argue that guns are a great equaliser because they mean your poor frail old grandmother can stand up to some gangster trying to stab her and defend herself.
Women in general, actually. Shooting is the one area of personal combat where women are actually better than men despite the biological strength disadvantage, due to better aim (when trained) and being smaller targets.
|
On December 23 2012 07:34 Cutlery wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2012 07:30 KwarK wrote:
There are those who argue that guns are a great equaliser because they mean your poor frail old grandmother can stand up to some gangster trying to stab her and defend herself. Only a culture of guns would consider this to be logical. ANd imo a culture of guns is what is the problem in the first place.
it does sound logical to me...but i guess tasers and pepperspray will do too 
|
On December 23 2012 07:38 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2012 07:34 Cutlery wrote:On December 23 2012 07:30 KwarK wrote:
There are those who argue that guns are a great equaliser because they mean your poor frail old grandmother can stand up to some gangster trying to stab her and defend herself. Only a culture of guns would consider this to be logical. ANd imo a culture of guns is what is the problem in the first place. it does sound logical to me...but i guess tasers and pepperspray will do too
I mean.. I'm only suggesting/saying that it's the only long term solution. It won't do much short term. But imo this must be the end-goal, or end-game, and it's important not to lose sight on that.
|
I haven't read most of this thread... because most of the post* are stupid..
Has someone posted a possible solution to be discussed besides the classic (and stupid) just "get rid of all your guns because I'm not American, and I don't understand what I'm talking about.. but I've never owned a gun.. so you shouldn't either.."
even some mods make bogus post..
On December 23 2012 07:26 jinorazi wrote:
1) i'd say almost everyone would rather live in a world without guns, to claim gun ban is better, is an obvious and not really up for debate.
Well thank God that you are here to tell us what is obvious and shouldn't be debated.. I'm one of those few who isn't almost everyone... who would debate you... but since you're not up for it.. why are you here?
1) I'd say you're full of it
On December 23 2012 07:30 KwarK wrote:
There are those who argue that guns are a great equaliser because they mean your poor frail old grandmother can stand up to some gangster trying to stab her and defend herself.
Care to test this? Let both take our grandmothers.. mine armed with a gun and yours with faith in her police... we'll put them in different houses and allow gangsters to enter the houses with the purpose of brutally raping and murdering them.. they have 15 minutes to make it.. After 15 minutes the "police arrive"
Should your grandmother fair better then mine... I'll give up every weapon I have and be one of the front men for an America without firearms..
If mine comes out better.. you stay silent and allow me to have my weapons in peace.. DEAL?
* For Jockmcplop
|
United States44373 Posts
Why are you aggressively arguing against that guy and then me when what I did is made your case to that guy before you did? Jeez.
|
United Kingdom10011 Posts
not only is everyone who disagrees with AmericanNightmare 'stupid', but so are half the people who agree with him. Too bad i don't give a damn what he thinks i guess..
|
There are situations that occur specifically because people have access to guns. Knowing you have a gun gives one slightly more bravado than one should potentially have. In my opinion, this is the problem.
Guns do have their uses, mostly in evening out the playing field for everybody.
Guns aren't the problem. The people using them are.
Better schooling and more rigorous selection could be an alternate "solution".
If we could train a generation to never use guns, but make it unlawful not to have them (just in case), I believe that would be the best of both worlds.
|
On December 23 2012 08:43 KwarK wrote:
Why are you aggressively arguing against that guy and then me when what I did is made your case to that guy before you did? Jeez.
Sorry to hurt your feelings..
On December 23 2012 08:46 Jockmcplop wrote:
not only is everyone who disagrees with AmericanNightmare 'stupid', but so are half the people who agree with him. Too bad i don't give a damn what he thinks i guess..
