NationStates Jolt Archive

Hey, We're allowed to have guns, why shouldn't we be able to go and kill somebody we hate? Heck, it's a free country, don't we have rights? And if we shoot somebody, that's their own fault, isn't it? Heck, why not, we already want same sex marriages, marijuana, drugs, anarchy and loads of other sh*t.

Hey, We're allowed to have guns, why shouldn't we be able to go and kill somebody we hate? Heck, it's a free country, don't we have rights? And if we shoot somebody, that's their own fault, isn't it? Heck, why not, we already want same sex marriages, marijuana, drugs, anarchy and loads of other sh*t.
I know you are being sarcastic ... but infringements on other peoples right to life liberty and the persuit of happyness

cause it goes LIFE, then liberty, then property

something abortionists will never understand

cause it goes LIFE, then liberty, then property

something abortionists will never understand
yikes dont drag abortion into this ... easy way to hijack thread :p

I know you are being sarcastic ... but infringements on other peoples right to life liberty and the persuit of happyness
has somebody been reading too much Thomas Hobbes & John Locke? ;)

it is simply morally wrong to take a life imo - nobody has the right to decide who lives and who dies. i still think guns should be illegal because all too often and all too easily passion/desire can overcome reason, and that's when shootings happen. if there were no guns, this wouldn't be a problem!

Hey, We're allowed to have guns, why shouldn't we be able to go and kill somebody we hate? Heck, it's a free country, don't we have rights? And if we shoot somebody, that's their own fault, isn't it? Heck, why not, we already want same sex marriages, marijuana, drugs, anarchy and loads of other sh*t.

What country?

cause it goes LIFE, then liberty, then property

something abortionists will never understand
Wow...that's a really strong argument. I will have to think a bit before I get back to you on that. Very impressive, Schrandtopia, and well put.

*picks nose while reading new posts*

has somebody been reading too much Thomas Hobbes & John Locke? ;)

it is simply morally wrong to take a life imo - nobody has the right to decide who lives and who dies. i still think guns should be illegal because all too often and all too easily passion/desire can overcome reason, and that's when shootings happen. if there were no guns, this wouldn't be a problem!
To be fair it really is a tool … knifing and the like would still happen … wouldn’t stop attacks just slow them down

*picks nose while reading new posts*
Three cheers for Chriss! The first step to fixing your problem is recognizing it.

Hey, We're allowed to have guns, why shouldn't we be able to go and kill somebody we hate? Heck, it's a free country, don't we have rights? And if we shoot somebody, that's their own fault, isn't it? Heck, why not, we already want same sex marriages, marijuana, drugs, anarchy and loads of other sh*t.
Yes, it is a right and who am I to stop them from making their own CHOICE. :mp5: BTW, there is leniency in The Kingsland if you so happen to take out a "pro-choice" rally :sniper: :p

*picks nose while reading new posts*
Wow we have an intellectual here

Wow we have an intellectual here

I was only joking

cause it goes LIFE, then liberty, then property

something abortionists will never understand
Then why are conservatives pro-death penalty and pro-guns?

I was only joking
And yet you managed to far surpass the average posting intelligence of the average NS'er.

I was only joking
so was I

To be fair it really is a tool … knifing and the like would still happen … wouldn’t stop attacks just slow them down
true but there would probably be fewer deaths - guns are more lethal than knives (unless you know what you're doing of course)

To be fair it really is a tool … knifing and the like would still happen … wouldn’t stop attacks just slow them down


Very hard to knife innocent bystanders.


Damn those stray knives! going through walls and hitting little kids and all!

Wow...that's a really strong argument. I will have to think a bit before I get back to you on that. Very impressive, Schrandtopia, and well put.

thank ye

Then why are conservatives pro-death penalty and pro-guns?

just to press the argument who said I was pro-death penalty?

and they usually argue that by killing the convict they save lives by keeping him out of the populous (and out the prison population, alot of people die in jail) and detering future criminals

Hey, if they jump in front of my bullet, who's to blame? I didn't force them to get infront, lol.

Seriously, about guns being illegal, what about collectors?

