• Two US TV journalists shot dead on air
    1,049 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Big Bang;48546094]they are pointless, actually, considering they're not really debates either way, it's one side claiming they'll have to take their guns from their cold dead hands. and then everyone else lol.[/QUOTE] You have no self awareness. [editline]26th August 2015[/editline] I was going to make a joke but you really dont. You really, REALLY dont.
[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;48546128]haha so gun owners being opposed to giving up the legal and registered firearms they have is somehow claiming that 'you'll have to pry our guns from our dead hands?' And what, exactly, does this do about the illegal firearms market?[/QUOTE] It's convenient to pretend the illegal market doesn't exist because it's the only way to make the "ban guns = stop all crime" claim work. Guys, wait, why not just ban murder?
[QUOTE=*Freezorg*;48546117]The US is fucking huge. Just any one state is bigger than my country. And yet, violent crime happens here too. I feel like, more often than not, we should look at it in a state context instead of a country-wide context.[/QUOTE] even when done per 100,000 people, america's homicide rate is still higher than a large amount of the western world
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;48546122]It's annoying to be nailed to the wall and demonized by a group of people that has no idea what they're talking about and would be happy to punish ~100,000,000 people for someone one person did as long as it got them a pat on the back from their peers. So gun owners are here defending themselves.[/QUOTE] ye ye sure im just a bit bothered that he's criticizing someone's arguments and at the same time saying "you couldn't possibly make a good argument" like wtf
[QUOTE=Big Bang;48546094]they are pointless, actually, considering they're not really debates either way, it's one side claiming they'll have to take their guns from their cold dead hands. and then everyone else lol.[/QUOTE] "and then everyone else"? Get real, mate.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;48546113]why you taking this so personally it's cool if you like getting angry at stuff for no reason but not everyone's into it[/QUOTE] I'm not taking it personally, I've never even held a real gun. I'm having fun actually. Taking people who aren't thinking and are making bad arguments, toying with those people and showing how ridiculous they are, I enjoy that. So I'm not angry, I'm actually rather entertained.
Holy shit these last ten pages.
No, no, no stop. I've got the solution, we don't have to argue anymore. We can just [B]ban murder[/B], which is easier than banning guns, and will cover more types of murder than just gun murder.
[QUOTE=*Freezorg*;48546117]The US is fucking huge. Just any one state is bigger than my country. And yet, violent crime happens here too. I feel like, more often than not, we should look at it in a state context instead of a country-wide context.[/QUOTE] that DOES NOT MATTER. in a country as militarized and well armed, that has spent millions in surveillance systems, that has spent billions attempting to thwart terrorist attacks, that has armed civilians apparently everywhere, shit like this still happens! and it in fact happens more than ANYWHERE else in the world. like, do you not see that there is a problem here? do you legitimately believe that it's merely due to chance that this happens more often in the US than anywhere else?
[QUOTE=Big Bang;48546147]that DOES NOT MATTER. in a country as militarized and well armed, that has spent millions in surveillance systems, that has spent billions attempting to thwart terrorist attacks, that has armed civilians apparently everywhere, shit like this still happens! and it in fact happens more than ANYWHERE else in the world. [/QUOTE] [citation needed[
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;48546135]even when done per 100,000 people, america's homicide rate is still higher than a large amount of the western world[/QUOTE] Isn't most of it gang violence? IIRC the vast majority of gun homicides are gang "wars" in which no third party is killed. I believe that particular problem and it's origin are in a spectre outside of the gun debate.
A lot of gun crime happens in poorer areas, a lot of which are part of cities with higher gun control. So, gun crime goes up, they limit guns, gun crime continues, they pass more limiting laws and the crime still grows. This is instead of focusing on attempting to actually settle on what caused the poorer areas to be so screwed up in the first place. No reason to generally pass more restrictive gun laws if they could fix the gang culture in these areas that are glorifying shooting. Lot of those guns I should add, are stolen, or otherwise illegal.
[QUOTE=Big Bang;48546147]that DOES NOT MATTER. in a country as militarized and well armed, that has spent millions in surveillance systems, that has spent billions attempting to thwart terrorist attacks, that has armed civilians apparently everywhere, shit like this still happens! and it in fact happens more than ANYWHERE else in the world. like, do you not see that there is a problem here? do you legitimately believe that it's merely due to chance that this happens more often in the US than anywhere else?[/QUOTE] It's not due to chance. But it's not due to guns, specifically, either. Again this argument is as valid as pointing out that Somalian pirates and global warming are both occurring at the same time.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;48546140]I'm not taking it personally, I've never even held a real gun. I'm having fun actually. Taking people who aren't thinking and are making bad arguments, toying with those people and showing how ridiculous they are, I enjoy that. So I'm not angry, I'm actually rather entertained.[/QUOTE] oh i'm sorry carry on with your schemes then. let's see you "toying with people"
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;48546136]ye ye sure im just a bit bothered that he's criticizing someone's arguments and at the same time saying "you couldn't possibly make a good argument" like wtf[/QUOTE] I'm waiting to see a good argument from the anti-gun side. Not seen one yet, seems like I won't, so I have low expectations. If you took it personally though, well, more entertainment for me.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;48546144]No, no, no stop. I've got the solution, we don't have to argue anymore. We can just [B]ban murder[/B], which is easier than banning guns, and will cover more types of murder than just gun murder.[/QUOTE] You say this as though it's an absurdly stupid notion but quick question. How many people would be murdered if it wasn't illegal to murder?
