It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Ha, get a laugh out of this

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 10:25 PM
reply to post by Cool Breeze

You hope my family gets shot???

lol, no of course not don't be silly.... I just hope that if there are say two kids standing on the sidewalk and a bullet is going to hit one of them - i hope it's your kid and not the kid of some poor guy who did nothing to cause this terrible event.

I'm saying that by owning a gun and supporting free ownership of guns you are causing innocent people to be hurt or killed - thus i hope you, who are of course willing to accept this as a fact of life, take the knock and not some poor guy who has been trying to clean up the ciry and get guns out of town.

any good point you made

Good idea, ignore anything i said which is right because you don't like me - certainly that is how you are going to come up with the correct and sensible solutions to the worlds problems......

posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 10:38 PM
reply to post by die_another_day

I don't see anything funny about this. I think I see how it's TRYING to be funny, but it's completely ignorant and sick when you consider even a moment the vast differences in skill, training, effort, reasoning, and resources required between safely removing a bullet from a patient... compared to what it takes to put the bullet in them.

posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 10:53 PM
reply to post by NatureBoy

No it has nothing to do with our differing viewpoints at all. I don't personally know you so how can I dislike you as a person? Heck for all I know we could be good friends one day and laugh about how we don't see eye to eye on a lot of things while having some beers.

The reason I stated that you ruined any good points you had raised (in my eyes) and I would no longer would take what you said into consideration was due to the sheer fact that you had stated you had hoped my family got shot. Poor sentence structure in my opinion but once you explained it, it wasn't as harsh as it came across. I can see what you are saying even though I do not agree.

See I believe that all of our Rights are equally important and you have been using your 1st ammendment right. I may not agree with you on things but I will always defend your right to have your own opinion and the right to say whatever you please. I'm not here to fight with your or anyone else even though I have gone toe to toe, so to speak, with a number of people here on ATS but I do not hate any of the members here! I am here to broaden my horizon on a number of subjects and it would be pretty useless if this was only a forum of like-minded people.

[Edit to fix spelling... damn man hands and blue collar fingures!]

[edit on 02/04/2009 by Cool Breeze]

posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 11:10 PM

Originally posted by badmedia

So many people trying to cure the symptom, so few trying to cure the cause.

And this applies to every medical doctor who cannot or does not bother to figure out the cause of a conditon and puts you on a med that has side effects requiring another me, that require another med and their two friends tell two friends, and so on and so on . . . .

Nice way to get kickbacks from the Big Pharm Co's, eh?

posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 11:25 PM
reply to post by badmedia

Guns are not made just to end lives, they protect lives just the same.

I'm fully in favor of gun rights, and if I'm lucky I might be getting a .500 Mag by the end of the year if I can talk my cousin into selling his.

However, let's not kid ourselves here. Aside from mere recreation purposes, Guns are weapons designed explicitly to injure and/or kill. The "protection" argument, while a valid use, is a weak justification for attempting to shift the designed purpose of the weapon. They are made to take life. That we are able to stay the trigger or display them on our person as a means of deterrent says far more about the gun owner, than the gun itself. It's only a deterrent, because it is designed for the singular purpose of taking or injuring life.

To scale the issue up to the national level, this is the same basic justification behind the once spiraling escalation of Nuclear weapons. It is nearly exactly synonymous with the basic function of MAD policies. These new nukes weren't produced to end lives... but to SAVE lives by deterrent! Again, I call BS. While perhaps a necessary policy, and our best defense, they were only effective because they were utter in their promise of devastation and on a hair trigger.

I'm sure you know, and any serious responsible gun owner here knows, that pulling a firearm is no light matter. If you pull your weapon, you had damned well be prepared to use it to the full extent of it's lethality if necessary, or else your "defense" is worthless and you've just made yourself a primary target by posing a threat to your attackers lives. If your opponent is armed, and you are hesitant to pull the trigger, you'll end up bleeding out or dead. You might anyway. But the moment you pull it under threat - you've just increased your own risk of being shot exponentially. It's a matter of survival at that point.

Guns are designed for one purpose only. To kill. Any other uses the owner finds for them goes against their sole and primary design and function.

posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 11:25 PM
reply to post by Cool Breeze

The reason I stated that you ruined any good points you had raised

Well i'm just trying to say that you shouldn't discount things people say that are right just because they say something else which is wrong,


Does that stop 2+2=4 being true? Of course not!

See I believe that all of our Rights are equally important and you have been using your 1st ammendment right.

