REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/socrazy.gif" alt="" />Another classic logical fallacy. How does "who's fault is it" help an innocent person who just got killed by a drunk driver? Our duty is to prevent it from happening, not just lay blame.
Not only that we are not preventing it, we are pouring oil on the fire by selling people liquor and serving them drinks.
How about a knife? Did you know that there was a mass school killing in which 7 died and ten were wounded, accomplished with a knife?Try walking in a school and killing a bunch of people with a pencil or a bathtub.
Currently, where I live, I reckon it's more dangerous to have a gun in my home than to not have one. If law enforcement officers lost the ability to control my neighborhood, then I suppose the risk of being injured by a criminal would outweigh the risk of my being injured by my own gun in my own home. At that point I would get a gun. But the truth is, as stinkeye pointed out, we screwed up a long, long time ago in this country, allowing the production, importation, and possession of firearms by just about everybody.The REALITY is that there are somewhere around 300 MILLION guns in the hands of private citizens in the US. The cats out of the bag and it's never going back in.
That being said. Gun control laws have no effect on criminals and gun crime. Someone that wants a gun to use in a crime is not going down to the gun shop and filling out paperwork for a legal firearm. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/socrazy.gif" alt="" />
I thoroughly agree.The ignorance of history on this BB (is) utterly F'n astounding.
Stinkeye wrote that. What do you think he meant by it? It seems he is stating, when he writes "The cat's out of the bag," that there are too many firearms available in the United States. Available to criminals and non-criminals alike. When he added, "and it's never going back in," he is implying that gun control laws will now be ineffective, and it would now be better for non-criminals to arm themselves against criminals and to have the right to protect themselves with a firearm as they go about their day to day lives, rather than to rely on any legal attempts to restricting a criminal's access to firearms. At some point the "cat" was "in the bag," i.e. there weren't too many firearms available in the United States, and now the "cat" is "out of the bag," and for whatever reason, there are too many firearms in the United States. For some reason the production, importation, and possession of firearms by individuals was not restricted, and now the "cat's out of the bag."The REALITY is that there are somewhere around 300 MILLION guns in the hands of private citizens in the US. The cat's out of the bag and it's never going back in.
"The cat's out of the bag" is a little misleading. It implies that gun ownership was, at some time, lower than it is today. I think the contrary is definitely true - that there are fewer guns per household in the USA than ever before, and that this number has been more or less decreasing for over 200 years.Stinkeye wrote that. What do you think he meant by it? It seems he is stating, when he writes "The cat's out of the bag," that there are too many firearms available in the United States. Available to criminals and non-criminals alike. When he added, "and it's never going back in," he is implying that gun control laws will now be ineffective, and it would now be better for non-criminals to arm themselves against criminals and to have the right to protect themselves with a firearm as they go about their day to day lives, rather than to rely on any legal attempts to restricting a criminal's access to firearms. At some point the "cat" was "in the bag," i.e. there weren't too many firearms available in the United States, and now the "cat" is "out of the bag," and for whatever reason, there are too many firearms in the United States. For some reason the production, importation, and possession of firearms by individuals was not restricted, and now the "cat's out of the bag."The REALITY is that there are somewhere around 300 MILLION guns in the hands of private citizens in the US. The cat's out of the bag and it's never going back in.
Good argument there GWS. Try and make a point next time. Thanks in advance. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/socrazy.gif" alt="" /><img src="/forum/images/graemlins/socrazy.gif" alt="" />Another classic logical fallacy. How does "who's fault is it" help an innocent person who just got killed by a drunk driver? Our duty is to prevent it from happening, not just lay blame.
Not only that we are not preventing it, we are pouring oil on the fire by selling people liquor and serving them drinks.
Do a little sociology research and come back when you figure out whether regular church attendance positively, or negatively, correlates with crime and gun use rates in a person by person sample. The answers are out there, and, surprise surprise, when people attend church regularly they are less likely to commit crimes, and less likely to use guns in criminal acts.Face facts, the USA is a violent society in the context of high per capita income nations. This is as true of knife violence as it is of gun violence.
Another fact that needs to be faced is that almost 80% of people in the US identify themselves as Christians and 70% attend church regularly. ...
Ban mousetraps. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/cussing.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />For the millionth time: ONLY guns, of all things that pro-gun retards keep bringing up over and over again, are designed and built specifically to kill and maim living things. They have NO other purpose, unlike pencils, bathtubs and alcohol.
We are doing all kinds of things to educate people on dangers of drinking and driving, domestic violence and alcohol abuse.
