MERGED--> all Gun Control discussion

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I like to drive and I like to shoot. The laws for driving are as ineffective as the ones for guns, but they're all in place so we should feel better.

Why not just get rid of all laws? Man, you're brilliant...

You're right seat belts just get in the way, lets get rid of them. Who cares what side of the road, if you want to drive in the middle you should just in the middle, do what you man. Anarchy in the USA :rockon:
 
We need those laws so they can make money. Here it's illegal to drive without a seatbelt but you can ride a motorcycle without a helmet. Brilliant. You love big Government aye? Tell me what to do, I'm so helpless.
 
We need those laws so they can make money. Here it's illegal to drive without a seatbelt but you can ride a motorcycle without a helmet. Brilliant. You love big Government aye? Tell me what to do, I'm so helpless.

You don't think deterring someone from driving 70 in front of a school saves lives?
 
I had a neighbor killed when I was growing up. A very nice middle class suburban neighborhood. The husband and wife got in an argument, he stormed out of the house bought a gun came back and killed her in her sleep. I always wonder if he had to weight a few days if that nice old woman would still be around...
 
We need those laws so they can make money. Here it's illegal to drive without a seatbelt but you can ride a motorcycle without a helmet. Brilliant. You love big Government aye? Tell me what to do, I'm so helpless.

So because your state leaves a legislative gap for motorcycle helmets, that relates to gun control, how?
 
Likewise. All talk.

Of course I'm all talk. :lol: What else can I do? Come down there and beat you up and take your guns? Write letters to US politicians and have them taken seriously? No, I'm not American so I have no power. But I can discuss, and point out flaws in arguments, as well as support and empathize with US citizens who do want change.

Big deal.

I think that comment pretty much sums up your attitude right there. :up:
 
He didn't and maybe...

Psychologically speaking it's much harder to kill with a knife.

A ton of folks have no problem with it.

I think that comment pretty much sums up your attitude right there. :up:


If you're going to have guns you'll have gun deaths. If you're going to have cars you'll have car deaths. But not from either of mine.


So because your state leaves a legislative gap for motorcycle helmets, that relates to gun control, how?

I wasn't trying to relate it stfu.
 
A ton of folks have no problem with it.
With what? Killing?



If you're going to have guns you'll have gun deaths. If you're going to have cars you'll have car deaths. But not from either of mine.
One of these is a common necessity, the other is not.



I wasn't trying to relate it stfu.
Wow, your propensity to anger and attack makes me scared that you collect guns for shits and giggles...
 
With what? Killing?




One of these is a common necessity, the other is not.




Wow, your propensity to anger and attack makes me scared that you collect guns for shits and giggles...


Yes


The one that was invented first?


It's good to have fear, and anger.
 
I personally felt a lot safer with a side arm while in Baghdad. I know what you're thinking -- that's a war zone, of course you need a gun there. But I felt a lot safer in Baghdad than in East St. Louis at night.

Everyone can agree, that mutual disarmament is a great thing. If it were possible, let's do it. Unfortunately, I don't think it is possible. So, personal protection will always be needed in certain areas, at certain times, for obvious reasons.

I'd like to get rid of my anti-virus software on my computer, but I know I can't because I have people trying to break into my computer 24/7. If the hackers would agree, we could let down our defenses and save a lot of time/money.

Or we could round them up and shoot them. :wink:

Oh, and I prefer assault rifles, because it's easier to defend my home from a 100 yards or so. ;)
 
Everyone can agree, that mutual disarmament is a great thing. If it were possible, let's do it. Unfortunately, I don't think it is possible.

It would take years for stricter gun control to impact the number of illegal guns and criminals with guns out there, but it would eventually happen.

Oh, and I prefer assault rifles, because it's easier to defend my home from a 100 yards or so. ;)

I understand you're being facetious, but can you imagine anyone feeling that degree of threat inside their home from someone 100 yards away?
 
I actually never understood this sheer feeling of threat that some Americans seem to feel on basically a daily basis and use as their justification for having guns. As somebody who grew up in a war zone, you'd think that a person like myself would be the one stockpiling assault rifles and what not to ensure that when I'm shot at again, I have a means of retaliating, but I don't. I absolutely don't comprehend on any level at all where this feeling, and the strength and conviction of it comes from. It's really bizarre.
 
I'd imagine anyone can understand the appeal, even if only in fantasy, of having some 'foolproof' means of instantly incapacitating anyone who tries to harm you--childlike daydreams of some magic shock-administering button that'd throw any attacker on their back for several minutes, stuff like that. Of course, in real life that'd be awful, because then everyone would have one and lots of people would wind up using them for situations having nothing to do with justified self-defense. But I can understand the appeal, particularly if you've been the victim of a physically injurious crime before.
 
I'd venture a guess that the vast majority of gun supporters have not been physically injured in a criminal manner before, though.

Like you said, I could understand the appeal, but the way the argument often comes across, it's almost like that's the primary goal and then I wonder whether these people ever step back and re-consider their lives and their circumstances, because the likely rational conclusion is that they don't need an assault rifle to protect themselves against...pretty much anything.
 
I own an assault rifle for fun not fear. The ones who live in unjustified fear are those that would like to see them banned, and the Democrat leaders who fear enacting a ban.
 
I own an assault rifle for fun not fear. The ones who live in unjustified fear are those that would like to see them banned, and the Democrat leaders who fear enacting a ban.

This is complete BS. I know many of gun owners who own because they live in unjustified fear...
 
I think we are completely justified, as a free and democratic society, to impose gun control laws, and one of those would be to ban assault rifles.

It infringes on a person's fun the same way that prohibitions against narcotics infringe on mine, but dem's the breaks.
 
I think we are completely justified, as a free and democratic society, to impose gun control laws, and one of those would be to ban assault rifles.

It infringes on a person's fun the same way that prohibitions against narcotics infringe on mine, but dem's the breaks.


Well narcs do kill a hell of a lot more people than assault rifles, but I'm for legalizing those as well.
 
Back
Top Bottom