The PokéCommunity Forums  

Go Back   The PokéCommunity Forums > Off-Topic Discussions > Discussions & Debates
Sign Up Rules/FAQ Live Battle Blogs Mark Forums Read

Notices

Discussions & Debates The place to go for slightly more in-depth topics. Discussions and debates about the world, current events, ideas, news, and more.


Advertise here

Reply
Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.  
Thread Tools
  #26    
Old November 6th, 2013, 05:32 PM
Rezilia's Avatar
Rezilia
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Gender: Female
Nature: Sassy

Advertise here
I'm a fan of Final Fantasy and anime comedy.

That said, I'm VERY used to frying pans being used as weapons. And other kinds of pans. Bathing pans, gold pans, etc...

So as Blah said, dual-use-thus-equivalent is way too overdone.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #27    
Old November 7th, 2013, 03:20 AM
Warsmith's Avatar
Warsmith
Paranoid Murderer
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Medrengard
Gender: Male
Nature: Bold
Ha, koff~

You ever see someone lose it when you rack a shotgun? The racking or a rifle or a shotgun is enough to grab someone's attention and hold it at the barrel. Cops will tell you that the shotgun is the stop-what-your-doing-right-now-or-your're-going-to-die tool. If the shotgun doesn't stop them. . .

Didn't we have another thread like this? Aren't this a bit overdone? I've gone over this. If a man can build a functioning, working rifle (that works fairly well I might add) out of a shovel in his garage. . . there is no stopping the flow of arms sales and illegal manufacturing around the world. Whether you like it or not the arms business is the largest (if not close to it) in the world. Lockheed Martin? Trillion dollar plane deal. Absorb that knowledge for a minute or two. Trillion. Larger than billion. Guns and tanks are larger than you. They are never going to disappear. Always present, always close to the heart and hands of millions of people around the globe. I think I'm done talking about this. Weapons are like lethal viruses. They're always going to be around, koffi~
__________________
FROM IRON, COMETH STRENGTH.
FROM STRENGTH, COMETH WILL.
FROM WILL, COMETH FAITH.
FROM FAITH, COMETH HONOUR.
FROM HONOUR, COMETH IRON.
THIS IS THE UNBREAKABLE LITANY;
AND MAY IT FOREVER BE SO.

Last edited by Warsmith; November 15th, 2013 at 11:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #28    
Old November 7th, 2013, 07:27 AM
Nuke
 
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Gateshead, England.
Age: 18
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
-What do you think of this issue? (changing of the 2nd or any amendments, is it necessary, how, and perhaps why)

As someone has previously said in this thread, criminals break laws. The way I see it outlawing guns will stop nothing in the U.S. because they'll still be in circulation on the black market. It also frankly just wouldn't happen given the legislative procedure to pass a new amendment.

-Are there points of your constitution that are silly and need changing?

As far as I'm aware the U.S. constitution was written concisely and only comprises of about 4000 words, there shouldn't be anything too silly in there I imagine and the only issue in the constitution usually contested seems to be gun control.

Personally I don't think guns should be given to members of the public for any usual reason, but America is past the point of being able to stop people from possessing them and their Congress would never approve of it regardless. It's an issue defeated before it even starts and it surprises me that is so often brought up despite the futility of the argument for gun control.
__________________

X + Y - 4914-3466-1264
Reply With Quote
  #29    
Old November 8th, 2013, 08:12 PM
twocows's Avatar
twocows
Pretentious Intellectual Jerk
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Michigan
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Nature: Lax
What's the point of having a set of unalienable rights if they're alienable? Perhaps the context was a bit different three hundred years ago, but the essence is the same: people should have the right to protect themselves and others by whatever means necessary. Almost all legally carrying gun owners are very responsible and would only use their weapon in defense of human (or potentially animal, depending on context) life.

My dad is licensed to carry, and does. He is 71 years old and I don't think he has ever needed to draw his weapon in defense, but the option is there should he need it. He also carries pepper spray because almost all gun owners understand the concept of "necessary force." Most situations, you could defend yourself from with a can of pepper spray. However, there are some situations where, unfortunately, the best solution involves the use of a firearm on a human being. This is sad, but it is nevertheless true. Taking guns away from responsible gun owners would leave us helpless to stop a situation where someone has the intent to kill.

