If some guy just wants to randomly shoot you there's nothing you can do to prevent that, you've been watching too much fucking james bond to think some receptionist is gonna start moving backwards on her chair and start a shootout with the gunman the second he starts barging in.
Only true for the first person to be shot, but this is an argument for making everyone helpless? You're not addressing how gun control prevents guns from getting into the hands of people who won't abide by the law. Nor does it prevent violent folks from acting out.
Gun control addresses neither of those issues until the point when guns are not to be found in society at all. Then what. What about police going on killing sprees? What about terrorists? What about pervasive robberies? Murders with swords and knives? The population will be powerless to counteract that.
Gun control proponents are emotionally stupid, and just react viscerally. It's such a shallow analysis that it's laughable.
What? "Oh crap, people keep shooting each other. Maybe if we let everyone get guns it'll stop!"
On April 05 2009 01:16 R3condite wrote: he had an automatic rifle... do u even noe how fast those things dish out bullets? he could have killed a LOT more if he wanted IMO
Get your facts straight. He had handguns. Only hand guns. No hint of body armor either. Would have been easy to take down with a sure shot.
On April 05 2009 01:51 BalliSLife wrote: So you're telling me you feel a lot fucking safer if you knew that everyone walking in Time Square had a gun on them?
Yes! Because carrying a handgun doesn't mean that they have to use it. It's something called self-restraint? That and people will shoot back if you don't have any self-restraint. Most police officers have it.
On April 05 2009 02:05 Kwark wrote: I'm reasonably sure TanGeng is trolling. Nobody is that stupid. Police going on killing sprees? Seriously? You think the only thing stopping the police going on killing sprees is that the citizens are armed? Plus in gun control countries the police are unarmed. If you actually looked at them rather than just making up stories about how they're anarchistic wastelands you'd know that.
Police don't have to shoot people if the population is unarmed, but that doesn't stop them from shooting people. There are news reports of police shootings every week. And every week there's news of police abusing their power and demanding people obey their AUTHORITAH. It's a short step from there to shooting people for "compliance" reasons. How about use of Tasers? And police rarely go on killing sprees because their union will help cover up the one or two murders if and when officers find that urge to kill.
But then again, the police in the disarmed nations are powerless to stop most forms of crimes. France has suburbs of Paris which are no-go zones. Most European nations have those kind of ghettos. Riots at the G20 meeting happened in Great Britain, and in the Fall of 2004, riots happened all around Paris.
On April 05 2009 02:40 Dead9 wrote: What? "Oh crap, people keep shooting each other. Maybe if we let everyone get guns it'll stop!"
Better two dead than 15 dead.
Again, all of you are reacting viscerally to the presence of guns. It's like saying I have one, so I must use it to kill somebody. If you think that way, it's a miracle how mankind's managed to live so long after inventing nuclear warheads.
It's a short step from some policeman being an asshole to them going on killing sprees? And if they go on killing sprees the best solution is for the people to form a citizens militia and fight them off? Seriously?
On April 05 2009 02:59 Kwark wrote: It's a short step from some policeman being an asshole to them going on killing sprees? And if they go on killing sprees the best solution is for the people to form a citizens militia and fight them off? Seriously?
Seriously? Ha. The police abuse their power far more than you can imagine. Deadly force has been used by the police as if they were thugs. You probably don't understand the police system in Mexico because that's how it works and that's eventually how it will work.
And if you will put up with that kind of harassment from your "law enforcement" "servant" then you deserve to be a slave to the system.
Oh and the occasional murder here and there and an organized cover-up by the "law enforcement servant" is far more dangerous than a man that goes on a killing spree and commits suicide.
Can we stop turning every thread into a political debate about gun control?
And charliemurphy can get away with saying racist stuff about black people because he is black. It's like Eddie Murphy and the word "nigger." I can't find the carlin only video, but here's him and Richard Pryor telling it like it is:
On April 05 2009 02:59 Kwark wrote: It's a short step from some policeman being an asshole to them going on killing sprees? And if they go on killing sprees the best solution is for the people to form a citizens militia and fight them off? Seriously?
