Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

Gun control in the US

Posted Dec 17, '12 at 11:51pm

nichodemus

nichodemus

11,871 posts

Knight

In what way? That they're addicted? That they use it often? How did people live for thousands of years before it?

When you start working, you will understand. There is no way a person can finish the number of reports he is expected to without a computer. There is no way a banker can now manage the vast number of transactions via hand.

The Second Amendment of the US Constitution.

In case someone brings up the Constitution point and that it's inviolable, well, your gun rights come from an amendment.

 

Posted Dec 17, '12 at 11:53pm

404011xz

404011xz

218 posts

Sorry forgot this. I'll disprove your statement first pearson. A valid legal activity for a gun. Some masked dude runs into a department store with a shotgun, he is currently focused on the cashier telling him/her to shove the bag full of money, you see he is skiddish and if anybody does anything he might shoot and in turn kill that pearson, so you take precossions and take out the 44 Magnum from your pants and blow his head off, all uncertanty cleared and you just stopped a potential murderer and robber. You notice, you rarely ever heard about murder in the old west? That was because everyone had a gun and everyone knew it, so people were alot less likely to do the stupid **** they do today. If they would allow people to do open carry or conseal carry then there would probably be alot less crimes commited because there would be less people to commit those crimes after a while. It's an interesting fact, when have you heard of some poor old lady being mugged? I've heard of attempts and then she pulls out a handgun and shoots him. So obviously it is better for defence than some riot shield or crossbow, do you see an old women carrying around one of the 2?

 

Posted Dec 18, '12 at 12:04am

404011xz

404011xz

218 posts

I would use quotes but I kinda suck at it and mess my words up. It isn't just a simple ammendment, it's a part of the Bill of RIghts, unallalienable rights that all citizens posses. Are you saying you want to take away rights that everyone should be able to posses? Oh and calling the cops won't really help in certain cities, look at Stockton, California, the police there basically told everyone they are on their own. And what if that certain possesion is a family heirloom that is hundreds of years old? Would you want somebody taking your grandmom's diamond broach? I think it's sentimental value is greater than it's money value. Also, look at switzerland, have you EVER heard of a crime happen their? No, that is because everyone is require to serve in the military for a few years and everyone has a gun. If everyone has a gun then that place is a major deterant for people to commit a crime in.

 

Posted Dec 18, '12 at 12:05am

nichodemus

nichodemus

11,871 posts

Knight

so you take precossions and take out the 44 Magnum from your pants and blow his head off, all uncertanty cleared and you just stopped a potential murderer and robber.

You think he can't shoot you first when you pull out your gun?

If they would allow people to do open carry or conseal carry then there would probably be alot less crimes commited because there would be less people to commit those crimes after a while.

Covering your eyes to what the rest of the world has done and moved on is also interesting. Britain currently has 0.22 gun murders per 100,000 people, compared to America. Coincidence that they impose strict rules on carrying guns? No. Relying on guns for protection instead of relying on the police ensures a society that is constantly mired in suspicion, required to be on your guard at all times in case you get caught napping. The very need of having to carry a gun at most times is proof in itself.

 

Posted Dec 18, '12 at 12:09am

404011xz

404011xz

218 posts

You shouldn't us Britain for an example, this is a country with a camera on every corner, which means the government knows EVERYTHING you do. Forget about farting in public they know when you are going to arrive somewhere before you do. Also if they were to be invaded how would they defend themselves? Say russian wanted to take them over, they would simply take out the capital and the entire country is theirs for the picking, no resistance, no worries. And yes I think I can shoot that guy because he is looking at the shop clerk and I am in his blind spot. Nic, I bet your a democrat aren't you.

 

Posted Dec 18, '12 at 12:20am

nichodemus

nichodemus

11,871 posts

Knight

I would use quotes but I kinda suck at it and mess my words up. It isn't just a simple ammendment, it's a part of the Bill of RIghts, unallalienable rights that all citizens posses.

An amendment is a change made to a basic law or constitution. When the drafters wrote the Bill in 1789, it was only in later that there were proposed amendments regarding gun laws. It wasn't inside initially.

And yes. Britain and the rest of Europe has ''taken'' away the rights of people to carry guns. What's the result? Go and look for yourself.

Also, look at switzerland, have you EVER heard of a crime happen their? No, that is because everyone is require to serve in the military for a few years and everyone has a gun.