We are doing NOTHING like that about guns. We are glorifying guns and perpetuate the myth that they are necessary. Until that changes, I agree, ban will not work. Gun control, education and people's change in attitude towards guns - yes.
Hunting is a legitimate sport, and is even protected in some areas. It is also used as a cost-effective population control.For the millionth time: ONLY guns, of all things that pro-gun retards keep bringing up over and over again, are designed and built specifically to kill and maim living things.
Guns are not only, or even principally, used to kill people. They are used for defense and hunting, as they have been used for hundreds of years. Only criminals and armies buy guns to kill people. Most guns are bought for defense or hunting.We are doing all kinds of things to educate people on dangers of drinking and driving, domestic violence and alcohol abuse.
We are doing NOTHING like that about guns. We are glorifying guns and perpetuate the myth that they are necessary. Until that changes, I agree, ban will not work. Gun control, education and people's change in attitude towards guns - yes.
Don't forget insecticide. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/shameonyou.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />Ban mousetraps. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/cussing.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />For the millionth time: ONLY guns, of all things that pro-gun retards keep bringing up over and over again, are designed and built specifically to kill and maim living things. They have NO other purpose, unlike pencils, bathtubs and alcohol.
We are doing all kinds of things to educate people on dangers of drinking and driving, domestic violence and alcohol abuse.
We are doing NOTHING like that about guns. We are glorifying guns and perpetuate the myth that they are necessary. Until that changes, I agree, ban will not work. Gun control, education and people's change in attitude towards guns - yes.
The hole that everyone leaves out are stray bullets. YOu don't see a stray knife kill an innocent (well, aside from that one guy in the movie Desperado). WAY too many people completely out of the fray have been killed by stray bullets.Good argument there GWS. Try and make a point next time. Thanks in advance. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/socrazy.gif" alt="" /><img src="/forum/images/graemlins/socrazy.gif" alt="" />Another classic logical fallacy. How does "who's fault is it" help an innocent person who just got killed by a drunk driver? Our duty is to prevent it from happening, not just lay blame.
Not only that we are not preventing it, we are pouring oil on the fire by selling people liquor and serving them drinks.
Oh you got the point. That's whay you took the time and effort to change the quote back. I changed it back again. So you can not respond to it again. Because you can't.
<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/roflmao.gif" alt="" />
If you are so hot to ban things because you are so concerned about the deaths of innocent people, lets talk about how many people booze kills. Drunk drivers kill around 40 thousand + people a year. But that’s only the tip of the iceberg. There’s all those people that drink themselves to death. Arguably, they are doing it to themselves. I wouldn’t include that. But since you like to ad in firearm suicides, why not? Same thing. Then we can talk about the link between violent crime and alcohol. Statistically that one is horrendous. Did you know that alcohol is responsible for more crime than all the illegal drugs combined?
Doesn’t all that death and destruction bother you? The deaths of innocents? The senseless slaughter of people who have done nothing wrong?
How come you don’t want to ban alcohol?
And the law against carrying knives in the UK hasn’t done much good has it? Lots of stabbings, aren’t there? Matter of fact, the rate of violent crime in the UK is higher than it is in the US, isn’t it? There’s a success story for you.
Wouldn’t stray bullets killing innocent bystanders be a lot like drunk drivers mowing people down on the sidewalk? An out of control projectile is exactly what happens when someone gets behind the wheel drunk. Only in that case, the projectile weighs over a ton instead of a few grains and has the ability to take out a house or an entire family walking/driving down the street.The hole that everyone leaves out are stray bullets. YOu don't see a stray knife kill an innocent (well, aside from that one guy in the movie Desperado). WAY too many people completely out of the fray have been killed by stray bullets.Good argument there GWS. Try and make a point next time. Thanks in advance. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/socrazy.gif" alt="" /><img src="/forum/images/graemlins/socrazy.gif" alt="" />Another classic logical fallacy. How does "who's fault is it" help an innocent person who just got killed by a drunk driver? Our duty is to prevent it from happening, not just lay blame.
Not only that we are not preventing it, we are pouring oil on the fire by selling people liquor and serving them drinks.
Oh you got the point. That's whay you took the time and effort to change the quote back. I changed it back again. So you can not respond to it again. Because you can't.
