Chief Kehoe Compares Dynamite To Guns, page 3

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 03:02 PM by butcherguy

reply to post by Kryties

When your civil war is over with, and half your people are dead and the other half covered in blood and your country is in ruins I wonder if then you'll think it was worth it?

We had one already.
A lot of people claimed at the time that it wasn't worth it... including Lincoln. But he was the one that prosecuted the war, wasn't he?

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 03:04 PM by Kryties

reply to post by butcherguy

How nice for you.

Good luck with your war. Doubt we'll see many of you on the other side but good luck anyway

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 03:21 PM by ngchunter

Originally posted by Kryties
It comes down to this really: the gun advocate crowd do not care about how many people or children die by guns as long as they get to keep them.

How many people or children have died because I have the right to keep and bear arms? 0. You will not revoke my right. That some mentally ill individuals and criminals kill people with guns does not mean you have justification to infringe on my right as a law abiding citizen. The point you're missing is that those who abuse alcohol, drive recklessly, or both, do not provide justification to remove my right to drink or drive a car just because there's a chance I might abuse my rights and mix the two. Both are regulated to set rules against abuse, but so are firearms in this country. Heavily. Suggesting that I cannot be allowed to own semi-automatics because they're too effective is like suggesting that I cannot be allowed to drink vodka because it will get me too drunk.

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 03:27 PM by Kryties

Originally posted by ngchunter

How many people or children have died because I have the right to keep and bear arms? 0.

There's that "collateral damage" term again. Except in your case you seem to be in denial that people and children have died because guns.

You will not revoke my right.

I'm not revoking anything. Calm yourself down mate. Hope you're not that anxious when your holding a gun....

I'm having what is generally known as an opinion. If you don't like it, don't read it.

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 03:29 PM by marg6043

reply to post by ngchunter

I agree, sometimes people that are not from America or Americans can never understand that guns in the US is right, a right that was so important as to be the second Amendment in the US constitution, that alone tells how important was to our founding fathers for Americans to have this right as one of the top priority.

Is a reasoning behind that, but only we Americans that have been born under this right understand the meaning.

I am a proud gun owner and I will fight for that right, I am just there next to you.

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 03:34 PM by Orwells Ghost

reply to post by Kryties

Good luck with your police state. I hope it works out better for you than it has for others.

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 03:36 PM by Kryties

reply to post by marg6043

Amazing how the right to bear arms is upheld so strongly yet the right to free speech, including opinion, is so strongly fought against, including in this thread.

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 03:36 PM by Biigs

The USA is in a bit of a political nightmare regarding guns and crime.

1. Theres a massive amount of guns.
2. The constitution states any law abiding individual has a right to bear arms, which can not be effected by government or foreign threats.
3. Gun crime is high, but so is stopping crime with firearms.
4. Mass murder incidents are climbing, so doing something about it is conflicted with the previous points.

I think the UK is in a better position overall and to get to a similar place with the USA, is basically never going to happen and thus is idealistic. We dont worry about our kids being gunned down at school, nor to we worry about being car jacked, mugged etc with the criminal use of a firearm. This is simply unachievable in the USA. I do not envy the presidents predicament in trying to make the country safer, without stepping on constitutional rights or making crime worse due to (less legal guns for defensive purposes) and the criminal trafficking elements of gun supply being a constant threat against measures to stop gun related crime.

edit on 14-1-2013 by Biigs because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 03:36 PM by Kryties

Originally posted by Orwells Ghost
reply to post by Kryties

Good luck with your police state. I hope it works out better for you than it has for others.

What police state? I don't live in a police state, contrary to whatever nonsense you like to make up in your own head.

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 03:37 PM by ngchunter

Originally posted by Kryties

Originally posted by ngchunter

How many people or children have died because I have the right to keep and bear arms? 0.

There's that "collateral damage" term again. Except in your case you seem to be in denial that people and children have died because guns.

I never used the words collateral damage. Do not put words in my mouth. No one has died because I have the right to have guns.

I'm not revoking anything. Calm yourself down mate. Hope you're not that anxious when your holding a gun....

You wish for it to be revoked. I'm simply telling you, I will not give up my right. It's not a matter of being "anxious," and your obvious fear of me holding a gun only speaks to your own insecurities.

I'm having what is generally known as an opinion. If you don't like it, don't read it.

