TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Texas school district to let teachers carry guns
Pages (10): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 »

quote:

Originally posted by tubularbills lol, oh USA

Fixed.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles That's a good point. Cars kill far more people in America than guns ever will. Remember, it doesn't matter that most people drive pretty safely and kill no one, just as it doesn't matter that the vast majority of people with guns use them safely and harm nobody. More cars = more automobile deaths just like more guns = more gun deaths, regardless of the intentions or actions of most of the people who buy them. Let's get on with banning cars!

How many cars were used specifically in homicides? and what is the primary function of a firearm in your cities?

i know, let's launch into all kinds of irrelevant analogies in the hope that we can ignore what's painfully obvious to the rest of the world.

According to that graph I think what is blatantly apparent is that 10 our of 100000 isn't much of a difference compared to 2 out of 100000. Nobody is saying that guns aren't dangerous, but we are saying that we should be able to defend ourselves.

Hell yea! Gotta rock that skullet, but most impressive are those guitars.

I'm rather partial to his cod piece.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN How many cars were used specifically in homicides?

But the point is that intentions are irrelevant. The vast majority of gun owners never kill or even plan on killing anyone, either, but plenty of people still die from guns each year, and limiting guns to the police would prevent needless deaths. Death prevention is the end goal. Similarly, few people try to murder someone with their car, but regardless of the fact that drivers normally have peaceful and law-abiding intentions, limiting cars to emergency vehicle drivers and freight carriers would vastly reduce automobile deaths. Everyone else can take trains or ride a bike.

The fact that some people will see this as inconvenient is merely an unpleasant side effect. Similarly, the fact that going without effective self-defense will force law-abiding citizens to be at the mercy of armed thieves, rapists, and murderers is just a little unpleasant side effect of an overall reduction in firearm deaths.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles But the point is that intentions are irrelevant. The vast majority of gun owners never kill or even plan on killing anyone, either, but plenty of people still die from guns each year, and limiting guns to the police would prevent needless deaths. Death prevention is the end goal. Similarly, few people try to murder someone with their car, but regardless of the fact that drivers normally have peaceful and law-abiding intentions, limiting cars to emergency vehicle drivers and freight carriers would vastly reduce automobile deaths. Everyone else can take trains or ride a bike. The fact that some people will see this as inconvenient is merely an unpleasant side effect. Similarly, the fact that going without effective self-defense will force law-abiding citizens to be at the mercy of armed thieves, rapists, and murderers is just a little unpleasant side effect of an overall reduction in firearm deaths.

the analogy is false though because cars perform a function (indeed they are even part of the economy) in modern society whereas firearms do not.

find me a useless item whose primary function is to kill people and then you have your analogy

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN the analogy is false though because cars perform a function (indeed they are even part of the economy) in modern society whereas firearms do not.

This is correct. Firearms never allow a physically weaker person to defend himself against a physically stronger assailant, nor do they allow anyone to kill their own food, nor does the thought that there might be armed individuals in a building ever deter thieves from attempting to rob it. This is why banks and gun stores are robbed as often and as successfully as houses.

You really dont get it....

quote:

Originally posted by nchs09 You really dont get it....

I know! Why can Americans just not accept that the only civilized thing to do is to render themselves helpless in the face of criminals and depend on the ever-successful police for any kind of effective self-defense? It baffles me, too.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles This is correct. Firearms never allow a physically weaker person to defend himself against a physically stronger assailant, nor do they allow anyone to kill their own food, nor does the thought that there might be armed individuals in a building ever deter thieves from attempting to rob it. This is why banks and gun stores are robbed as often and as successfully as houses.

i love the specific emphasis you use there, whilst ignoring the obvious "firearms allow anyone to kill anyone else regardless of physical power". or that you seem to be insinuating that firearms are used as lawful protection more often than unlawful homicide (they arent).

and LOL @ your hunting reference. im sure the gang bangers are out on the streets hunting turkey with their glocks what role do you think handguns play in the hunter-gatherer routine of modern man?

are you going to take this discussion seriously or are we to expect more illogical tripe?

