NationStates Jolt Archive

Both houses overwhelmingly (and bi-partisanly) overrode the Gov's veto..

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1759796

Next...Nebraska.

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a186/kecibukia/rtc.gif

Nebraska? Hey that's where I live!

There is no place like Nebraska,

Good old Nebraska, good...

(I sadly forgot the rest)

Concealed carry is for pussies. If you're gonna let people run around with thundersticks, you might as well let the hypothetical criminal see it, so as to deter him from doing anything. And so that people can look rednecky for satellite pics.

Nebraska? Hey that's where I live!

There is no place like Nebraska,

Good old Nebraska, good...

(I sadly forgot the rest)

From what I've read, they're on a third reading of a CC bill that supposedly has strong support.

So there really is a Kansas? Wow. I'm not exactly against this, just against the people who may be carrying the guns. :eek:

Delaware just moved to a shall-issue state.

To Kansas!

From what I've read, they're on a third reading of a CC bill that supposedly has strong support.
Exactly!

(Gets out guns ala crazy Texan oil tycoon from the Simpsons)

Yeehaw! BLAM! BLAM! BLAM! I'm as crazy as an oil tycoon philantropist!

Seriously though, I'm in support of it.

Or get Chuck Norris to police the world.

Freedom marches on.

Though, I’d really like to see the wholesale legalization of unrestricted carrying period, concealed or not.

Or get Chuck Norris to police the world.
Yes! He would make both those in support of guns and those against guns happy, as He could kick crime's ass without the use of firearms!

He would eat the guns. And the criminals. And the victims of crime.

He would eat the guns. And the criminals. And the victims of crime.
And people who look at Him wrong. No one should look at the Mighty Chuck in the wrong way.

Your country is a turd.

Damn, his Chuckness hijacked this thread well, through the medium of his imperfect mortal servants.

Chuck Norris eats pure crime for breakfast.

Great ... so now Kansasians can shoot people who want to actually teach biology in a biology class. Good for them.

Your country is a turd.
Every country’s a turd.

Great ... so now Kansasians can shoot people who want to actually teach biology in a biology class. Good for them.
:D Damn straight!

Every country’s a turd.

LIES! My country is a road apple.

On topic: Concealed carry? That sounds suspicious. If people have guns, have 'em where people can see 'em, yar.

On topic: Concealed carry? That sounds suspicious. If people have guns, have 'em where people can see 'em, yar.
I agree.

huzzah :D

I maintain that Chuck Norris should be the only human allowed to have a gun.

He doesn't need it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:BraddockMIA.jpg

I agree.

Well, isn't the U.S. still all 'zOMFGTerrorists!'? Isn't letting people hide guns on their person kinda work against that? I mean, if everyone has weapons hidden down their pants, doesn't that make it a bit hard to pick Mr. I-Keel-People out of the crowd?

...though would gun's not being concealed change this any? Hmm...

I maintain that Chuck Norris should be the only human allowed to have a gun.

He doesn't need it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:BraddockMIA.jpg
He only needs to look at you and you're dead.

You only need to look at him and you're dead.

Your country is a turd.

That is one painfully shaped turd, then. All those points and all.

My sphincter just cringes when I think about that!

Think of the amount of blood something big enough to comfortably accomodate millions of people would cause whilst passing through.

Think of the amount of blood something big enough to comfortably accomodate millions of people would cause whilst passing through.

Oy! I have a big anus, but not that big!

So this is how the West was won.

Don't make me mention Chuck Norris....

Great ... so now Kansasians can shoot people who want to actually teach biology in a biology class. Good for them.

Right. Because that's exactly what the law states.
:rolleyes:

Yay for Kansas. This is further proof the government is not oppressive as oppressive governments restrict the right to bear arms first thing they do when forming. ^^

Nebraska? Hey that's where I live!

There is no place like Nebraska,

Good old Nebraska, good...

(I sadly forgot the rest)
There's no place like Nebraska
Good old Nebraska U.
Where the girls are the fairest
The boys are the squarest
Of any school you ever knew.

There's no place like Nebraska
Good old Nebraska U.
Where the girls are the fairest
The boys are the squarest
Of any school you ever knew.

There may be some truth to this little ditty. I married a former Miss Nebraska who attended KU, stating similar reason as to why. I have to hand it to them though, they may be square, but there is something to be said for corn fed.

I wish someone would give a good reason to conceal carry. If I felt I needed a gun, I would strap it on and let the whole world know I was carrying. I would think people would be less likely to attack me in the first place if they saw the gun as opposed to thinking I didn't, then having to actually use it. Wouldn't it be better to totally avoid the attack then to have to react to it? It seems like such a chicken S--- thing to do to conceal it. Are you really that ashamed of having a gun? I have a couple dozen. I want everyone to know what they may face it they want to attack me.

It just seems to me that if someone is too ashamed to want people to know they are carrying they won't have the guts to shoot for the kill triangle. What advantage is there to conceal vs to carry openly, besides not having the guts to let people know you are carrying?

There may be some truth to this little ditty. I married a former Miss Nebraska who attended KU, stating similar reason as to why. I have to hand it to them though, they may be square, but there is something to be said for corn fed.
We used to say our girls were like our state-----Broad, Flat, and Windy.:D


Now I'm sure that isn't true of a Miss Nebraska.

It just seems to me that if someone is too ashamed to want people to know they are carrying they won't have the guts to shoot for the kill triangle. What advantage is there to conceal vs to carry openly, besides not having the guts to let people know you are carrying?

It hasn't got a thing in the world to do with being ashamed to want people to know. It has more to do with the mindset of criminals and the way they pick their targets. Common sense would tell one that it is far more difficult to choose an unarmed victim, if you don't know who's unarmed. Are you going to rob or rape grandma if there is a good chance she has a pepper box in that purse?
It also has to do with the fact that if you carry a gun in your car, you have to have it unloaded and the ammunition stored in a seperate compartment, out of reach of the driver. Good lot of self defense that is going to be. With consealed carry, I am now not a criminal myself, because I keep a loaded derringer Model 1 next to me. Did you ever find yourself in the drive up lane at the bank, with a large amount of cash to deposit and realize just how trapped you were should someone walk up to your car and stick a gun in your face? Many have, and some have died because of it. Car jacking is not funny.

We used to say our girls were like our state-----Broad, Flat, and Windy.:D



ooooh what you said! hahaha HONEY! Oh Honey! (hope you don't mind my editing out the disclaimer!)

It hasn't got a thing in the world to do with being ashamed to want people to know. It has more to do with the mindset of criminals and the way they pick their targets. Common sense would tell one that it is far more difficult to choose an unarmed victim, if you don't know who's unarmed. Are you going to rob or rape grandma if there is a good chance she has a pepper box in that purse?
It also has to do with the fact that if you carry a gun in your car, you have to have it unloaded and the ammunition stored in a seperate compartment, out of reach of the driver. Good lot of self defense that is going to be. With consealed carry, I am now not a criminal myself, because I keep a loaded derringer Model 1 next to me. Did you ever find yourself in the drive up lane at the bank, with a large amount of cash to deposit and realize just how trapped you were should someone walk up to your car and stick a gun in your face? Many have, and some have died because of it. Car jacking is not funny.

If you need a gun why don't you get a gun? What good is a gun that you can't shoot straight?

Let Grandma strap on a gun and she won't be touched. If only one grandma in a thousand has a gun, she'll still be attacked before she can get it out of her purse.

If you need a gun why don't you get a gun? What good is a gun that you can't shoot straight?

Let Grandma strap on a gun and she won't be touched. If only one grandma in a thousand has a gun, she'll still be attacked before she can get it out of her purse.

If you are referring to the derringer Model 1, it is a perfect weapon for personal protection in the 1 to 3 foot range, and fires either shotgun or 45 colt ammuniton that will penetrate the door of a car and the perpetrator, yet still be small enough to conceal with my hand.

I think you get my point even though you don't agree. Forcing grandma to strap on her six shooters, might be good for grandma, but it does nothing to deter a would be robber from moving on to the next victim who didn't have her guns displayed.

I read the first page of this thread, and saw all the people saying yay to concealed weapons...
And I'm quickly striking states off the list of "Might I ever visit this place?"
Seriously... carrying guns around...
It's the 21st century, folks... not the wild west. If you're so terrified of everyone around you being out to get you, don't leave your house... or move to somewhere... I dunno... safe?

Now people in Kansas don't have to restrict themselves to just shooting people crossing thier own lawns, they can shoot people on any lawn...

You only need to look at him and you're dead.

Not even that. All you have to do is type his name into Google and hit "I'm Feeling Lucky."

Right. Because that's exactly what the law states.
:rolleyes:

But it's implied, right? Because I really want to move to Kansas and shoot anyone who tries to teach the four stages of mitosis.

I read the first page of this thread, and saw all the people saying yay to concealed weapons...
And I'm quickly striking states off the list of "Might I ever visit this place?"
Seriously... carrying guns around...
It's the 21st century, folks... not the wild west. If you're so terrified of everyone around you being out to get you, don't leave your house... or move to somewhere... I dunno... safe?

We live in a nation that respects the right of the individual to protect themselves by use of firearms. Legislation over the past 50 years whittled that right down to where only the criminals could carry firearms because they didn't respect the laws. Our self appointed protectors reasoned that if laws were passed to restrict firearms that it would somehow have meaning to those who commit violent crimes. At the same time, they adopted policies recognizing the criminals as the victims, then releasing them back upon the population to prey at will.
Concealed Carry does nothing more than even the playing field, and restore the law abiding citizens right to self defense. It doesn't give you a right to have a shoot out to settle arguments, but it does allow you the option to defend yourself as apposed to being a sheep and hoping the perpetrator will not kill you. Personal, I would much prefer to die defending myself instead of trusting some criminal to have a hallmark moment.
Maybe you should re-think your list of places not to visit as these three states are the only fertile ground left for carreer criminals who prey upon those weaker, that have no right to defend themselves or others.

We live in a nation that respects the right of the individual to protect themselves by use of firearms. Legislation over the past 50 years whittled that right down to where only the criminals could carry firearms because they didn't respet the laws. Our self appointed protectors reasoned that if laws were passed to restrict firearms that it would somehow have meaning to those who commit violent crimes. At the same time, they adopted policies recognizing the criminals as the victims, then releasing them back upon the population to prey at will.
Concealed Carry does nothing more than even the playing field, and restore the law abiding citizens right to self defense. It doesn't give you a right to have a shoot out to settle arguments, but it does allow you the option to defend yourself as apposed to being a sheep and hoping the perpetrator will not kill you. Personal, I would much prefer to die defending myself instead of trusting some criminal to have a hallmark moment.
Maybe you should re-think your list of places not to visit as these three states are the only fertile ground left for carreer criminals who prey upon those weaker, that have no right to defend themselves or others.

I live in Canada... we don't do guns here... and things are good, for the most part. Should someone commit a crime with a gun, there are mandatory minimum sentences that make it quite costly to do it... not to mention we just don't allow handguns. Handguns aren't good for anything except shooting people. I (and many others) don't buy the idea that you need a handgun, or a semi/full automatic rifle to go hunting animals.
It's just a different way of looking at the world... and I prefer the Canadian way. ;)

Now people in Kansas don't have to restrict themselves to just shooting people crossing thier own lawns, they can shoot people on any lawn...

Yes sir, no intelligent life here.

It's just a different way of looking at the world... and I prefer the Canadian way. ;)

Good for you. I am glad to hear it. There's absolutely nothing wrong with being proud of your country, despite what some might say.

Yes sir, no intelligent life here.
I don't have a problem with guns, I have a problem with the 'guns are the cure for what ales ya' mentality, and that is most prevalent in celebrating concealed carry like you're all Wyatt Earp and shooting a teenage boy for crossing a fucking lawn.

I don't have a problem with guns, I have a problem with the 'guns are the cure for what ales ya' mentality, and that is most prevalent in celebrating concealed carry like you're all Wyatt Earp and shooting a teenage boy for crossing a fucking lawn.

We can just agree that you have a problem. Maybe when you sleep it off you will take a bit of time and check to see where that incident happened, what type of weapon it happend with, and realize that it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Then maybe consider the anger you feel having lost a cause you feel strongly about and relate that the joy that honest law abiding citizens here feel knowing that they can now defend themselves against such perpetrators as the one you are so angry about.

