RE: The issue of firearms

RE: The issue of firearms (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Loki45 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:02:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol Sorry, but yawn. I have heard all the arguments many, many times before. I have lived on both sides of the equation. Perhaps you haven't? In any event, I will argue against the wide availability of firearms until I die, just as I argue against the death penalty. These beliefs are part of my core beliefs: nothing you can say will sway them. Go and shoot, if it makes you happy. I think it's quite sad [&o] . Fine. You have your beliefs. Just don't try and impose those beliefs on me. Your beliefs do not and will not infringe on the rights afford to me by my country's constitution.

Loki45 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:04:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Starbuck09 No Loki I am from Britian and have a very firm grasp of English. Using grammar in this sense usually denotes that the author considers the phrase to not be what it si described. Here it seemed reasonable to indicate that picking out the term free world was to show that he did not consider it free at all. Not that he was simply acknowledging that he did not come up with the phrase which would seem to be self explanatory which is why I asked the question. Speaking to me like a child does not make your points any better it makes you seem foolish Loki. Your incorrect assumptions continue, I see. If you are correct and he's implying that it's not free (you originally said that it implied he thought Britain was not part of the free world) then that means he doesn't believe any of us are truly free. You live in a "free" society, yet a person is not "free" to purchase or own a gun. How is that free?

kittinSol -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:06:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Loki45 Your beliefs do not and will not infringe on the rights afford to me by my country's constitution. And one day soon, this will by my country too [:)] .

Starbuck09 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:07:06 PM)
Well yes the rate of murder in america is betwen four and seven times that of Britian per 100,000 people. You seemed to think the rise in rate was to do with america having a larger population when it is not. If you want to talk numbersamerica had 30,000 gun deaths last year 13,000 of which were homicides. In Britian there was 42. We have a population anout a sixth of yours the discrepancy is enormous. In your mind any murder with a gun ban is unacceptable so do you think that murder without one is? It is not possible to ensure that no criminals will ever have a gun what is possible is to ensure the number is negligible. The number of people who killed themselves and others by accident in the u.s. last year outstripped the u.k. death rates some six times. That alone points to the need for better regulation of who is responsible enough to possess a firearm.

kittinSol -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:09:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Starbuck09 That alone points to the need for better regulation of who is responsible enough to possess a firearm. You don't understand, Starbuck - many gun owners in America feel they have a constitutional right to carry guns without any regulation whatsoever (even though their interpretation of the Constitution is extremely arguable).

Ialdabaoth -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:10:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Starbuck09 Well yes the rate of murder in america is betwen four and seven times that of Britian per 100,000 people. You seemed to think the rise in rate was to do with america having a larger population when it is not. If you want to talk numbersamerica had 30,000 gun deaths last year 13,000 of which were homicides. In Britian there was 42. We have a population anout a sixth of yours the discrepancy is enormous. In your mind any murder with a gun ban is unacceptable so do you think that murder without one is? It is not possible to ensure that no criminals will ever have a gun what is possible is to ensure the number is negligible. The number of people who killed themselves and others by accident in the u.s. last year outstripped the u.k. death rates some six times. That alone points to the need for better regulation of who is responsible enough to possess a firearm. Actually, it doesn't. Access to firearms isn't necessarily the problem. I'd say the major problem is your average American's callous disregard for the value of any life that isn't his own or his family's. If you want to see 99% of America's problems go away, fix that.

