There is so much ignorance about firearms possession, I don't know where to start: if you're serious about understanding, peruse the http://gunfacts.info/ PDF. This should be a public poll, with the naysayers having to defend their positions with facts, studies and satistics: more often than not, their position is based strictly on emotional reaction.
Hand Guns - Yes or No
- Thread starter sderenzi
- Start date
EXCUSE ME!? THE ENTIRE BOOK IS BACKED UP BY STUDIES AND STATISTICS: YOU GET A GRIP.
Let's open another can, shall we?
Alcohol, cigarettes, cars, falls, pools and an incredible amount of other objects kill significantly more people than firearms ever did: should we ban all of those things?
What about illegal drugs? We can't get those because they're illegal and people can't make them on their own time, right? Oh wait. You mean I can't machine my own lead shooter? But wait...
Face it: the only people you're disarming are law-abiding citizens. Criminals will get their guns or commit their crimes with any other tool: you're ignorant if you think the object is the problem.
Alcohol, cigarettes, cars, falls, pools and an incredible amount of other objects kill significantly more people than firearms ever did: should we ban all of those things?
What about illegal drugs? We can't get those because they're illegal and people can't make them on their own time, right? Oh wait. You mean I can't machine my own lead shooter? But wait...
Face it: the only people you're disarming are law-abiding citizens. Criminals will get their guns or commit their crimes with any other tool: you're ignorant if you think the object is the problem.
Back it up with data, not emotional reaction: why are guns a problem? Since when? In what way? How are they any different from any other tool? Please, explain and provide data for your opinion, unless you want it tossed aside.
You have a right to your opinion, just don't think it'll be taken seriously if you can't back it up.
You have a right to your opinion, just don't think it'll be taken seriously if you can't back it up.
Didn't they say the same thing about drugs? Make more laws against illegal drugs and it'll keep the people from buy and using drugs, thus saving more lives? Yeah, I think the same thinking happened in the 20s with liquor prohibition ...and it didn't work either!
Then why don't you keep your fuckin' nose out of it?!
Baron Max
Ultimately, it comes back to the right to self-defense: it makes no sense to say "you can defend yourself... but not with this" when such a tool is the most efficient means of protecting self, and especially since the object has never been the problem.
I won't be participating in this thread any longer than I have. Peruse the gunfacts.info website if you're serious about understanding why gun control is a poor idea.
I invite members to provide data along with their opinions/comments/replies.
I won't be participating in this thread any longer than I have. Peruse the gunfacts.info website if you're serious about understanding why gun control is a poor idea.
I invite members to provide data along with their opinions/comments/replies.
See? You're right! And that's exactly what's wrong with any and all of the "gun control" measures that have ever been proposed!
Guns would be used in almost no deaths if criminals didn't have guns! Now ...please propose how to keep guns away from criminals, and I'll support the measure. But passing one more law, that criminals don't follow anyway, is nothing short of ignorant, if not stupid.
Baron Max
Guns are a problem because they take away the fairness away from conflict. At least you have a chance to defend yourself against a knife or a baseball bat, but if you're 10 feet away from a guy with a gun, what do you do? Nothing. You can kill 3 people from 10 feet away with a gun, and they won't even get a hit in. And no matter how much you learn to help yourself in that situation, the only way that you won't get a serious injury is either if you have a gun, or the person shooting at you has bad aim. You don't need data to know that, it's common sense.
If you also have a gun, then the fight becomes equal ...and you have a chance to defend yourself!
If you don't have a gun, then your only hope is to run away like a whipped, wimpering puppy. Is that what you want to be? You don't even want a single chance? Is that what your life is worth to you? ...to just stand there and wait for someone to bash you with a baseball bat or shoot you with a gun?
Listen, if y'all don't care enough about your own safety and welfare, that's fine, but please don't try to take away my right to protect myself and my family. That's not very damned nice of you!
Baron Max
ahhem.. let me remind you all the reason a poll exists is to come to a final conclusion, I'd say 8 vs 10 leaves that conlusion up in arms! What point was there in making a poll if those are the results I end up getting
grrrrrrrr
PS Is it the end of my polls?
