Gun Control: Hot or Not?

[Razola]

Hi, Andrew.

Oh right, guns. Remember kids: guns don't kill people. Bullets going really really fast kill people.

[mr_pikachu]

It's not the fall that kills you. It's the sudden stop at the end.

...Wait, that's not the point of this topic?

:D

But seriously, this topic is for discussion about gun control regulations and what changes, if any, should be made.

Personally, I don't have a problem with most of the regulations nowadays. However, there do need to be tighter restrictions on felons owning guns weapons (how about a probation sort of thing where they're not allowed to attempt to purchase one or they get tossed in the can for life?) and an extension on the time delay for obtaining a permit (which I believe is three days or so).

Excuse me as I run while you prepare your reaction posts.

[Dark-San]

If you asked about gun regulation, I am a strong believer for a total gun ban. If you take out the gun from the society itself, the society itself will become safer by itself. The scale will tip over to the law enforcement side since now they are the only ones with the weapons. This mean they can take out assassins like the Virginia Tech case faster then the possibility of these situation will decrease.

That used to be the case in the past. Time has change and we are now living in an age where there is a even greater need to protect ourselves. Welcome to the terrrorism age, where it can strike you when you least expected. Taking out the guns from the street would mean, you are giving these ass rats chances, multiple of them, to strike. Amercia would have become more vunerable if the guns would not be in place.

But then the terrorists can get it as freely as we do. But the numbers will prevail by itself.

Hence if given a choice, which opinion will you choose? It is hard to conclude since both side has its pros and cons.

[DarkTemplarZero]

At the very least require a thorough psychiatric evaluation for people who want to buy guns. In the VT case it was well known that the Cho kid was a maniac who wrote plays featuring characters who tried to kill each other by stuffing half-eaten cereal bars down their throats, but because he had no criminal record he had no problem buying a gun. Often it's the case that after the person gets the criminal record to prohibit them from buying a gun it is too late and the damage is done, but at least you know that the person you're selling the gun to isn't a homicidal maniac just waiting to strike.

[Mewtwo-D2]

I believe gun control is when you hold with both hands.


You take the right to arms away from the citizens, you have a weak and fearful population. People who can't defend themselves have a specific term- prey. Prey for tyrannical governments, prey for criminals, prey for random psychotics who want to murder people. You take away the right of the law-abiding to defend themselves, you are violating their right to live. It's my right to protect my body, my family, my friends, and my property.

I enjoy shooting as a hobby. I shoot very well- I enjoy it mostly because it's fun stress release to take out any anger on a sheet of paper. I don't relish the idea of killing another human being- I only would under dire circumstances. I believe I am the typical gun owner. If there was a danger to my safety, I would take up arms. If there wasn't, it's a harmless hobby that leaves nothing but paper and old bottles injured.

Society does not become safer without guns, because guns do not cause violence. If they did, then there would be mass murders at gun shows. Such a thing has never happened. Society is dangerous, but it's less dangerous for the weak than anarchy. That's why we made society in the first place. Look at places where guns have been banned- less people are being shot, sure, but look at the rates of stabbing deaths, or armed robbery, or rape. Did you know that 0% of reported rapes had a gun involved in any way? Washington D.C. has some of the strictest gun laws in the U.S., yet it has one of the highest murder rates. And don't get me started on robbery.

The point is when you outlaw guns, only outlaws have guns. By banning them, you're pouring money into organized crime and arms smugglers. Also, have you noticed that back when the Saturday Night Special was $10 at your local hardware store for anyone, there were no school shootings?

[mr_pikachu]

See, I suck at gun handling. Tried to shoot a rifle once in some accuracy contest on a vacation in Mexico... three shots, and not one hit the target. (Seriously, I don't have a clue where the projectiles stopped, because I missed the board entirely. All three times.)

However, I recognize the importance of people being able to defend themselves. It's one of the reasons I've trained myself so much in martial arts; if someone ever attacks me, I'm confident in my ability to deal with it. (Now, if they stand 20 feet away and pull a trigger, it's not like I can dodge the bullet. But my point is that if I get mugged or something, I only need the guy to lose focus for a fraction of a second and he'll be on the pavement. My training is in close-range combat.) I can defend myself, and that's important.

That's why I'm opposed to a complete gun ban, because people need to have some method of self-defense. It's just not good for anyone to be at the mercy of someone else. Yes, it's true that criminals are just as likely to wield weaponry if gun ownership is at all legal, but they'll get their guns one way or another. This gives innocent people a chance to fight back, in my estimation. Without having to spend years learning fighting techniques.

[DarkTemplarZero]

Guns don't kill people. I kill people. Muahahahah!

Mewtwo, where did you ever get to be so ANGRY? Hahah chill out, the universe isn't out to get you or anything. Get yourself a vodka martini and stop shooting things in anger.

But yeah, I'll agree with you there, gun bans only work well in civilized nations. Here in the United States where we have all these crazy Christian fanatics, gangster rappers, the overly paranoid Mewtwo-D2's, etc. etc. you'd just get prohibition all over again. But yeah, a psychiatric evaluation would be a good idea, at least prevent people like Cho from getting a gun.

[Blademaster]

Mewtwo, where did you ever get to be so ANGRY? Hahah chill out, the universe isn't out to get you or anything. Get yourself a vodka martini and stop shooting things in anger.

Here in the United States where we have all these crazy Christian fanatics, gangster rappers, the overly paranoid Mewtwo-D2's, etc. etc. you'd just get prohibition all over again.

OK, I'm stepping in.

Look, Zero, I've seen you and Mewtwo-D2 butt heads before; I don't know what vendetta you have against her, and while I usually agree with your viewpoints to an extent, I don't this time. Mewtwo-D2 is entitled to her opinion, just as you're entitled to yours, so how about you get a vodka martini yourself and quit picking on her.

[Mewtwo-D2]

Guns don't kill people. I kill people. Muahahahah!

Mewtwo, where did you ever get to be so ANGRY? Hahah chill out, the universe isn't out to get you or anything. Get yourself a vodka martini and stop shooting things in anger.

But yeah, I'll agree with you there, gun bans only work well in civilized nations. Here in the United States where we have all these crazy Christian fanatics, gangster rappers, the overly paranoid Mewtwo-D2's, etc. etc. you'd just get prohibition all over again. But yeah, a psychiatric evaluation would be a good idea, at least prevent people like Cho from getting a gun.

Look, kid. I know too many girls who have been raped, sexually assaulted, or otherwise sexually abused. I've said it before and I'll say it again. I've been on the receiving end of threats of sexual violence, and it made me determined to never be a victim again in any sense. You say the universe isn't out to get me? 1 out of every 4 women is raped or molested in her lifetime- that is never going to happen to me and mine again if I can prevent it. How is accepting the reality that life isn't always sunshine and rainbows paranoia?
You refuse stalwartly to carry anything to it's logical conclusion- this is life, shit happens. I accept that bad things can happen, and I prepare for them. Would you be calling me paranoid if I said I had $200 cash in my room in case of emergency? Would you call me paranoid if I said I keep a well-maintained stock of canned goods, fresh batteries, flashlights, and a radio in case of an emergency? How about that I have an emergency kit in my car, complete with basic tools, flares, and a thermal blanket? Unless you're a flaming lunatic, then no, you wouldn't. I'm not paranoid, I'm realistic. Realistically, in Human Earth, things go wrong sometimes. But if all you can think of is mindless feel-good platitudes, I'm going to have to tell you to go back to Candyland, or wherever it is that you live, and keep pretending the sky is made out of marshmallows.

As for where anger and stress come from, I build up a lot realizing there are people as doltish as you in the world. Charmed.

[Razola]

As for where anger and stress come from, I build up a lot realizing there are people as doltish as you in the world. Charmed.And this is why gun control would be a good thing. Because America is full of idiots and the biggest threat to an idiot with a gun is him or her self.

I'm playing devil's advocate here, as I generally am against gun control. I'm from a military family and we were taught to fear guns until we were old enough to learn how to handle them. Guns are a tool and like a lot of tools they need to be handled properly. We didn't need to hide guns in the house: by age 7 I knew that if I saw a gun I didn't fucking touch it. Sadly, not every kid has parents that bother teaching these things. I will admit my dad wasn't terrible at hiding guns: he had a box of handguns I didn't even know about until he took them out for cleaning when I was 14 or so.

The happy medium is mandatory training and education for even the simplest of firearms. For fuck's sake, we don't just let kids jump in a car at 16 and we shouldn't hand people weapons once they hit a proper age and satisfy a waiting period.

Also, there's not a damn thing paranoid about carrying personal protection. A person well-trained in the use of guns will know the difference between shooting to kill and shooting to simply disable. Rape is a violent crime, so might as well respond in kind. As heinous as rape is, we don't need Sally Goodweather becoming a Judge Dredd and executing every person that gives her a dirty look. This is why people should get some rudimentary training.

[Dark-San]

Not to talk about rights here but it would not make any economic sense here if we are to implement gun control. Firstly there would this long and tedious process of developing a foolproof system that seek to restrict the number of people into getting the weapon. Who pays all those research and implementation of these processes? The government.

Secondly by if you restrict the number of guns roaming around the street, the gun business will see a drop in business. If you restrict the number of gun supply, what would the retailer do the surplus? Throw them off? By looking at it in a serious angle, you will also need to compensate these people too for losing part of their bread and butter. And who compensates them? The government.


The happy medium is mandatory training and education for even the simplest of firearms. For fuck's sake, we don't just let kids jump in a car at 16 and we shouldn't hand people weapons once they hit a proper age and satisfy a waiting period.

Raz may have a point there. Perhaps through basic education, you may want to develop a culture for people to understand on these firearms but then it is a long term solution.

[DarkTemplarZero]

Life is always sunshine and rainbows! And yes, I would call you paranoid for doing such things, what next, you'll wear a hard hat all day for fear of being hit by space debris? Fine, so I don't live in a fourth world country like you do apparently, but the way to becoming a better person isn't through anger and paranoia but through love, understanding, and having a heart.

And meh I hate companies that make guns with a fiery passion. A woman from BAE came to our school to speak a few months ago to talk about "careers in math and science", at which point I had to ask her whether or not it was moral to use your intellect to devise more efficient ways of killing people or to profit from the cluster bombs that are still killing small children in southern Lebanon. But to go along with what you said, education? That's a laugh. Look at American culture! The average IQ in America is estimated at around 100, which is somebody who's barely capable of a 4 year college degree. The average American believes they learned all they needed to learn about guns from "Natural Born Killaz" by Ice Cube and Dr. Dre. Do you think they would give a crap about some poor yuppie trying to teach them that guns are bad?

[Razola]

Stereotypes against Americans are acceptable. Double standards are so fucking ACE.

Now if you excuse me, I'm going to assume all Koreans are psychotic killers. DarkTemplar showed me the way.

[Roy Karrde]

That's a laugh. Look at American culture! The average IQ in America is estimated at around 100, which is somebody who's barely capable of a 4 year college degree. The average American believes they learned all they needed to learn about guns from "Natural Born Killaz" by Ice Cube and Dr. Dre. Do you think they would give a crap about some poor yuppie trying to teach them that guns are bad?


