Deep Discussion Have a seat at Deep Discussion for in-depth discussions, extended or serious conversations, and current events. From world news to talks on life, growing up, relationships, and issues in society, this is the place to be. Come be a knight.

Ad Content
Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #76   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
Old November 17th, 2018 (10:54 AM).
Urrr's Avatar
Urrr Urrr is offline
Devil's Advocate
     
    Join Date: Aug 2017
    Gender: Male
    Nature: Modest
    Posts: 18
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BronzeHeart92 View Post
    And that's why I'm worried about the future of America's children growing up in a world where every day could be their last.
    I agree. It seems to me that they believe the world is out to get them. The mexicas or south americans in general want there money and are also rapists and drugdealers with guns. The "terrorists", who's faces are rather nebulous, are also a threat, not just to national monuments, airport and so on, but to small citys and towns as well as individual homes. If that is not a problem its any number of criminals from within.

    But the world is not out to get you (killed). If they want anything from you, its your money. You can always say that there is a rapists out there that could attack you and so on, but at some point you are not careful, rather just paranoid.
    Reply With Quote
      #77   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
    Old November 17th, 2018 (11:34 AM).
    BronzeHeart92's Avatar
    BronzeHeart92 BronzeHeart92 is offline
       
      Join Date: Jun 2017
      Location: Finland
      Gender: Male
      Nature: Bold
      Posts: 235
      Quote:
      Originally Posted by Urrr View Post
      I agree. It seems to me that they believe the world is out to get them. The mexicas or south americans in general want there money and are also rapists and drugdealers with guns. The "terrorists", who's faces are rather nebulous, are also a threat, not just to national monuments, airport and so on, but to small citys and towns as well as individual homes. If that is not a problem its any number of criminals from within.

      But the world is not out to get you (killed). If they want anything from you, its your money. You can always say that there is a rapists out there that could attack you and so on, but at some point you are not careful, rather just paranoid.
      This is precisely why I wonder if these people had some sort of a trauma or something which would explain their 'sticking to their guns by all costs' attitude. Again, you could say they have bad eggs from the south of the border. But naturally, not all of them like that. And since nothing lasts forever, hopefully the countries in Central America can truly see peace at last free from these drug gangs. And yeah, being paranoid never does anyone any good.
      Reply With Quote
        #78   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
      Old November 17th, 2018 (1:16 PM).
      Nah's Avatar
      Nah Nah is offline
       
      Join Date: Nov 2013
      Age: 26
      Gender: Female
      Posts: 13,173
      Quote:
      Originally Posted by EnglishALT View Post
      I hope LDSman doesn't mind if I add in something here, but isn't a car just as powerful as a gun if not more powerful? In America there was the World Trade Center bombing and the Oklahoma City bombing that took out the side of a building with a van. In Europe there has been a rash of car killings these past few years, here in Japan there was a car attack in Akihabara that I can remember. Renting a car is even easier than getting a gun, and packed with the right explosives far more deadly. Even with out explosives, a car can kill a significant amount of people if driven onto a busy side walk at a high rate of speed.

      So I guess my question is, do you believe a car is too powerful of a tool for any average person to wield? Do you fear that any driver on the road could snap at any moment and tear onto the side walk?
      While one can kill a lot of people with a car (you can kill a person with a lot of things really), cars aren't really the best comparison given that their primary intended function is something other than killing.

      Quote:
      That all being said, I think there is one thing that could help curb gun crime in America, and that is to have something similar to a credit database. If I can go into say Wal Mart and within twenty seconds either get approved or denied for a credit card, why can't there be a database that can approve or deny someone just as quick for a gun purchase? If some one's committed a crime, has a history of mental problems, has a restraining order against them, etc etc etc, the name is checked and either confirmed or denied for the purchase within 10 seconds with out giving a reason why, only a number for the person to call. It would maintain privacy and could be mandatory for any firearm transaction.
      Unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean, the US basically has that already. When you go to legally purchase a gun, a background check is performed, which as far as I know is mandatory nationwide and primarily looks at documented mental illnesses and felony convictions.

      Federal law prohibits convicted felons and, iirc, persons with known mental illnesses from being able to purchase firearms.

      ---

      That brings me though to a (sort of unrelated) question I have:

      Quote:
      Originally Posted by LDSman View Post
      boop
      Do you (or if anyone else happens to know the answer, feel free to chime in) happen to know how state and federal law interacts regarding guns? I think in some other thread it was mentioned how Alaska does not have a law that explicitly states that convicted felons cannot purchase guns, while most of the rest of the states do. Is a state having a law barring felons from buying guns redundant when federal law already bars them? Does federal law always supersede state law when it comes to guns, or no?
      __________________
      Nah ンン
      “No, I... I have to be strong. Everyone expects me to."
      Reply With Quote
        #79   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
      Old November 17th, 2018 (4:14 PM). Edited November 17th, 2018 by EnglishALT.
      EnglishALT EnglishALT is online now
         
        Join Date: Nov 2018
        Location: Japan
        Gender: Male
        Nature: Relaxed
        Posts: 142
        Quote:
        Originally Posted by BronzeHeart92 View Post
        Hey, attacks over here are obviously the exception rather than the rule. No need to be so cynical about our safety over here at all. That said, guns simply make it easier to kill people, no exception. And that's why I'm worried about the future of America's children growing up in a world where every day could be their last. And besides, so tired of people treating cars and knives like dangerous objects. They after all have purposes other than killing people, you know. In that light, making such comparisons is absolutely stupid.
        They do have other purposes but they are inheriently dangerous objects. In 2017 there was 40,000 people killed in car accidents in America, on the other hand only 15,000 were killed by guns. This according to USA Today and The Week UK. So which should I fear more from dying from?

        Furthermore your argument is that you fear traveling to America out of fear from being shot by someone essentially going “postal” to use an old 90s term. Yet continue to ignore that even with out a gun the vast majority of the public around the world has access to a killing machine no matter what purpose it serves.

        Quote:
        Originally Posted by BronzeHeart
        This is precisely why I wonder if these people had some sort of a trauma or something which would explain their 'sticking to their guns by all costs' attitude. Again, you could say they have bad eggs from the south of the border. But naturally, not all of them like that. And since nothing lasts forever, hopefully the countries in Central America can truly see peace at last free from these drug gangs. And yeah, being paranoid never does anyone any good.
        It is important to remember why guns are so important to the constitution of the United States, in fact I would say the second amendment is the most important amendment of them all. The reason being is the second amendment was written after an armed populous had just defeated the most powerful army in the world and shook off the government controlling them. The founding fathers clearly believed that their experiment in self government could become a tyranny similar to the one they just gained independence from. So they made sure the populous had the functional weaponry to rebel if need be. With out the fear that the populous can rise up and overthrow you, violently if need be, then all the other rights granted are nothing more than suggestions.

