Guns <Serious Answers Only>

Anything else you'd like to talk about? Post here.
>> How Do You Feel Right Now
Post Reply

Guns, what about them?

Down with them
62
84%
Up with guns
12
16%
 
Total votes: 74

User avatar
JenovaPX
Posts: 6401
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 5:58 pm
PSN ID: JenovaPX
Steam ID: Jenova1039

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by JenovaPX » Thu Jan 07, 2016 12:22 am

Nothing but a poor man's Ed Gein. Now that guy knew how to do a collection.
Welcome to the True Man's World
Destiny is Destiny.

User avatar
GuitarHero
Posts: 986
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2014 1:01 pm
NNID: GuitarHero
3DS Friend Code: 3995-6500-8091
Steam ID: fdob001
Contact:

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by GuitarHero » Thu Jan 07, 2016 1:04 am

I think collecting Pokemon cards would be a much safer thing to collect than guns...

There are also much safer (and as adrenalin-inducing) ways to have fun rather than having a gun for "recreational" use

User avatar
komodo joe
Posts: 2148
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 6:12 pm

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by komodo joe » Thu Jan 07, 2016 1:14 am

row101 makes a very convincing case for easier ownership of guns because if I could buy one then I could shoot him and no longer have to be subjected to his online content
Last edited by komodo joe on Thu Jan 07, 2016 1:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
pound shop bill sorenson. | LOOK CLOSER LENNY

User avatar
PiGreat
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 6:00 pm
NNID: PiGreat
3DS Friend Code: 0447-5928-1641
PSN ID: PiGreat
Steam ID: PiGreat

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by PiGreat » Thu Jan 07, 2016 1:38 am

god danm,
RichardUK wrote:I don't believe anyone is actually poor in this country
Image
THE ADVENTURES OF A GUY ON HIS QUEST TO BECOME A WEEABOO | BONUS COMMENTARY | RANDOM eton mess[/centre]

ChaosControl
Posts: 2282
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2014 5:55 am
NNID: jammydodger1985
3DS Friend Code: 270729914659
PSN ID: jammydodger1985
Steam ID: jammydodger1985

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by ChaosControl » Thu Jan 07, 2016 2:34 am

row101 wrote:
If I want to buy a gun right now in the UK I have to state a valid reason, have my identity verified, have a background check, have two people close to me confirm to the authorities that I will not misuse a gun, have approval from my doctor, have an inspection of the place where I will keep my guns and have a face-to-face interview.

That's far too many steps,
No, that's the right amount of steps. I love living in a country where mass shootings are extremely rare.

Also, shooting for fun is the only "legitimate" reason I can think of for owning a gun. The self defense argument is incredibly weak and overused without any context.
It's still illegal to shoot someone in self defense. Guns can't protect you from terrorist attacks. Unless you preemptively know when one is to occur and then shoot that person. Again, you would be charged with murder.

And if someone really wants to go to a shooting range for fun, then they should be willing to go through those procedures to get one. If someone is so damn eager to get hold of a firearm that they can't wait to go through the various checks, I'd question whether that person can even be trusted with a gun.

You compared guns to cars earlier (because they're totally the same, right?), people still have to buy a car, get a provisional license, learn to drive, pass the theory and practical tests, until this is done they still need to be accompanied by a license driver, get a license, insure the car, get MOT checks done.....

No one liverpool tart that all of that infringes on their right to have a car, so why is having stricter regulations on gun ownership a bad thing?

Like I said earlier...the guns aren't being taken away. More is being done to ensure responsible people own guns.
America has a ridiculously high rate of gun violence, the best way to combat this is to make it difficult to even aquire a gun.
I am functioning within the established parameters.

User avatar
row101
Posts: 1894
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 6:11 pm
NNID: row101
3DS Friend Code: Hello world.
PSN ID: Why are you reading?
Xbox Gamertag: Why am I typing?
Steam ID: Why are we alive?

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by row101 » Thu Jan 07, 2016 1:47 pm

ChaosControl wrote:
row101 wrote:
If I want to buy a gun right now in the UK I have to state a valid reason, have my identity verified, have a background check, have two people close to me confirm to the authorities that I will not misuse a gun, have approval from my doctor, have an inspection of the place where I will keep my guns and have a face-to-face interview.