You know the last time you pulled this IQ crap I owned you pretty badly, there has never been a legitimate IQ test that covered even a group of states not to metion the whole country. The creation of this so called Estimate stems from the IQ Hoax passed around in 00 and 04 in which people believed that Blue States had a higher IQ than Red States. In the end the entire thing was believed to be a Hoax becuase there is no way to estimate a IQ of that size.

And the rest of your generalization is so pathetic that it ranks up there with "You never go to the French to help in a war becuase all the French know how to do is Surrender and nothing else"

[Andrew]

I don't think we need guns, in the hands of the general public - AT ALL.

Law Enforement - I think they could have a stock of them at the police station, but they don't need them on the beat. I think Pepper-Spray and Electric Shock Guns could be much better options and hopefully non-lethal options to subdue criminals. This option couldn't occur until you could be sure the general public no longer has firearms, or a greatly diminished stock of them. There is no reason to need a firearm unless it's the reason "To protect myself". In which then everyone uses the same damn excuse. And it will go on in a cycle, or "Keeping up with the Jones'" with guns.

Military - Have as many damn guns as you want. But keep them in the field, or for training exercises. But, then, this leaves a goverment open to a Coup if it is instable...

[Mewtwo-D2]

Life is always sunshine and rainbows! And yes, I would call you paranoid for doing such things, what next, you'll wear a hard hat all day for fear of being hit by space debris? Fine, so I don't live in a fourth world country like you do apparently, but the way to becoming a better person isn't through anger and paranoia but through love, understanding, and having a heart.


Good luck with love helping you change a tire when your car gets a flat, or understanding feeding you and giving you light when a hurricane knocks out power to your area. You know what? I live in one of the wealthiest areas in the nation. My car still gets flat tires from time to time. I've still blown a hose on the side of the road in the middle of nowhere and needed my little emergency kit to fix it. I've still had trees fall across power lines and been without power for two days. Bad things happen. People get robbed, murdered, and raped every day, and that's just outside threats.
I live in a home powered by electricity- that means there's a chance the power will go out, and I'll need a flashlight, a radio, and a phone I can count on to find out what's happened, where, and when it's getting fixed.
I keep a small amount of spare cash for unexpected emergencies. Let's say I get really sick or break my leg, and I have to miss work for a month. I've got a little windfall so my bills will get paid just in case the worst happens.
I keep band-aids, antacids, and aspirin in my purse. I usually don't need them, but sometimes I'll cut myself on a loose nail, or my friend will get a bad stomachache at a restaraunt, or a classmate will develop a bad headache. Isn't it better that I have those things close at hand, rather than having to go out and get them?

Ever heard the old axiom that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure? Preparing against disaster doesn't make you paranoid and it doesn't make you a pessimist. And that's why I will never be against private citizens having the right to arm themselves- it's just another way of hedging your bets against the possibility of the worst happening. I don't go around all day thinking 'I better get another gun in case the zombies attack!', but the more responsibilities I gain, the more I prepare for contingencies. With every preventative, it's better to have it and not need it then need it and not have it. You carry a spare tire in your trunk? You're just as paranoid as I am.

You'll learn once you grow up, kid.

[Razola]

In which then everyone uses the same damn excuse. And it will go on in a cycle, or "Keeping up with the Jones'" with guns.Are you saying that there will be escalation among private citizens? That's just silly.

[TKnHappyNess]

They could control guns, however it goes against the 2nd ammendment. Unless they fix that so only it's legal for the authorities to carry guns.

[Razola]

They could control gunsThey can't stop kids from downloading music. It is nothing short of delusional to assume illegal arms sales could be stopped.

[TKnHappyNess]

They can't stop kids from downloading music. It is nothing short of delusional to assume illegal arms sales could be stopped.

Yeah, but you're not killing people by downloading music. Besides, maybe the RIAA will get the hint that people aren't going to pay $20 for a CD with one or two good songs.

[Mewtwo-D2]

Yeah, but you're not killing people by downloading music. Besides, maybe the RIAA will get the hint that people aren't going to pay $20 for a CD with one or two good songs.

Yeah, and no money goes to organized crime when people download music illegally. Plenty of things are illegal- does it stop you from doing all of them? Crack is illegal and dangerous, yet plenty of people find lots of ways to get it.

Look at the War on Drugs. It's a complete failure. Millions are going to lock up potheads and stop people from growing weed in their closets, while hard drug smugglers and organized crime just bribe a few officials and get their wares through. You think it would be any different with guns? All that would happen if we banned guns from private citizens would be the crime rate would skyrocket and organized crime would get ridiculous kinds of rich.


Also, according to the Supreme Court, the job of the police is to uphold the law, not to protect YOU.

[mr_pikachu]

Look at the War on Drugs. It's a complete failure. Millions are going to lock up potheads and stop people from growing weed in their closets, while hard drug smugglers and organized crime just bribe a few officials and get their wares through. You think it would be any different with guns? All that would happen if we banned guns from private citizens would be the crime rate would skyrocket and organized crime would get ridiculous kinds of rich.

Pretty much agree with this. As a historical example, just look at the Prohibition Act. Do you think that when the law was passed banning alcohol consumption, the entire nation suddenly became sober?

Like Mewtwo-D2 said, people will find ways to get around such rules, thus making them nothing more than minor inconveniences.

[DarkTemplarZero]

Approximately 10 people each year are killed by accidents involving vending machines, are you going to waste your life strapping vending machines to the wall before you go near them to prevent them from falling on you? And of course love and sunshine prevent you from getting flat tires, just look at me, never had one, and life is all love and sunshine for me :)

Oh the red daisies
Flowers retain all happiness
Sunshine, yay!
Sunshine!

Anyway, since my physics class was kinda boring today because the teacher was out and the idiot sub broke up a conversation with asking everybody about the VT massacre, I brought up the idea of giving teachers guns. Of course everybody scoffed. But on the other hand, I'm from a magnet school in the richest county in the country, not exactly Newark or Compton or LA or Virginia or another one of those Darfurs of the western hemisphere, so I don't know what it's like to live where every sweet-looking grandmother on the street is carrying an AK-47 in their shopping cart just waiting to rob somebody.

You seem to not understand something, guns are not like drugs. When somebody does drugs, I assume that they wouldn't in a public area, but rather somewhere private where they wouldn't get caught. Guns, on the other hand, for your average criminal, are only useful in places where you can actually use them against people. Since a ban on guns implies both the illegality of selling or carrying a gun, then carrying one around is risky, as being caught with one in your possession will automatically get you into prison and lose you the money you paid for it. Ditto for downloading music, it's done in private and the vast majority of people don't think of it as a problem, whereas guns must be used in public and I think all of us can agree that a maniac with a gun is a bad thing.

[Razola]

You seem to not understand something, guns are not like drugs. When somebody does drugs, I assume that they wouldn't in a public area, but rather somewhere private where they wouldn't get caught. Guns, on the other hand, for your average criminal, are only useful in places where you can actually use them against people. Since a ban on guns implies both the illegality of selling or carrying a gun, then carrying one around is risky, as being caught with one in your possession will automatically get you into prison and lose you the money you paid for it. Ditto for downloading music, it's done in private and the vast majority of people don't think of it as a problem, whereas guns must be used in public and I think all of us can agree that a maniac with a gun is a bad thing.Because nobody has ever driven under the influence!

Guns are just as easy to hide as drugs unless you are retarded and carry more than just handguns. Drug sniffing dogs are akin to metal detectors, so don't even bother making that point.

[PNT510]

Approximately 10 people each year are killed by accidents involving vending machines, are you going to waste your life strapping vending machines to the wall before you go near them to prevent them from falling on you? And of course love and sunshine prevent you from getting flat tires, just look at me, never had one, and life is all love and sunshine for me :)

Oh the red daisies
Flowers retain all happiness
Sunshine, yay!
Sunshine!

Anyway, since my physics class was kinda boring today because the teacher was out and the idiot sub broke up a conversation with asking everybody about the VT massacre, I brought up the idea of giving teachers guns. Of course everybody scoffed. But on the other hand, I'm from a magnet school in the richest county in the country, not exactly Newark or Compton or LA or Virginia or another one of those Darfurs of the western hemisphere, so I don't know what it's like to live where every sweet-looking grandmother on the street is carrying an AK-47 in their shopping cart just waiting to rob somebody.

You seem to not understand something, guns are not like drugs. When somebody does drugs, I assume that they wouldn't in a public area, but rather somewhere private where they wouldn't get caught. Guns, on the other hand, for your average criminal, are only useful in places where you can actually use them against people. Since a ban on guns implies both the illegality of selling or carrying a gun, then carrying one around is risky, as being caught with one in your possession will automatically get you into prison and lose you the money you paid for it. Ditto for downloading music, it's done in private and the vast majority of people don't think of it as a problem, whereas guns must be used in public and I think all of us can agree that a maniac with a gun is a bad thing.


What a joke. If guns aren't allowed by regular people then people just won't get them. It won't stop criminals from having them at all. If they already plan on steal from someone or killing someone, why would they have a problem with breaking another law and carrying a gun.

[Leon-IH]

What a joke. If guns aren't allowed by regular people then people just won't get them. It won't stop criminals from having them at all. If they already plan on steal from someone or killing someone, why would they have a problem with breaking another law and carrying a gun.

It will stop at least some criminals, sure as hell works here in Australia.

This is just going to go back and fourth in absolutes though, so you all might as well just give the fuck up, nobody is going to be convinced here.

[DarkTemplarZero]

Yeah, I'll agree with Leon. As they say, arguing on the Internet is like the special olympics, even if you win, you're still retarded.

<3 Mewtwo-D2 :)

[Mewtwo-D2]

I did not check my sources carefully. Pardon me.

[Hyperness is a Good Thing]

Hope this article is enlightening.

I don't mean to antagonise but..

http://www.breakthechain.org/exclusives/australiaguns.html

...because I dislike misinformation. *runs away*

[Andrew]

Mewtwo D_2 what was your source for that article, and what year was it from?

Also, how many of those crimes were drug related?

[DarkTemplarZero]

I don't mean to antagonise but..

http://www.breakthechain.org/exclusives/australiaguns.html

...because I dislike misinformation. *runs away*

To quote the Juggernaut, "pimpsmack yo' ass, bitch!" *snicker*

And no, that in no way implies that M2 is a bitch, I was only trying to maintain the effect of the quote :) Also, along the lines of what Andrew asked, how many of those where committed by Colonel Mustard in the Observatory with a wrench?

[Icebloom]

To argue for gun control laws is to say it is acceptable for politicians to use police, military and other "men with guns" to decide who can and can't have guns. Absolute hypocracy, I say. It's the reason why gun rights activists are justified in their anger -- When there are people out there who are willing to send men with guns to limit and take away the guns of decent, nonviolent human beings (and successful in some of their attempts, mind you), how are we supposed to act?

Besides, as far as self-defense goes, what's the moral difference between you using a gun to shoot an attacker, and calling the police to do the same thing? If you don't have the right to defend yourself with a gun, how can you logically have the right to call on someone else with a gun?

[Leon-IH]

Someone just got railed here, and it wasn't me.

[DarkTemplarZero]

Errr Icebloom you may not have noticed this but the whole system of people with something determining which people can have that something is how this country works. C'est la capitalism. Vive la FRANCE!

