100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: another question | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
How about just placing Value on all human life ... regaurdless of what we judge them to be ?? Awe.. common... I'm kinda partial to my sterility idea.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why do people think gun control laws actually prevent violent crimes when statistically violent crimes rise when strict laws are implimented? Because the gun lobby in US is very wealthy and weapons sales are very big. Works in a larger scale for wars too...just more money. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why do people think gun control laws actually prevent violent crimes when statistically violent crimes rise when strict laws are implimented? Because the gun lobby in US is very wealthy and weapons sales are very big. Works in a larger scale for wars too...just more money. Your response makes no sense when placed up against his question. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
spqr
on
Wed 02/20/08 04:57 PM
|
|
you have a point.
I got carried over. People is lead to think by statistics and spokepersons and a so called "american culture" that... would make more sense with my answer. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Think about it. If someones kid finds the parents hand gun and plays with it outside.. he might shoot someone or someone else, but if he plays with a rocket launcher (that you have because you say its unconstitutional to not have one) and it gets fired then someone could lose their house and whole family. Thats too dangerous for the general public and there is no reason to own it. You are not gonna use it for protection. chazer..... The scenerio you depict about the kid and the handgun applies to an idiot. When my dead husband was alive, he had many guns since he was a hunter. However, they were in a locked gun cabinet. Additionally, the guns were not loaded and the amo was not with the guns. Even the handgun he had for protection in the nightstand was not loaded. The amo was elsewhere. My dead husband was careful because we had two young children. Sure things happen as you depict above, but those people are usually stupid. Rocket launcher? Once again my husband had many guns, some that he used and others that he collected. However, e rocket launcher was never considered, let along among them. Isn't a rocket launcher a bit extreme? When you get into that type of firepower, aren't you talking drug dealer or terrorist? Some people on here say they want tanks etc. so no I don't think what I said was extreme. There are stupid people. What about columbine? What if those kids parents had extremely powerful weapon. They could have killed almost everyone in the school. You might think its extreme, but some people want to own tanks, rocket launchers etc. Thats why I said there should be limits on what type of guns are legal. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amendment II A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. yes, the right to bear arms. They are saying you can go and kill a bear and use his arms. It says nothing about guns. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Starsailor2851
on
Wed 02/20/08 05:05 PM
|
|
Amendment II A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. yes, the right to bear arms. They are saying you can go and kill a bear and use his arms. It says nothing about guns. Awesome! If I get arrested for this I'm telling them my lawyer interpreted the 2nd Amendment this way and I am protected.  Wait, am I still allowed to use a gun to kill the bear or do I have to wrestle with it, kill it in the Beowulf kinda way? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In all seriousness.
"Relative to the "bear arms" meanings, one study found "...that the overwhelming preponderance of usage of 300 examples of the 'bear arms' expression in public discourse in early America was in an unambiguous, explicitly military context in a figurative (and euphemistic) sense to stand for military service".[58] Further, the Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles declares that a meaning of "to bear arms" is a figurative usage meaning "to serve as a soldier, do military service, fight". The United States Declaration of Independence uses the expression "bear arms" in the sense of military duty on a ship." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amendment II A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. yes, the right to bear arms. They are saying you can go and kill a bear and use his arms. It says nothing about guns. Remember Amendment number 2 is from the (people's)Bill of rights that the people are to have in their favor(not the govt's favor) It precisely says: the right of the people to keep and bear arms, yes,and that way the people are also the militia too as they are in Switzerland. And the people will keep the govt more honest that way also. The people have the right to remove the govt if it is not following the LAW(Constitution) |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
FearandLoathing
on
Wed 02/20/08 05:53 PM
|
|
Just thought of something...Let me try and break it down.
