The Daily News

[mr_pikachu]

I wouldn't disagree with that, MToolen. As you implied, there's no way to remove guns from the streets; there are too many for anyone to keep track of them at this point. While, in an ideal world, guns would not exist, that's a utopian vision that just isn't possible in today's society. Allowing law-abiding citizens the chance to defend themselves against criminals is the next best thing.

[Blademaster]

^The difference is that your average, law-abiding citizen doesn't have a clue how to work a gun. I can guarantee that at least half the time, a citizen with a gun is either gonna freak out or get pissed off, and invariably accidentally or even intentionally kill some poor shmuck who's armed with his index finger. I don't condone criminal behavior, obviously, but that guy with the pantyhose mask who wants the 4 dollars in your wallet doesn't deserve to have three bullets emptied into his torso and drown in his own blood. People don't know how to work guns well enough to all deserve them.

[mr_pikachu]

^The difference is that your average, law-abiding citizen doesn't have a clue how to work a gun.

1. Cock hammer.
2. Pull trigger.
3. Repeat as necessary.

[Roy Karrde]

but that guy with the pantyhose mask who wants the 4 dollars in your wallet doesn't deserve to have three bullets emptied into his torso and drown in his own blood. People don't know how to work guns well enough to all deserve them.

Well for one if you are going to get a gun you obviously going to take training to recieve that, thus why we have gun permits.

As for the guy in the pantyhose mask, yeah he deserves to get three bullets into him, as does the guy that enters your house. Those people at that point have gotten to a point in their mind where they are willing to go to extremes to get what they want. They forfit their lives when they decided to come up and attack you. And at that point you have to realize that, and take the most drastic measure to make sure they do not harm you, or others around you.

[The Blue Avenger]

As for the guy in the pantyhose mask, yeah he deserves to get three bullets into him, as does the guy that enters your house.

They deserve to get punished, but they do not deserve to die. I can think of very few things that warrant death, and petty robbery is not one of them.

[Roy Karrde]

They deserve to get punished, but they do not deserve to die. I can think of very few things that warrant death, and petty robbery is not one of them.

Can you be sure they wont kill you? When that man points the gun at you and says hand over the money, can you be sure he wont kill you? What if your sister or brother was with you? Can you be sure he wont kill you? I am not talking about gunning down a man in cold blood. I am saying you either take action and kill him, or you gamble your life, and the lives of others.

[The Blue Avenger]

No, you're right, I don't know that he wouldn't kill me. But I still don't think that anything gives me the right to take another's life, even if they put me in such a position. I suppose this means I ought to take self-defense courses or something.

[mr_pikachu]

They deserve to get punished, but they do not deserve to die. I can think of very few things that warrant death, and petty robbery is not one of them.

Here's the problem. Maybe they don't deserve to die, but are you supposed to be punished for it? Ideally you could take non-lethal action, but most people haven't received training that would allow them to precisely attack and subdue an armed enemy without killing them (or getting killed). If you fight and yet hold back, you're as good as dead. Basic rule of combat. The majority is thus left with a simple choice: either completely surrender or go all-out to defend themselves.

Again, this is not the ideal solution. But we have to be realistic about the world in which we live and move beyond dreaming of utopia.


EDIT: Roy's point is valid as well. Whoever holds the gun is in control. And when the guy in control is the one holding up people for their cash, the balance of power needs to be shifted anyway. Most people, I think, would rather not place their lives in the hands of a mugger.

[MToolen]

Can you be sure they wont kill you? When that man points the gun at you and says hand over the money, can you be sure he wont kill you? What if your sister or brother was with you? Can you be sure he wont kill you? I am not talking about gunning down a man in cold blood. I am saying you either take action and kill him, or you gamble your life, and the lives of others.

Yes, and we all know how bad Vash the Stampede was hurt trying not to kill people. I feel very blessed to live in a neighborhood free of most immediate danger, so I'm not too sure how I'd react. While I know taking life shouldn't be in my hands, I don't know if that knowledge will matter with a gun pointed at me.

About the operating handguns issue, there are very many things that could go wrong with shooting one, especially with today's gangsta culture promoting firing sideways and angled; due to Newton's third law of motion, the reaction to the bullet could propel the gun out of one's hand. Just one example.