[Icebloom]

Errr Icebloom you may not have noticed this but the whole system of people with something determining which people can have that something is how this country works. C'est la capitalism. Vive la FRANCE!

Point number one: What I described was not capitalism at all. Capitalism is a system of private property rights. To initiate force to decide who can and who can't have guns when you are not part of the voluntary transaction that takes place is to violate private property rights, and thus, is not capitalism.

Point number two: You haven't addressed the hypocracy on the side of the gun control advocates.

Point number three: You haven't addressed the moral issue, in that there is no moral diffrence between shooting an attacker with a gun and getting someone else to do it for you (i.e. police).

Point number four: To dismiss my argument with a simple "this is how this country works" is nothing but bending over backwards for the current state of affairs. If I see something wrong, I'm going to state it and label it as such.

[DarkTemplarZero]

*yawn* I'll humor you.

First of all, I'm not arguing with you that allowing police to carry guns in order to prevent others from carrying guns is like having a huge stockpile of Nukes in order to force others to disarm their stockpiles; stupid and worthless. Police should not carry guns in civilian areas, neither should anyone else. Next, yeah, there is no moral difference, but the practical results are different, a police officer is trained to shoot as a last resort and to aim for non-fatal shots, whereas a scared civilian with a gun will probably shoot someone at the first sign of trouble right in the chest. You make a good point with the morality aspect, but as they say, in theory, practice is no different from theory.

[Mewtwo-D2]

I posted an article without checking it out thoroughly. That was unprofessional of me and below my usual standards. I'll delete it.


However- DTZ, you're ignoring completely the fact that criminals are criminals because they break the law. Why on earth would someone who is unwilling to follow laws about murder, rape, robbery, assault, etc. follow gun laws? What's more- most criminals already don't follow gun laws, so why would more make a difference?

Also- have you ever shot a gun? When you're in a crisis situation, you don't shoot for non-fatal areas. You shoot for the biggest target- namely, the torso. If you try to aim for the knee or the hand on someone threatening you physical harm, you're probably going to miss. You usually only get one chance, so to carry a gun, you better be willing to kill or be killed.

[Blademaster]

a police officer is trained to shoot as a last resort and to aim for non-fatal shots

If I didn't know you were serious, I'd sig that quote for purposes of comedy.

[Leon-IH]

Why on earth would someone who is unwilling to follow laws about murder, rape, robbery, assault, etc. follow gun laws?


Who said they'd follow them, it's just much harder for them to actually use a gun for their crimes.

Heres why gun control works, you can try to disagree with it, but you might not get far.


The difficulties relating to the purchase of guns if properly policed, if you've ever tried to buy a banned substance you'd know you can't just say "I'm going to buy some heroin" and then go out and do it in most cases.

The inability to perform a crime out of anger on the spot (takes all of 3 seconds to shoot someone, while it takes a LOT longer to choke someone to death) because you don't have a loaded gun in your home or workplace.

The people you'd have to deal with in order to get a gun would put some people off too.

[Mewtwo-D2]

The people you'd have to deal with in order to get a gun would put some people off too.

And the people who really wanted to commit murder and mayhem? The people who aren't going to be put off are the people I would especially not want having a gun. Also- the people selling guns would be in organized crime. Great idea! Let's strengthen those scumbags even more. We didn't have enough drug smuggling and sex slavery, so let's make them even richer with arms smuggling! Also, let's make it impossible for private citizens or police to stand up to organized crime. If police can't carry guns into civilian areas, where do you think organized crime is going to set up?

In America, the Supreme Court has ruled that the job of the police is to uphold the law, not to protect private citizens. My security should not rest on anyone else- I am responsible for my own body and my own property. The thing with gun control that you can't argue is that it makes people weak and dependent. With a gun, I have the ability to fight back against the criminals who wish to harm me, my loved ones, and take my property, regardless of how they are armed. Without a gun, I am dependent on my ability to get to a phone, police response time, and my ability to appease the criminal long enough that there is a minor chance they'll get caught. Also why is it that you hardcore pro-gun control make no distinctions between the average law-abiding citizen and trigger happy ghetto rats? (Note: ghetto rats come in all colors and economic levels- their distinguishing marks are a belief that crime is cool and the urge to destroy everything good or beautiful)

Read interviews with criminals- they are less likely to commit a crime on someone they suspect is carrying a gun. If 0% of reported rapes involved a firearm, aren't I much safer from the possibility of rape by carrying a firearm?

[Roy Karrde]

The difficulties relating to the purchase of guns if properly policed, if you've ever tried to buy a banned substance you'd know you can't just say "I'm going to buy some heroin" and then go out and do it in most cases.

You must not have been to many Southern American Cities. If I am going to go get a few grams of heroin all I have to do is go to South Dallas. Same goes with Pot and many other substances. It may cost alot, but many Police do not have the man power to patrol some of the more gang related areas. If there is a illigal market place for it, then it will be available to anyone that is willing to look.


The inability to perform a crime out of anger on the spot (takes all of 3 seconds to shoot someone, while it takes a LOT longer to choke someone to death) because you don't have a loaded gun in your home or workplace.

Yes becuase it took OJ Simpson so long to strangle two people to death. Oh wait he stabbed both of them. If people are going to kill some one out of anger they will find a way, either by guns, by knives, by nunchucks, anything.


The people you'd have to deal with in order to get a gun would put some people off too.

This holds really no weight, why? Becuase if you want to do something, if you really want something, if it is a gun, or drugs, or bombs. You will get it eventually. No matter how many hoops you jump over.


Police should not carry guns in civilian areas,

Okay Good friend, I am going to have to call Bull Shit on this. I have lived through one shooting in my life. It took place in a Public Area where just two hundred feet away two gangs opened fire on eachother. Shootings in Public Places do happen, and a Cop should have a weapon to not only protect himself but the civilians around him.

[Mewtwo-D2]

Also, forgot a few points:

1) You can build guns in your own home with not a ton of difficulty.
2) Most serial killers and mass murderers do not use guns- serial killers tend to favor strangulation, stabbing, and poisoning as their modus operandi, and most mass murderers favor explosives.
3) One of the most effective bombs is a standard 25 gallon propane tank- available at your local gas station for under $50.
4) Building bombs, making molotov cocktails, and mixing napalm are not difficult processes, and walkthrus are available online.
5) Death by strangulation or by beating may expend more effort, but are not terribly difficult all things considered. If you are angry enough to shoot someone and have that little control over yourself, you are angry enough to kill them in any way possible.
6) A good kitchen knife will slice through bone like hot butter.
7) Anything can be made into a weapon by someone with some ingenuity. ANYTHING.

[Roy Karrde]

Shush Mewtwo D2, if Leon and Dark found out about all of that, well we would have a ban on everything harmful wouldnt we? Cops would have to carry Time Out Cards becuase Butter Knives are too dangerous around Civilians.

[Mewtwo-D2]

Shush Mewtwo D2, if Leon and Dark found out about all of that, well we would have a ban on everything harmful wouldnt we? Cops would have to carry Time Out Cards becuase Butter Knives are too dangerous around Civilians.

Hey, if we have to have a Nanny State, I want to come by it honestly. Besides, they'll never succeed in banning rocks and tree branches, so I better start making a supply of clubs while I can cut my trees.

[Dark-San]

Shush Mewtwo D2, if Leon and Dark found out about all of that, well we would have a ban on everything harmful wouldnt we? Cops would have to carry Time Out Cards becuase Butter Knives are too dangerous around Civilians.

For some reason, my stand on the gun ban is pretty neutral. Nothing much for me to argue about but for certain reason, my name appeared on Roy's post and now I had to answer this.

In Singapore we have a total gun ban. In fact, it is only the law enforcers that possess such weapons. However that does not mean that the entire population have no idea on using a gun.On the gun experience itself, in fact almost 95% of the male population had experience on the usage of the gun through national service. The weapon they trained in are usually the M16s.

Besides me being a civilised person, why would I need a weapon to kill someone for? My only target is Roy and he should be simple enough to be killed without any usage of weapons.

[Mewtwo-D2]

Besides me being a civilised person, why would I need a weapon to kill someone for? My only target is Roy and he should be simple enough to be killed without any usage of weapons.

I don't know what the stats are in Singapore, but in the States, 1 out of every 8 males is raped or sexually molested, while 1 out of every 4 females is. I would kill someone to prevent rape.

[Roy Karrde]

For some reason, my stand on the gun ban is pretty neutral. Nothing much for me to argue about but for certain reason, my name appeared on Roy's post and now I had to answer this.

I was talking about Dark Templar Zero. There are other darks on this board other than you...

[Leon-IH]

1) You can build guns in your own home with not a ton of difficulty.

I could use that argument to propose a removal of a ban on explosives, given it's possible to make some extremely easily in your own back yard.



2) Most serial killers and mass murderers do not use guns- serial killers tend to favor strangulation, stabbing, and poisoning as their modus operandi, and most mass murderers favor explosives.

Somehow though, I'd rather someone try to strangle or stab me, then be able to kill me in 3 seconds from 10 yards. I can at least have a vague opportunity to defend myself against someone with a knife or who is trying to choke me, and I'd like that chance.



3) One of the most effective bombs is a standard 25 gallon propane tank- available at your local gas station for under $50.

Indeed it is. But it's still far more difficult to do than walking down to your local hardware store, buying a gun and some bullets then shooting me.



4) Building bombs, making molotov cocktails, and mixing napalm are not difficult processes, and walkthrus are available online.

Theres walk throughs to making freaking personal hovercrafts like those on old sci-fi cartoons online. Also, it's actually slightly more difficult to make and use these effectively than it is to shoot someone.



5) Death by strangulation or by beating may expend more effort, but are not terribly difficult all things considered. If you are angry enough to shoot someone and have that little control over yourself, you are angry enough to kill them in any way possible.

It's a great deal more difficult to kill someone with your hands than with a gun, generally speaking people don't totally snap for long enough to choke someone to death (it's surprisingly difficult).



6) A good kitchen knife will slice through bone like hot butter.

I still rate my chances better at 2 feet than at 10.



7) Anything can be made into a weapon by someone with some ingenuity. ANYTHING.

Sure, I could probably choke someone to death with my computer mouse, I could also kill them with a chair leg if I wanted to. But, my point is, you can't spontaneously go berserk and kill someone with ingenuity, they just don't go together.

I'm not saying that banning guns works on premeditated attacks, because even if they can't get a gun, you can with enough planning kill someone with damn near anything, no disputing that. However, it does have something of a change on ones ability to just snap and shoot someone.


Got to admit Roy, I've not been to the states, I wouldn't go by choice, in part because Americans seem to be perfectly happy to put up with all sorts of things that we wouldn't have down here (e.g. your workplace laws, gun laws, choice of presidents). That said, I doubt it's as easy to get drugs as "go to bad area of town, purchase drugs" I suspect there's a little more to it than that (that said, maybe our drug dealers are a little more wary than yours).

[Roy Karrde]

Got to admit Roy, I've not been to the states, I wouldn't go by choice, in part because Americans seem to be perfectly happy to put up with all sorts of things that we wouldn't have down here (e.g. your workplace laws, gun laws, choice of presidents). That said, I doubt it's as easy to get drugs as "go to bad area of town, purchase drugs" I suspect there's a little more to it than that (that said, maybe our drug dealers are a little more wary than yours).

