[QUOTE=Araknid;50950513]Such a shitty argument.
Alcohol I can't argue against but cars are almost completely necessary nowadays.[/QUOTE]
Not to sound like an asshole but if you honestly believe you think that many parts of the world, even within your own nation, that guns are not necessary for some people outside military or police use then you are very naive and I don't know what else to tell you.
[QUOTE=Unit-05;50950668]Not to sound like an asshole but if you honestly believe you think that many parts of the world, even within your own nation, that guns are not necessary for some people outside military or police use then you are very naive and I don't know what else to tell you.[/QUOTE]
Guns are not necessary for a vast majority of the United States and Commonwealth nations, AKA just about everyone in this thread.
[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;50951971]Guns are not necessary for a vast majority of the United States and Commonwealth nations, AKA just about everyone in this thread.[/QUOTE]
Well anyone who owns a farm, anyone who lives near a lot of brushwoods from bears and wolverines and that sort, anyone who lives in the bayou from alligators, high political officials who are often targets for kidnap and murder, there is many many reasons in any nation, it depends on lifestyle and profession.
And what I find insulting is that you are assuming what anyone does and where anyone lives in this thread.
you don't know them. You don't know me. You don't even know our fucking names.
[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;50951971]Guns are not necessary for a vast majority of the United States and Commonwealth nations, AKA just about everyone in this thread.[/QUOTE]
I can make a long list of things that are not necessary. In the United States, we don't ban things because they aren't necessary.
[QUOTE=Araknid;50950513]Such a shitty argument.
Alcohol I can't argue against but cars are almost completely necessary nowadays.[/QUOTE]
Buses, bicycles and walking. Cars aren't necessary, they just save time.
[QUOTE=archangel125;50949109]Maybe juries have a different role in the States. Here, their only job is to impartially decide whether or not a crime - as described in the criminal code - has been committed beyond a reasonable doubt, and with the extenuating circumstances being completely irrelevant. The judge, then, chooses the sentence based on legal precedent and taking mitigating factors into account. I don't think the guy should go to prison, either, but that's just how the legal system here works.[/QUOTE]
Jury Nullifcation is a wonderful thing that more people need to know about.
Just don't mention it while they're picking you for a jury (unless you don't want to do jury duty, then by all means mention it).
[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;50951971]Guns are not necessary for a vast majority of the United States and Commonwealth nations, AKA just about everyone in this thread.[/QUOTE]
List of harmful things that get people killed but we still have: alcohol, sports cars, pools, etc.
Then there are all the things we don't really need that cause incredible environmental damage, or the epic scale of advertising that is proven to negatively affect people's mental health... many, many things in life are harmful, often in ways we cannot predict or understand the full extent of.
Your argument is inevitably that "guns only have one use: to kill", and I think that view comes from a place of ignorance. Question: if you owned a gun, would you own it to kill people? No? Congratulations, you're just like everyone else.
[QUOTE=Unit-05;50952251]Well anyone who owns a farm, anyone who lives near a lot of brushwoods from bears and wolverines and that sort, anyone who lives in the bayou from alligators, high political officials who are often targets for kidnap and murder, there is many many reasons in any nation, it depends on lifestyle and profession.
And what I find insulting is that you are assuming what anyone does and where anyone lives in this thread.
you don't know them. You don't know me. You don't even know our fucking names.[/QUOTE]
Most people in the United States don't live in a farm, in the boondocks, or are the targets of assassination attempts.
The vast majority of Facepunchers, which is mostly people who drifted here from playing Garrysmod, aren't going to be rural farmers fending off bears in the wilderness.
[editline]26th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50952286]I can make a long list of things that are not necessary. In the United States, we don't ban things because they aren't necessary.[/QUOTE]
Good thing I never even suggested banning them.
[editline]26th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;50952482]List of harmful things that get people killed but we still have: alcohol, sports cars, pools, etc.
Then there are all the things we don't really need that cause incredible environmental damage, or the epic scale of advertising that is proven to negatively affect people's mental health... many, many things in life are harmful, often in ways we cannot predict or understand the full extent of.
Your argument is inevitably that "guns only have one use: to kill", and I think that view comes from a place of ignorance.[/QUOTE]Way to shove a whole lot of shit in my mouth. I never weighed in on my opinion on guns in this nation, because believe it or not, I never even brought up banning them in this thread. Maybe if you didn't have a huge persecution complex you wouldn't jump to assuming I want to take your guns whenever I even imply they are no the single most necessary and wholly good invention in Human history.
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;50952482]Question: if you owned a gun, would you own it to kill people? No? Congratulations, you're just like everyone else.[/QUOTE]
I own two and I'm in the Marines. I've probably spent more time firing guns than half the NRA. Stop trying to make yourself out as some horribly misunderstood minority. All you're doing is asuming anyone who disagrees with you has either never touched a gun or wants to ban them all. Both of which are incorrect.
[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;50953482]Most people in the United States don't live in a farm, in the boondocks, or are the targets of assassination attempts.
The vast majority of Facepunchers, which is mostly people who drifted here from playing Garrysmod, aren't going to be rural farmers fending off bears in the wilderness.[/QUOTE]
no, but they aren't city kids for the most part either.
[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;50953482]I own two and I'm in the Marines. I've probably spent more time firing guns than half the NRA. Stop trying to make yourself out as some horribly misunderstood minority. All you're doing is asuming anyone who disagrees with you has either never touched a gun or wants to ban them all. Both of which are incorrect.[/QUOTE]
lol you're talking shit about making assumptions? I don't even own a gun, nor are there any in my house. So much for your persecution complex theory.