That's far too many steps,
No, that's the right amount of steps. I love living in a country where mass shootings are extremely rare.
More guns does not mean that we'll turn into the US -- in America that's more of a societal problem and a problem with mental health than it is a problem caused by guns. Switzerland has it right on guns I think - a large number of people have a gun, but their gun death rate is pretty much in line with the rest of Western Europe, and far smaller than the US. When was the last time you heard about a mass shooting in Switzerland? That's because they pretty much fixed the societal problems that causes people to misuse guns, and I'd argue that if we were to do the same, our country could also use guns responsibly and not be like some people are in the US.
ChaosControl wrote:Also, shooting for fun is the only "legitimate" reason I can think of for owning a gun. The self defense argument is incredibly weak and overused without any context. It's still illegal to shoot someone in self defense. Guns can't protect you from terrorist attacks. Unless you preemptively know when one is to occur and then shoot that person. Again, you would be charged with murder.
In the US self-defence is a valid reason I think, due to places like Alaska where people do need a gun. In the UK I agree that it's not really a valid reason, but as I said, Americans can just bring their gun to the shooting range and have some fun with it. Collecting is also a valid use, there's a massive enthusiast community of gun-owners in places like /r/guns. All valid reasons. I don't have any illusions of guns preventing terrorist attacks.
ChaosControl wrote:And if someone really wants to go to a shooting range for fun, then they should be willing to go through those procedures to get one. If someone is so damn eager to get hold of a firearm that they can't wait to go through the various checks, I'd question whether that person can even be trusted with a gun.
Not many people are willing to go through with it, both because of the stigma towards guns in the UK and because of the complexity of applying for a license. I agree that there should be security procedures to get one, but right now the government is doing everything in its power to prevent people from using a gun. It's not very accessible.
ChaosControl wrote:You compared guns to cars earlier (because they're totally the same, right?), people still have to buy a car, get a provisional license, learn to drive, pass the theory and practical tests, until this is done they still need to be accompanied by a license driver, get a license, insure the car, get MOT checks done.....

No one liverpool tart that all of that infringes on their right to have a car, so why is having stricter regulations on gun ownership a bad thing?
It was probably a bit of a bad comparison in hindsight. But cars are obviously considerably harder to use, and they're used far more often in public places like roads. Guns, for the vast majority of Americans, are just kept in the safe for self-defence or occasionally brought to the shooting range. They're not typically used in a dangerous environment - a very very small minority of gun-owners are likely to use one in a fight, which is more comparable to driving a car, in that they're both a potential threat to public safety.
ChaosControl wrote:Like I said earlier...the guns aren't being taken away. More is being done to ensure responsible people own guns.
America has a ridiculously high rate of gun violence, the best way to combat this is to make it difficult to even aquire a gun.
Obama is doing the right thing, I agree, I even agree that he could go a little further even - but the UK government is just blatantly violating our liberties and making the process to obtain a license so bloated that it discourages and prevents the vast majority of people who otherwise might want a gun from getting one.
"Don't believe everything you read on the internet" - George Washington

User avatar
abx
Posts: 847
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 11:02 pm
NNID: abraxian
3DS Friend Code: 888888888888
PSN ID: abx_will
Xbox Gamertag: abxwill

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by abx » Thu Jan 07, 2016 1:49 pm

row101 wrote:Obama is doing the right thing, I agree, I even agree that he could go a little further even - but the UK government is just blatantly violating our liberties and making the process to obtain a license so bloated that it discourages and prevents the vast majority of people who otherwise might want a gun from getting one.
it's also very gooseberry fool difficult to get anthrax but there are plenty of budding amateur pathologists who would get the same kick having a vial of that around

why aren't you arguing for my right to have anthrax
Image
Image
high off the second-hand fumes

User avatar
Casplen
Posts: 669
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 6:38 pm
NNID: Casplen
PSN ID: Casplenn
Steam ID: Casplen

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by Casplen » Thu Jan 07, 2016 2:06 pm

row101 wrote:
Vtheyoshi wrote:yeah but guns are made with the express purpose of killing whereas cars are not
Guns also have legitimate uses just like cars do - collecting, sporting, self-defence both from criminals and nature. Millions of Americans enjoys these both out of necessity and for leisure. They're not exclusively used to kill people.

If I want to buy a gun right now in the UK I have to state a valid reason, have my identity verified, have a background check, have two people close to me confirm to the authorities that I will not misuse a gun, have approval from my doctor, have an inspection of the place where I will keep my guns and have a face-to-face interview.
Okay so lets entertain the notion that you're not a gooseberry fool moron, which of those steps do you think should be removed? Would you like people to not have a valid reason to own something of which the primary use is injuring or killing? Would you like unidentified people to have a gun? Would you like a background of violence or crime to go unnoticed? Should we take people's sole opinion that they will not misuse a gun? If mental health is the bigger problem, should we not get approval from a doctor to say that someone is not of an unstable mental condition? Should we not inspect an area to ensure that guns will be kept safe?

