Gun Control

[Mr Stabby]

they sure as hell made it harder to get now didnt it?

Drugs are easily available, if you're looking for them.

Cho without a gun = just another angry asian guy/33 people miraculously still alive

This guy was a deranged stalker, more than just angry.

it doesnt seem to work for americans ..Cho was still able to get a gun and that doesnt address the multitude of people who walk around undiagnosed or are without a criminal record ..warning flags do not sound when a person with a score to settle attempts to buy a gun ..the system has holes

American gun regulation needs improving, but guns should not be banned.

right, if the queen had balls she'd be king ..for all you know it could have turned into a bigger blood bath ..cho murders students, students fight back, not sure who murderer is shoot everyone with gun in hand, stray bullets kill/injure other students, police open fire on group of men carrying guns taking no chances ...why not just throw a match on the proverbial powder keg, it's much more to the point

It comes down to regulation, is everyone capable of acting responsibly with a gun in public...no. It should be like driving a car, they should take competency and psychiatric tests, HGV and buses require more advanced test, as should higher tiers of gun licenses. As Ron Paul says, if pilots were allowed to carry guns (special tests required obviously) would 9/11 have even happened, if the terrorist thought the pilots could be armed.

definately not 33

He could still have gone on a killing spree, and if he was determined to do so, which he seems to have been, he may have looked at the black market had the gun shops barred him.

that doesnt take into account my self preservation adrelinine ..I wouldnt hesitate to kick a woman in the crotch for example were she to lunge at me with a knife ..or eye gouge, punch to the adam's apple (or where it would be) etc ...the gloves come off when my life is at stake ...still my 74 year old aunt could kill Short Recoil if need be ,,give her a knife and I doubt she'd be able to kill last nights dinner

If she catches you off guard, or stabs in the back, she still poses a threat, if she has a knife with intent to kill you. What if you're the attacker towards a woman, you're physically stronger than, should they be allowed a gun for self defence.

and? if that's the only available source there'll be less guns on the street

I doubt any gangs use legal firearms, there will be less armed law abiding citizens though.

know for a fact I live 3 minutes away, I called them and asked, they checked abulance response time - 3 minutes

That doesn't apply to everyone.

wasnt designed to run over people

Dynamite was designed to improve safety in mining, can I have that?

most knives were not designed to stab people, knives over a certain length are prohibited

I can legally by a knife long enough to kill.

not designed to kill

not designed with the sole purpose of killing someone ..so yes

It can be used to kill , I don't have any need for a crowbar but I can own one, so I wouldn't be using it for it's intended purpose.

flame thrower? rpg? and what's to know? I throw the vial and hope for the best ..you're not implying all gun owners could field strip their weapons/make bullets out of dicarded bubble gum, a brick of coal and citrus juice

All gun owners should know how to use a gun. If you used an rpg inside, the exhaust gases alone would kill you, I don't think the case can be made that RPGs, flamethrowers or nerve gas can be used in self defence any better than a less lethal alternative ie a handgun.

 

[CptStern]

Drugs are easily available, if you're looking for them.

no they are not ..I smoke regularily but wouldnt even know where to begin to purchase herion for example ..the fact that it's out there doesnt mean that everyone has equal access ..if that were true dealers would be arrested much more frequently

This guy was a deranged stalker, more than just angry.

either way without the means there is no crime

American gun regulation needs improving, but guns should not be banned.

the gun murder rate would disagree with you

It comes down to regulation, is everyone capable of acting responsibly with a gun in public...no. It should be like driving a car, they should take competency and psychiatric tests, HGV and buses require more advanced test, as should higher tiers of gun licenses. As Ron Paul says, if pilots were allowed to carry guns (special tests required obviously) would 9/11 have even happened, if the terrorist thought the pilots could be armed.

so create people who are more effective killing machines ..at least that would ease up the strain on hospitals ...less survivors

He could still have gone on a killing spree

surely he wouldnt have killed 33 people armed solely with a kitchen knife/candle stick/boat oar

and if he was determined to do so, which he seems to have been, he may have looked at the black market had the gun shops barred him.

and where would this "black market" be ..I wouldnt know where to purchase an illegal firearm why would you think a student with psychological disorders who was a loner and an outcast would be able to?

