Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,813 Year: 3,070/9,624 Month: 915/1,588 Week: 98/223 Day: 9/17 Hour: 5/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Guns
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 165 of 301 (398209)
04-29-2007 6:58 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by Jon
04-29-2007 4:31 PM


Re: Got me? Got who? :-S
Can you substantiate that claim with even a shred of evidence?
Seeing as you completely discounted any and all evidence which doesn't support your claim, then by your standards - no.
However, if you look at the evidence provide above, you will see that people are more likely to be shot by their handgun than they are by someone else's handgun.
Additionally, there was another post about how the presence of guns in a home is an incentive to robbery rather than a deterant.
But, of course, this disagrees with you, so it too must be false.
That is one of the most ignorant statements I've read on the entire thread
Grow up. Your racist rants are getting you no where. The fact is that people who have guns (black or white, rich or poor) are more likely to be the victims of gun violence than those who do not have guns.
Just because someone is black or poor does not automatically make them the prep or vic of gun violence - despite your protestations to the opposite.
Owning a steak knife...
Again with the list of silly examples. Thank you, Jon. We know, you can list nouns. You are particular adept at listing nouns which are not produced with the intent of killing people. Congratulations.
Here's one you missed - "Owning brocolli makes you more likely to something something brocolli."
But we aren't discussing brocolli restrictions. Cho didn't kill 32 people with a cabbage. He used a gun. He used a gun to do exactly what the gun was designed to do.
Please take your noun lists to a different thread.
Do you know how those people get their guns?
Asked and answered. But, in case you have some sort of degenerative mind disease, I'll answer again.
Yes, currently while guns are legal it is VERY EASY to obtain a gun. It is illegal for person X to buy a gun, but they can pay person Y to buy it for them. Piece of cake.
But if we got serious about gun control, person Y could not easily obtain the gun to give to illegal person X, therefore it would not be as easy for person X to get the gun.
This isnt a very hard concept. I shouldn't have to draw a picture.
as for your homework assignment for me... please
1) Statistics show no sign of [legal] guns and crime being related; why do you still think it's the guns' fault?
What statistics?
2) Statistics DO show relation between oppressed minorities and murder”these statistics don't worry with what tool was used for the murder, if any”; why do you continue to deny that social factors play a major role?
Strawman. The issue is not whether or not these people kill each other, its whether or not they kill more with an 9mm automatic than they would with a crowbar.
How do you not understand that? We've been over and over it again and again.
3) People A have been killing off people B since the time there were people... whether you think that was 100 kya, 6 kya, or 2 mya. Haven't you overlooked the fact that people still kill people with or without guns? Will you tell me why this doesn't ride negatively on your argument?
Wow, you REALLY don't get this do you? I'm astonished, but I'll try again, and this time I will do it slow. Let's see if you can follow along.
Billy hates Bobby.
Billy wants to kill Bobby.
If Billy has a rock, Bobby can run away.
If Billy has a gun, Bobby is dead.
If Billy has an automatic 9mm, Bobby is dead, and so is Sally, and Sarah, and Beth, and Margret, and Timmy, and...
Billy should not have an automatic 9mm.
4) The people who want to commit crimes, and want to use guns to commit those crimes, will get the guns whether laws are put in place to prevent them from doing so or not
And yet again, it is significantly harder for you to obtain a hand grenade than it is for you to obtain a 9mm. Likewise, a criminal prevented from owning either, will have a much harder time obtaining a hand grenade than they would a 9mm.
Therefore, hand grenade controls are WORKING. There's no reason to believe that similiar controls on automatic pistols will not work.
There, now I've answered your ridiculous demands, fought off your racist rants, addressed you strawmen, and noted your complete disregard for other people's listed statistics.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Jon, posted 04-29-2007 4:31 PM Jon has not replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 166 of 301 (398211)
04-29-2007 7:05 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by Jon
04-29-2007 5:41 PM


Re: ”CREDIBLE sources anybody?”
Personal attack? Our debate is over.
Translation: Oh crap, my pants are down. Um, I gotta go!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by Jon, posted 04-29-2007 5:41 PM Jon has not replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 167 of 301 (398213)
04-29-2007 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 161 by nator
04-29-2007 6:34 PM


Re: Excuse me?
Click on my avatar. It's me.
You're a horse?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by nator, posted 04-29-2007 6:34 PM nator has not replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 168 of 301 (398215)
04-29-2007 7:24 PM
Reply to: Message 163 by macaroniandcheese
04-29-2007 6:47 PM