Yes, that's a paragraph of loaded questions, but my point is that those steps are perfectly reasonable. Guns are not toys, and all these so called legitimate reasons you give for owning them trivialise them immensely. If people want to collect them, will deactivated guns not suffice, or is "ability to maim" something desirable in an item on your shelf? If there really is a demand for shooting ranges, can guns and safety checks not be provided for use there? If the tragedy here is "people aren't free to enjoy weapons", then my only response is so gooseberry fool what. Lets get some perspective here.
Last edited by Casplen on Thu Jan 07, 2016 2:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Rik
Posts: 3731
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 8:12 pm
NNID: RikTheNinja
3DS Friend Code: 1032-1749-4002

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by Rik » Thu Jan 07, 2016 2:09 pm

row101 wrote:
ChaosControl wrote:
row101 wrote:
If I want to buy a gun right now in the UK I have to state a valid reason, have my identity verified, have a background check, have two people close to me confirm to the authorities that I will not misuse a gun, have approval from my doctor, have an inspection of the place where I will keep my guns and have a face-to-face interview.

That's far too many steps,
No, that's the right amount of steps. I love living in a country where mass shootings are extremely rare.
More guns does not mean that we'll turn into the US -- in America that's more of a societal problem and a problem with mental health than it is a problem caused by guns. Switzerland has it right on guns I think - a large number of people have a gun, but their gun death rate is pretty much in line with the rest of Western Europe, and far smaller than the US. When was the last time you heard about a mass shooting in Switzerland? That's because they pretty much fixed the societal problems that causes people to misuse guns, and I'd argue that if we were to do the same, our country could also use guns responsibly and not be like some people are in the US.
It's more the fact that while a lot of people in Switzerland have a gun (mainly due to being militia conscripts and being required to have one iirc, not necessarily because they particularly want/feel the need to own one) it's illegal to keep ammo at home, the only place you can buy it is at shooting ranges and any rounds bought there have to be used there. It's not that societal problems have been fixed, it's that for the most part the most dangerous thing somebody could do with their gun is to hit somebody over the head with it.
Ghost wrote:and since when has "being dumb" been a sin on the internet?
Pokeforum Random Battle Tourney - come for the battles, stay for the salt

User avatar
IronHide
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 3:57 pm
Steam ID: IronHide1981

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by IronHide » Thu Jan 07, 2016 4:04 pm

abx wrote:
why aren't you arguing for my right to have anthrax
Amateur, Ebola is where it's at.

User avatar
Vtheyoshi
Posts: 3266
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 6:23 pm
NNID: vtheyoshi
Steam ID: VlaSoul

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by Vtheyoshi » Thu Jan 07, 2016 9:34 pm

row101 wrote:
Vtheyoshi wrote:yeah but guns are made with the express purpose of killing whereas cars are not
Guns also have legitimate uses just like cars do - collecting, sporting, self-defence both from criminals and nature. Millions of Americans enjoys these both out of necessity and for leisure. They're not exclusively used to kill people.
yes but they exist with the primary purpose of killing
can you really not understand this
"self defence"
I have always found this to be a eton mess argument, because most of the time you'll have already been shot or stabbed before you can take your gun out, aim, fire
Image

Thanks to yung Kriken for the sig and avatar (asuka best girl)
MAL
Deviantart (trying to be more active nowadays, views are always appreciated) UPDATED 21/06/17

User avatar
row101
Posts: 1894
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 6:11 pm
NNID: row101
3DS Friend Code: Hello world.
PSN ID: Why are you reading?
Xbox Gamertag: Why am I typing?
Steam ID: Why are we alive?

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by row101 » Thu Jan 07, 2016 9:54 pm

Vtheyoshi wrote:
row101 wrote:
Vtheyoshi wrote:yeah but guns are made with the express purpose of killing whereas cars are not
Guns also have legitimate uses just like cars do - collecting, sporting, self-defence both from criminals and nature. Millions of Americans enjoys these both out of necessity and for leisure. They're not exclusively used to kill people.
yes but they exist with the primary purpose of killing
can you really not understand this
"self defence"
I have always found this to be a eton mess argument, because most of the time you'll have already been shot or stabbed before you can take your gun out, aim, fire
How many times do I need to repeat that 736,000 Americans live in Alaska with gooseberry fool Polar Bears? Ha, good luck taking guns away from the Alaskans, 58% of people own a gun there.