We can just agree that you have a problem. Maybe when you sleep it off you will take a bit of time and check to see where that incident happened, what type of weapon it happend with, and realize that it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Then maybe consider the anger you feel having lost a cause you feel strongly about and relate that the joy that honest law abiding citizens here feel knowing that they can now defend themselves against such perpetrators as the one you are so angry about.
Swing and a miss.

Swing and a miss.

Too bad. I was hoping it was something other than no intelligent life.
In any event. I hope things get better for you.

We can just agree that you have a problem...
His argument is actually a little more involved than that, and I happen to agree with it.

The relationship many people have with guns is not particularly healthy, you know. People don't buy guns to defend themselves (however silly an idea that might be), they buy them to feel better about themselves. And that's not good, IMHO.

Then maybe consider the anger you feel having lost a cause you feel strongly about and relate that the joy that honest law abiding citizens here feel knowing that they can now defend themselves against such perpetrators as the one you are so angry about.
This is one of the least rational statements I've ever read.

Too bad. I was hoping it was something other than no intelligent life.
In any event. I hope things get better for you.
So adorably insulting, certainly the kind of maturity I would want of someone hiding a gun in their jacket.

Yes, I know that the lawn shooting happened in a different stat. However, it is the attitude about guns I was talking about and so what state it happened in is irrelevant.

Had the teen also been carrying a gun the only real difference in the out come would be that he is dead and armed, the old man would be dead instead, or they both would be dead. Over a lawn. Because people thought that guns where the cure.

And no, I don't really give flying fuck about the issue, as I said-guns aren't the problem. It's your Wyatt Earp attitude about them that is. You can't legislate that-you can only hope that evolution catches up.

But it's implied, right? Because I really want to move to Kansas and shoot anyone who tries to teach the four stages of mitosis.

If you think it "implies" that, you need counseling.

I live in Canada... we don't do guns here... and things are good, for the most part. Should someone commit a crime with a gun, there are mandatory minimum sentences that make it quite costly to do it... not to mention we just don't allow handguns. Handguns aren't good for anything except shooting people. I (and many others) don't buy the idea that you need a handgun, or a semi/full automatic rifle to go hunting animals.
It's just a different way of looking at the world... and I prefer the Canadian way. ;)

Canada also has a higher percapita ownership rate than the US and has always had a lower crime rate. It's firearm measures were acceptable (even though I disagree w/ registration) until the Gov't started their various gun grabs which is what always happens.

In the US, crime has always been much higher no matter the ownership rates. In many cases, the places w/ the strictest laws had the highest crime. While I'm not claiming CCW necessarily reduces crime, even criminals admit they would rather go after easier targets and it has saved lives on numerous occasions.

His argument is actually a little more involved than that, and I happen to agree with it.

The relationship many people have with guns is not particularly healthy, you know. People don't buy guns to defend themselves (however silly an idea that might be), they buy them to feel better about themselves. And that's not good, IMHO.

What's "many" in comparison to the 40+ million who own firearms?

How do you know that people don't buy firearms to defend themselves? Anything to back that up?

I live in the Peoples Republic of Illinois and am not allowed CCW. Only King Richard and his ilk can do that. He's more equal than others apparently. One of the firearms I purchased was SPECIFICALLY FOR" home defense.

Had the teen also been carrying a gun the only real difference in the out come would be that he is dead and armed, the old man would be dead instead, or they both would be dead. Over a lawn. Because people thought that guns where the cure.

And no, I don't really give flying fuck about the issue, as I said-guns aren't the problem. It's your Wyatt Earp attitude about them that is. You can't legislate that-you can only hope that evolution catches up.

No. One sick old man thought a firearm was "the answer". He is now going to spend a long time in jail where he belongs.

If it is a "Wyatt Earp" attitude to want to CC, then I'm all for it as CCW holders are MORE law-abiding than the average citizen and would then be MORE evolved by your arguement.

All I can say is... yay for increased crime! :D

All I can say is... yay for increased crime! :D

Carry Laws actually reduce crime.

Carry Laws actually reduce crime.

Even as an ardent rights supporter, I'll say that can be argued.

The fact however, that CCW doesn't INCREASE crime or murders (as the anti-rights pundits squeel each and every time) goes to show that opposition to the laws is more of a form of citizen control than crime control.

Even as an ardent rights supporter, I'll say that can be argued.

The fact however, that CCW doesn't INCREASE crime or murders (as the anti-rights pundits squeel each and every time) goes to show that opposition to the laws is more of a form of citizen control than crime control.

Hooyah.

No. One sick old man thought a firearm was "the answer". He is now going to spend a long time in jail where he belongs.

Unfortunately, as that thread proved, there are many, many people out there who think that sort of reaction to a kid on your lawn is fully justified, and who would act similarly if they were in such a situation.

Unfortunately, as that thread proved, there are many, many people out there who think that sort of reaction to a kid on your lawn is fully justified, and who would act similarly if they were in such a situation.

No. It showed there were a few nitwits on an internet forum, not "many, many people" who want to go blasting at obnoxious kids.

No. It showed there were a few nitwits on an internet forum, not "many, many people" who want to go blasting at obnoxious kids.

Right.

Great ... so now Kansasians can shoot people who want to actually teach biology in a biology class. Good for them.
That would make them criminals, not defenders against crime.

If you guys think having more guns means less shootings thats crazy, okay okay so maybe the guns are allready there now your just making it legal fro them to carry them. To me that just does not make sense.

If you guys think having more guns means less shootings, okay okay so maybe the guns are allready there now your just making it legal fro them to carry them. To me that just does not make sense.

If you were a criminal would you consider 'jacking' a car if there was a posability of getting Mac-11ed?

If you guys think having more guns means less shootings thats crazy, okay okay so maybe the guns are allready there now your just making it legal fro them to carry them. To me that just does not make sense.

What doesn't make sense? People who actually follow the law can now get permits to carry firearms legally.

Those who don't follow the law were carrying them already.

Ah the Mac-11 (http://www.iawca.org/images/mac_supp.jpg)

If you were a criminal would you consider 'jacking' a car if there was a posability of getting Mac-11ed?
Good, you replace a car theft with a murder. Way to go!

If you were a criminal would you consider 'jacking' a car if there was a posability of getting Mac-11ed?
Or you'd just have a bigger gun and shoot the driver first.

Go to the thread 'The Missing Semicolon.' I'm interested in what you all have to say.

Good, you replace a car theft with a murder. Way to go!

So you consider defending your life and property is "murder"?

What doesn't make sense? People who actually follow the law can now get permits to carry firearms legally.

Those who don't follow the law were carrying them already.


and that's a good thing? Policehave the right to carry guns and they shoot the wrong people all the time, and they have training. Now you tell me your giving out the right to carry guns to everyday people. Yikes.

Or you'd just have a bigger gun and shoot the driver first.

Go to the thread 'The Missing Semicolon.' I'm interested in what you all have to say.

Once again, criminals are cowards. They will go after the easiest targets, not ones they know might be armed. And this comes from the criminals themselves.

Gun-culture morons. It's no surprise they're like that, and it's a given they're proud to be moronic.

Do you have any sort of clue as to just how pathetic you gun-culture morons seem to the international posters here? I mean, I know you make a brave show of apparently not caring what the international posters here think of your knuckle-walking, mouth-breathing proclivities as gormless American twits and phallus-surrogate enthusiasts, but come on.

and that's a good thing? Policehave the right to carry guns and they shoot the wrong people all the time, and they have training. Now you tell me your giving out the right to carry guns to everyday people. Yikes.

So you're saying we should rely on the police who shoot people all the time? Or are you saying we should disarm the police?

In EVERY state that has passed CC, the holders are MORE law abiding than the average citizen. Your average firearm owner also trains more often than the average police officer. Police training does not give one jedi like powers over firearms.

and Kansas slides closer towards the absolute right. Well at least the people are actually getting what they vote for now.

Next stop: Complete abortion ban, Anti-intellectualism laws, and mandatory bible study. Woot!

*hugs New Jersey*

Gun-culture morons. It's no surprise they're like that, and it's a given they're proud to be moronic.

Do you have any sort of clue as to just how pathetic you gun-culture morons seem to the international posters here? I mean, I know you make a brave show of apparently not caring what the international posters here think of your knuckle-walking, mouth-breathing proclivities as gormless American twits and phallus-surrogate enthusiasts, but come on.

Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelligent thought in this post.

and Kansas slides closer towards the absolute right. Well at least the people are actually getting what they vote for now.

Next stop: Complete abortion ban, Anti-intellectualism laws, and mandatory bible study. Woot!

*hugs New Jersey*

So self-defense is a measure of the "absolute right"? Does that mean those who consider themselves "leftists" oppose it?

You do realize that a good portion of the Dems in KS voted for this measure? Does that make them "rightists"?

Try this site:

www.progunprogressive.com

Once again, criminals are cowards. They will go after the easiest targets, not ones they know might be armed. And this comes from the criminals themselves.

Criminals are not all cowards, just the same as all americans are not stupid. Though the evidence might seem stacked to one side.

So you're saying we should rely on the police who shoot people all the time? Or are you saying we should disarm the police?

No i am sayiing that they kill enough people allready

In EVERY state that has passed CC, the holders are MORE law abiding than the average citizen. Your average firearm owner also trains more often than the average police officer.

If you give someone a car they will drive it, If you give someone a gun they will use it. People will die, does that not matter to you.

Police training does not give one jedi like powers over firearms.

No but it should and that is a problem.

LIES! My country is a road apple.

On topic: Concealed carry? That sounds suspicious. If people have guns, have 'em where people can see 'em, yar.

I wish someone would give a good reason to conceal carry. If I felt I needed a gun, I would strap it on and let the whole world know I was carrying.

What advantage is there to conceal vs to carry openly, besides not having the guts to let people know you are carrying?
I disagree. If gun-carrying people had to openly display their guns, then it would be easy for criminals to pick out the unarmed for robbing.

I'm not expert, but I imagine a gun on the outside of your jacket would also be easier to steal than one on the inside.

If you are referring to the derringer Model 1, it is a perfect weapon for personal protection in the 1 to 3 foot range, and fires either shotgun or 45 colt ammuniton that will penetrate the door of a car and the perpetrator, yet still be small enough to conceal with my hand.
Ah yes, Liverbreath again shows his knowledge in his field of expertise: shooting through car doors. ;) :D

Now people in Kansas don't have to restrict themselves to just shooting people crossing thier own lawns, they can shoot people on any lawn...
Are you serious? This doesn't legalise murder.

I live in Canada... we don't do guns here... and things are good, for the most part.
You don't do guns because you don't have to. The US has the misfortune of being gun-infested with no way to undo it.

It's your Wyatt Earp attitude about them that is.
US culture is too pro-violence.

His argument is actually a little more involved than that, and I happen to agree with it.
You mean this argument?
Swing and a miss.

The relationship many people have with guns is not particularly healthy, you know. People don't buy guns to defend themselves (however silly an idea that might be), they buy them to feel better about themselves. And that's not good, IMHO.
Yes, the relationship "here is my gun, I can rob and kill people with it" is certainly unhealthy, and also criminal. I agree that there appears to be a certain "penis-extension" thing going on with some gun owners, but that's not all of them. Many are quite responsible, and genuinely concerned about self-defence.

Unfortunately, as that thread proved, there are many, many people out there who think that sort of reaction to a kid on your lawn is fully justified, and who would act similarly if they were in such a situation.
Yeah I found that disturbing. About two people said that the boy deserved it, but I doubt that any would actually act as the old man did, even if only because they would go to jail for it.

So you consider defending your life and property is "murder"?
Is a car worth taking a life?

Criminals are not all cowards, just the same as all americans are not stupid. Though the evidence might seem stacked to one side.

If a criminal walks up to some houses and the lights are on, one has a sign "protected by Smith & Wesson", the other says "support a ban on handguns"?

WHich one will he rob?



No i am sayiing that they kill enough people allready

What's "they"? the police? Guns? the people?



If you give someone a car they will drive it, If you give someone a gun they will use it. People will die, does that not matter to you.

Most defensive uses of firearms do not entail even firing the weapon. There are over 250 million firearms in legal possesion in the US and the average CCW state has about 2% of it's population having licenses. They are NOT going around killing people. It's the criminals who are doing that and most "gun control" laws do nothing to stop them.