        Quote:
        Originally Posted by Nah
        While one can kill a lot of people with a car (you can kill a person with a lot of things really), cars aren't really the best comparison given that their primary intended function is something other than killing.
        I would say their intended function is irrelevant, if you fear someone is going to engage in a mass shooting, I would argue being hit with a car is just a valid fear especially considering the rash of cars used in terror attacks across Europe in the past few years.
        Reply With Quote
          #80   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
        Old November 17th, 2018 (6:17 PM). Edited November 17th, 2018 by LDSman.
        LDSman LDSman is offline
           
          Join Date: Dec 2017
          Posts: 246
          Quote:
          Originally Posted by BronzeHeart92 View Post
          What reason there would be for our government to give up power like that? We have other things to concern ourselves with than whoever has the biggest gun after all.
          Its lends itself to creating classes of people. Those with power and those without. Do your politicians have armed bodyguards? Why? Are their lives worth more than yours?


          Quote:
          As you might have surmised, guns are in fact a privilege around here, not meant for self-defence at all. Because how HARD they are obtain, no one's likely carrying them in first place and thus I do feel safe. And if there was a maniac with a car around, suffice for me to say that I wouldn't be here, talking to you.



          What reasons there would be for any of MY neighbors be in a cult? Aren't you just making assumptions here?
          I feel like you're intentionally missing the point.

          Quote:
          Originally Posted by BronzeHeart92 View Post
          Hey, attacks over here are obviously the exception rather than the rule. No need to be so cynical about our safety over here at all. That said, guns simply make it easier to kill people, no exception.
          A lot of things make it easier to kill people. You know what else a gun does? It makes it easier for granny to defend herself against thugs.

          Quote:
          And that's why I'm worried about the future of America's children growing up in a world where every day could be their last.
          You are so full of it.

          Quote:
          And besides, so tired of people treating cars and knives like dangerous objects. They after all have purposes other than killing people, you know. In that light, making such comparisons is absolutely stupid.
          Not really. Why does it matter how someone died? You think its better if a kid is killed by a SUV than a gun?

          Quote:
          Originally Posted by Urrr View Post
          I agree. It seems to me that they believe the world is out to get them. The mexicas or south americans in general want there money and are also rapists and drugdealers with guns. The "terrorists", who's faces are rather nebulous, are also a threat, not just to national monuments, airport and so on, but to small citys and towns as well as individual homes. If that is not a problem its any number of criminals from within.
          Muk happens. Being prepared to respond is a good thing.

          Quote:
          But the world is not out to get you (killed). If they want anything from you, its your money. You can always say that there is a rapists out there that could attack you and so on, but at some point you are not careful, rather just paranoid.
          I can point out any number of muggings that turned into homicides just because the mugger went "why not?"

          Quote:
          Originally Posted by BronzeHeart92 View Post
          This is precisely why I wonder if these people had some sort of a trauma or something which would explain their 'sticking to their guns by all costs' attitude. Again, you could say they have bad eggs from the south of the border. But naturally, not all of them like that. And since nothing lasts forever, hopefully the countries in Central America can truly see peace at last free from these drug gangs. And yeah, being paranoid never does anyone any good.
          You're a pretentious one aren't you? What kind of trauma did you experience to be so afraid of gun owners in a different country?

          Guns are tools like fire extinguishers. Having access to either is not paranoia.

          Quote:
          Originally Posted by Nah View Post
          While one can kill a lot of people with a car (you can kill a person with a lot of things really), cars aren't really the best comparison given that their primary intended function is something other than killing.
          one would think its worse. Cars aren't meant to kill people yet they do at a higher rate than guns.


          Quote:
          That brings me though to a (sort of unrelated) question I have:


          Do you (or if anyone else happens to know the answer, feel free to chime in) happen to know how state and federal law interacts regarding guns? I think in some other thread it was mentioned how Alaska does not have a law that explicitly states that convicted felons cannot purchase guns, while most of the rest of the states do. Is a state having a law barring felons from buying guns redundant when federal law already bars them? Does federal law always supersede state law when it comes to guns, or no?
          In general, federal law is supposed to trump things. However in practice it depends on the state. Look at how some cities/states ignore immigration laws. The Alaska thing is wrong.
          https://www.quora.com/If-Im-a-felon-in-Alaska-what-gun-rights-do-I-have
          Alaska is....unique... Ass end of nowhere, separate from the US and lots of subsistence hunting.


          Quote:
          Originally Posted by Urrr View Post
          1. "You can't get every threat." - True. And thus it is also true that no matter how many guns you have, there will always be someone starting a shoting, and until you have gunned him down, he will have killed multiple people already.
          Not always. There have been multiple cases of people preventing multiple fatalities.

          Quote:
          A Riot is not a reason to use your gun, which you claim is for self-defense.
          "Use" has many definitions. Koreans with rifles stood on the business roofs and simply being there convinced the rioters to go a different direction.

          Quote:
          As long as you are not about to be raped, killed, maimed or otherwise bodily harmed, shooting someone is a crime. Same is true for "looting and violence". Violence might be a reason to use a gun. Looting however is stealing, just as lighting a car on fire in a riot is destroying property. These are not reasons to use guns. Especially, as someone said before, if it is so hard to shot not to kill.
          Looters and arsonists should be shot. Maybe it'll end the riot with fewer injuries.
          Quote:
          2. If you live many hours from a police station, fine, you propably need something for self defense in your house. However, do you need semi-automatic rifles for that?
          Why does it matter what a person uses?
          Quote:
          3. My argument hinges on the point whether or not your citizens are law-abiding. You are correct in that you can never get 100% there. Yet, this doesnt change the fact that your main argument for having guns is because you want to defend yourself and your family. Do you live in a nice suburban area? Or in the city? Or in a 500 soul village? Where would you need to defend yourself?
          Self defense is self defense no matter where you live. Why does it matter?

          Quote:
          If at home, then because someone broke into your house. Do you have the time and space to use anything bigger than a handgun? Do you need semi-automativ rifles for that?
          Again with this distinction. Most homes are big enough to use rifles in.

          Quote:
          If not at home, are you able to carry your gun anywhere? If yes, even your semi-automatic rifle? Or any rifle for that matter? No? So what do you need those for?
          It varies by state. Some states allow carrying a rifle around. Others don't. Mainly because whiny babies complained. What part of Constitutional Right are you having trouble understanding?
          Reply With Quote
            #81   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
          Old November 17th, 2018 (7:40 PM). Edited November 17th, 2018 by Urrr.
          Urrr's Avatar
          Urrr Urrr is offline
          Devil's Advocate
             
            Join Date: Aug 2017
            Gender: Male
            Nature: Modest
            Posts: 18
            Quote:
            Originally Posted by LDSman View Post

            1. Not always. There have been multiple cases of people preventing multiple fatalities.

            2. "Use" has many definitions. Koreans with rifles stood on the business roofs and simply being there convinced the rioters to go a different direction.