Aside from that, I've said before that self-defense is a better argument in the US than in the UK. I'm not talking about terrorism, I'm talking about the times where your house is being robbed, maybe in the middle of the night, and the only thing you can do to stop it is to scare them away. Not shoot them, but use your gun responsibly to make them get the gooseberry fool out of your house. Along with recreational usage, the majority of gun-owners in the US have one kept in a safe for those kinds of circumstances, where's there's no alternative. Don't even pretend that calling the police is a reasonable course of action, not if it's an immediate threat to both your life and your family's lives.
Rik wrote:
row101 wrote:
ChaosControl wrote:
No, that's the right amount of steps. I love living in a country where mass shootings are extremely rare.
More guns does not mean that we'll turn into the US -- in America that's more of a societal problem and a problem with mental health than it is a problem caused by guns. Switzerland has it right on guns I think - a large number of people have a gun, but their gun death rate is pretty much in line with the rest of Western Europe, and far smaller than the US. When was the last time you heard about a mass shooting in Switzerland? That's because they pretty much fixed the societal problems that causes people to misuse guns, and I'd argue that if we were to do the same, our country could also use guns responsibly and not be like some people are in the US.
It's more the fact that while a lot of people in Switzerland have a gun (mainly due to being militia conscripts and being required to have one iirc, not necessarily because they particularly want/feel the need to own one) it's illegal to keep ammo at home, the only place you can buy it is at shooting ranges and any rounds bought there have to be used there. It's not that societal problems have been fixed, it's that for the most part the most dangerous thing somebody could do with their gun is to hit somebody over the head with it.
Incorrect. You're confusing the militia with the civilians -- militia, government ammunition is kept centralised, ammunition of the citizens can be freely bought and stored. The militia and the citizens play by different rules. Best source I could find: "Anyone can go to a gun store and buy all the ammo he wants with a background check and store it at home."
Last edited by row101 on Thu Jan 07, 2016 10:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Don't believe everything you read on the internet" - George Washington

User avatar
abx
Posts: 847
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 11:02 pm
NNID: abraxian
3DS Friend Code: 888888888888
PSN ID: abx_will
Xbox Gamertag: abxwill

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by abx » Thu Jan 07, 2016 10:07 pm

hey row answer my question you stupid gooseberry fool
Image
Image
high off the second-hand fumes

User avatar
row101
Posts: 1894
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 6:11 pm
NNID: row101
3DS Friend Code: Hello world.
PSN ID: Why are you reading?
Xbox Gamertag: Why am I typing?
Steam ID: Why are we alive?

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by row101 » Thu Jan 07, 2016 10:23 pm

Casplen wrote:
row101 wrote:
Vtheyoshi wrote:yeah but guns are made with the express purpose of killing whereas cars are not
Guns also have legitimate uses just like cars do - collecting, sporting, self-defence both from criminals and nature. Millions of Americans enjoys these both out of necessity and for leisure. They're not exclusively used to kill people.

If I want to buy a gun right now in the UK I have to state a valid reason, have my identity verified, have a background check, have two people close to me confirm to the authorities that I will not misuse a gun, have approval from my doctor, have an inspection of the place where I will keep my guns and have a face-to-face interview.
Okay so lets entertain the notion that you're not a gooseberry fool moron, which of those steps do you think should be removed? Would you like people to not have a valid reason to own something of which the primary use is injuring or killing? Would you like unidentified people to have a gun? Would you like a background of violence or crime to go unnoticed? Should we take people's sole opinion that they will not misuse a gun? If mental health is the bigger problem, should we not get approval from a doctor to say that someone is not of an unstable mental condition? Should we not inspect an area to ensure that guns will be kept safe?
Background checks are fine, identity verification is fine. Face-to-face interviews aren't needed, nor are references from others -- unless a person is particularly suspicious from the background check, but not for everyone, ideally all the important details should be covered in the background check. The process should ideally be as streamlined as possible. Same applies to inspecting the storage, it's completely immaterial to a person's ability to use a gun, just a needless complication in the process. Give guidance, sure, but if the background check checks out then it's not a major issue. Approval from the doctor seems sensible, though I imagine it would be better if that stage could be implemented into the background check.