If she catches you off guard, or stabs in the back, she still poses a threat, if she has a knife with intent to kill you.

if, if, if ..there are no "if"s were she holding a gun ..it's pretty much point and pull the trigger at close range

What if you're the attacker towards a woman, you're physically stronger than, should they be allowed a gun for self defence.

that's a separate issue entirely and completely unrelated

I doubt any gangs use legal firearms, there will be less armed law abiding citizens though.

and less civilians who own guns legally who they'd be able to steal them from

That doesn't apply to everyone.

it doesnt, in fact typical response time for ambulance is 8-11 minutes, I just happen to live near a hospital/police station ..but again that doesnt mean that a dog is less effective as a deterrent to B & E ..the whole idea behind breaking in is to steal things (burglary) not muder the victems ..that's a different crime altogether

Dynamite was designed to improve safety in mining, can I have that?

it was designed to blow shit up, and no I dont see why you cant have it

I can legally by a knife long enough to kill.

it's purpose is not to kill ..if you're referring to hunting knives I am not allowed to carry one

It can be used to kill , I don't have any need for a crowbar but I can own one, so I wouldn't be using it for it's intended purpose.

I could stuff elastics down someones throat and kill them, should elastics be banned? the whole point is that none of these things were created explicitedly to kill, guns are

All gun owners should know how to use a gun. If you used an rpg inside, the exhaust gases alone would kill you, I don't think the case can be made that RPGs, flamethrowers or nerve gas can be used in self defence any better than a less lethal alternative ie a handgun.

what about trip wires with c4 rigged to take off the legs of would be assailants? anti personal mines, gattling guns, windows with gulluiotines mounted on the sill, attack dogs with spiked collars dipped in lethal poisons? ....sounds like something that's not appropriate for self defense? funny how that doesnt come into consideration when it comes to gun owners

 

[tehsolace]

I could kill a man with a spoon. (feel free to quote that)

But my professional skills with utensils shouldn't lead to spoons being banned.

Guns, on the other hand, are specifically designed for one thing, which is doing harm to living beings. Yes, they may say "for protection" or "self defense", but ultimately they are truly saying "protection by killing/stopping the other person".

For that reason, it is reasonable to suggest that guns be banned from normal civilians.

And no, outlawing or banning guns will not stop a black market of them. However, can you honestly say that we will have the same amount of gun violence in 20-30 years if we ban guns today? A black market of guns wouldn't be able to keep up the gun population for long.

 

[Mr Stabby]

no they are not ..I smoke regularily but wouldnt even know where to begin to purchase herion for example ..the fact that it's out there doesnt mean that everyone has equal access ..if that were true dealers would be arrested much more frequently

I used to buy cannabis D:, I first bought it when I was 13 it was not very difficult, they sold all kinds of drugs. In poorer areas generally, where the police are less present illegal things can be bought, there has been a large spate of teenage gun crimes in the UK recently, somehow teenagers are getting guns and shooting each other. These black markets do exist and it's almost impossible to shut them down. IF they were shut down it would reduce drug and gun problems dramatically.

either way without the means there is no crime

Where there is a will there is a way

the gun murder rate would disagree with you

No it wouldn't.

so create people who are more effective killing machines ..at least that would ease up the strain on hospitals ...less survivors

No, it would reduce the number of loons with guns, and make those with guns less likely to do something accidentally stupid, or lose their gun.

surely he wouldnt have killed 33 people armed solely with a kitchen knife/candle stick/boat oar

He could have gotten an illegal firearm if he was intent on getting a gun.

and where would this "black market" be ..I wouldnt know where to purchase an illegal firearm why would you think a student with psychological disorders who was a loner and an outcast would be able to?