I am regularly upset that people continue to use the line "guns are only used to kill, therefore they are bad." This is largely untrue and very misleading in the case where it is accurate. It is misleading because firearms are almost universally used in the defense of human life (and no, not just against others carrying firearms; there are other weapons that can cause death on a large scale). It is untrue because sometimes the mere presence of a firearm is enough to subdue a criminal or defuse a potentially lethal situation. Additionally, even if this wasn't the case, most gun owners are taught to use only necessary force (as I mentioned earlier): we're not going to shoot to kill unless the situation requires it. Most situations requiring a firearm can be resolved without lethal force and often are.

The media doesn't help matters. Reports about gun misuse (a small fraction of a small fraction of gun owners, many of whom are not carrying legally) often receive front page coverage, even if these reports are blatantly untrue or highly misleading. Retractions are often overlooked or delegated to some forgotten part of a later broadcast or issue. And situations where lethal situations are defused by responsible gun owners are almost never covered by any media (and they do happen, possibly as often or more than the reverse; many 2nd amendment rights groups and sites have coverage of these situations).

So no, I think the constitutional rights granted to us in the second amendment are both necessary and sufficient for the purposes of protection, which was, in fact, the original purpose of the second amendment (though the protection was against a different group of people). And I think if you are going to make a list of rules that can't be violated, you should not be able to violate those rules later on because "times have changed." I support almost all of the rest of the bill of rights; I question the unlimited freedom of the press granted in the first amendment (especially in the case of ongoing criminal proceedings) and think that perhaps the seventh amendment should have accounted for inflation. That said, though I disagree with these rights, I do not think it is right to grant them, to say they are inviolable, and then to revoke them at some later time.
__________________
Doctors Without Borders: one of the few charity groups you can rely on to actually do real good in the world.

PM me if you have computer troubles. I work in IT for a living and can probably solve your problems. My rate is $expensive/hr, but I'm still cheaper than Creep Squad and, unlike them, will actually get the job done or let you know if I can't.

Quote:
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.
- H. L. Mencken, unsourced

Quote:
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."
- Isaac Asimov, Column in Newsweek (21 January 1980) [source]

NEW 40K MMOFPS YESSSSS
Reply With Quote
  #30    
Old November 8th, 2013, 10:00 PM
Pinkie-Dawn's Avatar
Pinkie-Dawn
I Am Become Death
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Age: 22
Gender: Male
Nature: Quirky
Quote:
Originally Posted by O07_eleven View Post
Question time!
-What do you think of this issue? (changing of the 2nd or any amendments, is it necessary, how, and perhaps why)

After watching this video, I should say we should allow people to keep their guns in preparations of a possible zombie invasion, because they're the most efficient weapons to kill them. As a matter of fact, I highly recommend that every country should be give its citizens a gun to prepare for said invasion, even if it means more shooting massacres when an invasion hasn't happened yet. Just look at ZombiU for example. It takes place in a country which has strict gun laws, making its citizens vulnerable to zombies.

Quote:
-Are there points of your constitution that are silly and need changing?
Only the first amendment, because it allows flawed/offensive opinions to run amuck and ruin everyone's day *coughpetacough*. There needs to be a limit regarding freedom of speech and expression.

Quote:
-Do you feel your government has secretly violated it's constitution through certain laws or actions? (NSA stuff)
I never payed much attention to this issue, but I do have my suspicions about it, though it's usually from corrupted politics I may not know about.
__________________
Credit goes to KhanadianDaleks of imgur for the gif
Reply With Quote
  #31    
Old November 8th, 2013, 10:15 PM
Rezilia's Avatar
Rezilia
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Gender: Female
Nature: Sassy
As far as mass media goes, the problem we have is an overwhelming amount of negative media. Reporters dig up "the dirt" instead of showing positive outcomes affiliated with various subjects.

