I propose a ban on the sale and manufacture of matches

a reply to: Rezlooper

My problem?

I can't even buy 2 boxes of Sudafed at Walgreens. I can buy ONE, and only with writing down my name, address, and DL number.

However, I can go next door and buy 5 AR-15's (if I have the cash) in less than an hour with just my DL for proof of physical address and ID.

What?!

It's that easy to buy guns in this country, guns that have the sole purpose of killing things (animals, humans, aliens).

That doesn't even seem remotely absurd to you? This nations sick fascination with guns goes beyond neurotic.

Look, I get it -- guns helped win this country from the British. Guns helped win the West. We don't live here:


(Mogadishu, Somalia ... remember Black Hawk Down?)

I live in a nice place like this:


Where I'm left alone if I leave other people alone.

If I have to be armed with a pistol 24/7 -- we have more than just radical Islam as a problem in this country.

originally posted by: Metallicus
Logic fail?

You most certainly do have a logic fail there, try to not assume so much and maybe try again?

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: VivreLibre

Actually, I'd be for banning powered, private transportation vehicles by 2035. As for guns, I just don't see a reason to own them and wonder what neighborhoods people find their selves living in where they feel the need for them. I don't live in a neighborhood where I feel the need to own a gun.

The second amendment's main purpose is not to defend yourself from neighborhood burgers.

Removed in lieu of better judgment.

a reply to: VivreLibre

If you honestly believe your assault rifle holds up to a tank, then go ahead buddy. It's just silly, if we want to beat an opponent, you don't fight by a means in which they are vastly superior.... but I realize the fact that you're even going here, means you don't really have the capacity to think this through, and will try to make what you believe is a reasonable comeback.

Well, don't expect me to respond, because it's really, really not worth my time.

originally posted by: VivreLibre

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: VivreLibre

Actually, I'd be for banning powered, private transportation vehicles by 2035. As for guns, I just don't see a reason to own them and wonder what neighborhoods people find their selves living in where they feel the need for them. I don't live in a neighborhood where I feel the need to own a gun.

The second amendment's main purpose is not to defend yourself from neighborhood burgers.

I started to say the same thing, but it goes in one ear and out the other for most people. They don't understand it, never will, and probably can't. The do not understand the depths of the 2A. It's meaningless to them.

originally posted by: VivreLibre

The second amendment's main purpose is not to defend yourself from neighborhood burgers.

Neighborhood burgers are a huge problem.

Just look at all the heart attacks caused by the fat content !!!

Restaurants need to check your weight before serving those things.

we should just ban people. Kill a thousand birds with one stone.

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: VivreLibre

If you honestly believe your assault rifle holds up to a tank, then go ahead buddy. It's just silly, if we want to beat an opponent, you don't fight by a means in which they are vastly superior.... but I realize the fact that you're even going here, means you don't really have the capacity to think this through, and will try to make what you believe is a reasonable comeback.

Well, don't expect me to respond, because it's really, really not worth my time.

Typical response from someone that doesn't understand fundamental concepts behind these rights.

"Not worth my time"
"Don't expect me to respond"
"you don't really have the capacity to think"
"what you believe is a reasonable comeback"
"facts hurt my feelings"

I didn't even state my opinion on the subject. I didn't even say I was pro-2A. Just stating something that is very basic and easy to understand about the 2nd amendment.

Some stuff are useful to society, some are not...

No one can deny that having a broken society and access to guns are a stupid combination, a lot of countries figured that out a long time a go, only the US and a few other countries are still lacking behind because of "stubborn" people and an outdated document that hasn't followed time.

To many people lose their right to life in the US because of this, 50 just lost their rights another 53 almost.

Tomorrow more people will lose their rights, because of a silly unnecessary piece of equipment, kind of sad when you people constantly screaming about rights.

These numbers could be much lower if you actually used your brain, idiocracy is real in the US, and it's not going to change.

Yes, people die for other reasons, though that doesn't make the Gun topic a non issue, it is an issue that should be dealt with but it's not, just talking heads.

originally posted by: Rezlooper

originally posted by: VivreLibre
I really think we need to focus on banning all forms of transportation.

