USN_Squid

Oh, and Frijole, nobody really needs a motorcycle that can go 175mph!
You should be happy with your 1975 Yamaha 250.

__________________

jex

Perhaps lol sometimes I don't know what I'm saying and if that makes two of us we're both screwed - what I'm saying is that if you agree to a gun culture then you have to accept what goes along with it and that one day someone close to you could be killed. We have a car culture, If a family member gets run over and killed they are a victim of circumstance brought about by a car culture. If we got rid of cars or restricted their speed to 20mph then it is unlikely that people would be killed by them.

If you're going to accept something into your life then you have to accept the negative issues around it. Proponents of AW's don't really have a voice when they try and explain to mothers who's kids have just been gunned down that AW's have a place in society because it's our right to carry them - sorry you just got the lone nutter.

I'm not saying there should be no grieving process, of course not. I drive a car. If someone close to be gets runs over and killed I'm going to complain and be upset but I'll have to accept it because I agree to a car culture.

Hope that explians it

As to your comment on education I couldn't agree more. I wondering also about regulation? How easy is it to get a gun? From what I gather it isn't hard. Perhaps a licence requiring a police report should be in order. That's basically what used to happen here before the ban. Checks were made by the applicant and a secure gun box was needed which would be checked by the police. If for any reason they didn't think you were legilble then they wouldn't allow you to have a gun.

Now I have met a lot of people in my life and to be honest most of them don't have a clue. They are uneducated and ignorant and for them to be given a weapon quite frankly is scary. It was bad enough seeing complete f**kwits in the army with a rifle for the 1st time. Fortunately the army trains soldiers to be aware of their weapons and the instruction is very safety concious and strict (as you would expect).

So now take the most stupid ignorant people you know and give them a gun. Would you trust them not to panic at some point or be stupid with it? Owning a weapon is a huge responsibility and if that's not taken seriously then expect the worst.

__________________
Jex

CingularDuality

This is a good point. It's obvious by reading just this thread that there are a lot of people that don't see the benefit of having an armed citizenry. Everyone knows that our society would screech to a halt if cars were suddenly forbidden to everyone but the gov't. But what exactly could happen if guns were suddenly forbidden to everyone but the gov't? Nobody likes to think about that. Everybody buys life insurance, but nobody likes to think about that, either....

Keep in mind that Hitler was a huge fan of gun control.

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

jex

I was on the understanding that since the ban gun crime had increased. Of course they don't wait but why did they not arm bobbies before the ban and then did after? Or were the police waiting until there were no guns for sale before arming themselves? lol

__________________
Jex

jex

I think you're seriously missing the point here unless you think that cars aren't a necessity in our way of life these days - guns are not. And just how would you ban deisel, nails and fertilizer? 3 components for a nasty bomb there.

Now lets take your average assault rifle - 30 rounds in the mag capable of fully automatic fire. Reload time for a trained shooter 2-6 seconds - speed of the bullet? faster than any car or baseball bat, can be shot from range and 1 shot generally incapacitates so no chance for an escape.

So given the choice what you you rather go against, in no particular order

Automatic Rifle
Automatic pistol
Baseball bat
Knife
Car

So by my reckoning, yeah a lot easier to kill people. Take the washington sniper for some proof. It's funny how guys who have a military background have a completly different understanding and viewpoint of weapons than armed civvies.

__________________
Jex

jex

Yeah disarm the peasants before you take control - then they have no means to fight back, brainwash them to fight a war that isn't just, blame it on ethnic minorities to confuse the situation and have fascist police making sure there are no dissenters.

The bigger the lie...

__________________
Jex

Wintermute

It has been implied that the UK gun ban caused an increase in gun crime but I really don't think it did. I can't think of any reason why it would.

The police weren't armed because it is a bad idea to do that if you can avoid it. Police are there to apprehend people so that they can be judged by the courts. They are not there to play Judge Dredd. As other have argued here, it is a bad idea to let the state have too much power over you. That said, if police do need firearms in certain situations then so be it.

Nothing happened.

he was also a fan of breathing, eating, sleeping, moustaches...

__________________
Wintermute

Play EVE online. It's like being an accounting addict in space.

www.MakePovertyHistory.com

MikoLovesYou

I was waiting for your response on the subject, cing.