Here in Canada, you can own any gun you want, in full working condition, but only if you hold a collectors permit. Which is hard to get at that.
Same with a tank, here in Canada, like England, you can drive a tank down the street, but it has restrictions, and you require both a heavy machenery permit, and a liscence that allows you to drive an 18-wheeler.

chillax!!! Everyone! those of you who want the guns; you won't when someone's shooting at you. Those of you who are bitching about abortion and how its "wrong;" shut it. I don't think it should be used a form of birth control, but its not fair to the child either to bring him/her into a family that doesn't what him/her. I'd rather not ever exist, and not know about it than have to deal with the fact that I was a mistake, and they weren't ready, and the don't have enough money, and that I ruined their lives.

chillax!!! Everyone! those of you who want the guns; you won't when someone's shooting at you.

most pro-gun people would argue thats the time you really want a gun

crazzies and criminals will always find a way to get guns - look at Europe, gun laws just take guns out of the hands of responsible citizens and to a nominal effect elevate the cost of black market guns

Those of you who are bitching about abortion and how its "wrong;" shut it. I don't think it should be used a form of birth control, but its not fair to the child either to bring him/her into a family that doesn't what him/her. I'd rather not ever exist, and not know about it than have to deal with the fact that I was a mistake, and they weren't ready, and the don't have enough money, and that I ruined their lives.


adoption?

most pro-gun people would argue thats the time you really want a gun

crazzies and criminals will always find a way to get guns - look at Europe, gun laws just take guns out of the hands of responsible citizens and to a nominal effect elevate the cost of black market guns




adoption?


Look at Switzerland, they have alot of guns and less crime.
Canada is a gun-loving country of hunters. Yet we have less crime then the US.
It really isn't the guns that kill people, it's the idiots that use them.
Although, I strongly agree with gun registry.

Then why are conservatives pro-death penalty and pro-guns?

So they can be the only Six-shooter-sheriff in town.

I dunno; I just watched a movie that made me want to post this.

Back to the original poster: All those things you mentioned only affect YOU, unless its destructive anarchy, in which case you explode things, but the difference is that with guns, they are designed for one person to affect another living organism. With drugs, you only hurt yourself.

With drugs, you only hurt yourself.

nay grasshoper

when your drug funds go to terrorists and druglords

when your car swerves off the road and smacks around a few bystanders

when your hospitilization eats away at my tax money

your drugs have then hurt other people

Then why are conservatives pro-death penalty and pro-guns?

Conservatives don't have to make sense, don't waste too much time trying to logic out the argument. Eventually your head will violently explode.

Spend your time more constructively my friend, like solving the Konigsberg bridge problem, or computing the last digit of Pi. ;)

nay grasshoper

when your drug funds go to terrorists and druglords

when your car swerves off the road and smacks around a few bystanders

when your hospitilization eats away at my tax money

your drugs have then hurt other people

Well technically yes; I just assumed people accounted for the trickle down factor. With a gun its instant gratification, as bad as it sounds. With drugs, the instant gratification you get is a nice brain cell slaughter and depending what drug, respiratory problems or high chance of disease or you get death by OD.

But of course, you are correct. In the way that suicide is a vengeful thing, as it saddens so many people; or so people have philosophized...

Hey, We're allowed to have guns, why shouldn't we be able to go and kill somebody we hate? Heck, it's a free country, don't we have rights? And if we shoot somebody, that's their own fault, isn't it? Heck, why not, we already want same sex marriages, marijuana, drugs, anarchy and loads of other sh*t.

And to the original poster:
KILLING - deprives an individual of life, deprives dependants of income, deprives relatives and friends of that persons companionship, removes a member of society who could be doing something productive to advance that society.

compare to -

SAME SEX MARRIAGE - ... ... ... hmmmm.... grants the right of marriage to a minority... deprives homophobes of a method of discriminatory oppression

MARIJUANA - assumed used recreationally, provides individuals with a relatively inexpensive and enjoyable high, legalizing it frees up prison space, recognizes peoples rights to thier own bodies, downside - deprives pantry of doritos and tortilla chips :)

DRUGS - see above, except downside, w/ harder drugs, there is harm, but still, its my own damn body, it only affects me if i practice responsibility and get high out of public

ANARCHY - Not even seeing this one... Anarchy = absence of government, cannot be found anywhere in the world save mid and southern Somalia.

ANARCHY - Not even seeing this one... Anarchy = absence of government, cannot be found anywhere in the world save mid and southern Somalia.
Isn't there a anarchic island in Danes, or somewhere like like? I remember hearing it on the radio a month or two ago.

Hey, if they jump in front of my bullet, who's to blame? I didn't force them to get infront, lol.

Seriously, about guns being illegal, what about collectors?