I would hope that you finally realize that polls, all polls, are nothing but a waste of time and effort. In the news media, they can make polls "prove" anything that they wish by just asking the right quiestions or by asking the right people. Polls suck giant donkey dick.
Baron Max
Yup, that's why I voted yes
No, I said I believe guns are a problem, but I'm not naive enough to think we can get rid of them all. Just under that is the quote from my last post. I took it that he was responding to me when he asked why guns are a problem, so that's what I answered to. But, as long as there's crackheads who have guns, I will to.
RenegadeSith
Registered Member
No conflict is fair, I've never even heard of a fair bare knuckles fight - someone always has more skill or experience. Life is about survival of the fittest. People will do whatever they can to disable/kill you in a conflict, fair fight or not. I am not in a fight to be fair, I am in it to protect myself, my family, or my property... otherwise I will not be fighting at all.
Right now, it is a "fair fight" if a criminal tries to rob me, because we both have guns. If you make a law to get rid of guns, then the government will come take my guns away (so much for a free country) and the criminal will still have his. BUT WAIT!!! Why will the criminal still have his gun if there are gun laws??? Because, he's a criminal... laws mean nothing to him, he breaks the law. The law now says you can't steal, rape, kill, etc... but aren't those thugs with guns doing that stuff despite the laws against them?
So, with guns laws in place, you'll have a society living in fear and a growing criminal element controlling the streets. Take this short article for example... if that citizen would not have been armed, that officer would have been killed! Is that the kind of law you want in place? Is that fair, to let some thug murder a father of three because he didn't want a traffic ticket?
I have a better idea... since gun laws will not effect the criminal element anyway, why don't you just mind your own business and stop lobbying to legislate my life. This is a free country, after all, and we have enough laws as it is!
Visit Renegade's BS
Interesting article, the confusing thing is why he didn't just kick down the guy instead of killing him. I'm not sure it makes alot of sense to go around hurting others just because of a brawl.
In any event I can see it now "Get off that officer" (approaches with left foot, steps back, smiles, shoots) meanawhile thug "What's that, is someone yelling, ehh screw them I am not going back to jail for a ticket I'll beat this cop then get outta here".
LOL
In any event I can see it now "Get off that officer" (approaches with left foot, steps back, smiles, shoots) meanawhile thug "What's that, is someone yelling, ehh screw them I am not going back to jail for a ticket I'll beat this cop then get outta here".
LOL
What if he's so much bigger than you ....and doesn't "kick down" as easily as you saying it???? Then what? Now you're in close where the big guy can beat the livin' shit outta' you. Is that what you want?
Criminals do it all the time ....whether it makes sense to you or not. So you're still back to "How do you protect yourself?".
The rest of your post was almost non-sensical, so I don't knw what the fuck to say about it.
Baron Max
Yes, but when someone threatens to cut you or beat you, you have a CHANCE to defend yourself. With a gun, there is no chance.
Did I say make a law? No. I said the opposite, I said that there is a problem with guns, however we will never be able to fix it.
Maybe because anyone can go out out side at anytime, almost anywhere, and buy an unregistered gun?
Laws mean nothing to me either, but I don't go around breaking them for no reason, they just don't don't have any major impact on the decisions I make.
Who said they weren't?
No it's not fair.
I'm not trying to legislate your life. You see how all of your excess emotion prevents you from seeing that? Why do people make that error so often? Do you have no brain that you can't scrool a few posts up and read what I said? I didn't say anything about a law. Why don't you mind your own bussiness and stop putting words in my mouth?
Too many IMO.
Although I disagree with guns being a problem, I didn't quote the above to debate this: rather, I would like you to realize that your message is key to understanding why it is important that we not disarm law-abiding citizens.
Whether or not you believe it to be a problem, guns are here to stay, so it makes no sense to disarm law-abiding civilians. Licensed individuals should have the option of acquiring firearms for self-defense or sporting purposes.
It's illogical to say "we can't get rid of guns", "criminals will always have guns" and "citizens shouldn't be allowed to have guns": it's right there in front of you... plain as fucking day. If you don't want to own a gun, don't... but you still enjoy the deterrent effect as a result of others having the right to do so.
Cheers.