Areas with Gangs/gun crime seems like a good place to look, the internet could probably help you if you're interested. You can't use the Logic, I a middle class law abiding citizen don't know how to access the black market, so it can't exist.

if, if, if ..there are no "if"s were she holding a gun ..it's pretty much point and pull the trigger at close range

If she has any sense, and realized she can't win in a fight, there wouldn't be much of an if with a knife either.

that's a separate issue entirely and completely unrelated

How, The gun is the great equalizer, shouldn't those less able to defend themselves be allowed guns to stack the odds in their favour.

and less civilians who own guns legally who they'd be able to steal them from

I doubt most illegal firearms come from gun theft, even then if that well dries up, they'll look elsewhere.

it doesnt, in fact typical response time for ambulance is 8-11 minutes, I just happen to live near a hospital/police station ..but again that doesnt mean that a dog is less effective as a deterrent to B & E ..the whole idea behind breaking in is to steal things (burglary) not muder the victems ..that's a different crime altogether

It depends why they are braking in, they may try and neutralize the occupants, so they can go about there burglary in peace, but if someone is trying to steal my computer and I ask them to stop, and they come at me with a knife, I should have the right to shoot them in the face.

it was designed to blow shit up, and no I don't see why you cant have it

While I agree I should be allow it, don't you think it's too dangerous for the general public to be allowed dynamite, more dangerous than guns in my opinion.

it's purpose is not to kill ..if you're referring to hunting knives I am not allowed to carry one

But I could kill someone with it, that's the issue, it's dangerous if used incorrectly. A hunting knife and a kitchen knife are quite similar sticking in someone's ribs.

I could stuff elastics down someones throat and kill them, should elastics be banned? the whole point is that none of these things were created explicitedly to kill, guns are

Dynamite is designed for quarrying, chainsaws to cut wood and nail guns are design to nail things at a distance. All of these can be used in a deadly manner even if not intended. Intent of the design is not the issue, it's intent of the user. If well regulated the people with bad intentions, they wouldn't get guns. The people who wouldn't use guns offensively should be allowed to own them.

what about trip wires with c4 rigged to take off the legs of would be assailants? anti personal mines, gattling guns, windows with gulluiotines mounted on the sill, attack dogs with spiked collars dipped in lethal poisons? ....sounds like something that's not appropriate for self defense? funny how that doesnt come into consideration when it comes to gun owners

Well assault rifles shouldn't be available to the public, but maybe to off duty/retired police and military

 

[HunterSeeker]

If an ordinary citizen does not know hot to get guns off the black market, a lot less people know hot to get guns of the black market. Besides, its much more easier for a pissed off guy to just pull a gun out of a drawer and shoot his girlfriend or whatever then attempting to kill her in another way.

And yes removing guns would reduce gun crime, claiming otherwise is like saying removing the internet would not reduce internet surfing.

 

[Solaris]

I used to buy cannabis D:, I first bought it when I was 13 it was not very difficult, they sold all kinds of drugs. In poorer areas generally, where the police are less present illegal things can be bought, there has been a large spate of teenage gun crimes in the UK recently, somehow teenagers are getting guns and shooting each other. These black markets do exist and it's almost impossible to shut them down. IF they were shut down it would reduce drug and gun problems dramatically.

A large spite? There have been less than 10 since ages. Which is nothing compared to the US where several people are shot a day. Far less people have the money to buy illegal guns or are willing to take the risk or even want one as badly as they do with drugs. We have very little gun crime in the UK becuase guns are illegal.

Where there is a will there is a way

Yes, but your average burgular and petty gangster doesn't want one that badly.

No it wouldn't.

yes it would

He could have gotten an illegal firearm if he was intent on getting a gun.

Then how come psycho's in the UK usually kill very few people, we have alot of people getting dragged into a forest and bludgeoned to death but very little mass rampages.

Areas with Gangs/gun crime seems like a good place to look, the internet could probably help you if you're interested. You can't use the Logic, I a middle class law abiding citizen don't know how to access the black market, so it can't exist.

It's far more obscure, and the very fact that the vast majority of criminals in the UK do not use guns is testament to this.

How, The gun is the great equalizer, shouldn't those less able to defend themselves be allowed guns to stack the odds in their favour.

No.

It depends why they are braking in, they may try and neutralize the occupants, so they can go about there burglary in peace, but if someone is trying to steal my computer and I ask them to stop, and they come at me with a knife, I should have the right to shoot them in the face.

