The Hypocrisy of Gun Control Advocates

page: 16
129
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Qemyst
 
They can't Qemyst; because they think with emotions and not logic! They are the sheeple that will be the first to take up exactly what they now oppose if it means their survival.




posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Qemyst
Could an anti-gun advocate tell me exactly how banning guns will prevent killers from killing?

Certainly, many of these events are 'crimes of passion', where they are extremely angry and their anger drives them. There are also those who are mentally ill and driven without sufficient reason.

In both of those cases, generally they will use whatever weapons are immediately accessible, longer term planning does exist but it's these crimes I am most concerned about.

Lack of access to firearms means they will typically use a less lethal weapon, knives, bats or fists. This results in reduced casualties, easier disarming and action against the aggressor, and means we don't have to have paramilitary police on every corner.


And by telling me how, I don't mean "it will make it more difficult." or your usual run of the mill anti gun advocate response. You say something, I will retort. Point by point, post by post.
edit on 16-12-2012 by Qemyst because: (no reason given)

Sounds like you don't want to hear the truth, if you'll respond politely so will I.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by RalagaNarHallas
 


What a stupid argument. Hey, maybe we should legalise the throwing of petrol bombs through peoples windows. Why not? They'll only die of smoking, or in a car crash or of old age anyway.

While I do think gun ownership panders to the America fantasy of being a latter day Wyatt Earp, MagicWand raises some very pertinent points in his OP and society is largely responsible for people going round the twist like that.

But I also think that if a nut case cannot easily get hold of a gun then he cant shoot you. Nothing I've seen defeats that point.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   
Sure. I can respond politely.


Originally posted by exponent
Certainly, many of these events are 'crimes of passion', where they are extremely angry and their anger drives them. There are also those who are mentally ill and driven without sufficient reason.

In both of those cases, generally they will use whatever weapons are immediately accessible, longer term planning does exist but it's these crimes I am most concerned about.

Lack of access to firearms means they will typically use a less lethal weapon, knives, bats or fists. This results in reduced casualties, easier disarming and action against the aggressor, and means we don't have to have paramilitary police on every corner.


How does this stop criminals from getting firearms and using them to kill? Australia put a total ban of firearms into effect and criminals still get them. How does this stop criminals who intend to kill others from using much more devastating weapons like bombs?



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 


What about the nutcase who gets hold of an entire country? That's never happened in history before, right?

"If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind?"

- Frederic Bastiat

There is ALWAYS way more loss of life and devastation because of a leader... always.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 
I am not some super human badass; never claimed to be those are you words not mine. You probaly live in a country that if if was not for "Americans" giving their life for you would speak either German, Japanese, or Russian right now! Artillery is used before the battle to soften the opposing force it is not something you use during the fight unless it is the last resort. You can try all you wish to bash me but I know what this country has done and my fellow miltary has done to keep you little turd like you safe for the last 60+ years so go and tell it it a 6 year old and try and make them believe what you believe! Sorry you feel like the only way you can feel good about yourself or the country you live in is to bash the USA.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by MagicWand67
 


Amen.. Do we rally to ban knives because of the incident in China? No.

I am also a father, one of which is the same that lost their lives, I am horrified, but that is the act of an individual, if a gun hadn't been available I'm sure he would have gone the same route as the guy in China.

The truth is people in the US and the world are going nuts. Is the cause the economy, global warming, genetically modified foods or mind control? We may never know

My kids are currently home schooled and were in the process of getting a big class c motor home to travel to further enrich our children's education. I know I can't guard them from every harm, even rest stops and camp grounds are ripe for any number of tragedy, but I'll do my best.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 


Okay, I see you have read some of what I had to say, but you do not comprehend fully. I do not own any automatic weapons. Those are the machine gun that the military uses that can fire continuously until it either fails mechanically (jammed--failed to fire/failed to eject) or runs out of ammo with a single pull of the trigger. Those are illegal to own, except by special permit and at great expense. Americans can own semi-automatics. A semi-auto will fire the current round, eject the spent casing, load a fresh round into the firing chamber and be ready to fire on the next pull of the trigger. One pull, one shot and the gun is ready to fire again unless out of ammo or has jammed. That is the same mechanics whether we are discussing a semi-automatic rifle or a semi-automatic pistol. A revolver holds rounds in a cylinder (typically 6 but can be as many as 12 depending on the particular gun) and will rotate the cylinder to place the round in front of the barrel to be fired on each pull of the trigger (provided it is a double action revolver, a single action revolver requires the hammer to be pulled back each time before the trigger is pulled). The differences between the two: the semi-auto hold more ammo before needing to be reloaded, has a faster rate of fire. Reload times are slightly faster with a semi-auto provided you have a full magazine ready. If you do not, the reload time is significantly slower with the semi-auto. Revolvers do not jam. A failure to fire is corrected by simply pulling the trigger again. With a semi-auto, clearing a jam can become complicated depending on what happened.


As for your hating/fearing me or w/e and not letting your children hang out with me. That's fine. I don't hang out with people I don't know. I don't let children handle my firearms without prior instruction on the handling of firearms and their parent being present at the firing line who must also be proficient in handling. Safety is the issue. Alcohol or drugs and firearms do not mix, period. Again, safety issues. As to firearms being kept at a range...I would have zero or limited control to their access at that point, wouldn't I? Which means they could be used without my knowledge or consent at that point wouldn't it? As far as renting range owned guns...every firearm is a little different. The sights can be set to the individual as well as adjustments on the fly if the gun is "firing to the left" for example. Which means the sights need adjusted or your shooting/aiming mechanics need adjusted.