Y'know, this argument is reminiscent of the US Electoral College. It sucks, we know, but what feasible alternatives do we have?

[The Blue Avenger]

Mr. P: I'm not claiming to have a solution. I know that a good solution is hard to come by at this point. I was merely commenting on whether or not the thug deserved to die.

[Blademaster]

Well for one if you are going to get a gun you obviously going to take training to recieve that, thus why we have gun permits.

Shooting at paper targets =/= taking the life of another human being.

As for the guy in the pantyhose mask, yeah he deserves to get three bullets into him, as does the guy that enters your house. Those people at that point have gotten to a point in their mind where they are willing to go to extremes to get what they want. They forfit their lives when they decided to come up and attack you. And at that point you have to realize that, and take the most drastic measure to make sure they do not harm you, or others around you.

It's that kind of overzealous disregard for human life that proves my point exactly.

[Roy Karrde]

Shooting at paper targets =/= taking the life of another human being.

It still provides you with the training you need.

It's that kind of overzealous disregard for human life that proves my point exactly.

When that man walked up to you and pointed a weapon to threaten your life and the lives of those around you, they lost any claim they have to their human life.

[The Blue Avenger]

Don't say that, Roy; you open the door for lots of weird philosophical questions.

Suppose the man is mentally ill. Does he deserve to die then?
Suppose the man is homeless and only needed money to feed his family - and made a poor choice. Does he deserve to die then?
Hell, let's get really weird - suppose the man's being blackmailed into threatening you. Does he deserve to die then?

You see where I'm going with this.

[Blademaster]

It still provides you with the training you need.

My mentality would change greatly if I were switching my gun away from a sheet of paper and towards a living being. The training would be useless at that point.

When that man walked up to you and pointed a weapon to threaten your life and the lives of those around you, they lost any claim they have to their human life.

A claim to one's life is something that can never be lost. To think otherwise is barbaric: Shooting the guy in the knee or the arm holding the gun should be sufficient. Overpowering and subduing him should be a responsible gun-owner's top priority, not mercilessly gunning him down in cold blood.

[Roy Karrde]

Suppose the man is mentally ill. Does he deserve to die then?
Suppose the man is homeless and only needed money to feed his family - and made a poor choice. Does he deserve to die then?
Hell, let's get really weird - suppose the man's being blackmailed into threatening you. Does he deserve to die then?

All of the answers to those are yes, the man has threatened your life, he walked up and basically got into the mindset of "Its either me or him". You do not have time to play a guessing game. You either take action, or you yourself basically forfit the claim on your life as well as the ones around you.

My mentality would change greatly if I were switching my gun away from a sheet of paper and towards a living being. The training would be useless at that point.

At the point that you have to actually pull your gun out, at that point you are running on so much adriniline and going on the mindset of killing this person. That the training you have will pretty much guide your body.

A claim to one's life is something that can never be lost.

Yeah it is, when he steps toward you and points a gun at you, he has gotten into a "Me or You" mindset. He has lost any claim to his life when he decided to try and take yours for money.

To think otherwise is barbaric:

To act in any other way is stupidity and reckless.

Shooting the guy in the knee or the arm holding the gun should be sufficient.

Problem with both is you are risking the chance of him shooting you back, especially if you do not aim to kill. Hesitation will cost you your life, and could cost you the lives of others. That man is coming at you to kill you, not doing the same is utter stupidity.

Overpowering and subduing him should be a responsible gun-owner's top priority, not mercilessly gunning him down in cold blood.

Well for one if the man is pointing the gun at you that is not cold blood that is self defense. Second the top priority of any gun owner at that time should be killing him. Becuase giving him any chance to shoot back at you, gives him a chance to kill you. And as I said, the others around you. Trying to subdue or overpower him, shows a lack of responsability and judgement on your part, and it puts the lives around you on the line.

[starjake]

Wow. You're saying it's OK to judge whether another human being has the right to live, as long as you can call it 'self-defense'? Who died and made you God?

[Roy Karrde]

Wow. You're saying it's OK to judge whether another human being has the right to live, as long as you can call it 'self-defense'? Who died and made you God?