Loki45 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:12:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Starbuck09 In your mind any murder with a gun ban is unacceptable so do you think that murder without one is? I think it's just as unacceptable and it's also regrettable that the person didn't see fit to arm themselves to prevent the murder. However, their failure to save themselves should not mean we remove that choice from others. quote: ORIGINAL: Starbuck09 It is not possible to ensure that no criminals will ever have a gun what is possible is to ensure the number is negligible. And that leads us back to the unacceptable argument. If you're going to take away my ability to defend myself, you'd better be able to assure me that I'll never need to. As you cannot do that, I will hang onto my right to defend myself, thank you. quote: ORIGINAL: Starbuck09 The number of people who killed themselves and others by accident in the u.s. last year outstripped the u.k. death rates some six times. That alone points to the need for better regulation of who is responsible enough to possess a firearm. It very much points to the need for responsible ownership, not a ban of the weapons themselves. I am fully in agreement that you can't just have any old redneck go and buy a gun. I would like to see 'control' in place to ensure the unfit do not have the weapons. I already went through a training class for my CHL (not to mention the training I got in the military). However, I see that more training could only be better. There are cleaning classes, storing and care classes, tactical use classes, etc. Those should be mandated. I have zero problem with that. I, like anyone, would like to know that if there's a guy next to me packing a concealed weapon that he's not a moron with it and knows how to handle it and when to pull it.

Starbuck09 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:12:13 PM)
What incorrect assumptions? Name one Loki. I asked rob if he was saying he did not consider Britian part of the free world as he implied he did not by singling out the phrase free world in inverted commas. I suggest you get to grips with the use of the question mark before you cast aspersions on my ability with English you complete pillock. So you equate freedom with the ability to behave however you wish. you can't own a firearm as it's against the law. Just as it is to drink drive rape six year olds and any number of other activities that we choose to abide by when we live in our free society.

Politesub53 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:13:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Loki45 quote: ORIGINAL: Starbuck09 I replied to your question about the relative size of American and British population sizes on the previous page Loki. And yet you still point to rates. I think we've all made it abundantly clear that in our minds ANY murder with a gun under a gun 'ban' is unacceptable. You seem to be okay with only criminals having the guns, so long as it's not a large number. If you're going to take MY gun, you'd better be able to damn well guarantee that NO criminal will be able to get one. As you cannot make that assurance, you will not take away my LEGAL right as a law-abiding citizen to own a gun. Yeah what dumb shits we are, we have only got the gun murder rate down to a few dozen a year. First you claimed we had high murder rates, then high gun murder rates, now your argument is we have a couple of gun murders. I am guessing there are more killed with guns accidentally in the US, than deliberately in the UK. And just for the record, inverted commas is another term for quotation marks.

Loki45 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:13:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol You don't understand, Starbuck - many gun owners in America feel they have a constitutional right to carry guns without any regulation whatsoever (even though their interpretation of the Constitution is extremely arguable). And your interpretation of our constitution is arguable as well, since you advocate banning them, which is also against the constitution. I am not one of those "zero regulation" gun nuts. I'm for 'control,' just not a 'ban.'

Loki45 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:14:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Yeah what dumb shits we are, we have only got the gun murder rate down to a few dozen a year. First you claimed we had high murder rates, then high gun murder rates, now your argument is we have a couple of gun murders. I am guessing there are more killed with guns accidentally in the US, than deliberately in the UK. Let's ask those in Britain who have lost people to gun violence if their loved ones' deaths were 'acceptable' to them.

kittinSol -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:15:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Loki45 quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol You don't understand, Starbuck - many gun owners in America feel they have a constitutional right to carry guns without any regulation whatsoever (even though their interpretation of the Constitution is extremely arguable). And your interpretation of our constitution is arguable as well, since you advocate banning them, which is also against the constitution. I am not one of those "zero regulation" gun nuts. I'm for 'control,' just not a 'ban.' Then I have no idea why you quaked in your boots when you read my posts [8D] . Time to chill, Loki: your toys are (still) safe.

Loki45 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:16:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Starbuck09 What incorrect assumptions? Name one Loki. I asked rob if he was saying he did not consider Britian part of the free world as he implied he did not by singling out the phrase free world in inverted commas. I suggest you get to grips with the use of the question mark before you cast aspersions on my ability with English you complete pillock. So you equate freedom with the ability to behave however you wish. you can't own a firearm as it's against the law. Just as it is to drink drive rape six year olds and any number of other activities that we choose to abide by when we live in our free society. Well hello, strawman argument. It's nice to see you today.

