Firearms.

rattle · Post by **rattle** » 10 Nov 2007, 19:22

When are you guys going to discuss women? Weapons can't be that interesting now can it?

TradeMark · Post by **TradeMark** » 10 Nov 2007, 19:36

womens makes mens mad, and then mens uses guns and kills people. FACT.

tombom · Post by **tombom** » 10 Nov 2007, 20:08

Felix the Cat wrote:Well, see, I'm not a Eurosocialist, so I don't try to socially engineer people and treat people as statistics.

I do know that I strongly believe that every person has the right to defend his or her self with a firearm. That's all I really need. I'm not going to launch a statistics blitz at you, because I don't determine what is right and wrong by way of statistics.

I'd much rather live in a society where everyone has equal access to guns than in a society where only the government and criminals (oh, but I just repeated myself) have access to guns.

I'm just going to have to quote this wonderful post again.

First, government = criminals is really stupid. Sure, governments do a lot of bad things but so do businesses and other big organisations.

Appealing to personal beliefs and shrugging off objective things like statistics in deciding what a national policy should be is so completely stupid I don't know where to start. My earlier post replacing it with beating up gays is evidence enough that it makes no sense and is a worthless justification.

Shrugging off all people who disagree with you as "Eurosocialists" - which is a weird term as I imagine there are many Americans who disagree with widely available guns, along with the fact that there are a lot of Europeans that aren't socialist that disagree with more legal avenues to guns - pretty much every non-fringe party in European politics in fact! It also shows off the bizarre way people of a certain political orientation decry everyone left of them as "socialists" and treat the term socialist as if it were synonymous with evil. In fact, you've done just that by equating this strange term Eurosocialist with people who "socially engineer people and treat people as statistics". I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. Treating people as statistics is attempting again just to smear people who you don't like; pretty much all politics or big scale revolves around treating people as statistics - it's necessary to make good decisions. I have no idea where socially engineering people comes from.

You also seem to fail to realise that politics is about compromise. You can't please everyone and ultimately you have to treat people as statistics in order to work out what the majority wants.

Decimator · Post by **Decimator** » 10 Nov 2007, 21:02

Big businesses can't legislate a monopoly on firepower.

tombom · Post by **tombom** » 10 Nov 2007, 21:11

Decimator wrote:Big businesses can't legislate a monopoly on firepower.

Sure, but why does this matter? It's also not entirely true.

Decimator · Post by **Decimator** » 10 Nov 2007, 21:31

A business can't oppress people, tax people, or impose laws on people. A government can do all those things and more. Felix and I both have a healthy distrust of government. I do not believe that my government has in mind the best for me, I do not believe that my government is honest, and I do not believe they can protect me from those who wish to harm me.

Hence, I promote firearms in the hands of as many people as possible, so that even if I am not carrying a weapon when someone considers harming me, they'll look at me and wonder "What if he has a gun?"

tombom · Post by **tombom** » 10 Nov 2007, 21:51

Decimator wrote:A business can't oppress people, tax people, or impose laws on people. A government can do all those things and more. Felix and I both have a healthy distrust of government. I do not believe that my government has in mind the best for me, I do not believe that my government is honest, and I do not believe they can protect me from those who wish to harm me.

So you believe things should just be a free for all?

You also believe that a court case which said you couldn't illegalise abortions was wrong - surely that's stopping the government deciding what's best for somebody?

Whoever holds the power to control a nation will have problems. There's nothing wrong with having a healthy distrust of government, but realise businesses are no better and nobody has come up with a better way of doing things.

Hence, I promote firearms in the hands of as many people as possible, so that even if I am not carrying a weapon when someone considers harming me, they'll look at me and wonder "What if he has a gun?"

You could say that this would cause an environment where people would be scared of going outside because people who consider harming you might have a gun and they'll have the advantage. Chances are somebody who wants to harm you can do perfectly well at harming you without using a gun with you having a gun.

Sleksa · Post by **Sleksa** » 10 Nov 2007, 22:02

Decimator wrote:A business can't oppress people, tax people, or impose laws on people. A government can do all those things and more.

oh yes, the goverment's fundamental job is to opress and enslave its people and to fucking eat children's brains, so its best to stock up on rations and machineguns up your cellar to prepare for the revolution

unless ofcourse the guys sitting in the goverment would be like, normal people like you, but no that cant be possible

Hence, I promote firearms in the hands of as many people as possible, so that even if I am not carrying a weapon when someone considers harming me, they'll look at me and wonder "What if he has a gun?"

i remember someone talking something about a "power trip" involved in firearm posessions, and this comes very close for me to being near it

cong06 · Post by **cong06** » 11 Nov 2007, 05:32

Decimator wrote:Hence, I promote firearms in the hands of as many people as possible, so that even if I am not carrying a weapon when someone considers harming me, they'll look at me and wonder "What if he has a gun?"