So.. everyone who disagrees with me is stupid? and only half of those who agree with me are also? Well.. While I certainly wouldn't call everyone who is anti-gun stupid... it's nice to know you will... glad you make this little nugget for all of us to read.. It says a lot about you to find out you don't give a damn about peoples opinion who don't agree with you..(unless you agree with me.. this disregard that last part)
So.. should people be allowed to carry guns?
|
United States44373 Posts
On December 23 2012 08:53 AmericanNightmare wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2012 08:43 KwarK wrote:
Why are you aggressively arguing against that guy and then me when what I did is made your case to that guy before you did? Jeez. Sorry to hurt your feelings.. Show nested quote +On December 23 2012 08:46 Jockmcplop wrote:
not only is everyone who disagrees with AmericanNightmare 'stupid', but so are half the people who agree with him. Too bad i don't give a damn what he thinks i guess.. So.. everyone who disagrees with me is stupid? and only half of those who agree with me are also? Well.. While I certainly wouldn't call everyone who is anti-gun stupid... it's nice to know you will... glad you make this little nugget for all of us to read.. It says a lot about you to find out you don't give a damn about peoples opinion who don't agree with you..(unless you agree with me.. this disregard that last part) So.. should people be allowed to carry guns?
He was commenting on what you said about not reading the topic because most of the people are stupid. He wasn't calling people stupid, he was calling you out on what you said although I'm not sure why I'm making the effort to explain your own posts to you.
|
EDIT: removed to not feed the troll.
|
EDIT: sorry did not see KwarK's post.
|
|
|
So Kwark.. when you said
On December 23 2012 07:30 KwarK wrote:
There are those who argue that guns are a great equaliser because they mean your poor frail old grandmother can stand up to some gangster trying to stab her and defend herself.
You weren't being condescending? It's my mistake if you weren't. I assume quite a bit which could be bad.. but it hasn't gotten me killed yet.. If you were.. then what I said stand, besides the sorry for hurting your feelings..
On December 23 2012 08:46 Jockmcplop wrote:
not only is everyone who disagrees with AmericanNightmare 'stupid', but so are half the people who agree with him. Too bad i don't give a damn what he thinks i guess..
I'm calling anyone who throws in statements into a conversation that does not add value of any kind to the conversation stupid.. I would never call someone who is engaged with me in a conversation of value stupid.. would call this statement you wrote right here stupid.. Good thing you don't care what I think though..
On December 23 2012 09:18 jinorazi wrote:
maybe you should see things from multiple perspective, accounting different social culture and not just pro-gun/nra style view on guns. for example, i wouldnt remove guns in usa but i wouldnt introduce them in korea.
with that said i'm not sure why you would be against a world without guns, aside from hunting and whatnot. for self protection there are other alternatives than guns. i understand fighting gun with gun but if there is no threat from a gun, i think there are fairly viable solutions for protection as long as we dont knitpick situations.
Oh I do.. I am extremely open minded and love learning new things.. I'm not a member of the NRA.. may that organization burn in hell..
You just changed what you said.. what I quoted from you originally said only a gun free world.. there was no mention of guns for hunting.. I would support no guns in the world (even hunting, I can use a bow) if the police didn't need to carry a gun also.. Should the world be so safe that they could walk about without BPVs and guns.. then I could live without them..
I was simply saying before that I would rather discuss solutions to get us to this point.. rather than have to read through people chiming in with unless stupid post that won't help anyone.. because they aren't there to help..
|
On December 23 2012 08:40 AmericanNightmare wrote:I haven't read most of this thread... because most of the posters are stupid.. Has someone posted a possible solution to be discussed besides the classic (and stupid) just "get rid of all your guns because I'm not American, and I don't understand what I'm talking about.. but I've never owned a gun.. so you shouldn't either.." even some mods make bogus post.. Show nested quote +On December 23 2012 07:26 jinorazi wrote:
1) i'd say almost everyone would rather live in a world without guns, to claim gun ban is better, is an obvious and not really up for debate.
