Huh! A guy got shot for his PS3 crazy! I wonder where?*ponders* and he does have a point i love guns hate killing and self defence with a gun is useless in close combat
Huh! A guy got shot for his PS3 crazy! I wonder where?*ponders* and he does have a point i love guns hate killing and self defence with a gun is useless in close combat
Chuckles I guess I will help. But it will cost you your soul.
That's because guns are easier to kill people with. Do you think that if all of a sudden guns disapeared people would stop murdering? Guns don't cause murder, they are used in murder because they are efficient. If I want to kill you and I don't have a gun I'm not going to say "well, okay. I was going to shoot you in the face, but since I don't have a gun I'll just give you a hug instead." I'm going to stab you. Or bludgeon you. Or poison you or run you over with my car. You're gettin' killed regardless. Getting rid of guns does nothing.Not really. It shows how important guns are to the American culture, and how many deaths are linked to it. Besides, you probably realize that, despite gun laws, guns are often still the leading cause of homocides in most developed countries.
... no duh. That's what I said: by your logic, there would be no such thing as self-defense. Self-defense is using force to protect yourself. If you can't pull a gun, you can't throw a punch or push someone off of you, either. Those are all acts of aggression.Originally Posted by Araciel
it was a bad way of saying yes you're right, by that logic there is no such thing as self defense. self defense is using force against force... what?
Too bad Michael Moore edited the US numbers to include legally justified homicides (self-defense, etc.) to bump the numbers up an extra couple thousand. Very legitimate.If you went to the source I gave you'd realize it's also on a respected Illinois facts page. I just remembered that the numbers themselves were the ones in the film.
yeah you're right. i just don't believe a gun should ever be used for self-defense. this is what i should have said in the beginning instead of trying to make it larger than that
But if there were no guns, the unintentional deaths would go down. A bullet can cut down someone by accident; a sword is virtually impossible to misuse and cut down an innocent. Besides, kids can get to them and set them off by accident...
And it's much easier and more efficient to use a gun. If someone wanted to murder someone from a distance it's easier... a melee weapon can't do that. The effeciency will create more deaths...
And sometimes just having a gun in the house can make the decision between a homocide or not. Mentally unstable or angry family members would more easily become victims of temptation.
The effeciency creating deaths, the unintended deaths, and temptation creating deaths would all be less without guns.
Furthermore, guns create the need for more guns. Every threat of a terrorist drives fear into you Americans, and you feel the need for guns. If someone takes out a gun even in self-defense, it will result in someone's death.
Violence begets violence; and guns make violence uneccesarily easy.
How often do innocent people get killed by stray bullets? Kids can kill themselves with kitchen knives.But if there were no guns, the unintentional deaths would go down. A bullet can cut down someone by accident; a sword is virtually impossible to misuse and cut down an innocent. Besides, kids can get to them and set them off by accident...
I call BS. People murdered an asston before guns were ever invented, and people murder an asston now. If I want to kill you, give me one reason why I wouldn't kill you with a knife if I didnt have access to a gun? In fact, it happens all the time.And it's much easier and more efficient to use a gun. If someone wanted to murder someone from a distance it's easier... a melee weapon can't do that. The effeciency will create more deaths...
Also, when people are killed by guns it's at close range 99 percent of the time. How often do people randomly get sniped? Almost never.
You're creating a bunch of hypothetical situations that are very rare. You can't ban something over obscure, unpredictable events that happen once in a blue moon.And sometimes just having a gun in the house can make the decision between a homocide or not. Mentally unstable or angry family members would more easily become victims of temptation.
I think this is a load of garbage personally, but what about criminals who get guns illegally? How am I supposed to defend myself against them?Furthermore, guns create the need for more guns. Every threat of a terrorist drives fear into you Americans, and you feel the need for guns. If someone takes out a gun even in self-defense, it will result in someone's death.
And don't even start with the terrorist nonsense. Nobody is trying to defend themselves against terrorists.
Most importantly, however, when my government decides to step out of line, I'd like them to know that I have the ability to defend myself against them. In my opinion thats the really important issue here. I'm not worried about a random criminal. I want politicians to know that I have the ability to fight back if need be.
Not that I need to at the moment. However, guns give power to the people and subtract power from politicians. How can that be a bad thing?
Guns are overrated.
It's sad how some people value guns way more than they value life. It's even more sad how people always say "_____ should be shot". It goes to show how much society nowadays revolves around guns.
If it's one thing that would keep me alive, the weapon's my life. I love shooting the 120mm main gun of the Abrams Tank, especially hearing it fire outside! It's like *KABOOM* and your like "WOOOH!".
Guns kill people too fast. I'd rather use a knife and stab them. At least I get to hear them scream. And btw, guns don't kill people, I do! HAHA!
Killing someone is not self-defence in my opinion. If you own a gun and they are pointing a gun at you, I don't think you should shoot them dead. I have no problem with disabling people who attack you, however, even if it's permanent. Self-defence is when you do something to your attacker so that you may escape in my opinion. It's not when you kill them.
just so no one has the wrong idea i do purely target shooting with a lot of responsible adults rifle shooting only 1 shot guns no automatics or nothing
life sucks
The fact that they are easy to kill with only makes them even more terrible tools. And seriously... it should be pretty obivious that something that's easy to kill with is more likely to cause deaths by accident than something that isn't.