Let's have mass media that shows gun owners using their guns to protect their lives and the lives of those they love and THEN see what happens.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #32    
Old November 9th, 2013, 10:14 AM
Esper's Avatar
Esper
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by twocows View Post
What's the point of having a set of unalienable rights if they're alienable?
Very few rights 100% are inalienable. War and the death penalty take away the right to life, the press are generally forbidden from mentioning the names of minors in court cases, and so on. Everything is a balance. I think it's fine to have a right that states people can defend themselves, but to specify the means is a little weird. For the second amendment to be about guns specifically and about self-defense implicitly is a little backwards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rezilia View Post
Let's have mass media that shows gun owners using their guns to protect their lives and the lives of those they love and THEN see what happens.
While I agree that the media has a problem ("if it bleeds, it leads") I think the statistics of gun violence in the US are enough to say there is a gun violence problem.

Plus, you can't really show something stopping something else from happening. Like if you have somebody who prays to keep their town safe from storms and then no storm comes you can't really prove the prayer did anything because there simply could have been no storms. You can have a person who has a gun and never gets robbed, but you can't show that they've never been robbed because they have a gun.
__________________

deviantart blog pair
Reply With Quote
  #33    
Old November 9th, 2013, 10:38 AM
WhiteKnightL's Avatar
WhiteKnightL
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Anywhere I want to live. Wonderful, isn't it?
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Nature: Calm
"-What do you think of this issue? (changing of the 2nd or any amendments, is it necessary, how, and perhaps why)"

Regulating the 2nd Amendment would be a good idea. These days any idiot can get a gun while many people want to get rid of affordable health care. Tell me, what could possibly go wrong?

Hand guns have their uses if you needed to defend yourself. Hunting rifles are self-explanatory. But what's the purpose of an assault rifle? Yeah, I understand people like to collect them (and I'm sure some of us like to collect Pokemon, even if we won't use them). But guns can still become tools for murder. They don't kill people but they sure make it a hell of a lot easier to do so. Why make it easy for a potential criminal?

I say start with background checks for anyone wishing to get a gun permit. After all, many pro-gun activists complain that criminals don't follow the law (obviously) and will get guns by any means, but that shouldn't be an excuse for easier gun access. Make it harder for them, at least. It could prevent some deaths. Besides, if you are a "law-abiding citizen" then there's nothing to be afraid of, right?
__________________
"The truth is like a lion. You don't have to defend it. Let it loose. It will defend itself."
-St. Augustine

"You lot. You spend all your time thinking about dying. Like you're going to get killed by eggs or beef or global warming or asteroids. But you never take the time to imagine the impossible. That maybe you survive." -The Ninth Doctor

I'm a Catholic Whovian who loves to watch anime and read manga, discovering my faith while still trying to to enjoy the things I love. Feel free to PM me for questions or just to chat!

Black 2 file
Palom
FC: 3483 3007 8236
Feel free to add me to trade and/or battle! Could really use some friends in BW2!

Poetry thread (please check it out!): http://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=310154

My trade thread: http://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=307887
Reply With Quote
  #34    
Old November 9th, 2013, 12:02 PM
Water Gym Leader's Avatar
Water Gym Leader
Arlyn Aquos
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Pacifidlog Town
Age: 19
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
Send a message via Skype™ to Water Gym Leader
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic Fox View Post
"If I had a gun I wouldn't have been robbed."

If you had a gun, the robber might have pulled out a weapon as well - what then? You've just escalated the problem to one where someone has to die. I would much rather leave them too it and call the police.

FYI - Off duty police officer is off duty. No radio for backup and no legal cover.
Most if not all off duty officers carry their fire arms on them at all times.
2) I happen to have a fast trigger finger and according to US law, if I feel threatened I have the right to shoot.
3) If someone takes my property by force I DO have the right to protect myself by any means necessary.
And last but not least I am signing up to be a member of the NRA.
__________________