Transportation kills thousands of people every year unnecessarily. When will America wake up and realize how careless it is to allow people to leave their house? Transporting ourselves across distances is extremely dangerous and has no place in modern society.

Pretty soon we'll have to ban ourselves from ourselves.

I have a restraining order on my self, I also sexually assaulted myself about five minutes ago, and I keep coming back for more but I am pretty tired and don;t know how to say no to myself. IS there an organization I can turn to for help?

a reply to: Rezlooper

My namesake invented the match.

Rezlooper:

...guns don't kill people just as matches don't kill people. People who want a gun will still get a gun just like people who want heroin will still get heroin.

Actually, guns, matches, and heroin, do kill people, along with many other objects and chemicals, but the issue here is context...that in which an object or chemical is used to inflict harm or death.

The specific purpose of a gun is to kill, the specific purpose of a match is to light a fire without bringing death (arsonists not withstanding), and the specific purpose of heroin is to get high without dying. Context is everything.

Many Americans are not interested in how many people die, they want their gun/s, no matter what consequence befall others. American society is not making it as hard as it possibly can to obtain a gun, and while this remains the case, gun rampages will continue to occur.

One thing that could be done is to ban all weaponry in certain public places, parks, malls, shops and stores (at owners discretion), city centres, etc. Gun manufacturers obviously prefer profits over the deaths of people, and believe they are absolved of any moral culpability once the gun has been sold to a customer...they are not!

a reply to: Rezlooper

Folks, guns don't kill people just as matches don't kill people.

try killing someone with a match, if you can't kill with a gun your using it wrong.
dumbass.

a reply to: elysiumfire

What is wrong with people. Is there a mass psychosis going on?

One thing that could be done is to ban all weaponry in certain public places, parks, malls, shops and stores (at owners discretion), city centres, etc.

Do you honestly think "banning" weaponry stops criminals or terrorists? Guns are already banned in most of those places you listed. Almost always, these acts were done in gun-free areas. It was only the good guys that didn't have them and now they're dead.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

You're right... I should remove my garbage😊

originally posted by: VivreLibre

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: VivreLibre

Actually, I'd be for banning powered, private transportation vehicles by 2035. As for guns, I just don't see a reason to own them and wonder what neighborhoods people find their selves living in where they feel the need for them. I don't live in a neighborhood where I feel the need to own a gun.

The second amendment's main purpose is not to defend yourself from neighborhood burgers.

I think you meant "buggers" ... not these 'burgers' :



Sorry...I had to. The image of a bunch of angry hamburgers chasing me down the street is just to amazingly awesome.

I'm against banning matches. I was over at my girlfriends and I had to pee, it was dark so I lit a match so's I wouldn't step on her 7 kids all sleeping on the living room floor. I made it to the kitchen and was gonn'a pee in the sink, but it was all full of dirty dishes, so I lit another match and walked through the pantry hall to the back door, and if I hadn't had a match I might have stepped on one of the chickens or sheep that sleep there. I made my to the window with the screen pulled back and crawled through and stood on the stove next to the house she was savin for a spare and stood on it and took care of business. None of this would'a been possible without a couple stick matches

a reply to: Mianeye

because of a silly unnecessary piece of equipment


It may be unnecessary in your country, But I have been using mine on a weekly basis for over a month now.

I live in an area with many predators. They are allowed to live, until they try to kill my chickens. Then they are not. And we have many trying this time of year.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: Rezlooper

Look, I get it -- guns helped win this country from the British. Guns helped win the West. We don't live here:

(Mogadishu, Somalia ... remember Black Hawk Down?)

I live in a nice place like this:

Where I'm left alone if I leave other people alone.

If I have to be armed with a pistol 24/7 -- we have more than just radical Islam as a problem in this country.

You say we don't live there but maybe we're on our way there... if the powers that be get the guns. Could be their agenda. These mass shootings have suddenly exploded in frequency during the Obama Administration. Why is that?