That's also because much of the Swiss guns floating around are Swiss Army weapons kept by the army personnel. Meaning the army knows exactly where the gun is, and they can track you. Knowing that, will you then willingly utilise it for murder?

Furthermore, the situation is more complicated. Switzerland is one of the world's richest countries, but has remained relatively isolated. It has none of the social problems associated with gun crime seen in other industrialised countries like drugs or urban deprivation.

Despite the lack of rigid gun laws, firearms are strictly connected to a sense of collective responsibility due to the national service required. From an early age Swiss men and women associate weaponry with being called to defend their country. The US doesn't o this, there is no mental link of gun ownership to national security. It is not Switzerland's cultural makeup, or its gun policies per se, that explain that low crime rate. Rather, it is the emphasis on community duty, of which gun ownership is the most important part, that best explains low crime rate.

Say russian wanted to take them over, they would simply take out the capital and the entire country is theirs for the picking, no resistance, no worries. And yes I think I can shoot that guy because he is looking at the shop clerk and I am in his blind spot. Nic, I bet your a democrat aren't you.

Do you know something called nuclear retaliation and game theory? Or having a national army? Or an anti missile defense system?

What do you think your magnum is going to do when a tank barrels down to you? Defend yourself? Are your tiny arms going to work against military grade weapons, or are you kidding yourself?

. Forget about farting in public they know when you are going to arrive somewhere before you do.

Let's wait for the British to come down hard on you. If not, I shall. According to 2009 Freedom of Information Act requests, the total number of local authority operated CCTV cameras was around 60,000 over the entirety of the UK. Very nice of you, trying to falsify a situation.

Nic, I bet your a democrat aren't you.

Most democrat politicians don't want gun control, or won't move towards it, so how does this have bearing in the thread? Or are you going to insinuate that I'm another internet foot soldier of the tyrannical liberal elite conspiracy?

 

Posted Dec 18, '12 at 12:21am

nichodemus

nichodemus

11,871 posts

Knight

And what if that certain possesion is a family heirloom that is hundreds of years old? Would you want somebody taking your grandmom's diamond broach? I think it's sentimental value is greater than it's money value.

So the sake of having a unique Constitution over the safety of people is more important to you? Very droll.

 

Posted Dec 18, '12 at 12:28am

SSTG

SSTG

10,861 posts

Knight

It seem to me that gun owners are paranoid and see evil everywhere.
Man that must be a pain to worry all the time and feel the need to arm oneself to the teeth.
Many of the crazy shooters who went on a killing rampage used guns that their parents had in their house so I think there's a pattern here.

 

Posted Dec 18, '12 at 12:29am

404011xz

404011xz

218 posts

No I'm just speculating. Most democrats are actually for gun control, unions, crap like that. And the Bill of RIghts was required for the Constitution, otherwise not enough states would sign it and pass it. I keep telling you, it's not guns that kill people, it's the people who hold the guns that do. Have you heard of a gun standing up on it's own and shooting somebody? No, it's those crazy people who give others the chance to say they are bad and ruin it for everyone. Nic, I honestly don't see why you hate guns? Did somebody in your family have the unforunate fate of being on the wrong side of one? If so sorry for bringing it up if it brings up bad memories

 

Posted Dec 18, '12 at 12:30am

EmperorPalpatine

EmperorPalpatine

4,977 posts

There is no way a banker can now manage the vast number of transactions via hand.

They did in the past, until about 60 years ago. Sometimes, when computers fail, they still need to. If the computers were down indefinitely, they'd likely hire more workers (hey, a partial solution to unemployment!), but they'd get it done.

Relying on guns for protection instead of relying on the police ensures a society that is constantly mired in suspicion

Or a society that finds police to be inadequate. 'When seconds count, police are just minutes away'. Their job isn't necessarily to prevent crime, but to apprehend those responsible when it's over.

What's the result?

An increase in other weapons.

Meaning the army knows exactly where the gun is, and they can track you. Knowing that, will you then willingly utilise it for murder?

The US has tracking systems, too. Criminals find ways around them, such as shaving off serial numbers.

we are a minority in favour of choosing other ways of dealing with conflict than using violent means to settle disputes.

How does one settle the dispute of 'I really want you dead so I can take what you have, including your kids'?

 
Reply to Gun control in the US

You must be logged in to post a reply!