Also, I think the fact that they are so easy to kill with actually DO encourage murderers. Trying to kill with, for example, a spoon is disscouraging because there's a high probability that you'll fail to kill the victim and get pwn'd yourself. Sure, a knife on the other hand isn't exactly hard to kill with either. But it IS still a lot harder and involves a greater risk than with a gun, and thus I DO think that some people who would kill you in an instant with a gun, actually would think twice before trying to do the same with a knife. And unlike guns, knifes serves other more useful purposes than killing.
Oh well...
This discussions as silly as "violent video games turn people violent". No. Just no. Be quiet you evil bastards*. *not aimed at EoFF members there.
If you give someone a gun, whether or not they shoot you in the face with it has nothing to do with you giving them a gun. Usually. The exceptions are the less intelligent ones, and the insane power loving ones. The fact is that there is a trigger on a gun. The choice of squeezing it or not is up to the person who's hand the gun is in.
Reading that, I realise I haven't successfully been able to put into words what I mean. Sorry 'bout that, I'll edit it if I figure out a better way to say it. Basically I'm saying that humans have brains, and we have immense power with our brains. Just because someone has a gun doesn't mean they will go on some violent rampage, shooting everything that moves. The choice is the human's, not the guns.
Unintentional shootings are more prevelant in America than you think. See more further below.How often do innocent people get killed by stray bullets? Kids can kill themselves with kitchen knives.
And most kids of 3 and up would know the dangers of a sharp object. Guns are less obvious. A curious child could more easily die from a gun.
Think about it. Would you want to fight gang wars with swords and clubs, or guns with further ranges? The more efficient, the easier to kill, and this fact could lead to more deaths.I call BS. People murdered an asston before guns were ever invented, and people murder an asston now. If I want to kill you, give me one reason why I wouldn't kill you with a knife if I didnt have access to a gun? In fact, it happens all the time.
Also, when people are killed by guns it's at close range 99 percent of the time. How often do people randomly get sniped? Almost never.
This is only a limited number of ways gun ownership can go sour. And despite your arguments, these can happen more often than you may think. See more about unintentional deaths below.You're creating a bunch of hypothetical situations that are very rare. You can't ban something over obscure, unpredictable events that happen once in a blue moon.
I was merely giving some examples of how gun ownership might spin out of control, and how it could at least partially have orchestrated those almost 12000 deaths. There are many other scenarios in which gun ownership can cause deaths. It doesn't matter how many I metion, though, the fact of the matter is that your country has more gun deaths than any other, and there's a reason for that. You may believe that there is no corellation between the laxer American gun laws and those murders have nothing to do with each other, that the murders would have occured anyway.I think this is a load of garbage personally, but what about criminals who get guns illegally? How am I supposed to defend myself against them?
And don't even start with the terrorist nonsense. Nobody is trying to defend themselves against terrorists.
Most importantly, however, when my government decides to step out of line, I'd like them to know that I have the ability to defend myself against them. In my opinion thats the really important issue here. I'm not worried about a random criminal. I want politicians to know that I have the ability to fight back if need be.
Not that I need to at the moment. However, guns give power to the people and subtract power from politicians. How can that be a bad thing?
The fact of the matter is, something caused each of those gun deaths, and I do not think that all of those would have occured if your gun laws were stricter. In fact, I think the majority of them were at least partially related to the gun laws, and some of them may have been completely avoided with better gun laws.
Our arguments will always boil down to the same thing: you think that gun ownership laws have little or nothing to do with the causes of these deaths, and I think they are directly related.
However, before you say that my arguments are hypothetical only, think of your arguments. You basically said you want guns legalized in your country for these two reasons: 1) in the case of a rebellion against your government, you want to be prepared; and 2) in case criminals have obtained guns and plan to attack you.
How is an organized American rebellion against your government and an invading force of gun-bearing criminals not a hypothetical situation? Hell, that's not just hypothetical, that falls into the vein of highly unlikely. Even if you wanted a rebellion, I doubt anyone would join you, and I don't think you're adamant enough to wage a one-man rebellion. I also don't see a point in rebelling agasint the American government, as faulted as it is. And the chance that a criminal would be dumb enough to shoot you with a hard-to-obtain gun (assuming there were gun laws in place) is highly unlikely. We have strict gun laws in Canada, and it is rare to have someone with an illegally obatined weapon to attack innocent bystanders.
And furthermore, despite reason 2), you say that your fears of terrorism have nothing to do with your need for guns. If the fear of enemies who obtained guns illegally and who will possibly attack you isn't a form of terrorism (in which case you "need a gun for protection"), I don't know what is.
You're trying to sidestep the main point here. It doesn't matter how many possible situations I list in which a gun could cause a murder, the fact is your country had almost twelve thousand homocides with guns in 1998, and in 2003 there was a total of 30 000 gun-related deaths including homocides, unintentional shootings. suicides etc. (This is the source. )
730 of those 30 000 were unintentional, wihch means that guns themselves caused those deaths more or less. A sword couldn't cut down an unintended victim unless the wielder was blind, but with stray bullets, it's all too easy. Suddenly all those "hypothetical" possibilites aren't as far-flung as you would beleive.
Last edited by Vincent, Thunder God; 11-30-2006 at 08:23 PM.
... maybe I'm real heartless, but I don't consider 730 deaths to be too many. Then again I don't consider any number to be too many seeing as I believe it's a right to own a gun, and the safety/security arguments are secondary IMO.
It's sad to see you don't understand nik's point about rebellion and defense against the government. That's one of the best reasons for owning a gun.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
