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.

 

Guns or No Guns?? Your views.

page: 14
19
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 07:51 AM
link   
reply to post by John Titor92
 


You are wrong...
It is ME + GUN=A protected mama,
grandmama and grandkids!




posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 07:54 AM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 

If those who were killed in the massacre would have been armed,it may have been less of a massacre.

If guns were legal,maybe those who went on a shooting spree would have just killed themselves before they killed anyone else.

We are beating that dead horse again,if people lived longer,they would know that being armed is a good idea by remembering what happened in the past.

Guess we gotta keep learning the same old lesson over and over again.

Society is the cause of most every atrocity,whether you would prefer to recognize it for what it is or not.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 07:55 AM
link   
What this thread is saying to me is that America is a violent place where people live in fear and need a gun to feel in any way safe.

I don't believe that to be the case, but it's the impression I'm getting.

On the other hand, I don't realistically expect to ever meet a madman with a shotgun whilst cycling down a Cumbrian lane, so I really can't see any reason why I should ever want a gun? It wouldn't in any way make be feel safer because there is nothing I need to feel safe from.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 




I agree... and not that I did anyway, but I don't consider all Americans as "Gun-nuts" either.
It's just that our cultures and clearly our societies are just so different.

As I've said several times, It seems arguing/debating this doesn't change opinions either... yes we can all learn and find out each other's experiences, which is great as we shouldn't be relying on the MSM and/or movies for our opinions and ideas about each other's country, but ultimately our positions and stances remain the same.

I think this thread has been a very civil and insightful one.
Yes it's frustrating and often alien to us that the other side doesn't see our point of view or that we can look at the same story or fact or evidence in two completely different ways.... but I guess that's what makes us unique and great in our own ways.
If we all just agreed and had the same views, It would be pretty boring right?

Cheers guys



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by chiponbothshoulders
reply to post by butcherguy
 

If those who were killed in the massacre would have been armed,it may have been less of a massacre


If they had been armed, maybe. But assuming guns were legal, cheap and readily obtainable. How many people living in that part of the Cumbria would have been carrying a gun? After all, there had never previously in their lifetimes been an occasion when they needed a gun ......

Of course, if more people carried a portable defibrillator and saline drips around with them then maybe more of the victims would have survived? But I don't see anyone campaigning for that?



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


Thats a very big thing to say butcherguy, and the sentiment is much appreciated.

To go back a post to your earlier question, I did think I explained it before but maybe I am not that good at explaining?

where an armed citizen kills a nut-job before he hurts someone is quite subjective. He might have gone on to kill others, it may have been an isolated incident, there's no way to differentiate.

Therefore the idea of an armed citizen ending a massacre is an assumption, and expectation, maybe even a 'reasonable opinion', but not provable.

What can be proven, by historical fact, is that when a gunman does go on the rampage it is mainly ended by him killing himself, even in the few that we have had this is also the case.

Therefore my only argument is that there is no evidence to support the statement that armed Cumbrians would have ended this earlier. Therefore that cannot be used as an argument to arm the citizens of the UK.

Is that a bit clearer?



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by chiponbothshoulders

If those who were killed in the massacre would have been armed,it may have been less of a massacre.


deleted my crass response as essen did it so much better



If guns were legal,maybe those who went on a shooting spree would have just killed themselves before they killed anyone else.


How does that work, he had a gun either way?





[edit on 4-6-2010 by waynos]



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 




if you're brought up in that culture and your media and society tells you 24hrs a day that there threats everywhere and says you're an idiot and un-American if you don't carry a gun


Really? We are talking about American media, correct? Because last I checked a large majority of our media sources have a huge bias AGAINST gun ownership.

I would also like to see where the media or society in general says we are idiots or un American if we don't carry a gun.. that is just pulled out of the air, and I hope you really don't believe that.

And the argument that guns have never really stopped a mass shooting spree like this is kind of like saying if you ban guns then these types of incidents will not occur. It leaves a lot of room for error of words.

I made my response to your OP a few posts up from you, and it all still stands. I just felt like addressing that one error.

Peace.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 

I know with absolute certainty that the bandits are always on patrol,especially at night.

I used to ride my bicycle to work every morning to my job 32 miles away,depending on arrangement I could make with fellow employees,sometimes it was only about 8 miles....anyway...

I had to leave at 3:15am to get there by 6:00am,regardless of arrangements,and I saw some pretty bizarre things over the 6 years I did this.

The only thing that saved me from being robbed or assaulted was adrenaline many times,they couldn't catch me,they tried,they even tried tricks to get me to stop a few times,but I didn't.

