Shoot to wound mentality

[archibaldcrane]

There's nothing inherently bad about gun ownership. I think that criminalizing things that aren't bad just to attempt to prevent things that are both already illegal and bad is dumb.

[Maxxthepenguin]

Well most illegal things are reversible or could be paid back in some way. Killing somebody is final, it allows no such thing. It can never be 'set right'. Therefore, preventative measures beyond just making it illegal are necessary, because it MUST be stopped before it happens. I think guns are not a necessity for regular Americans.

[Remyo]

Well most illegal things are reversible or could be paid back in some way. Killing somebody is final, it allows no such thing. It can never be 'set right'. Therefore, preventative measures beyond just making it illegal are necessary, because it MUST be stopped before it happens. I think guns are not a necessity for regular Americans.

define regular american.

[archibaldcrane]

I think guns are not a necessity for regular Americans.

Neither are alcohol or tobacco, and they each kill way more americans per year. Should we start stripping freedoms there and work our way down to guns?

[Maxxthepenguin]

I think guns are not a necessity for regular Americans.

Neither are alcohol or tobacco, and they each kill way more americans per year. Should we start stripping freedoms there and work our way down to guns?

They don't kill others. You're putting your life in your own hands (obviously drunk driving being the primary exception, and the laws against that are strict as hell.)

They kill yourself. Also, specifically with cigs, it's not fast at all. It's not a snap decision to use cigarettes to kill yourself or others. They are not the tools you use for murder.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms."
-- Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356

" ... to disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
-- George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380

I find those two to be relevant no matter the year. The other two at least sounded good, and one was said in '59.

Right, so we can shoot cops when they're oppressing us.

Right, just don't bitch and moan when they shoot back.

TJ and Mason's eras have both passed in terms of guns and an armed populace. Any violent opposition to our government today would require some kind of military action to be anywhere near successful, because as it is a group of armed citizens storming a city hall or state capitol or Washington DC is gonna end up being a rather one-sided bloodbath with the survivors being charged with treason/terrorism/etc.

Your probably right, but just because it wouldn't be successful, and the survivors would be charged doesn't mean people shouldn't be allowed to have guns. And for the record I've never shot a gun in my life.

Edit: Since the VT shooting was brought up, I'm curious. Has there ever been a killing spree in the U.S. in a non-gun free zone?

[Beckwin]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/08/virgin ... index.html

That's right, even driving up to a fucking police station, you can still kill and seriously wound people there with guns.

And I really hope that you're not arguing for college students to start packing to defend themselves. For every shooting spree that happens every few years that gets toned down to a gunfight, think about how many dipshit broskis would have a little too much scotch at the dorm Scarface + Godfather marathon and have "accidents" fucking around, not to mention the typical assholes that start fights at big house parties and ruin everyone's night.

[archibaldcrane]

I think guns are not a necessity for regular Americans.

Neither are alcohol or tobacco, and they each kill way more americans per year. Should we start stripping freedoms there and work our way down to guns?

They don't kill others. You're putting your life in your own hands (obviously drunk driving being the primary exception, and the laws against that are strict as hell.)

They kill yourself. Also, specifically with cigs, it's not fast at all. It's not a snap decision to use cigarettes to kill yourself or others. They are not the tools you use for murder.

Why is it that "they don't kill others" is a legitimate argument when it comes to alcohol and cigarettes, but every time someone brings up self-defense in terms of guns, people always say "you're more likely to get hurt if you have a gun!"

Can't have it both ways.

[guartz]

Gun bans are both immoral and unpractical.

Nobody can sit here and attempt to justify taking away guns from individuals by force or threat of force is moral, specifically since the majority individuals being infringed upon have committed no acts of aggression.

just like nobody can sit here and attempt to reason that banning guns will reduce violent crime. Specifically because we have solid historical evidence that points to the contrary.
http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/3_1/3_1_2.pdf

[Beckwin]

You're comparing guns to cigarettes.

Stop.







And found another one for swampy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mir_Aimal_Kasi

Guy bought his gun from a gun store :/

[Maxxthepenguin]

I think guns are not a necessity for regular Americans.

Neither are alcohol or tobacco, and they each kill way more americans per year. Should we start stripping freedoms there and work our way down to guns?

They don't kill others. You're putting your life in your own hands (obviously drunk driving being the primary exception, and the laws against that are strict as hell.)

They kill yourself. Also, specifically with cigs, it's not fast at all. It's not a snap decision to use cigarettes to kill yourself or others. They are not the tools you use for murder.

Why is it that "they don't kill others" is a legitimate argument when it comes to alcohol and cigarettes, but every time someone brings up self-defense in terms of guns, people always say "you're more likely to get hurt if you have a gun!"

Can't have it both ways.

In case you didn't know, my stance on gun control is we need to make it much harder to purchase a gun and have much tougher background checks but while it would be great to remove all guns, it is simply infeasible.

And as far as the self-defense things are, guns are mostly used to protect because other people have guns. So the guns are the problem in the first place

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/08/virginia.shooting/index.html

That's right, even driving up to a fucking police station, you can still kill and seriously wound people there with guns.

And I really hope that you're not arguing for college students to start packing to defend themselves. For every shooting spree that happens every few years that gets toned down to a gunfight, think about how many dipshit broskis would have a little too much scotch at the dorm Scarface + Godfather marathon and have "accidents" fucking around, not to mention the typical assholes that start fights at big house parties and ruin everyone's night.

Not at all, it's just that I rarely see a murdering spree in a non-gun free zone. It always seems the one's in the news are in gun free zones. VT, the mall, etc.

[Maxxthepenguin]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/08/virginia.shooting/index.html

That's right, even driving up to a fucking police station, you can still kill and seriously wound people there with guns.

And I really hope that you're not arguing for college students to start packing to defend themselves. For every shooting spree that happens every few years that gets toned down to a gunfight, think about how many dipshit broskis would have a little too much scotch at the dorm Scarface + Godfather marathon and have "accidents" fucking around, not to mention the typical assholes that start fights at big house parties and ruin everyone's night.

Not at all, it's just that I rarely see a murdering spree in a non-gun free zone. It always seems the one's in the news are in gun free zones. VT, the mall, etc.

Our news companies are businesses. They need to attract viewers to make money and VT shootings are far more sensational and interesting to most tv watchers than ghetto shootings.

[archibaldcrane]

You're comparing guns to cigarettes.

Stop.

You're right, it's an absurd comparison, I shouldn't slight the danger of cigarette usage by comparing it to gun usage.

[Zim]

wrong thread '_'

[HAcoreRD]

nono shoot to kill is fine, but i wanna be there when the cop kills the guy with his cellphone/tv remote/other shiny black object in his hand and says "woops!"

little bit of pie on your face there officer..

If a cop has a gun on you and you're dumb enough to suddenly reach inside your coat, you deserve whatever you get.

QFT

Any law enforcement officer has to use their gut, because they would like to go home alive at the end of their shift, not be buried because "Wait, I can't tell if that's a gun or a Onyx Nintendo DS!"

If a cop if pursuiting you, and you're running, you're obviously trying to hide something, innocent don't run. If you're ignorent enough to reach in your coat, the officer would have to assume you're reaching for a weapon, be it a gun, knife, boomerang, etc.

Granted, killing people stealing TVs is a bit....excessive use of force, but if we remove the force from police, we're powerless. Take the gun from the cop, all he has is the law, hand cuffs, and a night-stick. Real effective at long range, unless he can ninja throw that shit.

[Kaylia]

I think many people in this thread have forgotten how incredibly fun it is to shoot guns.

Or never knew.

Just remember kids - murder is already illegal. I don't want more of my rights stripped on the assumption that I will commit crime if I'm allowed to maintain my rights.

So is doing drug, driving at 200 on the highway and many others harmless thing according to people who do it. Just because it's fun for you doesnt mean it's good for the society in general, even if you can use it in an harmless way.

Neither are alcohol or tobacco, and they each kill way more americans per year. Should we start stripping freedoms there and work our way down to guns?

Most country are slowly banning cigarettes as well. No more smoking inside, no more publicity, hidding them behind counter (out of buyer's sight)..etc. Cry as much as you want about your "rights", but if they cost me hundred of dollars in health cares, I don't think they are legitimate

[Ryko]

Neither are alcohol or tobacco, and they each kill way more americans per year. Should we start stripping freedoms there and work our way down to guns?

Most country are slowly banning cigarettes as well. No more smoking inside, no more publicity, hidding them behind counter (out of buyer's sight)..etc. Cry as much as you want about your "rights", but if they cost me hundred of dollars in health cares, I don't think they are legitimate

<_< aren't you canadian? Isn't the cost rather inherent regardless whether or not they get removed?

[Kaylia]

<_< aren't you canadian? Isn't the cost rather inherent regardless whether or not they get removed?

There is no such thing has "free", they get us back with the taxes and all (30-50% of your salary, 15% on any product you buy..etc). The more smoker there is, the more people are going to get ill eventually, and everyone has to share the cost of this.

[Correction]

<_< aren't you canadian? Isn't the cost rather inherent regardless whether or not they get removed?

There is no such thing has "free", they get us back with the taxes and all (30-50% of your salary, 15% on any product you buy..etc). The more smoker there is, the more people are going to get ill eventually, and everyone has to share the cost of this.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourview/2008/02 ... _to_t.html