[QUOTE=AaronM202;48546148]The United States has a population of over 300 million, comparable to countries like China, India, Indonesia, and Brazil and whatnot. [/QUOTE] there are MORE SPREE KILLINGS in a population of 300 million than in the combined populations of China, India, Indonesia and Brazil which account for something like a third of the world's population. do the math lol.
[QUOTE=Big Bang;48546072] compare the amount of killings that have happened in the US in recent years versus the rest of the world. it IS anomalous that so many happen in the US.[/QUOTE] The US has the 110th highest murder rate (4.7), but homicide rates make your argument look bad because they aren't swayed by how many people live in the US.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;48545999]there's that nebulous 'mental care' point again and no this is utterly incomparable to video games, because the argument about video games was that they caused people to commit crime, not that they were actually [B]utilized to kill people[/B][/QUOTE] Banning guns is in no way a blanket reaction statement to people dying from gun violence right? So rather than getting dirty guns off the street and out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them, you just want to take them away from everyone. If you're gonna ban things "utilized to kill people" then lets ban swords, axes, warhammers, and other hand-to-hand combat weapons too.
why was the mass debate board ever removed
I assume the anti- vs pro-gun debates in US have touched on whether guns make it easier and "less traumatic" to kill a person, than let's say using a bat or a knife. It seems to be a more fitting thing to discuss than about implementing an impossible mass-ban on guns across USA.
[QUOTE=Thlis;48546162]You say this as though it's an absurdly stupid notion but quick question. How many people would be murdered if it wasn't illegal to murder?[/QUOTE] Murder is the legal term for a type of criminal killing, so if murder was legal, there'd be no murder. My point is that murder is already illegal and making it more illegal won't decrease the rate at which it occurs. The problem is that people feel motivated to commit murder in the first place.
[QUOTE=BANNED USER;48546166]Banning guns is in no way a blanket reaction statement to people dying from gun violence right? So rather than getting dirty guns off the street and out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them, you just want to take them away from everyone. If you're gonna ban things "utilized to kill people" then lets ban swords, axes, warhammers, and other hand-to-hand combat weapons too.[/QUOTE] when have I ever said that I wanted to take guns away from everyone the most I've said is that I'm anti-gun, please back up your 'you just want to take them away from everyone' part reminder: even the UK hasn't taken guns away from everyone
[QUOTE=Big Bang;48546164]there are MORE SPREE KILLINGS in a population of 300 million than in the combined populations of China, India, Indonesia and Brazil which account for something like a third of the world's population. do the math lol.[/QUOTE] How do you count spree killings? Because I'm sure with 50,000 murders in a year, Brazil probably had a [I]lot[/I] more than the US.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;48546173]I assume the anti- vs pro-gun debates in US have touched on whether guns make it easier and "less traumatic" to kill a person, than let's say using a bat or a knife. It seems to be a more fitting thing to discuss than about implementing an impossible mass-ban on guns across USA.[/QUOTE] There - this is one of the good arguments I mentioned. Firearms are a tool of choice for committing murders because it makes it easier for the killer, not physically, but mentally. You're detached from the killing, you aren't looking a victim in the eye while smashing them with a bat until they die. This is something that should be discussed but rarely is.
[QUOTE=Big Bang;48546164]there are MORE SPREE KILLINGS in a population of 300 million than in the combined populations of China, India, Indonesia and [b]Brazil[/b] which account for something like a third of the world's population. do the math lol.[/QUOTE] Im willing to believe you on just the subject of SPREE killings, but in GENERAL? eeehehhhheh no. I admittedly dont know much about South America but i know enough about how dangerous it is. Brazil is far more dangerous.
I would be for banning guns if we also banned them for police and every one of the worlds militaries and terrorist organizations
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;48546192]There - this is one of the good arguments I mentioned. Firearms are a tool of choice for committing murders because it makes it easier for the killer, not physically, but mentally. You're detached from the killing, you aren't looking a victim in the eye while smashing them with a bat until they die. This is something that should be discussed but rarely is.[/QUOTE] I would make a topic in general discussions about it, but that'll get out of hand quickly.
[QUOTE=BANNED USER;48546166]Banning guns is in no way a blanket reaction statement to people dying from gun violence right? So rather than getting dirty guns off the street and out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them, you just want to take them away from everyone. If you're gonna ban things "utilized to kill people" then lets ban swords, axes, warhammers, and other hand-to-hand combat weapons too.[/QUOTE] As it turns out, it's more common and far more easy to kill people with modern guns than with ancient weaponry. It would be fantastic if guns were taken away from (most) people, as by now they seem to cause more problems than their hobby/utility value makes up for. Leave the dangerous explosive powered kinetic weaponry to the experts, right?
[QUOTE=Swebonny;48546173]I assume the anti- vs pro-gun debates in US have touched on whether guns make it easier and "less traumatic" to kill a person, than let's say using a bat or a knife. It seems to be a more fitting thing to discuss than about implementing an impossible mass-ban on guns across USA.[/QUOTE] A gun with 7 bullets in it can kill 7 people in less than 7 seconds. I don't think the average person with a knife can do the same thing as [U]quickly[/U]. Speed is key in stopping the perpetrator, knives are inherently less lethal in terms of KILLS PER SECOND than knives. Less dangerous as a result, at least for MASS murders. This isn't disputable
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.