You would, if you were allowed to carry a gun. But the fact is, if you did have a gun you'd be more likely to accidently shoot a familly member than a burgular.

 

[No Limit]

I used to buy cannabis D:, I first bought it when I was 13 it was not very difficult, they sold all kinds of drugs. In poorer areas generally, where the police are less present illegal things can be bought, there has been a large spate of teenage gun crimes in the UK recently, somehow teenagers are getting guns and shooting each other. These black markets do exist and it's almost impossible to shut them down. IF they were shut down it would reduce drug and gun problems dramatically.

Yup, because you can go up to the first black guy you see in a shitty neighborhood and ask to buy a gun? Seriously, do you honestly believe everyone in this country has some kind of mob or gangster connections? Don't ask me how I know this but selling drugs on the street is a lot more rare than hollywood makes it out to be. Does it happen, sure. But that invokes a huge risk on the part of the dealer and the person making the buy. Half of the drugs sold this way aren't really drugs at all, they take your money and rip your ass off.

I don't know how a rational person can possibly claim that if guns were made a illegal they wouldn't be any harder to buy. If you banned the sale of all guns today people owning guns would drop greatly. Do I think banning the sale of guns in a country where virtually everyone at this point has a gun is a good idea? No. But the arguments people like you make lack any solid reasoning.

 

[Mr Stabby]

A large spite? There have been less than 10 since ages. Which is nothing compared to the US where several people are shot a day. Far less people have the money to buy illegal guns or are willing to take the risk or even want one as badly as they do with drugs. We have very little gun crime in the UK becuase guns are illegal.

It's rising, if teenagers can get guns, America has a more severe illegal gun problem than we do, but we're catching up. it stands to reason that adults can quire them illegally probably easier than teenagers.

Yes, but your average burgular and petty gangster doesn't want one that badly.

So, what about the ones that do, do you accept there are illegal firearms in the hands of criminals that gun control laws would do nothing to stop?

yes it would

No it wouldn't, it's a fact that better gun regulation decreases gun crime and that gun prohibition doesn't stop gun crime.

Then how come psycho's in the UK usually kill very few people, we have alot of people getting dragged into a forest and bludgeoned to death but very little mass rampages.

So what, illegal guns don't exist, but there are no mass shootings?

It's far more obscure, and the very fact that the vast majority of criminals in the UK do not use guns is testament to this.

No it's not, illegal gun use is rising.

No.

How's that?

You would, if you were allowed to carry a gun. But the fact is, if you did have a gun you'd be more likely to accidently shoot a familly member than a burgular.

That's ridiculous, how did you come to that conclusion

 

[Mr Stabby]

Yup, because you can go up to the first black guy you see in a shitty neighborhood and ask to buy a gun? Seriously, do you honestly believe everyone in this country has some kind of mob or gangster connections? Don't ask me how I know this but selling drugs on the street is a lot more rare than hollywood makes it out to be. Does it happen, sure. But that invokes a huge risk on the part of the dealer and the person making the buy. Half of the drugs sold this way aren't really drugs at all, they take your money and rip your ass off.

Firstly, I'm not American, secondly I bought drugs at 13, and I'm not alone in being able to do this, drugs are very available and increasingly so are guns.

I don't know how a rational person can possibly claim that if guns were made a illegal they wouldn't be any harder to buy. If you banned the sale of all guns today people owning guns would drop greatly. Do I think banning the sale of guns in a country where virtually everyone at this point has a gun is a good idea? No. But the arguments people like you make lack any solid reasoning.

You're confused between harder and impossible, would it be harder, yes. Would those determined to get a gun be stopped, no. What makes you think, that someone who is prepared to go as far as say murder, would give up looking for a gun because he couldn't get one at Walmart.

 

[Mr Stabby]

If an ordinary citizen does not know hot to get guns off the black market, a lot less people know hot to get guns of the black market. Besides, its much more easier for a pissed off guy to just pull a gun out of a drawer and shoot his girlfriend or whatever then attempting to kill her in another way.