Bren, I'm getting tired of having to explain this
Yawn.
Okay Bren, let's try this again. Concentrate hard now, I need you to follow along.
Here's what you said that I said:
all americans with guns are insecure hillbillies;
all people with guns are homocidal maniacs incapable of self-control;
all people who oppose gun control want every person to own and use immense, outdated WWI equipment;
the constitution only protects single shot arms;
Instead of stabbing a person in the arm, a drunken fool's only action with a gun would be to shoot the victim between the eyes.
But the quotes you list in your long post do not support your claims. In fact, they frequently go against what you claiming that I said.
Are you just confused? Or are you trying to disprove yourself?
You've certainly lost me in your musings.
It seems to me that you are trying to disprove what I am saying, so for convience, I'll list some of the statements that you hand picked. Why don't you go ahead and disprove them.
1) There is a world of difference between a national guardsman and a drunken hillbilly.
2) The Swiss are issued military weapons as part of their national service.
3) Many (I'll even say MOST) drunk hillbillies own at least 1 gun.
4) If a drunk were to shoot someone in the head, they would need more than stitches.
5) Bad parents should not have a stockpile of automatic weapons on hand for their kids to play with.
6) One-Wing thinks that the presence of guns keeps a crimewave at bay.
I fail to see how you've disproved any of the above statements. In fact, I'm rather boggled that you disagree with any of them.
Perhaps you'd like to enlighten us.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-29-2007 6:47 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-29-2007 8:27 PM Nuggin has replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 169 of 301 (398216)
04-29-2007 7:36 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by macaroniandcheese
04-29-2007 6:55 PM


Bren, do you know what a gun is?
Okay, Bren, I've tried to be nice about this, but I really have to ask.
Do you know what a "gun" is? Because you are claiming that more people die from accidental stabbings than from accidental shootings. It makes me wonder if you are a little sketchy on the definitions.
As for numbers - this is from the recent Newsweek Apr 30/2007 Pg 44 and 45
United States annual gun death toll
29,645 Deaths breaking down to 11920 Homocides, 16869 Suicides and 856 Unintentional.
So that's 856 accidental shooting deaths, or about 3 a day.
How many accidental stabbing deaths have you found? 10? 15?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-29-2007 6:55 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-29-2007 8:40 PM Nuggin has replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 178 of 301 (398231)
04-29-2007 10:00 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by macaroniandcheese
04-29-2007 8:27 PM


Re: Bren, I'm getting tired of having to explain this
See reply to above post
Edited by Nuggin, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-29-2007 8:27 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 179 of 301 (398232)
04-29-2007 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 172 by macaroniandcheese
04-29-2007 8:40 PM


Re: Bren, do you know what a gun is?
See reply to post above the one above this one
Edited by Nuggin, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-29-2007 8:40 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 180 of 301 (398234)
04-29-2007 10:11 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by crashfrog
04-29-2007 9:16 PM


Re: So, what does the 2nd amendment mean to you?
.22 long rifle? Or .22 pistol?
This is in reference to the "superman" kid on cops. Though I use "cops" as a blanket term, it could have been the LAPD knock off or Tails of the Highway Patrol.
The cops arrived after the incident had happened, so I have no idea what type of gun it way. Though given that it was on the street, I'm going to assume pistol - and given that it didn't break the skin, I'm going to guess a cheap ass pistol at that.
It wasn't meant as a "here's proof" kind of story. It was just an amusing anecdote

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by crashfrog, posted 04-29-2007 9:16 PM crashfrog has not replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 182 of 301 (398236)
04-29-2007 10:15 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by macaroniandcheese
04-29-2007 9:17 PM


Re: Bren, do you know what a gun is?
Bren, I've deleted the content of two of my needlessly harsh replies because in this thread you are actually making sense.
No one is suggesting that we ban all guns. The whole point of this thread was to point out that we have to draw a line someplace.
The NRA would like that line to be somewhere just short of an M1 Abrams tank.
Rosie ODonnell would like it to be just over a straw with a spitball in it.
Neither extreme is going to work.
The fact of the matter is, it is currently too easy to get weapons in this country. The weapons are more lethal than they have ever been. And the restrictions we place on the weapons go completely unenforced.
The system has to change.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-29-2007 9:17 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 184 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 04-29-2007 11:10 PM Nuggin has not replied
 Message 186 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-29-2007 11:28 PM Nuggin has not replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 247 of 301 (398413)
04-30-2007 4:30 PM
Reply to: Message 218 by Hyroglyphx
04-30-2007 12:09 PM


I win!
Sorry, NJ, you blew it.
Hitler disarmed his people.
I invoke Godwin's Law and proclaim myself winner!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by Hyroglyphx, posted 04-30-2007 12:09 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 248 of 301 (398418)
04-30-2007 5:12 PM
Reply to: Message 218 by Hyroglyphx
04-30-2007 12:09 PM


