You don't think "legally stored" guns have a threat? You're wrong, and lying to yourself. How many times do you hear about someone cleaning a gun and it goes off? Human error? Sure! Guns don't load themselves, but if some fucking moron has a stamp collection it doesn't kill his neighbor when he creases one.
LOL, you do realize when they say that the person has committed suicide right? Too funny.
Yes.
I get it that that happens too. But how about the ones where some fucker shoots his neighbor? Or his kid / spouse / roommate? Is that now murder that was gotten away with?
I've not really taken to personal insults in this thread, but stop for one second, assume that I'm not a moron, re read what I've said with an open mind instead of sticking your goddamn fingers in your ears and trying to be superior through sarcasm.
I've not really taken to personal insults in this thread, but stop for one second, assume that I'm not a moron, re read what I've said with an open mind instead of sticking your goddamn fingers in your ears and trying to be superior through sarcasm.
Mark
I think it was you stereotyping all hunters as rednecks etc....and you may want to read your own posts. You come off as very 'superior'
And the cleaning the gun and it went off thing? It doesn't just happen 'too'....it's suicide every time. Goes back to Earnest Hemmingway. Every time someone used to blow their head off it was 'cleaning their gun'.
As for shooting the neighbor, roomate etc. Same arguement for some idiot leaving a candle burning and burning down their house killing their family.
I think it was you stereotyping all hunters as rednecks etc....and you may want to read your own posts. You come off as very 'superior'
And the cleaning the gun and it went off thing? It doesn't just happen 'too'....it's suicide every time. Goes back to Earnest Hemmingway. Every time someone used to blow their head off it was 'cleaning their gun'.
Fair enough, shot off the redneck comment. Wasn't directed at anyone in particular. As for superior, it's because I'm right in this one.
We can cut off their hands, take away their guns, or teach them to act with intelligence. 2 of these make our society worse, 1 makes it better as a whole and solves the gun problem.
Oh yea.... Hemmingway totally gave him the tips on how to kill his neighbor on this one.
about 90 seconds of google searching...
Do you really think I can be bothered getting into a 'google off' with you?
Bottom line. You say you are 'right'. Right about what? You can't honestly believe that outlawing / melting legal firearms will somehow stop criminals from using/producing/creating a whole new black market for firearms can you? Making a gun is a hell of a lot easier than making crystal meth. Again, you claim to be right, but are 'right' in such a superficial way. It scares me a little that you don't see this.
Here is my thoughts on this, summarized, and using very tiny words.
- I don't think anyone should own a gun. Nobody needs one outside of enforcement and very select other reasons.
- I believe this because guns fall into a very narrow category: Weapon. They are one of the few things that serve no purpose but to hurt, kill, and destroy. Nobody has a need for this excepting the above mentioned.
- Many things that are "Tools" or other such objects CAN be used AS a "weapon", but do not meet the same classification as a pure weapon, like guns.
- Excuses of art, hunting, sport shooting and the like are bullshit.
- Guns are killing people for stupid reason (ease of kills, accidents, etc)
- I know that this is not going to change, and that they aren't going to be banned. I would be satisfied if the pro-gun people would admit that they like them and want them despite no need for having them personally.
- I don't know why the pro gunners want them, but it seems akin to the people with 5 year old giant bubba trucks with no wear and tear on the body. They wanted it, even though they had no real reason for it.
Here is my thoughts on this, summarized, and using very tiny words.
- I don't think anyone should own a gun. Nobody needs one outside of enforcement and very select other reasons.
- I believe this because guns fall into a very narrow category: Weapon. They are one of the few things that serve no purpose but to hurt, kill, and destroy. Nobody has a need for this excepting the above mentioned.
- Many things that are "Tools" or other such objects CAN be used AS a "weapon", but do not meet the same classification as a pure weapon, like guns.
- Excuses of art, hunting, sport shooting and the like are bullshit.
- Guns are killing people for stupid reason (ease of kills, accidents, etc)
- I know that this is not going to change, and that they aren't going to be banned. I would be satisfied if the pro-gun people would admit that they like them and want them despite no need for having them personally.
- I don't know why the pro gunners want them, but it seems akin to the people with 5 year old giant bubba trucks with no wear and tear on the body. They wanted it, even though they had no real reason for it.
Oh yea.... Hemmingway totally gave him the tips on how to kill his neighbor on this one.
about 90 seconds of google searching...