Actually being britiish i have no right to freedom of speech other than that given to me by european union - which is why i support europe btw
But thanks, i should let on that actually i like the idea of forcing people to give up their guns however i would like to convince everyone to lay them down at the same time and not make any more... makes me kinda a dreamer i suppose, but i'm not the only one, come and join me then the whole world will live as one.
Oh wait, no some idiot with a gun will appear out of the woodwork hanging onto a stupid bronze age value system and shoot you dead if you dare to suggest such a thing.

(For those that don't know, John Lennon was shot dead by a religious fool because of the song 'imagine' which i paraphrased - although there are many, many great people in the world (i'm sure includes you and many of the people i've been debating against in this thread) alas it only takes one crazy, mental, downtrodded or confused person with a firearm to take them away from us all forever. A knife weilding attacker would of course have been stopped by security. Until we can ensure that no one is brought up in a situation which will lead them to believe killing someone is ok for whatever reason then we just can't have guns available.)

[Edit to fix spelling... damn man hands and blue collar fingures!]

Hehe, tell me about it - i've loaded about 40 ton of heavy equipment onto trucks since i was last in this thread, my mistakes are staying

posted on Aug, 18 2009 @ 11:34 PM
Although comparing doctors and guns may be over the top for some
it is well documented that there are cures out there that doctors don't know about or simply deny they exist.

Some people have even showned that statistically speaking getting standard medical treatment reduces life expectancy compared to getting alternative treatments, or indeed doing nothing at all

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 12:05 AM
reply to post by NatureBoy

Hey now I never said I believed you were right
I simply stated you had made some good points to consider in order for me to understand your view better.

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 12:35 AM
reply to post by NatureBoy

If america was as hard on guns as it is on drugs then unlike drugs gun usage would plumet, for a start not many people can cook up a .22 in their basement like they can meth.

Please, do you know how many machinists their are in the world?
How about auto, aircraft, diesel, etc mechanics?
Not to mention, engineers, architects, hobbyists etc etc etc
Who do you think makes guns? Super intelligent robots from the future.

I know back in the early 1700's it may have been hard to build a gun.
But give me 3 days, and the raw materials-easily attained at almost any hardware and steel supply. I could build you a .50cal sniper rifle, semi-automatic, accurate to say 750 yards. After 2 days of tweaking-1250 yards.

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 12:42 AM
reply to post by endisnighe

Hey I will give ya 3 days....

I will be expecting my .50 cal on my door by Saturday

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 12:50 AM
reply to post by cams

it is well documented that there are cures out there that doctors don't know

Doctors are only human, and they don't necessarily always stay abreast of the latest research, especially if they're general practice. Some are old fashioned tend to stick what's worked in the past. Some are more situationally and perceptually aware, etc. Doctors as different from one another as their patients are generally... which is why you shouldn't hesitate to seek consultation with a specialist or get a second opinion if you're not satisfied or confident in your doctor's diagnosis.

Some people have even showned that statistically speaking getting standard medical treatment reduces life expectancy compared to getting alternative treatments, or indeed doing nothing at all

Statistics can be misconstrued or fudged, or methodologies for the removal of outliers and bias not properly followed or implemented. I am curious as to the controls of a study which provided such statistics, because on average - lifespans have continually increased in nations with proper health care infrastructures. Poorer second and third world nations lacking basic medical facilities (beyond humanitarian aid) show the inverse trend. The lower the quality and availability of healthcare, the shorter the average lifespan. This divergence is only going to get disproportionately wider with the advent of tissue re/generation, designer medicine, gene therapy, etc, which is really generating a lot of excitement over not just the possibility that some us alive today possibly living into our bicentennials and beyond... but the ability to slow or reverse aging to extend the quality of life as well to match the quantity.

A brief history of surgery, and a glimpse of the future. (Some graphic "innards" imagery)

There's also the factor that because we live in prosperous societies with a advanced health care infrastructures, communicable illnesses for the individual who does nothing are far less prevalent than they are in poorer nations with no public health care. For instance Tuberculosis, Polio, Malaria, etc, are far less common in industrialized nations because our nations have the infrastructure, the wealth, and the industry to keep the preponderance of the population healthy - reducing potential vectors for the transmission of disease. How do the statistics change in nations like Qatar, Indonesia, or Algeria? Mongolia? I'm sure the numbers wouldn't match exactly, but if doing nothing is implied as preferable to seeking professional medical, we should see a definite trend emerge.

Oh! And speaking of "doing nothing".... it turns out that by consuming around 1/8th to 1/3d less calories per day than is recommended for you has demonstrable and promising benefits for longevity. You live longer and live healthier, with a greater apparent quality of life.... if you can learn to live on the edge of starvation.

Caloric Restriction (CR) diets have been studied for a while in rats and mice, and have turned out better than anticipated in regards to health. However, CR diets can be extremely dangerous if not followed diligently and should only be done under the care of a physician because of the potential for abuse/misuse. Clinical studies in humans are not finished yet, but results thus far are promising.

