[QUOTE=Kartoffel;38900703]I think I'll put cannon hunting on my bucket list.[/QUOTE]
Same, and you don't even need a license for them here.
[QUOTE=zydos;38900933]Bahahahahaha
Question dodging 101. My life, personally, would be just fine without peanut butter, thanks. Though, if guns were outlawed, I'd be just fine. Hell I'd feel better knowing that there might not be instant-killing-machines in people's pockets, waiting to be used on me/anyone[/QUOTE]
yeah because someone willing to face murder charges isn't willing to face unlawful possession of a firearm charges
??
[QUOTE=zydos;38900933]Bahahahahaha
Question dodging 101. My life, personally, would be just fine without peanut butter, thanks. Though, if guns were outlawed, I'd be just fine. Hell I'd feel better knowing that there might not be instant-killing-machines in people's pockets, waiting to be used on me/anyone[/QUOTE]
Except gun bans don't work, and this has been proven, especially in Canada.
[QUOTE=zydos;38900933]Bahahahahaha
Question dodging 101. My life, personally, would be just fine without peanut butter, thanks. Though, if guns were outlawed, I'd be just fine. Hell I'd feel better knowing that there might not be instant-killing-machines in people's pockets, waiting to be used on me/anyone[/QUOTE]
No. I didn't dodge the question, I drew a parallel. Banning peanut butter for the hell of it would be pretty stupid and you shouldn't do it "just because". Guns are [I]exactly the same way.[/I]
Furthermore, banning guns doesn't mean that instant-killing-machines won't be in peoples' pockets. If you outlaw guns, [I]only outlaws will have guns.[/I] You have no good-natured, law-abiding citizens with firearms, then, and every single one of the instant-killing-machines in anyone's pockets at that point would be there for the purpose of killing you or someone else. Don't you get it?
[QUOTE=Apache249;38900947]Give up your computer, or at least your internet. Goodbye.[/QUOTE]
namaste
[QUOTE=zydos;38900969]namaste[/QUOTE]
bon soir, mon petit merde
[QUOTE=zydos;38900933]Bahahahahaha
Question dodging 101. My life, personally, would be just fine without peanut butter, thanks. Though, if guns were outlawed, I'd be just fine. Hell I'd feel better knowing that there might not be instant-killing-machines in people's pockets, waiting to be used on me/anyone[/QUOTE]
If you keep calling them "Killing machines" [b]No one[/b] in this discussion is ever going to take you seriously.
It's quite clear you don't approve of firearms for any purpose except for the purpose you use them for, you've made your point, just stop already.
[QUOTE=zydos;38900862]People just don't want to give up their guns. How much worse off would your life be without them?[/QUOTE]
On absolute principle: Why do you find it weird that the people find the need to have the most effective and practical weapon of their time to protect their life, liberty, and property? Even if that makes me sound a bit pretentious it's why it is the way it is. Think of it like a civilian arms race. The threat of someone else having a powerful weapon with the intent of hurting you exists. In some areas more than others, but it certainly exists. Some people find comfort in leveling the playing field by owning the same weapon. That's what home defense comes down to, and if you have a problem in killing someone who wants to kill you then you've got big problems buddy.
You're naive in your approach to guns as a whole. You act as though everyone who owns a gun "just in case" is a retarded, self-entitled asshole. But surprise! There are in fact people out there with brains as large as yours! More often than not they're actually bigger! From a practical standpoint, it is [I]truly[/I] a "just in case" measure. But it goes beyond that too, and you're offensively defending your own lack of care for gun culture, but there are in fact also people who enjoy guns for what they are. I can't explain it, and women might call it a guy thing, but it's for the same reason some people wish they were real-life action heroes, and for the same reason some people join the military (as an infantryman). They just find them [I]interesting[/I]. People that have zero interest in guns evidently simply do not understand why people own guns for fun, but you need to step outside of your own dense skull for a second, suck it up, and deal with it.
-snip-
[QUOTE=teh pirate;38900682]I don't understand: what do you think makes (since this was your example) an FN FAL less appropriate for shooting targets than any other gun, if not because it's scary looking? Is it because it's a military grade firearm? What do you think differentiates a "military grade" firearm from any other firearm? The scary appearance?
I don't want to get aggressive but your logic is seeming very circular.[/QUOTE]
The potential of the weapon exceeds the need, you don't need a semi-automatic gun when you can use a bolt-action for the same reason. You may want it but I don't think want and ownership of guns should overlap
[QUOTE=Mbbird;38901020]On absolute principle: Why do you find it weird that the people find the need to have the most effective and practical weapon of their time to protect their life, liberty, and property? Even if that makes me sound a bit pretentious it's why it is the way it is. Think of it like a civilian arms race. The threat of someone else having a powerful weapon with the intent of hurting you exists. In some areas more than others, but it certainly exists. Some people find comfort in leveling the playing field by owning the same weapon. That's what home defense comes down to, and if you have a problem in killing someone who wants to kill you then you've got big problems buddy.
You're naive in your approach to guns as a whole. You act as though everyone who owns a gun "just in case" is a retarded, self-entitled asshole. But surprise! There are in fact people out there with brains as large as yours! More often than not they're actually bigger! From a practical standpoint, it is [I]truly[/I] a "just in case" measure. But it goes beyond that too, and you're offensively defending your own lack of care for gun culture, but there are in fact also people who enjoy guns for what they are. I can't explain it, and women might call it a guy thing, but it's for the same reason some people wish they were real-life action heroes, and for the same reason some people join the military (as an infantryman). They just find them [I]interesting[/I]. People that have zero interest in guns evidently simply do not understand why people own guns for fun, but you need to step outside of your own dense skull for a second, suck it up, and deal with it.[/QUOTE]
"gun culture" is something the nra made up to help them win over senators so that the gun manufacturers in this country can make money.
