SoulMonster Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 It's not hard to see how you all succumb so easily to dictatorships, monarchies and fascism.Ooh, get em Really, though. So much of this bullshit is about, "You know, the authorities really need to step in and handle it." Well, fuck that. It might be part of your culture to call the cops or your local assemblyman, to cry bully to the principal every time someone is mean, to trust that some unaccountable panel of "experts" is on the case - but much of the US, not all, instinctively rejects that shit. If there's an issue, you know who's supposed to handle it? I'm supposed to handle it. Our country was birthed from a fundamental and justified antipathy toward concentrated power and authority. Sorry if you guys don't like it.I'll make a deal, though, because I'm a fair guy. Let's have the cops get rid of all of their guns and a let's dismantle the standing military and the military industrial complex. Then I'll have an open discussion about gun control.Well, you have already trusted your authorities and accepted them to put many other things designed for killing on a list of what is illegal to own. I don't see many Americans crying out about not being allowed to own bazookas, or arguing that taking away your right to own land mines was wrong or that you should have handled the problem of Americans going rampage with anthrax yourself and not letting the auhorities restrict and control it. Adding assault guns to the list of what is hard to get access to, simply wouldn't make much of a difference and wouldn't be a watershed moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Why does anyone need to own an M-16 or an AK-47?What has need got to do with it? How many of your possessions are to do strictly with need?Because my need for a 65" TV doesn't put other people's lives possibly in danger I dont believe you, i dont trust you, i dont trust your ability to refrain from bashing someones head in with it, its dangerous, you shouldn't have one.Why does anyone need to own an M-16 or an AK-47?What has need got to do with it? How many of your possessions are to do strictly with need?Because my need for a 65" TV doesn't put other people's lives possibly in danger I dont believe you, i dont trust you, i dont trust your ability to refrain from bashing someones head in with it, its dangerous, you shouldn't have one.But the TV was made to just sit in the corner and be watched. A gun was specifically designed to fire a piece of metal out the end to kill something.Right but on their own neither can do shit, the human being is the active agent in the equation that knocks people off, the gun or the telly cant do nothing by themselves. And in the same way a gun is designed to shoot lead to kill people but can be used for other purposes, that same idea applies to most objects on this planet...but without the human intent everything is benign in terms of objects.By following that logic antrax and atom bombs should be legal to own, too. It is the human intent that makes all these things dangerous.The notion that we should focus on fixing humans rather than take away the things that serve little purpose than allowing us to execute our bad intentions, is really naive. We won't be able to eradicate mental illnesses, despair, hatred, urge to revenge, etc. And as long as people have easy access to weapons designed for killing other human beings, they will be used for that purpose. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) Bombs take more effort. I think guns are the most efficient way of killing somebody. If someone is purchasing materials to make a bomb, wouldn't that make their intentions obvious?He efficency argument makes me laugh, so not only are humans these raving loose cannons on the verge of cracking at any minute but they're also lazy bastards whoose rage to murder will wear out after a couple of minutes if there isnt an efficient murdering tool within arms reach No one has said humans are "raving loose cannons on the verge of cracking". But a small percentage of us are. It is a fact.And yeah, taking away the most efficient method of killing someone is guaranteed to reduce the overall deaths by killing. That is a fact, too.why ban guns and punish the the vast majority of gun owners that dont do these things and that are responsible. the people that are doing these shootings are so small in number compared to responsible gun owners and the overall population of the US. Because even if they are small in number they still do a lot of damage It is not fair that a small minority should ruin the fun for everyone, but that is how it is. The same goes for speed limits and many other things in society. If you have a responsible society who is serious about attempting to protect its people, then you either have to have a perfect way of screening gun buyers, or overall make guns much harder to get by. Edited July 24, 2015 by SoulMonster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Cnut Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 It's not hard to see how you all succumb so easily to dictatorships, monarchies and fascism.Ooh, get em Really, though. So much of this bullshit is about, "You know, the authorities really need to step in and handle it." Well, fuck that. It might be part of your culture to call the cops or your local assemblyman, to cry bully to the principal every time someone is mean, to trust that some unaccountable panel of "experts" is on the case - but much of the US, not all, instinctively rejects that shit. If there's an issue, you know