mantisman51
Active Member
Oh yeah, guns haven't done any good, like protect life and property. Like most Libs you think we should make docile victims of the unfortunate and misunderstood criminals?
Must have thought she was an intruder...
- Thread starter theclemsonkid
- Start date
scsinet
Active Member
Originally Posted by TheClemsonKid
http:///forum/post/3152183
What I don't get is why any one person needs "x" number of guns in your home. To the poster who said they had too many to count off the top of your head...
Why? Under what circumstance would you ever need that many weapons? It doesn't make any sense to me. Unless you are forming a militia, or about to go Oceans Eleven on us, why in the world would you need, or more importantly, want that many weapons?
The fact that you don't see a need does not justify changing laws, and quite frankly, your argument is an insult to me and anyone else who invests in firearms for sporting, recreational, and above all, responsible reasons. To suggest that the only reason one accumulates some arbitrary quantity of firearms is to break the law is just insulting.
What about stamp collectors? Do they really NEED that many stamps? What about people that are into cars? Do they really NEED that '65 mustang? Do YOU really NEED a saltwater tank?
Your argument is drifting. The number of guns is totally irrelevant. One person is just as deadly with one gun as he is with "more than he can count." I know how many I own - 11, and I can't see how I could possibly use more than one at once, so why does it matter how many I have?
Where I do believe it matters is that a person who collects them - like Reef and to a lesser extent myself - is more likely to store them properly and use them safely. Furthermore, they are more likely to be someone who takes the time to understand how guns work, and practices using them safely on a regular basis, versus someone who buys a gun for home defense, shoves it under a mattress, and figures he'll know how to shoot it when someone breaks in.
I know the combination to my gun safe, so does my wife. My feeling is that if she decides she needs to shoot me, then if those guns were not in the house, she'd take care of me some other way.
I had a similar argument with someone else on here a while back. At the end of the day, I find it decidely unfortunate that you believe we should change laws dictating my ability to invest in a particular hobby just because you don't see any point to it.
http:///forum/post/3152183
What I don't get is why any one person needs "x" number of guns in your home. To the poster who said they had too many to count off the top of your head...
Why? Under what circumstance would you ever need that many weapons? It doesn't make any sense to me. Unless you are forming a militia, or about to go Oceans Eleven on us, why in the world would you need, or more importantly, want that many weapons?
The fact that you don't see a need does not justify changing laws, and quite frankly, your argument is an insult to me and anyone else who invests in firearms for sporting, recreational, and above all, responsible reasons. To suggest that the only reason one accumulates some arbitrary quantity of firearms is to break the law is just insulting.
What about stamp collectors? Do they really NEED that many stamps? What about people that are into cars? Do they really NEED that '65 mustang? Do YOU really NEED a saltwater tank?
Your argument is drifting. The number of guns is totally irrelevant. One person is just as deadly with one gun as he is with "more than he can count." I know how many I own - 11, and I can't see how I could possibly use more than one at once, so why does it matter how many I have?
Where I do believe it matters is that a person who collects them - like Reef and to a lesser extent myself - is more likely to store them properly and use them safely. Furthermore, they are more likely to be someone who takes the time to understand how guns work, and practices using them safely on a regular basis, versus someone who buys a gun for home defense, shoves it under a mattress, and figures he'll know how to shoot it when someone breaks in.
I know the combination to my gun safe, so does my wife. My feeling is that if she decides she needs to shoot me, then if those guns were not in the house, she'd take care of me some other way.
I had a similar argument with someone else on here a while back. At the end of the day, I find it decidely unfortunate that you believe we should change laws dictating my ability to invest in a particular hobby just because you don't see any point to it.
renogaw
Active Member
Originally Posted by SCSInet
http:///forum/post/3152204
Your argument is drifting. The number of guns is totally irrelevant. One person is just as deadly with one gun as he is with "more than he can count." I know how many I own - 11, and I can't see how I could possibly use more than one at once, so why does it matter how many I have?
what, you can't go Matrix style with an ouzie in each hand?
http:///forum/post/3152204
Your argument is drifting. The number of guns is totally irrelevant. One person is just as deadly with one gun as he is with "more than he can count." I know how many I own - 11, and I can't see how I could possibly use more than one at once, so why does it matter how many I have?
what, you can't go Matrix style with an ouzie in each hand?
scsinet
Active Member
Originally Posted by renogaw
http:///forum/post/3152207
what, you can't go Matrix style with an ouzie in each hand?