Seriously? Ha. The police abuse their power far more than you can imagine. Deadly force has been used by the police as if they were thugs. You probably don't understand the police system in Mexico because that's how it works and that's eventually how it will work.
And if you will put up with that kind of harassment from your "law enforcement" "servant" then you deserve to be a slave to the system.
Oh and the occasional murder here and there and an organized cover-up by the "law enforcement servant" is far more dangerous than a man that goes on a killing spree and commits suicide.
Gun control is prevalent in Europe. Europe isn't Mexico. Examples from Mexico are only marginally better than your examples from mythical countries.
On April 05 2009 02:59 Kwark wrote: It's a short step from some policeman being an asshole to them going on killing sprees? And if they go on killing sprees the best solution is for the people to form a citizens militia and fight them off? Seriously?
Seriously? Ha. The police abuse their power far more than you can imagine. Deadly force has been used by the police as if they were thugs. You probably don't understand the police system in Mexico because that's how it works and that's eventually how it will work.
And if you will put up with that kind of harassment from your "law enforcement" "servant" then you deserve to be a slave to the system.
Oh and the occasional murder here and there and an organized cover-up by the "law enforcement servant" is far more dangerous than a man that goes on a killing spree and commits suicide.
Gun control is prevalent in Europe. Europe isn't Mexico. Examples from Mexico are only marginally better than your examples from mythical countries.
That's because European police are a farce. Here's the British battle against "knife" crime. The British knife is now the American gun - except more people are afraid of in Britain of knives.
@TanGeng can u please stop bickering... 2 automatic handguns (edited)
also it's been confirmed that his guns were licensed... so much for rights to bear arms working towards ur favor
also did u noe that even if u own a handgun and shoot some1 because he was trying to shoot u they can sue u for shooting them... and the cops can decide to arrest u if they want to... though u r covered in part by self defense it is still illegal for you to shoot some1 and will go on ur yellow sheet and u can get prosecuted for it..
the world isn't as simple as u may think it is... nobody should be trigger happy because killing some1, whether or not he's a threat to u, is ILLEGAL unless u r in the policing sector... even then u can still get prosecuted... just not as badly
EDIT: STOP FUKIN DOUBLE POSTING AND DERAILING... make ur own damn thread and start convo there
Y DON'T U TELL THE FAMILIES OF THE DEAD THAT IT WAS THE DEAD PPL'S FAULT FOR NOT HAVING GUNS AND SHOOTING IT?!
jeez... gtfo... have some fukin respect for the dead...
On April 05 2009 02:59 Kwark wrote: It's a short step from some policeman being an asshole to them going on killing sprees? And if they go on killing sprees the best solution is for the people to form a citizens militia and fight them off? Seriously?
Seriously? Ha. The police abuse their power far more than you can imagine. Deadly force has been used by the police as if they were thugs. You probably don't understand the police system in Mexico because that's how it works and that's eventually how it will work.
And if you will put up with that kind of harassment from your "law enforcement" "servant" then you deserve to be a slave to the system.
Oh and the occasional murder here and there and an organized cover-up by the "law enforcement servant" is far more dangerous than a man that goes on a killing spree and commits suicide.
Gun control is prevalent in Europe. Europe isn't Mexico. Examples from Mexico are only marginally better than your examples from mythical countries.
That's because European police are a farce. Here's the British battle against "knife" crime. The British knife is now the American gun - except more people are afraid of in Britain of knives.
i highly... HIGHLY doubt ppl are more afraid of knives than guns... they would only say that cus they were nvr threatened by guns in the first place...