Why target shooting with guns? For me it is an evolution from archery, spears, throwing axes, slingshots, etc. I also have been known to woodworking, sewing and dancing as hobbies as well. Oddly enough, I don't watch television as entertainment. I guess I would rather do and actively participate than to just sit around letting others entertain me. To each their own, I suppose.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Qemyst
How does this stop criminals from getting firearms and using them to kill? Australia put a total ban of firearms into effect and criminals still get them. How does this stop criminals who intend to kill others from using much more devastating weapons like bombs?


Are we talking criminals or the mentally ill here? Organised crime will always have firearms, but they are not morons, they understand that harsh firearm penalties are enacted and that the use of firearms guarantees that they will face endless pursuit.

This reduces their actual use of firearms to those situations where they feel it is essential. Generally this is inter-gang rivalries or drug deals gone bad etc. These do not affect the general public as much and so there is a double effect where firearms are removed from regular society.

We regulate the components of firearms just as we regulate the components of explosives. Nobody is suggesting that it stops all crime, but the statistics show that the UK has a remarkably low level of violence and gun use. This is partly caused by our more progressive social policies, and partly due to the unavailability of guns.

Once again, nobody is saying ban guns = fix everything, but by heavily restricting firearms you can reduce their availability and so reduce many types of killing.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by LPOPranger
You probaly live in a country that if if was not for "Americans" giving their life for you would speak either German, Japanese, or Russian right now!

How ignorant can you be. You realise of course that Britain stood alone for the vast majority of the war and sacrificed millions of her children to help free Europe. Typical arrogant American, only concerned with their own contributions.


I know what this country has done and my fellow miltary has done to keep you little turd like you safe for the last 60+ years so go and tell it it a 6 year old and try and make them believe what you believe! Sorry you feel like the only way you can feel good about yourself or the country you live in is to bash the USA.

You know nothing, you're blinded by your own arrogant patriotism and don't even know who you're hoarding your guns against.

Grow up.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 
Britain would have fell if not for America!! Your own Prime Minister..Winston Curchhill ask why Londaners hide in the subways like cowards when the Germans came out every morning and cleared the streets of debris. It is well documented history......READ SOME!!!! For a country of which "The sun never set on the British Empire" how come you only have the island you started with??? Oh and by the waY 007 IS A MOVIE IT IS NOT REAL!!



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 



Not being American, you fail to understand the underpinnings of our constitution. It boils down to this: liberty vs. safety. We chose liberty at the time our constitution was drafted. Power to the people, or power to the government. You obviously believe in the benevolence of government. History proves you wrong.

Far more death and damage has happened at the behest of tyrannical leaders than in the hands of a few rogue individuals. Only the lies and distortions of the media can make you believe otherwise. History is proof. Your argument is invalid.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by MsAphrodite
 

Hitler or Hussain etc were not stopped by gun toting civilians. They were stopped by military action and this will always be the case.

Organised criminals can get hold of guns To go on a bank job, four instance, even here. That can't be stopped. But no teenager has ever entered a UK primary school and shot 20 5 & 6 year old's and their teachers to death, Neither has a bank robber come to think of it.

Never mind the other stuff, why wouldn't any sane person want to make it as difficult as possible for this to be repeated? We gave up our longbows centuries ago, catch up America.
edit on 16-12-2012 by waynos because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by exponent
 

Not being American, you fail to understand the underpinnings of our constitution. It boils down to this: liberty vs. safety. We chose liberty at the time our constitution was drafted. Power to the people, or power to the government. You obviously believe in the benevolence of government. History proves you wrong.

Being American, you've been brainwashed by propaganda to believe that you were breaking away from a tyrannical regime in order to free yourselves. How you can rationalise this with things like the 3/5ths compromise I have no idea whatsoever.

This is your idea of liberty? Literally keeping slaves? Segregating people with different skin colour? You know nothing of your country.


Far more death and damage has happened at the behest of tyrannical leaders than in the hands of a few rogue individuals. Only the lies and distortions of the media can make you believe otherwise. History is proof. Your argument is invalid.

History proves that a few rifles here and there does nothing against a mechanised army. How will you fight the tanks when they roll into your town? Do you think the few RPGs you might be able to get your hands on will make any difference?

The 2nd amendment became useless in the civil war. Once cannons became functional enough then military technology advanced far faster than you could ever keep up. You cannot defend yourself against invasion nor your own government without the help of your army. If you have your army, why do you need so many guns?



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 



How they were stopped was never my point. It was that they came into power in the first place.... The people were utterly helpless.

The rest of your post is irrelevant.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by LPOPranger
 


How come almost all modern Americans seem to forget it was a team effort? Your assistance WAS vital, but you weren't alone.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by LPOPranger
reply to post by exponent
 
Britain would have fell if not for America!! Your own Prime Minister..Winston Curchhill ask why Londaners hide in the subways like cowards when the Germans came out every morning and cleared the streets of debris. It is well documented history......READ SOME!!!! For a country of which "The sun never set on the British Empire" how come you only have the island you started with??? Oh and by the waY 007 IS A MOVIE IT IS NOT REAL!!

The irony of an American who thinks they saved the world telling me to read a history book will keep me chuckling for days.

You know nothing about what you are discussing. You can't even spell 'Londoners'. Educate yourself and stop being blinded by patriotism. During the second world war, when you were 'saving the world', you demanded we segregate your troops for you, because you couldn't stand to think of black people and white people intermingling. Bet you didn't even know the first part about that. It's ok though, most of you don't, you just want to believe you saved the world and made everything better.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by MsAphrodite
 


So my post ABOUT this shooting was irrelevant, but yours, about tyrants taking control of a country, wasn't.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 


You argue in circles.

Safety vs. liberty.

We choose liberty.

Not your country, not your issue.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by waynos
 



You think at the end of your nose when you need to think in a bigger picture. I cannot help you there.





new topics
top topics
 
129
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join