Ordinary law abiding citizens, yes. Criminals, no. I don't care if law abiding citizens get guns. How much more difficult would it be for a pissed off guy to pull out a carving knife. You can blame intent on the weapon.

And yes removing guns would reduce gun crime, claiming otherwise is like saying removing the internet would not reduce internet surfing.

It's like saying alcohol prohibition would stop drinking.

 

[HunterSeeker]

Ordinary law abiding citizens, yes. Criminals, no. I don't care if law abiding citizens get guns. How much more difficult would it be for a pissed off guy to pull out a carving knife. You can blame intent on the weapon.

Of cource you cannot blame intent on weapons, but you can blame success and it is far easier for the woman in question to run away from a guy with a carving knife then a gun.

On the other hand, if I where a criminal and a burglar. In a society without guns I would just be careful not to be spotted and flee if I alarmed someone. On the other hand, if I knew the probability of the owners of my target house had guns I would be damned sure to bring one myself just in case they try to shoot me.

It's like saying alcohol prohibition would stop drinking.

It would not stop drinking, but it would reduce the amount of drinking.

 

[Mr Stabby]

Of cource you cannot blame intent on weapons, but you can blame success and it is far easier for the woman in question to run away from a guy with a carving knife then a gun.

I doubt it would be any safer for the woman, I'm sure an angry man with sufficient intent is well capable of killing a woman without a gun. Of course had the woman the option of a gun, it could change the outcome.

On the other hand, if I where a criminal and a burglar. In a society without guns I would just be careful not to be spotted and flee if I alarmed someone. On the other hand, if I knew the probability of the owners of my target house had guns I would be damned sure to bring one myself just in case they try to shoot me.

There are some criminals who want a gun regardless, some who may never use a gun. You can't assume all criminals think like that.

It would not stop drinking, but it would reduce the amount of drinking.

It would greatly expand the bootleg alcohol industry. Supply and demand

 

[HunterSeeker]

I doubt it would be any safer for the woman, I'm sure an angry man with sufficient intent is well capable of killing a woman without a gun. Of course had the woman the option of a gun, it could change the outcome.

Apperantly, you do not seem to think that giving anyone a gun increases their ability to kill. So why then does the army not unleach their biggest and strongest soldiers on the opposition and just tell them to kill their enemies with their bare hands?

There are some criminals who want a gun regardless, some who may never use a gun. You can't assume all criminals think like that.

Of cource, but in a society where guns are not easy to get ahold of much fewer criminals will have guns.

It would greatly expand the bootleg alcohol industry. Supply and demand

This answears nothing.

 

[Cormeh]

You don't need guns. It's just that simple.

The argument regarding the Virginia tech lunatic really angers me, because people always insist that people like the tech murderer could have obtained a firearm illegally.

THAT'S NOT THE ****ING POINT.

The point is you can freely walk into a store and buy a gun with no intention of using it for protection, but using it to murder your fellow man in cold blood. Why does any society on Earth need this? Why?

Jesus christ, it's a shame to flick through the BBC website and read about shootings in London or 11 year old children being shot dead. How would legalising weapons such as guns have prevented that?

 

[Mr Stabby]

Apperantly, you do not seem to think that giving anyone a gun increases their ability to kill. So why then does the army not unleach their biggest and strongest soldiers on the opposition and just tell them to kill their enemies with their bare hands?

No, you're missing the point, there are many ways to kill people, to imply that guns increase the number murders is baseless, guns don't cause the intent. The effectiveness of a gun is irrelevant to domestic murders. It is however relevant in self defence. The military are irrelvant.

Of cource, but in a society where guns are not easy to get ahold of much fewer criminals will have guns.

Guns would never be out of reach to those who are determined to use them.

This answears nothing.

It does, legal prohibition will affect the strength of the black market arms trade, if criminals can't get their guns at walmart they'll looks elsewhere, and organized crime will cash in on the opportunity.

 

[Mr Stabby]

You don't need guns. It's just that simple.

The argument regarding the Virginia tech lunatic really angers me, because people always insist that people like the tech murderer could have obtained a firearm illegally.

THAT'S NOT THE ****ING POINT.