Of course not. That would not be responsible.
http:///forum/post/3152207
what, you can't go Matrix style with an ouzie in each hand?
Of course not. That would not be responsible.
mantisman51
Active Member
A gun in the safe is like a fire extinguisher in a safe. If needed, you might get it out in time, but do you really want to risk it? I keep all my guns but one in the safe, but the one is in a readily available place always.
scsinet
Active Member
Originally Posted by mantisman51
http:///forum/post/3152211
A gun in the safe is like a fire extinguisher in a safe. If needed, you might get it out in time, but do you really want to risk it? I keep all my guns but one in the safe, but the one is in a readily available place always.
No arguments there, I do the same thing, but I didn't see a need to get that detailed.
http:///forum/post/3152211
A gun in the safe is like a fire extinguisher in a safe. If needed, you might get it out in time, but do you really want to risk it? I keep all my guns but one in the safe, but the one is in a readily available place always.
No arguments there, I do the same thing, but I didn't see a need to get that detailed.
theclemsonkid
Member
Originally Posted by SCSInet
http:///forum/post/3152204
The fact that you don't see a need does not justify changing laws, and quite frankly, your argument is an insult to me and anyone else who invests in firearms for sporting, recreational, and above all, responsible reasons. To suggest that the only reason one accumulates some arbitrary quantity of firearms is to break the law is just insulting.
What about stamp collectors? Do they really NEED that many stamps? What about people that are into cars? Do they really NEED that '65 mustang? Do YOU really NEED a saltwater tank?
Your argument is drifting. The number of guns is totally irrelevant. One person is just as deadly with one gun as he is with "more than he can count." I know how many I own - 11, and I can't see how I could possibly use more than one at once, so why does it matter how many I have?
Where I do believe it matters is that a person who collects them - like Reef and to a lesser extent myself - is more likely to store them properly and use them safely. Furthermore, they are more likely to be someone who takes the time to understand how guns work, and practices using them safely on a regular basis, versus someone who buys a gun for home defense, shoves it under a mattress, and figures he'll know how to shoot it when someone breaks in.
I know the combination to my gun safe, so does my wife. My feeling is that if she decides she needs to shoot me, then if those guns were not in the house, she'd take care of me some other way.
I had a similar argument with someone else on here a while back. At the end of the day, I find it decidely unfortunate that you believe we should change laws dictating my ability to invest in a particular hobby just because you don't see any point to it.
Well for one, I never said that you are collecting as many guns as you can to break the law on purpose. So no need to put words in my mouth.
Secondly, you keep countering with "well what about cars/knives/saltwater tanks etc"... Last I checked, other than
[hr]
drugs (which are illegal) I can't think of anything else that has such a small upside versus it's "good" use.
Cars kill people, but they also make the country work. Knives are used for cooking, rope is used for a heck of a lot more than strangling, golf clubs are mostly used on a golf course, same for baseball bats on a field.
If you can honestly say that you think the good outweighs the bad when it comes to guns, then fine, we disagree. I just don't know how you could possibly think that.
And p.s. even as a person who doesn't think we need guns, kudos to those of you who use them responsibly, keep them locked and away from your kids, and understand how to fire one if the need ever arose...
http:///forum/post/3152204
The fact that you don't see a need does not justify changing laws, and quite frankly, your argument is an insult to me and anyone else who invests in firearms for sporting, recreational, and above all, responsible reasons. To suggest that the only reason one accumulates some arbitrary quantity of firearms is to break the law is just insulting.
What about stamp collectors? Do they really NEED that many stamps? What about people that are into cars? Do they really NEED that '65 mustang? Do YOU really NEED a saltwater tank?