For one man that was a pretty cheap shot on Bush. Second if you have not been to the states then you probably do not know the Constitutional Reason for having guns. Think of it as a failsafe, the creators had just faced a overwhelming army and a tyranical Government who did not care about the people. Mind you I will preface that with that is their opinion so that we don't start any historical debates. Anyway think of the Second Amendment as their way of making sure that their creation does not go Frankenstein on them. That their creation doesn't turn against the people. Ala the Government should fear the people, the people shouldnt fear the Government.

Take away Guns, take away the Second Amendment, you don't just risk being over run by criminals, but you risk that one day the Government will become so overpowerful and controlling that the people will have no choice but to bend to it's will.

Also just to add, getting drugs is just that easy, infact easier as you can usually drive up to a street corner and they will come to your window. So if you are careful enough to venture in and not get shot, you can get almost any drug for the cost.

[DarkTemplarZero]

Blademaster: If I didn't think that lame ass banner in your sig was serious, I'd sig it for comedy, but I just feel bad for you :)

M2: No offense, but your points flat out suck. Go get laid before you argue with me :) jk jk, don't stalk me and kill me with your chosen modus operandi.
First of all, google how to build a gun. I defy you to find something that's not either a bad air gun or a cheesey high school physics experiment in magnetism. Bombs I admit are fairly straightforward, a gun requires a bit more precision, otherwise at best you have something that'll blow up in your face.
And really, I don't see how this topic of people liking to use weapons other than guns relates to gun control, if there are no guns then what's the effect on people who like to kill each other with half-eaten cereal bars let's say? The point is that it's just much more efficient to kill people with guns than with cereal bars. You try to go on a rampage with a knife, you won't get very far, with a handgun on the other hand you can easily and effectively kill a large number of people without too much threat of retaliation unless they have a gun as well.

[mr_pikachu]

You try to go on a rampage with a knife, you won't get very far, with a handgun on the other hand you can easily and effectively kill a large number of people without too much threat of retaliation unless they have a gun as well.


Bombs I admit are fairly straightforward

I shouldn't have to explain how these quotes relate to one another. But considering how you seem to like ignoring the logical arguments of others, maybe it's necessary.

Guns kill one person at a time in rapid succession. Bombs kill a lot of people simultaneously.

Numbers are fun!

[DarkTemplarZero]

True, numbers are fun. However, bombs are not, but I don't see how the issue of whether or not it should be easy to buy a gun relates to the fact that with a little bit of effort you can make something go boom. However simple it may be to cut apart batteries and do whatever else to make an explosion, it's still far easier to go to a store in Virginia and buy a gun.

And don't mistake disagreeing with ignoring "logical arguments", for lack of a better term.

[mr_pikachu]

If it's easy to make a bomb, then what difference does it make what method is used to kill people? One could argue that a bomb would be worse; some could easily take out 100 people in a close space. Take away guns, and the next-easiest method of mass murder does a heck of a lot more damage. As tragic as the Virginia Tech massacre was, it would pale in comparison to something like that.

And I wouldn't have a problem if you were simply disagreeing with the arguments of others. Ignoring them outright and resorting to slandering the people who are actually participating in the debate, however, makes your posts nothing but a waste of space.

[Mewtwo-D2]

on the other hand you can easily and effectively kill a large number of people without too much threat of retaliation unless they have a gun as well.

Thank you for proving my point. If I have a gun, I can stop a shooting spree, thus saving many innocent lives.


Also- building a gun isn't too difficult. My dad showed me how. Anyone who's been in the military can show you how.

[Magmar]

I can build a gun.......

Geez, if I can do it, anyone can do it!!

[Mewtwo-D2]

I could use that argument to propose a removal of a ban on explosives, given it's possible to make some extremely easily in your own back yard.

I was just pointing out that a ban on guns would not prevent criminals from getting them by any stretch of the imagination. They can buy them illegally, or they can build them themselves.





Somehow though, I'd rather someone try to strangle or stab me, then be able to kill me in 3 seconds from 10 yards. I can at least have a vague opportunity to defend myself against someone with a knife or who is trying to choke me, and I'd like that chance.

And since your argument was against people snapping suddenly in anger and shooting, why would they be 10 yards away from you? Again, if guns made people more prone to violence, then why are there never shootings at gun shows, gun stores, and shooting ranges? Also- why were there no school shootings and a far lower crime rate when guns were in almost every home and were easily available everywhere?



Indeed it is. But it's still far more difficult to do than walking down to your local hardware store, buying a gun and some bullets then shooting me.

Actually, it's much easier.
1) Buy propane tank
2) Set it up where you want to commit mayhem
3) Pop the cap and light it

1) Go to hardware store and choose a model of gun
2) Fill out forms
3) Fill out forms
4) Fill out forms
5) Provide proof of competency
6) Submit to standard 3-day waiting period longer on some weapons
7) Buy bullets
8) Clean and test gun
9) Find person you want to kill
10) Shoot him

It's easier to buy and murder someone with a crossbow than it is a gun.





Theres walk throughs to making freaking personal hovercrafts like those on old sci-fi cartoons online. Also, it's actually slightly more difficult to make and use these effectively than it is to shoot someone.

No, it's really not.
-Bombs: too many to list, but not at all difficult to make.
-Molotov cocktails: kerosene, bottle, rag, lighter. That's all it is.
-Napalm: bezene and polystyrene mixed with gasoline. Not difficult at all.

With shooting, you have to aim. With those, you just throw and everyone dies.



It's a great deal more difficult to kill someone with your hands than with a gun, generally speaking people don't totally snap for long enough to choke someone to death (it's surprisingly difficult).

Generally people don't snap.



I still rate my chances better at 2 feet than at 10.

Perhaps, but it is easier to hit a moving target with a knife as opposed to a gun.




Sure, I could probably choke someone to death with my computer mouse, I could also kill them with a chair leg if I wanted to. But, my point is, you can't spontaneously go berserk and kill someone with ingenuity, they just don't go together.

Most non-psychotics don't spontaneously go berserk. And actually, most impromptu murders involve impromptu weapons.


I'm not saying that banning guns works on premeditated attacks, because even if they can't get a gun, you can with enough planning kill someone with damn near anything, no disputing that. However, it does have something of a change on ones ability to just snap and shoot someone.

But you're not answering how many people do that.

Also, for the drugs, I once lived in Reston, VA. Beautiful area, the first planned community in America, very, VERY upscale. We had a drug dealer who parked on top of our hill every Friday night, to sell cocaine to the rich kids.

[DarkTemplarZero]

Wow, Magmar can build a gun and Mewtwo can build a bomb? God DAMN I'm scared, we're all gonna die. I need a 12 guage to defend myself!

Mewtwo, if the process for getting a gun were that troublesome in Virginia then 33 people would still be alive today. I could only wish that that backwater extremist fourth world trash heap would be that civilized. In Virginia it's basically walk in, show you don't have a criminal record, buy a gun, go kill somebody. And guess what, it is always easy to build a bomb, and yet you see bombings are relatively rare compared to shootings. Guns are so much simpler and legal, bombs are messy, there's always a chance you'll blow your face off and you won't have anybody to sue but yourself, and face it, most people are idiots and don't want to end up in the next Darwin Awards because they blew their balls off with a poorly made Molotov.

People don't snap? Funny, you seem to be right on the brink, and you definitely have the anger, the knowledge, and certainly the motive to go on a rampage. Honestly, you scare me. But I'm curious, tell me, just how do you build a gun that won't blow your face off?

[Mewtwo-D2]

Wow, Magmar can build a gun and Mewtwo can build a bomb? God DAMN I'm scared, we're all gonna die. I need a 12 guage to defend myself!

Mewtwo, if the process for getting a gun were that troublesome in Virginia then 33 people would still be alive today. I could only wish that that backwater extremist fourth world trash heap would be that civilized. In Virginia it's basically walk in, show you don't have a criminal record, buy a gun, go kill somebody. And guess what, it is always easy to build a bomb, and yet you see bombings are relatively rare compared to shootings. Guns are so much simpler and legal, bombs are messy, there's always a chance you'll blow your face off and you won't have anybody to sue but yourself, and face it, most people are idiots and don't want to end up in the next Darwin Awards because they blew their balls off with a poorly made Molotov.

People don't snap? Funny, you seem to be right on the brink, and you definitely have the anger, the knowledge, and certainly the motive to go on a rampage. Honestly, you scare me. But I'm curious, tell me, just how do you build a gun that won't blow your face off?

Kid, the guy got his guns illegally. I'm not an angry person- I'm a realistic one. I have no motive to go on a rampage. The only people I would willingly kill would be rapists or people threatening my family. If I came across a woman (or a man) being raped in some backalley in D.C., you can bet I would shoot their attacker. But it's not like I'm going to go out walking with a gun hunting rapists. If I found out some scumbag had raped my sister and I had him in my crosshairs, damn right I would shoot him. But I would not go looking for him.
If someone is willing to commit mass murder and is unable to get a gun, they will probably go with a bomb.

But to sum up everything for you, DTZ:
You are a child. Your mind has obviously not progressed beyond insults and feel-good platitudes. You are unwilling to look past your prejudices, you are completely unwilling to consider anyone else's point of view, and you immediately leap to conclusions on subjects that you have no understanding of. This is not meant as an insult, but only a statement of fact. I sincerely hope you are able to stay in your plastic bubble, as the real world would probably kill you.

Sure it would be nice if the world was a happy, peaceful place, but California ranks quite high in the crime rate. It's 9th on the list for the violent crime rate, while Virginia comes in at 37th. Meanwhile, Washington D.C.- paragon of gun control, has one of the highest murder rates in the country. These are statistics taken by unbiased sources. It's simple mathematics. Now, are you going to continue arguing how much worse Virginia is compared to California?

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

[firepokemon]

So we have the two right wingers that spouted crap about how Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and that getting rid of Saddam would get rid of terrorists. Did that happen? I don't think so.

They're the ones who will spout off about how criminals will get guns anyhow. Thats true. But such open door policy of guns is not an issue in a western country. Roy Karrde would tell you, "What about Mexico". Mexico isn't a western country. A western country is any country in western Europe, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Canada and the US. The fact is US has a problem with murders as result of guns unlike any other western country. This could well be attributed to the fact the US has more crime than any other western country and has more criminals in prison than any other country. These republican, likely conservative and most definately Iraq war supporters can debate with what they think to be intelligent debate. But they would also tell you, the US is winning the Iraq war. They're the same ones in 2003 who were convinced weapons would be found and the US would win and Iraq would be a better place to be. Iraq isn't any better than it was, there was no weapons of mass destruction found and Saddam wasn't even close to nuclear technology. The fact is we're talking about guns. They're tell you they have a right to bear arms. They're also tell you criminals will find other ways to get guns. Yes thats true New Zealand has a problem of unlicensed rifles. But we have no problems with crimes as result of handguns or the less. Its also true that the US has a culture of guns, and that any ban would be completely different than other western countries. A change in Gun Control I will admit won't do much difference because all types of gun weaponary is available in the US that just isn't available elsewhere. A ban would only see all those gun weaponary go underground, that I can agree with. But the fact that most people can buy a gun in less than 10 minutes in the US and that no one necessarily needs a license for those guns says something. Also the fact people can get hold of guns that go way beyond self defence says something I would have thought. America has problems, one of them is guns.