3DS FC: 0903-4056-8403
3DS XL FC: 0404-6887-6558
~~DIVING DEEP~~ (A Water Pokemon Fan Club)
Reply With Quote
  #35    
Old November 9th, 2013, 03:43 PM
Cerberus87's Avatar
Cerberus87
Mega Houndoom, baby!
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Brazil
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Nature: Lonely
Quote:
Originally Posted by Water Gym Leader View Post
Most if not all off duty officers carry their fire arms on them at all times.
2) I happen to have a fast trigger finger and according to US law, if I feel threatened I have the right to shoot.
3) If someone takes my property by force I DO have the right to protect myself by any means necessary.
And last but not least I am signing up to be a member of the NRA.
Fast trigger finger won't save you when the bandit has the control of the situation...
__________________

3DS FC: 3282-2423-7870 (PM if you add) (Bug-type Safari)

I like Lyra so take my opinions with a grain of salt.
Reply With Quote
  #36    
Old November 10th, 2013, 09:06 AM
Esper's Avatar
Esper
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by Water Gym Leader View Post
3) If someone takes my property by force I DO have the right to protect myself by any means necessary.
How does protecting yourself extend to protecting your property?

I'm not trying to be snarky. I want to know how property is potentially worth someone's life, what examples or justifications make it not seem so over the top.
__________________

deviantart blog pair
Reply With Quote
  #37    
Old November 10th, 2013, 09:25 AM
Kanzler
スペースディスコ ��82.
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
Age: 21
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
Quote:
Originally Posted by Water Gym Leader View Post
Most if not all off duty officers carry their fire arms on them at all times.
2) I happen to have a fast trigger finger and according to US law, if I feel threatened I have the right to shoot.
3) If someone takes my property by force I DO have the right to protect myself by any means necessary.
And last but not least I am signing up to be a member of the NRA.
This seems misguided. Nobody has the right to do anything by any means necessary. The name of the game is reasonable force, it has always been and it will always be. A statement like "if I feel threatened I have the right to shoot" means if somebody brushes me the wrong way, then I can off him - after all, I feel "threatened", don't I? Even with the defense of property, the court will decide whether the use of force was reasonable or not. The right to carry arms does not amount to an effective carte blanche on the use of force. If US law worked the way you say it did, then it seems awfully lawless to me.
__________________
Cadance.
Reply With Quote
  #38    
Old November 10th, 2013, 09:41 AM
Rezilia's Avatar
Rezilia
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Gender: Female
Nature: Sassy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scarf View Post
How does protecting yourself extend to protecting your property?

I'm not trying to be snarky. I want to know how property is potentially worth someone's life, what examples or justifications make it not seem so over the top.
In the U.S., the idea of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness used to be Life, Liberty, and Property. Americans are VERY territorial and materialistic. If you take their ****, they have every right to put a bullet in your brain.
__________________



Last edited by Livewire; November 10th, 2013 at 05:00 PM. Reason: No censor bypass please
Reply With Quote
  #39    
Old November 10th, 2013, 09:49 AM
Cerberus87's Avatar
Cerberus87
Mega Houndoom, baby!
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Brazil
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Nature: Lonely
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rezilia View Post
In the U.S., the idea of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness used to be Life, Liberty, and Property. Americans are VERY territorial and materialistic. If you take their sh*t, they have every right to put a bullet in your brain.
Americans weren't the ones who invented capitalism but they were certainly the ones who perfected it. No wonder it's such a materialistic nation.
__________________

3DS FC: 3282-2423-7870 (PM if you add) (Bug-type Safari)

I like Lyra so take my opinions with a grain of salt.
Reply With Quote
  #40    
Old November 10th, 2013, 11:00 AM
CarcharOdin's Avatar
CarcharOdin
Master of The Universe
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Monterey, California, USA
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Nature: Naughty
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cerberus87 View Post
Americans weren't the ones who invented capitalism but they were certainly the ones who perfected it. No wonder it's such a materialistic nation.
If wanting to own things and wanting a right to voluntary exchange makes me a bad person, then I guess I'll just have to be fine living as a bad person.