No but it should and that is a problem.

The problem is that police do not recieve enough training and are not legally obligated to protect people from crime in the first place. I think that is more of a problem than allowing LAC's to carry.

Gun-culture morons. It's no surprise they're like that, and it's a given they're proud to be moronic.

Do you have any sort of clue as to just how pathetic you gun-culture morons seem to the international posters here? I mean, I know you make a brave show of apparently not caring what the international posters here think of your knuckle-walking, mouth-breathing proclivities as gormless American twits and phallus-surrogate enthusiasts, but come on.

Are you alittle jelious that we can own them? Just because you don't like guns means that you can control everyone who does.

OT: Congrats to Kansas! I think Wesconsin will be next.
I am sure the Brady Bunch is sh*ting themselves right now!

Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelligent thought in this post.
In your opinion.However, the opinion of a gun-culture moron means exceedingly little to me.

Is a car worth taking a life?

Are they "just" going to take your car? or are they going to shoot you just for fun afterwards? Or maybe rape your daughter in the back seat?

Is it worth taking a chance?

Are you alittle jelious that we can own them?Are you a little jealous that I can spell words greater than three syllables in length?

Are they "just" going to take your car? or are they going to shoot you just for fun afterwards? Or maybe rape your daughter in the back seat?

Is it worth taking a chance?
Is the sky never going to stop falling?

In your opinion.However, the opinion of a gun-culture moron means exceedingly little to me.

Oh, a personal attack. How civilized. I guess the "gun culture" is more advanced then.

Gun-culture morons. It's no surprise they're like that, and it's a given they're proud to be moronic.

Do you have any sort of clue as to just how pathetic you gun-culture morons seem to the international posters here? I mean, I know you make a brave show of apparently not caring what the international posters here think of your knuckle-walking, mouth-breathing proclivities as gormless American twits and phallus-surrogate enthusiasts, but come on.

How condescending. Gun culture morons eh? Is that all you have as a basis for argument?

Are they "just" going to take your car? or are they going to shoot you just for fun afterwards? Or maybe rape your daughter in the back seat?

Is it worth taking a chance?
Ah, so you'll kill them "just in case", so it's back to the law of the jungle. Allowing people to own firearms legally will just make criminals get bigger guns.

How condescending. Gun culture morons eh? Is that all you have as a basis for argument?
Well, maybe if they'd give me something more to work with...

Gun-culture morons. It's no surprise they're like that, and it's a given they're proud to be moronic.

Do you have any sort of clue as to just how pathetic you gun-culture morons seem to the international posters here? I mean, I know you make a brave show of apparently not caring what the international posters here think of your knuckle-walking, mouth-breathing proclivities as gormless American twits and phallus-surrogate enthusiasts, but come on.
Wow, what a convincing, rational, and non-bigoted argument. :rolleyes:

This is nothing more than trolling.

I'm European, btw.

and Kansas slides closer towards the absolute right. Well at least the people are actually getting what they vote for now.
Fool. I'm far left and I think that banning guns is stupid. There can be no revolution when the populace is disarmed by the ruling class.

Are you a little jealous that I can spell words greater than three syllables in length?

Are you ever going to stop making personal attacks and actually try and form an arguement?

Are you a little jealous that I can spell words greater than three syllables in length?

Nice cop-out. Have a good day!

Ah, so you'll kill them "just in case", so it's back to the law of the jungle. Allowing people to own firearms legally will just make criminals get bigger guns.

Bigger guns are not nesacarily better guns. And, to utilize a cliche, if we outlaw firearms only outlaws will have firearms.

If a criminal walks up to some houses and the lights are on, one has a sign "protected by Smith & Wesson", the other says "support a ban on handguns"?

Which one will he rob?

It dosen't matter who he robs, It should not come down to who dies that night.

here are a couple of scenarios.

Theif gets killed
Pro gun Home owener and family get killed
ban Guns Home owner and family get killed

Which one can you live with. I will tell you now I see no happy ending.


Most defensive uses of firearms do not entail even firing the weapon. There are over 250 million firearms in legal possesion in the US and the average CCW state has about 2% of it's population having licenses. They are NOT going around killing people. It's the criminals who are doing that and most "gun control" laws do nothing to stop them.

They have guns in their homes, they wer'nt allowed to go around killing people. Now they have the ability, People react, In fear, in anger, now they have a gun strapped to them, Though crime rate just possibly might go down death will go up.

Another thing if you think the solution to solving the gun issue is to allow more guns that is crazy. It is simple math, Guns + Guns = more guns. Im sure they taught you that.


The problem is that police do not recieve enough training and are not legally obligated to protect people from crime in the first place. I think that is more of a problem than allowing LAC's to carry.

Like I said it is a problem,

Oh, a personal attack. How civilized. I guess the "gun culture" is more advanced then.
No, what you wrote about "no intelligent thought" was a personal attack. My reply was a clarification.

Now why don't you go polish your gun barrel.

Ah, so you'll kill them "just in case", so it's back to the law of the jungle. Allowing people to own firearms legally will just make criminals get bigger guns.

No, it won't. This has been shown over and over. It makes them go for easier targets.

Once again, most defensive firearm uses don't involve firing the weapon at all.

The myth of CCW making criminals more violent has been shown wrong over and over in each state that has passed it.

Fool. I'm far left and I think that banning guns is stupid. There can be no revolution when the populace is disarmed by the ruling class.

I'm not directly opposed to just the far right, I also disagree completely with the far left. God forbid there's a day when people are moderate and not trying to strangle each other.

Are you ever going to stop making personal attacks and actually try and form an arguement?
When have gun-rights people ever listened to sensible arguments? :D

It's all 'oh my God, if I don't have a gun, I'm going to be, like, raped and murdered every day!!! I don't care I'm more likely to harm myself! I don't care that the mortality rate with no gun control is massive! I'm, like, just so frightened!'

I've never even seen a gun, and I'm pleased to say I'm much less likely to face the situations your come up with than you are with your guns.

Fool. I'm far left and I think that banning guns is stupid. There can be no revolution when the populace is disarmed by the ruling class.

and what ruling class is this? What revolution for that matter?

I'm curious as to why people seem to think that they should be able to tell me what I can and cannot own.
Furthermore, they seem rather hell-bent on telling me that because some fuckheads have killed/will kill people (an action they can and will continue, regardless of what's available), that I, someone who's a strict adherent to gun safety (and hasn't even been in a fight in his life) should be restricted the right to own and use a legitimate tool.
This "holier-than-thou", "I know what's best for you" shit is personally insulting.

Tell me why my freedoms should be restricted?

No, what you wrote about "no intelligent thought" was a personal attack. My reply was a clarification.

Now why don't you go polish your gun barrel.

To what end? polishing serves no purpose. Unless I was to auction it off as a collecter's item (http://turnbullrestoration.com/images/tr_pgimages/tr_left.jpg)

Dismissing a contratiction to your stance makes me wonder about the gravity of it.

It dosen't matter who he robs, It should not come down to who dies that night.

here are a couple of scenarios.

Theif gets killed
Pro gun Home owener and family get killed
ban Guns Home owner and family get killed

Which one can you live with. I will tell you now I see no happy ending.



They have guns in their homes, they wer'nt allowed to go around killing people. Now they have the ability, People react, In fear, in anger, now they have a gun strapped to them, Though crime rate just possibly might go down death will go up.

Another thing if you think the solution to solving the gun issue is to allow more guns that is crazy. It is simple math, Guns + Guns = more guns. Im sure they taught you that.



Like I said it is a problem,

I believe that violent crime in the US has been on a steady decrease for the past 30 years, even as conceal carry was allowed in various states.

I'm curious as to why people seem to think that they should be able to tell me what I can and cannot own.
Furthermore, they seem rather hell-bent on telling me that because some fuckheads have killed/will kill people (an action they can and will continue, regardless of what's available), that I, someone who's a strict adherent to gun safety (and hasn't even been in a fight in his life) should be restricted the right to own and use a legitimate tool.
This "holier-than-thou", "I know what's best for you" shit is personally insulting.

Tell me why my freedoms should be restricted?

Legitimate tool? IT"S A DEVICE TO KILL PEOPLE not build a barn. You have to realise it's a device for the sole purpose of killing people.

Bigger guns are not nesacarily better guns. And, to utilize a cliche, if we outlaw firearms only outlaws will have firearms.
So you say you'd have a chance with a handgun against a shotgun or an assault rifle? Right.

It's really a pity that you've to live in a country you need a gun to feel safe...

No, it won't. This has been shown over and over. It makes them go for easier targets.

Once again, most defensive firearm uses don't involve firing the weapon at all.

The myth of CCW making criminals more violent has been shown wrong over and over in each state that has passed it.

You're wasting your time. No amount of statistics and evidence will ever convince some people that conceal carry is a good thing.

contratiction
What's contratiction? Some old Reagan-era policy for Nicaragua?

I'm curious as to why people seem to think that they should be able to tell me what I can and cannot own.
Furthermore, they seem rather hell-bent on telling me that because some fuckheads have killed/will kill people (an action they can and will continue, regardless of what's available), that I, someone who's a strict adherent to gun safety (and hasn't even been in a fight in his life) should be restricted the right to own and use a legitimate tool.
This "holier-than-thou", "I know what's best for you" shit is personally insulting.

Tell me why my freedoms should be restricted?

Gah!

In my opinion it would be unfair to take away someone's right to own a gun. However, it is the ability to take that gun into a public area in any shape or form.

You don't even have to tell me because my grandfather owns a massive aray of guns and taught me how to shoot when I was young. Why? Not because it's fun (even though it is), but because I'm actually planning on going into law enforcement.

I feel safer with one criminal with a knife, then one criminal with a knife and six civilians carrying. Why? because not everyone makes the best decisions. Even cops who are trained in scenarios like that don't make the best decisions, so let's arm the regular joe schmos of America!

So you say you'd have a chance with a handgun against a shotgun or an assault rifle? Right.


*facepalm*

You'd have more of a chance than you'd think. A 9mm to your chest or head will put you down. You don't need a .50BMG to stop a person you know.....

I believe that violent crime in the US has been on a steady decrease for the past 30 years, even as conceal carry was allowed in various states.

here is an idea why not allow people to carry bullet proff vest. That would be a move to DEFEND yourself from other people with guns. Giving people guns or the right to carry said guns is just like pooring gas on the fire. It will not help except to makepeople "feel" safer.

Are you serious? This doesn't legalise murder.
And niether did the permit that allowed the old man to have the shotgun, and yet here we are...also, you might want to look into this thing we have, sarcasm.


You mean this argument?
Seeing as both those comments quote the same posting, that would be a no. Go ahead, give it another whirl. Eventually you'll get the hang of following an internet conversation.

You're wasting your time. No amount of statistics and evidence will ever convince some people that conceal carry is a good thing.

That's because it is a BAD thing

So you say you'd have a chance with a handgun against a shotgun or an assault rifle? Right.

It's really a pity that you've to live in a country you need a gun to feel safe...

You have never taken Tactical insertion seminars then. My Sig Sauer P226 (http://www.waffennoser.ch/img/sig_sauer_p226_16052004.jpg) Vs. your Kalashnikov (http://www.unidadepopular.org/ak-47.JPG).

I fell very lucky.

You have never taken Tactical insertion seminars then.
"Tactical insertion seminars"?

Geez...

Do any of you go out on dates?

That's because it is a BAD thing


Show me proof that it is wrong, not personal opinion. Show me government testamony, show me statistics, show me facts.

But good luck, because there are none. CCW has not lead to an increase in violent crime where it has been passed.

"Tactical insertion seminars"?

Geez...

Do any of you go out on dates?

Habitualy.

You have never taken Tactical insertion seminars then. My Sig Sauer P226 (http://www.waffennoser.ch/img/sig_sauer_p226_16052004.jpg) Vs. your Kalashnikov (http://www.unidadepopular.org/ak-47.JPG).

I fell very lucky.

your taking Tactical insertion seminars. Don't you have better things to do. I hear gardening is nice, maybe even knitting.

FBI Uniform Crime Report (1992) shows that 70% of violent crimes are committed by 7% of criminals, many of whom are on probation or are given parole and released early. Of incarcerated felons surveyed by the Department of Justice, 34% have been driven away, wounded, or captured by armed citizens; 40% state that they have decided against committing crimes for fear their would-be victims were armed.

