Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Guns, Guns Guns


Winchester

Should civilians have the right to own firearms?  

159 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Don,

No, I now have revised my memory according to the wisdom of statisticians, who obviously define reality much more than living human reason. I must insist that you conform to reality as it has been sanely defined by collected numbers. However you choose to imagine the form of a .2 child is left to you, as statisticians have obviously left off with anything resembling imagination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, and bc, lighten up.  It doesn't seem like you're having much fun around these parts.

Ah, true insight. Actually, virtually every time I come to this board it's because I'm thinking about something having more directly to do with Catholicism - as opposed to politics - and then I end up reading these replies and getting too annoyed to start a thread about something that really matters.

But at least I'm happy to see that nobody seems to be offering arguments against those in my last post, which I take to imply that none of you have any. ("I'm paranoid, have many guns and live in a crappy neighborhood" or "I think it's cool to claim to be prepared to kill people" is not an argument against gun control.) Don's story about being chased and shot at by armed madmen just confirms my point that lack of gun control leads to an arms race among normally peaceful people. So next time I log on, I might even keep my calm long enough to post something on a real topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don John of Austria

_bc's a women?

Bc you didn't put forth any arguements in your last post you made assertions, that is not the same thing, assertions which have been Challenged and you have made no reponse too, so when you would like to make an arguement I will nbe happy to respond to it however you have yet to respond to any of our arguements( such as having the right to defend yourself regardless of utilitarian issues) so I really am not worried.

Oh and agian your source didn't say anything about howmany households in Switzerland had Guins furthermore you failed to respond to the issue of mexico and stabings..... We are still waiting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, and one last thing, since when did armed peaceful people become such a concern? Sounds to me like you have never been in a situation where your life was threatened. I'd be willing to bet that if some rapist was having their way with you that you'd change your tune pretty quickly.

That's a bit offsides. Especially if you believe your opponent a woman. I disagree with bc, too, but I know people who believe in gun control but have been on the wrong end of a weapon.

bc:

1. Are guns of themselves morally evil?

2. Who has a right to what type of gun?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a powder keg issue.
didn't that feel so much better than when the guy did the same thing years later and I pulled out the rifle and he sped off to who knows where rather than trying to kill us.

You guys are so cool...

I'm with you Princess. You guys are great. All y'alls are great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

_bc,

I hope I don't diminish the impact of your thread, I'd like to see Don John answer your questions (except the purerile one. I don't think you're serious. lol).

Yes. In a perfect society with everyone behaving. Gun ownership would be pointless. In a society where guns are not already plentifully available, gun restrictions would make sense. My point is from a practical point of view is that guns are already so abundant in society, there are no practical means of removing them from the bad element in society. Additionally, gun laws would only be followed by the already law abiding.

Real gun control by would have to start with tremendous punative penalties for crimes committed with guns. Like a mandatory 25 year sentence with no chance of parol. As it is now, you can get away with less than a year in jail.

In Florida, Gov.Bush pushed a 10/25/Life law. I think itsan automatic 10 years for a crime committed with a gun, 25 years if the gun was discharged, and automatic Life if someone was hurt or killed. (It may be life only if someone is killed).

Now that's the begining of real gun control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

_bc,

I hope I don't diminish the impact of your thread, I'd like to see Don John answer your questions (except the purerile one.  I don't think you're serious. lol).

Well, that one wasn't directed at him. :P

Yes.  In a perfect society with everyone behaving.  Gun ownership would be pointless. In a society where guns are not already plentifully available, gun restrictions would make sense.  My point is from a practical point of view is that guns are already so abundant in society, there are no practical means of removing them from the bad element in society.  Additionally, gun laws would only be followed by the already law abiding. 
And that's a good argument, but I rather see it as a restraint on the ways and means of gun control than something that would make it undesirable to make guns fewer and further between. So, yes, it should happen gradually, probably first by making it illegal for people who've been convicted of violent crime to be in possession of a gun and then slowly onwards.

In Florida, Gov.Bush pushed a 10/25/Life law.  I think its an automatic 10 years for a crime committed with a gun, 25 years if the gun was discharged, and automatic Life if someone was hurt or killed.  (It may be life only if someone is killed).

Now that's the begining of real gun control.

Sounds like a good law.

Well, how far off was my assumption?

Way off, not just because you're factually wrong but mainly because my voting habits and gender are not relevant to this issue or arguments in this debate. Is gun control a better/worse idea if I'm a male/female conservative/liberal/troglodyte?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay people. Here's the deal. If any post contains even a hint of a personal attack, the entire post gets deleted. I don't care how much work you put into it.

If you have five paragraphs of a brilliant argument, but your last sentence says, "you are acting like a child", the whole post gets deleted.

That's the way it is. If you want your arguments to be heard, then don't resort to personal attacks. It's as simple as that.

CLICK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, yes, it should happen gradually, probably first by making it illegal for people who've been convicted of violent crime to be in possession of a gun and then slowly onwards.

Ummmmmm.................., _bc it is already illegal. You might want to do a little research. I have an idea, which is exactly the same as what the NRA has been saying for years now. Rather than make up new laws, and new restrictions, why don't we enforce the laws we already have on the books. Your slowly onwards comment personally frightens me, because what you advocate is a complete disarmament of law abiding citizens. Doing such would not eliminate criminals having guns. If you think it would then you had better take a good close look at England. Last I checked it was illegal for a private citizen to own a handgun there. So why is it that criminals still have them? Simply because making laws forbidding someone to have one do little good. The only ones that obey such laws are law-abiding people. Criminals could care less how many laws are written. They wouldn't/will not follow them anyway. Ban guns from society and the only people that would be able to defend themselves are the criminals. It seems we have been around and around about this very point, but you still fail to grasp that concept. Why is that?

Also _bc, I'm sorry for any personal attack I may have directed towards you. It was not called for and from now on I will keep those opinions to myself. But as far as wanting to know your political leanings, I think it is very pertinent to the conversation. I will not berate you for those choices. It is simply a matter of me wanting to know the mindset of one I'm dealing with, and like it or not, this issue is political.

Peace,

Marcus

Edited by mp15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummmmmm.................., _bc it is already illegal.

I should have written 'effectively illegal', which it isn't now.

I'll also apologize for calling you puerile. I shouldn't have commented on your gender-stereotyping of my opinions, instead I did virtually the same thing to you by making your personality a matter of discussion. I'm sorry. Isn't life ironic, though?

I feel humbled that my post had to be censored because of a stupid comment like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...