Your argument is drifting. The number of guns is totally irrelevant. One person is just as deadly with one gun as he is with "more than he can count." I know how many I own - 11, and I can't see how I could possibly use more than one at once, so why does it matter how many I have?
Where I do believe it matters is that a person who collects them - like Reef and to a lesser extent myself - is more likely to store them properly and use them safely. Furthermore, they are more likely to be someone who takes the time to understand how guns work, and practices using them safely on a regular basis, versus someone who buys a gun for home defense, shoves it under a mattress, and figures he'll know how to shoot it when someone breaks in.
I know the combination to my gun safe, so does my wife. My feeling is that if she decides she needs to shoot me, then if those guns were not in the house, she'd take care of me some other way.
I had a similar argument with someone else on here a while back. At the end of the day, I find it decidely unfortunate that you believe we should change laws dictating my ability to invest in a particular hobby just because you don't see any point to it.
Well for one, I never said that you are collecting as many guns as you can to break the law on purpose. So no need to put words in my mouth.
Secondly, you keep countering with "well what about cars/knives/saltwater tanks etc"... Last I checked, other than
[hr]
drugs (which are illegal) I can't think of anything else that has such a small upside versus it's "good" use.
Cars kill people, but they also make the country work. Knives are used for cooking, rope is used for a heck of a lot more than strangling, golf clubs are mostly used on a golf course, same for baseball bats on a field.
If you can honestly say that you think the good outweighs the bad when it comes to guns, then fine, we disagree. I just don't know how you could possibly think that.
And p.s. even as a person who doesn't think we need guns, kudos to those of you who use them responsibly, keep them locked and away from your kids, and understand how to fire one if the need ever arose...
mantisman51
Active Member
No good? My father was going out to his semi just across the street from my brothers house to check his reefer fuel(refridgerated trailer). Some meth head skel ran out of the house next door screaming, "You wanna f*** with me?" And ran up to my dad with a pistol aimed at his head. My brother pulled the rifle he kept by the front door, pointed it at the skel and yelled to drop the piece. The skel suddenly became calm and said, "I don't want know s***" and slunk back to his hole. That POS would've killed my dad, if we didn't have a gun. BTW, the skel and his POS female skel left and didn't come back again-they abandoned their meth hole.
angler man
Member
Cars kill people, but they also make the country work. Knives are used for cooking, rope is used for a heck of a lot more than strangling, golf clubs are mostly used on a golf course, same for baseball bats on a field.
Again, you are looking at this wrong. It's not the car that kills people, it's people who kill people. If someone wants to kill you, or your insane liberal professor they will do it because "they" are the issue.
Gun makers create jobs, ammo makers create jobs, safe builders create jobs, permits create revenue and so do tags for hunting. This isn't a zero sum game.
BTW, I have a shotgun passed through the family, I don't particularly find guns fascinating but I respect people wanting to protect their families and property. If I had a choice to live in a neighborhood of all gun owners and one without guns I would without question choose to live where the guns are. Burglars do care about their lives, more guns = less people breaking into homes with the intent to steal, kill, r@pe or anything else.
Again, you are looking at this wrong. It's not the car that kills people, it's people who kill people. If someone wants to kill you, or your insane liberal professor they will do it because "they" are the issue.
Gun makers create jobs, ammo makers create jobs, safe builders create jobs, permits create revenue and so do tags for hunting. This isn't a zero sum game.
BTW, I have a shotgun passed through the family, I don't particularly find guns fascinating but I respect people wanting to protect their families and property. If I had a choice to live in a neighborhood of all gun owners and one without guns I would without question choose to live where the guns are. Burglars do care about their lives, more guns = less people breaking into homes with the intent to steal, kill, r@pe or anything else.
scsinet
Active Member
Originally Posted by TheClemsonKid
http:///forum/post/3152214
Well for one, I never said that you are collecting as many guns as you can to break the law on purpose. So no need to put words in my mouth.
Secondly, you keep countering with "well what about cars/knives/saltwater tanks etc"... Last I checked, other than
[hr]
drugs (which are illegal) I can't think of anything else that has such a small upside versus it's "good" use.
