It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NYT: Americans With Assault Rifles Should 'Give Them Up For The Good Of Their Fellow Citizens'

page: 19
53
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 02:38 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

It's messy, it has a great impact on family and friends, it's often a waste of talent - most people commit suicide when they are still young. So, all in all, we seem to agree that we should do all we can to prevent uncontrolled impulsive suicide.

Please note that I am NOT opposed to people that voluntarily want to end their lives. In my country, we have laws to regulate euthanasia, but that should never be confused with impulsive suicide.

Often one hears the argument "Well, X kills too, so do something about X first". Well, this thread is about guns, not about X. Start a new thread about X and I may (or may not) chime in if I feel I have something useful to add.

Now, how about guns?

If, as most of you say, you actually never use your gun, or at best for target practicing or hunting, then why the abundance of lethal weapons in your closets, under you beds or in your toilets? Is it so hard to understand that you should not keep an atom bomb in your shed just because the aliens MIGHT land one day?




posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 02:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: SunwolfNope,you are wrong.Nothing you say will change anyones mind.


Ad hominem attacks are mostly used by fundamentalists if they feel threatened by arguments. Be aware, and mark my words: within a decade you will loose the right to bear arms unless you provide solid, understandable and logical arguments to the growing part of the population that is against it. The old argument that guns protect you to tyranny is moot, as you may well know: the People have seen with their own eyes that owning a gun does not protect them against state tyranny anymore. Talk to Edward Snowden.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 03:24 AM
link   
a reply to: ForteanOrg

Often one hears the argument "Well, X kills too, so do something about X first". Well, this thread is about guns, not about X. Start a new thread about X and I may (or may not) chime in if I feel I have something useful to add. 

I am curious about something.
Are you more concerned about guns or the people that are dying?
edit on b000000312015-12-10T03:27:30-06:0003America/ChicagoThu, 10 Dec 2015 03:27:30 -0600300000015 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 03:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: ForteanOrg

Often one hears the argument "Well, X kills too, so do something about X first". Well, this thread is about guns, not about X. Start a new thread about X and I may (or may not) chime in if I feel I have something useful to add. 

I am curious about something.
Are you concerned about guns or the people that are dying?


The two are related, so about both. But there is more to it: it has to do with civilisation and cooperation. It has to do with trust and attitude. In a country where people are afraid of loosing control, they tend to carry weapons.

I have often thought that the main reason most Americans (still) believe in the 2nd is that half of you are always thinking that their enemies are in the White House. And during any presidency, their numbers climb, so eventually the majority of y'all think the government is their enemy. After the next election, the halves simply swap. It's that suspicion, that lack of trust, that annoys me.

Ditch the bloody guns. Your State may be a danger to you, but owning a gun won't help you at all. Educate yourselves: the biggest thread is not your States firepower.
edit on 10-12-2015 by ForteanOrg because: he made various typos.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 04:52 AM
link   
a reply to: ForteanOrg


The two are related, so about both.

I will be a bit more specific.
Do you care about people that die from other causes?
Causes that are preventable?
So far we have seen reason to believe that you are against guns, not caring so much about people dying.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 05:07 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

So by your logic, its perfectly justifiable for innocent people to be getting shot down in the street by mentally unstable individuals who had far to easy access to a firearm... just so long as people are dying from other causes as well?



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 05:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: butcherguy

So by your logic, its perfectly justifiable for innocent people to be getting shot down in the street by mentally unstable individuals who had far to easy access to a firearm... just so long as people are dying from other causes as well?

Where the hell do you get that?
I am pointing out that the poster has a problem with guns only.

There is a rock lying next to my front porch. It will not jump up and bash someone in the head all by itself.
If someone picks it up and bashes someone on the head, the problem is not the rock... get it?

edit on b000000312015-12-10T05:12:06-06:0005America/ChicagoThu, 10 Dec 2015 05:12:06 -0600500000015 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 05:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: butcherguy

So by your logic, its perfectly justifiable for innocent people to be getting shot down in the street by mentally unstable individuals who had far to easy access to a firearm... just so long as people are dying from other causes as well?

Where the hell do you get that?


Your (apparently) against any kind of gun restrictions and raise the fact that people die by other means to justify it... That's where the hell I got it from.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 05:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: butcherguy

So by your logic, its perfectly justifiable for innocent people to be getting shot down in the street by mentally unstable individuals who had far to easy access to a firearm... just so long as people are dying from other causes as well?

Where the hell do you get that?


Your (apparently) against any kind of gun restrictions and raise the fact that people die by other means to justify it... That's where the hell I got it from.

Where do you get that I am against any gun restrictions?



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 05:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: butcherguy

So by your logic, its perfectly justifiable for innocent people to be getting shot down in the street by mentally unstable individuals who had far to easy access to a firearm... just so long as people are dying from other causes as well?

Where the hell do you get that?


Your (apparently) against any kind of gun restrictions and raise the fact that people die by other means to justify it... That's where the hell I got it from.

Where do you get that I am against any gun restrictions?