The FBI's statistics in the 1992 Uniform Crime Report also concluded: "Violent crime rates are highest overall in states with laws limiting or prohibiting the carrying of concealed firearms for self-defense."

Legitimate tool? IT"S A DEVICE TO KILL PEOPLE not build a barn. You have to realise it's a device for the sole purpose of killing people.
Oh really...
Lets see, what have I used a gun for.
I went deer and turkey hunting from the age 12-16*: No people shot (and sadly only deer scared)
Just last weekend a few friends and I went to a range to shoot pistols (Sig 9 & 1911), for the fun of it: Again no people shot, only some paper shredded.

How about other people I've known
My father, his friends as well as my uncle
They've been hunting most of their lives: No people shot(coyote, deer, turkey, deer, etc): No people shot. But quite alot of food gathered.
Some female friends of mine: Also have gone pistol shooting: Still no people shot.
My roommate: Hunting and competative shooting No people shot
My roommate's dad: Hunting, and even made a citizen's arrest when someone tried to mug him Holy Pastafarian, I'm starting to see a fucking pattern here. NO PEOPLE SHOT.

Gee, I guess a gun has more uses than shooting people after all.
Wow, who would have guessed.

Please folks, use logic in your arguements.

*Yes, I had my own shotgun at that age, try not to wig out.

your taking Tactical insertion seminars. Don't you have better things to do. I hear gardening is nice, maybe even knitting.


You complain about people carrying concealed weapons, but then ridicule those who take training courses on how to use weapons properly......brilliant.....

You have never taken Tactical insertion seminars then. My Sig Sauer P226 (http://www.waffennoser.ch/img/sig_sauer_p226_16052004.jpg) Vs. your Kalashnikov (http://www.unidadepopular.org/ak-47.JPG).

I fell very lucky.
Great, now you need training too to have any chance against the criminals. Still, my strongest point was that in most civilized countries you don't need a weapon to feel safe at night. Indeed, you're really lucky.

All this pro-gun trouble and costs should be rather spent on better funding for the police. Or just move to another nation.

Oh really...
Lets see, what have I used a gun for.
I went deer and turkey hunting from the age 12-16*: No people shot (and sadly only deer scared)
Just last weekend a few friends and I went to a range to shoot pistols (Sig 9 & 1911), for the fun of it: Again no people shot, only some paper shredded.

How about other people I've known
My father, his friends as well as my uncle
They've been hunting most of their lives: No people shot(coyote, deer, turkey, deer, etc): No people shot. But quite alot of food gathered.
Some female friends of mine: Also have gone pistol shooting: Still no people shot.
My roommate: Hunting and competative shooting No people shot
My roommate's dad: Hunting, and even made a citizen's arrest when someone tried to mug him Holy Pastafarian, I'm starting to see a fucking pattern here. NO PEOPLE SHOT.

Gee, I guess a gun has more uses than shooting people after all.
Wow, who would have guessed.

Please folks, use logic in your arguements.

*Yes, I had my own shotgun at that age, try not to wig out.


Your actually sad that you didn't kill things. I think I found the problem, It still dosen't change the fact that it is a implement for killing it has no other function. You shot things with it not once did i hear you say that you used it to hammer in a nail or open a can of beer. It is not a tool it is a weapon. The FEAR of being killed is what stops people from doing things. if that's the case can I have a moat filled with sharks around my house.

Great, now you need training too to have any chance against the criminals. Still, my strongest point was that in most civilized countries you don't need a weapon to feel safe at night. Indeed, you're really lucky.

Most gun owners do indeed have safety and handling training. Don't confuse responsible gun owners with street walking scum who rob gas stations.

All this pro-gun trouble and costs should be rather spent on better funding for the police. Or just move to another nation.

The average response time for 911 is 15 minutes. Are you really going to rely on the police to protect you?

Some of you say, 'Oh why would I ever need a gun? I'll never get robbed....' And it's always those people who never thought it would happen to them that end up either getting robbed or killed. My policy on guns is I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

The only people who have anything to worry about from CCW are the people who mug and kill others. Law abiding citizens who don't rape, kill, or stick people up have nothing to fear from citizens carrying concealed weapons. Think about it: if you don't fuck with other people, you won't get shot.

And moving to another nation....sorry, some of us don't have that kind of money....

Most gun owners do indeed have safety and handling training. Don't confuse responsible gun owners with street walking scum who rob gas stations.



The average response time for 911 is 15 minutes. Are you really going to rely on the police to protect you?

Some of you say, 'Oh why would I ever need a gun? I'll never get robbed....' And it's always those people who never thought it would happen to them that end up either getting robbed or killed. My policy on guns is I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

The only people who have anything to worry about from CCW are the people who mug and kill others. Law abiding citizens who don't rape, kill, or stick people up have nothing to fear from citizens carrying concealed weapons. Think about it: if you don't fuck with other people, you won't get shot.

And moving to another nation....sorry, some of us don't have that kind of money....


I have never once said that any of you would use your gun for criminal purposes. I am just stating that given people more guns will do nothing bar worsen the situation.

Are you a little jealous that I can spell words greater than three syllables in length?
Do you really think that you'll convince anyone by just continuously calling them a bunch of morons?

I'm not directly opposed to just the far right, I also disagree completely with the far left. God forbid there's a day when people are moderate and not trying to strangle each other.
Just be careful who buys your rope in the future. ;)

and what ruling class is this? What revolution for that matter?
You must tell me what wonderful classless society you live in.

I've never even seen a gun, and I'm pleased to say I'm much less likely to face the situations your come up with than you are with your guns.
I could say the same, except that I have an understanding that criminals where he lives are much more likely to use guns against him. Thus he needs better defence.

Legitimate tool? IT"S A DEVICE TO KILL PEOPLE not build a barn. You have to realise it's a device for the sole purpose of killing people.
Guns are devices used for rapidly putting holes in things. That can be wood, metal, people, etc. Not all holes kill people. For example, you can kneecap them.

I have never once said that any of you would use your gun for criminal purposes. I am just stating that given people more guns will do nothing bar worsen the situation.


And again, I'm still waiting for actual proof to support your opinion. Until you produce proof, that's all that is, an opinion.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but I am telling you that so far every state that has passed CCW has NOT seen an increase in violent crime.

I'm starting to see a fucking pattern here.
There you are putting out more strawmen than a scarecrow factory at Halloween.

I can do this too:

Kid walks on old mans lawn: Old man shoots and kills kid.

See, it's not hard to reference irrelevant anecdotes.

I could say the same, except that I have an understanding that criminals where he lives are much more likely to use guns against him. Thus he needs better defence.
Gun crime is much lower, so they're unlikely to have a gun in the first place. But hey, they're be even less likely to have a gun pointed at me if they could just buy one at the local supermarket, right?

I am much more likely to give them what they want and come away shaken. I will then cancel my credit cards/etc and feel pleased it wasn't worse.

This is infinately better to seeing someone come at me with a gun, try to defend myself and one of us ending up dead on the ground.

Stop being so materialistic. Such minor possessions are never worth dying (or killing) over.

Have you guys even read history, The sole purpose of the gun was to kill the other guy, to make them die for their country, From the cannon to your modern day pistol, Millions of people have died. When did the gun become a children's plaything to shoot holes in walls and shred stacks of paper. It is not a toy, tool or inflation device. It is a serious weapon that was designed to kill thing's mainly people. you shrug off this fact with such calm that it scares me, quoting facts and spinning your speeches.

GUNS KILL maybe not this time but they will kill people. You say there is nothing you can do to stop the amount of guns in america, There is BAN GUNS, People are shoot and killed everyday and not one of them deserved it. NO ONE and I reapeat NO ONE Deserves to die. If they kill your friend you kill theirs, is that it, is that how you think. that is sick.

The funny thing is, alot of the anti-gun people on this thread have never been around guns, never held one, and has never fired one. The thing they seem to not understand is a CCW permit is not and will never be a free lisence to kill. (the Brady Campaign will want you to beleave this) I see mine as a insurence policy, There is a really really good chance I will never have to use it. (I never hope to) However, it does help knowing that if something were to happen I would have some way to defend myself. I like knowing that I hold the trump card in almost any nasty situation. Of course the deterence that citizens are arms is the big win win. Crime has been reduced and no guns needed to leave thier holsters. :cool:

The funny thing is, alot of the anti-gun people on this thread have never been around guns, never held one, and has never fired one. The thing they seem to not understand is a CCW permit is not and will never be a free lisence to kill. (the Brady Campaign will want you to beleave this) I see mine as a insurence policy, There is a really really good chance I will never have to use it. (I never hope to) However, it does help knowing that if something were to happen I would have some way to defend myself. I like knowing that I hold the trump card in almost any nasty situation. Of course the deterence that citizens are arms is the big win win. Crime has been reduced and no guns needed to leave thier holsters. :cool:

It is true that i have never been around gun's. The closest i have ever got to one is on point blank at the arcade. I don't have to to know that they kill people. the only reason why you have one is to kill or threaten to kill someone.

Your actually sad that you didn't kill things. I think I found the problem, It still dosen't change the fact that it is a implement for killing it has no other function. You shot things with it not once did i hear you say that you used it to hammer in a nail or open a can of beer. It is not a tool it is a weapon. The FEAR of being killed is what stops people from doing things. if that's the case can I have a moat filled with sharks around my house.
Yes, I was disappointed that my deer permit went empty and that I wasn't able to obtain venision(tasty and lean) on the cheap.
Also, reality check here. Weapons are tools, just as much as a hammer is.

Have you guys even read history, The sole purpose of the gun was to kill the other guy, to make them die for their country, From the cannon to your modern day pistol, Millions of people have died. When did the gun become a children's plaything to shoot holes in walls and shred stacks of paper. It is not a toy, tool or inflation device. It is a serious weapon that was designed to kill thing's mainly people. you shrug off this fact with such calm that it scares me, quoting facts and spinning your speeches.

GUNS KILL maybe not this time but they will kill people. You say there is nothing you can do to stop the amount of guns in america, There is BAN GUNS, People are shoot and killed everyday and not one of them deserved it. NO ONE and I reapeat NO ONE Deserves to die. If they kill your friend you kill theirs, is that it, is that how you think. that is sick.

I guess I should thing about this when I mess with my swords? How about when I finally pick up a recurve bow? Or crossbow? (Banned by the pope in the middle ages!) My guess is you never enjoyed a weekend outing at the range. I was going to say something, however...let me repost something for you in my next post.

Yes, I was disappointed that my deer permit went empty and that I wasn't able to obtain venision(tasty and lean) on the cheap.
Also, reality check here. Weapons are tools, just as much as a hammer is.

Okay now your REALLY scariing me. It is not a tool, name one other thing a Gun can do other then shoot things and kill them. (unless they are allready dead or inanimate)

There is BAN GUNS, People are shoot and killed everyday and not one of them deserved it. NO ONE and I reapeat NO ONE Deserves to die. If they kill your friend you kill theirs, is that it, is that how you think. that is sick.

Australia tried that, and they saw a MASSIVE increase in violent crime in the first year. Banning guns will only make things worse.

http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/6/26/12629

Twelve months after the law was implemented in 1997, there has been a 44 percent increase in armed robberies, an 8.6 percent increase in aggravated assaults, and a 3.2 percent increase in homicides. That same year in the state of Victoria, there was a 300 percent increase in homicides committed with firearms. The following year, robberies increased almost 60 percent in South Australia. By 1999, assaults had increased in New South Wales by almost 20 percent.

Two years after the ban, there have been further increases in crime: armed robberies by 73 percent; unarmed robberies by 28 percent; kidnappings by 38 percent; assaults by 17 percent; manslaughter by 29 percent, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

Just one of many things you can find on Google.

It is true that i have never been around gun's. The closest i have ever got to one is on point blank at the arcade. I don't have to to know that they kill people. the only reason why you have one is to kill or threaten to kill someone.
Or to go hunting.
Or to particiate in accuracy competitions.
Or to plink targets.
Or to display.
etc.
etc.

You can use guns for more than shooting people.
Wake up and get it through your noggin, that your assertion that "the only reason why you have one is to kill or threaten to kill someone." is patently false.