I am saying that if some one is putting a gun in my face. That the judgement of that man's life has already been made. You either kill him, or you run the chance of ending up killed, and most likely getting others killed around you.

[Blademaster]

All of the answers to those are yes

At the point that you have to actually pull your gun out, at that point you are running on so much adriniline and going on the mindset of killing this person.

Yeah it is, when he steps toward you and points a gun at you, he has gotten into a "Me or You" mindset. He has lost any claim to his life when he decided to try and take yours for money.

To act in any other way is stupidity and reckless.

That man is coming at you to kill you, not doing the same is utter stupidity.

Well for one if the man is pointing the gun at you that is not cold blood that is self defense. Second the top priority of any gun owner at that time should be killing him.

Becuase giving him any chance to shoot back at you, gives him a chance to kill you. And as I said, the others around you. Trying to subdue or overpower him, shows a lack of responsability

I'm taking my leave from this argument now. You're displaying some very disturbing behavior in these answers, and if you truly believe that even slight criminal provocation of any kind is grounds for murdering the provoker, you need help and you need it fast.

[Roy Karrde]

You're displaying some very disturbing behavior in these answers,

The only disturbing behavior is your lack of willingness to defend your own life and the lives around you. God I would hate to be one of your loved ones if it came down to you defending them.

and if you truly believe that even slight criminal provocation of any kind is grounds for murdering the provoker, you need help and you need it fast.

Putting a gun in your face is not slight criminal provocation it is a attempt to murder you. Saying anything less shows a lack of rational thought on your part. You need help, or you need to lock yourself away from anyone else in society, so that your own stupidity does not harm anyone else.

[starjake]

God I would hate to be one of your loved ones if it came down to you defending them.

You think the only possible way to defend someone is to outright kill the threat? And I thought I had trouble thinking outside the box...

You know, for most of us, simply killing someone because they pointed a gun in your face would just be stooping to their level. Based on your replies, though, I'm guessing that you don't think it's stooping.

[Roy Karrde]

You think the only possible way to defend someone is to outright kill the threat? And I thought I had trouble thinking outside the box...

If some one has a gun aimed at you, and is just a finger moment away from ending your life. You do not have the time to think out of the box, or to attempt anything but the instant ending of his life. Giving that man even a split second to pull the trigger will only end your life.

You know, for most of us, simply killing someone because they pointed a gun in your face would just be stooping to their level. Based on your replies, though, I'm guessing that you don't think it's stooping.

I really cannot see the logic ( or lack of ) in that. You are not stooping to his level becuase you did not instigate the scene, you did not seek that person out to rob them with the possibility of killing them. You are only acting in self defense to make sure they cannot kill you or anyone else in the area.

[mr_pikachu]

I have more to say on this topic, but I'll forego that in favor of getting back to posting news. The issue of self-defense vs. human life could probably have its own topic, really.

Instead of continuing the argument, let me just make an indirect comment about this massive discussion...

Get Out of Your Own Way: Studies Show the Value of Not Overthinking a Decision

[Heald]

This is why I'm glad we actually had gun control in the UK long before we had the crazy thought of giving a firearm to every Tom, Dick and Harry that came along. No offence to you Yanks, but when you interpreted 'an armed militia' as 'giving a deadly weapon to everyone, regardless of whether they will use said weapon for criminal purposes or not', you really fucked up big time. Answer this honestly, you card-carrying NRA members: would you rather have the choice to own a gun and live in fear your entire life, or have gun control and feel safe and secure? Personally, since I already have the second option, I think I could live without having to make up for my insecurities by keeping a few pounds of FMJ around.

[Blademaster]

No offence to you Yanks, but when you interpreted 'an armed militia' as 'giving a deadly weapon to everyone, regardless of whether they will use said weapon for criminal purposes or not', you really fucked up big time.

NONE. FUCKING. TAKEN.

[Roy Karrde]

No offence to you Yanks, but when you interpreted 'an armed militia' as 'giving a deadly weapon to everyone, regardless of whether they will use said weapon for criminal purposes or not', you really fucked up big time.

You do realize that we do have gun laws and screenings, not to mention the vast VAST majority of Gun Owners are peaceful people.

[The Blue Avenger]

That, uh, changes absolutely nothing about the point he was making.