Cars kill people, but they also make the country work. Knives are used for cooking, rope is used for a heck of a lot more than strangling, golf clubs are mostly used on a golf course, same for baseball bats on a field.
If you can honestly say that you think the good outweighs the bad when it comes to guns, then fine, we disagree. I just don't know how you could possibly think that.
And p.s. even as a person who doesn't think we need guns, kudos to those of you who use them responsibly, keep them locked and away from your kids, and understand how to fire one if the need ever arose...
I'm not trying to argue either way that the proverbial scale with "good" one one side and "bad" on the other is tipped in one direction or another.
I can see your argument, that guns are so much more dangerous than anything else, that people might be better off choosing a "less deadly hobby"... stamp collecting as an extreme example.
But what I am saying is that a properly executed regimen of responsibility pertaining to gun ownership significantly mitigates said dangers, possibly to a point of making their safety on par with other hobbies generally considered to be "safer."
To look at news articles that highlight gun related incidents and drawing a conclusion based on that is failing to try to gain an understanding about how many gun incidents are NOT happening. Your argument that things like cars, knives, rope, etc is valid, but did you know though that more people die from drowing in residential swimming pools every year than in gun incidents? Swimming pools don't have any "critical role" in the world...
What is even less difficult is to strike from the list of incidents the incidents that would happen even if guns were illegal, because they'd happen anyway. Guns are everywhere. Chances are the neighbor living on at least one side of you has one, but you'd never know, because he is being safe and responsible with it.
The silence of guns being used safely and responsibly is deafening.
http:///forum/post/3152214
Well for one, I never said that you are collecting as many guns as you can to break the law on purpose. So no need to put words in my mouth.
Secondly, you keep countering with "well what about cars/knives/saltwater tanks etc"... Last I checked, other than
[hr]
drugs (which are illegal) I can't think of anything else that has such a small upside versus it's "good" use.
Cars kill people, but they also make the country work. Knives are used for cooking, rope is used for a heck of a lot more than strangling, golf clubs are mostly used on a golf course, same for baseball bats on a field.
If you can honestly say that you think the good outweighs the bad when it comes to guns, then fine, we disagree. I just don't know how you could possibly think that.
And p.s. even as a person who doesn't think we need guns, kudos to those of you who use them responsibly, keep them locked and away from your kids, and understand how to fire one if the need ever arose...
I'm not trying to argue either way that the proverbial scale with "good" one one side and "bad" on the other is tipped in one direction or another.
I can see your argument, that guns are so much more dangerous than anything else, that people might be better off choosing a "less deadly hobby"... stamp collecting as an extreme example.
But what I am saying is that a properly executed regimen of responsibility pertaining to gun ownership significantly mitigates said dangers, possibly to a point of making their safety on par with other hobbies generally considered to be "safer."
To look at news articles that highlight gun related incidents and drawing a conclusion based on that is failing to try to gain an understanding about how many gun incidents are NOT happening. Your argument that things like cars, knives, rope, etc is valid, but did you know though that more people die from drowing in residential swimming pools every year than in gun incidents? Swimming pools don't have any "critical role" in the world...
What is even less difficult is to strike from the list of incidents the incidents that would happen even if guns were illegal, because they'd happen anyway. Guns are everywhere. Chances are the neighbor living on at least one side of you has one, but you'd never know, because he is being safe and responsible with it.
The silence of guns being used safely and responsibly is deafening.
angler man
Member
The silence of guns being used safely and responsibly is deafening.
This is a straight forward true statement. If people actually saw how many people own a gun they would be blown away......pun intended.
This is a straight forward true statement. If people actually saw how many people own a gun they would be blown away......pun intended.
mantisman51
Active Member
I know a guy in Sierra Vista, call him Melvin. He hates guns, always trashing me for having a couple, come to find out he's been keeping a shotgun loaded in his closet for years. When I challenged his hypocrisy, he said that he was safe because he knew how to keep a gun safe and use. He was just worried cause of all the other nuts "out there".
reefraff
Active Member
More people are killed ever year in bath tubs and swimming pools than by guns. Do we ban water?