Okay now your REALLY scariing me. It is not a tool, name one other thing a Gun can do other then shoot things and kill them. (unless they are allready dead or inanimate)

It is all in what you use it for my friend. :)

Here is the promiced post:



Well, I do not wish to antagonize for to get a answer. In many ways I can understand why those from other countries who do not have any knowledge about guns aside from watching them blaze away in movies (Do not get me started about the inaccuracy shown in movies about any sort equipement) and sometimes in the evening news when a criminal uses one to commit a violent act. This forms a mindset that guns are bad, period. Unfortunantly, many of these people will never understand the fun of trying to put a very tiny peice of metal through a peice of paper 1,2,3+ football field lengths away. They will never understand the nastalgia of having a rifle used in a war in years past. Just the thrill of being able to handle, work on, and admire something that had a small hand in shaping the world as it is today. To them, that peice of metal and wood represents violence, represents fear, and in some cases represents what exactly is wrong with humanity. Because of this they loathe guns, which in all honesty is absolutely fine. There is absolutely nothing wrong with hating something. However, what gets me is these people go on a crusade to ban the thing that they hate. Under the flag of anti-crime, social safety, and just flat phobias of guns they set out to remove all firearms. When someone has spent the amount of cash I have invested in my collection, I will have a very serious issue with this. Especially when the groups have to lie (brady campaign) to get the public on thier side in thier gun bans. Now, regardless of the banner they fly under or any genuine well meaning of these groups there is one thing that is ignored, the rights of the everyday citizen. No one seems concerned about those who keep guns for a hobby or recreational purpose. They by a very far margin outweigh those who use guns for malicious purposes. So, what these gun bans do is punish the lawful gun owners by taking away historical/recreational peices, not including the cash investment a owner expends to buy them. (Guns are by no means cheap) All this for what? You made a vast majority give up thier property for help ease your phobia. Something that may put a slight dent in crime level if any. This is simply unacceptable for any free country to follow through with something like this. What has just happened was like taking cough syrup for a serious flu. It may help releave a annoyance but does nothing to fight a deep seated virus in ourselves and in society. All that has happened is we banished a scapegoat instead of addressing the real problem. This is exactly why I am against any further gun control, I see any further as being punished for crimes that I did not commit while doing little to nothing to reduce crime or punish those who commit these crimes.

I guess I should thing about this when I mess with my swords? How about when I finally pick up a recurve bow? Or crossbow? (Banned by the pope in the middle ages!) My guess is you never enjoyed a weekend outing at the range. I was going to say something, however...let me repost something for you in my next post.

Indeed they are all weapons, designed for killing things, Who's sole purpose is to kill things. At least they were honest about it.

This is not a game, not some acuraccy contest. It's not like your going around having competition with the mailman. Your carrying to kill. The only reason why you havn't killed it because you don't want to. Ans from wat i have seen here tongiht you all seem to not care if you pull that trigger and someone dies. Can you live with someones death on your hands?

Okay now your REALLY scariing me. It is not a tool, name one other thing a Gun can do other then shoot things and kill them. (unless they are allready dead or inanimate)
Shooting is a mechanical/chemical function and can facilitate or ease the performance of an action, such as hunting.
A gun IS a tool I can use to hunt.

Tool.
(n)
1. A device, such as a saw, used to perform or facilitate manual or mechanical work.
2. Something used in the performance of an operation; an instrument.

Weapon.
(n)
1: any instrument or instrumentality used in fighting or hunting.

Gun
(n)
1. A weapon consisting of a metal tube from which a projectile is fired at high velocity into a relatively flat trajectory.

Thus: Weapon == Tool.
And since: Gun == Weapon
Therefore: Gun == Tool

You obviously didn't read my last post, so here it is again.

Australia tried that, and they saw a MASSIVE increase in violent crime in the first year. Banning guns will only make things worse.

http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/6/26/12629

Twelve months after the law was implemented in 1997, there has been a 44 percent increase in armed robberies, an 8.6 percent increase in aggravated assaults, and a 3.2 percent increase in homicides. That same year in the state of Victoria, there was a 300 percent increase in homicides committed with firearms. The following year, robberies increased almost 60 percent in South Australia. By 1999, assaults had increased in New South Wales by almost 20 percent.

Two years after the ban, there have been further increases in crime: armed robberies by 73 percent; unarmed robberies by 28 percent; kidnappings by 38 percent; assaults by 17 percent; manslaughter by 29 percent, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

Just one of many things you can find on Google.

Shooting is a mechanical/chemical function and can facilitate or ease the performance of an action, such as hunting.
A gun IS a tool I can use to hunt.

Tool.
(n)
1. A device, such as a saw, used to perform or facilitate manual or mechanical work.
2. Something used in the performance of an operation; an instrument.

Weapon.
(n)
1: any instrument or instrumentality used in fighting or hunting.

Gun
(n)
1. A weapon consisting of a metal tube from which a projectile is fired at high velocity into a relatively flat trajectory.

bravo you can use google. Did you get the one about how a bullet enters the head causing the brain to explode and splatter on the wall behind him or the one on death, as a sidenote you might want to see all the religious myths on the life here after. Because your going to send someone there.

You obviously didn't read my last post, so here it is again.
NewsMax.com is a piece of dog turd.

bravo you can use google. Did you get the one about how a bullet enters the head causing the brain to explode and splatter on the wall behind him or the one on death, as a sidenote you might want to see all the religious myths on the life here after. Because your going to send someone there.
Who said I was going to shoot someone?
When did I say I was going to shoot someone?

NewsMax.com is a piece of dog turd.

But their source was the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Your point?

You obviously didn't read my last post, so here it is again.

Originally Posted by Automagfreek
Australia tried that, and they saw a MASSIVE increase in violent crime in the first year. Banning guns will only make things worse.

http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/6/26/12629

Quote:
Twelve months after the law was implemented in 1997, there has been a 44 percent increase in armed robberies, an 8.6 percent increase in aggravated assaults, and a 3.2 percent increase in homicides. That same year in the state of Victoria, there was a 300 percent increase in homicides committed with firearms. The following year, robberies increased almost 60 percent in South Australia. By 1999, assaults had increased in New South Wales by almost 20 percent.

Two years after the ban, there have been further increases in crime: armed robberies by 73 percent; unarmed robberies by 28 percent; kidnappings by 38 percent; assaults by 17 percent; manslaughter by 29 percent, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

Just one of many things you can find on Google.

it is indeed sad. Sad that they died and sad that you would use them in an argument to promote gun usage.

Man, Oregon is the coolest state! They have no regulations on assault weapons, and you don't need a license to purchase 'em.

You can read their gun control laws (or lack of) here: http://www.bradycampaign.org/legislation/state/viewstate.php?st=or

You can read about a guy who went deer hunting with a home-made howitzer here: http://www.buckstix.com/howitzer.htm

He later builds a mortar to hunt feral cats: http://www.buckstix.com/CoehornMortarHunt.htm

I love the second ammendment.

Who said I was going to shoot someone?
When did I say I was going to shoot someone?

your attitude about guns does, You think of it as a tool, Tools are meant to be used. If you keep thinking about it as your right to own and carry a gun you will use it. I would love to hear your argument to the police " I was aiming for the knee cap"

But their source was the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Your point?
I thought I'd already made it. It's dog turd.

I love the second ammendment.
The Second Amendment doesn't protect your right to have a gun.

I started a thread on it but no one was interested. :(

it is indeed sad. Sad that they died and sad that you would use them in an argument to promote gun usage.

Did you even bother to READ my post? That increase in crime was caused be a GUN BAN in Australia, something YOU are preaching.

England too has much higher violent crime than the US because of their STRICT GUN LAWS. When are you going to realize that LESS people die when gun control laws are more lax?

England too has much higher violent crime than the US because of their STRICT GUN LAWS. When are you going to realize that LESS people die when gun control laws are more lax?
Yes...you have lower violent crime...that's because they're using guns instead.

What a stupid argument.

your attitude about guns does, You think of it as a tool, Tools are meant to be used. If you keep thinking about it as your right to own and carry a gun you will use it. I would love to hear your argument to the police " I was aiming for the knee cap"
My attitude?
Tools aren't "meant" to be used. They don't sit there crying "Use me...USE ME"
They are simply a means to facilitate an action.
My prefered action doesn't involve shooting people. Nor pointing it anywhere near people.
You are not me, do not assume to know me.

I disagree. If gun-carrying people had to openly display their guns, then it would be easy for criminals to pick out the unarmed for robbing.

I'm not expert, but I imagine a gun on the outside of your jacket would also be easier to steal than one on the inside.

Your two statements contradict each other. If you have a gun on the outside you aren't going to get attacked, just robbed?

Anyway, it seems the only arguement for "conceal" is this great unknown as to who is carrying. But wouldn't it work better if the criminal would be walking down the street and see a gun on the hip of every few people. I imagine s/he would look for a different neighborhood. Without being able to see who's carrying s/he would just assume no one is and take the chance. After all they are going to rob someone. Would they rob in a neighborhood with people showing or one with no people showing but maybe carrying?

My bet is if they looked around and saw a couple people carrying they would move on. If they looked around and saw no one carrying they would take the chance.

What this comes down to is a bunch of people who are too ashamed to let people know they carry. They don't want to be embarassed by showing a gun. They don't want people staring at them because they have a gun. Is this the type of person that would be brave enough to safely use a gun if the time came, or would they react out of emotion? The whole need for conceal is emotion, what makes us think they would be cool in a tense situation?

When are you going to realize that LESS people die when gun control laws are more lax?
When my IQ drops about forty points and I take out a membership in the Republican party, probably.

Did you even bother to READ my post? That increase in crime was caused be a GUN BAN in Australia, something YOU are preaching.

England too has much higher violent crime than the US because of their STRICT GUN LAWS. When are you going to realize that LESS people die when gun control laws are more lax?

I did read you post. you did not once state the starting number just increased percentages. Nor did you state WHY the increase happened. yes they did increase i am not arguing that fact. But you have no proof that it didn't increase for other reasons. Your so focused on this that you refuse to consider other possibilities. Your only marker is that they banned guns. Death will happen it allways does people die everyday. You have to agree with me there. But your saying that people can go around with loaded weapons. You allready have your death stories why add to it. Is your fear that strong that you would risk other people lives so you can feel safe.

Another thing, it is my right to own and carry. But that doesn't imply an implicit right to use. As the old saying goes, my right to swing my fist, ends where your face begins.
I would appreciate it if you would stop being childish and telling me what my intentions are.

When are you going to realize that LESS people die when gun control laws are more lax?
Murders:
America: 0.042802 per 1,000 people
UK: 0.0140633 per 1,000 people

hmm, four times as many murders without the gun control laws. Obviously fewer are people are dying.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur_percap

My attitude?
Tools aren't "meant" to be used. They don't sit there crying "Use me...USE ME"
They are simply a means to facilitate an action.
My prefered action doesn't involve shooting people. Nor pointing it anywhere near people.
You are not me, do not assume to know me.

Why can't you say guns kill people. Say it go on. People are killed by guns. SAY IT. Say that i can use it to splatter there brans acroos the wall, When you admit that fact you will be one step closer to realising it it not a tool.

Another thing, it is my right to own and carry. But that doesn't imply an implicit right to use. As the old saying goes, my right to swing my fist, ends where your face begins.
I would appreciate it if you would stop being childish and telling me what my intentions are.

I am not telling you what your intentions are that would be implying i am physic. No matter waht your intentions are you will be carrying a device that can fire out a hunk of metal at astounding speeds. What else are you going to do with it?

Why can't you say guns kill people. Say it go on. People are killed by guns. SAY IT. Say that i can use it to splatter there brans acroos the wall, When you asmit that you will be one step closer to realising it it not a tool.


Nope, people kill people. Be it bare handed, with a baseball bat, knife, or gun. Do not blame the method, blame the person. Scapegoating doesn't help anyone.

I have to get off here to fly to Chicago. If I can I will get on from the hotel room tonight. Until then I would love to see you kill my arguements in the paragraph. Have fun and take care!

Nope, people kill people. Be it bare handed, with a baseball bat, knife, or gun. Do not blame the method, blame the person. Scapegoating doesn't help anyone.
So people kill people.

What should we do to stop them killing people?

I know! Let's give them lethal weapons!

okay then lets look at that PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. Thank you for that point. Now you can't deny that fact. it dosent say CRIMINALS KILL PEOPLE not does it say REPUBLICANS KILL PEOPLE. It simply states that PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. two things one. Firstly the fact that you dismiss this fact so lightly would shock and astound me except for the fact that in this conversation i have moved beyond shock to disgust. Secondly if PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE why give them guns.

