[QUOTE=FreakyMe;39225707]If you are going to link something, at least read the article you are linking.[/QUOTE]
Oh no he was off by two.
Unleash the hellhounds.
[QUOTE=FreakyMe;39225707]If you are going to link something, at least read the article you are linking.[/QUOTE]
wow 2 more than I thought and it still didnt end the world! GASP
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cs4vjq6sW40[/media]
12 shots, I am redeemed
I gotta admit it's kind of funny how you guys talk about guns. I'm not even allowed to carry a small pocket knife outside.
Yet I live in one of the safest areas in the world, 2nd lowest intentional homicide rate on the planet.
[QUOTE=ItsMozy;39225944]I gotta admit it's kind of funny how you guys talk about guns. I'm not even allowed to carry a small pocket knife outside.
Yet I live in one of the safest areas in the world, 2nd lowest intentional homicide rate on the planet.[/QUOTE]
and where would that be
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;39225951]and where would that be[/QUOTE]
According to wikipedia Western Europe has a rating of 1. That's 1 per 100.000 deaths.
[IMG]http://puu.sh/1O1uw[/IMG]
Tho I admit that intentional homicide isn't just by gun.
Gun debate threads please.
[QUOTE=InsanePyro;39225137]Don't be an arse. Yes I'm sure someone somewhere dropped one on someones head or something. But someone hasn't walked into a elementary school and started bashing kids in the head with a TV[/QUOTE]
What an absurd thing to say. Nobody's walked into an elementary school and started bashing kids in the head with heroin, either, and nobody denies that heroin causes deaths directly and indirectly.
[QUOTE=teh pirate;39227090]What an absurd thing to say. Nobody's walked into an elementary school and started bashing kids in the head with heroin, either, and nobody denies that heroin causes deaths directly and indirectly.[/QUOTE]
That wasn't my point. They were saying a ban on gun whatever's would be useless so I'm trying to figure out why we should bother banning anything.
[QUOTE=InsanePyro;39227191]That wasn't my point. They were saying a ban on gun whatever's would be useless so I'm trying to figure out why we should bother banning anything.[/QUOTE]
Because some things do go away when banned. Some do not.
Not only will guns not go away when banned, there's also no reason to ban them, so why do it? It's already been demonstrated that they aren't a cause of violence, nor do they appear to be a catalyst for it. At this point anti-gun debaters are just saying "why [I]not[/I] ban them?" and trying to paint gun owners as psychopaths.
Nothing like gun control to turn generally decent facepunchers into unreasonable idiots.
Hey guys apparently every nation with gun control has been doing it wrong all these years, despite per 10 000 fatal gun crime stats showing otherwise.
O well.
[QUOTE=Craigewan;39227438]Nothing like gun control to turn generally decent facepunchers into unreasonable idiots.
Hey guys apparently every nation with gun control has been doing it wrong all these years, despite per 10 000 fatal gun crime stats showing otherwise.
O well.[/QUOTE]
Thank you for contributing, perhaps now you could suggest how we remove the 200 Million weapons. And manage to sway around 50% of the country into a total ban support.
[QUOTE=Craigewan;39227438]Nothing like gun control to turn generally decent facepunchers into unreasonable idiots.
Hey guys apparently every nation with gun control has been doing it wrong all these years, despite per 10 000 fatal gun crime stats showing otherwise.
O well.[/QUOTE]
So people will get shot less if you ban guns but crime continues all the same ? wow! can you imagine that1! ?
I like this video, feel like it could be informative here.
[video=youtube;w0o7YgiTFm4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0o7YgiTFm4[/video]
Hunting weapons can be just as dangerous, if not more, than scary babykilling libertyseeking ak-47's like this one. Just because a gun doesn't have wood grips doesn't mean its scary.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;39224438]None of these are impeachable crimes.[/QUOTE]
Is being an incompetent idiot an impeachable crime?
Obama's sorely lacking intelligence aside, Texas is going to flip out over this.
[QUOTE=Craigewan;39227438]Hey guys apparently every nation with gun control has been doing it wrong all these years, despite per 10 000 fatal gun crime stats showing otherwise.[/QUOTE]
To be honest, quite a bit of European countries are p. lax in terms of gun control and let you own all sorts of cool shit after just a bit of paperwork. And yet there's never been mass shootings in them, and gun crime is commmitted with weapons from black markets.