            3. Looters and arsonists should be shot. Maybe it'll end the riot with fewer injuries.

            4.Why does it matter what a person uses?
            Self defense is self defense no matter where you live. Why does it matter?
            Again with this distinction. Most homes are big enough to use rifles in.
            It varies by state. Some states allow carrying a rifle around. Others don't. Mainly because whiny babies complained. What part of Constitutional Right are you having trouble understanding?
            1. Just as there have been multiple cases of people being murdered by the dozen, before someone stops them, even though, as you argue, lax gun regulations should mean the opposite.

            2. True, but than again, the same thing could have been achieve by the police. And if you argue that the police isnt trained well enough, or hasnt enough funds, then why dont you fix that first, rather then compensating by giving everyone firearms.

            3. And that sentence right there should be the reason you should not be allowed to have a gun. Because you are not defending yourselfs, but rather perform vigilante justice. If you shot someone because he tries to steal something of your property (and kill him), then you have murdered someone. You may get (partly) away with it, but you still killed someone in cold blood. If you believe in god, or rather judgement, then rethink your life choices.

            4. It matters, because, if you where serious with your claim of self defence, then the logical option would be to use something that is easy to handle, not unwieldy and easy to store. Why use a rifle of any kind if a handgun does its job just as well, or better and is even cheaper to buy?
            Same goes for going outside. Do you carry a rifle everywhere you go? The woods, the city, grocery shopping, taking your kid to school and so on... Do you go into a cinema with your semi-automatic rifle on?


            In general I would like to say, rather than insult commenters you dont agree with, you should try and produce a logical argument that proves your point. And instead of falling back on your argument that "firearms are a constitutional right", you should try and convince people why that is still in need today. No law is perfect. Times are changing (morally, technologically, and otherwise). Laws can be changed.
            Reply With Quote
              #82   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
            Old November 17th, 2018 (7:53 PM).
            EnglishALT EnglishALT is online now
               
              Join Date: Nov 2018
              Location: Japan
              Gender: Male
              Nature: Relaxed
              Posts: 142
              Quote:
              Originally Posted by Urrr View Post
              2. True, but than again, the same thing could have been achieve by the police. And if you argue that the police isnt trained well enough, or hasnt enough funds, then why dont you fix that first, rather then compensating by giving everyone firearms.

              3. And that sentence right there should be the reason you should not be allowed to have a gun. Because you are not defending yourselfs, but rather perform vigilante justice. If you shot someone because he tries to steal something of your property (and kill him), then you have murdered someone. You may get (partly) away with it, but you still killed someone in cold blood. If you believe in god, or rather judgement, then rethink your life choices.
              There are times however where the police are either overwhelmed as we saw in the LA riots mentioned, or pull back and allow the riot/looters to wear themselves out as we have seen in Baltimore or Ferguson.

              As for murdering some one for stealing or destroying your property, I can see where you come from with it being murder. However the ones who are most affected by say riots or looting tend to be poorer and lower class businesses, again pointing back to the LA riots, or the Ferguson riots. For many people this business is their life's work, and in many cases it is their life. Destroying it either by stealing everything inside, or burning the building down is something that they will never be able to recover from. Do you believe that they should not be able to protect something they worked ten, twenty, maybe even thirty years to build up, and not have it destroyed by an angry mob?
              Reply With Quote
                #83   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
              Old November 17th, 2018 (9:50 PM).
              Marth's Avatar
              Marth Marth is offline
               
              Join Date: Jun 2013
              Location: Canada
              Age: 29
              Nature: Timid
              Posts: 15,328
              I'd say yes to gun control laws (like background checks, registrations, limiting their use) because there IS less instance of gun violence in countries with stricter laws.
              Also if you really wanna kill someone be a man and stab them.
              __________________

              Reply With Quote
                #84   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
              Old November 18th, 2018 (12:02 AM).
              BronzeHeart92's Avatar
              BronzeHeart92 BronzeHeart92 is offline
                 
                Join Date: Jun 2017
                Location: Finland
                Gender: Male
                Nature: Bold
                Posts: 235
                Quote:
                Originally Posted by EnglishALT View Post
                They do have other purposes but they are inheriently dangerous objects. In 2017 there was 40,000 people killed in car accidents in America, on the other hand only 15,000 were killed by guns. This according to USA Today and The Week UK. So which should I fear more from dying from?

                Furthermore your argument is that you fear traveling to America out of fear from being shot by someone essentially going “postal” to use an old 90s term. Yet continue to ignore that even with out a gun the vast majority of the public around the world has access to a killing machine no matter what purpose it serves.
                Yup, that's exactly it. Over here in Europe, I don't need to fear PRECICELY because we can't buy guns like you could any other item. From my perspective, that's obviously alien and wrong. Can you imagine a store here with a prominent gun section? And again, cars aren't meant for killing.

                Quote:
                It is important to remember why guns are so important to the constitution of the United States, in fact I would say the second amendment is the most important amendment of them all. The reason being is the second amendment was written after an armed populous had just defeated the most powerful army in the world and shook off the government controlling them. The founding fathers clearly believed that their experiment in self government could become a tyranny similar to the one they just gained independence from. So they made sure the populous had the functional weaponry to rebel if need be. With out the fear that the populous can rise up and overthrow you, violently if need be, then all the other rights granted are nothing more than suggestions.
                Except this world has changed a lot since the 18th century when the constitution was written, yes? How is that we HAVEN'T become a tyranny yet, again? Sure, USA might have places where the outreach of emergency services are rather limited. But then, nothing lasts forever and these places might get sufficient coverage after all, no matter if it takes years or even decades. That aside, from what I have read, you pro-gun people apparently fear too much government intervention in your lives, yes? That really makes me wonder...
                Reply With Quote
                  #85   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
                Old November 18th, 2018 (12:32 AM).
                EnglishALT EnglishALT is online now
                   
                  Join Date: Nov 2018
                  Location: Japan
                  Gender: Male
                  Nature: Relaxed
                  Posts: 142
                  Quote:
                  Originally Posted by BronzeHeart92 View Post
                  Yup, that's exactly it. Over here in Europe, I don't need to fear PRECICELY because we can't buy guns like you could any other item. From my perspective, that's obviously alien and wrong. Can you imagine a store here with a prominent gun section? And again, cars aren't meant for killing.
                  For the third, forth, fifth time, what a car is meant for is irrelevant.

                  You have said, that you fear traveling to the U.S. because you believe some one will snap and shoot you.

                  Now tell me honestly, yes or no, do you believe that a person who has 'snapped' that wants to commit mass murder, will look at his one or two ton car, will look at his butcher's knife, will look at his computer where he can google up bomb materials and say. "Well I want to kill people, but I don't have a gun so I just can't do it."