Why can't you say guns kill people. Say it go on. People are killed by guns. SAY IT. Say that i can use it to splatter there brans acroos the wall, When you asmit that you will be one step closer to realising it it not a tool.
Guns kill people.

Cars kill far, far more people.
Hammers kill people.
Screwdrivers kill people.
Tire irons and wrenches kill people.
Knives kill people.
Ropes kill people.
Pillows kill people.
Planes kill people.
Sticks kill people.
Bricks kill people.
Baseball bats kill people.
Matches kill people.
Tractors kill people.
And on and on and on.

Most any tool can be used to kill someone.
This doesn't make it less of a tool.
You're point, logic, and reasoning are VOID.

It's the intent and effect, with which a person uses a tool that determines the morality of their action.

So people kill people.

What should we do to stop them killing people?

I know! Let's give them lethal weapons!

Or better yet! Take them away from the ones that follow the law and let the law-breakers keep them!

Gun crime is much lower, so they're unlikely to have a gun in the first place. But hey, they're be even less likely to have a gun pointed at me if they could just buy one at the local supermarket, right?

I am much more likely to give them what they want and come away shaken. I will then cancel my credit cards/etc and feel pleased it wasn't worse.

This is infinately better to seeing someone come at me with a gun, try to defend myself and one of us ending up dead on the ground.

Stop being so materialistic. Such minor possessions are never worth dying (or killing) over.
You may be surprised, but I agree with your post entirely. I don't want guns to be legalised in societies that are already gun-free.

You say there is nothing you can do to stop the amount of guns in america, There is BAN GUNS
This policy has never worked.

Your carrying to kill. The only reason why you havn't killed it because you don't want to. Ans from wat i have seen here tongiht you all seem to not care if you pull that trigger and someone dies. Can you live with someones death on your hands?
Even if one is carrying a gun, one should seek not to use or even display it. One should seek to get out of the situation without using it. Most criminals will be deterred by the mere display of a gun. Killing is an absolute last resort, and only justifiable if the person was trying to kill you.

Because your going to send someone there.
Tens of Millions of people own guns. The vast vast vast, overwhelming majority of them have never shot anyone and never will.

it is indeed sad. Sad that they died and sad that you would use them in an argument to promote gun usage.
Are you content to spend forever mourning the victims of crime, year in year out, and not prepared to think about ways to prevent people from being victims of crime in the future?

I thought I'd already made it. It's dog turd.
So the Australian Bureau of Statistics is dog turd? Facts are such inconvenient things, to quote Ronald Raygun or some such.

Guns kill people.

Cars kill far more eople.
Hammers kill people.
Screwdrivers kill people.
Tire irons and wrenches kill people.
Knives kill people.
Ropes kill people.
Pillows kill people.
Planes kill people.
Sticks kill people.
Bricks kill people.
Baseball bats kill people.
Matches kill people.
Tractors kill people.
And on and on and on.

Most any tool can be used to kill someone.
This doesn't make it less of a tool.
You're point, logic, and reasoning are VOID.

your kidding me, your not even using logic and reasoning. All those things have killed yes. Whether it be accidental or on purpose, But they all do other things a gun does nothing else but kill or in some cases cauase "holes" as one person so lightly put it. This is not an argument about people carrying around tractors concealed in their pockets. This is an argument about people carrying death in their coat pocket.

I did read you post. you did not once state the starting number just increased percentages. Nor did you state WHY the increase happened. yes they did increase i am not arguing that fact. But you have no proof that it didn't increase for other reasons. Your so focused on this that you refuse to consider other possibilities.

This happened directly after the gun ban. 2+2=5, right?

Your only marker is that they banned guns. Death will happen it allways does people die everyday. You have to agree with me there. But your saying that people can go around with loaded weapons. You allready have your death stories why add to it. Is your fear that strong that you would risk other people lives so you can feel safe.

For some reason you have this seed planted in your mind that all people with loaded guns will use them. That is nothing more than a fallacy, a paranoid one at that. And for the record, I do not own handguns, nor would I probably carry one. I merely support the right to do so, because it doesn't bother me if law abiding citizens carry them. I certainly don't lose any sleep at night knowing that people who don't break the law have guns.

Conceal carry is not even worth arguing over, because in every state that has passed it we have not seen daily shootouts. We have not seen firefights break out over simple arguments. I don't know the actual numbers, but I'm willing to bet money that the number of incidents involving law abiding citizens who carry concealed guns is very low. There are much bigger things in this world to worry about than carrying concealed firearms. Perhaps your energy would be better served lobbying for stopping the AIDS crisis, feeding the tens of thousands of children that die from hunger, and preventing drunk driving.

Personally, those things are much more worthy of attention than CCW.

Most any tool can be used to kill someone.
This doesn't make it less of a tool.
You're point, logic, and reasoning are VOID.
The only purpose of this particular 'tool' is to kill.

There are two sides of this argument. Gun control people look at the facts and see that gun control is essential and that guns lead to more of the things they are meant to stop (ie crime).
Pro-gun people decide what they want, and then try to fit the facts to suit it. It doesn't work, I'm afraid. Unrestricted access to guns is foolish, and leaves you at more risk, not less.

okay then lets look at that PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. Thank you for that point. Now you can't deny that fact. it dosent say CRIMINALS KILL PEOPLE not does it say REPUBLICANS KILL PEOPLE. It simply states that PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. two things one. Firstly the fact that you dismiss this fact so lightly would shock and astound me except for the fact that in this conversation i have moved beyond shock to disgust. Secondly if PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE why give them guns.

Well, apparently when more law abiding people get guns, bad numbers go down, and when we take them from the law abiding people, bad numbers go up. I assume you want them down, yes?

The only purpose of this particular 'tool' is to kill.

There are two sides of this argument. Gun control people look at the facts and see that gun control is essential and that guns lead to more of the things they are meant to stop (ie crime).

No, criminals lead to crime, and that crime in fact goes down when gun laws are loosened, but goes up when gun laws are tightened. Funny, inn't it?

No, criminals lead to crime, and that crime in fact goes down when gun laws are lossen, but goes up when gun laws are tightened. Funny, inn't it?
Only in an NRA world.

America has four times the murder rate of the UK. Funny, isn't it?

your kidding me, your not even using logic and reasoning. All those things have killed yes. Whether it be accidental or on purpose, But they all do other things a gun does nothing else but kill or in some cases cauase "holes" as one person so lightly put it. This is not an argument about people carrying around tractors concealed in their pockets. This is an argument about people carrying death in their coat pocket.
As I said before, a gun does more than kill.
Yet you continue to insist that, despite all evidence to the contrary, that all it does is MURDER DEATH KILL.
You continue to insist that because I may own, and even carry a gun, that I will kill someone.

This is an arguement about the fact that some of us, don't want to be punished for the criminal (and atrocious) activities of others.

You Are All Insane. You Keep Telling Me That You Don"t Intend On Using The Guns You Are Fighting So Desperatly For. Then Why Have Them If You Are Not Going To Use Them. Insane, You Are Carrying Death In Your Pocket Death. That Fact Will Never Change, No One Has The Right To Take A Life It Is Never "justified". You Want To Carry It Around With You So You Can Feel Safe. How Can You Feel Safe Unless You Have The Intention On Using It. And I Don't Mean Holding It Up So The Guy Gets Scared. The Only Reason He Runs Is The Fact He's Afraid You Will Use It. The Only Reason While You Feel Safe Is Deep Down You Know You Will.

The only purpose of this particular 'tool' is to kill.

There are two sides of this argument. Gun control people look at the facts and see that gun control is essential and that guns lead to more of the things they are meant to stop (ie crime).
Pro-gun people decide what they want, and then try to fit the facts to suit it. It doesn't work, I'm afraid. Unrestricted access to guns is foolish, and leaves you at more risk, not less.

And what "facts" would those be? The ones that show that there is NO evidence that any "gun control" measure has ever reduced crime? The ones that show that even w/ increased firearm ownership in the US, crime has dropped?
Noone here is talking about "unrestricted access". That's a Red Herring arguement the same as comparing the CAWB to fully-auto weapons. It's false and always will be.

When my IQ drops about forty points and I take out a membership in the Republican party, probably.
I've never seen someone on NS, with the exception of homophobic trolls, be so wilfully ignorant of facts in order to hold onto their ideological scripts.

This is not a game, not some acuraccy contest. It's not like your going around having competition with the mailman. Your carrying to kill. The only reason why you havn't killed it because you don't want to. Ans from wat i have seen here tongiht you all seem to not care if you pull that trigger and someone dies. Can you live with someones death on your hands?


You then, have not been reading the posts. I do care if someone dies. If it is necessary, I'ld rather it not be myself or a family member.

People carry to protect themselves.

Once again, the majority of defensive firearm uses do not involve fireing the weapon at all.

your kidding me, your not even using logic and reasoning.

Sure he was, your logic and reasoning.

All those things have killed yes. Whether it be accidental or on purpose, But they all do other things a gun does nothing else but kill or in some cases cauase "holes" as one person so lightly put it. This is not an argument about people carrying around tractors concealed in their pockets. This is an argument about people carrying death in their coat pocket.

Yyeeeahh...We gonna have to work on this -phobia (as in, irrational fear or hatred) of guns. People carrying guns is not "carrying death". Statistically, it's more like carrying protection of life than anything else.

And what "facts" would those be? The ones that show that there is NO evidence that any "gun control" measure has ever reduced crime?
*Yawns at gun-rights people who always look over facts because they don't like them.*

America has four times the murder rate of the UK. Shall I put that in big letters for you, perhaps with little pixies dancing around it?

I have never once said that any of you would use your gun for criminal purposes. I am just stating that given people more guns will do nothing bar worsen the situation.

And nothing here has endorsed "giving people more guns". The CCW law allows people who follow the law to legally have a firearm on their person. It doesn't "give" a firearm to anyone.

Only in an NRA world.

America has four times the murder rate of the UK. Funny, isn't it?

Yes, but UK's murder rates rise, while America's falls as it countinues to lossen gun control?

The only purpose of this particular 'tool' is to kill.

There are two sides of this argument. Gun control people look at the facts and see that gun control is essential and that guns lead to more of the things they are meant to stop (ie crime).
Pro-gun people decide what they want, and then try to fit the facts to suit it. It doesn't work, I'm afraid. Unrestricted access to guns is foolish, and leaves you at more risk, not less.
1. I haven't, not once, in this discussion argued for unfettered access to guns.
2. I do believe in some gun-control.
3. You assertion that a gun's only purpse is to kill, is demonstratably false.
4. There is far more to murder rates than, "access to guns".
5. This overwhelming phobia of guns, demonstrated on this thread, is a hinderance to any worthwhile debate on the topic.

*Yawns at gun-rights people who always look over facts because they don't like them.*

America has four times the murder rate of the UK. Shall I put that in big letters for you, perhaps with little pixies dancing around it?

*Yawn* and always has. Why then is the murder rate in the UK climbing, especially in regards to firearms?

Now that you've resorted to personal attacks, it shows how weak your arguement is.

*Yawns at gun-rights people who always look over facts because they don't like them.*

America has four times the murder rate of the UK. Shall I put that in big letters for you, perhaps with little pixies dancing around it?

Instintaneous values aren't the helpful ones, as control has been lossened, that number goes down, as it is tightened, the number goes up. Do you want it up, or down?

You Are All Insane. You Keep Telling Me That You Don"t Intend On Using The Guns You Are Fighting So Desperatly For. Then Why Have Them If You Are Not Going To Use Them. Insane, You Are Carrying Death In Your Pocket Death. That Fact Will Never Change, No One Has The Right To Take A Life It Is Never "justified". You Want To Carry It Around With You So You Can Feel Safe. How Can You Feel Safe Unless You Have The Intention On Using It. And I Don't Mean Holding It Up So The Guy Gets Scared. The Only Reason He Runs Is The Fact He's Afraid You Will Use It. The Only Reason While You Feel Safe Is Deep Down You Know You Will.

Auugh! Ritlina flashback! <_>

That's because it is a BAD thing

So defending youself is a "bad thing"? Gotcha.