If I had the opinion that your right to free speech should be revoked, and there was a growing debate about whether or not to revoke your free speech rights, you probably would and should have a problem with my opinion. I will feel free to read and respond to your opinion, regardless if I like it or not. If you don't like that, then perhaps you should not be participating on a forum where both sides are allowed.

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 03:40 PM by hawkiye

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by butcherguy

There is a big difference between an inanimate object that doesn't kill and one that does.

Nice try attempting to label those of us who wish to see some sense in gun legislation as being nutters who fear inanimate objects though. Top notch effort there.

What sense is that? An irrational fear of an inanimate object that is only related to 1.5 percent of deaths yet you are hundreds of times more likely to die at the hands of a doctor or in a car accident and have no sense of fear of those terrible killers?

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 03:43 PM by Kryties

reply to post by ngchunter

Funny you talk of both sides of the debate yet the gun advocates seem to get together and gang up on those of us simply calling for a little common sense. Not only that, they deflect, cherry pick and literally make up complete lies in order to justify their argument - I have been in many a thread today alone where these tactics have occurred.

As far as I am concerned there is a concerted effort by the gun advocate crowd to stifle and crush any opinion that doesn't include allowing them to continue to have the right to shoot people, and in turn allow children and adults to be slaughtered.

edit on 14/1/2013 by Kryties because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 03:45 PM by hawkiye

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by ngchunter

Funny you talk of both sides of the debate yet the gun advocates seem to get together and gang up on those of us simply calling for a little common sense. Not only that, they deflect, cherry pick and literally make up complete lies in order to justify their argument - I have been in many a thread today alone where these tactics have occurred.

As far as I am concerned there is a concerted effort by the gun advocate crowd to stifle and crush any opinion that doesn't include allowing them to continue to have the right to shoot people, and in turn allow children and adults to be slaughtered.
edit on 14/1/2013 by Kryties because: (no reason given)

And specifically what lies would those be?

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 03:46 PM by Kryties

reply to post by hawkiye

As an example look a few posts above to the ridiculous police state nonsense comment made up by a particular member.

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 05:22 PM by Orwells Ghost

Originally posted by Kryties

Originally posted by Orwells Ghost
reply to post by Kryties

Good luck with your police state. I hope it works out better for you than it has for others.

What police state? I don't live in a police state, contrary to whatever nonsense you like to make up in your own head.

Maybe not today. The nanny state doesn't happen all at once, but in small increments. It's like slowly boiling a frog, and you're the frog. This is happening in your country, even faster than it is happening in mine. The second amendment of the U.S. Constitution was put in place to deter such practices and protect individual liberties from the excesses of government.

We'll see how you feel about the subject when the state legislates against your favourite dessert/fast food/television show because it's been deemed detrimental to your health or to your society (Will somebody think of the children!). Before you know it, you and thousands of your countrymen are throwing rocks at the police as they effortlessly break up your peaceful protest with their fancy assault rifles.

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 05:24 PM by Kryties

reply to post by Orwells Ghost

That post is laughable at best. I do not live in a police state and will not. This is not America mate, we are not an inherently violent people like the Americans are.

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 05:30 PM by Orwells Ghost

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by Orwells Ghost

That post is laughable at best. I do not live in a police state and will not. This is not America mate, we are not an inherently violent people like the Americans are.

Inherently violent? Now that's the truly laughable comment, especially coming from one whose nation was founded from the dregs of Europe; mere boat loads of criminals, rapists and thieves. Guess what, American's are human beings, just like Aussie's and run the gamut from good to bad, just like you guys.

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 05:32 PM by Kryties

reply to post by Orwells Ghost

Yeah, there's that mistake that Americans always make of thinking the Brits just dropped off the convicts and left them there unguarded.

Many Aussies descend from the guards, as I do. But nice try butchering history....

Criminals who stole bread to feed their families. Yeah, real nasty types they were

edit on 14/1/2013 by Kryties because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 05:37 PM by Orwells Ghost

reply to post by Kryties

You're really good at deflecting from the subject at hand. Tell me why you think the Second Amendment was included in the American Constitution, and try to leave out the racist undertones this time.

reply posted on 14-1-2013 @ 05:39 PM by Kryties

reply to post by Orwells Ghost

Actually it is you who are deflecting. The topic at hand is actually Chief Kehoe comparing dynamite to guns. I haven't forgotten the topic, it seems you have though.

Also, please don't accuse me of making racist undertones when I have done no such thing. It is extremely poor form.

edit on 14/1/2013 by Kryties because: (no reason given)

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 >> ^^TOP^^