who's supposed to handle it? I'm supposed to handle it. Our country was birthed from a fundamental and justified antipathy toward concentrated power and authority. Sorry if you guys don't like it.I'll make a deal, though, because I'm a fair guy. Let's have the cops get rid of all of their guns and a let's dismantle the standing military and the military industrial complex. Then I'll have an open discussion about gun control.Well, you have already trusted your authorities and accepted them to put many other things designed for killing on a list of what is illegal to own. I don't see many Americans crying out about not being allowed to own bazookas, or arguing that taking away your right to own land mines was wrong or that you should have handled the problem of Americans going rampage with anthrax yourself and not letting the auhorities restrict and control it. Adding assault guns to the list of what is hard to get access to, simply wouldn't make much of a difference and wouldn't be a watershed moment.Yeah but as previously explained there are legal poisons out there too as well as legal agents out there on the market with which to make a bomb so, yknow, you kinda have those options anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Cnut Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Bombs take more effort. I think guns are the most efficient way of killing somebody. If someone is purchasing materials to make a bomb, wouldn't that make their intentions obvious?He efficency argument makes me laugh, so not only are humans these raving loose cannons on the verge of cracking at any minute but they're also lazy bastards whoose rage to murder will wear out after a couple of minutes if there isnt an efficient murdering tool within arms reach No one has said humans are "raving loose cannons on the verge of cracking". But a small percentage of us are. It is a fact.And yeah, taking away the most efficient method of killing someone is guaranteed to reduce the overall deaths by killing. That is a fact, too. why ban guns and punish the the vast majority of gun owners that dont do these things and that are responsible. the people that are doing these shootings are so small in number compared to responsible gun owners and the overall population of the US. Because even if they are small in number they still do a lot of damage It is not fair that a small minority should ruin the fun for everyone, but that is how it is. The same goes for speed limits and many other things in society. If you have a responsible society who is serious about attempting to protect its people, then you either have to have a perfect way of screening gun buyers, or overall make guns much harder to get by.Thats whats implied though, that society at large cannot be trusted. So guns kill people? Ban guns. Some people find life hard? Dope em up until they are drooling window lickers, these ideas do not address the problem, they just paper over the cracks, if there is something in a small amount of people that causes them to crack then it is that thats the problem that needs addressing, not the fact that there are methods out there to kill, efficient or otherwise, there will always be methods to kill. Shit, guns are illegal here in England but if i wanted to turn someone over I could make a zip gun, knives longer than a swiss army knife are illegal to carry, you cant own rambo knives, bowie knives etc, i'll just go crack open my Mums chef set, you can ban anything you like, it wont address or sort out whatever it is in my head that makes me a psycho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magisme Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 It's not hard to see how you all succumb so easily to dictatorships, monarchies and fascism.Ooh, get em Really, though. So much of this bullshit is about, "You know, the authorities really need to step in and handle it." Well, fuck that. It might be part of your culture to call the cops or your local assemblyman, to cry bully to the principal every time someone is mean, to trust that some unaccountable panel of "experts" is on the case - but much of the US, not all, instinctively rejects that shit. If there's an issue, you know who's supposed to handle it? I'm supposed to handle it. Our country was birthed from a fundamental and justified antipathy toward concentrated power and authority. Sorry if you guys don't like it.I'll make a deal, though, because I'm a fair guy. Let's have the cops get rid of all of their guns and a let's dismantle the standing military and the military industrial complex. Then I'll have an open discussion about gun control.Well, you have already trusted your authorities and accepted them to....Nope. Don't assume what I trust. By the way, where did bazookas, land mines and weaponized anthrax come from anyway? Some crazy second amendment defender created them? Nope. Pretty sure governments did that. So trustworthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Cnut Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Thats a fair point too actually, not sure if Mags meant exactly that but the government didnt ask my fuckin permission about what they do or dont make illegal Soulie, I dont trust shit, its just how things are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 It's not hard to see how you all succumb so easily to dictatorships, monarchies and fascism.Ooh, get em Really, though. So much of this bullshit is about, "You know, the authorities really need to step in and handle it." Well, fuck that. It might be part of your culture to call the cops or your local