1. I haven't, not once, in this discussion argued for unfettered access to guns.
2. I do believe in some gun-control.
3. You assertion that a gun's only purpse is to kill, is demonstratably false.
4. There is far more to murder rates than, "access to guns".
1. Fine
2. Fine
3. Go on then, prove that to me.
4. Ah, so simply deny it could be a correlation because you don't like it? Excellent argument.

You Are All Insane. You Keep Telling Me That You Don"t Intend On Using The Guns You Are Fighting So Desperatly For. Then Why Have Them If You Are Not Going To Use Them. Insane, You Are Carrying Death In Your Pocket Death.

I would rather have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.

That Fact Will Never Change, No One Has The Right To Take A Life It Is Never "justified". You Want To Carry It Around With You So You Can Feel Safe. How Can You Feel Safe Unless You Have The Intention On Using It.

There is a difference between carrying a gun to protect yourself in the event you are about to be raped, killed, your house broken into, etc, and walking down the street with intent to kill the first person you see.

And I Don't Mean Holding It Up So The Guy Gets Scared. The Only Reason He Runs Is The Fact He's Afraid You Will Use It.

Then that was a successful use of the weapon without firing it. The gun served its purpose: the crime was prevented, and no life was taken.

The Only Reason While You Feel Safe Is Deep Down You Know You Will.

This is really getting quite old.....Owning/carrying a gun does NOT make you a killer. I own 2 rifles and a shotgun, and I would NEVER murder another person. The oly time I would use a gun is if someone broke into my house and was threatening the live of my family or myself.

Well, maybe if they'd give me something more to work with...

For someone using a subgenius title, you sure do act like a pink.

1. Fine
2. Fine
3. Go on then, prove that to me.
4. Ah, so simply deny it could be a correlation because you don't like it? Excellent argument.

It already has been shown. Read the thread.

Correlation /= causation.

If that were true, it could be claimed logically that minorities CAUSE crime. Do you agree w/ that?

*Yawns at gun-rights people who always look over facts because they don't like them.*

America has four times the murder rate of the UK. Shall I put that in big letters for you, perhaps with little pixies dancing around it?

True, but how many of those murders were committed with knives, cars, baseball bats, etc?

1. Fine
2.Fine
3. Go on then, prove that to me.
4. Ah, so simply deny it could be a correlation because you don't like it? Excellent argument.

Okay as far as 4...US and UK are very differnt country, unempolyment, poverty, education, legal systems...etc. And you want a gun to murder rate correlation, how about the one where the murder rate goes down when we loosen gun control?

For someone using a subgenius title, you sure do act like a pink.
Well, you're the one sucking MY Slack - Glorp.

*Yawn* and always has. Why then is the murder rate in the UK climbing, especially in regards to firearms?

Now that you've resorted to personal attacks, it shows how weak your arguement is.
Where is the personal attack? I think, again, this shows how weak your arguments are. You try to make out as if the people who dismantle your arguments point by point are simply being rude, rather than admit you're wrong.

When the UK and US murder rate crosses over, you'll have an argument.

Incidently, the UK murder rate is climbing because of... gangs having easy access to guns! Funny old world, isn't it?

Incidently, the UK murder rate is climbing because of... gangs having easy access to guns! Funny old world, isn't it?

While America's drops because?...


P.S. And wait, UK's gun control laws, beyond raise murder rates, don't even work at all?

1. Fine
2.Fine
3. Go on then, prove that to me.
4. Ah, so simply deny it could be a correlation because you don't like it? Excellent argument.
Point 4: I didn't say there was no correlation. I said there is more to murder rates than access to guns, implying that other variables are at play here as well.
Point 3: As I've said before in this thread, I and others I know have used guns for other purposes than killing. Hell, even deterence is a non-lethal use.

So defending youself is a "bad thing"? Gotcha.

You really love to ignore the good points and twist my words into something that you can hold onto. How can a gun defend? How can something that was designed to kill defend. Don't spout arguments about deterance, you said so yourself you don't want to use it. If i have a gun and I don't intend on using it, what is the point. You may not use it you may never use it. But if you have it, you have to intend to use it.

and Automagfreek actually there isn't when you boil it down, it's shooting someone with a gun. No matter how you spin it.

It dosen't matter who he robs, It should not come down to who dies that night.

here are a couple of scenarios.

Theif gets killed
Pro gun Home owener and family get killed
ban Guns Home owner and family get killed

Which one can you live with. I will tell you now I see no happy ending.

False dichotomy.

The most common scenario is

Home owner brandishes firearm and criminal runs away.



They have guns in their homes, they wer'nt allowed to go around killing people. Now they have the ability, People react, In fear, in anger, now they have a gun strapped to them, Though crime rate just possibly might go down death will go up.

and yet is hasn't happened in the 38 other states that have shall issue laws. Go figure.

Another thing if you think the solution to solving the gun issue is to allow more guns that is crazy. It is simple math, Guns + Guns = more guns. Im sure they taught you that.

Once again. Nothing here is about "more guns". It's about allowing people who follow the law to legally carry the ones they own.

Point 3: As I've said before in this thread, I and others I know have used guns for other purposes than killing.
I have absolutly no issue with people using licenced guns at licenced premises for recreational use. What is foolish is to take them out of these recreational places and pretend they 'stop crime.'

You really love to ignore the good points and twist my words into something that you can hold onto. How can a gun defend? How can something that was designed to kill defend.

Ummm, criminal sees gun, criminal runs away. Not that complicated.

False dichotomy.

The most common scenario is

Home owner brandishes firearm and criminal runs away.
Absolute nonsense with no basis other than 'you hope it happens like that'. The far more likely scenario is actually someone ending up dead.

You really love to ignore the good points and twist my words into something that you can hold onto. How can a gun defend? How can something that was designed to kill defend. Don't spout arguments about deterance, you said so yourself you don't want to use it. If i have a gun and I don't intend on using it, what is the point. You may not use it you may never use it. But if you have it, you have to intend to use it.

A gun "defends" by a LAC using it to stop a crime against themselves or others. It happens hundreds of thousands of times each year in the US. Mostly w/o even firing.

Where did I say I wouldn't use it?
I would rather not have to use it but I want the ability to if necessary.

Are you really unable to see the difference?

I have absolutly no issue with people using licenced guns at licenced premises for recreational use. What is foolish is to take them out of these recreational places and pretend they 'stop crime.'

Why pretend? The numbers go down when gun control loosens, we needn't pretend.

You really love to ignore the good points and twist my words into something that you can hold onto. How can a gun defend? How can something that was designed to kill defend.

Someone breaks into my house and tries to rape my sister. They don't know I'm in the house and have weapons. I get one of my guns, load it, and put a stop to the situation. First I tell him to freeze and get the fuck off my sister, then I tell him to get on the floor while I call the police. If he has a weapon or attempts to flee, then he probably will get put down with a shot to the knees. He certainly won't die from it, and it prevents him from doing further harm to me or my sister. Successful defence without the loss of life.

Whereas in this scenario if I didn't have a gun and he did, I would probably be dead and the same for my sister.

Don't spout arguments about deterance, you said so yourself you don't want to use it. If i have a gun and I don't intend on using it, what is the point.

Having it in case the need ever arises. Duh. It's like a spare tire, you carry it in case you need it, but you hope you never have to use it.

You may not use it you may never use it. But if you have it, you have to intend to use it.

According to whom? You?

False dichotomy.

The most common scenario is

Home owner brandishes firearm and criminal runs away.

and yet is hasn't happened in the 38 other states that have shall issue laws. Go figure.

Once again. Nothing here is about "more guns". It's about allowing people who follow the law to legally carry the ones they own.

Owner brandishes fire arms and runs away, What basis do you base that on. Anything could happen, from you scenario to someone dying. that fact never changes, everytime i mention this you ignore it and go on about telling me how wrong i am. You all know it can kill, that it's sole purpose is to kill, your all law abiding citizins, now i ask myself why would you want to kill?

Absolute nonsense with no basis other than 'you hope it happens like that'. The far more likely scenario is actually someone ending up dead.

Oh really? If the criminal is the only one with a gun, yeah, I can see an innocent dying. Course, you obviously can show how someone dying becomes more likely as the rates go down at the same time.

Why pretend? The numbers go down when gun control loosens, we needn't pretend.
So the fact you're four times more likely to be murdered than me is a good argument for loose gun rules?

Owner brandishes fire arms and runs away, What basis do you base that on. Anything could happen, from you scenario to someone dying. that fact never changes, everytime i mention this you ignore it and go on about telling me how wrong i am. You all know it can kill, that it's sole purpose is to kill, your all law abiding citizins, now i ask myself why would you want to kill?

Because, on the off chance the criminal doesn't run, we can protect ourselves and others.

Absolute nonsense with no basis other than 'you hope it happens like that'. The far more likely scenario is actually someone ending up dead.

BS. It has nothing to do w/ "I hope it happens that way". It is a documented fact that over 90% of DGU's do NOT involve firing a weapon.

http://www.guncite.com/kleckandgertztable1.html

Your scenario is the one filled w/ "absolute nonsense" and emotional rhetoric.

Automagfreek your saying that you have no problem with shooting someone in the knees with a shotgun who is standing over your sister. You would probably injure her and maybe even kill her.

BS. It has nothing to do w/ "I hope it happens that way". It is a documented fact that over 90% of DGU's do NOT involve firing a weapon.

http://www.guncite.com/kleckandgertztable1.html

Your scenario is the one filled w/ "absolute nonsense" and emotional rhetoric.
I'm afraid I don't know what a DGU is.

And, my maths may be off, but I think that means that 10% DO involve firing a weapon.

Has been interesting arguing with you - I have to go now, but if you're still going on later I shall rejoin the fray...

So the fact you're four times more likely to be murdered than me is a good argument for loose gun rules?
Wait - maybe you're onto something with that.

I recant; America needs the loosest gun laws imaginable. Under five? There's a kiddy kalishnikov just for you. Senior? Get a year's supply of Geritol with every glock sold.

Really. Buy up all the guns you can, America. All the guns you can.

Because, on the off chance the criminal doesn't run, we can protect ourselves and others.

so you can kill someone can you. you left out that point, you can blast away and end their life, If you think that is right your the last person who should ahve a gun.

Automagfreek your saying that you have no problem with shooting someone in the knees with a shotgun who is standing over your sister. You would probably injure her and maybe even kill her.

I wouldn't use my shotgun (it's doubled barreled), I'd use my rifle that fires .45 pistol ammo. Little mess, little damage, but enough to get him to stop. What's your point?

Where is the personal attack? I think, again, this shows how weak your arguments are. You try to make out as if the people who dismantle your arguments point by point are simply being rude, rather than admit you're wrong.

So far you've shown none of my arguements to be wrong.

When the UK and US murder rate crosses over, you'll have an argument.

I have an arguement now because the crime and murder rates in the UK were lower even when the UK had less restrictive laws. Now the US's is dropping w/ less restictive laws while the UK's is increasing.

Incidently, the UK murder rate is climbing because of... gangs having easy access to guns! Funny old world, isn't it?

Criminals committing crimes. Go figure. And yet the US's is dropping. Funny, isn't it.

So the fact you're four times more likely to be murdered than me is a good argument for loose gun rules?

*sigh* No, it's a good arguement for living in the UK right now, but our loose gun control is reducing (as in, a downward trend over time) those numbers. The 4 to 1 now has nothing to do with what we should do for the future. Statistics show, that looser laws lower the number. We want a lower number. Looser laws, falling numbers. Tighter laws, rising numbers. The likelyhood of you being murdered continues to rise, with your tighten laws. The likelyhood of me being murdered continues to fall, with looser laws.

I'm afraid I don't know what a DGU is.

And, my maths may be off, but I think that means that 10% DO involve firing a weapon.

Has been interesting arguing with you - I have to go now, but if you're still going on later I shall rejoin the fray...

Defensive Gun Use.

10% involve firing and less than 1% involve the criminal being killed.

That counteres your arguement of the "most likely scenario".

so you can kill someone can you. you left out that point, you can blast away and end their life, If you think that is right your the last person who should ahve a gun.


Ok, so let's take away weapons from law abiding citizens so that only criminals have them. You seem to have no problem with criminals blasting away at us, but the second we try to protect ourselves, your bleeding heart goes on red alert....

Your two statements contradict each other. If you have a gun on the outside you aren't going to get attacked, just robbed?