Stop trying to guilt trip people who support a system that emphasizes having as free of a market as possible. It's patronizing and low.
__________________
CarcharOdin gets high on life to forget about drugs.
Reply With Quote
  #41    
Old November 10th, 2013, 11:13 AM
Kanzler
スペースディスコ ��82.
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
Age: 21
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
Ehh there's nuances to "voluntary exchange". I'd describe it more like "voluntary exchange within a power differential". Those with power determine the terms of the exchange, for example if someone's bigger than you, it's easier for them to say no to you, so they control the exchange. This is why competition is supported, and sometimes enforced - which if you think about it, is going against voluntary exchange. Social redistribution can be very good. In the case of Norway, the government gets around 70-80% of every dollar's worth of petroleum they sell, and it goes to a public fund that is reinvested into government services and funds, i.e., having money for the future. Can we even dream of American oil companies redistributing profits to the rest of us?

Anyways justifying my shooting a person trying to make off with my television on the basis they're making off with my television seems ridiculous to me, but I guess I'm a foreigner. Sure, I'd be emotional as it happens, but when I'm not thinking with my balls I'd leave justice and the law to those who have the authority to manage it. I don't think the average person should be able to wield that kind of power.
__________________
Cadance.
Reply With Quote
  #42    
Old November 10th, 2013, 02:29 PM
Cerberus87's Avatar
Cerberus87
Mega Houndoom, baby!
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Brazil
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Nature: Lonely
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarcharOdin View Post
If wanting to own things and wanting a right to voluntary exchange makes me a bad person, then I guess I'll just have to be fine living as a bad person.

Stop trying to guilt trip people who support a system that emphasizes having as free of a market as possible. It's patronizing and low.
I'm surprised that after 1929 people still haven't learned that a market "as free as possible" will only have disastrous consequences. I believe this possibility should be as low as possible (but not zero like in communism).

Adam Smith's ideas are beautiful on paper. On paper.
__________________

3DS FC: 3282-2423-7870 (PM if you add) (Bug-type Safari)

I like Lyra so take my opinions with a grain of salt.
Reply With Quote
  #43    
Old November 10th, 2013, 08:03 PM
Rezilia's Avatar
Rezilia
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Gender: Female
Nature: Sassy
Does anyone remember what I said about using a standard and only THEN allowing capitalism on top of it? Anyone?

I don't believe there should be a maximum limit to what people can obtain but there SHOULD be a minimum limit. I don't want to keep seeing wise old men (that are also military veterans) and their grandchildren on the street just because someone thinks it cool for the minimum limit of money everyone gets to be $0.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #44    
Old November 10th, 2013, 08:20 PM
Cerberus87's Avatar
Cerberus87
Mega Houndoom, baby!
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Brazil
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Nature: Lonely
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rezilia View Post
Does anyone remember what I said about using a standard and only THEN allowing capitalism on top of it? Anyone?

I don't believe there should be a maximum limit to what people can obtain but there SHOULD be a minimum limit. I don't want to keep seeing wise old men (that are also military veterans) and their grandchildren on the street just because someone thinks it cool for the minimum limit of money everyone gets to be $0.
Minimum wage in Brazil, barely enough to afford basic needs for a standard family of four. The recommended wage our governmental statistics institute stipulates is triple what most people earn. But the politicians don't give a ****.
__________________

3DS FC: 3282-2423-7870 (PM if you add) (Bug-type Safari)

I like Lyra so take my opinions with a grain of salt.
Reply With Quote
  #45    
Old November 10th, 2013, 08:32 PM
Rezilia's Avatar
Rezilia
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Gender: Female
Nature: Sassy
Yeah, what I'm saying is - Minimum Wage being so low wouldn't be a bad thing if every single citizen automatically received a "standard check" - whether jobless or with a job - which had enough money to pay for housing, food, and other necessities, while the prices of said necessities were low enough to allow the standard check to actually be enough to pay for things.

^ That's communism, which allows people to still earn more if they wanted to - thus, capitalism. Both at once. Awesome, right?

--

... Main topic is guns?

Uhm...

I don't like guns. But guns aren't bad people are, etc etc.