And not ONE of those is an example of RESPONSIBLE gun ownership or handling. The FIRST THING you are EVER taught about firearms is that they are ALWAYS loaded, until you PROVE they aren't. Anybody who takes their weapon out of storage and does not clear the action right away is violating the first rule of safe handling.
The friend I mentioned earlier was showing my wife and I his handguns. One of them is a beautiful Beretta 1934 . . . it's a classic. First thing he did when he took it out of the case was clear the action, remove the magazine, and clear the action again. Then he handed it over and I cleared the action myself. Wife asked why I did it when he just did the same thing. Just force of habit . . . you pick up a firearme, it is loaded. The folks in the articles you linked should have their ability to own fireamrs taken from them because they are STUPID, not because firearms are "bad".
Here is my thoughts on this, summarized, and using very tiny words.
- I don't think anyone should own a gun. Nobody needs one outside of enforcement and very select other reasons.
- I believe this because guns fall into a very narrow category: Weapon. They are one of the few things that serve no purpose but to hurt, kill, and destroy. Nobody has a need for this excepting the above mentioned.
- Many things that are "Tools" or other such objects CAN be used AS a "weapon", but do not meet the same classification as a pure weapon, like guns.
- Excuses of art, hunting, sport shooting and the like are bullshit.
- Guns are killing people for stupid reason (ease of kills, accidents, etc)
- I know that this is not going to change, and that they aren't going to be banned. I would be satisfied if the pro-gun people would admit that they like them and want them despite no need for having them personally.
- I don't know why the pro gunners want them, but it seems akin to the people with 5 year old giant bubba trucks with no wear and tear on the body. They wanted it, even though they had no real reason for it.
Mark
You are entitled to your opinion, Mark, but that is not the same as being right. Do you like your Smartphone? Do you like being able to access the web from your phone, and take pictures, and upload those pics to the web? Do you "need" a phone that does all those things, or is it just something that you like having? Same concept.
Here is my thoughts on this, summarized, and using very tiny words.
- Excuses of art, hunting, sport shooting and the like are bullshit.
Mark
'using very tiny words'....no...you don't come off condescending or superior at all...lol
Hunting and target shooting as 'bullshit'? Again, just because in your world you like to have your meat 'humanely' slaughtered in a slaughter house and raised and force fed in tiny pens away from your innocent eyes, I tend to believe the millions of law abiding hunters and target shooters in North America would tend to disagree with that statement ???
So...15 people die each year in Canada fishing, and fishing is obviously not a necessity (if hunting isn't, fishing obviously isn't..nor are they sports?) should we ban fishing rods too? They are only, by design, for one thing...killing. Add in the commercial fishing boats into the accidents category (another 121 fatalities in 2011) and we get some pretty high death numbers by comparison...
Simply because one doesn't agree that hunting or owning firearms should be...doesn't give them the right to make that decision for others. Obviously these anti gun people have never had to shoot an animal that was about to cause them serious harm. I have been charged by bears, I have had them try to get into my tent...I have had a very good friend killed by a bear while trying to save a child and mother from said bear in a public hotsprings.
I am an avid hunter, fisherman, and trapper. I hunt for food for my family, and no, I don't agree with Trophy Hunting, or the hunting of Grizzlies...would I shoot the bigger buck of two if I saw them together...damn rights.
Inanimate objects aren't the problem...people are. Long before guns were around Genghis, Attila and others had no issues burning, raping, and killing. The history of Germany may have played out slightly different had they of had an armed nation...
I can appreciate some don't like or want guns...but they should also appreciate that I do.
Do you mean Nazi myths? Or German in general? Because yes there are a lot of myths that the Nazis did this or the Nazis did that. One example is the "banned guns" myth perpetuated by the NRA. The Nazis actually relaxed gun laws previously passed by the Weimar Republic.
Another big one is the "Nazis put fluoride in the water to keep concentration camp prisoners docile."
Unfortunately I understand what you are saying and don't agree with that whole propaganda factor..
I am saying that had the treaty of Versailles (within your link) not been enacted with the firearms restrictions and the banning of firearms..many people there would still have had arms and not surrendered them...in the few years (4?) before the Holocaust I am sure not many had access to them or thought they had cause to need them? Hard to say there...but with all those guns out of circulation, the few that took the steps after 1928 to get firearms again were probably very small....
I am just presuming here, but I am also willing to bet the number of German Jews that were actually given permits after '28 is probably next to zero considering they actually put it in writing later on....