I was going to stay out of this argument because I don't feel suited to discuss it, but the fact that you mentioned intimidation reminded me alot of Boweling for Columbine, a movie that documentary that attempts to prove that the reason why America has the highest Murder rate is not:
1) Violence in video games
2) Violence in Media
3) um...other Violence
But instead the fact that we are scared. (If you watch it, skip to the animated clip about the "Bullet" describing the history of America)

Anyway. I thought it was interesting. My personal opinion is that Violence is always wrong, and that Guns promote Violence.
If you're worried about overthrowing a corrupt government, then look at Ghandi. He did some amazing stuff without Guns.

Caydr · Post by **Caydr** » 11 Nov 2007, 05:56

My two cents.

The notion that making guns illegal will reduce crime in any way makes me sorry to be a member of this species. Guns shouldn't be handed out to children or made easy to get either, but there's no sense making out as though their existence makes it any easier to commit any sort of crime. If there were no guns, there'd be knives. No knives, there'd be sticks. No sticks, there'd be no air, and we'd all die anyway.

But making guns illegal would be a little like America's recent action on terrorism. Apparently now that it's been officially made illegal, they're expecting to see a major decline in suicide bombing. Let's make guns illegal, then criminals will be forced to move to another country or something!

nemppu · Post by **nemppu** » 11 Nov 2007, 07:01

Caydr wrote:The notion that making guns illegal will reduce crime in any way makes me sorry to be a member of this species. Guns shouldn't be handed out to children or made easy to get either, but there's no sense making out as though their existence makes it any easier to commit any sort of crime. If there were no guns, there'd be knives. No knives, there'd be sticks. No sticks, there'd be no air, and we'd all die anyway.

That's one of the suckiest-fuckiest things I've read in a while. The issue can't be simplified that much.

Ofcourse making guns illegal won't be a good solid solution in a country like USA where the guns are all over the fucking place. But take Finland for example, where pretty much all the guns are on police/military/licenced hunters/licenced sports shooters.. if any of those are abusing their guns get owned fast and hard because they are in the known records.

What might be hard for you dipshits to understand is that there are no guns all over Finland in every fucking corner. There's no magical fucking black market that's around the corner where you go and pick up a gun. The fact that illegal guns are illegal, and that the police are actually doing their job, means that getting an illegal weapon requires you to know some fucking badass illegal mafioso motherfuckers. Theyre not easy to get at all. Guns can be traced. Your average dumbshit criminal in Finland does NOT have a gun. Just look at the firearmed robbery/violence statistics. Knives, yeah, but don't fucking think you can get rid of all knives.

Making guns completely illegal in a country like USA where theyre all over the place wouldnt work. Neither will the opposite work in a country with the opposite situation. The two situations are not comparable so stop comparing them. Thnx bye.

Comp1337 · Post by **Comp1337** » 11 Nov 2007, 09:49

LISTEN TO NEMPPU PEOPLE

KingRaptor · Post by **KingRaptor** » 11 Nov 2007, 10:29

Libertarians often seem to forget that other r-word that comes with "rights" - responsibility. Sure, it's easy to complain "the govt. doesn't trust me with a gun!", but asked to name some people they know whom they wouldn't trust with a firearm, and I reckon you could easily get a list twenty or thirty names long.

On the flip side, using crime-vs-gun-laws statistics to promote gun control works great until you get to Canada. Or Switzerland. Or Israel. Or, for that matter, crime rate-against-time graphs with gun-law-was-passed-here marks on them.

I am of the opinion that gun ownership should come with extremely stringent restrictions based on the competency of the individual in question to adhere to safety rules, the psychological condition of the person, and (obviously) whether or not he/she has a criminal record. Applying CCP rules to all gun ownership in the US would be a good start. Also, perhaps the sale of firearms to the general public should be nationalized.

cong06 wrote: If you're worried about overthrowing a corrupt government, then look at Ghandi.

Except that Gandhi went against the British, who could be reasoned with, and it was really World War II (directly and indirectly) more than anything else that allowed the British colonies to attain independence.

Had it been the Imperial Japanese ruling India, how long do you think Gandhi would have been allowed to live?

MightySheep · Post by **MightySheep** » 11 Nov 2007, 15:09

is it true that if someone trespasses your property in America you can shoot him? that would be so ausome. just put a few dollars on your garden then wait by the window for some idiot to pick it up

nemppu · Post by **nemppu** » 11 Nov 2007, 15:23

MightySheep wrote:is it true that if someone trespasses your property in America you can shoot him? that would be so ausome. just put a few dollars on your garden then wait by the window for some idiot to pick it up

yah ur an idiot

manored · Post by **manored** » 11 Nov 2007, 15:55

Caydr wrote:My two cents.