                  Please, tell me, do you honestly believe that the lack of access to a firearm, will prevent someone who wants to murder, from killing? Yes or no?

                  Quote:
                  Originally Posted by BronzeHeart92 View Post
                  Except this world has changed a lot since the 18th century when the constitution was written, yes? How is that we HAVEN'T become a tyranny yet, again? Sure, USA might have places where the outreach of emergency services are rather limited. But then, nothing lasts forever and these places might get sufficient coverage after all, no matter if it takes years or even decades. That aside, from what I have read, you pro-gun people apparently fear too much government intervention in your lives, yes? That really makes me wonder...
                  So we haven't become a tyranny, thus there is no chance that one will happen in the future? Do you believe that if we were to travel back to Venezuela in 1998 when Hugo Chavez was elected, and said "Guys, don't do it, this guy will lead you down to the road of dictatorship and tyranny" anyone would have honestly believed us? Or how about Turkey, a nation that a decade ago was seriously considered becoming a part of the EU and Europe, that anyone would have believed that the election of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, would lead them to the tyranny the people of Turkey experience today?

                  Tyranny is not something that comes with a big flashing banner and strobe lights. It can be insidious and usually comes in the time of crisis or war in which the public is not focused on the erosion of their rights. Just because you believe it is X year, does not mean that it is any less of a threat to people now or in the future.
                  Reply With Quote
                    #86   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
                  Old November 18th, 2018 (4:08 AM). Edited November 18th, 2018 by Urrr.
                  Urrr's Avatar
                  Urrr Urrr is offline
                  Devil's Advocate
                     
                    Join Date: Aug 2017
                    Gender: Male
                    Nature: Modest
                    Posts: 18
                    Quote:
                    Originally Posted by EnglishALT View Post
                    1.There are times however where the police are either overwhelmed as we saw in the LA riots mentioned, or pull back and allow the riot/looters to wear themselves out as we have seen in Baltimore or Ferguson.

                    2.As for murdering some one for stealing or destroying your property, I can see where you come from with it being murder. However the ones who are most affected by say riots or looting tend to be poorer and lower class businesses, again pointing back to the LA riots, or the Ferguson riots. For many people this business is their life's work, and in many cases it is their life. Destroying it either by stealing everything inside, or burning the building down is something that they will never be able to recover from. Do you believe that they should not be able to protect something they worked ten, twenty, maybe even thirty years to build up, and not have it destroyed by an angry mob?
                    1.If the police are overwhelmed, then because they do not have either enough staff, training or funds, which again goes back to my point. Pointing out where in recent history this lack was the case doesnt help your argument.

                    2. No. If you shot someone because he attacks your store you build for 20 years, then yes, you are have murdered someone, and it doesnt matter what class they are. Just because you have less, doesnt mean you can get away with a crime. If you suggest that material goods are more important than a human life, fine be that way. But, in your scenario we would have a whole riot on our hands. Do you suggest your friendly store owner gun down a dozen people, just so they cant steal from him?
                    If you dont answer this question in your head with a immediate "NO", then sorry, your moral values are screwed.
                    Also one thing, if you have worked 20 years for your dream shop, then there is something called insurance any reasonable person with a property available to the public should have.


                    PS: I can not help but wonder why you let out number 1. of my orignial post you quoted. Had nothing to say about it?
                    Reply With Quote
                      #87   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
                    Old November 18th, 2018 (4:14 AM).
                    BronzeHeart92's Avatar
                    BronzeHeart92 BronzeHeart92 is offline
                       
                      Join Date: Jun 2017
                      Location: Finland
                      Gender: Male
                      Nature: Bold
                      Posts: 235
                      Quote:
                      Originally Posted by EnglishALT View Post
                      For the third, forth, fifth time, what a car is meant for is irrelevant.

                      You have said, that you fear traveling to the U.S. because you believe some one will snap and shoot you.

                      Now tell me honestly, yes or no, do you believe that a person who has 'snapped' that wants to commit mass murder, will look at his one or two ton car, will look at his butcher's knife, will look at his computer where he can google up bomb materials and say. "Well I want to kill people, but I don't have a gun so I just can't do it."

                      Please, tell me, do you honestly believe that the lack of access to a firearm, will prevent someone who wants to murder, from killing? Yes or no?



                      So we haven't become a tyranny, thus there is no chance that one will happen in the future? Do you believe that if we were to travel back to Venezuela in 1998 when Hugo Chavez was elected, and said "Guys, don't do it, this guy will lead you down to the road of dictatorship and tyranny" anyone would have honestly believed us? Or how about Turkey, a nation that a decade ago was seriously considered becoming a part of the EU and Europe, that anyone would have believed that the election of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, would lead them to the tyranny the people of Turkey experience today?

                      Tyranny is not something that comes with a big flashing banner and strobe lights. It can be insidious and usually comes in the time of crisis or war in which the public is not focused on the erosion of their rights. Just because you believe it is X year, does not mean that it is any less of a threat to people now or in the future.
                      1. No need to be so cynical, friend. True, crimes do happen over here on occasion. But they will be investigated as expected in a functional society. Got something against law enforcement and other authorities perhaps? Yes, humans can kill without firearms, that's a fact. But really, we are a safe society regardless. And that's something to be appreciated.

                      2. True. But hey, we DO remember what happened once Nazis came to power, right? It's all we can do in order to NOT repeat that mistake at all. In case of Poland and Hungary, one can hope EU can intervene before their situation gets too out of hand. Dunno about Turkey but it's certain Mr. Erdogan's a nutcase who should NOT be in a position of authority in first place.
                      Reply With Quote
                        #88   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
                      Old November 18th, 2018 (4:40 AM). Edited November 18th, 2018 by EnglishALT.
                      EnglishALT EnglishALT is online now
                         
                        Join Date: Nov 2018
                        Location: Japan
                        Gender: Male
                        Nature: Relaxed
                        Posts: 142
                        Quote:
                        Originally Posted by Urrr View Post
                        1.If the police are overwhelmed, then because they do not have either enough staff, training or funds, which again goes back to my point. Pointing out where in recent history this lack was the case doesnt help your argument.
                        The only time I can remember in which the police were completely overwhelmed and it wasn't a stand down order, is the South Central LA riots in 1992, which were so large, so dangerous, that the national guard had to be called in under the orders of the Governor, and the marines and army were called in under the President. Something that large and dangerous, where not only the national guard but the marines were used tells me that no amount of staff, training, or funds would have allowed the police to handle themselves.

                        Quote:
                        Originally Posted by Urrr View Post
                        2. No. If you shot someone because he attacks your store you build for 20 years, then yes, you are have murdered someone, and it doesnt matter what class they are. Just because you have less, doesnt mean you can get away with a crime. If you suggest that material goods are more important than a human life, fine be that way. But, in your scenario we would have a whole riot on our hands. Do you suggest your friendly store owner gun down a dozen people, just so they cant steal from him?
                        If you dont answer this question in your head with a immediate "NO", then sorry, your moral values are screwed.
                        Also one thing, if you have worked 20 years for your dream shop, then there is something called insurance any reasonable person with a property available to the public should have.
                        You automatically assume that a poor store owner has the insurance coverage that would cover such a thing. We know from these riots they do not.

