Jim Jefferies Comedian on gun control

a reply to: HauntWok

Sorry, there is nothing in that link about not enforcing laws on the books.

Please try again.

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I blame the special interest groups and lobbyists that bought our government and allowed the gunman to get a hold of a firearm legally in the first place instead of allowing the laws that we have already on the books to be enforced.

You mean special interest like Bloomberg special interest? Something along the line of Mayors for Gun Control?

The argument over the non-availability of a firearm if it is kept in a safe is ridiculous. Or if I am sucker punched it won’t matter if I am carrying concealed. The same argument can be made about the on duty police officer, or the off duty Police officer who can carry concealed, (in any state) covered by federal law, LEOSA. The same argument about the safe could be made by any weapons system used by the military. The simple fact is security limits operational capability of anything. The more security applied to a resource, the slower it is to be put in to action. If I pack all my guns in a safe and then bury them in the backyard under a layer of concrete, the guns will never be stolen. But what’s the point of having firearms then. If they are left on the night stand, they may be immediately available when needed, but an untrained family member may pick it up, or a burglar may get to it before I wake up.
It’s risk mitigation and risk acceptance. Every gun owner, police officer, police department, military base should determine what level of risk is appropriate in order to provide security and operational capabilities. No one is going to have the same answer. I keep my weapons in a locked safe. It works for me, because I also have two German shepherds who sleep in the bed whom will most definitely wake me up before anyone can get all the way in my house.

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: SM2

MIDDLE GROUND!

For gods sake! How absolutely dense can people be?

I know there's people you think shouldn't have access to guns right? Murderers, rapists, gang members, crazy people, terrorists?

Yes... and once someone commits a felony they are no longer legally allowed to buy a gun... not sure what your getting at.
If your going to claim gun show loop hole... there is no gun show loop hole, I live in Oklahoma been to several gun shows, everyone gets checked. All the gun shows I went to in Texas.. same thing..A criminal that wants a gun will get a gun.

Now if you wanted to take steps to improve mental health care in the country, to lessen the chance of a crazy person getting a gun...well I am on board for that. But... going to see a psychiatrist because your a little depressed shouldn't have the police knocking on your door to confiscate your guns. those kinds of reactions (new York) cause people to ignore their mental health out of fear of repercussions possibly leading to a worse outcome.

originally posted by: Onslaught2996
a reply to: SubTruth

I would say that the majority just "LIKE" guns and some actually use it for the purpose they wanted on for..protection.

Why would you need an arsenal if you didn't just love guns..if it was for protection one would suffice.

That's not entirely true.

I have guns for protection only. I do not hunt or shoot for sport, so no other argument is valid for me at all.

I also do not "like" guns. I have guns for one reason only.... protection at my home.

If an intruder is beating on my door in an a attempt to get in, I will have a handgun ready.

If that intruder is already in my home, I will have a shotgun ready.

So no, one does not suffice for protection.

Guns are a tool. I'm not going to use a wrench to put a nail in the wall.

originally posted by: Onslaught2996

originally posted by: redhorse
a reply to: Onslaught2996


Some particular low points; an assumption that teachers would shoot children because children give teachers a hard time

So your so sure a teacher will not have a bad day and just walk in with a gun, if she was legally allowed to, in a class room and start firing?

You can make this guarantee? You would trust you kid in a school with an armed teacher and just hope they are sane and can handle pressure like a normal person?

And a law banning guns in schools would stop this how? Crazed killers tend to ignore the laws.

originally posted by: Onslaught2996
a reply to: butcherguy

So you are not willing to say there is a chance you could be caught off guard?

Now who lives in La La land. Someone ever walk up on you and surprise you? Honestly.

Now imagine that it was a criminal...still say you gun in a safe would be any good? How about you don't keep the gun in a safe...surprised and held up with your own gun...would make a great story.

If people never get surprised in their own homes..explain all the families or people killed in their own homes...by family members or criminals...I am pretty sure they thought the same thing...Nope, never..etc.

So if something is not 100% effective, it is completely useless? That makes no sense. Nothing is a 100%

originally posted by: Onslaught2996

originally posted by: kx12x


Did I say that? (I didn't). What is not having a gun going to change about that specific scenario? Are saying that not having a gun will mean I'm immune to being caught off guard? Do you even logic, bro?

You know what I was saying..

Always trying to twist and turn something.