No Self Defense
Alright, before I address you points NJ, I want to clear something up.
You "pro-shoot people" people keep claiming that you can use a gun for defense against someone.
A hand gun is piss poor defense against a bullet. Look at the size and shape of a handgun. If the attacker doesn't hit the gun directly, they aren't going to be stopped at all.
A better tool for self defense would be a bullet proof vest or an armor plated car.
You don't use a gun for defense, you use a gun for offense. You want to have a gun so that you can KILL someone who you think is going to do you harm. Stop pretending like you aren't looking to KILL someone.
Now, onto NJ's post:
Its common sense that by trying to ban guns, all you really do is ensure the people who don't play by the rules remain armed, while you are disarming those with integrity.
Once again, you've restated the position which no one is stating. No one is saying we take away ALL guns. We are saying it should be HARDER for people to get SOME KINDS of guns.
I keep hearing you and Nator saying that its way too easy to buy a handgun, but neither of you have offered any solutions or defined what "easy" constitutes in this instance
Okay, here's an example.
I live in a state where it is illegal to own a fully automatic Uzi, but I want one so I can kill all the girl scouts on my street. I get in my car, I drive a couple of hours into Arizona and go to a gun show. While there I pay a couple hundred dollars for a non-automatic Uzi, no background check, then from the EXACT SAME VENDOR, I purchase the missing part that's needed to make it fully automatic, and the video of how to put that part back into the gun. I pay maybe 20 bucks for the spring and another 20 bucks for the uzi.
Here's another example:
I live in NYC and have a criminal record for armed robbery. It is illegal for me to buy a hand gun. I go to a store, pick out a gun I want, hand some money to my brother, who hands the money to the store owner. The store owner hands my brother a gun, which he then hands to me.
THAT'S VERY EASY.
Please tell me how you plan on making any difference by taking away people's guns?
Jesus, you people are dumb. I'll say this in caps. NO ONE IS SAYING TAKE AWAY EVERYONE'S GUNS.
NO. ONE. IS. SAYING. TAKE. AWAY. EVERYONE'S. GUNS.
I see Joe Gangbanger every day, in every single city I've ever lived in.
Exactly how many gun fights have you been in, if you've been accosted by Joe Gangbanger and his gun EVERY day in the EVERY city?
Maybe Joe would, but my muzzle control is a little better than that.
Either arrogent or retard, or both.
This may be news to you, but you don't have "muzzle control" over the handgun that your wife uses to blow your head off. You are MORE likely to the victim of a shot FROM YOUR OWN GUN that from SOMEONE ELSES GUN.
What do you call a person who bitches about something but offers no real solutions
You people are really starting to make me sick. ALL YOU DO is put up a strawman - "You want to take away everyone's guns!" then repeat it adnaseum.
When we reply that that's not what we said, you say "You haven't offered any solutions."
BECAUSE WE"VE SPENT ALL OUR TIME TRYING TO EXPLAIN TO YOU GODDAMN MOUTHBREATHERS WHAT THE FUCKING DEBATE IS ABOUT!!!!
There's NO point in explaining solutions to you, you don't have the first clue what the hell we are talking about.
It's like all you "pro-shoot people" crowd are a bunch of fucking creationists. You say "Scientists want to ban the Bible!" And we say, "um no." Then you say "You haven't proven creation." And we say, "we're trying to answer you question about banning the bible." And you follow it up with "God speaks to me directly!"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by Hyroglyphx, posted 04-30-2007 12:09 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 249 by AdminSchraf, posted 04-30-2007 5:29 PM Nuggin has replied
 Message 250 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-30-2007 5:29 PM Nuggin has replied
 Message 280 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-30-2007 9:19 PM Nuggin has not replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 260 of 301 (398438)
04-30-2007 6:11 PM
Reply to: Message 249 by AdminSchraf
04-30-2007 5:29 PM


Re: No Self Defense
I understand. But part of "treat other members with respect" has got to mean stop posting the same false statement over and over again.
In this thread alone, I've had to say "We are not saying ban all guns" about 50 times.
Clearly saying it with a even tone does NOTHING to get the point across.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by AdminSchraf, posted 04-30-2007 5:29 PM AdminSchraf has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by AdminSchraf, posted 04-30-2007 6:18 PM Nuggin has not replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 261 of 301 (398439)
04-30-2007 6:13 PM
Reply to: Message 250 by New Cat's Eye
04-30-2007 5:29 PM


Re: No Self Defense
you've already conflated pro-gunners with drunk rednecks
No. Jon did.
I said that drunk rednecks are likely to have guns, not that people who are likely to have guns are drunk rednecks.
Jon is the one who claims that everyone who has a gun is a drunk redneck with a little penis. A statement he refuses to back up.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-30-2007 5:29 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 264 of 301 (398442)
04-30-2007 6:15 PM
Reply to: Message 252 by New Cat's Eye
04-30-2007 5:32 PM


This is the "if everyone had a gun, no one would get shot" argument.
No only is it obviously wrong, it flies in the face of shootings like Columbine where there WERE GUARDS WITH GUNS who did not stop the kids.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-30-2007 5:32 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 265 of 301 (398443)
04-30-2007 6:17 PM
Reply to: Message 253 by New Cat's Eye
04-30-2007 5:32 PM


Re: No Self Defense
Okay, this I have to hear.
How is it "intuative" that a person who is going to commit a crime is less likely to perpetrate that crime on a person with a concealed hand gun?
How does the criminal know that person has a concealed hand gun?
Why are psychic criminals resorting to gun crime when they could be winning poker games in vegas?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-30-2007 5:32 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024