If these German Jews had kept their firearms before the holocaust...it could very well have changed history is what I am saying.
I can at least say I tried my best to explain, but all you gun fans refuse to see my simple points. Best of luck to you.
Mark
P.S. I never said I don't come off as superior. I usually do... and often for very good reasons.
This is the case because your points are just that....simple. It's a much more complex issue than your simpleton approach, and you can't expect people who know what they are talking about to not counter such silliness
I happen to disagree with your opinion that more guns would have changed history there. There are a lot of factors to consider, obviously. I think the Nazis would have risen to power regardless.
This is the case because your points are just that....simple. It's a much more complex issue than your simpleton approach, and you can't expect people who know what they are talking about to not counter such silliness
Let's test that
What is it that I arguing? What have been my main three points, and what responses have I received that make no sense and I have thus ignored.
A North Carolina mayor has issued an ultimatum to town residents: pull up your sagging pants or pay a fine.
Pro Tem Carnell Robinson, the mayor of Dunn, N.C., claims the saggy pants look among many young men is bringing down the city's image and wants to enact an ordinance prohibiting the fashion statement, WRAL-TV reported.
Under Robinson's proposal, the first two violations would result in a warning, according to the station. Third-time violators could face a fine of up to $200.
"I believe this form of dress is totally disrespectful," Robinson told the station. "(This is) just a simple matter of the community re-establishing some standards."
Robinson also said the ordinance, if enacted, would help bring down the city's crime rate.
Saggy pants "is part of a culture that breeds drug sales, drug addictions, crime and murder," Robinson said. "That is not what I want for our community."
Yeah, and when James Dean wore the devils clothing (what we now call "jeans") in Rebel Without a Cause they were seen as symbol of youth rebellion and banned in certain places.
I'll admit that youth at times seem retarded but there is no doubt that with age comes increased ignorance and decreased tolerance with a definite lack of hindsight.
EDIT: I see Comp is reading this so I must say my comments do not apply to really old people.
Comments
I think it was you stereotyping all hunters as rednecks etc....and you may want to read your own posts. You come off as very 'superior'
And the cleaning the gun and it went off thing? It doesn't just happen 'too'....it's suicide every time. Goes back to Earnest Hemmingway. Every time someone used to blow their head off it was 'cleaning their gun'.
As for shooting the neighbor, roomate etc. Same arguement for some idiot leaving a candle burning and burning down their house killing their family.
Fair enough, shot off the redneck comment. Wasn't directed at anyone in particular. As for superior, it's because I'm right in this one.
Also:
This is a very elaborate assisted suicide.
This little bitch probably had it coming
Oh yea.... Hemmingway totally gave him the tips on how to kill his neighbor on this one.
about 90 seconds of google searching...
Do you really think I can be bothered getting into a 'google off' with you?
Bottom line. You say you are 'right'. Right about what? You can't honestly believe that outlawing / melting legal firearms will somehow stop criminals from using/producing/creating a whole new black market for firearms can you? Making a gun is a hell of a lot easier than making crystal meth. Again, you claim to be right, but are 'right' in such a superficial way. It scares me a little that you don't see this.
Here is my thoughts on this, summarized, and using very tiny words.
- I don't think anyone should own a gun. Nobody needs one outside of enforcement and very select other reasons.
- I believe this because guns fall into a very narrow category: Weapon. They are one of the few things that serve no purpose but to hurt, kill, and destroy. Nobody has a need for this excepting the above mentioned.
- Many things that are "Tools" or other such objects CAN be used AS a "weapon", but do not meet the same classification as a pure weapon, like guns.
- Excuses of art, hunting, sport shooting and the like are bullshit.
- Guns are killing people for stupid reason (ease of kills, accidents, etc)
- I know that this is not going to change, and that they aren't going to be banned. I would be satisfied if the pro-gun people would admit that they like them and want them despite no need for having them personally.
- I don't know why the pro gunners want them, but it seems akin to the people with 5 year old giant bubba trucks with no wear and tear on the body. They wanted it, even though they had no real reason for it.
Mark
EDIT: Also
*ahem*
And not ONE of those is an example of RESPONSIBLE gun ownership or handling. The FIRST THING you are EVER taught about firearms is that they are ALWAYS loaded, until you PROVE they aren't. Anybody who takes their weapon out of storage and does not clear the action right away is violating the first rule of safe handling.