In case you are clueless..I am saying..telling the world that a gun makes you 100% safer is a lie. If your caught off guard...it doesn't matter if you have a gun or not. Your just as vulnerable as the next guy/girl. If you have a gun..it does not guarantee your safety, it does not make you safer than anyone else. I have read stories of unarmed people even children fending off bad guys, also have read stories of where a few times guns have done some good with bad guys.

The stories of people with guns doing more bad than good outweigh each by a huge margin..where bad with guns winning, yet they are considered safe...what other tool is kept around where it does more harm than good?

You can bring in cars..etc...but tell me..how many cars are out there..and how many people do they kill compared to ownership. Does the small benefits and good they do outweigh the costs of health-care and deaths worldwide...?

AH, therein is the disconnect. Stories do not facts make.

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: SM2

MIDDLE GROUND!

For gods sake! How absolutely dense can people be?

I know there's people you think shouldn't have access to guns right? Murderers, rapists, gang members, crazy people, terrorists?

Or do you think we all should live in the fictional wild west?

This, this right here is why I'm for gun control, people that are so god dammed myopic that they can't see beyond their own effing personal bull [snip].

People, like this somehow think that if everyone including children are constantly armed that fixes all our problems. Look at the world, look at the ME, lots of guns in Iraq, I'm not really sure if they have gun laws, and people who believe an invisible man in the sky says they should kill.

Do we have people in this country that believe in an invisible man in the sky too? Oh right, we do, and some of those people also think that the invisible man in the sky says they should kill too!

en.m.wikipedia.org...(United_States)

There are also people in this country that want to kill just because if the color of a person's skin, or where a person was born.

Maybe just maybe, these kinds of people shouldn't have free access to firearms.

So what part of inalienable, guaranteed and protected right do you fail to comprehend? Of course felons and the mentally ill should not have access, which is why felons loose all of their rights. All criminals do while incarcerated. For felons it stays that way until you get pardoned and/or apply for reinstatement of your rights (this even includes voting)

I know, I want to start a movement to stop people of your ilk from exercising your first amendment rights. While we are at it, lets also revoke your 4th amendment and 5th amendment rights as well, I mean , really I do not think you need them, you have nothing to hide and so therefore you can not incriminate yourself.

Once you remove one, especially the second, the rest come tumbling down. So instead of insulting people who do not agree with your misguided beliefs, move. Leave. Move to the UK or Australia. The bill of rights in not going to be changed and people are getting sick of you and your kind attempting to put restrictions on everything.

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Onslaught2996

Fine..tell me where he was wrong when he said once guns were banned in Australia..there have been no mass shootings? 

Shouldn't he have said that there have been no shootings in Australia since guns were banned?
Why didn't he say that?

Because there have been.

Let's see. Mass murders in Australia before gun bans:

Cullin-La-Ringo massacre - Horatio Wills and his traveling party were killed by Aborigines at Cullin-La-Ringo Station in Queensland in 1860; police, native police and civilians killed 60 to 70 Aborigines in response.

George David Silva murdered six members of the Ching family at Alligator Creek near Mackay, Queensland in 1911.

Coniston massacre - Over 50 Aboriginal people were killed in the last Aboriginal massacre in 1928. The motive was revenge for the killing of dingo hunter Frederick Brooks.

Notice that 2 out of 3 were state sponsored slaughters of aboriginals.

Now let's look at mass murders since gun bans:

Childers Palace Fire - In June 2000, drifter and con-artist Robert Long started a fire at the Childers Palace backpackers hostel that killed 15 people.
Monash University shooting - In October 2002, Huan Yun Xiang, a student, shot his classmates and teacher, killing two and injuring five.
Churchill Fire - 10 confirmed deaths due to a deliberately lit fire. The fire was lit on 7th of February 2009.[6]
2011 Hectorville siege - A mass shooting that took place on Friday, April 29, 2011, in Hectorville, South Australia. It began after a 39-year-old male, Donato Anthony Corbo, went on a shooting rampage, killing three people and wounding a child and two police officers, before being arrested by Special Operations police after an eight-hour seige.[7]
Quakers Hill Nursing Home Fire - 10 confirmed and as many as 21 people may have died as a result of a deliberately lit fire in a Quakers Hill nursing home. The fire was lit early on 18th of November 2011.[8]

Seems that gun bans didn't help much.