You two can spout off all the bullshit you want. You are the same two that think Iraq is going so well. Just lie back you two, watch the moronic Fox News and just believe what you choose to believe.

I and others on the otherhand will be open-minded and will actually think well theres a reason america has problems and one of them is your open-door gun policy.

[Roy Karrde]

So we have the two right wingers that spouted crap about how Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and that getting rid of Saddam would get rid of terrorists. Did that happen? I don't think so.

Umm no one said that getting rid of Saddam would get rid of terrorists, it was a step in the right direction as it was a step to make sure that we wouldnt have another 9/11 just a year and a half after the event, and that Saddam would stop funding terrorism.


They're the ones who will spout off about how criminals will get guns anyhow. Thats true. But such open door policy of guns is not an issue in a western country. Roy Karrde would tell you, "What about Mexico". Mexico isn't a western country.

So the line for Western Countries zig zags around Mexico?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_countries#_note-Society_in_Focus

From a cultural and sociological approach the Western world is defined as including all cultures that are (directly derived from) European cultures, i.e. Europe, Israel, the Americas (North and Latin America), Australia and New Zealand (and sometimes South Africa and the Philippines). Together these countries constitute "Western society"


A western country is any country in western Europe, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Canada and the US.

Says you, but only becuase you are trying to prove your point.


These republican, likely conservative and most definately Iraq war supporters can debate with what they think to be intelligent debate.

Blanket Statements are always the first sign of a idiot.


But they would also tell you, the US is winning the Iraq war. They're the same ones in 2003 who were convinced weapons would be found and the US would win and Iraq would be a better place to be. Iraq isn't any better than it was, there was no weapons of mass destruction found and Saddam wasn't even close to nuclear technology. The fact is we're talking about guns.

Yet you spend a paragraph of misdirection on Iraq, what a Sad person you are.


They're tell you they have a right to bear arms.

Which we do.


They're also tell you criminals will find other ways to get guns.

Just like Drugs.


But the fact that most people can buy a gun in less than 10 minutes in the US and that no one necessarily needs a license for those guns says something. Also the fact people can get hold of guns that go way beyond self defence says something I would have thought. America has problems, one of them is guns.

America has a problem with Guns that I agree with, America also has a problem with Drugs and Illigal Immigration, all three can quickly become connected. Also I wonder have you bought a gun in the United States? Gone through the Procedure to buy one? Timed it?


You two can spout off all the bullshit you want.

I am not the dumbass going around making Blanket Statements and bringing in things that have nothing to do with the argument.


You are the same two that think Iraq is going so well. Just lie back you two, watch the moronic Fox News and just believe what you choose to believe.

Again Blanket Statements, although if you want to get into a debate on Iraq, make a topic, stop going off topic.


I and others on the otherhand will be open-minded and will actually think well theres a reason america has problems and one of them is your open-door gun policy.

And Driving Guns underground will only worsen the problem.

[firepokemon]

I'm not a big fan of take a quote from what I say and then rebut it.


The exact scope of the Western World is of somewhat subjective nature, depending on whether cultural, economic or political criteria are used. In general however these definitions always include the following countries: the countries of Western Europe, the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

From Wikipedia. That is what I referred to. I will not include Mexico or latin america because they are not western in nature. Western refers to economically developed countries not developing countries, therefore I took this piece from that Wikipedia source. Its all well using sociological explanations but as far as I and most people reference to the western world are first world countries from Western Europe, United States, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and sometimes South Africa. Why the Phillipines would be included is beyond me, may as well include Singapore, japan then.

I'm sorry if you don't grasp what conception of western world I am referring to, but it doesn't include Mexico. A country where many of its citizens live in horrific poverty, thats the reason they have crime. Thus why I choose not to attribute it.

I'm really glad you're able to use copy and paste and also quote what I have say, but I'm not fond of such things, they're always rather boring.

I'm well aware the United States having had a gun culture for so long and then banning them thus forcing the undergrounding (is that even a word) of guns wouldn';t exactly work. I'm also not calling for a ban of guns. I think the US needs and all states should adopt such laws (as its easy to say put restrictions but some states have different laws so it is difficult) proper licensing system, no criminal or anyone thought to be dangerous should get be able to get a license. That means a licensing process where a person must get two independent sources saying this person is a good person because of blah blah blah. Perhaps even a psychiatric report. And once that they can get a license. Remove blatant gun weaponary that is not for recreational use (ie. hunting, sport) or self defense. The US or its citizens just do not need them. Gun shop owners and worklers should enquire as to why they want such gun weaponary. And mental patients or people thought to be dangerous should not be able to get a license. This license should be made nation-wide and could be used in all states. Perhaps there needs to be an adoption of gun laws like states have done with Jessica Laws. I wouldn't expect things to change immediate but such a process whereby gun owners must be licensed would mean that fewer people who ought to gain guns would not be able to obtain them. Yes this would also create an underground market, but then surely there is already an underground market.

[Roy Karrde]

I will not include Mexico or latin america because they are not western in nature. Western refers to economically developed countries not developing countries, therefore I took this piece from that Wikipedia source.

Western Countries are based on a multitude of criteria, some on economy which Mexico would not be considered, others on Social and Political Norms, which Mexico WOULD be a part of. Now if we were discussing Economic Transactions in the modern world your point would be valid, but no we are talking about Guns in Western Countries, that would be considered Social, and Mexico is considered a Social Economic Country.


Its all well using sociological explanations but as far as I and most people reference to the western world are first world countries from Western Europe, United States, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and sometimes South Africa. Why the Phillipines would be included is beyond me, may as well include Singapore, japan then.

That is only becuase those few fit all three, but we are not talking about Western Economies, again we are talking about Social Western Countries, which would fit a much broader list.


I'm sorry if you don't grasp what conception of western world I am referring to, but it doesn't include Mexico. A country where many of its citizens live in horrific poverty, thats the reason they have crime. Thus why I choose not to attribute it.

So Poverty automatically means you will comit a crime? You are just trying to throw what ever you have up against the wall when I have already proven that there are many ways to consider a Western Country.



I'm well aware the United States having had a gun culture for so long and then banning them thus forcing the undergrounding (is that even a word) of guns wouldn';t exactly work.

Good we agree on something, keep Iraq out of it and we can have a actual civilized debate.


I'm also not calling for a ban of guns. I think the US needs and all states should adopt such laws (as its easy to say put restrictions but some states have different laws so it is difficult) proper licensing system, no criminal or anyone thought to be dangerous should get be able to get a license. That means a licensing process where a person must get two independent sources saying this person is a good person because of blah blah blah. Perhaps even a psychiatric report. And once that they can get a license. Remove blatant gun weaponary that is not for recreational use (ie. hunting, sport) or self defense. The US or its citizens just do not need them.

All well and good, but that is going to stop inner city crime how? This would stop Cho how? You really need to do some research on Gun Laws, what each state has for a law as well as Federal Laws.


Gun shop owners and worklers should enquire as to why they want such gun weaponary.

Yes becuase people dont Lie.


And mental patients or people thought to be dangerous should not be able to get a license.

That already happens, the problem with Cho is that he said he didnt want to be in the hospital and left, he then lied on his Gun Application.


This license should be made nation-wide and could be used in all states. Perhaps there needs to be an adoption of gun laws like states have done with Jessica Laws. I wouldn't expect things to change immediate but such a process whereby gun owners must be licensed would mean that fewer people who ought to gain guns would not be able to obtain them. Yes this would also create an underground market, but then surely there is already an underground market.

There is already an underground market the only difference is that you will be limiting even more the families that live in the inner cities and such that want to play by the rules and protect their home. The Gangs and Criminals know where to get the guns, and if they do not they will find the way.

Anyway you made a whole post with out making a Politically Bigotted Statement on Republicans, going off topic on Iraq, or making a Blanket Statement, you get a Gold Star!

[firepokemon]

I continue to maintain that thoughts on the western world have remained the same and while their may be an academic debate taking place on what constitutes the western world I for one am not going to believe it.

Why would I be limiting inner-city families who want to live by the world? They can obtain a licence I see nothing that I have said that will limit american families from obtaining a gun for self defence. All I have said, is use a licensing system and get rid of weaponary that someone wouldn't be using for self defence or that is not needed for self defence.

Roy Karrde, also your american but I would think not even you know all state gun laws. I realise some have stricter conditions for gun use than others, but wouldn't some type of universal law be more helpful and surely you as a gun advocate realise there needs to be at least some gun restrictions. That does not mean limit recreational or self defense use. But surely for self defense you don't need a rifle or surely for self defense you don't need a powerful pistol. Wouldn't a normal easy pistol be just as good? Alsi I'm aware criminals will always find a way, but if you can make it at least more difficult that may mean just one more death as result of guns.

[Roy Karrde]

I continue to maintain that thoughts on the western world have remained the same and while their may be an academic debate taking place on what constitutes the western world I for one am not going to believe it.

That is fine, but you cannot deny that many countries these days would now constitute a "Western Country", based on one or two of the factors. back in the 70s you could sit a set of terms down and say "These are what constitute a Western Country" now days these terms have expanded. Saying that a Country isnt considered a Western Country in a debate on a Country on a Social means just becuase that country does not live up to the Economic mark for a Western Country is wrong.


Why would I be limiting inner-city families who want to live by the world? They can obtain a licence I see nothing that I have said that will limit american families from obtaining a gun for self defence. All I have said, is use a licensing system and get rid of weaponary that someone wouldn't be using for self defence or that is not needed for self defence.

Becuase making many people jump through a extrodinary amount of loop holes while the bad guys just go pick them up from a Chevy in the back of a 7-11 will put alot of families off. Besides I really think it should be the states or even the city that decides the gun laws. Someone buying a Gun in say a Rural Town in Utah shouldnt have to go through the same rules as some one buying a gun in Mid Town Los Angelas.


Roy Karrde, also your american but I would think not even you know all state gun laws. I realise some have stricter conditions for gun use than others, but wouldn't some type of universal law be more helpful and surely you as a gun advocate realise there needs to be at least some gun restrictions. That does not mean limit recreational or self defense use. But surely for self defense you don't need a rifle or surely for self defense you don't need a powerful pistol. Wouldn't a normal easy pistol be just as good? Alsi I'm aware criminals will always find a way, but if you can make it at least more difficult that may mean just one more death as result of guns.

My point with the state laws is that many of your ideas are already laws for some states, but many of them do not require laws like that. Placing down blanket laws can be good sometimes, but bad the other, in the end laws like these should more go on a city by city basis or a state by state basis than nation wide. A person in Los Angelas wouldnt need a Rifle or a High Powered Pistol, but a Farmer in Kansas who has to keep a look out for Foxes or Wolves may need one.

[firepokemon]

Well things should be adaptable city to city or state to state I would think that would be fine. I do think state power rather than city would be even better, otherwise I could not see how a licensing system could work.