I'm out of juice for this topic lol
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #46    
Old November 11th, 2013, 12:38 AM
Warsmith's Avatar
Warsmith
Paranoid Murderer
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Medrengard
Gender: Male
Nature: Bold
This irritates me, koff~

Let me be perfectly clear. Hello, those who would label everyone who owns an 'assault rifle' as a ridiculous person or a gun nut: You are sorely mistaken and deceived. "Well, CoffeeDrink, what's the purpose of owning an assault rifle?" Stop calling it that! Assault rifle? Are you kidding me? Sure, there are military styled rifles, but that's it! You can't legally buy yourself an assault rifle, if you can even call them that! Stop. Please, please, please, for your own good and intellect do not call them assault rifles, and do not bring up the 'why do you own one?' topic.

I have already established that
1. assault rifles, as you put them, account for around %1 (hovering about there) of all the shooting deaths in the US
2. assault rifles are harder to conceal
3. would you rather take a .308 to your chest or a 5.56?
4. they're harder to conceal.

Hunting rifles for instance, look like regular po-dunk, non threatening hunting rifles. Turns out they can carry heavier ordnance than your assault rifles. The shells are heavier, they can fire at the same rate, they have an attached scope, often times they are just as easy to piece together, they can have magazines the same as your semi-auto assault rifles. For the love of all that you believe in please do not raise the question "why do you need an assault rifle?" ever again.

Would you question me purchasing a sniper (hunting) rifle that chambered the same rounds? Remember in Battlefield, where you can take off the scope off a sniper rifle and run around the map wasting people with it? Remember how they're semi-automatic and can kill just as effectively? Stop with the assault rifles bit. It's old, it's tired, it's a useless argument. Any gun can kill you if it hits you in the brain. Handguns can do this, rifles can do this, hell, why aren't you putting shotguns on trial here? Have you seen what slug shells can do to a man? Missing limbs and violent death. That is what a shotgun offers, and in actuality is far more effective at dispatching 'crowds' of people.

Enough with the 'lethal assault rifles' already. Please. They're semi-auto and pose no greater threat than a handgun. If you make the argument that rifles can hold more rounds than a handgun: Five-Seven. The FN Herstal Five-Seven comes standard with a 20+1 round magazine and can have a 30+1 magazine fitted for the thing. Are we done? Can we all say that a bullet to the mendula oblongata, no matter the caliber or the weapon, will kill you almost instantaneously? Please drop the assault rifle bit. You'll be laughed out of the gun club. Try it. Bring it up with a gun store owner. He'll tell you what I told you. No more of this 'assault rifle' business, koffi~
__________________
FROM IRON, COMETH STRENGTH.
FROM STRENGTH, COMETH WILL.
FROM WILL, COMETH FAITH.
FROM FAITH, COMETH HONOUR.
FROM HONOUR, COMETH IRON.
THIS IS THE UNBREAKABLE LITANY;
AND MAY IT FOREVER BE SO.
Reply With Quote
  #47    
Old November 11th, 2013, 02:43 AM
KittenKoder's Avatar
KittenKoder
I Am No One Else
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Seattle
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Nature: Calm
The gun debate, on both sides, is ... pointless.

There, I said it, it's an exercise in futility. Why? On those against guns, the excuses are always attempting to blame a machine, a tool, for the actions of the one using it, which does nothing to fix a problem. The people who want guns often just whine like kids who have their toys taken away from them for misbehaving. Try this, take the word "gun" out of the equation, this is really a debate on how to further reduce violent criminal activity, and there has been only one proven method for that, short of removing everyone's freedom. Education, or at least better education. For one thing, challenging people tends to distract them from such thoughts as "I want to see this person dead." Not to mention, the more a person knows about reality, the less they are inclined to turn to criminal activity for any reason.
__________________
If you add me, please message me so I can reciprocate. No, garbage does not make a cute Pokemon, and it smells funny.