Guns would be less illegal,if more people did not think the worst of people,which only escalates a situation beyond reason.

Sticks and stones may break my bones,but words will never hurt me.

Drop 2 gears and double the cadence,they can't even catch you in a car if you take into consideration the fact that you can blow through a 30" opening,or between trees,and a car is over 4' wide.

Nobody lives forever,don't be greedy.

I think selfishness is more the reason that weapons pose a problem,too many would be too quick to whip out a gun and start shooting before they got their coffee in the morning.

Maybe caffeine should be made unlawful too......

There is a pattern here.

People cannot be reasonable all the time,some never are,ever.



[edit on 4-6-2010 by chiponbothshoulders]



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Scarcer

I do have to say though, why should my rights be taken away because someone else is misusing a tool?


No-one wants to take your rights away, entirely up to you.

You have the Right To Bear Arms and that's fine.

We don't want it, for reasons that have been debated to the nth degree in this thread, that should be fine with you.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 



Are we civilized? We've killed over a million people in Iraq. This was a sovereign country, which had never attacked us until we went there

Never forget the images of Donald Rumsfeld shaking the hand of Saddam Hussein.

A weapon of that much power is frightening. It's not the individual soldier who makes the decisions of who we fight or where. It's the few at the top.

Are you so certain that they will direct their attention only against the "bad guys" and not against those who would stand in the way of their ambition?

People like Hitler existed. Never forget that. They convince their military and police to work for them, and kill millions. Considering this very real threat, would you want to live in a society where your government prohibits the ownership of a means of defense if the government becomes tyrannical?

We tend to think of "our government" similarly to the way we think of "our sports team".... as if it's the Dallas Cowboys against the rest of the world.

This isn't a game. It's real. When we use the word "we", make sure you know who you're talking about.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:16 AM
link   
reply to post by 30_seconds
 


The word civilization has nothing to do with being more caring and understanding or not killing people. It simply means we have political, social and economic structure.. that meets the definition of being civilized. We are still very much barbaric. That is why I advocate gun ownership, because I have the right to protect myself from the barbaric nature of 'society'.


[edit on 4-6-2010 by broahes]



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:20 AM
link   
reply to post by 30_seconds
 


Interesting post, I realise it was in direct response to one of my own but if we get involved in that discussion it would completely derail the thread.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by broahes
 




Not just the media... But society too.
The whole "Right to bear arms" thing was what I really meant and that you have all these people who believe It's an American right and an absolute must to own a gun... and that you're somehow at risk if you don't., which is of course not true, as in reality you're more likely to be killed or injured by a gun if you own one.

And the fact that your media, along with ours, tries to paint such a bleak picture and say that there are rapists and murderers lurking on every corner... It all adds up.

But we don't have guns so I guess we protect ourselves in other ways.

As I said... With you guys perhaps It's mass paranoia... It's a "What if" thing... A "Just In case" thing.... whereas we don't see it like that.
It happens so rarely here that you may as well buy an anti-lightning suit because you have more chance getting hit by lightning.

With us, You guys see it as Mass ignorance and that we are scared and uneducated about guns... which is not the case.

As I've said a few times now.... you're of either one of these two views.

You either think carrying guns solves problems, or carrying guns creates problems.

99.9% Brits think It's the latter.

About 40-50% of you guys think it solves them.... or at least carry or have one in the home... so not even a majority of Americans think it's a good idea.

It's all about which side of that statement you fall.
Arguing and saying our "Evidence" or "Facts" are wrong is just pointless, on both sides.

We'll agree to disagree.


[edit on 4/6/10 by blupblup]



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:27 AM
link   
There are wolves among us.

Don't make yourself a lamb.

This is why gun rights exist.

If you choose to become a pacifist, unarmed, naive, and attempt to force this doctrine among the rest of your brethren, you will find yourselves among those who are helplessly led toward either slavery or annihilation.

(Unfortunately, you can't convince everyone.)

But for myself, I will never give up the right to fight back, knowing that there are people who are aligned against those like me.

I have never committed a crime against another human being. Even if it sounds "sissy" to say so, I believe love is the only way to progress towards a better society. I have no intent to ever harm another human being or create a world where pain or suffering exists. I just want to be left alone, and allowed to keep what I create. I work hard to provide for myself, my girlfriend, and our child. By what logic can someone I don't know take possession of my creativity and my engery? I believe income tax is not just illegal, it's immoral. To take by force what is the prerogative of the individual to create is a form of slavery, and a brutal, ugly, disgusting form of coercion. I live in a world where this happens all the time. I still pay my taxes, but every penny I pay makes me feel a little bit more sick.