Well thank God that you are here to tell us what is obvious and shouldn't be debated.. I'm one of those few who isn't almost everyone... who would debate you... but since you're not up for it.. why are you here? 1) I'd say you're full of it Show nested quote +On December 23 2012 07:30 KwarK wrote:
There are those who argue that guns are a great equaliser because they mean your poor frail old grandmother can stand up to some gangster trying to stab her and defend herself. Care to test this? Let both take our grandmothers.. mine armed with a gun and yours with faith in her police... we'll put them in different houses and allow gangsters to enter the houses with the purpose of brutally raping and murdering them.. they have 15 minutes to make it.. After 15 minutes the "police arrive" Should your grandmother fair better then mine... I'll give up every weapon I have and be one of the front men for an America without firearms.. If mine comes out better.. you stay silent and allow me to have my weapons in peace.. DEAL?
maybe you should see things from multiple perspective, accounting different social culture and not just pro-gun/nra style view on guns. for example, i wouldnt remove guns in usa but i wouldnt introduce them in korea.
with that said i'm not sure why you would be against a world without guns, aside from hunting and whatnot. for self protection there are other alternatives than guns. i understand fighting gun with gun but if there is no threat from a gun, i think there are fairly viable solutions for protection as long as we dont knitpick situations.
not sure of your aggressiveness, i find it ironic you call others stupid and full of it with the type of reply you made.
|
On December 23 2012 09:18 jinorazi wrote:
i find it ironic you call others stupid and full of it with the type of reply you made.
Anyone who says there can be a world with no crime or violence.. or anyone who says something isn't debatable.. when it is very much a subject that can be debated to death and back.. IS FULL OF IT..
But please.. as I said.. I love to learn.. so point out to me where I was being ironic.. so I can learn from it and we won't have this problem again..
|
United Kingdom10011 Posts
OK please tell me this: How do you know that most of the posters on here are stupid, if you haven't read the thread in first place?
I haven't read most of this thread... because most of the posters are stupid..
That seems pretty closed minded to me.
Am i missing something here?
|
On December 23 2012 09:59 Jockmcplop wrote:OK please tell me this: How do you know that most of the posters on here are stupid, if you haven't read the thread in first place? Show nested quote +I haven't read most of this thread... because most of the posters are stupid.. That seems pretty closed minded to me. Am i missing something here?
I assume he/she read a sample of the thread, saw the ignorance parade, and decided to avoid reading the entire thing. At this point, with a thread more than 300 pages long, ain't nobody got time for that anyway.
|
On December 23 2012 09:59 Jockmcplop wrote:OK please tell me this: How do you know that most of the posters on here are stupid, if you haven't read the thread in first place? Show nested quote +I haven't read most of this thread... because most of the posters are stupid.. That seems pretty closed minded to me. Am i missing something here?
I'll edit the original post since it's apparently the only thing you can think about... And I'd say you're missing quite a bit.. like the part where I said MOST of the thread..suddenly that because "I haven't read any of it.. but everyone is stupid".. you're just like the dude from NZ.. but what do you care..
On December 23 2012 10:04 Zealotdriver wrote:
I assume he read a sample of the thread, saw the ignorance parade, and decided to avoid reading the entire thing. At this point, with a thread more than 300 pages long, ain't nobody got time for that anyway.
JACKPOT... When someone post an absolute waste post such as the one I gave as an example.. the only thing it adds to is their post count.. 310 pages and like I said.. I haven't seen anything that from the anti-gun side that could even be a possible solution that could get us to where we could eventually lead to a no gun U.S... That's what I want to discuss.. not how U.S. should be like other countries because they don't have guns..
|
On December 23 2012 09:48 AmericanNightmare wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2012 09:18 jinorazi wrote:
i find it ironic you call others stupid and full of it with the type of reply you made. Anyone who says there can be a world with no crime or violence.. or anyone who says something isn't debatable.. when it is very much a subject that can be debated to death and back.. IS FULL OF IT.. But please.. as I said.. I love to learn.. so point out to me where I was being ironic.. so I can learn from it and we won't have this problem again..
i never said a world with no crime or violence, i was speaking in terms of countries with already strictly placed gun regulation with low gun saturation, and that world is better than the counterpart. do explain why you would prefer high gun saturation with lax gun control and screening as it is usa.
i was pointing out the useless subjects like you first pointed it out, people saying gun control or no gun control in usa without realistic viewpoint on it, which is the majority of this thread. i didnt call them idiots like you did, i said there is no need for same old words.
the irony comes from you calling others(me) full of it on their words yet you strongly present your opinion with authoritative tone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
