America And Guns

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='OraProMe' date='10 November 2009 - 09:21 PM' timestamp='1257902462' post='2000000']
No but the frequency of guns being used violently will decrease if fewer people have guns, obviously. ...[/quote]

Like in Chicago?

[Winchester]

[quote name='Lounge Daddy' date='10 November 2009 - 08:39 PM' timestamp='1257903598' post='2000019']
Like in Chicago?
[/quote]
And Washington DC.

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='Winchester' date='10 November 2009 - 05:32 PM' timestamp='1257903143' post='2000008']
Different weapons for different purposes. Sidearms have a place and in close quarters, they're effective. Also, since it's no longer cricket to carry a long arm around, a pistol has to do. For some bizarre reason, the military still uses pistols, but let's pretend they're not needed for the sake of pc bullshinobi.
[/quote]

never said the military wouldn't get to use them. and besides, the military uses lots of things that civilians(or for that matter, the military itself) shouldn't get to use.

doubt there is anything more effective than a shotgun in close quarters, its kind of their "thing".
I'm not totally against handguns, just think you shouldn't be able to get them at the corner store in 20 minutes, etc.

i dont have too much problem with owning guns, hell we have 5. just that you should have to jump through a couple hoops before you get to have a machine that can kill someone at a distance with a quarter inch movement of your finger.


and this is an awesome idea
editwarning: the F-Word is said once. view at your discretion
[media][url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAoMNEQo4sQ"]http://www.youtube.c...h?v=aAoMNEQo4sQ[/url][/media]

Edited November 11, 2009 by Jesus_lol

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Winchester' date='10 November 2009 - 09:37 PM' timestamp='1257903443' post='2000014']
But it's not cricket. It's legal here in the great state of Texas, but I wouldn't want the hassle of dealing with the fall out.[/quote]

Ah, yes. I suppose "cricket" does fall under a different category than "legal."

[quote]Anywhere it's not illegal it's a violation of human rights and a violation of that rag all those deists signed a couple hundred years ago.
[/quote]

Hey: that magical rag sits there under glass hundreds of miles away from you and magically protects your rights from politicians, because politicians fear its awesome power. They know it will stop them from violating anyone's liberty. Show some respect.

~Sternhauser

Edited November 11, 2009 by Sternhauser

[Winchester]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' date='10 November 2009 - 08:49 PM' timestamp='1257904173' post='2000032']

I'm not totally against handguns, just think you shouldn't be able to get them at the corner store in 20 minutes, etc.

[/quote]
Oh, a strawman argument. I get it now.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' date='10 November 2009 - 09:49 PM' timestamp='1257904173' post='2000032']
never said the military wouldn't get to use them. and besides, the military uses lots of things that civilians(or for that matter, the military itself) shouldn't get to use.

doubt there is anything more effective than a shotgun in close quarters, its kind of their "thing".
I'm not totally against handguns, just think you shouldn't be able to get them at the corner store in 20 minutes, etc.

i dont have too much problem with owning guns, hell we have 5. just that you should have to jump through a couple hoops before you get to have a machine that can kill someone at a distance with a quarter inch movement of your finger.

[/quote]

Jesus_lol, the main point and the bottom line is that you want to do violence against people who do nothing immoral, and who do not intend to harm any non-aggressor. That's a problem.

~Sternhauser

Edited November 11, 2009 by Sternhauser

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='Winchester' date='10 November 2009 - 05:54 PM' timestamp='1257904481' post='2000039']
Oh, a strawman argument. I get it now.
[/quote]

no, its relevant. gun control doesnt always mean taking away guns etc. i was saying that in a perfect system imo, it should be more difficult to get guns in the states than it is. i think canadian law is a bit too restrictive, so im not suggesting that far. kind of like needing a license to drive a car, you have to prove you can responsibly use a dangerous machine before you get to in public.

just because criminals can get illegal guns, doesnt mean legal guns should just be given away

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='10 November 2009 - 05:54 PM' timestamp='1257904486' post='2000041']
Jesus_lol, the main point and the bottom line is that you want to do violence against people who do nothing immoral, and who do not intend to harm any non-aggressor. That's a problem.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

i dont actually want to do violence against anyone. i dont know what the hell you are talking about here. try making an argument instead of just claiming i am an evil man.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' date='10 November 2009 - 10:07 PM' timestamp='1257905239' post='2000046']
no, its relevant. gun control doesnt always mean taking away guns etc. i was saying that in a perfect system imo, it should be more difficult to get guns in the states than it is. i think canadian law is a bit too restrictive, so im not suggesting that far. kind of like needing a license to drive a car, you have to prove you can responsibly use a dangerous machine before you get to in public. [/quote]

It is very much like needing a license to drive a car. Does having a license prove you are a responsible driver? Does it prove you are a dangerous driver? It proves that you can memorize some questions and behave nicely for a 15-minute road test. There is no moral requirement to have a driver's license to drive a car.

[quote]
just because criminals can get illegal guns, doesnt mean legal guns should just be given away[/quote]

Sure they should. The fact that criminals can get statutorily-unapproved guns is the best reason to give guns away.


[quote]i dont actually want to do violence against anyone. i dont know what the hell you are talking about here. try making an argument instead of just claiming i am an evil man.
[/quote]

You say you don't want to do violence. You're wrong about that.

Let's say I want to make firearms and sell them to as many people as I want, as long as I suspect them to be decent individuals. Or, let's say I buy and carry a firearm without going through any background check and without getting getting a permission slip from any other man, and I have no intent to harm an innocent. Tell me: what would you do to me, once you've had your way and made those acts contrary to statute?

~Sternhauser

Edited November 11, 2009 by Sternhauser

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' date='10 November 2009 - 10:07 PM' timestamp='1257905239' post='2000046']
...
i dont actually want to do violence against anyone. i dont know what the hell you are talking about here. ...[/quote]

Laws are coercive by their very nature—stripping rights and using threat of law to get what you want is in fact violence.

[Winchester]

Yeah, life's better without laws.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Winchester' date='10 November 2009 - 10:31 PM' timestamp='1257906686' post='2000056']
Yeah, life's better without laws.
[/quote]

Neither Lounge Daddy or I said that.

~Sternhauser

Edited November 11, 2009 by Sternhauser

[Winchester]

No. I said it.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Winchester' date='10 November 2009 - 10:33 PM' timestamp='1257906785' post='2000058']
No. I said it.
[/quote]

Sincerely?

~Sternhauser

[Winchester]

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='10 November 2009 - 09:33 PM' timestamp='1257906827' post='2000059']
Sincerely?

~Sternhauser
[/quote]
Of course not! Do I look like an anarchist?

[Era Might]

[quote name='Winchester' date='10 November 2009 - 09:35 PM' timestamp='1257906923' post='2000061']Do I look like an anarchist?
[/quote]
More like a giraffe.