You make a very good point, and I agree with you that I was looking at things the wrong way. You are completly right, and I agree with you 100%.


You bring up the point that the law was passed on guns that only LOOK scary. This is where our opinion differs.....whereas you would like to see the law removed completly because it was f'ed up in the first place, I would like to see a revised Brady Bill that banned ALL of the dangerous weapons.

While I may be extremely liberal, I still believe that people have the right to bear arms. Sure, I wouldn't protest if they wanted to ban handguns altogether, but I do not have any objection to a person wanting to protect himself. However, I do believe that sufficient training should be given to the buyer of the gun, as the current training is not enough. A course should cover ALL important points, such as how to handle a gun, gun safety, firefight tactics, when and when not to shoot, etc. The current licensing just isn't enough today.

And gun shows are ridiculous. That's where most criminals get their guns. These shows need to be stopped.

__________________

MikoLovesYou

He seemed to be blaming the countries problems on "people like me", when he doesn't even know who I am. He also insulted my intelligence by saying "I believe every sound clip I hear on the news" (which is obviously untrue). On top of that, the message was concluded with an arrogant statement, implying that he is better than I (and people who agree with me on this issue).


Now how is that not a personal attack?

__________________

luna

Bill got shot down....

Senate Kills Bill Protecting Gun Makers

__________________
Resurgent's New Motivational Motto:
"Now train harder! Live inside your character! If it dies, YOU DIE! Focus!"

Jesus had a soulstone.

jex

*Sets clays*

There, now you have an anti 'personal attack' mine

__________________
Jex

fr1j0l3

EXACTLY!!!

I LOVE that Idea.

Make me QUALIFY for the bike, take a class, take a track day, whatever.

If it were only QUALIFIED riders with literbikes, my insurance rates would go down, and accidents would drop off sharply!

Sure, someone could still get one illegaly, but the accident rates would still be much much lower.

USN_Squid

I agree with that on principle. Training and education can't be bad for anybody. But criminals are criminals and will find a way around it. And firearms are a little easier to hide than a motorcycle.

In New York State alone, approximately 100,000 persons are convicted of unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle each year, and this is probably a small proportion of the actual number of people who drive without a valid license. And given the poor performance of the Federal government in prosecuting felons that were identified by the Instant Background Check trying to buy firearms, I don't have much confidence in that kind of system.

Fact: You do not need a license to buy a car. You can buy as many as you want and drive them all you like on your own property without a license.

Fact: Cars are registered because they are (a) a source of tax revenue, (b) the object of fraud in some transactions, and (c) a high theft object. Thus we ask the government to track these.

Fact: There is no constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear automobiles, and thus they are subject to greater regulation than guns.

Fact: There are more guns in the U.S. than cars (228,000,000 guns according to 1998 FBI stats, and 207,754,000 automobiles according to 1998 Federal Highway Administration registrations). Yet you are 31 times more likely to be accidentally killed by a car than a gun according to the National Safety Council . . . despite cars having been registered and licensed for almost 100 years.

__________________

Wolfie

Necessity should have no bearing in whether something should be legal or illegal

If I was mentally unstable, I bet I could do alot more damage with a shotgun than with an assault weapon.

fr1j0l3

umm.. ok, you cut and pasted some "Facts" without a conclusion.

Why not register guns for revenue? Ther is also fraud and theft involved in firearms.

And can you imagine the number of accidental auto deaths had we NOT required registration and licensing?

And becasue you have no confidence in the way the background checks are working, you abandon it, rather than fix it?

This is the crux of the issue. keep and bear "arms". NRA folks are afraid to let someone define what an "arm" is. 2nd ammendment was written a long time ago.

What are "arms" in this day and age?
What is " a 21st century "militia"?
Why is regulation bad?

Let me ask this. If money was not an object (yeah I know, big leap) and we all could afford cars (most of us can), do we not see driving on a public highway as a "right"?

How would we react if we were told not to drive anymore?

"I can't get to my job, I have the right to get where I need to go"
"You can't tell me what to do, it's my car"

But we have cars under registration and licensing. Generates revenue, and tries to ensure that the roads are safer.

What is the big problem with requiring licenses and registration on arms? (aside from the slippery-slope "they're gonna take all our guns away and kill us all" nonsense)