assemblyman, to cry bully to the principal every time someone is mean, to trust that some unaccountable panel of "experts" is on the case - but much of the US, not all, instinctively rejects that shit. If there's an issue, you know who's supposed to handle it? I'm supposed to handle it. Our country was birthed from a fundamental and justified antipathy toward concentrated power and authority. Sorry if you guys don't like it.I'll make a deal, though, because I'm a fair guy. Let's have the cops get rid of all of their guns and a let's dismantle the standing military and the military industrial complex. Then I'll have an open discussion about gun control.Well, you have already trusted your authorities and accepted them to put many other things designed for killing on a list of what is illegal to own. I don't see many Americans crying out about not being allowed to own bazookas, or arguing that taking away your right to own land mines was wrong or that you should have handled the problem of Americans going rampage with anthrax yourself and not letting the auhorities restrict and control it. Adding assault guns to the list of what is hard to get access to, simply wouldn't make much of a difference and wouldn't be a watershed moment.Yeah but as previously explained there are legal poisons out there too as well as legal agents out there on the market with which to make a bomb so, yknow, you kinda have those options anyway.Bombs are illegal, yes.There will always be options if you want to kill someone. You could build a bomb, buy an illegal gun, use a knife or a car, or smother with a pillow or strangle with your hands. Making handguns harder to obtain won't remove all the killings, just a large share of the gun killings, and as such it is a sensible (I believe) step in the right direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Bombs take more effort. I think guns are the most efficient way of killing somebody. If someone is purchasing materials to make a bomb, wouldn't that make their intentions obvious?He efficency argument makes me laugh, so not only are humans these raving loose cannons on the verge of cracking at any minute but they're also lazy bastards whoose rage to murder will wear out after a couple of minutes if there isnt an efficient murdering tool within arms reach No one has said humans are "raving loose cannons on the verge of cracking". But a small percentage of us are. It is a fact.And yeah, taking away the most efficient method of killing someone is guaranteed to reduce the overall deaths by killing. That is a fact, too. why ban guns and punish the the vast majority of gun owners that dont do these things and that are responsible. the people that are doing these shootings are so small in number compared to responsible gun owners and the overall population of the US. Because even if they are small in number they still do a lot of damage It is not fair that a small minority should ruin the fun for everyone, but that is how it is. The same goes for speed limits and many other things in society. If you have a responsible society who is serious about attempting to protect its people, then you either have to have a perfect way of screening gun buyers, or overall make guns much harder to get by.Thats whats implied though, that society at large cannot be trusted. So guns kill people? Ban guns. Some people find life hard? Dope em up until they are drooling window lickers, these ideas do not address the problem, they just paper over the cracks, if there is something in a small amount of people that causes them to crack then it is that thats the problem that needs addressing, not the fact that there are methods out there to kill, efficient or otherwise, there will always be methods to kill.We are working on removing the reasons people want to kill eachother, whether they are social injustice, mental imbalances, bad upbringings, uncontrolled anger, gang disputes, and so on, and societies have worked on this since societies came to be. Making it harder to obtain handguns (and other instruments of killing) doesn't mean we are NOT trying to fix the underlying problems, it just means that we have realized these things are VERY hard to fix and that it might take us very long to get there (if we ever do), and that in the meantime we must just have to accept that we have to impose certain rules on people as a temporary solution. That is why we have speed limits, that is why we have mandatory children car seats, that is why civilians can't own weapons of mass destructions, and so on and so on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 It's not hard to see how you all succumb so easily to dictatorships, monarchies and fascism.Ooh, get em Really, though. So much of this bullshit is about, "You know, the authorities really need to step in and handle it." Well, fuck that. It might be part of your culture to call the cops or your local assemblyman, to cry bully to the principal every time someone is mean, to trust that some unaccountable panel of "experts" is on the case - but much of the US, not all, instinctively rejects that shit. If there's an issue, you know who's supposed to handle it? I'm supposed to handle it. Our country was birthed from a fundamental and justified antipathy toward concentrated power and authority. Sorry if you guys don't like it.I'll make a deal, though, because I'm a fair guy. Let's have the cops get rid of all of their guns and a let's dismantle the standing military and the military industrial complex. Then I'll have an open discussion about gun control.Well, you have already trusted