Life-span extension in mice by preweaning food restriction and by methionine restriction in middle age.

[edit on 19-8-2009 by Lasheic]

[edit on 19-8-2009 by Lasheic]

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 01:17 AM
Weeeeeeoooooohhhh! Ah'm Ready to fight in the Revvaloution! Gunna water me some trees of Liberty!

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 01:35 AM
If someone wants to shoot me, then perhaps my time is up here. I hope the exit is made as i stand thankful for having lived at all.

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 01:40 AM

Originally posted by thaknobodi
If someone wants to shoot me, then perhaps my time is up here. I hope the exit is made as i stand thankful for having lived at all.

You could always shoot them first ya know.

Just a thought.

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 01:47 AM
reply to post by Lasheic

That guy was an idiot, but probably not as idiotic as that gun is. The .600 caliber Nitro Express revolver. $40 bucks per bullet, or something crazy like that. The recoil on that bad boy is unbelievable. I don't know why that guy wasn't ready for something that strong, that thing can probably break your wrists. Or fly out of your hands like that. And hit you square in the face
. I've been around guns since I was a freshman in high school (took instructional classes, been going to a shooting range, Junior NRA, etc.) and I would be terrified to wield and fire that beast. For the same reason that is in that video

It is complete overkill. But... at the same time, it is awesome... and for the same reasons it is dumb. Kinda like a Michael Bay film

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 02:10 AM

Originally posted by groingrinder
reply to post by NatureBoy

I think most doctors are just trying to make a living. They could care less about saving lives.

Most new doctors spend their first few years busting their humps in emergency rooms for a 100 hours a week. What is your source for claiming that most doctors don't care about saving lives?

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 07:35 AM
How this got turned into a debate is beyond me.

Judging by the threat title it was an attempt at irony ie a joke.

Geez some people just take things so seriously.

I thought it was funny. I moved on.

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 08:56 AM

Originally posted by die_another_day
reply to post by dannyfal

No, these unintentional deaths are induced by incompetent doctors. Usually those doing their internship.

About 80,000 of that 120,000 are killed by bad prescriptions.

Rest include surgery mistakes and in rare cases, murder labeled as unintentional by hospital lawyers.

This is also a reason why we need to reform the health care system. We need to make higher standards and regulations on doctors and on drugs.

[edit on 8/18/2009 by die_another_day]

a surgery mistake would go into the category of unintentional death caused by doctor?

so your saying if i get shot in the head and the doctor can't get the bullet out or something and i die its considered the doctor killing me? as opposed to the shooter killing me?

who collects these stats anyway

how come that hasn't been brought up yet.... if the NRA is gathering the stats it would be different than the AMA gathering the stats

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 11:52 AM
Although this study is a little old, the data speaks for itself. There are many more instances of people using guns to defend themselves than the media lets on. And guess what, most of them DON'T result in someone getting shot.

There are approximately two million defensive gun uses (DGU's) per year by law abiding citizens. That was one of the findings in a national survey conducted by Gary Kleck, a Florida State University criminologist in 1993. Prior to Dr. Kleck's survey, thirteen other surveys indicated a range of between 800,000 to 2.5 million DGU's annually. However these surveys each had their flaws which prompted Dr. Kleck to conduct his own study specifically tailored to estimate the number of DGU's annually.

Subsequent to Kleck's study, the Department of Justice sponsored a survey in 1994 titled, Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms (text, PDF). Using a smaller sample size than Kleck's, this survey estimated 1.5 million DGU's annually.

[edit on 19-8-2009 by daveinok]

posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 12:14 PM

Originally posted by NatureBoy
reply to post by LetTheTruthBeTold

HOw silly of me i forgot that you guy are going to rise up and overthrow your government any day now........ refereshed with the blood of.... yeah, yeah....

Here's how it would pan out now,
"Hey bob how big is the revolutionary army?"
'a million men and their pickup trucks'
"and guns?"
'yep we all got hunting rifles and semi automatics'
"and you told the government we're overthrowing them?"
"what's that whistling noise bob?"
'sounds like a cruse missile........'

You are not going to win a revolution with guns, thus you might as well drop that stupid old law.

America might not be europe but last time i checked it was on earth and full of humans, pleed special case all you like - simple fact is your nation would be better without guns.

I hope you don't believe the US military would fire on it's own brethren who would be defending the constitution of the US do you?

In Canada, where it is not a right to bear arms, in the cities violent crime is on the rise and we law abiding taxpaying hard working citizens can't do a thing about it now can we? None of the guns the gang members have are legal but they have them and we don't so we are in fact powerless.

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in