So are you saying you'd be all for federal laws that restrict guns as much as California or Canada... I'm confused dude.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 06:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
It's messy, it has a great impact on family and friends, it's often a waste of talent - most people commit suicide when they are still young. So, all in all, we seem to agree that we should do all we can to prevent uncontrolled impulsive suicide.


Who are you kidding? You are more concerned with the method than the outcome.


If, as most of you say, you actually never use your gun, or at best for target practicing or hunting, then why the abundance of lethal weapons in your closets, under you beds or in your toilets? Is it so hard to understand that you should not keep an atom bomb in your shed just because the aliens MIGHT land one day?


I have a three story home, I keep a fire extinguisher on each floor in the outside chance I will need one not because I want to use any of them.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 06:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: ForteanOrg


The two are related, so about both.

I will be a bit more specific.
Do you care about people that die from other causes?
Causes that are preventable?
So far we have seen reason to believe that you are against guns, not caring so much about people dying.


I care about people in general, so I don't want to see them get hurt or killed.

This does not mean that I try to pamper people or that people should be forbidden to do things that are (potentially) dangerous. Just some examples, perhaps you'll catch my drift: I drive a car. One can kill people driving a car - but it was not build to that intent. I own knives. You can kill using knives. But these knives weren't intended to kill, they were intended to cook with, peel potatos, cut wood, stuff like that. I am a Dutch miller. I run a windmilll and they are VERY dangerous instruments. They can kill people. But they weren't intended to do so. They were intended to create dry land so the people could prosper.

See, life is dangerous en in the end it will kill you. It's merely that I feel that one should postpone the end as long as needed and possible. I don't determine the need nor the possibility - I just facilitate the process of keeping folks alive and well as good as I can.

Guns were build with the INTENT to kill. They serve no other purpose. Hence, they shorten the lives of people that might have lived for a longer time without them. They also oppose the judicial system, because you, the gun-owner, are allowed to be judge, jury and executioner all in one person. And if you get it wrong, well, you may be judged yourself. But your innocent victim will be dead just the same.

Ditch the guns. Grow up.
edit on 10-12-2015 by ForteanOrg because: he left a line hanging..



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 06:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
Who are you kidding? You are more concerned with the method than the outcome.


Actually - no. I'm concerned with both.


I have a three story home, I keep a fire extinguisher on each floor in the outside chance I will need one not because I want to use any of them.


To put out a fire. Not to bash in the head of a stranger, I hope.

Hey, some people are confused, drunk or simply lost. They may wander inside your home. Do you assume they will attempt to kill you and so bash their heads in with your fire-extinguiser? Or do you check them out and try to help them? And if they, say, carry a gun: do you bash them over their head with the fire-extinguisher or do you quickly leave and call the police?

Let me guess: you are far better than the police of course, you don't need the judicial system, you will judge yourself and kill the guy. And after the lights come on and you see he was a confused, pipesmoking drunk, you'll say to yourself: "So, what, I killed him. He should not have commited the crime of entering my premises without my consent. Stupid ass, serves him right. And hey, pipe smoking kills people. So, as long as they don't do anything about that, I won't give up my gun."



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 06:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
[
Actually - no. I'm concerned with both.


I do not believe you.


To put out a fire. Not to bash in the head of a stranger, I hope.


Of course, bashing someone's head in with a fire extinghuisher in a home invasion scenario could likely get you charged with felony assault, attempted murder or worse.


Hey, some people are confused, drunk or simply lost. They may wander inside your home.


My home is locked, you cannot just 'wander in', you would have to commit a felony to get in there to begin with.


Do you assume they will attempt to kill you...


If someone forcibly enters my home I do not have to assume anything, they are there for criminal purposes.


Let me guess: you are far better than the police of course, you don't need the judicial system, you will judge yourself and kill the guy. And after the lights come on and you see he was a confused, pipesmoking drunk, you'll say to yourself: "So, what, I killed him. He should not have commited the crime of entering my premises without my consent. Stupid ass, serves him right. And hey, pipe smoking kills people. So, as long as they don't do anything about that, I won't give up my gun."


Your juvenile premises are comical. If someone forcibly enters my home and approaches me or my family I am certainly not waiting for the police, nor do I have to as outlined by the laws of my state. I am well within my rights to protect myself and my family.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 07:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
I do not believe you.


Of course you don't. You can't grasp it, can you: folks that live happy lives without the need for guns




Of course, bashing someone's head in with a fire extinghuisher in a home invasion scenario could likely get you charged with felony assault, attempted murder or worse.


So, don't do it. Also, what strikes me is that it's not because you dont WANT to do it - it's because the judicial system will get you if you do. I bet you'd be complaining about that if it ever happened to you "Well, I don't get it. I killed a bad guy, and now I have to go to prison! It's not fair!"


My home is locked, you cannot just 'wander in', you would have to commit a felony to get in there to begin with.


My home is not locked. Not because I think that folks need to come in - but in case of a fire, I want my family to be able to get OUT.


If someone forcibly enters my home I do not have to assume anything, they are there for criminal purposes.


