RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (Full Version)

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



Message

BamaD -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/19/2015 4:07:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

What I am doing (and I'm probably being about as effective as p^ssing in the wind) is to hopefully get you guys thinking about why people own their guns. Instead of Monday morning quarterbacking after a mass shooting happens and the so-called big solution is to disarm people, why don't you start talking and listening to people who can't protect themselves with a sling shot?


It's like this for me, LP: Yes, I would like it for you to have a gun in order to defend yourself against, for instance, some fruitcake, brain-dead, neurotic stalker who clearly hasn't grown up beyond his early teen years and has no understanding of what it means to *examine himself and what he is thinking and doing* in order to *stop being an obsessive nutcase*. However, I would prefer it if neither of you were to have firearms and, more to the point, you, particularly, were to be absolutely certain that firearms were *never even to enter into the equation*. In short: obviously, I'd prefer you not to be up against a fucking headbanger *at all* - but, failing that, at worst, an *unarmed* fucking headbanger.

You missed the point completely. If, as you wish, niether had firearms she wouldn't have a chance, so until you find a way to see to it that everyone is nice to each other she needs a firearm.



thompsonx -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/19/2015 4:15:44 PM)


ORIGINAL: BamaD

You missed the point completely. If, as you wish, niether had firearms she wouldn't have a chance, so until you find a way to see to it that everyone is nice to each other she needs a firearm.

Or we could cook him and invite everyone to a pot luck[:D]



BamaD -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/19/2015 4:27:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: BamaD

You missed the point completely. If, as you wish, niether had firearms she wouldn't have a chance, so until you find a way to see to it that everyone is nice to each other she needs a firearm.

Or we could cook him and invite everyone to a pot luck[:D]


Interesting idea, but likely unconstitutional.



CreativeDominant -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/19/2015 4:31:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

What I am doing (and I'm probably being about as effective as p^ssing in the wind) is to hopefully get you guys thinking about why people own their guns. Instead of Monday morning quarterbacking after a mass shooting happens and the so-called big solution is to disarm people, why don't you start talking and listening to people who can't protect themselves with a sling shot?


It's like this for me, LP: Yes, I would like it for you to have a gun in order to defend yourself against, for instance, some fruitcake, brain-dead, neurotic stalker who clearly hasn't grown up beyond his early teen years and has no understanding of what it means to *examine himself and what he is thinking and doing* in order to *stop being an obsessive nutcase*. However, I would prefer it if neither of you were to have firearms and, more to the point, you, particularly, were to be absolutely certain that firearms were *never even to enter into the equation*. In short: obviously, I'd prefer you not to be up against a fucking headbanger *at all* - but, failing that, at worst, an *unarmed* fucking headbanger.
That would be great...then. SLL shed have to worry about would be:

~~~being choked to death