I don't condone the killing of civilians of other nations based on the tax dollars I pay. I don't feel right knowing that my energy is being used for evil.

When the day comes (if) that someone attempts to compel me to continue this by force, I will resist. I may resist at my own peril. I may resist at the risk of losing my life.

But there comes a time when a person knows that their own life is worth less than what they gain by losing it.

I don't want to live in a world where my energy is used to create death and destruction.

If I must create a little bit of this to prevent a larger portion, then I will fight back.

Taking arms away from the people is the final step of totalitarian dictactorship. Just look at history's major regimes... Hitler, Stalin, Mao.

All your argument is for naught. Get armed or get dead.

[edit on 4-6-2010 by 30_seconds]



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:30 AM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


How can you claim media and society are beating us all with "must have gun" ideals and every American must have a gun then a few lines later say something like "40-50% of you seem to have guns so the majority of Americans dont even want guns"

Seems like you contradicted yourself.

But since neither of those positions were backed by anything other than "that is how you feel" I guess the contradiction doesnt matter anyway.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


We can agree on a lot more than you think, I'm sure. I have no doubt that our media plays up fears that are unjustified. I'm not one to fear anything anyway.

I have also said, like you have pointed out, that it is a pretty pointless argument for people to be arguing about this issue from two separate countries. I don't really care what laws you want in the UK, as I'm sure you don't care what kind of laws we have here. That is one of America's biggest problem, our country sticks its nose in places it doesn't belong WAAAAY too much.

I would love to live in a world where guns were not used at all. As for paranoid, I'm not. I don't even own guns for protection, but as I said, they are there if I need to use them for such.

This has been a good thread, however pointless, because I always enjoy learning why others take their own side.. and this thread has given me a lot to look at.

I've enjoyed.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by blupblup
 


How can you claim media and society are beating us all with "must have gun" ideals and every American must have a gun then a few lines later say something like "40-50% of you seem to have guns so the majority of Americans dont even want guns"

Seems like you contradicted yourself.



Well perhaps those who look at the stats and facts and those who are informed, don't pay attention to the MSM and don't want guns?

Guns are engrained in the American psyche, much like religion.... but as people become more aware, people are leaving religions.... much like gun ownership has dropped in America since the 70's & 80's.

People nowadays are much more informed and perhaps the Anti-gun lobbyists and campaigns have actually had some affect over there?
Perhaps people are slowly realising that research and statistics have shown that guns intensify crime situations, and increase the likelihood of a more violent or lethal outcome?

Whatever the case, people are slowly ditching the guns over there it seems, which is a very good thing indeed.



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

For the fourth time, that conclusion has no merit unless you can prove a gun carrying public was in attendence.



So ok, i'll accept for the arguements sake that there was no gun carrying public in attendance.

But what you fail to take into account that it was still within a larger society in general where guns are freely available.

If those guns had not been so readily available for criminals to get hold of in the first place then the massacres would not have taken place.

I guess the lesson from those maybe that if you live in a gun owning society it is best not to have any 'no guns allowed' areas.

But they have little in common with gun related massacres in the UK.
Completely different society and environment.

The vast majority of burglaries carried out in the UK are by opportunist thieves or bag heads trying to feed their habit.
They don't have guns and the last thing on earth they want is a confrontation with the home owners.
The presence of a gun owning homeowner will have no bearing on whether they would perform the crime or not.

As I have stated previously on numerous occassions, comparing our two societies is apples and pears.



[edit on 4/6/10 by Freeborn]



posted on Jun, 4 2010 @ 08:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by broahes
I don't really care what laws you want in the UK, as I'm sure you don't care what kind of laws we have here. That is one of America's biggest problem, our country sticks its nose in places it doesn't belong WAAAAY too much.




Well that was the exact reason I started this thread... because some were gloating in the original UK Gunman thread that if we had guns, this wouldn't have happened.... and I saw that as disrespectful and set up this one to allow people to grieve and discuss the relevant events on the other thread.

Not saying that It's only Americans though as I know that some Brits did the same thing on your last massacre thread, so.... Swings and roundabouts I guess.






I would love to live in a world where guns were not used at all. As for paranoid, I'm not. I don't even own guns for protection, but as I said, they are there if I need to use them for such.




Well me too... but I know that's not possible... no guns would be great, so would no wars... but hey, we can but dream.


And I didn't mean every gun owner was paranoid, not at all... just the nation as a whole really....obviously it's a general statement and there always exceptions to the rule.





This has been a good thread, however pointless, because I always enjoy learning why others take their own side.. and this thread has given me a lot to look at.
I've enjoyed.



Exactly, me too


[edit on 4/6/10 by blupblup]




top topics



 
19
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join