your authorities and accepted them to....Nope. Don't assume what I trust. By the way, where did bazookas, land mines and weaponized anthrax come from anyway? Some crazy second amendment defender created them? Nope. Pretty sure governments did that. So trustworthy.I meant the American population. The American population have already accepted that the US goverment can impose various rules on what they (the population) is allowed to own. That list is pretty huge now. Adding hand guns to that list isn't the start of anything, it is just a continuation of an existing process. It doesn't mean the end to libery or freedom or whatever.As for governments creating land mines, bazookas and antrax, I don't know, a lot of weaponry is created by private corporations.Thats a fair point too actually, not sure if Mags meant exactly that but the government didnt ask my fuckin permission about what they do or dont make illegal Soulie, I dont trust shit, its just how things are.They certainly do ask the population in the States, and so far the population has said they want their handguns.As for not asking you, I suppose you live in a representative democracy, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
netcat Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 My city is currently full of demobilized soldiers straight from the war zone. Many of them bring souvenirs – guns, heavy weapons, grenade launchers. very soon our patritos and war heroes discover that in civilian life noone cares about them... Some sell their AKs for couple of bottles of vodka. others join criminal clans to defend their business interests. police on the other hand barely do shit, they are clearly afraid. Kiev used to be a quiet city with relatively low homicide rate. And now it’s full of illegal weapons and mentally unstable people who are willing to use it. In the nearest future it’s only gonna get worse. i imagine law-abiding citizens will be the only ones unarmed. many of them lying in the morgue with a tag on toe wondering where did they go wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bt88 Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Whenever this debate starts up, one of the main talking points is always "what about chicago? They have strict gun laws and the murder rates are high!!!" That's misguided, but it doesnt stop people from pointing it out. For one, Illinois' laws as a whole aren't as strict, and without federal regulation, it's still easy to get guns in. The guns in Chicago come from a very small network. And multiple studies have pointed to higher guns in use, more guns in use. yes this article comes from a super liberal website, but it links to multiple academic studies which are theoretically more objectivehttp://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/02/15/1599631/no-chicago-isnt-proof-that-gun-regulation-doesnt-work/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magisme Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 They certainly do ask the population in the States, and so far the population has said they want their handguns.That's not how it works at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 They certainly do ask the population in the States, and so far the population has said they want their handguns.That's not how it works at all.I am far from an expert but as far as I understand it, you have a representative democracy and your current chosen leaders (Congress) will not pass restrictive gun laws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magisme Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 I'm pretty sure you and others had already realized that a two party, corporate controlled system does not a representative democracy make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
netcat Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 I'm pretty sure you and others had already realized that a two party, corporate controlled system does not a representative democracy make.i guess ochlocracy is not for everyone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 I'm pretty sure you and others had already realized that a two party, corporate controlled system does not a representative democracy make.I agree it is seriously flawed, but I still think it is a representative democracy, and that if your population had voted for pro-gun laws politicians, legislation that would restrict gun access would have been implemented. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magisme Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) I'm pretty sure you and others had already realized that a two party, corporate controlled system does not a representative democracy make.I agree it is seriously flawed, but I still think it is a representative democracy, and that if your population had voted for pro-gun laws politicians, legislation that would restrict gun access would have been implemented.Electoral politics is so much more complicated than that, so to say that gun laws would be enacted if more of the population supported them is just wrong. If it became one of the main issues upon which people voted, maybe, but that's just not the case. Even after it's a given that money chooses the candidates and most of the population doesn't vote because why bother, how many people do you think go to the poll and make gun control the main decider for them? Not many. I don't have polls in front of me, but I'd bet a significant majority of Americans do support tougher gun laws.Edit: I'm basically throwing up the downzy signal when I say I don't have the polls in front of