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;50955458]lol you're talking shit about making assumptions? I don't even own a gun, nor are there any in my house. So much for your persecution complex theory.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Congratulations, you're just like everyone else.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Your argument is inevitably that "guns only have one use: to kill", and I think that view comes from a place of ignorance.[/QUOTE] Your argument boils down to "You don't know about guns! You're unfairly coming for guns!"
Even if you don't own a gun, you're acting out a persecution complex.
Also good job trying to call me out on not knowing about guns when you don't even own one.
[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;50955724]Even if you don't own a gun, you're acting out a persecution complex. [/QUOTE]
Surely you aren't this retarded.
[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine]Your argument boils down to "You don't know about guns! You're unfairly coming for guns!"[/QUOTE]
That's not what I said. When I said it came from a place of ignorance, I was clearly talking about an understanding of why most people own guns. Just because you're allegedly a marine who owns guns does not mean you know much of anything about other gun owners. You're clearly making assumptions about their wants and needs based on your own life, which is a very narcissistic way of looking at things.
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - UncleJimmema))[/highlight]
Y'all might take notice that a certain someone got banned for derailing the thread. If you want to have a gun debate, please take it somewhere else. This is about people who got killed by some crossbow-wielding nutcase in Canada.
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;50956026]Surely you aren't this retarded.[/QUOTE]
Sick burn.
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;50956026]That's not what I said. When I said it came from a place of ignorance, I was clearly talking about an understanding of why most people own guns. Just because you're allegedly a marine who owns guns does not mean you know much of anything about other gun owners. You're clearly making assumptions about their wants and needs based on your own life, which is a very narcissistic way of looking at things.[/QUOTE]
Good thing I just said that most people don't need a firearm. I never said farmers shouldn't own them or people under threat of violence shouldn't. Hell, I never even specified who wasn't 'most' in my eyes. You immediately jumped to the assumption that I want to take everybody's gun. I never made any assumptions. If you're a regular Human being in the city or the suburb than you have very few reasons to have a firearm besides sport. Which is fine. But don't pretend like it's something you can't live without at that point.
Also, [I]allegedly[/I] a Marine :v:, I'm totally making it up to fuck with you yeah.
How did I know a gun debate would start in this thread? I have no plan on getting involved this time, but I knew it was coming.
However, now after this there's calls for a crossbow license too. A license for a medieval weapon.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;50957614]How did I know a gun debate would start in this thread? I have no plan on getting involved this time, but I knew it was coming.
However, now after this there's calls for a crossbow license too. A license for a medieval weapon.[/QUOTE]
well gun debates aside, I found this to be an interesting outlook between firearms and other projectile weapons that is really popular. Crossbows have been around before medieval times, but black powder weapons have been in use since the late 1300's and early 1400's, making them quite literally medieval weapons.
Most of our weapons actually stem from medieval weapons and even before then but are just merely modernized with stronger and lighter materials and better designs, like the compound bow.
People will often say, [URL="https://gastatic.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/traditions-pa-pellet-flintlock-muzzleloader-black.jpg"]this is a modern gun
[/URL]
But then turn around and and say, [URL="http://www.archerscafe.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Barnett-Ghost-350-CRT.jpg"]this is a medieval weapon
[/URL]
When in reality they are both modern weapons that are very capable and should require training and a license. And swords are no different either.
[QUOTE=Unit-05;50958211]
When in reality they are both modern weapons that are very capable and should require training and a license. And swords are no different either.[/QUOTE]
I disagree entirely, I don't feel any muzzle-loading firearm, bow, or sword should require any kind of license, and at present in Canada almost any firearm made before 1898, as well as any flintlock or matchlock rifle needs no license to own, which means that the traditions muzzle-loader you posted is unlicensed in Canada. And when is a sword a sword at that point? Will someone with a really long kitchen knife need to get a license for it? Will it stop at just swords? If the UK is any indication, no, as there have been active campaigns against any pointed blade, and before Labour was kicked out of parliament I recall hearing talk of banning pointed blades entirely. I'd rather not have to worry about people banning or licensing my pocket knives or my sword, especially since said licenses always first criminalize ownership of the thing and make the license and exemption from prosecution that expires every 5 years.
Jesus christ. Didn't know that crossbows were so deadly.
[QUOTE=.Vel;50959224]Jesus christ. Didn't know that crossbows were so deadly.[/QUOTE]
When it was mentioned that you would rather than a bullet than a crossbow bolt, it is very true. You aren't supposed to pull a crossbow bolt with a broadhead out of anything living. If you're lucky, a bullet will pass straight through you causing only a hole.
Think of a stick with 4 razor sharp edges at the tip, going into you, angled so that the only way it is designed to move is further into the target, reversing the direction will cause the barbed end to pull on anything it has passed by.
Compare this to surgically removing a metal chunk or two, and I think you would always go bullet.
[QUOTE=Revenge282;50959285]When it was mentioned that you would rather than a bullet than a crossbow bolt, it is very true. You aren't supposed to pull a crossbow bolt with a broadhead out of anything living. If you're lucky, a bullet will pass straight through you causing only a hole.
Think of a stick with 4 razor sharp edges at the tip, going into you, angled so that the only way it is designed to move is further into the target, reversing the direction will cause the barbed end to pull on anything it has passed by.
Compare this to surgically removing a metal chunk or two, and I think you would always go bullet.[/QUOTE]
100%. Although you could probably get more shots off with a gun, a crossbow seems like it has a much higher chance of killing.
[QUOTE=.Vel;50961370]100%. Although you could probably get more shots off with a gun, a crossbow seems like it has a much higher chance of killing.[/QUOTE]
It's not even killing, it's more maiming. A gun is more likely to put you out in one if it's placed right. A crossbow, even if on target, is still liable to take some time.
Personally, we should just ban anything pointy or fast and be done with it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.