Plus "10'000 gun deaths" is bullshit, of course the US is going to have [b]more of everything[/b] if you count all 50 states at once. States that, if I might add, vary wildly in both gun crime rates and gun control laws, and with the most restrictive states usually having worse crime stats as a further confirmation of [B]banning guns does jack squat[/B].
The problem with the US is that one side rejects all forms of control, and the other side only sees "BAN FUCKING EVERYTHING" as the only option, and never proposed anything that would actually do something useful without fucking law abiding gun owners up the ass.
We don't need to control guns. We need a halfway decent mental health-care system so these shootings don't happen in the first place.
[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;39227844]To be honest, quite a bit of European countries are p. lax in terms of gun control and let you own all sorts of cool shit after just a bit of paperwork. And yet there's never been mass shootings in them, and gun crime is commmitted with weapons from black markets.
Plus "10'000 gun deaths" is bullshit, of course the US is going to have [b]more of everything[/b] if you count all 50 states at once. States that, if I might add, vary wildly in both gun crime rates and gun control laws, and with the most restrictive states usually having worse crime stats as a further confirmation of [B]banning guns does jack squat[/B].
The problem with the US is that one side rejects all forms of control, and the other side only sees "BAN FUCKING EVERYTHING" as the only option, and never proposed anything that would actually do something useful without fucking law abiding gun owners up the ass.[/QUOTE]
Agreed. Once again, a little bit of compromise is in order in the U.S.
[QUOTE=Strongbad;39227917]We don't need to control guns. We need a halfway decent mental health-care system so these shootings don't happen in the first place.[/QUOTE]
Mental Health reform and wider spread knowledge about what to do with people with mental health problems is an incredibly complicated issue in terms of personal freedoms, legislation and health care logistics.
Guns are easy to rile up fear factor and emotional reactions in people so it seems like the easier solution, and I understand the need for an easier solution but gun control will not solve the original problem nor will it go over well with half the country.
If they really want to play with constitutional rights and actually fix the problem they need to rope in media coverage of these attacks. If I had a serious mental disorder and wanted to act out in a way that would have me remembered for years and years to come and simultaneously have the president of the United States mentioning my name the easiest way to do it is to go out and kill a bunch of people in some horrible massacre. The reason for this is because it's such a big story for media outlets it's played and debated about by pundits for months after the fact. My picture is plastered on every TV screen in the country, if not the world and everyone knows who I am and talks about me.
The proliferation of the killers in the massacres to a celebrity status is probably one of the most harmful things that people have been doing since Columbine.
No president would dare make an executive order that would be challenged in the court, if executive order ever came under scrutiny it would never pass the legal challenge. That is why these executive orders will most likely be nothing more than changes in enforcement of current laws and directions for other federal departments.
[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;39227844]The problem with the US is that one side rejects all forms of control, and the other side only sees "BAN FUCKING EVERYTHING" as the only option, and never proposed anything that would actually do something useful without fucking law abiding gun owners up the ass.[/QUOTE]
This is probably the best summary of our situation I've ever heard. The problem is, people who think (presumably) like you are a minority. The vast majority of our gun control advocates [i]want[/i] law-abiding gun owners to be fucked up the ass simply because they think we shouldn't own guns. The reason most gun owners don't see value in gun control is because the kinds of gun control proposed here have no value.
[QUOTE=Ekalektik_1;39228426]This is probably the best summary of our situation I've ever heard. The problem is, people who think (presumably) like you are a minority. The vast majority of our gun control advocates [i]want[/i] law-abiding gun owners to be fucked up the ass simply because they think we shouldn't own guns. The reason most gun owners don't see value in gun control is because the kinds of gun control proposed here have no value.[/QUOTE]
And then you have prominent people who are fucking retarded, like FPSRussia who teaches nothing about safety other than "don't try this at home" and to some extend James Yeager who literally said if there's an executive order he's gonna start killing people.
Neither side is perfect but I'll be damned if I haven't had enough of the idiocy that's rampant on both sides of the debate.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;39228470]to some extend James Yeager who literally said if there's an executive order he's gonna start killing people.[/QUOTE]
where does he say this? lol
[QUOTE=Protocol7;39228470]Neither side is perfect but I'll be damned if I haven't had enough of the idiocy that's rampant on both sides of the debate.[/QUOTE]
It's a battle of tards. On one side you have the NRA wearing pants on their heads, on the other side you have Feinstein using a ramset to firmly nail pants to her skull.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;39228515]where does he say this? lol[/QUOTE]
A video that got taken down.