The notion that making guns illegal will reduce crime in any way makes me sorry to be a member of this species. Guns shouldn't be handed out to children or made easy to get either, but there's no sense making out as though their existence makes it any easier to commit any sort of crime. If there were no guns, there'd be knives. No knives, there'd be sticks. No sticks, there'd be no air, and we'd all die anyway.

But making guns illegal would be a little like America's recent action on terrorism. Apparently now that it's been officially made illegal, they're expecting to see a major decline in suicide bombing. Let's make guns illegal, then criminals will be forced to move to another country or something!

Said everthing :)

tombom · Post by **tombom** » 11 Nov 2007, 18:05

Caydr wrote:My two cents.

The notion that making guns illegal will reduce crime in any way makes me sorry to be a member of this species. Guns shouldn't be handed out to children or made easy to get either, but there's no sense making out as though their existence makes it any easier to commit any sort of crime. If there were no guns, there'd be knives. No knives, there'd be sticks. No sticks, there'd be no air, and we'd all die anyway.

But making guns illegal would be a little like America's recent action on terrorism. Apparently now that it's been officially made illegal, they're expecting to see a major decline in suicide bombing. Let's make guns illegal, then criminals will be forced to move to another country or something!

Don't you live in Canada? I didn't realise guns were widely available there. Nice pulling out the "sorry to be a member of this species" card when somebody disagrees with you without providing any sensible counter arguments except ridiculous hyperbole and a strawman of other's views.

Also check out this.

cong06 · Post by **cong06** » 11 Nov 2007, 19:21

KingRaptor wrote:
cong06 wrote: If you're worried about overthrowing a corrupt government, then look at Ghandi.
Except that Gandhi went against the British, who could be reasoned with, and it was really World War II (directly and indirectly) more than anything else that allowed the British colonies to attain independence.

Had it been the Imperial Japanese ruling India, how long do you think Gandhi would have been allowed to live?

Ghandi wasn't the only example...Martin Luther King managed to promote more rights while fighting against a very irrational group of people: The South!

And if you're claiming that governments these days are going to turn into Imperial Japan, I think you're mistaken. While there may not be that many people that actually care about the the outcome of the world, it's a large enough minority to prevent a government like America from turning into a full blown Dictatorship.

the-middleman · Post by **the-middleman** » 11 Nov 2007, 20:07

Many of you seem to play this life like PVE

Are we not supposed to share this world with all other human beings? Should we not try to live with the criminal, the thief and even the rapist? Im shocked how many here consider shooting someone out of whatever reason. If I catch a thief in my flat then YES I do call the police and wait 30 mins for them to arrive. Maybe they will catch the thief, maybe not. Shoot him? Insane!

I come from a german smalltown. Germany has pretty strict laws on guns. Although I do know a few guys own guns I have never in my entire life seen a gun from close distance let allone touch one. I sometimes see cops carry on on their belt. Thats all. Guns are for me...fiction....they only exist in movies. I am so happy about this. I cant imagine living in a neighborhood where everyone got guns, multiple guns, show them around, show them to their kids.

I do know that there is a certain need for guns for cops or military but thats it IMO. We(me and most of the readers of this forum) live in the richest, safest and most peacefully countries of the all times. Guns should have no place in our homes

Mars · Post by **Mars** » 11 Nov 2007, 20:38

the-middleman wrote:Many of you seem to play this life like PVE

Are we not supposed to share this world with all other human beings? Should we not try to live with the criminal, the thief and even the rapist? Im shocked how many here consider shooting someone out of whatever reason. If I catch a thief in my flat then YES I do call the police and wait 30 mins for them to arrive. Maybe they will catch the thief, maybe not. Shoot him? Insane!

I come from a german smalltown. Germany has pretty strict laws on guns. Although I do know a few guys own guns I have never in my entire life seen a gun from close distance let allone touch one. I sometimes see cops carry on on their belt. Thats all. Guns are for me...fiction....they only exist in movies. I am so happy about this. I cant imagine living in a neighborhood where everyone got guns, multiple guns, show them around, show them to their kids.

I do know that there is a certain need for guns for cops or military but thats it IMO. We(me and most of the readers of this forum) live in the richest, safest and most peacefully countries of the all times. Guns should have no place in our homes

I agree with the middleman on this. Second├é┬┤d.

Spring RTS Engine

Firearms.

Live with

Re: Live with