The point is you can freely walk into a store and buy a gun with no intention of using it for protection, but using it to murder your fellow man in cold blood. Why does any society on Earth need this? Why?

American gun regulation needs improving, guns should not be outlawed for those who are not lunatics, stronger scrutiny is required, not prohibition. lunatics shouldn't be allowed cars either.

Jesus christ, it's a shame to flick through the BBC website and read about shootings in London or 11 year old children being shot dead. How would legalising weapons such as guns have prevented that?

What if one of those teenagers breaks into your house? Legalization would have no affect on a teenager getting a gun, they wouldn't be able to buy a gun legally (not even in America).

 

[Jintor]

Ah, the old 'Criminals don't obey the law so they wouldn't obey the gun requirements' thingymagig.

I've got to say that I still don't see the point of legalising gun ownership for the general public, requirement tests or not. I get the feeling that would increase casualties, not decrease them.

 

[Cormeh]

American gun regulation needs improving, guns should not be outlawed for those who are not lunatics, stronger scrutiny is required, not prohibition. lunatics shouldn't be allowed cars either.

What do cars have to do with this? Cars were invented to get from A to B comfortably and punctually. Guns were invented to hurt and kill people.

How do we establish lunatics from sane people? Oh, hang on, all the guys wearing straight jackets with the tweety-birds flying around their heads.

What if one of those teenagers breaks into your house? Legalization would have no affect on a teenager getting a gun, they wouldn't be able to buy a gun legally (not even in America).

What if I get hit by a bus tomorrow? What if? What if? "What if" is a lousy argument to be honest. What if guns were illegal and idiot teenagers had no easy or cheap way to obtain them?

*sigh*

 

[Mr Stabby]

What do cars have to do with this? Cars were invented to get from A to B comfortably and punctually. Guns were invented to hurt and kill people.

How do we establish lunatics from sane people? Oh, hang on, all the guys wearing straight jackets with the tweety-birds flying around their heads.

Cars can be used to deadly consequence, it is lethal if misused, intention of design is irrelevant, they're dangerous. Germany has a degree psychiatric analysis in their gun regulation, it seems to work.

What if I get hit by a bus tomorrow? What if? What if? "What if" is a lousy argument to be honest. What if guns were illegal and idiot teenagers had no easy or cheap way to obtain them?

*sigh*

No it's not. To say armed robbery doesn't happen is a lousy argument. People should have the option to defend their property, the nanny state can't protect everyone. Those teenagers obtained those guns illegally, gun control didn't stop them.

 

[Lt. Drebin]

What do cars have to do with this? Cars were invented to get from A to B comfortably and punctually.

I think he's just making a simple point...anything in the wrong hands can be used maliciously.

 

[Cormeh]

No it's not. To say armed robbery doesn't happen is a lousy argument. People should have the option to defend their property, the nanny state can't protect everyone. Those teenagers obtained those guns illegally, gun control didn't stop them.

So, instead of taking better measures to crack down on illegal guns and weapons, we should just legalise them? The easy way option is basically telling the public to load up get on with it.

It's not what a society needs.

 

[Mr Stabby]

So, instead of taking better measures to crack down on illegal guns and weapons, we should just legalise them? The easy way option is basically telling the public to load up get on with it.

It's not what a society needs.

We have been taking steps against illegal arms, and illegal drugs, it's next to impossible to stop, they are too easy to smuggle. It's not pro-gun, it's pro-choice.

 

[Jintor]

So we provide the option to all peoples to increase their capacity for violence.

Promoting freedom of choice, certainly, but...

 

[Mr Stabby]

it doesn't affect people's capacity for violence, anymore than a car or kitchen knife does, the vast majority of people would never use those in a deliberately threatening manner towards another person, why would they be different with a gun.

 

[Jintor]

it doesn't affect people's capacity for violence, anymore than a car or kitchen knife does, the vast majority of people would never use those in a deliberately threatening manner towards another person, why would they be different with a gun.

Rule Two: People are IDIOTS.

/EDIT And I've had this argument before, but I have to reiterate that the purpose of a gun is to, you know, shoot things.