Loki45 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:17:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol Then I have no idea why you quaked in your boots when you read my posts . Time to chill, Loki: your toys are (still) safe. I quaked for no one. I simply replied sarcastically about the effetiveness of a ban. And the only people who think guns are toys are those who are against their ownership and those who are not responsible gun owners.

Starbuck09 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:19:36 PM)
You say in your post that it is regrettable that the people who died did'nt arm themselves to preven the murder. This is outrageous loki. The vast majority of people being shot and killed have no chance to defend themselves they are in no way culpable for criminal actions against them. Presumably it would be regrettable when some lunatic commits a drive by shooting and blows a nine year old girls head off as she was in the vicinity? Clearly this tacticdoes'nt work as the rate of murder would be negligible as people would be defending themselves from criminal elements. Killing is extremely difficult it is not as easy as it appears in the matrix if you've been in the military then you know this all too well Loki. I cannot assure you in Britian that you will not be hit by lightning, so presumably if you visit england you will stay indoors at all times?

Politesub53 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:22:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Loki45 quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Yeah what dumb shits we are, we have only got the gun murder rate down to a few dozen a year. First you claimed we had high murder rates, then high gun murder rates, now your argument is we have a couple of gun murders. I am guessing there are more killed with guns accidentally in the US, than deliberately in the UK. Let's ask those in Britain who have lost people to gun violence if their loved ones' deaths were 'acceptable' to them. You keep repeating this parrot fashion, maybe it was unwise of you to bring UK gun crime into your argument without checking your facts. Lets spell it out, gun crime isnt aceptable, thats why the UK took steps, which have worked, to reduce it. The only way to eliminate it, as you well know, is to eliminate guns. I have never advocated that for the US.

Starbuck09 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:23:08 PM)
Why is that a strawman argument?If you can't think of a rebuttal just say so don't dodge it. No-one thinks people who die from gun crime in the u.k. is acceptable. We think it is unacceptable which is why we do everything in our power to minimise the number of deaths and do so exceedingly well.

Loki45 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:24:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Starbuck09 Why is that a strawman argument?If you can't think of a rebuttal just say so don't dodge it. No-one thinks people who die from gun crime in the u.k. is acceptable. We think it is unacceptable which is why we do everything in our power to minimise the number of deaths and do so exceedingly well. It's a strawman argument because you bring in activities that are reprehensible and also very illegal in response to my question about your country being free if I'm not free to own a gun there. BIG difference.

Starbuck09 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:25:59 PM)
No it isn't what is morally reprehensible in our culture includes owning guns as it led to high rates of gun crime. So in our society we made it against the law. Our laws govern what we consider morally unacceptable. That makes us no less free.

Loki45 -> RE: The issue of firearms (8/17/2009 3:27:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 You keep repeating this parrot fashion, maybe it was unwise of you to bring UK gun crime into your argument without checking your facts. Lets spell it out, gun crime isnt aceptable, thats why the UK took steps, which have worked, to reduce it. The only way to eliminate it, as you well know, is to eliminate guns. I have never advocated that for the US. I keep repeating it because it bears repeating, especially when I know that every time I say it, it goes right over your heads (so noted because you continue to ignore it). Listen, control is fine. Regulations, steps taken to make sure the 'right people' can attain weapons is fine. An outright ban does only one thing: it ensures that a law-abiding citizen can't get something but a criminal can and will. That is unacceptable. As you cannot assure that a criminal won't get a gun, you cannot and will not take one from me, a law-abiding citizen trained in responsible gun ownership. I don't ever want to 'need' to pull a gun on someone. I hope my gun does nothing in its life but collect dust. But if the day comes when I 'need' to use it, I want that choice. I want the ability to defend myself and my loved ones, period.

Page: << < prev 8 9 [10] 11 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

5.859375E-02