On April 05 2009 03:19 R3condite wrote: @TanGeng can u please stop bickering... 2 automatic handguns (edited)
also it's been confirmed that his guns were licensed... so much for rights to bear arms working towards ur favor
also did u noe that even if u own a handgun and shoot some1 because he was trying to shoot u they can sue u for shooting them... and the cops can decide to arrest u if they want to... though u r covered in part by self defense it is still illegal for you to shoot some1 and will go on ur yellow sheet and u can get prosecuted for it..
the world isn't as simple as u may think it is... nobody should be trigger happy because killing some1, whether or not he's a threat to u, is ILLEGAL unless u r in the policing sector... even then u can still get prosecuted... just not as badly
EDIT: STOP FUKIN DOUBLE POSTING AND DERAILING... make ur own damn thread and start convo there
Y DON'T U TELL THE FAMILY OF THE DEAD THAT IT WAS THEIR FAULT FOR NOT HAVING GUNS AND SHOOTING IT?! jeez... gtfo
It's still a tragedy, but you're blaming everybody else for owning guns. It's like getting stabbed by a knife and blaming everyone else for owning knives.
It's a stupid visceral reaction. It's laughably shallow. And just because you wish the world could un-invent guns, it's not going to happen.
On April 05 2009 03:19 R3condite wrote: i highly... HIGHLY doubt ppl are more afraid of knives than guns... they would only say that cus they were nvr threatened by guns in the first place...
You might think that, but the UK government has a tough on "Knife" crime initiatives that involves the government disarming the population of knives. Like I said, UK is more afraid of knives than US is afraid of guns.
On April 05 2009 03:19 R3condite wrote: i highly... HIGHLY doubt ppl are more afraid of knives than guns... they would only say that cus they were nvr threatened by guns in the first place...
You might think that, but the UK government has a tough on "Knife" crime initiatives that involves the government disarming the population of knives. Like I said, UK is more afraid of knives than US is afraid of guns.
It got cool for kids to carry knives and a few died. It'd be better if that stopped. There's no point to be made here by you. Knives are still dangerous, less than guns but not the kind of thing you want fourteen year old boys who think they're gangsters.
On April 05 2009 03:19 R3condite wrote: i highly... HIGHLY doubt ppl are more afraid of knives than guns... they would only say that cus they were nvr threatened by guns in the first place...
You might think that, but the UK government has a tough on "Knife" crime initiatives that involves the government disarming the population of knives. Like I said, UK is more afraid of knives than US is afraid of guns.
It got cool for kids to carry knives and a few died. It'd be better if that stopped. There's no point to be made here by you. Knives are still dangerous, less than guns but not the kind of thing you want fourteen year old boys who think they're gangsters.
But you want to disarm everyone. What's your argument for inhibiting everyone's right to protect themselves?
And if you think guns are bad, why not knives? Where do you draw the line?
On April 05 2009 03:19 R3condite wrote: i highly... HIGHLY doubt ppl are more afraid of knives than guns... they would only say that cus they were nvr threatened by guns in the first place...
You might think that, but the UK government has a tough on "Knife" crime initiatives that involves the government disarming the population of knives. Like I said, UK is more afraid of knives than US is afraid of guns.
Look u can't talk for both country at once.. u either lived in one to know it better or the other... iono where in US u may live but ppl in US ARE scared of guns... i really don't understand wat u mean when u say UK is more afraid of knives than US is of guns...i personally think both r very scary at the disposal of a wrong person...
EDIT: that aside please start a new thread if u wish to continue talking about gun control and knife control and what not...
plus... if i remember correctly ur original argument was for guns wasn't it? so from that i guess u r for knives as well? how does saying that UK is scared of knives say anything at all about how and y guns should be legal??
On April 05 2009 03:19 R3condite wrote: i highly... HIGHLY doubt ppl are more afraid of knives than guns... they would only say that cus they were nvr threatened by guns in the first place...
You might think that, but the UK government has a tough on "Knife" crime initiatives that involves the government disarming the population of knives. Like I said, UK is more afraid of knives than US is afraid of guns.
It got cool for kids to carry knives and a few died. It'd be better if that stopped. There's no point to be made here by you. Knives are still dangerous, less than guns but not the kind of thing you want fourteen year old boys who think they're gangsters.
But you want to disarm everyone. What's your argument for inhibiting everyone's right to protect themselves?
And if you think guns are bad, why not knives? Where do you draw the line?