I'd rather have a few more people per 100,000 die by gunfire than have my right to self defense stripped from me.

quote:

Originally posted by Zild I'd rather have a few more people per 100,000 die by gunfire than have my right to self defense stripped from me.

oh look, im completely pragmatic when it comes to the US and gun control; you have already lost your battle. its too late for any measures to have any noticeable difference, at least in our life time.

what i DO object to is the nonsense that pro gun people go on with, like jive there talking about hunting. absolute nonsense.

the salient point here is that people in the US need a gun to protect themselves because of the level of gun ownership in the first place.

quote:

Originally posted by nchs09 You really dont get it....

Here we go. I will take off my habitual "mock by false agreement" posture now and address the critics.



You guys think that Americans are the ones who fail to "get it." I think that both sides to this argument can end up misunderstanding one another. But Zild put the American sentiment on the topic succinctly:

quote:

I'd rather have a few more people per 100,000 die by gunfire than have my right to self defense stripped from me.

Americans want the right to have a means of self-defense that will be effective against someone who wants to harm them, a means that will be effective even if that person is bigger, stronger, or just really mean-looking and carrying a sharp knife. They would rather not have to wait around and hope for the police to get there and put a stop to the situation. They would rather not to have to submit to any old asshole who wants to deal unlawfully with them.

Other countries are willing to give up that means of self-defense. And I have no problem with that: they can govern their societies however they wish. But then topics like this come up and practically every non-American emotes and opines about how Americans are all a bunch of primitive cowboy wanna-bes with low IQs and masculinity issues, as if they had some psychotic itch for would-be robbers to step on their property just so they could blast a few holes in them.

No. Mostly it is just about trying to prevent helplessness in the face of a dire threat when the cops happen not to be around.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Here we go. I will take off my habitual "mock by false agreement" posture now and address the critics. You guys think that Americans are the ones who fail to "get it." I think that both sides to this argument can end up misunderstanding one another. But Zild put the American sentiment on the topic succinctly: Americans want the right to have a means of self-defense that will be effective against someone who wants to harm them, a means that will be effective even if that person is bigger, stronger, or just really mean-looking and carrying a sharp knife. They would rather not have to wait around and hope for the police to get there and put a stop to the situation. They would rather not to have to submit to any old asshole who wants to deal unlawfully with them. Other countries are willing to give up that means of self-defense. And I have no problem with that: they can govern their societies however they wish. But then topics like this come up and practically every non-American emotes and opines about how Americans are all a bunch of primitive cowboy wanna-bes with low IQs and masculinity issues, as if they had some psychotic itch for would-be robbers to step on their property just so they could blast a few holes in them. No. Mostly it is just about trying to prevent helplessness in the face of a dire threat when the cops happen not to be around.

do you not wonder why you live in perpetual fear of attack moreso than citizens of other comparable countries?

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN do you not wonder why you live in perpetual fear of attack moreso than citizens of other comparable countries?

Our poorest twenty percent are poorer and dumber than the poorest twenty percent in most other Western countries, and for the most part poor and dumb people are the ones who commit violent crimes.

There are other things as well, but I think that may be the biggest reason.

Are you poor as well then?

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Mikey Mike Are you poor as well then?

Nah, I am totally bourgeois. I can also grasp the concept of not belittling or insulting the intelligence of those who disagree with me, a notion that apparently evades you.

Hey diggerz, do you need any more proof at just how skewed your fellow countrymens opinions are? Just look at the responses from them. If you disagree with them, then you've managed to break the mold and there's hope for you yet. If you agree with them, then my points are all the more valid.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles I can also grasp the concept of not belittling or insulting the intelligence of those who disagree with me, a notion that apparently evades you.

well, to be fair you did throw around a fair bit of sarcastic mockery

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Nah, I am totally bourgeois. I can also grasp the concept of not belittling or insulting the intelligence of those who disagree with me, a notion that apparently evades you.

That's great. You just be sure to remember that little nugget of wisdom should you ever get shot defending yourself whilst trying to be the big man.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Mikey Mike That's great. You just be sure to remember that little nugget of wisdom should you ever get shot defending yourself whilst trying to be the big man.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles But then topics like this come up and practically every non-American emotes and opines about how Americans are all a bunch of primitive cowboy wanna-bes with low IQs and masculinity issues, as if they had some psychotic itch for would-be robbers to step on their property just so they could blast a few holes in them.

Right on cue. Good show.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.