First off, other countries that have guns and yet also have less crime as result of guns: Basic media, this is why I watch independant news such as PBS. When your fed violence in TV shows and on the news everyday and then given something of which you've never had (gun) you do what comes naturally and copy others...seeing as you watched TV, you do it. This is a very complicated reasoning for the discussion, but if you watch TV in say Canada there is nowhere near the amount of violence that is on in the US. Now to figure out where all this started: FCC being brought into government funding, circa 1989. Before this movies were pretty much allowed to do what they wished as with TV, however the crime involving guns was lower (it hit a peak in 1996 and has all but risen since then). Again this is my opinion and it may not make sense to you, also I like argument...so fire away. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amendment II A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. yes, the right to bear arms. They are saying you can go and kill a bear and use his arms. It says nothing about guns. Remember Amendment number 2 is from the (people's)Bill of rights that the people are to have in their favor(not the govt's favor) It precisely says: the right of the people to keep and bear arms, yes,and that way the people are also the militia too as they are in Switzerland. And the people will keep the govt more honest that way also. The people have the right to remove the govt if it is not following the LAW(Constitution) smo i know and you know but when they get the knock on the door from the gestopo then they will know 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
leahmarie
on
Wed 02/20/08 11:27 PM
|
|
This whole line of debate leaves out much of the entirety of the questions at hand. All the information available has certainly not been represented.. And some of what has been introduced has been spun in such a way, to fit the writers stance. Comparing us to Switzerland, Australia or England, and justifying a point by it is either not too well thought out, or well thought out and omitting much of the truth. Comparing South Dakota to Washington DC.. considering the vast differences in lifestyle and available acreage per person ~ Makes about as much sense as saying that sunshine is directly responsible for the suicide rate in southern California... simply because most suicides occur on sunny days there. The biggest question: Where do you think illegal guns come from? Do you think they just somehow materialize out of thin air? That there are places in the woods that manufacture them? Like so many meth labs, pot fields or gin distilleries. Illegal firearms generally start out as legal firearms. On this continent anyway. If I wanted to traffik in guns.. I can't just call up Sig Sauer or Glock and arrange for a drop shipment of hand guns and rifles. I know where to go here in Oregon and purchase a weapon, if I was in the market. Usually the same place I'd go if I am in the market for anything black market or illegal. What I would be purchasing is a once legally owned firearm that was relieved of its owner at some point. How illegal weapons and drugs are distributed is about the only correlation between drugs and firearms there is. How they are obtained is vastly different. So.. this information kind of paints a different picture in the claim that gun control only removes the weapons from honest non-criminal citizens. If there were fewer legal weapons available, there would be fewer illegal ones too! Telling me that my defense is why I should carry and keep weapons is certainly not a convincing arguement either. I have carried and kept weapons. During that time? I found myself in some pretty precarious situations too. Most likely because I was under a false sense of security? Maybe because I was younger and otherwise not too bright? Maybe a combination of the two? Who really knows. All I can tell you is this: I now only use non lethal force to defend myself.. and it has been several years since I have felt a need to actively defend myself. Oddly? That directly coralates to when I decided to lose the weapons of deadly force. There is also evidence available that indicates a weapon in the house increases the possibility of a homicide in your home by nearly 3 times. Suicide by almost 5 times. I detest the age old claim that 'Guns don't kill people. People kill people.' I have met many that have survived a knife attack. Myself included. I have not met near as many that have survived an attack by firearm, in comparison. I really love the argument that owning weapons is a deterent to tyranny too... Really? Most people in Iraq owned weapons... How did that work out for them with Saddam Hussein? It was legal to own weapons in Germany too.. That stopped Hitler? Apparently the gun laws were reduced there too.. in 1938, unless you happened to be Jewish. I am not necessarily for or against gun control. Many of the reasons I've listed above... are the reasons I chose to not have weapons of deadly force though. I am for discussing the topic in its true colors, using the whole truth and from an educated point of view. Resources England http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/hosb702.pdf http://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp Australia http://www.aic.gov.au/stats/crime/homicide.html http://www.aic.gov.au/stats/crime/weapons.html Switzerland http://www.almc.army.mil/ALOG/issues/NovDec00/MS575.htm http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/en/index/infothek/publ.Document.97724.pdf http://pages.prodigy.net/vanhooser/swiss_fact_sheet.htm D.C. http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/325/23/1615 Gun Ownership http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/329/15/1084 http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/327/7/467 Gun ownership http://www.unicri.it/wwd/analysis/icvs/pdf_files/understanding_files/19_GUN%20OWNERSHIP.pdf JISTME....... If you are open for discussion of the subject, as you say in the above, then in lieu of posting nothing but criticism and mockery of other people's thoughts and listing numerous websites, how about some interaction by telling us what your mindset is on the subject? The idea of this or any thread is not for you to have us search countless websites. You should give your thought process on the subject. All you have contributed is useless negativity and made it known when you were young you were not too bright. Your stupidity in your youth has nothing to do with the thread. And please, pleaseee ............. no more dumb analogies about "sunshine is directly responsible for the suicide rate in southern California." Where was your mind when your fingers were typing that one? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Where the hell do people live that need a firearm for protection ??? I have had my house broken into once while I was here and woke up with a young man standing over my bed and my little dog barked and he ran out .. So chances are had there been a gun in my house .. A he could of used it on me or B there would be one dead kid and my life could/would be wounded.. Killing another human being is something I never want to experiance .. and those that say they have no problem with taking another HUMAN Life scream volumes about our society has a whole ... okay back to being silly .... Hey Jist my brother from another mother ...  shoes........ One thing you need to remember about crime. It isn't always about where one lives or the people who live in your neighborhood. Quite often it is about the people who come into your neighborhood. I grew up in Overbrook Hills a suburb of Philadelphia. Most of the people living there were doctors, lawyers, and other professional people, and practically everyone had live-in maids. I am not making this point to brag about my upbringing, only to make it clear that I lived in an excellent neighborhood. At any event, there were two home invasions, all because the intruders felt that the homes they were invading had safes full of money. Additionally, the brother of a doctor who lived in the neighborhood was murdered and his body thrown at the doctor's door. It turned out the murderer was a mental patient that the doctor was treating. The doctor had recommended that the guy go for treatment since he was showing violent tendencies. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
adj4u
on
Thu 02/21/08 04:37 AM
|
|
Think about it. If someones kid finds the parents hand gun and plays with it outside.. he might shoot someone or someone else, but if he plays with a rocket launcher (that you have because you say its unconstitutional to not have one) and it gets fired then someone could lose their house and whole family. Thats too dangerous for the general public and there is no reason to own it. You are not gonna use it for protection. chazer..... The scenerio you depict about the kid and the handgun applies to an idiot. When my dead husband was alive, he had many guns since he was a hunter. However, they were in a locked gun cabinet. Additionally, the guns were not loaded and the amo was not with the guns. Even the handgun he had for protection in the nightstand was not loaded. The amo was elsewhere. My dead husband was careful because we had two young children. Sure things happen as you depict above, but those people are usually stupid. Rocket launcher? Once again my husband had many guns, some that he used and others that he collected. However, e rocket launcher was never considered, let along among them. Isn't a rocket launcher a bit extreme? When you get into that type of firepower, aren't you talking drug dealer or terrorist? Some people on here say they want tanks etc. so no I don't think what I said was extreme. There are stupid people. What about columbine? What if those kids parents had extremely powerful weapon. They could have killed almost everyone in the school. You might think its extreme, but some people want to own tanks, rocket launchers etc. Thats why I said there should be limits on what type of guns are legal. yep if those adults there were armed then maybe the idiots would have only got off one shot if any at all after all if they knew people there could shoot back it probably would not of became an issue good point for right to carry argument (any public shooting spree) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Think about it. If someones kid finds the parents hand gun and plays with it outside.. he might shoot someone or someone else, but if he plays with a rocket launcher (that you have because you say its unconstitutional to not have one) and it gets fired then someone could lose their house and whole family. Thats too dangerous for the general public and there is no reason to own it. You are not gonna use it for protection. chazer..... The scenerio you depict about the kid and the handgun applies to an idiot. When my dead husband was alive, he had many guns since he was a hunter. However, they were in a locked gun cabinet. Additionally, the guns were not loaded and the amo was not with the guns. Even the handgun he had for protection in the nightstand was not loaded. The amo was elsewhere. My dead husband was careful because we had two young children. Sure things happen as you depict above, but those people are usually stupid. Rocket launcher? Once again my husband had many guns, some that he used and others that he collected. However, e rocket launcher was never considered, let along among them. Isn't a rocket launcher a bit extreme? When you get into that type of firepower, aren't you talking drug dealer or terrorist? Some people on here say they want tanks etc. so no I don't think what I said was extreme. There are stupid people. What about columbine? What if those kids parents had extremely powerful weapon. They could have killed almost everyone in the school. You might think its extreme, but some people want to own tanks, rocket launchers etc. Thats why I said there should be limits on what type of guns are legal. yep if those adults there were armed then maybe the idiots would have only got off one shot if any at all after all if they knew people there could shoot back it probably would not of became an issue good point for right to carry argument (any public shooting spree) You missed the whole point. If their parents had a highly destructive weapons they wouldn't have even had to enter school. Just blow it up from the outside with rockets, tanks, etc. You people shouldn't complain. You can carry a hand gun but in some states I can't even carry my nunchaku. Found that out when I was learning them in martial arts. Cause of course you can shoot someone but I can't hit them over the head with a stick. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no you missed the point
if people could defend themselves the chances of attack diminish |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not against people who are gonna kill themselves in the end.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not against people who are gonna kill themselves in the end. well they would not take as many with them and just because it should be legal to buy your rocket launcher does not mean that everyone would |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JISTME....... If you are open for discussion of the subject,.... yada, yada, yada.... Has there ever been a time that you have not taken something written that does not agree with your point as a personal attack? Have you ever responded to anything that opposes your point of view without venom? If so? I have not seen evidence of it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a subject, that folks have strong feelings on.
Please realize everyone expresses their opinion in their way. You don't have to read everything &/or even acknowledge their post. Keep it nice & agree to disagree. Mod. Don |
|
|
|
|