Here in Canada, you can own any gun you want, in full working condition, but only if you hold a collectors permit. Which is hard to get at that.
Same with a tank, here in Canada, like England, you can drive a tank down the street, but it has restrictions, and you require both a heavy machenery permit, and a liscence that allows you to drive an 18-wheeler.

Dude, that's totally not true, I live in Canada, we don't let people own tanks. On a seperate note, when it is said that it is a person's right to own a weapon that is only in the United States as the remenant of a constitution in which BRITAIN was trying to destroy America and people needed them for self defense. Furthermore, the slippery slope argument doesn't hold up when so many people see that governments don't care about .22s for hunting deer. They care about Kalishnikovs for hunting humans. On a side note, Kalishnikov has recently marketed vodka. But I digress: Even though people want restrictions on some of the deadliest (is that spelled right) things known to man, that doesn't mean that they want to infringe upon the rights of Americans, Canadians, or anybody else in the world

Hey, We're allowed to have guns, why shouldn't we be able to go and kill somebody we hate? Heck, it's a free country, don't we have rights? And if we shoot somebody, that's their own fault, isn't it? Heck, why not, we already want same sex marriages, marijuana, drugs, anarchy and loads of other sh*t.

No. Your rights end where another person's begin.


Then why are conservatives pro-death penalty and pro-guns?

Because guns are part of Americas culture. The death penalty removes dangerous criminals from society.

nay grasshoper

when your drug funds go to terrorists and druglords

when your car swerves off the road and smacks around a few bystanders

when your hospitilization eats away at my tax money

your drugs have then hurt other people

1)legalized and regulated they wouldn't
2)same with alcohol. or cellphones. or people who don't get enough sleep. or people on cold medicine. Impaired people driving should be against the law but using drugs isn't the only source of impairment, nor do most impaired people drive. From what I have seen with drinkers, people who drive drunk are likely to be the types to drive impaired. People who call cabs when drunk tend to more responsible in the other situations.
3)Is anyway. Billions and billions spent on the "drug war."

cause it goes LIFE, then liberty, then property

something abortionists will never understand
No, life, liberty AND property

No, life, liberty AND property
If you want to be technical it is not property rather the pursuit of happiness


Happiness != property

(may cause happiness but they are not equal)

If you want to be technical it is not property rather the pursuit of happiness


Happiness != property

(may cause happiness but they are not equal)
I'm citing Locke, not Jefferson. Locke wrote of Life, Liberty and Property. Jefferson of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

I'm citing Locke, not Jefferson. Locke wrote of Life, Liberty and Property. Jefferson of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
oh ;) got it

oh ;) got it
common mistake, fear not. You are still better informed than 99% of Americans.

common mistake, fear not. You are still better informed than 99% of Americans.
Lol I completely forgot … eeek so many comp classes pushing out my other knowledge lol

I'm citing Locke, not Jefferson. Locke wrote of Life, Liberty and Property. Jefferson of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
That was to make it sound better. We all know he really meant property, though.

That was to make it sound better. We all know he really meant property, though.
How would you know ?
Met him?

I mean seems to me like a good catch all of everything including property that he dident name ... including money ... land ... (both I wouldent strictly clasify as property) your free will including being able to work and live where you wish

to persue happyness in all its forms


seems to be a much better garontee for things then just property

Dude, that's totally not true, I live in Canada, we don't let people own tanks. On a seperate note, when it is said that it is a person's right to own a weapon that is only in the United States as the remenant of a constitution in which BRITAIN was trying to destroy America and people needed them for self defense. Furthermore, the slippery slope argument doesn't hold up when so many people see that governments don't care about .22s for hunting deer. They care about Kalishnikovs for hunting humans. On a side note, Kalishnikov has recently marketed vodka. But I digress: Even though people want restrictions on some of the deadliest (is that spelled right) things known to man, that doesn't mean that they want to infringe upon the rights of Americans, Canadians, or anybody else in the world


You can own a tank in canada.