                        Furthermore even if Insurance does cover everything, it can take months for the money to come, and what would you suggest a business do while they wait? What should they do with their employees? Many businesses would not be willing to rebuild in such a dangerous area and risk full destruction all over again leading them to move, meaning a loss of income to a already poor city and the loss of jobs and income for those that worked there. Should we not care about all of those lives as well?

                        Now it is interesting that you called it a crime. Many states have laws that allow for the use of deadly force to prevent arson, but do not allow for mere looting.

                        "“…is justified in using reasonable physical force upon another person when and to the extent that he reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of a criminal trespass by such other person in or upon such premises; but he may use deadly physical force under such circumstances only (1) in defense of a person as prescribed in section 53a-19, or (2) when he reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent an attempt by the trespasser to commit arson or any crime of violence, or (3) to the extent that he reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate an unlawful entry by force into his dwelling…”

                        https://www.theridgefieldpress.com/89954-hulda-lane-shooting-when-is-it-legal-to-use-deadly-force/

                        That I would say seems reasonable as committing arson, burning down a building can create a situation where the fire can spread to other nearby buildings and endanger lives.

                        I also think it is important to draw a distinction between say a shoplifter, and say a violent riot such as in Ferguson, Baltimore, or South Central LA, in one there is very little fear going on, in another it is a violet mob against you and possibly a few others you rounded up. There is no guarantee that when they attack your shop, they will not kill you as well.

                        When I am thinking of this for example I am thinking back to the Korean store owners that stood on top of their shops during the South Central LA riots, while they may have injured if not outright killed a few people who went to attack their shops, their actions saved their town from a lot of devastation and possibly even more loss of life.

                        Quote:
                        Originally Posted by Urrr View Post
                        PS: I can not help but wonder why you let out number 1. of my orignial post you quoted. Had nothing to say about it?
                        I honestly did not want to step all over the discussion you were having with LDSman, and just wanted to acknowledge a few parts.

                        Quote:
                        Originally Posted by BronzeHeart92
                        1. No need to be so cynical, friend. True, crimes do happen over here on occasion. But they will be investigated as expected in a functional society. Got something against law enforcement and other authorities perhaps? Yes, humans can kill without firearms, that's a fact. But really, we are a safe society regardless. And that's something to be appreciated.
                        Which is the same can be said about the U.S. or practically any other first world country. What is your point and how does it relate to your fear of being shot when you travel to the U.S.?
                        Reply With Quote
                          #89   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
                        Old November 18th, 2018 (5:03 AM).
                        gimmepie's Avatar
                        gimmepie gimmepie is offline
                         
                        Join Date: May 2012
                        Location: Australia
                        Age: 23
                        Gender: Male
                        Nature: Adamant
                        Posts: 19,240
                        So, I don't really have the time for long responses or anything atm but two things did jump out at me from an earlier reply.

                        Doesn't it seem a bit odd to anyone else that the number of users of a gun in self-defence eclipses the number of guns used in criminal activity? I know that not all dangerous/violet/potentially deadly crimes make use of guns - most probably don't, but I get the impression that there's more than a few people defending themselves with deadly force when it's just not needed?

                        Second, more of a question than anything, what can be done about current gun control laws not being properly enforced? I think we can agree on both sides that's a problem that needs to be addressed.
                        __________________
                        Reply With Quote
                          #90   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
                        Old November 18th, 2018 (5:11 AM).
                        BronzeHeart92's Avatar
                        BronzeHeart92 BronzeHeart92 is offline
                           
                          Join Date: Jun 2017
                          Location: Finland
                          Gender: Male
                          Nature: Bold
                          Posts: 235
                          Quote:
                          Originally Posted by EnglishALT View Post

                          Which is the same can be said about the U.S. or practically any other first world country. What is your point and how does it relate to your fear of being shot when you travel to the U.S.?
                          Make no mistake, I don't wan't go to USA because I don't want someone shooting at me while there. But you could definitely say there's an ideological reason behind it as well. In this day and age, why USA still has that 2nd Amendment is quite a mystery. Again, this isn't the 18th century anymore, yes? Society has advanced since then and it's not unreasonable that someone might see Americans as literal barbarians for 'sticking to their guns' still. Fortunately, I don't hate Americans in general.
                          Reply With Quote
                            #91   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
                          Old November 18th, 2018 (5:12 AM). Edited November 18th, 2018 by EnglishALT.
                          EnglishALT EnglishALT is online now
                             
                            Join Date: Nov 2018
                            Location: Japan
                            Gender: Male
                            Nature: Relaxed
                            Posts: 142
                            Quote:
                            Originally Posted by gimmepie View Post
                            So, I don't really have the time for long responses or anything atm but two things did jump out at me from an earlier reply.

                            Doesn't it seem a bit odd to anyone else that the number of users of a gun in self-defence eclipses the number of guns used in criminal activity? I know that not all dangerous/violet/potentially deadly crimes make use of guns - most probably don't, but I get the impression that there's more than a few people defending themselves with deadly force when it's just not needed?
                            I wouldn't say that is too surprising, just because a gun was used in self defense does not mean the attacker did not possess a knife, or was far stronger than the victim, or was attempting to attack the victim in greater numbers. If a large male attacker using only his strength attempts to rape a gun carrying smaller woman, I doubt any one expects her to suddenly forgo the use of her gun just because he doesn't have one.

                            Quote:
                            Originally Posted by BronzeHeart92 View Post
                            Make no mistake, I don't wan't go to USA because I don't want someone shooting at me while there. But you could definitely say there's an ideological reason behind it as well. In this day and age, why USA still has that 2nd Amendment is quite a mystery. Again, this isn't the 18th century anymore, yes? Society has advanced since then and it's not unreasonable that someone might see Americans as literal barbarians for 'sticking to their guns' still. Fortunately, I don't hate Americans in general.
                            I can understand that and I do appreciate your candor. There is a safety aspect, there is a fear of tyranny aspect as we have already covered, and most importantly I think there is the aspect that there is a large thriving black market on America's southern border. Like with weed and other drugs, if the government attempts to outlaw something, the cartels will move in and fill that void, difference is the weapons the cartels bring tend not to be registered or traceable.