Anyway, it seems the only arguement for "conceal" is this great unknown as to who is carrying.
The problem with your gun being robbed is not just the immediate material loss. It means that another gun is being passed into the criminal "underworld", likely to be used to kill or maim a person.

Another possibility is the criminal taking your gun and using it against you there and then.

If you saw a street with a couple of people carrying openly and the others unarmed, why would you go elsewhere? The rational thing to do would be to wait until the carriers disappeared and then take your pickings.

Anyway, thank you for answering my post rationally. Most of the pro-gun banning people in this thread seem to grow increasingly hysterical.

Nor did you state WHY the increase happened. yes they did increase i am not arguing that fact. But you have no proof that it didn't increase for other reasons. Your so focused on this that you refuse to consider other possibilities. Your only marker is that they banned guns.
What else happened in Australia that could have caused such a dramatic increase in crime rates?

You Are All Insane. You Keep Telling Me That You Dont Intend On Using The Guns You Are Fighting So Desperatly For.
Capitalising every word makes your arguments more convincing. :rolleyes:

Incidently, the UK murder rate is climbing because of... gangs having easy access to guns! Funny old world, isn't it?
Gangs have easy access to guns, despite guns being utterly banned since 1997? Very effective laws you have there.

How can something that was designed to kill defend. Don't spout arguments about deterance, you said so yourself you don't want to use it. If i have a gun and I don't intend on using it, what is the point. You may not use it you may never use it. But if you have it, you have to intend to use it.

In extreme cases, defence sometimes necessitates killing. But think about the situation where a gun is pull out as a deterrent. The crime stops, and no life is taken. What's the problem?

I suspect that you have some qualms based on abstract morality, not pragmatic reality.

I wouldn't use my shotgun (it's doubled barreled), I'd use my rifle that fires .45 pistol ammo. Little mess, little damage, but enough to get him to stop. What's your point?

... My point is you think it is okay to kill people. You have no problems with shooting someone in the knee cap, you have no problem pulling that trigger do you? You would just shot and hope to all buggery that it everything turns out right, Well what if he charges you grabs the gun and uses it to kill both you and you sister or he tries to jump out of the way and you shoot him dead or in your happy little bed time story he's knee caps say goodbye to this mortal realm.

Ok, so let's take away weapons from law abiding citizens so that only criminals have them. You seem to have no problem with criminals blasting away at us, but the second we try to protect ourselves, your bleeding heart goes on red alert....

if you have been reading my posts instead of ignoring them you will find that i have stated many times that Killing under no circumstances is ever justified. If you actually read them you will find i would even like a ban on guns. i alsothink that they are an outdated system of killing that should be banned world over and that we have no need for them in the world today, the problem is you think because they have them that you will be safer if you also have them. This is not true.

Now that I've officially recanted, I'd just like to enthuse Americans to

BUY AS MANY GUNS AS POSSIBLE. PLEASE BUY AS MANY GUNS AS POSSIBLE. THE REST OF THE PLANET IS COUNTING ON YOU.

Defensive Gun Use.

10% involve firing and less than 1% involve the criminal being killed.

That counteres your arguement of the "most likely scenario".
1% is infinately higher than 0%.

I'm interested to see your statistics don't include how often the innocent family is killed.

Gangs have easy access to guns, despite guns being utterly banned since 1997? Very effective laws you have there.
Guns aren't utterly banned, handguns are. And you think that making it even easier for them to get guns would make the murder rate fall?

I really do have to go now. Bye bye!

... My point is you think it is okay to kill people.

Show me where I said I would shoot to kill. Shooting someone doesn't mean that they automatically die. If a bullet hits you in the knee, your heart doesn't suddenly stop.....

You have no problems with shooting someone in the knee cap, you have no problem pulling that trigger do you?

Not if it is in defence of my life of my family's life. You goddamn right I'd shoot any criminal that tried to kill me or my family. I wouldn't sit by and let them shoot me without a fight.

You would just shot and hope to all buggery that it everything turns out right, Well what if he charges you grabs the gun and uses it to kill both you and you sister or he tries to jump out of the way and you shoot him dead or in your happy little bed time story he's knee caps say goodbye to this mortal realm.

He charges me, he gets a round in his body. He grabs the gun, he gets his neck broken (I know how to defend myself in hand to hand combat). He gets killed, oh well. He shouldn't have been in my house trying to rape my sister. Either way, I win in this scenario.

1% is infinately higher than 0%.


Yeah, with gun control, we kill the criminal 0% of the time, but more and more people get killed by the criminal.

if you have been reading my posts instead of ignoring them you will find that i have stated many times that Killing under no circumstances is ever justified. If you actually read them you will find i would even like a ban on guns. i alsothink that they are an outdated system of killing that should be banned world over and that we have no need for them in the world today, the problem is you think because they have them that you will be safer if you also have them. This is not true.


And the cold hard facts stated OVER AND OVER in this thread prove you dead wrong. Sorry bud, that's just the way it is. Criminals will always have access to guns and or other weapons. Citizens have the right to protect their lives, and owning guns is apart of that.

In your happy, perfect world there would be no hatred, no crime, and no guns. Everyone would love each other and get along, and there would be no violence. But this is the real world, with bad people in it. And so long as there are bad people with the means to kill the innocent, I will have the means to protect myself.

if you have been reading my posts instead of ignoring them you will find that i have stated many times that Killing under no circumstances is ever justified.

Soo...I assume your stance is lay down and let them do whatever they want?

if you have been reading my posts instead of ignoring them you will find that i have stated many times that Killing under no circumstances is ever justified. If you actually read them you will find i would even like a ban on guns. i alsothink that they are an outdated system of killing that should be banned world over and that we have no need for them in the world today, the problem is you think because they have them that you will be safer if you also have them. This is not true.

You've been watching to many movies.

You've also just shown you extreme bias towards firearms that sparks of Hoplophobia.

I'm sure the Tutsi's feel the same way as you as hundreds of thousands of them were killed by Hutu's w/ machete's after the Gov't disarmed them.

Yay Genocide.

your just proving my point, You have no problems with killng that man. You want a gun, you want the right to carry that gun, because you know you can and will use it. Now that scares me, more than anything else, that scares me the most.

1% is infinately higher than 0%.

I'm interested to see your statistics don't include how often the innocent family is killed.


Guns aren't utterly banned, handguns are. And you think that making it even easier for them to get guns would make the murder rate fall?

I really do have to go now. Bye bye!

It's interesting that you've provided no statistics at all except for the increasing UK murder rate.

You've been watching to many movies.

You've also just shown you extreme bias towards firearms that sparks of Hoplophobia.

I'm sure the Tutsi's feel the same way as you as hundreds of thousands of them were killed by Hutu's w/ machete's after the Gov't disarmed them.

Yay Genocide.

You know that is truly sad all those deaths. You blame the government for taking away their guns. I blame the people who killed them. I do not dispute that bad things happen. I know we don't live in fairy world. But the fact that you people can kill other human beings scares me more than words can say.

your just proving my point, You have no problems with killng that man. You want a gun, you want the right to carry that gun, because you know you can and will use it. Now that scares me, more than anything else, that scares me the most.

The fact that those w/ CCW licenses commit crimes at a exponentially lower rate than the average citizen scares you?

You know that is truly sad all those deaths. You blame the government for taking away their guns. I blame the people who killed them. I do not dispute that bad things happen. I know we don't live in fairy world. But the fact that you people can kill other human beings scares me more than words can say.

The Gov't stood by and guarded the Hutu's while it happened. It scares me that Governments disarm the people and then continue to whittle away at their rights.

You should be more scared of the criminals, as they kill more people than all legal firearm owners combined.

your just proving my point, You have no problems with killng that man.

IF HE'S TRYING TO KILL ME! Jesus man, you need to open your eyes! It's either my life, or the life of some criminal. I am NOT going to willingly give up my life because some lowlife wants to loot my house or just kill me for kicks, and I am offended that you would not support my right to protect my own life.


You want a gun, you want the right to carry that gun, because you know you can and will use it. Now that scares me, more than anything else, that scares me the most.

Now you're just not making any rational sense. There is a difference between using a gun aggressively and defensively. I would only use a gun if there was no other choice, and you would too if the situation was right.

You mean to tell me that if someone broke into your house and was about to kill your family that you wouldn't use any means to protect them? If not, then you are a sad human being.

The fact that those w/ CCW licenses commit crimes at a exponentially lower rate than the average citizen scares you?

facts are nice arn't they, They are just number on the screen, When you become a statistic let me know how you feel.

To reiterate let me say that the fact that average citizens of ANY country can kill there fellow human being for whatever reason. If that is the average that country and the people living in it do trult scare me.

You know that is truly sad all those deaths. You blame the government for taking away their guns. I blame the people who killed them. I do not dispute that bad things happen. I know we don't live in fairy world. But the fact that you people can kill other human beings scares me more than words can say.

Gah, you're like a giant logic vacuum! and you don't even adress the points made, just "wah wah kill kill death and destruction"!

MAKE SURE TO SPEND ALL YOUR TIME AND MONEY ON GUNS. ANYTHING ELSE IS UNAMERICAN.

facts are nice arn't they, They are just number on the screen, When you become a statistic let me know how you feel.

To reiterate let me say that the fact that average citizens of ANY country can kill there fellow human being for whatever reason. If that is the average that country and the people living in it do trult scare me.

Look! See that! "They (facts) are just number [sic] on the screen"?!

This is assinine.

MAKE SURE TO SPEND ALL YOUR TIME AND MONEY ON GUNS. ANYTHING ELSE IS UNAMERICAN.

...Can you start with an arguement?

facts are nice arn't they, They are just number on the screen, When you become a statistic let me know how you feel.

To reiterate let me say that the fact that average citizens of ANY country can kill there fellow human being for whatever reason. If that is the average that country and the people living in it do trult scare me.

Well of course. For example your car could hit a patch of black ice and slide off the road into an old lady. If you are so scared that people can so easily kill other people, then maybe you should just kill yourself. I'm not trying to flame, honestly. If this world seems so bad and so scary to you, then why be here?

IF HE'S TRYING TO KILL ME! Jesus man, you need to open your eyes! It's either my life, or the life of some criminal. I am NOT going to willingly give up my life because some lowlife wants to loot my house or just kill me for kicks, and I am offended that you would not support my right to protect my own life.

Now you're just not making any rational sense. There is a difference between using a gun aggressively and defensively. I would only use a gun if there was no other choice, and you would too if the situation was right.

You mean to tell me that if someone broke into your house and was about to kill your family that you wouldn't use any means to protect them? If not, then you are a sad human being.

I have no problems with you protecting you and your sisters life, and it is true that a gun will remove your problem, BUT YOU JUST KILLED A MAN. That fact never changes, you might get the newspaper saying on how quickly you acted and such a hero you are. You still killed some guy. and the thing is until the smoke clears, until you see the corpse you have no idea who.

GUNnZ R BAD

NO GuNNz R GUD

This is assinine.

This? The debate? Bobs Own Pipe? Chercheurs de linconn? Guns? The forum?

facts are nice arn't they, They are just number on the screen, When you become a statistic let me know how you feel.

To reiterate let me say that the fact that average citizens of ANY country can kill there fellow human being for whatever reason. If that is the average that country and the people living in it do trult scare me.

I have a greater chance of being a "statistic" if I'm an urban, AA Male between the ages of 18-34 w/ a felony record. SInce I'm not though...

By statistics, I'm quite safe especially w/ having a firearm.


So you're an idealist. That's fine. I'm a realist.

I have no problems with you protecting you and your sisters life, and it is true that a gun will remove your problem, BUT YOU JUST KILLED A MAN. That fact never changes, you might get the newspaper saying on how quickly you acted and such a hero you are. You still killed some guy. and the thing is until the smoke clears, until you see the corpse you have no idea who.

I know, and I would take no pleasure in doing it. I wouldn't beat off over his corpse with my gun in my hand. It would be something that would be with me until I die, but I would at least take comfort in the fact that I saved my life and my sister's life. I would rather kill a evil man and feel bad for the rest of my life than see an good and innocent family member die and feel guilt for having done nothing.

Look! See that! "They (facts) are just number [sic] on the screen"?!

you think this is funny!!!?!!??. They died man and you people use them in your propaganda. They died, they died for no reason. They died because people killed them and you think this is funny.