Dude, that's totally not true, I live in Canada, we don't let people own tanks. On a seperate note, when it is said that it is a person's right to own a weapon that is only in the United States as the remenant of a constitution in which BRITAIN was trying to destroy America and people needed them for self defense. Furthermore, the slippery slope argument doesn't hold up when so many people see that governments don't care about .22s for hunting deer. They care about Kalishnikovs for hunting humans. On a side note, Kalishnikov has recently marketed vodka. But I digress: Even though people want restrictions on some of the deadliest (is that spelled right) things known to man, that doesn't mean that they want to infringe upon the rights of Americans, Canadians, or anybody else in the world


Yea, you can own a tank here. I've met someone in this province who owns an ex-Soviet T-80, and has driven it on public roads, LEGALLY.
The reason you don't seem them around, is because they guzzle more gas then anything else on the road, not exactly an efficient daily driver.
The pavement will ruin the tracks in a few days, and those tracks cost alot.
And finnally, although concrete highway bridges will hold the weight, most country drigges, suspension bridges, or large bridges in this country will not hold the weight.
As for guns, here in Canada, you can get a collectors liscense, as I've stated before. It's harder to get then a Moose liscense in Nova Scotia (They have a lottery for the 200 avalible, or at least it was 200 two years ago, may have gone down). I personally know freinds of the family who collect guns. A man who works for the navy, has a collectors liscense, and owns some 35 guns, ranging from matchlock muskets, to an M-60 (Yes, an M-60). All of them are in full working order, and all registered.

...all too often and all too easily passion/desire can overcome reason, and that's when shootings happen. if there were no guns, this wouldn't be a problem!
It sure would be nice if the world was still perfectly peaceful like it was before guns were invented. :p

Wow...that's a really strong argument. I will have to think a bit before I get back to you on that. Very impressive, Schrandtopia, and well put.

Why would you need to think about that argument? Simple answer - a fetus is not alive (something the anti-choicers can't seem to grasp), so it has no place in "Life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness."

Oh, lord, let's play "Shoot downthe propaganda!"

nay grasshoper

when your drug funds go to terrorists and druglords

Only because it's criminalized. Where did that market come from again?

when your car swerves off the road and smacks around a few bystanders

Why are you using drugs and driving again? Oh yeah, that's already illegal...so banning drugs is unnecessary.

when your hospitilization eats away at my tax money

Are you after the obese next? How ridiculous...a lot of people do stupid things that puts them in the hospital. Care to cite some figures about these drug users eating up hospital funds, or are you content to just put the phantom of it out there?

your drugs have then hurt other people

No, idiots and idiotic laws which facilitate criminality rather than discouraging it have hurt other people. Try again.

has somebody been reading too much Thomas Hobbes & John Locke? ;)

it is simply morally wrong to take a life imo - nobody has the right to decide who lives and who dies. i still think guns should be illegal because all too often and all too easily passion/desire can overcome reason, and that's when shootings happen. if there were no guns, this wouldn't be a problem!
Oddly enough, knifings and bludgeonings would still occur.

Then why are conservatives pro-death penalty and pro-guns?
Because if you have transgressed in a way extreme enough to garner the death penalty you have forfeited your right to life.

Why would you need to think about that argument? Simple answer - a fetus is not alive (something the anti-choicers can't seem to grasp), so it has no place in "Life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness."
Not true, just because something is a parasite does not make it "dead". Severely underdeveloped, completely dependent on it's host, and with little to no brain function perhaps, but not "dead".

Not true, just because something is a parasite does not make it "dead". Severely underdeveloped, completely dependent on it's host, and with little to no brain function perhaps, but not "dead".

How can something be dead if it were never alive at all?

-or-

Did I ever say anything about it being "dead?" Who are you quoting? Oh, you black and white thinkers...

And to the original poster:
KILLING - deprives an individual of life, deprives dependants of income, deprives relatives and friends of that persons companionship, removes a member of society who could be doing something productive to advance that society.

compare to -

SAME SEX MARRIAGE - ... ... ... hmmmm.... grants the right of marriage to a minority... deprives homophobes of a method of discriminatory oppression

MARIJUANA - assumed used recreationally, provides individuals with a relatively inexpensive and enjoyable high, legalizing it frees up prison space, recognizes peoples rights to thier own bodies, downside - deprives pantry of doritos and tortilla chips :)

DRUGS - see above, except downside, w/ harder drugs, there is harm, but still, its my own damn body, it only affects me if i practice responsibility and get high out of public

ANARCHY - Not even seeing this one... Anarchy = absence of government, cannot be found anywhere in the world save mid and southern Somalia.


I think you're wrong with the marijuana part. People start smoking or sniffing it, and once the effect is gone, the're lying on the streets, and there's an awful smell that smoking it makes a horrible smell that I choke on. :mad:

I think you're wrong with the marijuana part. People start smoking or sniffing it, and once the effect is gone, the're lying on the streets, and there's an awful smell that smoking it makes a horrible smell that I choke on. :mad:
Chris, you've become the new Defensor Fidei. Well, at least you haven't been here long enough to gain any credibility worth losing.