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I blame the special interest groups and lobbyists that bought our government and allowed the gunman to get a hold of a firearm legally in the first place instead of allowing the laws that we have already on the books to be enforced.

Uhh , the laws are enforced.....but see thats not the problem with you and people who hold the same viewpoint, the problem is you dont want us to have GUNS AT ALL.


that wasnt my question anyway........you stated that the guns were the problem........

And REFUSE to address the issue of the mental health state of the person holding it........

My question was ....

So do you blame the gun, or the person pulling the trigger?

And the Above is your deflecting answer........any person with a lick of sense or honesty would have no issues stating that anyone who commits a mass murder has some kind of psychological issue going on......but you keep deflecting, refusing to answer it, because YOU KNOW that the answer wont fall in line with your gun stance.....

Because the answer makes it clear that the problem isnt guns, its the mental health of the people firing them

Heres a reality check , if the psychopath wants to shoot someone, hes going to get a gun whether its legally or not......

You are so disengenious in your answers its not even funny.......

Not funny. You can wait an hour for some one so save you when something happens for your heroes to protect you. I won't give up the right to be independent. These incidents of violence he talks about are single people with problems mostly which does not represent most people. Criminals will always have access to them legal or not. I wish to be on an even keel myself. I not one to have an orgasm when i shoot a gun. You know the type. They love to shoot kill. like the ones that sign up to military service or police because they get off on shooting and killing things. Just listen to some solders or cops after it happens. These criminals have the same attitude as them. I reserve the right to protect myself against those that will have that attitude even if only 1%. People will always have guns. Disarm the good people. 34k gun that will never happen here. People here are smart enough to manufacture their own if we have too and that said there will always be a reason to protect yourself. If Aussies aren't capable of that that is their issue. It would never happen here. In America here it would not take any time at all to manufacture just about any thing. even guided missiles. Ir and gps is easy, mechanics aren't hard. This is all old technology now. Just like fire is nothing new. Not that i would make them. Just saying it all can be done and there is no way to get rid of them all from criminals. Defend against a tyrannical gov? Yes if it happens we were given that right. America was founded on fleeing from an oppressive gov so our forefathers left a loophole. Not necessarily thinking that would happen but thinking if the right was there and people were armed the gov would be respective of the citizens so it would not happen. If they fail in that, then they deserve a revolt. If you feel safer without a gun don't buy one. But even if totally illegal. know this they will still be there, we will just be more vulnerable to crime. The police can't be everywhere. If that was the case this issue would not be being discussed now. No one wants crazies to have guns true but accept the facts illegal doesn't mean they would be gone. If that was the case there would be no illegal drug problem would there? How prevalent is that? Think about that one long and hard. reply to: Onslaught2996

It's funny, al those gun lovers react in this thread like the comedian explained.
Ban guns, and you go all nuts...

For me, you may keep all you guns.

It's in your culture, but I'm staying on this side of the pond.

Just my opinion, no offence...

a reply to: drneville

Ban guns, and you go all nuts...

What do you hold dear? That we may speak of taking it, to see how you react.

My brain... and you aint comming for it... lol

originally posted by: drneville
My brain... and you aint comming for it... lol

Yeah, I'm not a zombie yet...

geez...9 pages and people are taking a Australian comedians 14-min bit on guns, as if it is some congressional referendum up for a vote....can you get a 20-pound hammer to swat that fly, or can you get by on a 10-pounder?

originally posted by: drneville
It's funny, al those gun lovers react in this thread like the comedian explained.
Ban guns, and you go all nuts...

For me, you may keep all you guns.

It's in your culture, but I'm staying on this side of the pond.

Just my opinion, no offence...

That's not very prescient. If a comedian talked about the joys of molesting children, the responses would be just as predictable.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: drneville
It's funny, al those gun lovers react in this thread like the comedian explained.
Ban guns, and you go all nuts...

For me, you may keep all you guns.

It's in your culture, but I'm staying on this side of the pond.

Just my opinion, no offence...

That's not very prescient. If a comedian talked about the joys of molesting children, the responses would be just as predictable.

What revolt would happen when a joke image on ATS was a bumper sticker that said cats flattened while you wait on the bumper of a truck? Is it ok to make jokes then? All those left leaning anti hunting animal savers would lose control. These are the same gun grabbing people from the left. It's only a joke when it suits them.

a reply to: MarlinGrace

Butcherguy would approve.