[Last Exile]

The 2nd Amendment was written during the bloody Civil War when the whole damn US was scared all the time and arms were required. It's nearly 200 years down the track now. Who the bloody hell do people need to bear arms against now? The conditioning that has gone into making that many people believe guns are necessary is just sad. They're not necessary. This is the 21st century. Change the damn law and outlaw guns. Every other major country that did this had their critics and said it would never work and that it wouldn't reduce gun-related crime. Yet it did. Don't hide behind the excuse of the US being a unique situation or that it's the bullet or the person firing the gun that kills people that removes guns from having responsibility. Guns provide the easiest way to kill someone. Why allow them to circulate so freely?

[DarkTemplarZero]

Umm Roy, if I was living in Los Angeles I would need a rifle. Preferably a minigun or something similar that's capable of several thousand rounds a minute. Just in case some African-American youth who's a member of a gang decides I'm a buster fool and a playerhater and that he wants to pop a cap or whatever it is they say. Little does he know that I'm a trap star and that I'll put 200 warning shots right in his face :) Hahah jk jk.

http://www.unicri.it/wwd/analysis/icvs/pdf_files/understanding_files/19_GUN%20OWNERSHIP.pdf
^ An interesting study. Apparently homicide rates are much lower in countries that have very strict gun laws, i.e. the UK, etc. Woo.

[Roy Karrde]

Okay how did I get dragged into this again? Anyway I may actually be picking up a gun soon. Mind you I have never even seen a gun before in my life before. But my Apartment has had alot of frequent break ins, and yesterday I had a run in with a very very angry man who had a bad case of road rage, who lives just down the road. So I am starting to consider one for protection.

[Mewtwo-D2]

The 2nd Amendment was written during the bloody Civil War when the whole damn US was scared all the time and arms were required. It's nearly 200 years down the track now. Who the bloody hell do people need to bear arms against now? The conditioning that has gone into making that many people believe guns are necessary is just sad. They're not necessary. This is the 21st century. Change the damn law and outlaw guns. Every other major country that did this had their critics and said it would never work and that it wouldn't reduce gun-related crime. Yet it did. Don't hide behind the excuse of the US being a unique situation or that it's the bullet or the person firing the gun that kills people that removes guns from having responsibility. Guns provide the easiest way to kill someone. Why allow them to circulate so freely?



There are just so many things wrong with your post, I hardly know where to begin... I guess at the beginning.

1) Revolutionary War. The Constitution was written in 1789 and ratified in 1791- the Civil War was fought between 1860-1865. Clear? Okay.
2) Needed guns because we were "scared"? How about "Needed guns because most of the continent was a fucking wilderness, and people needed guns to provide food for their families and protect themselves from criminals where there was no one to enforce the law."
3) Who do we need to bear arms against? Let's start with the most common one- CRIMINALS. Like all countries, America has crime. Unlike many countries, people in America have the right to defend themselves against criminals. There's also the reason the 2nd Amendment was written- to defend against tyrannical governments. What has every dictator in history done first? De-arm the populace. You can't rule an armed population through fear and terror.
4) It's the 21st century? Oh, goody! I guess all violent crimes will stop now that you have made that astute observation. Hey, criminals! It's the 21st century! Rape, murder, and armed robbery are now primitive as well as bad, so you'd better stop it.
5) No, it really didn't reduce crimes. Fewer people were shot, but more people were stabbed or bludgeoned to death, and rape and robbery statistics skyrocketed. Criminals, like everyone else, prefer to operate in the simplest way possible- they are very unlikely to attempt an assault on an individual they believe is armed. Don't believe me? Read interviews with mafioso's and other gangsters. They're happy when their potential victims are disarmed.
6) It's the price of avoiding tyranny. I have the right to live free, and I have the right to prevent anyone from infringing on my rights. I have the rights to my life and property, and therefore, logically, I have the right to protect both.

Bottom line, you fail American history, you fail elementary psychology, and you fail on world history.

[Last Exile]

1. You didn't have a big army then, granted. You have the biggest army in the world now, you have numerous armed police forces. They are your protection. I don't recall being vigilante as being a factor for the greater good. Furthermore, the 2nd Amendment wasn't written for the general public. It was written for STATE MILITAS! NOT for the general public. The 2nd Amendment was taken out of context from Day 1 and still is. That's American History. You are not in a war, you are not under attack. Stop living in fear!

2. You have just admitted you live in constant fear! Fear of being overrun, fear of being defenseless, fear or not being able to stick it to someone who sticks it to you?! If you're meant to be the greatest democracy on Earth, what the bloody hell do you have to fear?! You've got the bombs, you've got the armies, the power but you're still afraid. Because the world no longer lives in awe of the US. And we shouldn't. Is that not the definition of a tyranny? Why on earth should 6 billion other people live the way that a country that has only 270 odd million decides is fit for the rest of the world? This isn't colonial times, Civil War, WWI, WWII, Cold War, Gulf War. Wars in the Middle East are fought far, far away from your comfy home where you can sleep at night without the worry of a shell blowing you to smithereens or militia running into your home. What the bloody hell do you have to fear? Criminals. Okay. You make guns and ammo so easily obtainable that anyone with the moolah could access them even if they're the biggest dickbrain alive. So make them unaccessible. I repeat - every other bloody country that ever outlawed guns had their critics, but you know what? We're much safer for having done so!

3. Tyranny? TYRANNY?! You call disarming the general population tyrannical?! Well excuse me! Australia wanted them banned after we had, and what still is, the biggest gun massacre in modern history. Yes, we did. Martin Bryant, a very mentally sick person, bought a gun via normal means and randomly killed 35 people, for which he is imprisoned for life and will never see the light of day. That's more than Virgina, than Columbine, than all of them. How did we feel? Bloody mortified. We didn't want anyone to do this again! So we banned those bloody guns. But we do allow the odd but of game hunting, we do allow recreational use of guns under appropriate conditions. Even professional shooters/gun-users in Australia don't have problems with it. They think this is just fine and that it is for the greater good. Australia, England, virtually all of the western block of Europe, India - guns are illegal and the population wanted that to be so! Even countries with larger populations with yours have far less gun-related deaths than yours. And here's the strange part - the other forms of crime DON'T go up to compensate! That is a complete load of crap. There is a difference between perception and truth. If you honestly believe everything a gangster or crook says, you are a prisoner of fear. If you believe everything the media says, you are a prisoner of fear for they are the biggest circulators of it. You are a prisoner of their tyrrany. There is truth in the media, but only when it is profitable. If fear and lies are profitable, they will do whatever it takes to make you believe that. You are a prisoner of fear and they have won the battle versus people like you.

4. So shoot them before they shoot you? That's really responsible. You've just admitted once again, you live in fear and terror of what MIGHT happen! Yes, what MIGHT happen! There is a dark side to humanity, bad things happen because ultimately there is the capability for anyone to be evil. OF COURSE VIOLENT CRIME IS GOING TO HAPPEN! Did I ever bloody say it didn't?! Don't put words into my mouth or twist what I said. Crimes happen because of people. THAT'S WHY THE POLICE EXIST! Police may not be perfect but for the greater part they do their bloody job. We may not approve of all their means but they get the job done and they make the world a safer place. YOU ARE NOT THE LAW! So you think having a weapon and having the right to kill someone, just because it's in self defense, makes you any better than a criminal?! Killing someone is killing someone, murder is murder. Unless it is in war, on the battlefield, IT'S MURDER. It's vigilante warfare. Yeah, that's living free - not. No thanks, I don't want to live like that.

5. You are deluded if you think all tyrannical governments disarm the population. Iran, Iraq before Saddam's fall, Yemen, North Korea, the African states under tyrannical rule. They were all given the right to bear arms. And look what happened to them. Look what happened to them once they decided to arm themselves once their loonie took over. Living in constant fear, believing in the right to bear arms against the POTENTIAL of being attacked. This line of thinking, of fear of the unknown - this is what breeds paranoia and being a prisoner of fear. This ISN'T freedom. It's the exact opposite.

Your argument falls flat. Your claims are as ill-founded as any I have ever seen. You contradict yourself every few sentences. You are a prisoner of the fear and tyranny that you claims to be against and free of. You fail at aruging, at history, but most of all, as being a free person. You are the opposite. You have done everything criminals and terrorists wanted people like you to do. You are a prisoner of fear. You are a prisoner of self-inflicted tyranny. You are the ultimate failure.

You are the ultimate failure.

[DarkTemplarZero]

Mewtwo you fail at life, but that's beside the point. Just kidding, I love you :) You're my favorite crazy murderous maniac, outside of perhaps Tommy Vercetti, but he's not real.

1) LE said all there has to be said.
2) Lucky now most of the continent is rather safe and there are people to enforce the law, eh?
3) Wrong, the first thing every dictator did was wipe out the opposition and declare it illegal to stand against him. But yeah, it's well known that reality has a liberal bias, we'll discredit that >.<
4) Yes they are primitive and bad, so you'd better stop it. I don't understand why Christian people seem to love killing each other so much, what do you not understand about "thou shalt not kill"?
5) That's a load of crap and you know it. There is incredibly strict gun control in Tokyo, and there is an average of 200 homicides per year for a population of ~ 12 million and a relatively small police force. Los Angeles ranges from about 600-1000 per year, with a population of only 4 million and a massive police department.
6) Oh please, take your head out of the gutter for one second and realize that life is not entirely a nuclear bomb that a dog just took a diarrhea shit all over.

Hahah Last Exile that quote was classic. "You are the ultimate failure" AHAHAHAHAH I'm laughing hysterically here, so straightforward, so blunt, I love it.

[Last Exile]

Japan's problems stem from their strict, interdependent culture and high living costs and high expectations. Failure isn't tolerated in Japan so when you fail, you either kill someone else or yourself. I wouldn't claim to know the reasons in the US, I haven't look into that section enough,

[anonymous]

I know that whatever i post will get me flamed, so I'll just let a picture do the talking instead.

http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/3870/1178691282471qa1.jpg

[DarkTemplarZero]

I really don't understand the correllation between 9/11 and gun control. You want people to be allowed to carry guns on planes? That is the most outrageously stupid idea I have ever heard. One accidental discharge and everybody on that plane is dead. Other than that incomprehensibly stupid idea, I am unfortunately not retarded enough to think of any more possible corellations. You're clearly an idiot, care to enlighten us? And you're right, if you tried to argue something that stupid, you would be flamed. You might as well argue that the moon is made of green cheese.

[anonymous]

and thats the kind of reason why i didnt really bother with a huge response. no matter what anyone posts here, mostly what ive seen in this thread is less of a debate, and more of a blatant argument, with much flaming, regardless of what someone says. and i didnt mean "allow guns on a plane", because that would be retarded for obvious reasons. maybe i shouldve cropped that part out, but i just got lazy at this point. bet ill get flamed for posting this stuff too, even though theres no real point here either. thanks for proving my point.

[Blademaster]

Zero, MUST you insult everybody on TPM who disagrees with you? :sweat:

anonymous, I apologize for him, Roy Karrde, and whoever else has given you the wrong idea here - most of the smarter folks in TPM don't reply to these kinds of threads, for obvious reasons - if they did, we'd have threads just like this... only they'd be 800 posts long.

Anyway, welcome to TPM and all that jazz; if you avoid the Mods and the peanut gallery here, it's really a nice place.