me. Drop some links from the google! Edited July 24, 2015 by magisme Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 I'm pretty sure you and others had already realized that a two party, corporate controlled system does not a representative democracy make.I agree it is seriously flawed, but I still think it is a representative democracy, and that if your population had voted for pro-gun laws politicians, legislation that would restrict gun access would have been implemented.Electoral politics is so much more complicated than that, so to say that gun laws would be enacted if more of the population supported them is just wrong. If it became one of the main issues upon which people voted, maybe, but that's just not the case. Even after it's a given that money chooses the candidates and most of the population doesn't vote because why bother, how many people do you think go to the poll and make gun control the main decider for them? Not many. I don't have polls in front of me, but I'd bet a significant majority of Americans do support tougher gun laws.You are right, it could that the majority wants stricter gun laws but just hasn't made it a priority when choosing politicians. I don't know. Still, if you want it strongly enough you just have to vote in that direction and I am sure it will happen.Here are the numbers, btw, seems like it is split in half: http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magisme Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) I'm pretty sure you and others had already realized that a two party, corporate controlled system does not a representative democracy make.I agree it is seriously flawed, but I still think it is a representative democracy, and that if your population had voted for pro-gun laws politicians, legislation that would restrict gun access would have been implemented.Electoral politics is so much more complicated than that, so to say that gun laws would be enacted if more of the population supported them is just wrong. If it became one of the main issues upon which people voted, maybe, but that's just not the case. Even after it's a given that money chooses the candidates and most of the population doesn't vote because why bother, how many people do you think go to the poll and make gun control the main decider for them? Not many. I don't have polls in front of me, but I'd bet a significant majority of Americans do support tougher gun laws.You are right, it could that the majority wants stricter gun laws but just hasn't made it a priority when choosing politicians. I don't know. Still, if you want it strongly enough you just have to vote in that direction and I am sure it will happen.Here are the numbers, btw, seems like it is split in half: http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htmInteresting. I could have sworn I heard majority opinion was for. Maybe it's when you ask specifically about assault weapons. Don't know.Anyway, while I've been supporting gun rights here, I see this and have to .Do you think having stricter gun control laws would reduce the number of gun-related deaths in the country, or not? margin of error ± 4.5 Would reduce 40%Would not reduce 60% Edited July 24, 2015 by magisme Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Yeah, I felt the same when reading it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bono Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 America's view on guns is perverse and idiotic. The rest of the world knows it and the stats prove it. But it's in America's constitutaion so...... YEEHAW MOTHERFUCKERS!!! BANG BANG! SHOOT'EM UP!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Cnut Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 America's view on guns is perverse and idiotic. The rest of the world knows it and the stats prove it. But it's in America's constitutaion so...... YEEHAW MOTHERFUCKERS!!! BANG BANG! SHOOT'EM UP!!!!Did you ever consider a career in the foreign office? With a reasonable non-patronising approach like this you'd be a hit at conferences, I can see your sensitive caring approach swaying American opinion in no time 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magisme Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 Yeah, I felt the same when reading it.It's like if they admit an obvious thing they'll go down a slippery slope in their own mind. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bono Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 America's view on guns is perverse and idiotic. The rest of the world knows it and the stats prove it. But it's in America's constitutaion so...... YEEHAW MOTHERFUCKERS!!! BANG BANG! SHOOT'EM UP!!!!Did you ever consider a career in the foreign office? With a reasonable non-patronising approach like this you'd be a hit at conferences, I can see your sensitive caring approach swaying American opinion in no time You are ridiculous. This is a debate that's been going on for forever and it's a stupid conversation because the evidence is there for all to see that what I said is true. It's beyond the point of being sensitive and caring. Ameicans who cling to this stupid ideology that more guns is better aren't worth the sensitve caring approach anymore. Their attitude towards guns is perverse and idiotic and that's the truth. I'll say it again. The world knows it, the stats prove it and yet the Americans argue it. You can only be sensitive and caring for so long until you say fuck it. I'm not tryingt o sway anyone's opinions because honestly you can't fix stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.