Gun control and such.

[palmer6strings]

Dude sheep, you totally missed the point of the hole post if you think I got the dumbest post. This here just proves that you didn't try to understand that the post was dumb on purpose to show you all how dumb this whole situation is becoming. People prolly wonder why I'm hateful, well this is why. I've tried to be a good to great member f this site, but as of late it's just become moronic.

It makes me sad that people make me so mad that I cannot enjoy anything due to their stupidity.

Also it's pretty sad that you say I'm the only one throwing toys but yet can't see that you are wrong also.

[Arseen]

Watch this go ignored just like everything else I say, most of you all are my friends but alls I see are a bunch of babies right now.

Ignored no... worth replying on the other hand...
Well here goes.

First off, if you don't live in the country being spoke about at hand, then your opinion is really invalid. Not trying to be an asshole but it's true.

No... it... is... not.
to both sentences.

Second, why should my rights be taken away just because my neighbor doesn't like it. You know, dogs kill people too, let's just outlaw them. "But Palmer, you're comparing apples to oranges, blah blah blah..."
No I'm really not. I own quite a bit of firearms that's never killed or hurt anyone. And there is a way higher percentage of people that is the same as me. Same goes for dogs. There is a high percent of dogs that hasn't hurt anyone. But yet there are a few that have killed people. So yeah let's outlaw them.

You know, gays, rapists, assholes, druggies... They all helped the spread of STD's that slowly kill people. Let's all revoke their rights. Oh but wait, we legalized gay mairage, can't not let everyone be happy about gays but we can piss people off about guns!

First part: Most dangerous dog breeds that kill people, or are likely to do so, are outlawed or heavily controlled.

Second part: Not gonna comment on that racist desperate venting.

Third: most drugs are illegal here in the states. Look how many motherfuckers still do them. How well did the law work there. Answer me that.

To that there is multitude of reasons:
- Lack of caring.
- Desperate search for fullfilment/joy/gratification.
- Escaping the grim reality
- Money hungry people who want more money gripling public healthcare.
- Individual right preventing forcefull rehabilitation even when person has lost grip on life.

List goes on.

[JakeHC]

Statistics speak. Look at the number of gun related deaths between US and Australia.

I honestly don't understand the insane attachment to fire arms.

[FritzWhite]

I know if I were in France a few months ago that I would have wanted to be armed and have had a fighting chance rather than be hopelessly slain by ISIS.

That is probably the most idiotic thing that anyone here as ever said.

Think what would have happened if random people would have returned fire in crowded places.
The death toll would have been way higher.

As for Mexico vs US... pretty much 3rd world country with corrupted goverment with gangs running wild vs one of the leading 1st world country with quite well working policy force... desperate comparison.
Compare US and Canada...

And for only good people turning guns in if they were illegal... that is so lame excuse.
Just cease and destroy as much of them as possible, and make getting new ones hard, with huge penalty for possession, and great reward for returning guns or reporting them.
They will eventually quite fast run out.

Before acceptance of the most idiotic thing ever said on TCP award (move over Einhander), I have to ask where you see anything in my quote about 'random people'? If I had been there, I would absolutely want to be armed, and to not desire a means to defend yourself when someone is actively trying to take your life, is making a poor choice, or to put it in terms you'll understand, being an idiot.

Let me bring a little light into the darkness here by explaining how guns work. A quality firearm is not going to go off on it's own and if properly sighted, is not going to shoot off in any old direction. They can be VERY accurate so the odds of me hitting anything other than the desired target is nill. Again, the vehicle comparison is totally apt here. You can make the same anti-automotive arguments with the number of driving related accidents and death compared to countries without cars. It's not an acceptable argument, as cars don't usually drive off in any old random direction hitting people, and they serve a useful purpose when used properly.

Also, if you are being attacked by terrorists who WILL kill you, what difference does it make if you're shot by another civilian with poor aim or a terrorist? It makes no difference. Was there any other reason for the idiot comment than those I addressed here? Do I still get the biggest idiot on TCP ever award (read it and weep Einhander)?

You can spread that fascist, take all your guns by force and melt them rhetoric all you like, I'll maintain the right to defend myself and my family. Also, Austraila/Japan are NOT comparable to the US as they don't have the border issues we have, though guns should be left alone even if we didn't.

[alexenochs]

personally i think owning a gun is a good decision you can say well they could take them away and destroy them...there are plenty of people with access to a 3d printer and the know how to print a plastic or even metal gun out and with time this will become an easier and easier task and you cant say the government will be able to regulate that.. lets compare this to some video game related stuff currently people on ebay are selling artists covers on ebay printed and put in a case from here right? they could do the same thing with parts of guns labeling them as a part of a mouse trap or something of the sort if the government actually found a way to stop this it would still be accessible from other countrys to be shipped here just like certain drugs made into bath soaps and shipped here they cant stop it because its not labeled and made at that specific thing same with guns they could ship them in multiple packages and such stuff like this is happening now and the government isnt stopping it..also someone said " someone wanting to commit a crime wont spend money to do so" this isnt true at all as there are plenty of people that willl spend money to make (or steal) money/items there are too many guns and too many ways to get ahold of them for the government to keep them from the masses this is fact guns wont disappear no matter what happens look at the outlaw of alcohol people still had it

[palmer6strings]

YOU ALL ARE MISSING MY POINT FUCKING COMPLETELY!!! Jesus Christ!!

And by your logic of non US natives not allowed an opinion on US gun control, I hereby declare you no longer to have an opinion on gay marriage.  Unless you swing that way of course.  Then it's all good.

First off, if you don't live in the country being spoke about at hand, then your opinion is really invalid. Not trying to be an asshole but it's true.

No... it... is... not.
to both sentences.

You're opinion on how this country is ran IS invalid to THIS country. Why would you think it's not? You don't legally vote here, so it doesn't matter what you think.
Also, if I said, "I don't like the color of your living room, you should change it to what i think it should be." My opinion would be invalid because it's your house.

Also sheep, by your statement, you deem If I'm gay, then it's ok to have an opinion of gun control be it in favor or not? And if I'm not gay that it;s not ok to have an opinion on gun control. THAT sounds pretty dumb to me.

First part: Most dangerous dog breeds that kill people, or are likely to do so, are outlawed or heavily controlled.

Second part: Not gonna comment on that racist desperate venting.

Ok, tell me then. What dogs are Illegal or heavily controlled here. Oh, and you cannot trust the WONDERFUL INTERNET!!! (<---sarcasm) because when I looked at the list, I had to laugh because I know some people that legally have some of these dogs...

Also, there was no freaking racism in my post, it was all freaking sarcastic.

Also again...

Oh, and your logic that legalising gay marriage helps spread std's........you win the dumbest comment on the internet award for the day.  Congratulations.

^--- That, is not what I said at all. AT ALL. Again, I was being sarcastic meaning that, if you want rights for yourself, don't try to take other peoples rights. Got it?? Good.

What I did say was this.

You know, gays, rapists, assholes, druggies... They all helped the spread of STD's that slowly kill people.

Do you see anywhere that I said that having a gay marriage causes STD's? No? Neither do I. Because I didn't say that....
At one time... (not so much anymore mind you...) these caused a lot of STD spread. It's been scientifically noted.

I'm not really cool with the nature of being gay but I'm really not opposing it either. So I am indifferent of what you want to do behind closed doors.

Third: most drugs are illegal here in the states. Look how many motherfuckers still do them. How well did the law work there. Answer me that.

To that there is multitude of reasons:
- Lack of caring.
- Desperate search for fullfilment/joy/gratification.
- Escaping the grim reality
- Money hungry people who want more money gripling public healthcare.
- Individual right preventing forcefull rehabilitation even when person has lost grip on life.
List goes on.

None of these answers make any sense to the question I asked really.
The fact that drugs are illegal doesn't mean that they should still do them. What I'm saying is that criminals still do them even though they are illegal.
Soooo.... if people still do them since they are illegal, how is gun control going to keep criminals from getting guns.

Answer: They freaking wont. Criminals will still get guns.


All in all, I THOUGHT that you all would try to understand a little better since I considered you friends.

I can't believe I have to defend my position and sorry that I thought you all could sense some sarcasm.

[palmer6strings]

I know if I were in France a few months ago that I would have wanted to be armed and have had a fighting chance rather than be hopelessly slain by ISIS.

That is probably the most idiotic thing that anyone here as ever said.

Think what would have happened if random people would have returned fire in crowded places.
The death toll would have been way higher.

As for Mexico vs US... pretty much 3rd world country with corrupted goverment with gangs running wild vs one of the leading 1st world country with quite well working policy force... desperate comparison.
Compare US and Canada...

And for only good people turning guns in if they were illegal... that is so lame excuse.
Just cease and destroy as much of them as possible, and make getting new ones hard, with huge penalty for possession, and great reward for returning guns or reporting them.
They will eventually quite fast run out.

Before acceptance of the most idiotic thing ever said on TCP award (move over Einhander), I have to ask where you see anything in my quote about 'random people'? If I had been there, I would absolutely want to be armed, and to not desire a means to defend yourself when someone is actively trying to take your life, is making a poor choice, or to put it in terms you'll understand, being an idiot.

Let me bring a little light into the darkness here by explaining how guns work. A quality firearm is not going to go off on it's own and if properly sighted, is not going to shoot off in any old direction. They can be VERY accurate so the odds of me hitting anything other than the desired target is nill. Again, the vehicle comparison is totally apt here. You can make the same anti-automotive arguments with the number of driving related accidents and death compared to countries without cars. It's not an acceptable argument, as cars don't usually drive off in any old random direction hitting people, and they serve a useful purpose when used properly.

Also, if you are being attacked by terrorists who WILL kill you, what difference does it make if you're shot by another civilian with poor aim or a terrorist? It makes no difference. Was there any other reason for the idiot comment than those I addressed here? Do I still get the biggest idiot on TCP ever award (read it and weep Einhander)?

You can spread that fascist, take all your guns by force and melt them rhetoric all you like, I'll maintain the right to defend myself and my family. Also, Austraila/Japan are NOT comparable to the US as they don't have the border issues we have, though guns should be left alone even if we didn't.

 I actually agree with you Fritze. But it's not you that got that "award" It was apparently me because people are to shallow to try to understand what I said, and then rearrange what I said to make it sound the way they want to hear it.

[Arseen]

if you are being attacked by terrorists who WILL kill you, what difference does it make if you're shot by another civilian with poor aim or a terrorist?

Your assumption iis that the terrorist WILL hit and kill me.
In that case gun woukd be OK.

But my assumption is that I'm more likely not to be hit than be hit by one or few terrorists in crowded place.
But add to that one or few panicing people with guns (and probably not so great aim) and survival probability drops greatly.

And yes you get the trophy for the single most idiotic comment.
BTW: Bit interesting how you didn't use US examples of school and cinema shootings.
Bit older yes but still...

You're opinion on how this country is ran IS invalid to THIS country. Why would you think it's not? You don't legally vote here, so it doesn't matter what you think.
Also, if I said, "I don't like the color of your living room, you should change it to what i think it should be." My opinion would be invalid because it's your house.

1: We are talking about gun control not running the country as whole.
2: The fact that we can't vote or change things there don't make our opinions or reasoning on gun control invalid. They have no direct effect but they do have validy.
3: There is some what huge difference on house paint and protection from guns.

AND

1: Sarcasm is hard to convey with text.
2: "Also, there was no freaking racism in my post, it was all freaking sarcastic". Oh the comment about gays and such spreading STDs followed by legalizing gay marriage was racist.

[Arseen]

Hitting the hay now, good night.

[KalessinDB]

"Criminals will still do the illegal thing" is such a terrible argument. It's basically calling for having no laws at all. Why is murder illegal? Criminals will still murder! Why is chemical warfare illegal? Criminals will still use chemical weapons! Why is theft illegal? Criminals will still steal!

[palmer6strings]

It's actually an extremely good arguement because guns have a way to protect also. If they don't then maybe we should just send military to fight with sausages instead. Same goes for police officers

Again, there was no "racism" in what I said. "Gay" is not a race lol.

[FritzWhite]

if you are being attacked by terrorists who WILL kill you, what difference does it make if you're shot by another civilian with poor aim or a terrorist?

Your assumption iis that the terrorist WILL hit and kill me.
In that case gun woukd be OK.

But my assumption is that I'm more likely not to be hit than be hit by one or few terrorists in crowded place.
But add to that one or few panicing people with guns (and probably not so great aim) and survival probability drops greatly.

And yes you get the trophy for the single most idiotic comment.
BTW: Bit interesting how you didn't use US examples of school and cinema shootings.
Bit older yes but still...

I'm going to let you hang onto that trophy there. So... just to ge the record straight: you're less afraid of a terrorist in your vicinity that's trying to kill you than a "random" armed civilian that's trying to kill your attacker? I'm going to let that hang in the air while you admire the trophy on your mantel.

I used the example of France because it's relevant for 2 reasons: 1. It happened somewhat recently. 2. France has strict gun control laws.

Also, pointing out the fact that, following a gun ban, many criminals will remain armed while law abiding citizens are defenseless (this is ESPECIALLY true in US) is not the same as suggesting anarchy..

[shenske]

[Polygon]

I'm a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment. Without it the others just become privileges. The biggest reason to stand behind the 2nd Amendment is for protection against tyranny be it from our own government or an invading government. That is why I own guns and why I support that other law abiding citizens do. Personal defense is simply a side benefit. But in reality I've only ever used my guns for recreation. Thanks goodness. I hope that's all I ever use them for.

[zygmuray]

I don't say much on this forum, but what I will say about USA and its gun laws is that whole gun show loophole where you don't need to get a background check to buy a gun from a gun show in some states is just a terrible idea.

I don't think its really an issues with people having guns, I believe their needs to be regulations on WHO has guns there are lots of dumb and incapable people out there that should not be anywhere near them.

Just my opinion