And who sniffs marijuana? And who's laying in the streets like a stewbum from weed? Oh boy, check your basic facts before posting.

Ah. Cut him some slack, he must be high.

Originally Posted by Terra Romani
And to the original poster:
KILLING - deprives an individual of life, deprives dependants of income, deprives relatives and friends of that persons companionship, removes a member of society who could be doing something productive to advance that society.

compare to -

SAME SEX MARRIAGE - ... ... ... hmmmm.... grants the right of marriage to a minority... deprives homophobes of a method of discriminatory oppression

MARIJUANA - assumed used recreationally, provides individuals with a relatively inexpensive and enjoyable high, legalizing it frees up prison space, recognizes peoples rights to thier own bodies, downside - deprives pantry of doritos and tortilla chips

DRUGS - see above, except downside, w/ harder drugs, there is harm, but still, its my own damn body, it only affects me if i practice responsibility and get high out of public

ANARCHY - Not even seeing this one... Anarchy = absence of government, cannot be found anywhere in the world save mid and southern Somalia.
Don't use such big words. :rolleyes:

nay grasshoper

when your drug funds go to terrorists and druglords


So legalise them.


when your car swerves off the road and smacks around a few bystanders


So ban alcohol as well.

Hang on, that's been tried. Did pretty much the same thing as banning cannabis. Rise in black market availability, organised crime, the mafia...

Doesn't wash, sorry.


when your hospitilization eats away at my tax money


We'd better ban abseiling then. And any other danger sport.


your drugs have then hurt other people


By your definition, I couldn't even fart without hurting other people.

Chris, you've become the new Defensor Fidei. Well, at least you haven't been here long enough to gain any credibility worth losing.

And who sniffs marijuana? And who's laying in the streets like a stewbum from weed? Oh boy, check your basic facts before posting.

Ah. Cut him some slack, he must be high.


I'm not high. I made a mistake


on an unrelated note, THE TAMPA BAY LIGHTNING SUCK

cause it goes LIFE, then liberty, then property

something abortionists will never understand
funny, becaues my dictionary defines life as the time from birth to death.

thus an embryo or fetus does not qualify.

Hey, We're allowed to have guns, why shouldn't we be able to go and kill somebody we hate?
Despite my noticing of the obvious sarcasm, the reason is that you cannot infringe upon (in this order) somebody's life, liberty, or property

if there were no guns, this wouldn't be a problem!

.... :confused: What about knives, cudgels, chains, garrotes, rocket launchers and various body parts?

I think you're wrong with the marijuana part. People start smoking or sniffing it, and once the effect is gone, the're lying on the streets, and there's an awful smell that smoking it makes a horrible smell that I choke on. :mad:
who sniffs marijuana?

and when you consider that pot is a pretty cheap drug that is not physically addictive and if anything is more likely to cause someone to play video games all night and conk out at 5 am in a delightful weed nap than anything...

and pot has a delightful smell. perhaps i just think so because it's been associated with so many wonderful memories. *sigh*

I'm surprised, Chris has managed to reach an Oliver Willis level of stupid.

when your drug funds go to terrorists and druglords

first off, most pot in the u.s. comes from the u.s., other drugs, no however, if you legalize them then they'll be coming from legitimate companies and businesses.

when your car swerves off the road and smacks around a few bystanders

make it illegal to be high and drive. same deal with drinking and driving.

when your hospitilization eats away at my tax money

considering that it is physically impossible to overdose on marijuana and the only illnesses i know of that have been associated with someone getting high are related to their pot being laced with herion, however if you make pot legal, you regulate it so that kind of thing does not happen.

now, it is quite easy to get alcohol poisoning as the ratio of intoxication to death for alhcohol is 1:9, so if three drinks gets you buzzed, 27 will kill you.

your drugs have then hurt other people
yet not if they're legal and regulated.

-rant on drugs-
Chris, I don't believe people should use drugs, but:

"Stupidity should be painful"

If somebody willingly wants to damage their bodies with some sort of harmful substance, why should anybody want to stop them? I mean, people who later come off their addiction* are now smart enough not to do drugs again, and those who are stupid enough to keep using drugs, well . . . their stupidity is gone through other ways . . .


*(All the pro-drug use ppl out there - yes I do realize that some drugs actually don't cause addictions and aren't harmful)