<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/roflmao.gif" alt="" />
If you are so hot to ban things because you are so concerned about the deaths of innocent people, lets talk about how many people booze kills. Drunk drivers kill around 40 thousand + people a year. But that’s only the tip of the iceberg. There’s all those people that drink themselves to death. Arguably, they are doing it to themselves. I wouldn’t include that. But since you like to ad in firearm suicides, why not? Same thing. Then we can talk about the link between violent crime and alcohol. Statistically that one is horrendous. Did you know that alcohol is responsible for more crime than all the illegal drugs combined?
Doesn’t all that death and destruction bother you? The deaths of innocents? The senseless slaughter of people who have done nothing wrong?
How come you don’t want to ban alcohol?
And the law against carrying knives in the UK hasn’t done much good has it? Lots of stabbings, aren’t there? Matter of fact, the rate of violent crime in the UK is higher than it is in the US, isn’t it? There’s a success story for you.
Is it possible to get guns completely out of this society? I doubt it.
However, for every proponent of the Wild West mentality, the blood of the innocent is partially on your hands. Imagine how you would all feel if it was someone close to you who walked out of a store or some such straight into a stray bullet. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/socrazy.gif" alt="" />
Hey, I'm with you on a lot of what you're saying.Wouldn’t stray bullets killing innocent bystanders be a lot like drunk drivers mowing people down on the sidewalk? An out of control projectile is exactly what happens when someone gets behind the wheel drunk. Only in that case, the projectile weighs over a ton instead of a few grains and has the ability to take out a house or an entire family walking/driving down the street.The hole that everyone leaves out are stray bullets. YOu don't see a stray knife kill an innocent (well, aside from that one guy in the movie Desperado). WAY too many people completely out of the fray have been killed by stray bullets.Good argument there GWS. Try and make a point next time. Thanks in advance. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/socrazy.gif" alt="" /><img src="/forum/images/graemlins/socrazy.gif" alt="" />Another classic logical fallacy. How does "who's fault is it" help an innocent person who just got killed by a drunk driver? Our duty is to prevent it from happening, not just lay blame.
Not only that we are not preventing it, we are pouring oil on the fire by selling people liquor and serving them drinks.
Oh you got the point. That's whay you took the time and effort to change the quote back. I changed it back again. So you can not respond to it again. Because you can't.
<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/roflmao.gif" alt="" />
If you are so hot to ban things because you are so concerned about the deaths of innocent people, lets talk about how many people booze kills. Drunk drivers kill around 40 thousand + people a year. But that’s only the tip of the iceberg. There’s all those people that drink themselves to death. Arguably, they are doing it to themselves. I wouldn’t include that. But since you like to ad in firearm suicides, why not? Same thing. Then we can talk about the link between violent crime and alcohol. Statistically that one is horrendous. Did you know that alcohol is responsible for more crime than all the illegal drugs combined?
Doesn’t all that death and destruction bother you? The deaths of innocents? The senseless slaughter of people who have done nothing wrong?
How come you don’t want to ban alcohol?
And the law against carrying knives in the UK hasn’t done much good has it? Lots of stabbings, aren’t there? Matter of fact, the rate of violent crime in the UK is higher than it is in the US, isn’t it? There’s a success story for you.
Is it possible to get guns completely out of this society? I doubt it.
However, for every proponent of the Wild West mentality, the blood of the innocent is partially on your hands. Imagine how you would all feel if it was someone close to you who walked out of a store or some such straight into a stray bullet. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/socrazy.gif" alt="" />
I just find it amusing that alcohol kills as many or more innocent people than guns, and yet there is little outcry. But I guess they are less dead because the alcohol wasn’t designed with killing intent.
Somebody should carve that on their tombstones.
BUT HERE IS THE CRUX OF THE MATTER THAT THE ANTI GUN PEOPLE WILL NEVER DISCUSS HERE, OR IN ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OF THIS SUBJECT.
(And, like every other single time I have posted this, with sources and links, they ignore it, don’t want to talk about it, and/or change the subject or just go away)
1. In EVERY single state/municipality that has instituted strict gun control, the rate of gun/violent crime has gone UP.
2. In EVERY single state/municipality that has instituted relaxed concealed carry laws (Meaning if you have no history of mental instability or drug use, are not a convicted felon and are able to pass the prescribed courses, you have a right to carry a handgun concealed on your person) the rate of gun/violent crime has gone DOWN.
Given the above, how do you rationalize banning guns in this country? How do you get past that? I would really love to hear SOMEONE… ANYONE from the anti gun contingent address the above points, one and two. How do you explain the above?
Why have strict gun laws always resulted in INCREASED gun crime in this country?
Why have liberalized concealed carry laws always resulted in DECREASED gun crime in this country?
Tell me how you rationalize that?
I’d really like to know.