Page 17 of 78 FirstFirst ... 71314151617181920212767 ... LastLast
Results 401 to 425 of 1930

Thread: United States Gun Control: Gun Control = Fascism Everybody!

  1. #401
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    98

    Default

    That's not the issue. The point is the fact the odds of dying from a knife attack are very low, lower than the odds of dying from a gun attack. Ergo, limiting firearms and making way for knife crime results in less deaths.

  2. #402
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    294

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    In close contact a knife can be just as deadly, and with the right materials a bomb can be even more destructive. As I said before, the deadliest school massacre ever in the U.S. did not come from a gun but a bomb.



    My point is, that while violence with such a weapon will decline, it will merely be replaced with violence by another weapon. Again you see that with knives in Britain.
    I'm still not getting why other weapons being as deadly as guns is reason for guns to be legal.

  3. #403
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scammel View Post
    That's not the issue. The point is the fact the odds of dying from a knife attack are very low, lower than the odds of dying from a gun attack. Ergo, limiting firearms and making way for knife crime results in less deaths.
    Actually it is the issue, when you have numerous large cities with large getto areas like there exists in the U.S. the response rate for police and ambulances takes much longer, as such being stabbed by a knife multiple times or shot multiple times, the risk of bleeding out or dying from fatal injuries greatly increases.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eterna View Post
    I'm still not getting why other weapons being as deadly as guns is reason for guns to be legal.
    Nor am I suggesting it is, there are numerous reasons guns should be legal, the fact that criminals merely move to other lethal tools is just something I am pointing out for the argument that a decrease in guns will suddenly mean a decrease in violence.

  4. #404
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    98

    Default

    I'm still not getting why other weapons being as deadly as guns is reason for guns to be legal.
    Again, the logic is that just drive people to use other weapons which are just as deadly, thus having no actual effect. The thing is, knives, the most common alternative, aren't as deadly.

  5. #405
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scammel View Post
    Again, the logic is that just drive people to use other weapons which are just as deadly, thus having no actual effect. The thing is, knives, the most common alternative, aren't as deadly.
    And as I would point out, that anyone wishing to truly kill a person, a knife is just as deadly. Just ask Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman

  6. #406
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    98

    Default

    Actually it is the issue, when you have numerous large cities with large getto areas like there exists in the U.S. the response rate for police and ambulances takes much longer, as such being stabbed by a knife multiple times or shot multiple times, the risk of bleeding out or dying from fatal injuries greatly increases.
    Except it's not a cross-country comparison - the comparison is between knife and gun crime. The fact that the US may have poorer emergency services doesn't matter, as in whichever country you're taking stats from will have the same emergency services handling both knife and gun attacks.

  7. #407
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scammel View Post
    Except it's not a cross-country comparison - the comparison is between knife and gun crime. The fact that the US may have poorer emergency services doesn't matter, as in whichever country you're taking stats from will have the same emergency services handling both knife and gun attacks.
    Problem is response time does matter, I believe we can both agree that you are more likely to survive from either a knife or gunshot wound if you are in a hospital as opposed to bleeding out on the street. As such the quicker a ambulance can get to a area and administer aid does matter.

  8. #408
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    the Netherlands
    Posts
    3,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    And as I would point out, that anyone wishing to truly kill a person, a knife is just as deadly. Just ask Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman
    Not really stab wounds are less deadly besides it is a lot easier to just pull a trigger. With a gun you can kill a group of people, lets say 20 children and 7 adults, much faster.
        Spoiler:- My latest challenge:

  9. #409
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 7 tyranitars View Post
    Not really stab wounds are less deadly besides it is a lot easier to just pull a trigger. With a gun you can kill a group of people, lets say 20 children and 7 adults, much faster.
    Yet mass shootings or even mass stabbings are not very common, what is far more common is someone being shot between 3 to 9 feet, a range in which some one can easily pull a knife and stab some one just as easily if not quicker than pulling a gun. Hell when it comes to mass killings in say a school, using a hand gun or rifle is not the best way to kill, to go at it. Using a Shotgun has a better spread range, and using a bomb can take everyone out in one swoop!
    Last edited by BigLutz; 8th January 2013 at 11:06 PM.