~~~being beaten...perhaps to death

~~~being slashed...either to permanent disfigurement or death.

Yes, those are so much more appealing.



jlf1961 -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/19/2015 4:44:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

What I am doing (and I'm probably being about as effective as p^ssing in the wind) is to hopefully get you guys thinking about why people own their guns. Instead of Monday morning quarterbacking after a mass shooting happens and the so-called big solution is to disarm people, why don't you start talking and listening to people who can't protect themselves with a sling shot?


It's like this for me, LP: Yes, I would like it for you to have a gun in order to defend yourself against, for instance, some fruitcake, brain-dead, neurotic stalker who clearly hasn't grown up beyond his early teen years and has no understanding of what it means to *examine himself and what he is thinking and doing* in order to *stop being an obsessive nutcase*. However, I would prefer it if neither of you were to have firearms and, more to the point, you, particularly, were to be absolutely certain that firearms were *never even to enter into the equation*. In short: obviously, I'd prefer you not to be up against a fucking headbanger *at all* - but, failing that, at worst, an *unarmed* fucking headbanger.



Just how are you going to guarantee "unarmed?" Lets see that would mean nothing that could possibly be used as a weapon, so there goes 99.999999999999% of the items in everyday use.

What you and every other "gun control" idealist fail to realize with the "get rid of guns to stop the killing" argument is that humans have this nasty habit of using whatever means they can get their hands on to kill other humans. Guns, knives, rocks, cricket bats, ball bats, neck ties, and god knows how many poisons there are, we are geniuses on coming up with new and improved ways to kill other humans.

Since the advent of firearms, the rule has been he who has the most guns makes the rules, before that it was he who had the most guys with the most swords made the rules.

Hell, look at Itsy, the prehistoric guy found in the glacier, he was a murder victim for christ's sake.

Thanks to new battery technology, I can make a wonderful rail gun with a back pack power supply. Not practical, but in a pinch I could put a round through an 8 inch concrete wall to fuck your day to hell and gone. (the detailed DIY information is on the internet)

Need to make a bomb, household chemicals in the right proportions (DIY information on the internet)

Want to recreate a wonderful British Sten gun (no complicated machine tools needed, DIY information on the internet)

Want to make 9 mm ammo for said sten gun? The Jews in palastine were making them with lipstick tubes when the Brits would not let them have guns because they were killing Brits and Palestinians.

Want to make a shit ton of AK's cheap, smuggle a bunch of Indian back alley gunsmiths and put em in your basement.

And I have not even touched on the high strength thermo plastics that hobbyists can get and make weapons that are undetectable including firearms.

Hell the Filipinos were killing Japanese troops with shotguns made from a nail, two pieces of pipe and a chunk of wood.

As soon as Cain killed Abel, (or for you atheists, og smashed mog with a rock) humans have been finding ways to kill each other.

Australia didnt stop at guns, they continued to swords and other bladed weapons because Aussies figured out you didnt need a gun to kill lots of people, the Chinese just figured that one out.

Taking the legal ownership of guns away is not going to stop the killing, guns are just efficient in doing that. What you need to do is change the basic human character.

Humans as a race are killers, hell we find some shit stupid reasons to fight wars just so we can do it on a massive scale, religion, skin color, tribe of birth, hair color, political beliefs, or just because some stupid shit head cut us off in traffic. If we dont use guns, we use cars (Texas wife killed cheating husband and mistress by running them over with her Mercedes repeatedly.)

My point is simple, take away the guns, and some smart bastard is going to come up with yet another way to kill someone and in the day of modern technology, its gonna be more efficient.


like this

Guns, knives, swords etc are not the problem, humans are the problem.

You want to stop the bloodshed, change the humans.



LookieNoNookie -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/19/2015 5:17:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Except Hillary and anyone who can't see the difference between a buyback and a mandatory buyback.

www.rageandwar.com/?p=31944


I wanna take your guns!!!!

I wanna take your socks!!!!!!

I wanna take your shoes.....




thompsonx -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/19/2015 5:38:04 PM)


ORIGINAL: BamaD

Interesting idea, but likely unconstitutional.

Certainly not the cooking part. Couldn't we tell everyone he died accidently while duck hunting with dick cheny?



thompsonx -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/19/2015 5:40:53 PM)

Since the advent of firearms, the rule has been he who has the most guns makes the rules, before that it was he who had the most guys with the most swords made the rules.

In ww2 russia had the most guys and the most guns[:D]



thompsonx -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/19/2015 5:43:36 PM)

Thanks to new battery technology, I can make a wonderful rail gun with a back pack power supply. Not practical, but in a pinch I could put a round through an 8 inch concrete wall to fuck your day to hell and gone. (the detailed DIY information is on the internet)

No you cannot...unless of course you have access to a big cheque book.



Termyn8or -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/19/2015 9:59:15 PM)

"Want to make 9 mm ammo for said sten gun? The Jews in palastine were making them with lipstick tubes when the Brits would not let them have guns because they were killing Brits and Palestinians."

You fucking racist anti-Semite. They are coming for you.

T^T



PeonForHer -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/21/2015 2:57:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961



My point is simple, take away the guns, and some smart bastard is going to come up with yet another way to kill someone and in the day of modern technology, its gonna be more efficient.


like this

Guns, knives, swords etc are not the problem, humans are the problem.

You want to stop the bloodshed, change the humans.


I never quite get why that's used so often as a trumping argument. Don't you see that it cuts both ways? If knives and swords may be used instead of guns -or some other bloodthirsty way of doing it - then why the *addition* of guns to the whole sorry mess? How does that improve matters?

If I were to accept your view of humans as so murderous - which I don't, because most aren't, most of the time - why allow that murderousness to be so easily facilitated?