More people die from medical mistakes than gun fire, do we ban doctors?
Someone already mentioned cars.
Trying to say that because guns are known to kill more people than to save them is not only inaccurate, it's is a poor argument. Assuming that was even the case it would be like saying Cars cause more people to die than they transport to the hospital to be saved so we shouldn't have them. They have a lot of other uses.
More people die from medical mistakes than gun fire, do we ban doctors?
Someone already mentioned cars.
Trying to say that because guns are known to kill more people than to save them is not only inaccurate, it's is a poor argument. Assuming that was even the case it would be like saying Cars cause more people to die than they transport to the hospital to be saved so we shouldn't have them. They have a lot of other uses.
reefraff
Active Member
Originally Posted by Angler man
http:///forum/post/3152240
The silence of guns being used safely and responsibly is deafening.
This is a straight forward true statement. If people actually saw how many people own a gun they would be blown away......pun intended.
I can think of 3 incidents where me or someone I know have used the possession of a gun to prevent an altercation, None of use reported it to the cops for one reason or another.
zappbrannigan
Member
I can think of 3 incidents where me or someone I know have used the possession of a gun to prevent an altercation, None of use reported it to the cops for one reason or another.
There wouldnt be any "altercations" if there were no guns in the first place... You can outrun somebody with a knife. but somebody wants to kill you with a gun. its so easy, he doesnt even have to chase you. You all may think that owning your guns can help you feel safe if somebody else with a gun comes to get you. gun+no gun = youre dead... gun + gun = youre safe and the bad guys dead....but what about no gun + no gun = no incident.
in china owning guns is illegal, and nobody has them. even the police on the street dont cary guns, there is no need for them here. and though china is one of the poorer countries, i feel alot safer going out at night here than i did when i lived in LA.
There wouldnt be any "altercations" if there were no guns in the first place... You can outrun somebody with a knife. but somebody wants to kill you with a gun. its so easy, he doesnt even have to chase you. You all may think that owning your guns can help you feel safe if somebody else with a gun comes to get you. gun+no gun = youre dead... gun + gun = youre safe and the bad guys dead....but what about no gun + no gun = no incident.
in china owning guns is illegal, and nobody has them. even the police on the street dont cary guns, there is no need for them here. and though china is one of the poorer countries, i feel alot safer going out at night here than i did when i lived in LA.
darthtang aw
Active Member
Originally Posted by TheClemsonKid
http:///forum/post/3152214
Well for one, I never said that you are collecting as many guns as you can to break the law on purpose. So no need to put words in my mouth.
Secondly, you keep countering with "well what about cars/knives/saltwater tanks etc"... Last I checked, other than
[hr]
drugs (which are illegal) I can't think of anything else that has such a small upside versus it's "good" use.
Cars kill people, but they also make the country work. Knives are used for cooking, rope is used for a heck of a lot more than strangling, golf clubs are mostly used on a golf course, same for baseball bats on a field.
If you can honestly say that you think the good outweighs the bad when it comes to guns, then fine, we disagree. I just don't know how you could possibly think that.
And p.s. even as a person who doesn't think we need guns, kudos to those of you who use them responsibly, keep them locked and away from your kids, and understand how to fire one if the need ever arose...
Several things. And I am going to break this down for you...
1. Your argument that if he didn't have a gun he might not have killed her is retarded. Completely. Crimes of passion are done with whatever weapon is at hand. There are cases of them being done with knives and bats because there was no gun in the home. Therefore this proves your argument is wrong right there.
2. I don't own a gun, I used to own several. But when I had children I decided not to have them around until they are old enough to understand guns and respect them....I am actually rethinking this and getting a gun safe for my guns since break ins are up in my area. Don't worry, if I commit a crime of passion I will be sure to use a knife or baseball bat versus the gun...especially since those items are close at hand and can be destroyed easily...
3. The gun has the single LARGEST good up side to cars and vehicles. With out guns owned by citizens you would NOT have the automobile. Why? Because it was private ownership of guns that started the revolutionary war and created this very country you now live in. It was private ownership of guns that brought about the constitution.....Without guns in the hand of the common citizen...we would still be under british rule and the world would look much different (most likely under monarchies and theocracies).