  10. #410
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    the Netherlands
    Posts
    3,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    Yet mass shootings or even mass stabbings are not very common, what is far more common is someone being shot between 3 to 9 feet, a range in which some one can easily pull a knife and stab some one just as easily if not quicker than pulling a gun. Hell when it comes to mass killings in say a school, using a hand gun or rifle is not the best way to kill, to go at it. Using a Shotgun has a better spread range, and using a bomb can take everyone out in one swoop!
    Yeah but I don't believe bombs are legal in the USA, as it isn't for self defense. A shotgun isn't as lethal from distance, granted if you put a shotgun on someones head and pull the trigger it will be a bloody mess. But a shotgun from distance spreads out and is hardly lethal from a distance.
        Spoiler:- My latest challenge:

  11. #411
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 7 tyranitars View Post
    Yeah but I don't believe bombs are legal in the USA, as it isn't for self defense. A shotgun isn't as lethal from distance, granted if you put a shotgun on someones head and pull the trigger it will be a bloody mess. But a shotgun from distance spreads out and is hardly lethal from a distance.
    Which was the reason I was using a school for example, in a compact space of say a school, or a movie theater, or a mall, (where these mass shootings usually take place) you are not going for range, but pure lethality.
    Last edited by BigLutz; 9th January 2013 at 1:10 AM.

  12. #412
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,245

    Default

    Yesterday, Jon Stewart talked about gun control on his episode and he summarizes the problem here.

    “But now I get it. Now I see what’s happening. So this is what it is: Their paranoid fear of a possible dystopic future prevents us from addressing our actual dystopic present. We can’t even begin to address 30,000 gun deaths that are actually, in reality, happening in this country every year because a few of us must remain vigilant against the rise of imaginary Hitler.”

  13. #413
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    Yesterday, Jon Stewart talked about gun control on his episode and he summarizes the problem here.
    Pretty much, the founders of this country rightfully saw the need of a armed populous to protect their creation from getting out of control.

  14. #414
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    the Netherlands
    Posts
    3,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    Pretty much, the founders of this country rightfully saw the need of a armed populous to protect their creation from getting out of control.
    That was in the middle of war though. Where there was always a threat that the british army would arrive on your doorstep.
        Spoiler:- My latest challenge:

  15. #415
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 7 tyranitars View Post
    That was in the middle of war though. Where there was always a threat that the british army would arrive on your doorstep.
    Umm no, it was created in 1789 and ratified in 1791, the Revolutionary War ended in 1783

  16. #416
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    Pretty much, the founders of this country rightfully saw the need of a armed populous to protect their creation from getting out of control.
    But however, the ones who believes in the paranoia that gun control leads to government taking ALL the guns away which will lead to Hitler/Stalin/etc. We need to read the phrase from the 2nd amendment very carefully, "Well-regulated militia." After all, there have been many technological advancements of our weaponry as Americans no longer have muskets.

  17. #417
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    But however, the ones who believes in the paranoia that gun control leads to government taking ALL the guns away which will lead to Hitler/Stalin/etc.
    You want to be that it will never happen in the future of this country?

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    We need to read the phrase from the 2nd amendment very carefully, "Well-regulated militia."
    We have already been over this, from their own words they viewed a militia as the public themselves

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    After all, there have been many technological advancements of our weaponry as Americans no longer have muskets.
    The founding fathers had just finished fighting the most well equipped army in the nation, with the arms they had. Do you honestly think they would not wish to have the populous to have some parity?

  18. #418
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    You want to be that it will never happen in the future of this country?
    With our modern system, hell no. That's the kind of thinking that makes gun control harder to deal with. Should we take ALL the guns away? No.

    We have already been over this, from their own words they viewed a militia as the public themselves
    That is the problem. We can't just view the whole public as a militia as there's a difference between an organized and unorganized militia. That is discipline in owning a weapon especially types that are meant to be in the hands of experts. That is why we have to look at other countries on how they do gun control and learn from them.

    The founding fathers had just finished fighting the most well equipped army in the nation, with the arms they had. Do you honestly think they would not wish to have the populous to have some parity?
    No. When did I disagree with that?

  19. #419
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    With our modern system, hell no. That's the kind of thinking that makes gun control harder to deal with. Should we take ALL the guns away? No.
    Of that we are in agreement, however it is also ignorant to believe that a dictator cannot rise to power in our country.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    That is the problem. We can't just view the whole public as a militia as there's a difference between an organized and unorganized militia. That is discipline in owning a weapon especially types that are meant to be in the hands of experts. That is why we have to look at other countries on how they do gun control and learn from them.
    That is why we have gun training classes and the such, you may not like the public as a militia, but by law they are.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    No. When did I disagree with that?
    My point was, and I was assuming what you were going for, is that the founding fathers could not forsee the modern era of technology in weapons. The counter point to that is what I said, that it does not matter if we are talking about a AK-16 or a Musket

  20. #420
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,245

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    Of that we are in agreement, however it is also ignorant to believe that a dictator cannot rise to power in our country.
    Here's one question... How? Obama is going to rise up to be the angry black man with a big liberal agenda? Because Rush Limbaugh did say we will be going into 4 years of tyranny.