[QUOTE=Lonestriper;38901062]The potential of the weapon exceeds the need, you don't need a semi-automatic gun when you can use a bolt-action for the same reason. You may want it but I don't think want and ownership of guns should overlap[/QUOTE]
But why? What makes one firearm inherently worse than another? Each "grade" of firearm comes with its own drawbacks. None of the few civilians who own heavy machine guns such as the Browning M2 would even consider using that weapon to kill anyone, not even in a home defense scenario, but despite this you deny the validity of owning one-- why?
[QUOTE=Lonestriper;38901062]The potential of the weapon exceeds the need, you don't need a semi-automatic gun when you can use a bolt-action for the same reason. You may want it but I don't think want and ownership of guns should overlap[/QUOTE]
We've been over this before, semi-automatics are very useful if you need to get a second shot off quickly while hunting. That's just one of the reasons people might "need" them. (Even though the "need" argument is ridiculous IMO)
[QUOTE=Lonestriper;38901062]The potential of the weapon exceeds the need, you don't need a semi-automatic gun when you can use a bolt-action for the same reason. You may want it but I don't think want and ownership of guns should overlap[/QUOTE]
Well I don't [I]not[/I] need one either. If I am allowed to have one, and I want one, why shouldn't I get one?
I do wish you guys would quit rating each other dumb. Dumb shouldn't replace the disagree rating.
[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;38901068]"gun culture" is something the nra made up to help them win over senators so that the gun manufacturers in this country can make money.[/QUOTE]
Well the idea existed since long before the NRA apparently coined it, seeing as I just made that up and am not quoting any blog post or news article, if you were wondering.
[QUOTE=Apache249;38901113]Well I don't [I]not[/I] need one either. If I am allowed to have one, and I want one, why shouldn't I get one?[/QUOTE]
because a gun is a deliberate killing tool. you don't need a gun and therefore shouldn't have in the same way you don't need to scale skyscrapers and therefore are not allowed to.
[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;38901135]because a gun is a deliberate killing tool. you don't need a gun and therefore shouldn't have in the same way you don't need to scale skyscrapers and therefore are not allowed to.[/QUOTE]
We've been over this time and time again.
Sometimes people just like to shoot at targets.
Is that too hard to wrap your head around?
[QUOTE=Apache249;38901113]Well I don't [I]not[/I] need one either. If I am allowed to have one, and I want one, why shouldn't I get one?[/QUOTE]
You should, if you are allowed. I disagree with the being allowed part
[QUOTE=Mbbird;38901126]Well the idea existed since long before the NRA apparently coined it, seeing as I just made that up and am not quoting any blog post or news article, if you were wondering.[/QUOTE]
no, i understand how you're using it, and the whole concept is something that the nra uses for lobbying. i misspoke when i said they made it up, haha. they capitalized on it.
[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;38901135]because a gun is a deliberate killing tool. you don't need a gun and therefore shouldn't have in the same way you don't need to scale skyscrapers and therefore are not allowed to.[/QUOTE]
You don't [B]need[/B] to do a lot of things. You are also not strictly forbidden from scaling skyscrapers, and are able to do it with certain permissions, so that's a weak retort at best.
[QUOTE=Lonestriper;38901145]You should, if you are allowed. I disagree with the being allowed part[/QUOTE]
Why? Is it because they're scary looking?
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;38901143]We've been over this time and time again.
Sometimes people just like to shoot at targets.
Is that too hard to wrap your head around?[/QUOTE]
and some people like to shoot at kids. the risk does not outweigh the "benefit" (???) provided by "shooting targets"
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;38901159]Why? Is it because they're scary looking?[/QUOTE]
Because ultimately the existence and ownership of guns is connected with gun-violence and a bunch of people who would otherwise be alive? The price of your freedom to own guns isn't worth the death it is built upon
[QUOTE=teh pirate;38901151]You don't [B]need[/B] to do a lot of things. You are also not strictly forbidden from scaling skyscrapers, and are able to do it with certain permissions, so that's a weak retort at best.[/QUOTE]
agreed because, unlike owning a gun, scaling a skyscraper only endangers yourself.
[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;38901202]and some people like to shoot at kids. the risk does not outweigh the "benefit" (???) provided by "shooting targets"[/QUOTE]
Please find a chart that shows the amount of child-killers that use Semi-automatic rifles (not pistols, shotguns, etc.) compared to those that only use them for target shooting. If you can, of course.
[QUOTE=Lonestriper;38901207]Because ultimately the existence and ownership of guns is connected with gun-violence and a bunch of people who would otherwise be alive? The price of your freedom to own guns isn't worth the death it is built upon[/QUOTE]
I really don't like the "Guilty until proven innocent" approach you seem to be taking. Especially since the guns they wish to ban here are almost never used in actual crimes.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;38901213]Please find a chart that shows the amount of child-killers that use Semi-automatic rifles (not pistols, shotguns, etc.) compared to those that only use them for target shooting. If you can, of course.[/QUOTE]
please find me a chart detailing the amount of school shootings that didn't involve guns
[QUOTE=Lonestriper;38901207]Because ultimately the existence and ownership of guns is connected with gun-violence and a bunch of people who would otherwise be alive? The price of your freedom to own guns isn't worth the death it is built upon[/QUOTE]
But most gun violence is caused by firearms that are either illegally purchased or stolen
[editline]19th December 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=GoldenGnome;38901226]please find me a chart detailing the amount of school shootings that didn't involve guns[/QUOTE]
Congratulations on making the most fucktarded statement ever.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.