The friend I mentioned earlier was showing my wife and I his handguns. One of them is a beautiful Beretta 1934 . . . it's a classic. First thing he did when he took it out of the case was clear the action, remove the magazine, and clear the action again. Then he handed it over and I cleared the action myself. Wife asked why I did it when he just did the same thing. Just force of habit . . . you pick up a firearme, it is loaded. The folks in the articles you linked should have their ability to own fireamrs taken from them because they are STUPID, not because firearms are "bad".
You are entitled to your opinion, Mark, but that is not the same as being right. Do you like your Smartphone? Do you like being able to access the web from your phone, and take pictures, and upload those pics to the web? Do you "need" a phone that does all those things, or is it just something that you like having? Same concept.
'using very tiny words'....no...you don't come off condescending or superior at all...lol
Hunting and target shooting as 'bullshit'? Again, just because in your world you like to have your meat 'humanely' slaughtered in a slaughter house and raised and force fed in tiny pens away from your innocent eyes, I tend to believe the millions of law abiding hunters and target shooters in North America would tend to disagree with that statement ???
Neat tiein:
Drafting the Bill of Rights Rare Footage of Founder Fathers - YouTube
Simply because one doesn't agree that hunting or owning firearms should be...doesn't give them the right to make that decision for others. Obviously these anti gun people have never had to shoot an animal that was about to cause them serious harm. I have been charged by bears, I have had them try to get into my tent...I have had a very good friend killed by a bear while trying to save a child and mother from said bear in a public hotsprings.
I am an avid hunter, fisherman, and trapper. I hunt for food for my family, and no, I don't agree with Trophy Hunting, or the hunting of Grizzlies...would I shoot the bigger buck of two if I saw them together...damn rights.
Inanimate objects aren't the problem...people are. Long before guns were around Genghis, Attila and others had no issues burning, raping, and killing. The history of Germany may have played out slightly different had they of had an armed nation...
I can appreciate some don't like or want guns...but they should also appreciate that I do.
Please say you are not perpetuating the myth that the Nazis banned guns?
Gun politics in Germany - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Do you mean Nazi myths? Or German in general? Because yes there are a lot of myths that the Nazis did this or the Nazis did that. One example is the "banned guns" myth perpetuated by the NRA. The Nazis actually relaxed gun laws previously passed by the Weimar Republic.
Another big one is the "Nazis put fluoride in the water to keep concentration camp prisoners docile."
I can at least say I tried my best to explain, but all you gun fans refuse to see my simple points. Best of luck to you.
Mark
P.S. I never said I don't come off as superior. I usually do... and often for very good reasons.
Unfortunately I understand what you are saying and don't agree with that whole propaganda factor..
I am saying that had the treaty of Versailles (within your link) not been enacted with the firearms restrictions and the banning of firearms..many people there would still have had arms and not surrendered them...in the few years (4?) before the Holocaust I am sure not many had access to them or thought they had cause to need them? Hard to say there...but with all those guns out of circulation, the few that took the steps after 1928 to get firearms again were probably very small....
I am just presuming here, but I am also willing to bet the number of German Jews that were actually given permits after '28 is probably next to zero considering they actually put it in writing later on....
If these German Jews had kept their firearms before the holocaust...it could very well have changed history is what I am saying.
This is the case because your points are just that....simple. It's a much more complex issue than your simpleton approach, and you can't expect people who know what they are talking about to not counter such silliness
I happen to disagree with your opinion that more guns would have changed history there. There are a lot of factors to consider, obviously. I think the Nazis would have risen to power regardless.
Let's test that
What is it that I arguing? What have been my main three points, and what responses have I received that make no sense and I have thus ignored.
Remember there's three pages of posts!
I refuse to play your mind games any longer. I'm going to go clean my gun
Your argument is basically . . .
1) The sole purpose of firearms is to kill, maim, or wound.
2) This is a bad thing, and so no one, outside of law enforcement or the military, should be allowed to own firearms.
3) These two points are unassailable in their "truthiness" because, well, because you say so . . .
What do I get as my parting gift?
Please take this back before some defenseless idiot reads it and thinks it's true.
Refreshing rap by the ILL MIND OF HOPSIN 5 : theCHIVE
Yeah, and when James Dean wore the devils clothing (what we now call "jeans") in Rebel Without a Cause they were seen as symbol of youth rebellion and banned in certain places.
I'll admit that youth at times seem retarded but there is no doubt that with age comes increased ignorance and decreased tolerance with a definite lack of hindsight.
EDIT: I see Comp is reading this so I must say my comments do not apply to really old people.