                            In all honesty, every country within the next twenty to forty years is going to need to come up with better regulations and openness with gun ownership. We have already seen the distribution of 3D printed gun plans over the internet, Pandora's box is already open, and as time progresses it will become easier and easier for anyone with a 3D printer to create a gun. Having control over your borders to prevent illegal items coming in for the black market like firearms will soon be meaningless.
                            Reply With Quote
                              #92   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
                            Old November 18th, 2018 (6:16 AM). Edited November 18th, 2018 by LDSman.
                            LDSman LDSman is offline
                               
                              Join Date: Dec 2017
                              Posts: 246
                              Quote:
                              Originally Posted by Urrr View Post
                              1. Just as there have been multiple cases of people being murdered by the dozen, before someone stops them, even though, as you argue, lax gun regulations should mean the opposite.
                              Honestly not sure what you are saying here.
                              Quote:
                              2. True, but than again, the same thing could have been achieve by the police. And if you argue that the police isnt trained well enough, or hasnt enough funds, then why dont you fix that first, rather then compensating by giving everyone firearms.
                              Answered by Eng. Police aren't/can't be everywhere. And that assumes the police will care enough to respond.

                              Quote:
                              3. And that sentence right there should be the reason you should not be allowed to have a gun. Because you are not defending yourselfs, but rather perform vigilante justice. If you shot someone because he tries to steal something of your property (and kill him), then you have murdered someone. You may get (partly) away with it, but you still killed someone in cold blood. If you believe in god, or rather judgement, then rethink your life choices.
                              Watching people steal from people who have been hit by a disaster just pisses me off.

                              4
                              Quote:
                              . It matters, because, if you where serious with your claim of self defence, then the logical option would be to use something that is easy to handle, not unwieldy and easy to store. Why use a rifle of any kind if a handgun does its job just as well, or better and is even cheaper to buy?
                              Rifles are easy to handle. In some cases, easier than handguns. Also cheaper depending on what you get.

                              Quote:
                              Same goes for going outside. Do you carry a rifle everywhere you go? The woods, the city, grocery shopping, taking your kid to school and so on... Do you go into a cinema with your semi-automatic rifle on?
                              So if I don't take it everywhere it should be banned?


                              Quote:
                              In general I would like to say, rather than insult commenters you dont agree with, you should try and produce a logical argument that proves your point. And instead of falling back on your argument that "firearms are a constitutional right", you should try and convince people why that is still in need today. No law is perfect. Times are changing (morally, technologically, and otherwise). Laws can be changed.
                              Defensive gun use far outstrips criminal gun use. I don't need to justify a Right. Do you wish to justify freedom of religion, speech, fair trials, etc?

                              As far as insulting, being called paranoid or suffering from some unknown trauma tends to irritate me.

                              Quote:
                              Originally Posted by Zeke View Post
                              I'd say yes to gun control laws (like background checks, registrations, limiting their use) because there IS less instance of gun violence in countries with stricter laws.
                              Also if you really wanna kill someone be a man and stab them.
                              Well that's sexist and stupid. Why would I risk serious injury in a knife fight when I can just shoot them instead?

                              Quote:
                              Originally Posted by BronzeHeart92 View Post
                              Yup, that's exactly it. Over here in Europe, I don't need to fear PRECICELY because we can't buy guns like you could any other item.
                              Seems like you fear Americans more than you fear guns.

                              Quote:
                              From my perspective, that's obviously alien and wrong.
                              Because you refuse to learn anything about guns.



                              Quote:
                              Except this world has changed a lot since the 18th century when the constitution was written, yes? How is that we HAVEN'T become a tyranny yet, again? Sure, USA might have places where the outreach of emergency services are rather limited. But then, nothing lasts forever and these places might get sufficient coverage after all, no matter if it takes years or even decades. That aside, from what I have read, you pro-gun people apparently fear too much government intervention in your lives, yes? That really makes me wonder...
                              A free people don't need the government acting like nannies taking care of particularly stupid small children.

                              Quote:
                              Originally Posted by Urrr View Post
                              But, in your scenario we would have a whole riot on our hands. Do you suggest your friendly store owner gun down a dozen people, just so they cant steal from him?
                              Most rioters will run away after the first couple drop. At is more about not knowing what the rioters are planning. Do you let them burn your house/store down while your family is inside? Do you bring your family outside where the mob can curb stomp, beat, rape and kill them or do you shoot a few and make them run?

                              Quote:
                              If you dont answer this question in your head with a immediate "NO", then sorry, your moral values are screwed.
                              What are your values if you would let your family die to spare strangers?

                              Quote:
                              Also one thing, if you have worked 20 years for your dream shop, then there is something called insurance any reasonable person with a property available to the public should have.
                              Not all insurance covers "civil unrest" and payouts can take awhile. Sometimes deductibles are really high.



                              Quote:
                              Originally Posted by BronzeHeart92 View Post
                              1. No need to be so cynical, friend. True, crimes do happen over here on occasion. But they will be investigated as expected in a functional society. Got something against law enforcement and other authorities perhaps? Yes, humans can kill without firearms, that's a fact. But really, we are a safe society regardless. And that's something to be appreciated.
                              Not all law enforcement is honest. And the US is mostly a safe society, Its a big country. Some areas are less safe.

                              Quote:
                              2. True. But hey, we DO remember what happened once Nazis came to power, right? It's all we can do in order to NOT repeat that mistake at all. In case of Poland and Hungary, one can hope EU can intervene before their situation gets too out of hand. Dunno about Turkey but it's certain Mr. Erdogan's a nutcase who should NOT be in a position of authority in first place.
                              Obvious difference between us. You want outside intervention after things get bad. I believe intervention should be from within and sooner.

                              Quote:
                              Originally Posted by gimmepie View Post
                              So, I don't really have the time for long responses or anything atm but two things did jump out at me from an earlier reply.

                              Doesn't it seem a bit odd to anyone else that the number of users of a gun in self-defence eclipses the number of guns used in criminal activity? I know that not all dangerous/violet/potentially deadly crimes make use of guns - most probably don't, but I get the impression that there's more than a few people defending themselves with deadly force when it's just not needed?
                              Its not odd to me. Most criminals want an easy crime and will run from people they either find to be armed or think are armed. Take a purse from an old lady, knock an old man out and grab his wallet, burgle a home thought to be empty. Problem is that the victims don't know what the intent is. Take the purse, then drag the old woman to ATMs around the city, then decide that the old woman is cute and then kill her afterwards because you just committed multiple felonies and she saw your face.
                              Mugger approaches an old woman, old woman recognizes his behavior as mugger aggressive and grabs her gun in her purse. Mugger recognizes the movement as "she saw me and might be armed." he goes elsewhere post haste. DGU. Person tries to kick in door and homeowner yells "I have a gun and I'm calling the police!" Burglar runs. Maybe it was the gun, maybe it was the call. There was a case of a housewife with kids shooting a guy who kicked in multiple doors to get to them. Front door, then bedroom door and then crawl space door despite clear yells of "I have a gun and I've called the police." Audio on 911 call. If anything, I think the numbers are under reported. Some district attorneys will treat that as "brandishing" and arrest the potential victim.