jlf1961 -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/21/2015 4:03:34 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961



My point is simple, take away the guns, and some smart bastard is going to come up with yet another way to kill someone and in the day of modern technology, its gonna be more efficient.


like this

Guns, knives, swords etc are not the problem, humans are the problem.

You want to stop the bloodshed, change the humans.


I never quite get why that's used so often as a trumping argument. Don't you see that it cuts both ways? If knives and swords may be used instead of guns -or some other bloodthirsty way of doing it - then why the *addition* of guns to the whole sorry mess? How does that improve matters?

If I were to accept your view of humans as so murderous - which I don't, because most aren't, most of the time - why allow that murderousness to be so easily facilitated?




Simple, guns are the most easily concealed way of defending oneself.

Let you in on a secret, you pass me on the street, and short of using a metal detector, you would have no clue I had a colt 1911 on me, well sometimes its the SW .40.

Hell, if I could find a comfortable enough holster, i would invest in a .50 desert eagle.

And as for humans not being murderous by nature, what area of technology advances faster than any other? Weapons research.

Not medicine, food production, energy production, weapons.

Humans are wonderful creatures. Most collected items on the planet are weapons.

Maybe, once the majority of people have killed each other off, someone will come up with something better. I doubt it, though.



PeonForHer -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/21/2015 5:21:10 AM)

quote:

Let you in on a secret, you pass me on the street, and short of using a metal detector, you would have no clue I had a colt 1911 on me, well sometimes its the SW .40.


Actually I would have a very strong clue, because you've just said it. (Why on earth would you want to give up that sort of info so publicly?) And I think I might recognise you from your picture. Obviously, any of the government's forces would have far more information than that on you, however, courtesy of this wonderful world of the Net. Governments do tend to stay on top of the tech that's available to civilians.

So, if I wanted to arrest you - well, come up behind you, maybe, suddenly, nice little stranglehold ...? I could do that without a gun, on my own. But to be comfortable, I could have a team around me. As far as I can see, carefully, with foreknowledge of the target, is generally how government forces deal with people that they want 'out of circulation'.

quote:


And as for humans not being murderous by nature, what area of technology advances faster than any other? Weapons research.


For me, that still concentrates on the dramatic, noisy world at the periphery of humans' lives - not the ordinary, quiet, day-to-day bulk of it. What proportion of all your days, since you were old enough to hold and shoot a weapon, have been involved in your killing people? Or has anybody been involved in killing anyone else?



Musicmystery -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/21/2015 5:47:38 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961what area of technology advances faster than any other? Weapons research.


What total bullshit, brought about presumably by your obsession with defending anything gun.

Medical technology DOES advance quickly. So does space technology, biological research (DNA/genome) . . .

What "major advances" have occurred recently in weapons technology?

Breathe, Jeff. You're actually a sharp guy when you're not blinded by gun fever.



BamaD -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/21/2015 10:26:51 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961



My point is simple, take away the guns, and some smart bastard is going to come up with yet another way to kill someone and in the day of modern technology, its gonna be more efficient.


like this

Guns, knives, swords etc are not the problem, humans are the problem.

You want to stop the bloodshed, change the humans.


I never quite get why that's used so often as a trumping argument. Don't you see that it cuts both ways? If knives and swords may be used instead of guns -or some other bloodthirsty way of doing it - then why the *addition* of guns to the whole sorry mess? How does that improve matters?

If I were to accept your view of humans as so murderous - which I don't, because most aren't, most of the time - why allow that murderousness to be so easily facilitated?


I am 65, most thugs are under 30, are you telling me that with swords or knives I have an even chance, with guns they don't have an even chance.



mnottertail -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/21/2015 10:33:07 AM)

yup, any training with swords, knives, anything, you have a good chance.



BamaD -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/21/2015 10:41:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

yup, any training with swords, knives, anything, you have a good chance.


quote:


My skill level is fine, but my mobility is not. If you know anything about knife or sword fighting you would know that mobility is very important.



PeonForHer -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/21/2015 10:55:22 AM)

quote:

I am 65, most thugs are under 30, are you telling me that with swords or knives I have an even chance, with guns they don't have an even chance.


... Assuming the thugs don't have guns, that is.

But in answer: No, gun supporters are telling you that. That's an implication every time they crank up the argument of 'Hey, if people don't kill with guns, they'll kill with something else ... should we also ban knives, sticks and even rolled up fists?'



BamaD -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/21/2015 11:05:03 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

I am 65, most thugs are under 30, are you telling me that with swords or knives I have an even chance, with guns they don't have an even chance.


... Assuming the thugs don't have guns, that is.

But in answer: No, gun supporters are telling you that. That's an implication every time they crank up the argument of 'Hey, if people don't kill with guns, they'll kill with something else ... should we also ban knives, sticks and even rolled up fists?'

No that was assuming we both have guns. I would be more skilled with a sword than they would, likely not with a knife, possitively with a gun.



mnottertail -> RE: Nobody wants to take your guns. (10/21/2015 11:07:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

yup, any training with swords, knives, anything, you have a good chance.


quote:


My skill level is fine, but my mobility is not. If you know anything about knife or sword fighting you would know that mobility is very important.


No, it is not at all important. not for any fighting. The movements can be very very small, just like you make with a gun.



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625