4. Guns give me a choice in the face of danger. Someone breaks in my home I have options. Someone breaks in your home...you have hope......wait, you voted for Obama, Hope is all you need. I just hope the people breaking in your home don't think it would be prudent to shoot you or your family.
5. I love how you can take a story about an obviously mentally unstable individual and place the blame on the gun.....yeah, the guy pulling the trigger is completely innocent and under the mind control of the gun and its corupt brain waves......Hmmmmmmmm...I may have just thought up a decent movie.
http:///forum/post/3152214
Well for one, I never said that you are collecting as many guns as you can to break the law on purpose. So no need to put words in my mouth.
Secondly, you keep countering with "well what about cars/knives/saltwater tanks etc"... Last I checked, other than
[hr]
drugs (which are illegal) I can't think of anything else that has such a small upside versus it's "good" use.
Cars kill people, but they also make the country work. Knives are used for cooking, rope is used for a heck of a lot more than strangling, golf clubs are mostly used on a golf course, same for baseball bats on a field.
If you can honestly say that you think the good outweighs the bad when it comes to guns, then fine, we disagree. I just don't know how you could possibly think that.
And p.s. even as a person who doesn't think we need guns, kudos to those of you who use them responsibly, keep them locked and away from your kids, and understand how to fire one if the need ever arose...
Several things. And I am going to break this down for you...
1. Your argument that if he didn't have a gun he might not have killed her is retarded. Completely. Crimes of passion are done with whatever weapon is at hand. There are cases of them being done with knives and bats because there was no gun in the home. Therefore this proves your argument is wrong right there.
2. I don't own a gun, I used to own several. But when I had children I decided not to have them around until they are old enough to understand guns and respect them....I am actually rethinking this and getting a gun safe for my guns since break ins are up in my area. Don't worry, if I commit a crime of passion I will be sure to use a knife or baseball bat versus the gun...especially since those items are close at hand and can be destroyed easily...
3. The gun has the single LARGEST good up side to cars and vehicles. With out guns owned by citizens you would NOT have the automobile. Why? Because it was private ownership of guns that started the revolutionary war and created this very country you now live in. It was private ownership of guns that brought about the constitution.....Without guns in the hand of the common citizen...we would still be under british rule and the world would look much different (most likely under monarchies and theocracies).
4. Guns give me a choice in the face of danger. Someone breaks in my home I have options. Someone breaks in your home...you have hope......wait, you voted for Obama, Hope is all you need. I just hope the people breaking in your home don't think it would be prudent to shoot you or your family.
5. I love how you can take a story about an obviously mentally unstable individual and place the blame on the gun.....yeah, the guy pulling the trigger is completely innocent and under the mind control of the gun and its corupt brain waves......Hmmmmmmmm...I may have just thought up a decent movie.
darthtang aw
Active Member
Originally Posted by ZappBrannigan
http:///forum/post/3152331
There wouldnt be any "altercations" if there were no guns in the first place... You can outrun somebody with a knife. but somebody wants to kill you with a gun. its so easy, he doesnt even have to chase you. You all may think that owning your guns can help you feel safe if somebody else with a gun comes to get you. gun+no gun = youre dead... gun + gun = youre safe and the bad guys dead....but what about no gun + no gun = no incident.
in china owning guns is illegal, and nobody has them. even the police on the street dont cary guns, there is no need for them here. and though china is one of the poorer countries, i feel alot safer going out at night here than i did when i lived in LA.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHH!
How are your other freedoms in China treating you?
http:///forum/post/3152331
There wouldnt be any "altercations" if there were no guns in the first place... You can outrun somebody with a knife. but somebody wants to kill you with a gun. its so easy, he doesnt even have to chase you. You all may think that owning your guns can help you feel safe if somebody else with a gun comes to get you. gun+no gun = youre dead... gun + gun = youre safe and the bad guys dead....but what about no gun + no gun = no incident.
in china owning guns is illegal, and nobody has them. even the police on the street dont cary guns, there is no need for them here. and though china is one of the poorer countries, i feel alot safer going out at night here than i did when i lived in LA.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHH!