 

[Mr Stabby]

Rule Two: People are IDIOTS.

That's not relevant, the majority of legal gun owners can use a gun in a competent manner.

/EDIT And I've had this argument before, but I have to reiterate that the purpose of a gun is to, you know, shoot things.

So, some people like to shoot clay pigeons or targets. Self defence is a justified circumstance for shooting someone.

 

[Jintor]

I can't see how I'm carefully maneuvered into believing that the more guns are avaliable to everybody the safer I am.

I don't know how the ****ing logic works!

 

[Yogibbear]

Countries like Australia have anti-gun laws. Sure if you really want you can get a license to have one for the farm/recreation/whatever but the fact is you need to get a license, and you can't generally buy ridiculous automatic rifles and so fourth without reasonable explanations.

If you look at our data on gun shootings per year vs. the US you can see the effect. (I think we had legislation around the early-mid 90's where you took your rifles/shotguns into the police station and they gave you money for them and they all got disposed off, all automatics/shotguns/etc etc)

Seriously, unless there's a kangaroo or something or i want to train to become an elite olympic clay-pigeon shooter, there's no reason to own a gun. Or you could join the army. Or go to a shooting range, without a license, but you just can't take the guns home from the shooting range. i.e. you hire the guns, fire them, get your fix, go home gun-less.

 

[Raziaar]

You shoot Kangaroos over there?

Monsters... ;(

Do you shoot Koalas too?

Cause if so, I'll have to mess up some Australians... Starting with Danimal.

 

[Hondo]

I'd just like to throw in my lot and say that I own multiple firearms and I am strongly against any form of gun control.

 

[CptStern]

...I own multiple firearms..

obviously you dont understand the concept behind gun control :E

anyways, you dont count Mongo, you've been drinking the koolaid for too long

 

[Hondo]

You modified that post like three times in less than a minute and I still don't get what you're trying to tell me.

 

[CptStern]

sigh, would it help if I used hand signals?

gun control ..you know ..like "arms control" ..they try to lessen the amount of weapons they have ....nevermind it's an obtuse joke that flew over your head

and the koolaid bit ..it's a reference to Jim Jones who forced more than 900 people to drink poisoned koolaid with nothing more than words ..it means to blindly follow the masses

and the Mongo bit ..well that's open to interpretation, but I swear it had more to do with your name than anything else :E

 

[Hondo]

You're pretty lame.

 

[CptStern]

wow that's it? I'm lame?

ok

 

[Raxxman]

CptStern argument = Why do you need a gun to disagree with me.

Counter argument = because I have a gun...

seriously if those for gun laws could actually pull a single head out of the colctive asses of the gun world they might stand a chance. They're without a decent spokemen who can stand up to them.

 

[mastag]

You're pretty lame.

Witty retort.


Anywhoo, why is preventing the sale of Projectile Killing Machines, or guns, a bad thing? Yes, criminals would still possibly get them, but it would make it damn harder.

As for hunting and the like, perhaps get a license or something?

 

[Mr-Fusion]

Guns are ****ing retarded and so are all the people who demand to carry one. It's a ****ing shit hobby to go and shoot brick walls and target ranges. GAY GAY GAY Hobby.

And for the people who pretend to be "survival hunters". Well that's just even more gay. Yes even the people who use guns for peaceful purposes (trying to feel powerfull with a device that creates a loud noise).

"lets go to the forest to hunt"

Pure, utter, retardation.

Don't negotiate with terrorists, gun lovers and scientologists.

 

[Hondo]

Wow. Convincing.

 

[CptStern]

CptStern argument = Why do you need a gun to disagree with me.

Counter argument = because I have a gun...

seriously if those for gun laws could actually pull a single head out of the colctive asses of the gun world they might stand a chance. They're without a decent spokemen who can stand up to them.

why do we need a spokes person when the issue is self evident? any fool can see that, whether they accept it is a different matter all together ..it is the height of insanity to allow just anyone the ability to take someone's life away on a whim ...at any time you or someone like you, for whatever reason, can take my life or the lives of those I care about. please answer me this ..why do you think your right to own a gun supercedes my family's right to live?