See ya around the forums! :wave:

[Roy Karrde]

Ooookay how do I keep getting dragged into this, really DTZ you need to calm down, alot. Anyway welcome to the forums Anonymous, really alot of people in these debates are just playing around for fun and never mean what they say. Anyway welcome to the forums! Check out RPG! * Waves * Umm... Okay I am leaving this topic, I dont wanna be dragged back in * Runs away crying *

[Master Rudy]

Ooookay how do I keep getting dragged into this, really DTZ you need to calm down, alot. Anyway welcome to the forums Anonymous, really alot of people in these debates are just playing around for fun and never mean what they say. Anyway welcome to the forums! Check out RPG! * Waves * Umm... Okay I am leaving this topic, I dont wanna be dragged back in * Runs away crying *

Sure ya do Roy! Because there's nothing more amusing that watching Zero make a total fool of himself time and time again! Oops! Sorry Z! You know I love you and your foolishness.

Ok now that I'm done sinking to DTZ's level and showing how dumb he sounds when he pulls crap like that it's time to hit the real debate. As it stands most of what needs to be said has been posted already. And it really does boil down to the fact that when you outlaw firearms then only the outlaws will have them. Look at other good cases in history. Prohibition? Didn't take much to find a speakeasy and get drunk. War on drugs? Not hard to find it if you truely know where to look and who to ask. Hell if I really wanted to I know at least 10 people I could get weed from right now. Guns would be the same case. Yeah I'm sure it's worked in some places but you can't base how the rest of the world will react on one country. Plus it's absurd to say it's bullshit that some of us are wrong to say other types of violent crime go up when guns are out of the mix. Admittedly I can't remember what magazine it was in (might have been American Rifleman)but they published a story showing why the right to bear arms works. An armed bystander watched as a criminal fleeing from the cops shot and killed a policeman after wrecking his car and then proceeded to turn on the witness. The witness was quick to get out his own weapon and drop the scumbag. Now in DTZ's world what do we have? A dead cop and an unarmed civvie at the total mercy of the crook.

Personally like Roy I don't know why I got into this myself. Pro Gun Control vs. Right to Bear Arms is like so many debates in the US. Both sides believe they are right and will show evidence to back it up. One side will not tip to the other and say you win.

/sigh
NOW I WANT MY 10 MINUTES THAT I SPENT TYPING THIS BACK!!!! :P

*goes back to listening to LP and playing WoW*

[Mewtwo-D2]

1. You didn't have a big army then, granted. You have the biggest army in the world now, you have numerous armed police forces. They are your protection. I don't recall being vigilante as being a factor for the greater good. Furthermore, the 2nd Amendment wasn't written for the general public. It was written for STATE MILITAS! NOT for the general public. The 2nd Amendment was taken out of context from Day 1 and still is. That's American History. You are not in a war, you are not under attack. Stop living in fear![\quote]

Wrong- Supreme Court says the military and the police are not here to protect individuals, but to uphold the law. If someone is getting robbed and calls the police, they don't have to do shit. Your property is not their concern. As for State Militias- EVERYONE IN THE UNITED STATES IS IN THE MILITIA! The militia applies to every able-bodied citizen. I can go get a friend of mine who set up the Pittsburgh Militia, and I can go find the laws on it, but every able-bodied citizen is part of the militia by default.

[QUOTE=Last Exile;328098]2. You have just admitted you live in constant fear! Fear of being overrun, fear of being defenseless, fear or not being able to stick it to someone who sticks it to you?! If you're meant to be the greatest democracy on Earth, what the bloody hell do you have to fear?!

How about rape and armed robbery?


You've got the bombs, you've got the armies, the power but you're still afraid. Because the world no longer lives in awe of the US.

What in the blue fuck does the world community have to do whether private citizens of the United States attempt to assault other private citizens of the United States? Is the World Community going to protect my property?


And we shouldn't. Is that not the definition of a tyranny? Why on earth should 6 billion other people live the way that a country that has only 270 odd million decides is fit for the rest of the world? This isn't colonial times, Civil War, WWI, WWII, Cold War, Gulf War.

Who ever said you had to live the way the US does? Not me. I said I am not letting some bureaucrat comfy in his soft chair deprive me of my rights.


Wars in the Middle East are fought far, far away from your comfy home where you can sleep at night without the worry of a shell blowing you to smithereens or militia running into your home. What the bloody hell do you have to fear? Criminals. Okay. You make guns and ammo so easily obtainable that anyone with the moolah could access them even if they're the biggest dickbrain alive. So make them unaccessible. I repeat - every other bloody country that ever outlawed guns had their critics, but you know what? We're much safer for having done so!

Safer, unless you're a woman. Actually, male rape is a pretty big problem too- I know at least five women who were raped, molested, or sexually assaulted. Two of them had mace. You are giving criminals carte blanche to do whatever they want.


3. Tyranny? TYRANNY?! You call disarming the general population tyrannical?! Well excuse me! Australia wanted them banned after we had, and what still is, the biggest gun massacre in modern history. Yes, we did. Martin Bryant, a very mentally sick person, bought a gun via normal means and randomly killed 35 people, for which he is imprisoned for life and will never see the light of day. That's more than Virgina, than Columbine, than all of them. How did we feel? Bloody mortified. We didn't want anyone to do this again! So we banned those bloody guns. But we do allow the odd but of game hunting, we do allow recreational use of guns under appropriate conditions. Even professional shooters/gun-users in Australia don't have problems with it. They think this is just fine and that it is for the greater good. Australia, England, virtually all of the western block of Europe, India - guns are illegal and the population wanted that to be so! Even countries with larger populations with yours have far less gun-related deaths than yours. And here's the strange part - the other forms of crime DON'T go up to compensate! That is a complete load of crap. There is a difference between perception and truth. If you honestly believe everything a gangster or crook says, you are a prisoner of fear. If you believe everything the media says, you are a prisoner of fear for they are the biggest circulators of it. You are a prisoner of their tyrrany. There is truth in the media, but only when it is profitable. If fear and lies are profitable, they will do whatever it takes to make you believe that. You are a prisoner of fear and they have won the battle versus people like you.


"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let's not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country." --Adolf Hitler

http://constitutionalistnc.tripod.com/hitler-leftist/id14.html

"Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA - ordinary citizens don't need guns, as their having guns doesn't serve the State." -- Heinrich Himmler, Hitler's SS leader.

"Ideas are more dangerous than guns. We wouldn’t let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas?"
Joseph Stalin

"If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves."
Joseph Stalin

http://www.jpfo.org/deathgc.htm

Congratulations- you guys have a lot in common.


4. So shoot them before they shoot you? That's really responsible. You've just admitted once again, you live in fear and terror of what MIGHT happen! Yes, what MIGHT happen!

So, you'd have sex without a condom because it's living in fear to assume the girl MIGHT get pregnant, or you MIGHT get an STD?


There is a dark side to humanity, bad things happen because ultimately there is the capability for anyone to be evil. OF COURSE VIOLENT CRIME IS GOING TO HAPPEN! Did I ever bloody say it didn't?! Don't put words into my mouth or twist what I said. Crimes happen because of people. THAT'S WHY THE POLICE EXIST! Police may not be perfect but for the greater part they do their bloody job.

So, if I am getting raped, I can get to the phone and call them! And they'll materialize at my side and pull the dickweed off of me?



We may not approve of all their means but they get the job done and they make the world a safer place. YOU ARE NOT THE LAW! So you think having a weapon and having the right to kill someone, just because it's in self defense, makes you any better than a criminal?! Killing someone is killing someone, murder is murder. Unless it is in war, on the battlefield, IT'S MURDER. It's vigilante warfare. Yeah, that's living free - not. No thanks, I don't want to live like that.

Murder is murder. Yeah- people still die on the battlefeild. If it's kill or be killed, I am not a criminal. If someone tries to kill me, I will kill them first to preserve my rights. I'm not saying that it happens often, but if it has to come down to my life versus the person who is trying to rape or kill me, they are going to be killed by me.


5. You are deluded if you think all tyrannical governments disarm the population. Iran, Iraq before Saddam's fall, Yemen, North Korea, the African states under tyrannical rule. They were all given the right to bear arms. And look what happened to them. Look what happened to them once they decided to arm themselves once their loonie took over. Living in constant fear, believing in the right to bear arms against the POTENTIAL of being attacked. This line of thinking, of fear of the unknown - this is what breeds paranoia and being a prisoner of fear. This ISN'T freedom. It's the exact opposite.

So sex without condoms, drive with no seat belt, non-perishable food and savings accounts be damned! Accepting that the worst CAN happen is simple common sense. You refuse to accept that the worst can happen, you invite it. If I never get assaulted or raped, good! I never want to get assaulted! But an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. I arm myself against the possibility that one day someone is going to assault me.


Your argument falls flat. Your claims are as ill-founded as any I have ever seen. You contradict yourself every few sentences. You are a prisoner of the fear and tyranny that you claims to be against and free of. You fail at aruging, at history, but most of all, as being a free person. You are the opposite. You have done everything criminals and terrorists wanted people like you to do. You are a prisoner of fear. You are a prisoner of self-inflicted tyranny. You are the ultimate failure.

You are the ultimate failure.


You are a naive little child. You think that the world always works out just the way you plan? And you think preparing for the possibility of bad things happening is being a prisoner of fear?

I drive a car- I need to buy gas, get tune-ups, and carry a spare tire. Most of the time, my car will run fine- last year I had two flat tires, a burst coolant hose, and a broken horn. My spare tire helped get me off the side of the road and home, my emergency kit helped me fix the coolant hose, and my spare fuses helped me fix the horn. I bought all of them when the car was working fine.

I live in a house- I need to keep a battery-powered radio, have candles/gas lamps, and have a reliable phoneline when the power goes out. Last year the power went out 6 times- four times at night. Snowstorms and thunderstorms knocked the power out. Once it was out for 12 hours. Luckily, I was able to keep in contact with the power company, and was able to not fall down my stairs and hurt myself, thanks to my flashlight.


I am a female- I can get pregnant. If I choose to have sex, I would choose to use birth control, because I don't want to have children right now. If I was having sex with someone I didn't know was clean, I'd use a condom to make sure I wouldn't get an STD. As a woman, I'm also more at risk to get raped than men. I am less strong than the average man, so I am less likely to successfully fend off an attack without a weapon.

I have a body- it gets sick sometimes. I go to the dentist to keep my teeth from falling out and to the doctor to keep my body healthy. My mother died of breast cancer at an early age, so once I hit 25, I will get yearly mammograms. Apparently that's being a prisoner of fear.


I am realistic. I hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. I'd like to know how you all get along with your cars that never break down, your houses that never run out of power, your supernatural protection from all forms of crime, your sex partners who never get pregnant and are always clean, your always perfect teeth, and your always perfect health. If you could pass the secret on to me, I'd be happy to hear it.

[Blademaster]

Can we all just CHILL OUT now? None of you are accomplishing anything except frustrating each other. You all are at opposite ends of the subject, so as perfect as you all think your arguments are, NOBODY ELSE DOES. You all sound like bickering children using big-people words and topics. Cut it out already - I've been listening to a whole lot of you saying the same things over and over, and I STILL don't agree with you. Do any of you honestly feel any different - that your life's viewpoint has suddenly been changed because some stranger you barely know has ruffled your feathers and told you their opinion? Does that make ANY sense to ANY of you stubborn people?