How are your other freedoms in China treating you?
zappbrannigan
Member
chinas lack of freedoms aside, i was just making an example of a society with no guns. if youd rather you can take belgium instead. they also are gun free.
theclemsonkid
Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3152336
3. The gun has the single LARGEST good up side to cars and vehicles. With out guns owned by citizens you would NOT have the automobile. Why? Because it was private ownership of guns that started the revolutionary war and created this very country you now live in. It was private ownership of guns that brought about the constitution.....Without guns in the hand of the common citizen...we would still be under british rule and the world would look much different (most likely under monarchies and theocracies).
4. Guns give me a choice in the face of danger. Someone breaks in my home I have options. Someone breaks in your home...you have hope......wait, you voted for Obama, Hope is all you need. I just hope the people breaking in your home don't think it would be prudent to shoot you or your family.
5. I love how you can take a story about an obviously mentally unstable individual and place the blame on the gun.....yeah, the guy pulling the trigger is completely innocent and under the mind control of the gun and its corupt brain waves......Hmmmmmmmm...I may have just thought up a decent movie.
You really want to try and say without the gun there wouldn't be cars? If you are trying to make yourself look intelligent and somewhat credible, that's a pretty dumb argument to make.
And the Obama and hope reference... how very mature! Maybe after recess and a nap you can come to the adult forum and have a legitimate discussion.
You don't want to have to shoot a robber? Why not spend the $25 a month you use for beer and ammo and get yourself a nice security system.
And about the "mentally unstable" individual you speak of. Yes, I am willing to bet that there is a certain percentage of people in that position who would look elsewhere if he didn't have a gun. But I am also willing to bet that there is a good percentage who wouldn't...
And funny how no one has mentioned the suicide topic yet. What about this article which clearly shows that where there are more guns, there are more suicides.
Now why do you suppose that is? By your flawed logic, if someone really wanted to kill themselves, they would find a way even without a gun. Yet by the numbers, the states with the highest gun ownership are twice as likely to have a gun related suicide than those of the lowest gun ownerships by state.
Care to explain?
http:///forum/post/3152336
3. The gun has the single LARGEST good up side to cars and vehicles. With out guns owned by citizens you would NOT have the automobile. Why? Because it was private ownership of guns that started the revolutionary war and created this very country you now live in. It was private ownership of guns that brought about the constitution.....Without guns in the hand of the common citizen...we would still be under british rule and the world would look much different (most likely under monarchies and theocracies).
4. Guns give me a choice in the face of danger. Someone breaks in my home I have options. Someone breaks in your home...you have hope......wait, you voted for Obama, Hope is all you need. I just hope the people breaking in your home don't think it would be prudent to shoot you or your family.
5. I love how you can take a story about an obviously mentally unstable individual and place the blame on the gun.....yeah, the guy pulling the trigger is completely innocent and under the mind control of the gun and its corupt brain waves......Hmmmmmmmm...I may have just thought up a decent movie.
You really want to try and say without the gun there wouldn't be cars? If you are trying to make yourself look intelligent and somewhat credible, that's a pretty dumb argument to make.
And the Obama and hope reference... how very mature! Maybe after recess and a nap you can come to the adult forum and have a legitimate discussion.
You don't want to have to shoot a robber? Why not spend the $25 a month you use for beer and ammo and get yourself a nice security system.
And about the "mentally unstable" individual you speak of. Yes, I am willing to bet that there is a certain percentage of people in that position who would look elsewhere if he didn't have a gun. But I am also willing to bet that there is a good percentage who wouldn't...
And funny how no one has mentioned the suicide topic yet. What about this article which clearly shows that where there are more guns, there are more suicides.
Now why do you suppose that is? By your flawed logic, if someone really wanted to kill themselves, they would find a way even without a gun. Yet by the numbers, the states with the highest gun ownership are twice as likely to have a gun related suicide than those of the lowest gun ownerships by state.
Care to explain?