                              Quote:
                              Second, more of a question than anything, what can be done about current gun control laws not being properly enforced? I think we can agree on both sides that's a problem that needs to be addressed.
                              Either get rid of the unenforced laws or start fining the people who are supposed to be enforcing those laws.

                              Quote:
                              Originally Posted by BronzeHeart92 View Post
                              Make no mistake, I don't wan't go to USA because I don't want someone shooting at me while there. But you could definitely say there's an ideological reason behind it as well. In this day and age, why USA still has that 2nd Amendment is quite a mystery. Again, this isn't the 18th century anymore, yes? Society has advanced since then and it's not unreasonable that someone might see Americans as literal barbarians for 'sticking to their guns' still. Fortunately, I don't hate Americans in general.
                              I've lived in the US for 38 years and have never been shot at. Stay out of the gang neighborhoods and don't deal drugs and you'll be fine.
                              Reply With Quote
                                #93   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
                              Old November 18th, 2018 (6:31 AM).
                              BronzeHeart92's Avatar
                              BronzeHeart92 BronzeHeart92 is offline
                                 
                                Join Date: Jun 2017
                                Location: Finland
                                Gender: Male
                                Nature: Bold
                                Posts: 235
                                Australia is an interesting, but difficult comparison to the US. What makes Australia interesting is how effective their TOTAL disarming was. What makes it difficult is that total disarmament in the US will not happen in the US anytime soon, if ever at all.

                                Total disarmament in the US would take a Constitutional Amendment, and one going against a very popular Amendment. You would probably need 75%+ of the US population in fervent support of total disarmament for it to even come close to happening. So the US ifs left with other options. We're stuck in an odd conundrum: pass laws that likely won't solve much of the problem, or continue to do nothing essentially thumbing our nose at victims of an obvious epidemic.

                                No form of partial gun control will make any major mark in the United States. Sure, background checks will make initial guns sales more difficult and may deter some people, but multiple problems arise. How many people would commit violent gun crimes who would have passed a background check? Likely a ton. How many guns exist on the secondary market and, either by loophole or black market, are not subject to background checks? A significant amount. Must we check a person's entire family and all acquaintances before granting a background check? Without this, someone's violent son, or neighbor, or mother, could easily take the gun and use it. In addition to all of these problems (and many more) as long as just 1 state has free gun laws, ALL US states have free gun laws. If West Virginia is handing out guns like candy on Halloween, all it takes is a long ride and those guns can go anywhere. There are no customs checks between states.

                                However, gun violence is an epidemic. Thousands of people are dying 100% PREVENTABLE DEATHS due to firearm violence, and by pure physics and nature of firearms (long range, easy to use prolifically), a good number of these people would not have been hurt as bad or at all if guns were not involved. Doing nothing is essentially shrugging our shoulders at all people affected by these crimes, whether it be directly or indirectly. We focused more effort on containing and preventing the spread of ebola than we have on guns, and ebola has a grand total of 0 deaths in the US.

                                How do we in the US acknowledge and put effort into solving this epidemic, but do so in a manner consistent with our laws, and in a manner that will actually be effective in any significant way?

                                Whomever finds out that answer deserves a Nobel Prize. Like 10 of them.

                                - Camarohusky from Newgrounds

                                Just dropping this here in case anyone's interested. Also, you should obviously realize that guns are not a 'right' outside USA, LDSman. Why should it be? We here in EU are doing fine as it is. Same for Japan, Australia etc. If you think WE need same gun 'rights' as you, I'd say you're pretty deluded on that front.
                                Reply With Quote
                                  #94   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
                                Old November 18th, 2018 (7:22 AM).
                                gimmepie's Avatar
                                gimmepie gimmepie is offline
                                 
                                Join Date: May 2012
                                Location: Australia
                                Age: 23
                                Gender: Male
                                Nature: Adamant
                                Posts: 19,240
                                We don't have total disarmament here. You can still buy and own a gun there's just heavy restrictions. I even know people who work in the gun industry and own guns.
                                __________________
                                Reply With Quote
                                  #95   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
                                Old November 18th, 2018 (7:39 AM).
                                LDSman LDSman is offline
                                   
                                  Join Date: Dec 2017
                                  Posts: 246
                                  Quote:
                                  Originally Posted by BronzeHeart92 View Post
                                  Australia is an interesting, but difficult comparison to the US. What makes Australia interesting is how effective their TOTAL disarming was.
                                  What GP said. No where near that.

                                  Quote:
                                  What makes it difficult is that total disarmament in the US will not happen in the US anytime soon, if ever at all.
                                  It'll never happen.

                                  Quote:
                                  Total disarmament in the US would take a Constitutional Amendment, and one going against a very popular Amendment. You would probably need 75%+ of the US population in fervent support of total disarmament for it to even come close to happening. So the US ifs left with other options. We're stuck in an odd conundrum: pass laws that likely won't solve much of the problem, or continue to do nothing essentially thumbing our nose at victims of an obvious epidemic.
                                  Or instead of useless gunlaws, look into stopping the violence.

                                  Quote:
                                  No form of partial gun control will make any major mark in the United States. Sure, background checks will make initial guns sales more difficult and may deter some people, but multiple problems arise. How many people would commit violent gun crimes who would have passed a background check? Likely a ton.
                                  Most of the gun violence is committed by people involved in drug deals and gang culture. They don't buy their guns legally. They get relatives to buy the guns (illegal) or they steal them (illegal).

                                  Quote:
                                  How many guns exist on the secondary market and, either by loophole or black market, are not subject to background checks? A significant amount. Must we check a person's entire family and all acquaintances before granting a background check? Without this, someone's violent son, or neighbor, or mother, could easily take the gun and use it.
                                  At that level of checks, you likely have a totalitarian society.

                                  Quote:
                                  In addition to all of these problems (and many more) as long as just 1 state has free gun laws, ALL US states have free gun laws. If West Virginia is handing out guns like candy on Halloween, all it takes is a long ride and those guns can go anywhere. There are no customs checks between states.
                                  Free? No state has "free" gun laws. And there is federal law about buying handguns between states. In addition, you STILL have to pass a background check.

                                  Quote:
                                  However, gun violence is an epidemic. Thousands of people are dying 100% PREVENTABLE DEATHS due to firearm violence, and by pure physics and nature of firearms (long range, easy to use prolifically), a good number of these people would not have been hurt as bad or at all if guns were not involved
                                  . Unprovable claim.

                                  Quote:
                                  Doing nothing is essentially shrugging our shoulders at all people affected by these crimes, whether it be directly or indirectly. We focused more effort on containing and preventing the spread of ebola than we have on guns, and ebola has a grand total of 0 deaths in the US.
                                  Bull muk. So much money and effort goes into preventing gun violence plus if ebola got lose in the US, it would kill far more than guns violence does. Stupid comparison.

                                  Quote:
                                  How do we in the US acknowledge and put effort into solving this epidemic, but do so in a manner consistent with our laws, and in a manner that will actually be effective in any significant way?
                                  That's the issue all right.

                                  Quote:
                                  Whomever finds out that answer deserves a Nobel Prize. Like 10 of them.

                                  - Camarohusky from Newgrounds
                                  Support your own arguments please.

                                  Quote:
                                  Just dropping this here in case anyone's interested. Also, you should obviously realize that guns are not a 'right' outside USA, LDSman.
                                  I realize that. Isn't this a US Gun Control debate? Gun ownership is a Right in the US.

                                  Quote:
                                  Why should it be? We here in EU are doing fine as it is. Same for Japan, Australia etc.
                                  Hopefully things will keep going fine. What will you do if they don't?

                                  Quote:
                                  If you think WE need same gun 'rights' as you, I'd say you're pretty deluded on that front.
                                  I think it'd help. Stop with the deluded comments. Not helpful.
                                  Reply With Quote
                                    #96   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
                                  Old November 18th, 2018 (2:10 PM).
                                  Nah's Avatar
                                  Nah Nah is offline
                                   
                                  Join Date: Nov 2013
                                  Age: 26
                                  Gender: Female
                                  Posts: 13,173
                                  Quote:
                                  Originally Posted by BronzeHeart92 View Post
                                  If you think WE need same gun 'rights' as you, I'd say you're pretty deluded on that front.
                                  I would also rather that we not call people deluded because they have a differing opinion or imply that the only reason someone believes something is because of some sort of psychological issue, regardless of who's right and wrong. I'm really not bent out of shape over this, I just think that the thread has been going fairly well for the most part and just would like to keep it that way, and so would like to nip in the bud anything that might happen to send it in an unwanted direction.

                                  Be aware though that I'm not talking about just this part of a post or just one person, I'd like for everyone to keep this in mind.


                                  Quote:
                                  Originally Posted by Zeke View Post
                                  Also if you really wanna kill someone be a man and stab them.
                                  nah, real men kill people with plastic spoons
                                  __________________
                                  Nah ンン
                                  “No, I... I have to be strong. Everyone expects me to."
                                  Reply With Quote
                                    #97   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
                                  Old November 18th, 2018 (2:18 PM).
                                  LDSman LDSman is offline
                                     
                                    Join Date: Dec 2017
                                    Posts: 246
                                    Quote:
                                    Originally Posted by Nah View Post



                                    nah, real men kill people with plastic spoons
                                    Why a spoon? Because it hurts more.
                                    Reply With Quote
                                      #98   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
                                    Old November 18th, 2018 (4:51 PM).
                                    Marth's Avatar
                                    Marth Marth is offline
                                     
                                    Join Date: Jun 2013
                                    Location: Canada
                                    Age: 29
                                    Nature: Timid
                                    Posts: 15,328
                                    Quote:
                                    Originally Posted by LDSman View Post


                                    I've lived in the US for 38 years and have never been shot at. Stay out of the gang neighborhoods and don't deal drugs and you'll be fine.
                                    Dude I don't know what to say anymore you're 38...you're 38 and you're like this. You're saying we're deluded but you refuse to see the facts right before you.
                                    Also my second comment was a joke, women can stab too. But that's why there's less murder in countries with strict gun laws, because it's LESS easy to kill someone!

                                    Also some people can only afford to live in such places, so harmless people who just happen to be less fortunate deserve to live in such danger? And what of the school shootings? Schools aren't dangerous places with gangs.
                                    __________________

                                    Reply With Quote
                                      #99   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
                                    Old November 18th, 2018 (5:54 PM). Edited November 18th, 2018 by LDSman.
                                    LDSman LDSman is offline
                                       
                                      Join Date: Dec 2017
                                      Posts: 246
                                      Quote:
                                      Originally Posted by Zeke View Post
                                      Dude I don't know what to say anymore you're 38...you're 38 and you're like this. You're saying we're deluded but you refuse to see the facts right before you.
                                      I never said any of you were deluded. Plenty of facts support my arguments. As far as my age, as you get older, you learn to look up things on your own rather than accept the lies given to you by people who think they know better.

                                      Quote:
                                      Also my second comment was a joke, women can stab too. But that's why there's less murder in countries with strict gun laws, because it's LESS easy to kill someone!
                                      Wasn't a good joke.
                                      Less murder? Not true.
                                      http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/guns-in-other-countries/


                                      Quote:
                                      Also some people can only afford to live in such places, so harmless people who just happen to be less fortunate deserve to live in such danger? And what of the school shootings? Schools aren't dangerous places with gangs.
                                      Address the issues in those neighborhoods rather than trying to curtail my rights. Depends on the school you go to. One of the schools I attended in a rather bad neighborhood had gangs.
                                      Reply With Quote
                                        #100   Link to this post, but load the entire thread.  
                                      Old November 18th, 2018 (7:50 PM).
                                      EnglishALT EnglishALT is online now
                                         
                                        Join Date: Nov 2018
                                        Location: Japan
                                        Gender: Male
                                        Nature: Relaxed
                                        Posts: 142
                                        Quote:
                                        Originally Posted by Zeke View Post

                                        Also some people can only afford to live in such places, so harmless people who just happen to be less fortunate deserve to live in such danger? And what of the school shootings? Schools aren't dangerous places with gangs.
                                        It may be unpopular to say but there is some need for the poorer neighborhoods to take responsibility for the violence plaguing their area. Establishing youth centers, daycare centers, neighborhood watches are necessary to keep children out of gangs and to avoid gang activity. Keep from having children at a young age or outside of marriage so that a child can grow up in a stable two parent house hold. Stop demonizing the police and start working with them, change the culture of snitching being a bad thing and into something to help the neighborhood. Become proactive with the police in rooting out the drug houses and gang members to cut the cancer out of the community.

                                        Banning guns or placing more restrictions on guns isn’t going to stop murders in poor neighborhoods. You can look at the ghettos of France to see that is true, besides most of the firearms in these neighborhoods are already bought illegally. A proactive culture change with people working toward creating a better neighborhood, by force if necessary, is the only thing that will change the community.

                                        Now as for schools, the truth is that they are soft targets. A psycho knows they can go in and massacre dozens of people before the cops even get close to the school. A upgrade in security is necessary, having two rows of electronically locked doors that everyone must be buzzed through after the first bell rings, having metal detectors at the enterances, and most importantly of all having a locked firearm in the building either in the class room or in the teachers office.
                                        Reply With Quote
                                        Reply

                                        Quick Reply

                                        Join the conversation!

                                        Create an account to post a reply in this thread, participate in other discussions, and more!

                                        Create a PokéCommunity Account
                                        Ad Content
                                        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

                                        Forum Jump


                                        All times are GMT -8. The time now is 8:27 PM.