Quit this pointless arguing and immature name-calling NOW and lighten up already - as screwed up as your life may or may not be, it's not worth wasting any of it by getting upset over this crap.

Oh, and a cookie goes to the first person to deduce the paradox of what I just said. :sweat2:

[Mewtwo-D2]

You know, I would not have gotten so hostile if DTZ had not called me delusional and paranoid for having been sexually victimized. It was not my fault that I was targetted for abuse, and I am making sure that I will never be in a position of weakness again. The rape victims I know didn't choose to be raped, and now most of them choose to arm themselves rather than risk being sexually victimized again.

Instead of making this about my politics, how about acknowledging that this is a legitimate women's issue? And a legitimate men's issue, but few people like to confront that.

[Mewtwo-D2]

Now that I'm on my own computer, maybe I can enlighten all of the people blaming me for my victimization as to what living in fear really is.

I was victimized at 12. I was a shy new student in a public school, after having gone to private school my whole life. I was about 5'4'' and maybe 130 lbs. I also had a large bust I was shy about. From the first week, I had boys approaching me in the halls demanding sexual favors. I was told that if they caught me alone, they were going to rape me. Daily, I heard boys telling me that they knew where I lived, what my schedule was, and that they were going to find me and rape me. I was too afraid to tell anyone, so I would just cry. I was able to take solace in one person- Kuro_Espeon. Even girls would tell me that their guy friends wanted me to perform sexual favors on them. I couldn't eat my lunch without people howling at me like I was a stripper. All I could do was hang my head and cry. I was insulted, I was spit at, I had my notes and books stolen, I had false stories about me told to teachers, and I had only one person in the whole school who would talk to me as if I were human.

I became bulimic and I stopped trying to treat my teenage acne. I stopped wearing any shirts that weren't XXL. I almost stopped brushing my hair- I let it grow really long so I could hide behind it. If anyone so much as mentioned the word 'sex', I would cry, or sometimes throw up. I would throw up after biology lectures because I was still so scared from what had happened to me. I still saw some of those boys in the hall, and they were still much bigger than me. I still was sure that they would rape me unless I was as unattractive as possible. I gained 150 lbs. in four years, and would miss school for any reason. I believed fervently that if I was alone with a male besides my father or brother, he would try to rape me. I made no male friends for almost three years- I wouldn't even talk to boys. I'd just hide behind my curtain of hair, my self-inflicted obesity, my acne, and my XXL T-shirt and cry if one tried to talk to me. I had nightmares about rape almost every night for four years.

So don't you dare talk to me about living in fear. That is living in fear- being too paralyzed to live your life. With help from pokemaniacbill, I began to realize that not everyone was out to victimize me. I took charge of my life, and said that I would never be a victim again. I was never going to sit by passively and cry while things went wrong. I was going to take my life into my own hands, and would take any measures necessary to not be made into a victim again. I am not a vigilante killer, and I will not be striding through the streets of DC, killing any man in sight. I will carry my gun in all legal places, and hopefully will never have to draw it at any point in my life. A gun is a tool, and I would not use it unless I was actively in danger. But you can not talk to me about living in fear unless you have ever been in active fear of your own body. You do not understand, and you will never understand unless you yourself have been sexually victimized. I hope it never happens to you.


Now I just have to wait to get flamed for daring to be angry at the people who sexually abused me.


EDIT: Now that I think on it, could you two tell me just why it is you are so threatened by the fact that I refuse to be a victim of sexual intimidation?

[Heald]

Guns ought to be banned. They're so gauche. They need to be banned so people think up more inventive ways of killing each other.

Think about it: how many people do you hear getting shot? And how many people do you hear getting killed through interpretive dance? Exactly. People have gotten boring and predictable. If everyone has a gun, people are always ready for each other, and thus, if someone pulls out a gun, chances are someone else has a gun too, and therefore someone is going to go down like Monica.

However, take the guns out of the equation, and instead of hearing about 'another' school shooting, you hear about some Chinese kid who massacred several of his classmates with trained killer bees, or two guys who decide Columbine is too conventional and decide to blow up all reason with a context bomb. What about an army of trained squirrels that fire darts out of bamboo pipes? What about playing a tune on the ukulele of death that is so bizarre that it literally melts the victim?

And when was the last time you heard of someone strangling another person with their feet?

Yes, it is certainly true that people will kill each other, whether or not they have guns, so ban the guns and tap into that creative strain! The dimension-skipping volkswagen of doom awaits.

[Mewtwo-D2]

Actually, now that I think on it- could you two tell me why it is that you're so threatened by my refusal to be a victim of sexual intimidation? Please, do enlighten me. I'd really love to hear a reason why I shouldn't feel safe in my own body.
I already know DTZ considers a dead rape victim morally superior to a woman with a rapist dead at her feet, but Last Exile, I thought you had a functioning brain.

[Last Exile]

Okay...You asked for it.

Do you honestly think I've had a perfect life?

You don't want to know the number of times my dad almost beat me to death, tried to strangle me to death or hit and run me. You don't want to know the number of times my mother almost killed him to defend me. You don't want to know the number of times I had other students feel me up or strip and beat me in high school. Or that an old man felt me up on the bus in 9th grade. (So don't tell me I don't know what it means to be a victim of sexual violence because I know EXACTLY what it means and how it feels!) Or the number of death threat notes or pranks I had pulled off in my lockers and desks while teachers did nothing against it. Or the taunts and slams I got about my weight especially from the phys ed teachers. Or the number of times I had racial slurs cast from me from even the teachers as well as the students or the principal and the school counsellor suggest I was the problem and may have even asked for it. Or the number of taunts and pranks my relatives and father pulled on me and my mother after she divorced my father. Or being attacked at knifepoint by white supremacist skinheads 1 block from my house. Or the years I've had to live in virtual poverty in envy of the luxuries and priviliges eveyrone else had while I've lived plainly ever since my parents split. And aside from the occassional solace from my busy mother trying to raise me single, I was alone. I didn't have anyone to set them off or help me.

I know exactly what evil men and teen boys are capable of. I felt it every day for 9 years. But I refused to let them get the better of me. I refuse to sink to the level of criminals and perpetrators. I will never compromise my tolerance, self-beliefs, values or integrity like that. Violence is not the solution. Violence begets violence. The people that do that in high school and the world do it because if there's one thing they like more than a victim's fear, it's a violent reaction that makes the victim look worse than the attacker. I know I'm stronger than those scum and I will not lose to them. And the funny thing was, a few weeks before Year 12 finished, nearly all of the guys that gave me crap said they were sorry for what they did and that they admired me for never caving in to them and they wished me to have a good life. I never gave up, I refused to lose or lower myself. And I survived. I'm stronger for it and I've moved on.

And I admit there wasn't a day between Year 5 and Year 12 I didn't think of doing myself in, or dreaming up a way to kill some of those bastards at school or of killing my father. But I constantly reminded myself of two things. One, giving into those twisted desires would mean I failed and that I was worse than those people. Second, that I would let down the two people that believed in me and raised me well - my mother and myself. That's what kept me going through those years and I made it through. Life has been better since then. Hardly ideal, but better. I believed I would make it through and life would be better on the other side, which it is.

Do I claim to be perfect? No. I'm still overweight but much less than I once was and I don't stigmatise or despise myself for my weight or body. I screwed up my honours year in genetics but I found computer science and I'm doing well at that now. I have steady work now after years of unemployment and thinking I'd never find work. I am extroverted, highly sociable and self-confident. I've had to work hard to fix my life and to get over the misery and pain fo the first 18 years of my life which I rarely think about or remember for obvious reasons. I'm 26 as of earlier this month and still haven't had my first kiss, let alone a girlfriend. I have plenty of reasons to be resentful and to be mad at the world and life.

But there's a problem, M2. The world doesn't care. We all have our own problems and scars. Now I'm not undermining yours in any way at all. Rape is the worst crime of all, far worse than murder. A late colleague of mine who was a psychologist in criminal and child fields once told me that you could possibly cure a murderer but there was no hope in hell of curing a rapist or sexual predator because they were the most evil of them all. They are the scum of the earth. Last month I saw a pedophile in a net cafe watching videos of young boys nude. I wanted to pick up the keyboard next to him and beat him to death in disgust, but I didn't because it's wrong to kill someone even if they deserve it. It wouldn't say much about me as a human being. The world knows evil exists and that bad things happen to people. As much as we'd like to prevent it all and save everyone from harm and expel all evil from the world, that is impossible. What happened to you is wrong, tragic and disgusting. I do empathise with you, knowing how sick and cruel sexual violence is. But I have to say this - move on. People can only help you and empathise so much. In the end, people expect you to be a functional human being, to cope with any crap life deals you because in the end, you are but one person in a world of over six billion. There are people that live and suffer in worse conditions/events than us. The best thing you can do is stand up for yourself, value and believe in yourself, don't remain quiest if something happens to you (i never did) and move on. If you let it linger it will get the better of you, hold you back and never let you move forward. Fear is the ultimate mind killer. But in the end, fear is a message of synaptic impulses triggered by the mind. You can override any reaction in the body.

On some of your other points, I would never have unprotected sex, that is idiotic and clownish. I wouldn't risk getting the woman I was doing it with pregnant or infected with an STD or anything like that. I maintain my clothes, pay rent to my mum when all my friends don't pay their parents one cent, clean my room, do the housework, work my job hard and well which my supervisors really appreciate, work at uni damn hard which my lecturer and tutor appreciate. And don't compare me to two of the most evil men in history. I'm brown skinned and am still taunted about it almost daily from people on the street or online. Don't compare me to those two pinaccles of evil. They're two people who would kill me in a heartbeat just for my skin colour. If there's one thing I hate after rapists, it's aryan scum/Neo-nazis, just like the ones who almost killed me six years ago. So don't go there.

Good on you for getting over it. But you haven't fully convinced me. If you need a gun, you're still resorting to low means in my eyes. This is a point the two of us will never agree on. So will you stop labelling me as a child and knowing nothing about your kind of plight when I know it all too well and I had to grow up too fast and faced death more times than you'll care to face it yourself. I wouldn't wish my life on anyone. But I won't throw away the fact I am alive, that I have a decent life better than half of the people on this planet and that I will persevere. And that one day I will find a woman to be happy wih long-term and to make her happy too, but I'm not going to look for one until I'm financially secure enough and secure in my own life to be able to treat her well and support her. I have no regrets for going that long with stuff like that. There is far worse that could have happened to me.

As for idiots like DTZ, go fuck yourself. Stop your bravado and your taunts, you make me sick. Stop relying on the internet to find victims to taunt to make you feel better. Leave her alone.

Now give it a rest and leave me alone, M2. I've taken two weeks to get over my damn cold and I need sleep or I won't get enough study done for my computing exam. I don't want to post in this topic anymore, I'm sick of arguing and the last thing I need right now is another flame war. Where the hell are you Misc mods or are you too busy sucking each other off? Some job you guys do...not.

Anyone else who wants to fire something at me had better watch their mouth and facts, or you'd better be waving a white flag high and clear, because if you aren't, it'll be the last thing you ever do.

[RedStarWarrior]

Whiny bitches...