He's gotten people killed before (See: Life as PMC), so I wouldn't be surprised.
Yeagar is a dipshit.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;39228470]And then you have prominent people who are fucking retarded, like FPSRussia who teaches nothing about safety other than "don't try this at home" and to some extend James Yeager who literally said if there's an executive order he's gonna start killing people.
Neither side is perfect but I'll be damned if I haven't had enough of the idiocy that's rampant on both sides of the debate.[/QUOTE]
I think the problem is the extremists of both sides have come to the forefront; when most people think "pro-gunner" they think FPSRussia who is unsafe and dumb or James Yeager who is outright psychotic, and when pro-gunners think "anti-gunner" they think Diane Feinstein and her '30 bullet assault clips.' There is incontrovertible merit to both arguments, but neither of them are really being presented in a way that demonstrates that (though if I do say so myself, the anti-gunner "Feinstein" crowd is doing themselves a larger disservice).
[QUOTE=Ekalektik_1;39228580]I think the problem is the extremists of both sides have come to the forefront; when most people think "pro-gunner" they think FPSRussia who is unsafe and dumb or James Yeager who is outright psychotic, and when pro-gunners think "anti-gunner" they think Diane Feinstein and her '30 bullet assault clips.' There is incontrovertible merit to both arguments, but neither of them are really being presented in a way that demonstrates that (though if I do say so myself, the anti-gunner "Feinstein" crowd is doing themselves a larger disservice).[/QUOTE]
Exactly. There are clearly no shortage of researched people regarding the subject on Facepunch, but all that research falls on deaf ears (i.e. the people with the power to actually do shit.) It says a lot about the type of people we put in Congress, which is in my opinion one of the biggest problems we have in the U.S. to date.
To be honest. We're debating on an internet forum.
A bloody internet. Forum. Filled with 12-25 somethin's from various countries.
Our arguments do nothing than maybe sway the other side. Maybe. Except that often people become far too entrenched in their ideas that they dismiss anything contraire and somehow still think they're informed and intelligent about the issue.
While it's good we can present points and try to inform each other passively or aggressively, it's silly to think it'll do anything. If you want to do something, contact your government officials or people who actually hold the power to do something. They might not do anything, but at least you did something more than argue at anonymous people on the internet. :v:
(Also, for every angry gun-lovin' person writing; I wonder how many people are writing their officials saying "guns are bad, keep up the good work." Not even in a joking/snarky way, I'm actually legit curious.)
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;39228515]where does he say this? lol[/QUOTE]
Check this out: [URL="http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/01/daniel-zimmerman/breaking-james-yeagers-ccw-license-revoked-david-gregory-walks/"]link[/URL]
Thankfully he had his CCW permit revoked and hopefully more will come his way, he's been threatened to kill prank callers before who call him a coward, so it's about damn time something was done about him.
[editline]15th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Doom14;39228797]To be honest. We're debating on an internet forum.
A bloody internet. Forum. Filled with 12-25 somethin's from various countries.
Our arguments do nothing than maybe sway the other side. Maybe. Except that often people become far too entrenched in their ideas that they dismiss anything contraire and somehow still think they're informed and intelligent about the issue.
While it's good we can present points and try to inform each other passively or aggressively, it's silly to think it'll do anything. If you want to do something, contact your government officials or people who actually hold the power to do something. They might not do anything, but at least you did something more than argue at anonymous people on the internet. :v:
(Also, for every angry gun-lovin' person writing; I wonder how many people are writing their officials saying "guns are bad, keep up the good work." Not even in a joking/snarky way, I'm actually legit curious.)[/QUOTE]
We're actually probably better off arguing with random people on the internet than we are sending an email to a politician. I can guarantee you that shit doesn't get read.
Every time you send a letter or an email to a politician you're gonna get a canned response. It's too much of a top-down approach than it is the bottom-up the founding fathers intended.
I find it funny that all the proposed topics for gun control have nothing to do with Sandyhook, nor would any of these regulations have prevented the shooting.
[QUOTE=Dumb mans]You don't need 10 bullets to kill a deer![/QUOTE]
What if someone target shoots? Who said the 2nd amendment was just for hunting? If there are magazine restrictions, people will just buy more than one magazine, it is seriously that simple.
[QUOTE=Obama]We cannot wait for congress[/QUOTE]
If this imperial president is going to decide to circum vent legislative process and seize power for himself, then [U][I][B]he MUST be removed from office.[/B][/I][/U]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
