|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Gun Control Again | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
We do occasionally see mass stabbings but they're comparatively rare because people tend to try to get away. It's easier to shoot somebody running away than to stab him.
"She done him wrong" so he killed her and others associated with her. If guns weren't available he would have found some other way.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
~1.6 writes:
Did I say otherwise? I was just pointing out that guns do cause more damage than other weapons. Guns do kill where other weapons may only injure. People who have no intention to kill do kill because the gun is so powerful.
Guns are here and here to stay.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Faith writes:
We should take them away from idiots. Unfortunately, it's mostly the idiots who want them.
Yes guns are more efficient. So we should take them away from the good guys and let the bad guys have them I guess, which is what would happen in that case.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
I don't think so. As I've said before, it is not rational to think you can defend yourself with a gun. A gun is not a defensive weapon. The only way to win a gunfight is to shoot first. The vast majority of gun owners in America are responsible law-abiding citizens. To be responsible gun owners, people would have to understand the capability of their guns - and I don't think most of them do.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
NosyNed writes:
I would say it's irresponsible to have a gun in the house that's likely to do more harm than good. Even the US has laws about the civilian possession of explosives, etc. The problem is that many of those responsible, law abiding gun-owners accidentally kill and injure innocent people. As for "law-abiding" citizens, they also turn Jews in to the Gestapo.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
That's probably false.
Canada does not have the demographic diversity of the US.... Faith writes:
That may be true. But it isn't true because guns make you safer. It's true because Canadians don't own guns for protection. As I've mentioned before, in my lifetime I've met only one civilian (other than collectors) who owned a handgun. (And he had it for sharks, not people.)
There are areas where there is a high incidence of gun ownership and very low to zero crimes or gun deaths.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
Personally, I don't think gun safety in the US can be improved much. It's a bit like trying to prevent drowning in the mid-Atlantic: there's just too much water to ever make it "safe".
... instead of getting a sensible approach to how gun safety might be improved.... Faith writes:
There are two good ways to prevent more drownings after a drowning tragedy: learn water safety or stay out of the water.
If you really want to promote gun safety, screaming about guns after a gun tragedy is NOT the way to go about it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
The fact is that Hitler relaxed the gun laws. He did prohibit the Jews from owning weapons, which made it easier for the law-abiding Germans who had guns to march them off to the concentration camps.
... the fact is that Hitler required guns to be registered and then when he knew who had guns, when the time came he went and confiscated them from those who had obeyed the law and that allowed him to herd them off to concentration camps without a fight.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Percy writes:
I think Wal-Mart should arm its employees to protect its customers from its other customers.
Imagine if her 2-year old had killed some other random customer in the Wal-Mart.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
frako writes:
Chances are he's already got one.
Yea lets give the under payed over worked and over stressed uneducated bloke that is constantly harassed by customers a gun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Cat's Eye writes:
That's why it's safer. You don't have one goober pointing it at his best friend and pulling the trigger.
Artillery is run by a crew not an individual.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
faith writes:
It was The Good Old Days.
They were head and shoulders above today's politicians intellectually and they had a grasp of historical realities that have been lost completely today, especially to the left.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Cat's Eye writes:
Dillinger needed Tommy guns because the police had them, so he stole them from the police. My opinion is that the metric for the limitation of civilian arms should be the police. What about body armour? It's not an "arm", technically, but it would be handy to protect me from the police.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
NoNukes writes:
Just to be clear: Is it once-a-felon-always-a-felon? Or can you work your way up to ex-felon? If you serve your sentence for a felony, can you then wear body armour to protect you from other ex-felons?
No US state prevents wearing of body armor by non-felons.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Cat's Eye writes:
Well, in Canada it would have about as much market as giraffe shoes.
Is it not commercially available?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024