I don't have that issue - if somebody enters my home, he does not have to force anything. You can just walk in here, I'm in Europe and I'm safe. Even if a burglar might enter my home, chances are he won't have a gun, as that would make it far more plausible to be put away for a long time when caught. Also, he knows I don't have a gun either, so why the fuzz..

But let's see: so you lock your doors WHILE YOU ARE AT HOME? Talk about paranoia.. man, where do you live for gawds sake..?


your juvenile premises are comical.


Coming from a man that LOCKS HIS DOORS WHEN HE IS AT HOME..


If someone forcibly enters my home and approaches me or my family I am certainly not waiting for the police, nor do I have to as outlined by the laws of my state. I am well within my rights to protect myself and my family.


See, that's the problem, right there. If somebody is in your home, you assume he will attack your family. Where I live we assume the guy is lost and we offer him help. See the difference?

Hence, no guns here.

Hence, guns there.

We're done, methinks.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 07:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
Of course you don't. You can't grasp it, can you: folks that live happy lives without the need for guns


No, it is because I think your are intellectually dishonest.



So, don't do it.


Who said I would? You? Certainly not me.


Also, what strikes me is that it's not because you dont WANT to do it - it's because the judicial system will get you if you do. I bet you'd be complaining about that if it ever happened to you "Well, I don't get it. I killed a bad guy, and now I have to go to prison! It's not fair!"


So because I am able to comprehend and observe the law this is now a problem?


My home is not locked. Not because I think that folks need to come in - but in case of a fire, I want my family to be able to get OUT.


Good for you. We are pretty capable of operating a simple dead bolt in the case of fire, fine motor skills are not a problem here.


I don't have that issue - if somebody enters my home, he does not have to force anything.


Good for you. I chose to keep my home locked.


You can just walk in here, I'm in Europe and I'm safe. Even if a burglar might enter my home, chances are he won't have a gun, as that would make it far more plausible to be put away for a long time when caught. Also, he knows I don't have a gun either, so why the fuzz..


Good for you. Who brought in a criminal with a gun in this scenario, you? It certainly was not me.


But let's see: so you lock your doors WHILE YOU ARE AT HOME? Talk about paranoia.. man, where do you live for gawds sake..?


I do. My location is in my profile. My neighbor two houses over had a daylight robbery where the criminal entered through their unlocked back door.


Coming from a man that LOCKS HIS DOORS WHEN HE IS AT HOME..


I see, so locking my doors is juvenile? I tend to think not locking them is naïve.


See, that's the problem, right there. If somebody is in your home, you assume he will attack your family. Where I live we assume the guy is lost and we offer him help. See the difference?


Who said they were attacking me, you? Certainly not me. I said I have the option of not waiting for the police. In the case of an intruder who is hostile I will definitely not wait for the police.


We're done, methinks.


I think not. You enjoy hearing yourself talk too much to drop the topic. Your smarmy and smug 'where I live is better' rhetoric is all too obvious to the posters here. It is obvious you have some insecurities to deal with and this is most likely your prime outlet.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 07:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: butcherguy

So by your logic, its perfectly justifiable for innocent people to be getting shot down in the street by mentally unstable individuals who had far to easy access to a firearm... just so long as people are dying from other causes as well?

Where the hell do you get that?


Your (apparently) against any kind of gun restrictions and raise the fact that people die by other means to justify it... That's where the hell I got it from.

Where do you get that I am against any gun restrictions?


So are you saying you'd be all for federal laws that restrict guns as much as California or Canada... I'm confused dude.

Yes... you are confused.
You blame me for being against any gun restrictions. .. then you come back with that.
I am not against all gun restrictions, but that doesn't mean that I am for California style restrictions.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 08:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
Coming from a man that LOCKS HIS DOORS WHEN HE IS AT HOME.


This statement right here pretty much sums up the entire disconnect. The vast majority of people in the United States lock their doors when they're at home. Every single police department and sheriff's office in this country is going to recommend that you do that. As odd as that may sound to you, its 'common sense' over here.

There are significant differences in our cultures and they go quite a bit deeper than just gun control, it would seem.
edit on 10-12-2015 by vor78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: vor78

originally posted by: ForteanOrg
Coming from a man that LOCKS HIS DOORS WHEN HE IS AT HOME.


This statement right here pretty much sums up the entire disconnect. The vast majority of people in the United States lock their doors when they're at home. Every single police department and sheriff's office in this country is going to recommend that you do that. As odd as that may sound to you, its 'common sense' over here.

There are significant differences in our cultures and they go quite a bit deeper than just gun control, it would seem.


I believe you more or less nailed it



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 08:47 AM
link   
Guns psychologically helps people feel safe, just as Cops psychologically helps people feel safe, Just as the Military psychologically helps people feel safe.

What makes people feel unsafe and psychologically traumatized, is the Government

That's why we need Guns, Lots and lots of Guns.

Because we cant afford Attack Helicopters, Tanks, and Artillery...But if we could...We Would




top topics



 
53
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join