    That is why we have gun training classes and the such, you may not like the public as a militia, but by law they are.
    But just because the public can be a militia doesn't mean they can skip background checks. After all, we have to look at the mental health of those who owned weapons themselves.

    My point was, and I was assuming what you were going for, is that the founding fathers could not forsee the modern era of technology in weapons. The counter point to that is what I said, that it does not matter if we are talking about a AK-16 or a Musket
    But here's what I am trying to say; is it necessary to own a semi-automatic weapon?

  21. #421
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    Here's one question... How? Obama is going to rise up to be the angry black man with a big liberal agenda? Because Rush Limbaugh did say we will be going into 4 years of tyranny.
    Do I think Obama fits the bill? No

    But look at the trend over the past decade, you have a kill list with Americans on it.

    When the President is confronted with a problem with Illegal Immigration, instead of going to Congress he merely signs a executive order directing INS to disregard some illegals.
    When the President is confronted with the problem of guns, instead of letting Congress work it out, as Biden says today: Executive Order
    When the President is confronted with the problem of the debt ceiling, as has been talked about: Executive Order to create a trillion dollar coin

    Over the past decade we have moved toward more and more of what Obama once called and now takes part in: a imperial Presidency. My point there is ground work to be laid for one day for a popular President to come in and rule merely by executive order.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    But just because the public can be a militia doesn't mean they can skip background checks. After all, we have to look at the mental health of those who owned weapons themselves.
    Of which I completely agree, but are you willing to have mental health checks on other rights? Voting? Writing for a newspaper or blog? Abortions?

    Quote Originally Posted by Silver Soul View Post
    But here's what I am trying to say; is it necessary to own a semi-automatic weapon?
    You realize by definition any weapon that does not require the user to physically reload the gun by putting the next cartridge in by hand is consider a semi-automatic right? Semi-Automatic merely means the gun reloads itself before the person pulls the trigger again, a modern handgun in which the gun ejects the cartridge after it fires and pushes the next one in, is considered by definition a semi-automatic

    Now does a gun need a semi-automatic firing rate in which it fires 3 rounds each time you squeeze the trigger? Probably not, really those type of guns fall into two categories: They look cool, and they are great cheats for hunters.

    But as we saw with the assault weapons ban, doing away with these guns does not stop crime where people commit them using these types of weapons. And honestly I would be more afraid of a shooter who has to choose the next level of gun when it comes to a killing spree: The shot gun. Merely because instead of one bullet hitting one person one, two, or three times, it sprays out, hitting multiple people in close proximity at the same time. The Auroa Colorado shooting would have been MUCH worse if the guy came in with a shot gun than just a hand gun or assault weapon.
    Last edited by BigLutz; 9th January 2013 at 9:41 PM.

  22. #422
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    367

    Default

    The US Government recently brought approximately 1.2 billion rounds of ammunition for issues within the United States, but yet the same people want you to give up your right to own a gun to defend yourself?

    Seems legit.

  23. #423
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    98

    Default

    The US Government recently brought approximately 1.2 billion rounds of ammunition for issues within the United States, but yet the same people want you to give up your right to own a gun to defend yourself?

    Seems legit.
    The US isn't Syria, you know. Neither the British or Candians were systematically purged once the bans were in force.

  24. #424
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scammel View Post
    The US isn't Syria, you know. Neither the British or Candians were systematically purged once the bans were in force.
    Because obviously since it is not happening now, it will never happen in the future...

  25. #425
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    2,627

    Default

    Well Silver, I take obama "exploring" executive orders to combat gun violence as yet another step in Obama "rising up to be the angry black man with the liberal agenda" Sure it sounds innocent, but things like this usually do when they first come down.

    This is a major issue I have with your white knight Silver. He probably wakes up every morning cursing that pesky constitution and the congress he has to go through, so what does he do? Executive orders to bypass them.
    Last edited by TheWatersGreatGuardian; 9th January 2013 at 11:22 PM.

    "What good is it for a man to gain the world, yet forfeit his soul?"

Page 17 of 78 FirstFirst ... 71314151617181920212767 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •