Gun control and such.

[FritzWhite]

Hey,

I lived in Toronto up until 2 years ago. I never locked my door. I had two break ins. Both time is was someone looking to steal something to support a drug habit. Both times they were caught and both times they weren't there to harm me. I currently work in mental health. I think guns as home defence is a bit comical. regardless, in Canada, we have more guns per capita than the USA. The difference seems to be empathy and education.

I am not going to shoot a man for stealing my laptop. I am not killing a man over stuff. The one guy came in, stole my laptop and ran. Cops caught him. He wasn't dangerous, he was desperate. If you want to fix the gun violence issue in the States, here is my opinion. Tell the NRA to piss off and die. Create an organization that educates the public. Not gun education, but how to be kind and sympathetic. Teach people to not respond to every offence with violence and anger. In my case, I don't hate the guy who stole my laptop, and I don't feel sorry for him. He is the product of something else, probably out of his control. Bad parents maybe. I have one client i work with whose mother fed him opiates as a child to calm him down. He has been an addict since he was 8. I shouldn't loath him, and I don't. I get why he steals.

Teaching compassion is far more important than puffing up your chest and claiming "I need to protect my family". If you really wanted to protect them you would have a group lobby for clean needle exchanges, methadone clinics and the like. Proper support for people with mental health issues, housing first initiatives. We do a lot of things like that in Canada, and everyone of them has been met with a significant statistical drop in crime. Proven drop. So instead of funnelling money into worthless self absorbed things like the NRA, protect your gun rights by making sure the most vulnerable populations won't feel the need to pick one up to score their next hit. As for gangs, most of there money comes from the drug trade. Eliminate the drug trade the gangs will have a hard time thriving.

Now can all this be eliminated completely, probably not. But you cant argue with a 80 or 90 percent decrease in violent crimes in certain areas, and those are actual numbers I have seen. I want to see you guys have guns, but only for sport. I want you and your buddies to head to a range for a day and crack off a few rounds, come home, have a few beer, kiss your kids good night and lock those guns away feeling safe. And feeling safe not because you own a gun, but because you know there is no need to others to use one against you.

Skape

I'm glad you made it through those past events unharmed, but 2 personal experiences are NOT enough to accurately reach the conclusion that home invaders are not a health risk. I always prefer compassion and reason over violence, always. If I can verbally achieve compliance then I will, if I'm not at home and I can run away and escape from a situation then I will, if I can strike up a dialogue and talk to the person to bring them into a more reasonable frame of mind then I will, BUT... if my back is against the wall, if I can't talk my way out, if I can't escape, and it's either die or defend then I will not hesitate and I won't feel guilty about using deadly force because I haven't compromised my values. There is nothing wrong with protecting yourself and your family if the only alternative is death.

I don't understand the notion that my gun is not useful because it's locked away. Obviously, I'm going to need about 10 seconds to access it, but this doesn't disqualify its potential usefulness. The fact that I MIGHT have 10 seconds, and the situation COULD be life or death, means that I'm going take as much control over my family's safety as I can.

I wish we could teach compassion and *poof* the bad violent crimes just fade away, but this isn't reality. There will ALWAYS be bad people that will do bad things to you for no reason whatsoever. You can argue statistics and how unlikely you think this is but it can and does happen everyday. If there is any chance at all, and the stakes are the ultimate, then why would I risk something like that when I have a chance to prevent it? There's no ethical dilemma because I've already explained that this is a last resort when there is NO other option.

I understand and appreciate the motivation behind the anti-gun side. You want to save lives and honestly, I think your intention is righteous. I also want to save lives. The problem that I have with most of the arguments expressed by the anti-gun side is that they are not backed by a complete understanding of firearms and how they work. Guns don't fire on their own. They don't shoot in a random direction. They can (and should) be used in a safe and responsible way, even in an instance of deadly force. They're a tool and there's nothing inherently good or bad about them. Like everything in life, it's at the discretion of the user. As long as people in the world have guns, I want to have one also. There will never be a world wide gun ban, so, I'll stay armed.

[wiggy]

The only thing I'm gonna say is. If someone wants to kill/hurt/intimidate/whatever... they are going to do it with anything they can get their hands on. If not a pistol, maybe a shotgun or rifle. If not those, a knife. If not that, then something else. I will also state, that someone that is actually going to buy the gun, have it registered under their name, pays to be certified CCW isn't the ones you have to worry about. Why would they spend that much money to just commit a crime?

Here is the deal. A criminal is what he/she is... a CRIMINAL... they wont pay for any of that shit. Also, if the Government happens to finally take the guns away from civilians, a criminal will still be able to get their hands on firearms. A criminal wont care because they are planning on breaking the law anyway.

Last but not least, the Government wants us all to be sheep. They want us to follow them, no questions asked. They already think they own everything we have.
If they happen to take our firearms away, they WILL turn into a tyrannical force that we a nation wont be able to anything about.

Just my $0.02.

My now very, VERY ex-friend has a CCW and a number of handguns. One day he pinned his wife against a wall, held a pistol to her head and threatened to blow her brains out.

In front of their 3 children.

He then tried to kidnap his youngest son. He was arrested, charged with several felonies, but managed to plead to some. Sort of misdemeanor and is still in procession of all his handguns and CCW.

I don't like to bring up personal experiences, as they are only anecdotal evidence, but this particular event seems to very effectively argue the "need not fear" mentality when it comes to people who have registered firearms and are "trained" (any moron monkey can get a CCW.  Let's be realistic here, it's NOT hard to do).

As an FYI, this is not the reason that I'm not in favor of handgun ownership. I was opposed to such long before. This event just happened to ruin a life-long friendship.

[shenske]

Unless anyone is opposed i'm going to shut this conversation down. This really isn't the place to have such a conversation but i let it run its course so everyone could express their opinions.

... lets scan some boxes and make some covers

[FritzWhite]

The only thing I'm gonna say is. If someone wants to kill/hurt/intimidate/whatever... they are going to do it with anything they can get their hands on. If not a pistol, maybe a shotgun or rifle. If not those, a knife. If not that, then something else. I will also state, that someone that is actually going to buy the gun, have it registered under their name, pays to be certified CCW isn't the ones you have to worry about. Why would they spend that much money to just commit a crime?

Here is the deal. A criminal is what he/she is... a CRIMINAL... they wont pay for any of that shit. Also, if the Government happens to finally take the guns away from civilians, a criminal will still be able to get their hands on firearms. A criminal wont care because they are planning on breaking the law anyway.

Last but not least, the Government wants us all to be sheep. They want us to follow them, no questions asked. They already think they own everything we have.
If they happen to take our firearms away, they WILL turn into a tyrannical force that we a nation wont be able to anything about.

Just my $0.02.

My now very, VERY ex-friend has a CCW and a number of handguns. One day he pinned his wife against a wall, held a pistol to her head and threatened to blow her brains out.

In front of their 3 children.

He then tried to kidnap his youngest son. He was arrested, charged with several felonies, but managed to plead to some. Sort of misdemeanor and is still in procession of all his handguns and CCW.

I don't like to bring up personal experiences, as they are only anecdotal evidence, but this particular event seems to very effectively argue the "need not fear" mentality when it comes to people who have registered firearms and are "trained" (any moron monkey can get a CCW.  Let's be realistic here, it's NOT hard to do).

As an FYI, this is not the reason that I'm not in favor of handgun ownership. I was opposed to such long before. This event just happened to ruin a life-long friendship.

You can trade the word guns for knife and the phrase blow her brains out for slit her throat and you'd have the same argument. You argued earlier that guns are not comparable to vehicles or other life hazards because they're man made and can kill you. The same is true for archery, sword fencing, and martial arts.

Unless you can qualify why it's unique and not comparable, the vehicle comparison still applies. One can have the same scenario with a vehicle as your friend did with his firearm. It can be used irresponsibly to kill people and there are people on the road who are a danger to everyone yet still have driver's licenses. The system's not perfect, but I would rather maintain my liberty then have it stripped away because of the misdeeds of a minority.

I don't have much more to say on the subject unless someone wants to keep talking about it in case you want to close the thread.

[Megatron]

Go.  See.  Deadpool. 





Seriously.



...what?  This has about as much relevance on the site as this thread does.   

[TDIRunner]

Go.  See.  Deadpool. 





Seriously.



...what?  This has about as much relevance on the site as this thread does.   

Is Ryan Reynold's performance as good in Deadpool as his performance was bad in Green Lantern?

[Megatron]

Is Ryan Reynold's performance as good in Deadpool as his performance was bad in Green Lantern?

Yes.  I love how Nolan North voices the character in video games, and I wasn;t sure Reynolds could keep up, however this movie understands the character and really has fun with it. 
It isn't as crazy as the video game was, seeing as they still have to cater to mass audiences, however if you're a fan of the character, or over the top sex, language and violence with some pretty good meta humor, then this movie is for you.

...not for children.  This is a HARD "R"

[TDIRunner]

Is Ryan Reynold's performance as good in Deadpool as his performance was bad in Green Lantern?

Yes.  I love how Nolan North voices the character in video games, and I wasn;t sure Reynolds could keep up, however this movie understands the character and really has fun with it.  
It isn't as crazy as the video game was, seeing as they still have to cater to mass audiences, however if you're a fan of the character, or over the top sex, language and violence with some pretty good meta humor, then this movie is for you.

...not for children.  This is a HARD "R"

Good to hear.  I'm glad that they didn't wuss out and go for a PG-13 rating.  

Also, I don't want to know too much about the movie, but I'm assuming that we all just pretend that X-Men Origins: Wolverine didn't happen, even though it's considered part of the same "universe."

[Megatron]

Also, I don't want to know too much about the movie, but I'm assuming that we all just pretend that X-Men Origins: Wolverine didn't happen, even though it's considered part of the same "universe."

I will say nothing about the plot of the film.  But Ryan Reynolds has already stated in trailers that "Origins was a career low for him"...so he seems like a guy to address the elephant in the room.

[TDIRunner]

Also, I don't want to know too much about the movie, but I'm assuming that we all just pretend that X-Men Origins: Wolverine didn't happen, even though it's considered part of the same "universe."

I will say nothing about the plot of the film.  But Ryan Reynolds has already stated in trailers that "Origins was a career low for him"...so he seems like a guy to address the elephant in the room.

Interesting.  I wouldn't consider Origins to be a career low for Reynolds so much as I would call it a career low for the X-Men film franchise.  Now Green Lantern.........

[Megatron]

I think it's more of a career low for Deadpool...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vv05IIPRY6Y

[wiggy]

The only thing I'm gonna say is. If someone wants to kill/hurt/intimidate/whatever... they are going to do it with anything they can get their hands on. If not a pistol, maybe a shotgun or rifle. If not those, a knife. If not that, then something else. I will also state, that someone that is actually going to buy the gun, have it registered under their name, pays to be certified CCW isn't the ones you have to worry about. Why would they spend that much money to just commit a crime?

Here is the deal. A criminal is what he/she is... a CRIMINAL... they wont pay for any of that shit. Also, if the Government happens to finally take the guns away from civilians, a criminal will still be able to get their hands on firearms. A criminal wont care because they are planning on breaking the law anyway.

Last but not least, the Government wants us all to be sheep. They want us to follow them, no questions asked. They already think they own everything we have.
If they happen to take our firearms away, they WILL turn into a tyrannical force that we a nation wont be able to anything about.

Just my $0.02.

My now very, VERY ex-friend has a CCW and a number of handguns. One day he pinned his wife against a wall, held a pistol to her head and threatened to blow her brains out.

In front of their 3 children.

He then tried to kidnap his youngest son. He was arrested, charged with several felonies, but managed to plead to some. Sort of misdemeanor and is still in procession of all his handguns and CCW.

I don't like to bring up personal experiences, as they are only anecdotal evidence, but this particular event seems to very effectively argue the "need not fear" mentality when it comes to people who have registered firearms and are "trained" (any moron monkey can get a CCW.  Let's be realistic here, it's NOT hard to do).

As an FYI, this is not the reason that I'm not in favor of handgun ownership. I was opposed to such long before. This event just happened to ruin a life-long friendship.

You can trade the word guns for knife and the phrase blow her brains out for slit her throat and you'd have the same argument. You argued earlier that guns are not comparable to vehicles or other life hazards because they're man made and can kill you. The same is true for archery, sword fencing, and martial arts.

Unless you can qualify why it's unique and not comparable, the vehicle comparison still applies. One can have the same scenario with a vehicle as your friend did with his firearm. It can be used irresponsibly to kill people and there are people on the road who are a danger to everyone yet still have driver's licenses. The system's not perfect, but I would rather maintain my liberty then have it stripped away because of the misdeeds of a minority.

I don't have much more to say on the subject unless someone wants to keep talking about it in case you want to close the thread.

God, I KNEW that would be your argument.

He didn't hold a knife to her head, despite the fact that this happened in their kitchen, with several knives on hand. Instead he went to the bedroom, unlocked he safe, loaded his pistol, and then came back into the kitchen to hold it to her head.

A knife is a tool with many uses. A hand gun is a weapon which has one, single use.

Fencing is a sport in which nobody is ever killed. A hand gun is a weapon made to kill another person.

Martial arts is a means by which to defend one's self with their bare hands and feet. A hand gun can slaughter a room full of people without ever coming into contact with them, and in a matter of seconds.

Archery was conceived as a means by which to hunt more effectively. It of course has been used as a weapon. It takes a great deal of training and skill to become an effective archer, and I've yet to see a news reel of some kid walking into his/her school and destroying dozens of lives with a bow and arrow. A hand gun can be wielded in a deadly manner by anyone who can pick it up. Point at crowd, pull trigger.

I feel that I've already very clearly identified the differences between a handgun and EVEEYTHING you've compared it to.

In the end, comparisons are a useless argument anyway.  What difference does it make if a watermelon could be dropped off a 10 story busing and kill someone below?  The point is that it doesn't happen, and if it did, not to the degree that kids walk into schools with their daddy's machine gun and kill dozens of innocent people. The comparisons only exemplify the lack of a logical argument for the ownership of deadly weapons. An effective argument cannot be based on either speculation or (and I mean no offense here) nonsensical analogies/comparisons.

[amiga1200]

  wow!
mind you, at least you guys compose yourselves far better than assembler games, and shanmue dojo.
at least you can have a 'convo' (of sorts) without ban hammers from cliques flying about, respect +1!
...
now my stance on firearms:
it's been stated counless times, the weapons don't just 'up it' and fire off by their own volition.
peoples are my issue, firearms wouldn't be required on my end otherwise.
it's this simple:
live and let live is my outlook, but stray into my domain uninvited, or try to steal from me, i have NO qualms dumping at point blank range three rounds of a browning 50 caliber AP rifle, and reload, and take out ANY sheoples that try to fuck my out of my own stash, i DON'T abide by mob rule, nor do i involve myself in the paltry affairs of others.
as such, i'm left alone, i leave them alone, nobody knows what i own, nobody gets hurt, winning. ......is my outlook.
we have no legal recourse to defend ourselves from home invasion, that's why i can't tell the difference between a 'copper' (filth) or a civvy, one is paid to be a shit, the other survives by it.
[edit]
stuff.

[wiggy]

Feeling as though murder is justified should an uninvited person simply step into your house and that you abide my a "mob mentality" is honestly a bit terrifying to me. And not just murder, but to absolutely decimate a person.

Again, the guns don't scare me, people like you do.

[amiga1200]

  good BE scared, i don't give a fuck.
strange coming from somebody in the land of ultimate self-safety, and yet, i can't get a tool, RICH!
...
i'll put it to you this way, in england, we play for keeps, the robbers don't fuck about, they know the stakes, and risks.
how would you like it if i busted into you house UNARMED?
i'm CERTAIN my bare hands will enjoy taking up the slack.
making a point.
if some FUCK breaks into my home, they obviously mean biz, as do i.
their life, or mine.
i'm buzz all-done, and that's a wrap.  
[edit]
keyboards.