Join me on IRC, synirc.net #PokemonTactics, for friendly discussions on tactics and strategies.
Reply With Quote
  #48    
Old November 15th, 2013, 11:30 PM
Warsmith's Avatar
Warsmith
Paranoid Murderer
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Medrengard
Gender: Male
Nature: Bold
Quote:
Originally Posted by KittenKoder View Post
Education, or at least better education. For one thing, challenging people tends to distract them from such thoughts as "I want to see this person dead." Not to mention, the more a person knows about reality, the less they are inclined to turn to criminal activity for any reason.
Thought about that, koff~

I thought it'd be great to have scientists left and right, but then quickly realized it'd be an exercise in futility. Sadly, no one can be offered the same opportunities as the other, and some turn towards crime, which can and quite often pays better than a straight job working at Kinko's. True, countries with a higher education have less gang violence (I just made that up, I didn't check or anything, so I'll just take your word on this. You could have said bananas make less criminals and I would have said sure) but they also see their fair share of crime. Japan for instance and their endless Yakuza issues, but any C student in Japan can most likely smoke one of America's A students for breakfast, that's just the way it is. They still got crime, and they got less people. Less people equals less crime, that I know for sure is true.

We also have a massive debt to everyone and are too greedy to dole it out to the needy and love to build tanks, planes, bombs and missiles instead. It's sick, really. When you look at how we handle things. . . Here: Hitler was a bad cat, right? Turns out he dragged his country's sorry ass out of debt and put it to work manufacturing guns, tanks, planes, and creating a military state. This served a purpose. While the US and the 'Elected Officials' who are 'looking out for us' like blowing a Trillion dollars on the complete F-35 project (20yrs or so). It's almost sad to think that Hitler was more of a hero to his own people than our leaders are to us, koffi~
__________________
FROM IRON, COMETH STRENGTH.
FROM STRENGTH, COMETH WILL.
FROM WILL, COMETH FAITH.
FROM FAITH, COMETH HONOUR.
FROM HONOUR, COMETH IRON.
THIS IS THE UNBREAKABLE LITANY;
AND MAY IT FOREVER BE SO.
Reply With Quote
  #49    
Old November 16th, 2013, 09:39 AM
KittenKoder's Avatar
KittenKoder
I Am No One Else
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Seattle
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Nature: Calm
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoffeeDrink View Post
Thought about that, koff~

I thought it'd be great to have scientists left and right, but then quickly realized it'd be an exercise in futility. Sadly, no one can be offered the same opportunities as the other, and some turn towards crime, which can and quite often pays better than a straight job working at Kinko's. True, countries with a higher education have less gang violence (I just made that up, I didn't check or anything, so I'll just take your word on this. You could have said bananas make less criminals and I would have said sure) but they also see their fair share of crime. Japan for instance and their endless Yakuza issues, but any C student in Japan can most likely smoke one of America's A students for breakfast, that's just the way it is. They still got crime, and they got less people. Less people equals less crime, that I know for sure is true.

We also have a massive debt to everyone and are too greedy to dole it out to the needy and love to build tanks, planes, bombs and missiles instead. It's sick, really. When you look at how we handle things. . . Here: Hitler was a bad cat, right? Turns out he dragged his country's sorry ass out of debt and put it to work manufacturing guns, tanks, planes, and creating a military state. This served a purpose. While the US and the 'Elected Officials' who are 'looking out for us' like blowing a Trillion dollars on the complete F-35 project (20yrs or so). It's almost sad to think that Hitler was more of a hero to his own people than our leaders are to us, koffi~
You do make some good points, but whenever you try to point out that population is one of the largest problems in the world, most people make up lame excuses of why it's not a factor.
__________________
If you add me, please message me so I can reciprocate. No, garbage does not make a cute Pokemon, and it smells funny.

Join me on IRC, synirc.net #PokemonTactics, for friendly discussions on tactics and strategies.
Reply With Quote
  #50    
Old November 16th, 2013, 07:14 PM
AzuGazer's Avatar
AzuGazer
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Gender: Male
Quote:
Originally Posted by KittenKoder View Post
You do make some good points, but whenever you try to point out that population is one of the largest problems in the world, most people make up lame excuses of why it's not a factor.
well yea population is a problem... but can people fix it?
__________________
ALMOST HALLOWEEN!!!
(which i don't celebrate)
Reply With Quote
Reply
Quick Reply

Sponsored Links


Advertise here
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Minimum Characters Per Post: 25



All times are UTC -8. The time now is 05:26 PM.


Style by Nymphadora, artwork by Sa-Dui.
Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2014 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2014 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.