[Heald]

You do realize that we do have gun laws and screenings, not to mention the vast VAST majority of Gun Owners are peaceful people.

To blow up the analogy a little, or perhaps by the greatest possible extent, take your pick, but if we were to say the same about nuclear weapons, i.e. most nations that have nuclear weapons are only going to use them in self defence, then that justifies the odd rogue nation have a nuclear weapon too. Just as 'a few million people' being the price to pay if nuclear weapons fell into the wrong hands, the US pays the price of a dozen people for every weapon sold to someone not responsible enough to have said weapon.

I know that banning guns outright would not be the way to go, simply because then only the bad guys would have the guns, which would be far less ideal than the current situation, but every time either Congress or a state tries to take measures to stop guns falling into the wrong hands, you get every card-carrying NRA member ranting and raving about the Constitution, because despite most of the Bill of Rights being irrelevant or just plain ignored, turning to a document written over 200 years ago for a completely different situation to what it is used in now is more important than common sense.

[Roy Karrde]

Alright well the whole gun thing is not really for this thread. Heald if you wish to debate it I would love to in another thread. Anyway I am here to declare something about Iraq that I know none of you thought I would ever say.

The Iraq war was the Wrong War, at the Wrong Time, with the Wrong Strategy. It is the recipe for losing the war on terror, and most of all has stretched us thin, bled us dry, it has led us to demoralization, it has led us to defeat, and we have lost the hearts and minds of the Muslim World.

Or atleast that is what Al Qaeda now seems to be saying
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htw.../20080627.aspx

[Heald]

Nearly a decade in, 110 deaths and finally someone asks a simple question:

Should we be using equipment designed for use in Northern Island in the Middle East?

This has no bearing on whether or not the UK ought to be involved in the Middle East at all, but it is outstanding that we even go to war with outdated tech that is useless in the Middle East. Perhaps when Tony Blair decided to go war-mongering with his BFF George Bush, he should have asked whether we were capable of fighting a war in the Middle East. Bang up job all round, you twats.

[Roy Karrde]

And this is why we have the Death Penalty

This has been the subject of some discussion in the Metroplex these last few days. How these men could do this, if they will get qualified for a hate crime, and how long till they die. The way he describes the murder is graphic, and really he acts like he wasn't even shooting people, like he was gunning down some animal.

What's sad is the tax payers are going to have to pay for the trial, and several re trials of this scum, when taking them outside and using two bullets would be a much more effecient way.

[Heald]

16 injured in France after demonstration accidentally uses real bullets instead of blanks

Lol?

[mr_pikachu]

Man auctions off his life, sale price disappoints

This gives whole new meaning to the phrase, "You fail at life."

[Toxicity]

Chinese baby born with second penis on back.

I'm sorry if I just turned everybody into pedophiles.

[Blademaster]

...

Can I make a joke about "China syndrome" right now?

[Toxicity]

...

Can I make a joke about "China syndrome" right now?

If you really need to, feel free.

[Drusilla]

Accidental fungus leads to promising cancer drug

Yay! As I've always said, the best things happen by "accident". Here's hoping that this will lead to something monumental.

[mr_pikachu]

Fans are asked to treat Chiefs games like bowling matches

This is what happens when all your home games sell out, and your fans are still outnumbered. All that heckling must've gotten to the few Chiefs loyalists.

[MToolen]

Black singer sings Black National Anthem in place of Star Spangled Banner

Personally, I don't cheer her on, but there are worse things she could've done. Besides, the SSB's music was originally a horrible, horrible drinking song.

[Roy Karrde]

Sharia law SHOULD be used in Britain, says UK's top judge

If I lived in Britain I would be so very scared of what this could lead to.

[Ultimate Charizard]

Yet more taking it up the tailpipe to keep the minorities happy.
This follows the Police being told to remove posters from an advertising campaign because they feature Sniffer Dogs (Muslims consider dogs as 'unclean' animals) and also over the fact Muslims feel insulted to be searched by Sniffer-dogs at Airports etc.

How can they rationalise allowing the use of an anarchaic set of rules as Law which clearly were only written to keep the succesful Men happy and the rest under their thumb.

This entire frelling country is collapsing under a never ending pile of self-importance Bull-crap