I do think knives are bad in many contexts. Obviously they have practical uses around the house (unlike guns) but kids having them so they can act big in front of other kids will inevitably lead to someone getting stabbed. So yeah, it's illegal to carry them in public or for certain people to own certain types of knife. No other way of seeing that imo.
I don't carry knives, I don't own any knives for anything but cooking and a penknife and I don't want one. I don't feel like I need to protect myself with a knife or a gun. My argument is that it causes unnecessary deaths.
On April 05 2009 03:19 R3condite wrote: i highly... HIGHLY doubt ppl are more afraid of knives than guns... they would only say that cus they were nvr threatened by guns in the first place...
You might think that, but the UK government has a tough on "Knife" crime initiatives that involves the government disarming the population of knives. Like I said, UK is more afraid of knives than US is afraid of guns.
Look u can't talk for both country at once.. u either lived in one to know it better or the other... iono where in US u may live but ppl in US ARE scared of guns... i really don't understand wat u mean when u say UK is more afraid of knives than US is of guns...i personally think both r very scary at the disposal of a wrong person...
In the US, people are scared of guns in the inner city. A lot of kids carry guns for self-protection because they are afraid of kids in gangs bullying them around with a gun. In the UK, people are scare of knives in the inner city. A lot of kids bring knives for self-protection because they are afraid of kids in gangs bullying them around with a knife.
Rather symmetric. Guns are more dangerous, but it's not the cause of violence and it's ineffective to target the weapon because the violence will only shift to other weapons. Furthermore, gun control takes away a means of self-protection from everyone not just those involved in the violence. Where is the justification for that?
If and when knives are outlaws, people will shift batons or fists, and it'll be even harder for an individual to resist a group of people attacking or mugging them. Robbery by a group of young men is much safer in such a society, and it'll be natural for mugging and robbery by groups of delinquents to be much more common. Maybe people will start taking martial arts classes, and at that point the government can outlaw kids from having arms and legs.
ohh: Forgot one really serious crime, rape. Expect that to be on the rise, too.
You're saying it'll be even harder for people to defend themselves from muggers armed with fists than muggers armed with knives? You're not too bright are you.
Gun control means someone can't intimidate me with a gun. If they want to stab me they can't do it from a distance. If they want to baton me to death they have to hit me for a prolonged period of time, even less lethal than a knife. And so forth. Less to be afraid of. Easier to escape from. Easier to overpower while unarmed. Easier for doctors to save you from.
On April 05 2009 04:06 Kwark wrote: You're saying it'll be even harder for people to defend themselves from muggers armed with fists than muggers armed with knives? You're not too bright are you.
Gun control means someone can't intimidate me with a gun. If they want to stab me they can't do it from a distance. If they want to baton me to death they have to hit me for a prolonged period of time, even less lethal than a knife. And so forth. Less to be afraid of. Easier to escape from. Easier to overpower while unarmed. Easier for doctors to save you from.
If you choose to stay unarmed, you'll be a sitting duck. That much is obvious, so obviously you have no idea how to think critically.
Rather instead it's for those who elect to be armed in self-defense. In the US a growing percentage of gun carriers are women, because of their inferior size and muscle mass. The gun is an equalizer so a stronger person can't just overpower a weaker person.
Anyways, you can elect to be defenseless in a free country. You don't have to carry a gun or knife or any form of self-protection. But you can't expect that all criminals would be so benign as to leave you alone. In that case, it's a matter of how well you can defend yourself or if you choose to be subservient instead, and let some thugs exert their will over you.
Sitting duck to who? The guy armed with the sharp stick? Its actually pretty hard to get a gun in this country, even if you're a criminal with powers of law defiance who can somehow generate an illegal gun. It's to the benefit of the criminal community as a whole that there aren't guns. Policemen aren't armed. When they quarrel they don't all die. It's easy to obtain an illegal gun in a society when gun ownership is taken for granted and people think it's okay to gain a gun. That's why the "only criminals will have guns" argument works in the US. Because it's entrenched. It's far harder to do so in a country where everyone agrees that gun ownership is utterly retarded.
EPT
