Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
Wow, the only purpose of a gun is to kill stuff...and it still kills less stuff than machines that aren't meant to kill. That's awesome! Get rid of cars!
Originally posted by Adam Warlock
Hell no... Over my dead body. Their gonna have to pry my guns from rotting corpse.I already printed out my 3 letters and sent them to all 3 sources. I also sent 3 letters in my own words expressing my views and opinions about their influence on gun control.
👆
...The right to bear arms shall not be infringed!
-Article 2, Amendment 2 of the U.S. Constitution
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Again, you can't help but embarrass yourself. Since when has the primary function of a car been to cause another living thing harm?
And yet regardless of the intial function, it has turned out to be very effective at ending lives. As a matter of fact its far better in our day to day society at ending lives then guns.
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
I see that 'proportionality' and 'intent' are a little above your level of comprehension. Not to worry, you can look forward to learning about that in Grade 7.
Krunk as hilarious as you think your being NC is right here , Car's kill more people then guns do AND you have a getaway vehicle. Let's ban guns so we can run people over !!!
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
I see that 'proportionality' and 'intent' are a little above your level of comprehension. Not to worry, you can look forward to learning about that in Grade 7.
That's ok, insulting people when you don't have an adequate response is common in the mentally defecient. I'll let it slide.(try harder too, I graduated 7th grade about 7 years ago... try a lower grade 🙄 )
You don't want to look at stats posted in the thread, that's fine. Whatever. You can still defend your stance. Who cares that in places with high -legal- gun ownership, there is less crime? Who cares that criminals already get their guns illegally, and have no reason to obey another law making a gun illegal? Who cares that disarming normal citizens of their legal guns would raise violent crime rates?
I can't work out if you're being facetious or you actually think you are making pertinent points. Either way, I'll indulge the latter as I feel this best represents your true-self...
If you use a car as it is intended, it is unlikely someone will be hurt or killed by it.
If you use a gun as it is intended, it is likely someone will be hurt or killed by it.
Cars = a mode of transport.
Guns = a tool to kill or maim people with.
Do you see the difference?
(I believe you can, but then I am an optimist...)
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
I can't work out if you're being facetious or you actually think you are making pertinent points. Either way, I'll indulge the latter as I feel this best represents your true-self...If you use a car as it is intended, it is unlikely someone will be hurt or killed by it.
If you use a gun as it is intended, it is likely someone will be hurt or killed by it.
Cars = a mode of transport.
Guns = a tool to kill or maim people with.Do you see the difference?
(I believe you can, but then I am an optimist...)
Um, yes. Generally the idea of defending yourself from an attacker involves hurting or possibly killing them. Your point is pure shite.
Originally posted by grey fox
Krunk as hilarious as you think your being NC is right here , Car's kill more people then guns do AND you have a getaway vehicle. Let's ban guns so we can run people over !!!
Riiiiiight. I think I'll leave this post for a lobotomized monkey to reply to...
Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
That's ok, insulting people when you don't have an adequate response is common in the mentally defecient. I'll let it slide.
I am insulted by the ignorance on display in your posts, but I still dignify them with a reply. You should feel honored.
Anyway, on I go...
Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
You don't want to look at stats posted in the thread, that's fine. Whatever. You can still defend your stance. Who cares that in places with high -legal- gun ownership, there is less crime? Who cares that criminals already get their guns illegally, and have no reason to obey another law making a gun illegal? Who cares that disarming normal citizens of their legal guns would raise violent crime rates?
Well, let's see: In Europe - and much of the developed world - actual private gun-ownership is pretty low. This statistic is coupled with a low rate of gun-related deaths. Me thinks there is a correlation...
Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd FlooWell, let's see: In Europe - and much of the developed world - actual private gun-ownership is pretty low. This statistic is coupled with a low rate of gun-related deaths. Me thinks there is a correlation...
And yet a higher rate of robbery, assault, rape, muggings etc. I hope you can understand the correlation.
Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
Um, yes. Generally the idea of defending yourself from an attacker involves hurting or possibly killing them. Your point is pure shite.
You are welcome to say my point is 'shite', but your post is blunt (as in 'dull'😉; ergo, you never had a point in the first place.
Where has this scenario come from? Did anyone say "culture of fear"? If you take away the bad-bad man's gun, then why do you need a gun to defend yourself? Oh, right. You don't.
http://www.jcpr.org/wpfiles/LudwigGunspap.PDF?CFID=664158&CFTOKEN=90701352
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0210e.asp
hmm, here it looks like gun-related crimes are actually down...and guns are still legal, oh snap! http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm
some more facts before I go to my final http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=7862
Just do a google search you lazy bum. All the stats support at least being able to own a handgun to protect yourself.
Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
http://www.jcpr.org/wpfiles/LudwigGunspap.PDF?CFID=664158&CFTOKEN=90701352
Despite being irrelevant (it's about the procedure for carrying a gun, not whether or not you have a gun in the first place), this file does nothing to counter my claim that 'less guns = less gun-related deaths'. So, you've got nothing there.
Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0210e.asp
Libertarianism is a lovely ideal, but the rate of homocides in the US proves that individuals do 'infringe on the liberty of others'. Also, do you really fail to see the contradiction of a libertarian owning a gun which would allow him/her to infringe upon another's life in the most ultimate way possible? I guess you don't...
Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
hmm, here it looks like gun-related crimes are actually down...and guns are still legal, oh snap! http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm
Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
some more facts before I go to my final http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=7862
Hahaha! Your big finale comes from a right-wing, conservative trash mag! No conflict of interest there! You might as well quoted something from The Enquirer..."Aliens Say Guns Are OK!"...
Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
Just do a google search you lazy bum. All the stats support at least being able to own a handgun to protect yourself.
First off, if you cry 'stats', then it's your job to present them. Sadly, you presented me with a load of garbage that had nothing to do with the debate, and then some 'facts' from conservative trash rags. Secondly, my point of contention is that if guns are banned, then less people are going to die from them. Nothing you have posted has refuted that simple, basic statement.