Casplen wrote:Yes, that's a paragraph of loaded questions, but my point is that those steps are perfectly reasonable. Guns are not toys, and all these so called legitimate reasons you give for owning them trivialise them immensely. If people want to collect them, will deactivated guns not suffice, or is "ability to maim" something desirable in an item on your shelf?
Not necessarily saying collecting them for display, but collecting them for use as an enthusiast. There's a massive community of gun-owners out there, but as a Brit we don't really see it very often. But it does exist, and the silent majority of these people just want to enjoy their hobby responsibly.
Casplen wrote:If there really is a demand for shooting ranges, can guns and safety checks not be provided for use there? If the tragedy here is "people aren't free to enjoy weapons", then my only response is so gooseberry fool what. Lets get some perspective here.
People should still be able to own guns so they can have one to themselves (i.e. buying one which they personally like, not undermining the enthusiast community who want to do things with their guns), and if we're talking about dangerous people here, theoretically anyone could go onto shooting range and get a rented gun with nothing more than a quick lesson, but when you buy a gun you have to go through the whole licensing process.
abx wrote:hey row answer my question you stupid gooseberry fool
Nah, I'm gooseberry fool tired of desperately trying to push back the circlejerk.
"Don't believe everything you read on the internet" - George Washington

User avatar
abx
Posts: 847
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 11:02 pm
NNID: abraxian
3DS Friend Code: 888888888888
PSN ID: abx_will
Xbox Gamertag: abxwill

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by abx » Thu Jan 07, 2016 10:45 pm

row101 wrote:Nah, I'm gooseberry fool tired of desperately trying to push back the circlejerk.
not good enough, explain why i'm not allowed weaponised anthrax
Image
Image
high off the second-hand fumes

User avatar
JenovaPX
Posts: 6401
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 5:58 pm
PSN ID: JenovaPX
Steam ID: Jenova1039

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by JenovaPX » Thu Jan 07, 2016 10:48 pm

Because the government is ruining your freedom.
Welcome to the True Man's World
Destiny is Destiny.

User avatar
komodo joe
Posts: 2148
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 6:12 pm

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by komodo joe » Thu Jan 07, 2016 10:52 pm

you don't pick and choose what arguments to respond to that's not how a gooseberry fool debate works
Image
pound shop bill sorenson. | LOOK CLOSER LENNY

User avatar
Highlight
Posts: 923
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2014 11:32 pm

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by Highlight » Thu Jan 07, 2016 10:54 pm

row101 wrote:I'm talking about the times where your house is being robbed, maybe in the middle of the night, and the only thing you can do to stop it is to scare them away. Not shoot them, but use your gun responsibly to make them get the gooseberry fool out of your house. Along with recreational usage, the majority of gun-owners in the US have one kept in a safe for those kinds of circumstances, where's there's no alternative. Don't even pretend that calling the police is a reasonable course of action, not if it's an immediate threat to both your life and your family's lives.
This would be an almost reasonable argument, if not for one thing... you see, you've just made it super easy for people to get guns, right? So, erm, couldn't the robbers also have firearms? What you gonna do then? Haven't you just massively escalated the situation by allowing all the people involved to have guns in their possession?
ImageImage
Dig Dug wrote:Highlight nailed that.

User avatar
row101
Posts: 1894
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 6:11 pm
NNID: row101
3DS Friend Code: Hello world.
PSN ID: Why are you reading?
Xbox Gamertag: Why am I typing?
Steam ID: Why are we alive?

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by row101 » Thu Jan 07, 2016 11:06 pm

Highlight wrote:
row101 wrote:I'm talking about the times where your house is being robbed, maybe in the middle of the night, and the only thing you can do to stop it is to scare them away. Not shoot them, but use your gun responsibly to make them get the gooseberry fool out of your house. Along with recreational usage, the majority of gun-owners in the US have one kept in a safe for those kinds of circumstances, where's there's no alternative. Don't even pretend that calling the police is a reasonable course of action, not if it's an immediate threat to both your life and your family's lives.
This would be an almost reasonable argument, if not for one thing... you see, you've just made it super easy for people to get guns, right? So, erm, couldn't the robbers also have firearms? What you gonna do then? Haven't you just massively escalated the situation by allowing all the people involved to have guns in their possession?
Criminals aren't afraid to obtain guns illegally, which is why still have a large of number of gun homicides in the UK which you don't hear about, and even more cases where a gun is used to threaten people. By giving responsible citizens the right to bear arms, you balance things out -- instead of just a small number of criminals having guns, now everybody has a gun to defend themselves with. The criminals no longer have the higher ground.
"Don't believe everything you read on the internet" - George Washington

User avatar
abx
Posts: 847
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 11:02 pm
NNID: abraxian
3DS Friend Code: 888888888888
PSN ID: abx_will
Xbox Gamertag: abxwill

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by abx » Thu Jan 07, 2016 11:07 pm

WHY CAN'T I HAVE ANTHRAX ROW
Image
Image
high off the second-hand fumes

User avatar
Kappa
Posts: 1895
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:48 pm
NNID: IT'S JUST THE
PSN ID: NATURE OF
Steam ID: MY GAME

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by Kappa » Thu Jan 07, 2016 11:12 pm

the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun

i love binary morality

User avatar
JenovaPX
Posts: 6401
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 5:58 pm
PSN ID: JenovaPX
Steam ID: Jenova1039

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by JenovaPX » Thu Jan 07, 2016 11:14 pm

row101 wrote:Criminals aren't afraid to obtain guns illegally, which is why still have a large of number of gun homicides in the UK which you don't hear about, and even more cases where a gun is used to threaten people.
Provide a reference or stop.
Welcome to the True Man's World
Destiny is Destiny.

User avatar
Cribs
Posts: 1331
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 6:04 pm
Steam ID: Cribster18

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by Cribs » Thu Jan 07, 2016 11:15 pm

holy eton mess this thread has tilted me hard


You keep going on about Alaska and polar bears which I don't really get, if it really is that bad in Alaska then 1. why do people even live there, 2. Aren't polar bears endangered and therefore protected and 3. How does this even affect your point, people are asking for much stricter measures like they are here in the UK, I'm sure if there is reasonable danger in gooseberry fool Alaska then they will be allowed their guns but people in New Orleans for example are in a completely different scenario.

Also I don't really buy your only other valid reason for owning guns which is for enjoyment. I can't believe that no-one has mentioned this but there are plenty of ranges in the U.K who own their own guns, there is literally no need to own your own gun in order to enjoy shooting one.

Basically none of your arguments for gun rights hold any merit and you really need to reconsider your argument when you once again bring up the fact that cars/knives also kill people however aren't restricted because honestly I lose brain cells whenever you say eton mess like that.

row101 wrote: There's far more of a gun culture in America. Imagine some rural run-down village in Texas. Now imagine that somehow, for some reason, the government thinks it's a good idea to take away all the guns. Theoretically, all the guns have gone. But maybe there's one gun left, one guy who still has it. That guy pretty much has control of the town, he can go round and threaten people as much as he likes because the government took the rest of the guns away, and being rural Texas the police are pretty useless and there's not much that can be done about it. It's a fundamental imbalance - guns go from something that anyone can have to defend themselves with to something that only a select few criminals have, illegally. Those criminals then have an advantage over the unarmed population.
I'll also add that this was incredibly dumb too, why do you believe that the police would be "pretty useless" in this matter

User avatar
Bleachyleachy
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2014 11:00 pm

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by Bleachyleachy » Thu Jan 07, 2016 11:18 pm

Going to chime in on the guns for 'self-defence' argument
Authors name slips my mind, but they put it brilliantly once:
"Birth control can be achieved by wearing a condom or punching your balls until they're a bloody pulp. The difference is one is defensive, the other is offensive"

A tool designed specifically for terminating life is an offensive measure
A burglar alarm is a defensive measure
A sturdy door with a heavy duty lock is a defensive measure
A bright torch (enough to startle a midnight intruder if shone into the eyes) is a defensive measure

Or in the worst case scenario, putting your hands up when someone has a knife to your throat or a gun to your temple and deciding that your wallet is worth less than your life, you get the idea

I've seriously never bought the argument that guns for self-defence are legitimate, and while I can't prove it, I suspect a lot of Americans are dishonest when they say so too
Guns and shooting are fun. That is why I would want to own a gun. I'm sure I speak on the behalf of many Americans when I say this. But I would never try to justify ownership of firearms with some flimsy action hero belief that when my house is broken into I will turn into a hero capable of putting a bullet between a dude's brain

User avatar
weakboson
Posts: 187
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 12:48 am

Re: Guns <Tools For Tools?>

Post by weakboson » Thu Jan 07, 2016 11:22 pm

guns make my dick feel long and hard

even though it isn't

and never will be

damn i'm pathetic

if it werent for guns I'd have probably shot myself by now

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests