Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: garebear on August 31, 2012, 07:45:22 AM
-
How many American men, women and children have to be shot to death before we are willing to admit that the fantasy of the concealed carrier will not win the day? How long before the notion of the heroic vigilante, seated in the back of the theater, perched behind the counter of the supermarket or quietly taking notes in the back of the class, will emerge to stop the madness and, finally, like the reality of shooting-victims, be put to rest?
Even if this were to happen half the time, it wouldn’t be mathematically sufficient. Are you honestly willing to let some of your own family members be shot to death so that an armed bystander can ‘set things straight’ in then end? It should pain everyone that it NEVER happens doubly so. But it never does. Just as sure as the “thoughts and prayers” will go out to the victims, time after time after time, we can rest assured that nothing will ever be done. No thoughts changed nor laws enacted. ‘Freedom’ is working and, once we get these bodies off of aisle 6 or cleared from campus, we can get back to business, start classes back up and go right back to believing it. Otherwise, if we don’t have enough guns and ammo to give to every nutjob who has ‘been acting strangely’ but is exercising his ‘god-given right’ to blow the brains out of unarmed civilians, the gubment will come for us and kill us all. At this rate, I’ll take my chances with the government. How many civilians has the English military and police put away compared to American mass murderers?
I mean this not as a rhetorical rant, but I would literally like your acceptable body count. USA Today notes that 25,423 murders by gunfire took place in the United States in 2006 through 2007, which is more than half the population of my hometown. I wonder if the people of my hometown would be willing to lose half of their friends and family, or even one, for our absolute unnecessary right to own guns with little or no oversight.
Let’s dabble in counterfactual thinking. For a moment, suspend your known history of the United States. Just for a moment, pretend that the Founding Fathers saw no point in allowing every citizen to legally own a firearm and instead forbade in the Constitution. Let’s say we were arguing to get it an amendment LEGALIZING firearms because that had never existed before. For our argument, we can refer to a country called X. X is the actual America you know today, where gun violence is raging and, each week, another killing spree emerges in the news. (Some might argue that this is not really a counterfactual argument in the theoretical , but is known as that perspective which is the rest of the world but not American, but I digress.) Would any politician in his or her right mind actually make this argument? Of course not. It is absurd on its face. Such is the madness of our current state, where, dead bod after dead body, the ‘thoughts and prayers go out to the victims’. It is time our politicians, and we ourselves, gave more than lip service and did something about the problem. I want some protection; you can save your thoughts and prayers.
-
Non sense, if people didn't have guns they would find another way to kill other people. Your whole argument is fatally flawed, because the problem is the people that commit these murders not the tool they happen to use. When the Manson family was out slaughtering people, I didn't see an outcry for knife control. The statistic you sited, 25K is about .00008% of the population. While about 32K die in car accidents, should we try to ban cars? The statistics show you have a better chance of being killed in a car accident than being shot and killed. Try being honest, you simply don't like guns, and since you don't like them, you think no one else should be able to have one.
-
Non sense, if people didn't have guns they would find another way to kill other people. Your whole argument is fatally flawed, because the problem is the people that commit these murders not the tool they happen to use. When the Manson family was out slaughtering people, I didn't see an outcry for knife control. The statistic you sited, 25K is about .00008% of the population. While about 32K die in car accidents, should we try to ban cars? The statistics show you have a better chance of being killed in a car accident than being shot and killed. Try being honest, you simply don't like guns, and since you don't like them, you think no one else should be able to have one.
Actually, I surrender to your superior logic.
Just look at all the mass killings perpetrated with the knife.
I should have never brought it up, so as to be destroyed by your narrative.
Man, you're dumb.
-
Wasnt there some dudes in China that literally stabbed like 80-100 people to death Garebear? Cause I'm pretty sure there was.
People kill people. They use tools to accomplish that goal. Guns, bombs, knives, sharp sticks, stones - it doesn't matter.
-
Wasnt there some dudes in China that literally stabbed like 80-100 people to death Garebear? Cause I'm pretty sure there was.
People kill people. They use tools to accomplish that goal. Guns, bombs, knives, sharp sticks, stones - it doesn't matter.
I think that number is a little high.
I think I remember hearing of some guy who stabbed a bunch of kids in a kindergarten.
But just imagine if that guy had a gun. You and I both know it would have exponential.
I'm not asking for the end of guns in America. Personally, I don't think that's possible. There are too many already. That is something we both already know also. I would like to see more oversight on the matter. That's all.
The NRA is simply illogical, given the current pace of victims.
I remember, a few months ago, on this very site, where some American was actually making fun of how many a crazy Chinese guy stabbed. Can you imagine that guy in America? Come on, man. He would have had a gun and killed ten times that many people.
Of course, we are so numb to it, it would have been on the news for about five days, and then we would have largely forgotten about it.
Think about it now. If someone "just kills five people" it barely registers on our radar.
-
Wasnt there some dudes in China that literally stabbed like 80-100 people to death Garebear? Cause I'm pretty sure there was.
People kill people. They use tools to accomplish that goal. Guns, bombs, knives, sharp sticks, stones - it doesn't matter.
China has a mass knife/hatchet attack nearly every month. Gaybear is just a whiny little bitch.
-
Actually, I surrender to your superior logic.
Just look at all the mass killings perpetrated with the knife.
I should have never brought it up, so as to be destroyed by your narrative.
Man, you're dumb.
I'm dumb? You blame an inanimate object for the woes of the world. Give me a fucking break ::) People are the problem not the gun, not the knife, not the bomb! I guess that little fact has escaped you
-
I'm dumb? You blame an inanimate object for the woes of the world. Give me a fucking break ::) People are the problem not the gun, not the knife, not the bomb! I guess that little fact has escaped you
Right. There were so many mass killings before the gun.
Good point.
-
Right. There were so many mass killings before the gun.
Good point.
Your god damn right there were
-
Honestly, governments wanting to take weapons away from civilians is a way to control the civilians with their superior gun power and the civilian's lack of it.
This is quite common in history, with these chinese, japanese. Sword bans, people resorting to invention of various hand fighting techniques, unconvential weapons such as nun chucks, chairs, etc...
People kill people. A poorly moraly educated society will kill and maim and harm and steal regardless of any law. This is the first problem.
The second problem is, you ban gun ownership and the government owns everyone. Cops are above the law as it is. Government is corrupt and does shit all and fuck all they want already...
The funny thing is... in North America people FEAR government... while in the rest of the world europe/africa/middleeast/south america, governments FEAR people and people revolt and dont give a shit.
Look at the occupy movement. Look at the multi million people world record, historical record protests against the fradulent and murderous middle east wars, in particular the iraq war. Did the governments change their mind? No they just beat the shit out of alot of ppl and still went ahead and killed alot of ppl somewhere else (eg: middle east).
If people cannot protect themselves and their property by their own will.. then... yeah... we live in a police state as it is.
I am not against guns/weapons, although I am obviously against crime.. but as someone already mentioned, if ppl cant kill with guns, they surely can kill by other unconvential methods. The problem is the social education.
-
Honestly, governments wanting to take weapons away from civilians is a way to control the civilians with their superior gun power and the civilian's lack of it.
This is quite common in history, with these chinese, japanese. Sword bans, people resorting to invention of various hand fighting techniques, unconvential weapons such as nun chucks, chairs, etc...
People kill people. A poorly moraly educated society will kill and maim and harm and steal regardless of any law. This is the first problem.
The second problem is, you ban gun ownership and the government owns everyone. Cops are above the law as it is. Government is corrupt and does shit all and fuck all they want already...
The funny thing is... in North America people FEAR government... while in the rest of the world europe/africa/middleeast/south america, governments FEAR people and people revolt and dont give a shit.
Look at the occupy movement. Look at the multi million people world record, historical record protests against the fradulent and murderous middle east wars, in particular the iraq war. Did the governments change their mind? No they just beat the shit out of alot of ppl and still went ahead and killed alot of ppl somewhere else (eg: middle east).
If people cannot protect themselves and their property by their own will.. then... yeah... we live in a police state as it is.
I am not against guns/weapons, although I am obviously against crime.. but as someone already mentioned, if ppl cant kill with guns, they surely can kill by other unconvential methods. The problem is the social education.
Read the original post. That might help you to form a credible response.
-
No.
Gun ban = gay
-
Good thread
Guns doesnt kill people but it makes it a helluva lot easier
-
Good thread
Guns doesnt kill people but it makes it a helluva lot easier
Really? Have you ever shot a gun? Not as easy to hit things as you think
-
Really? Have you ever shot a gun? Not as easy to hit things as you think
Yes i have.
And congratulations on knowing what i think ???
Its a helluva lot easier to pick up a gun and shot somebody to death than killing them with your bare hands. And killing multiple people with your bare hands is plain difficult.
-
Yes i have.
And congratulations on knowing what i think ???
Its a helluva lot easier to pick up a gun and shot somebody to death than killing them with your bare hands. And killing multiple people with your bare hands is plain difficult.
And it would be a hell of a lot easier to plow into a crowd with a car than killing people with your bare hands. You see where I'm going with this? People will find a way to cause death and mayhem, just the way it is. Banning guns only means that criminals will be the only ones with them. Look at Chicago, how long did they have a hand gun ban? Every weekend I could turn on the news and a multitude of people shot and or killed with hand guns
-
Yes i have.
And congratulations on knowing what i think ???
Its a helluva lot easier to pick up a gun and shot somebody to death than killing them with your bare hands. And killing multiple people with your bare hands is plain difficult.
And its harder to kill people with guns than it is with explosives made from commonly available chemical compounds. It never ends. Guns are just an easy scapegoat because its the most commonly used weapon in the US.
I believe there is a country in north eastern Europe with gun laws that make ours look strict, and If I remember right they don't have the problems with firearms that we do.
-
So i am thinking............
I am psychotic, and i feel every one has failed me and needs to be punished.
I must find a way to kill lots of people but i live in a country that makes gun possession against the law.
I guess there is no way i can do it.
I cannot poison a large group people like for example putting human shit in a large pot of pasta sauce at a busy restaurant.
I cannot derail a train over a bridge.
I cannot construct a bomb out of fertilizer and drive it into a building full of people
I cannot start a fire in a crowded place like a theater and bar all the exits
I cannot get guns illegally from criminals
there is nothing a can do.
Good thing there are gun laws in this country.
::)
-
Are you insane? ???
-
Honestly, governments wanting to take weapons away from civilians is a way to control the civilians with their superior gun power and the civilian's lack of it.
This is quite common in history,
BINGO, even the thought of compromising our 2nd Amendment rights is completely foolish and ignorant.
-
A firearm offers any human being the single best protection of their life, liberty and property against anyone trying to take or violate any of those things away. Mass shootings are such of a low frequency compared to the incidents where firearms in the hands of citizens actually save lives and prevent the loss of life and property.
There is no reason whatsoever to get rid of the 2nd amendment.
-
Your chances of being a victim of gun violence: 0.00802331467410947% (if it's even that high)
;D
-
Your chances of being a victim of gun violence: 0.00802331467410947% (if it's even that high)
;D
Even less if you own a gun yourself. :)
-
Even less if you own a gun yourself. :)
Good point!
-
I find percentages are always more telling than simply looking at absolute numbers.
Absolute numbers can be shocking and not tell the whole story.
-
How many American men, women and children have to be shot to death before we are willing to admit that the fantasy of the concealed carrier will not win the day? How long before the notion of the heroic vigilante, seated in the back of the theater, perched behind the counter of the supermarket or quietly taking notes in the back of the class, will emerge to stop the madness and, finally, like the reality of shooting-victims, be put to rest?
Even if this were to happen half the time, it wouldn’t be mathematically sufficient. Are you honestly willing to let some of your own family members be shot to death so that an armed bystander can ‘set things straight’ in then end? It should pain everyone that it NEVER happens doubly so. But it never does. Just as sure as the “thoughts and prayers” will go out to the victims, time after time after time, we can rest assured that nothing will ever be done. No thoughts changed nor laws enacted. ‘Freedom’ is working and, once we get these bodies off of aisle 6 or cleared from campus, we can get back to business, start classes back up and go right back to believing it. Otherwise, if we don’t have enough guns and ammo to give to every nutjob who has ‘been acting strangely’ but is exercising his ‘god-given right’ to blow the brains out of unarmed civilians, the gubment will come for us and kill us all. At this rate, I’ll take my chances with the government. How many civilians has the English military and police put away compared to American mass murderers?
I mean this not as a rhetorical rant, but I would literally like your acceptable body count. USA Today notes that 25,423 murders by gunfire took place in the United States in 2006 through 2007, which is more than half the population of my hometown. I wonder if the people of my hometown would be willing to lose half of their friends and family, or even one, for our absolute unnecessary right to own guns with little or no oversight.
Let’s dabble in counterfactual thinking. For a moment, suspend your known history of the United States. Just for a moment, pretend that the Founding Fathers saw no point in allowing every citizen to legally own a firearm and instead forbade in the Constitution. Let’s say we were arguing to get it an amendment LEGALIZING firearms because that had never existed before. For our argument, we can refer to a country called X. X is the actual America you know today, where gun violence is raging and, each week, another killing spree emerges in the news. (Some might argue that this is not really a counterfactual argument in the theoretical , but is known as that perspective which is the rest of the world but not American, but I digress.) Would any politician in his or her right mind actually make this argument? Of course not. It is absurd on its face. Such is the madness of our current state, where, dead bod after dead body, the ‘thoughts and prayers go out to the victims’. It is time our politicians, and we ourselves, gave more than lip service and did something about the problem. I want some protection; you can save your thoughts and prayers.
-
people kill people.
-
^^
love it!
-
people kill people.
lol thats pretty funny
-
people kill people.
Hahahah
queer bear bottom bitch, a response???
-
Hahahah
queer bear bottom bitch, a response???
He can't respond because he's easily influenced, and extremely near sighted.
I know about six veterans, and I don't know how he could stand them and how they stood him! lol
-
LOL "spoons made me fat"!!!
hahhahaha thats some funny as shit
its the same shit with all the libtards, the ends justify the means...
-
in a perfect world - with a non-corrupt govt filled with people we KNOW would never enslave the population...
in a perfect world - where criminals didn't exist and people weren't killed daily for no reason at all, just walking to work or sitting in the park....
in a perfect world - where all public places have armed security guards...
We don't need gun permits in that world. But since we don't live there, we need permits, we need to be an armed society. Japan woudl never invade the USA because they knew there'd be a man with a rifle hiding behind every blade of grass.
Keeps em honest!
-
people kill people.
;D
-
If guns were somehow self animating, going around killing people I'd be all for a full on ban.
(http://www.pbs.org/art21/files/imagecache/full_image/images/simmons-030.jpg)
-
I know this is the typical ignorant response, but seriously...
If people have such an irrational problem with our 2nd Amendment, our lack of socialized medicine, etc...
Instead of fundamentally changing the last bastion of freedom in the world, fucking everyone here over, why don't you simply consider immigrating to Canada? It's basically the same, yet they lack these essential rights and freedoms that you so hate.
-
I know this is the typical ignorant response, but seriously...
If people have such an irrational problem with our 2nd Amendment, our lack of socialized medicine, etc...
Instead of fundamentally changing the last bastion of freedom in the world, fucking everyone here over, why don't you simply consider immigrating to Canada? It's basically the same, yet they lack these essential rights and freedoms that you so hate.
some idiots would rather piss and moan about the "rights" of a small % of the public they percieve to be violated.
They have a desire stemming from self rightous envy combined that causes them to look down on others and believe they know better than others...
-
I know this is the typical ignorant response, but seriously...
If people have such an irrational problem with our 2nd Amendment, our lack of socialized medicine, etc...
Instead of fundamentally changing the last bastion of freedom in the world, fucking everyone here over, why don't you simply consider immigrating to Canada? It's basically the same, yet they lack these essential rights and freedoms that you so hate.
OK. Good point.
Have they been taken over?
Is it Nazi Germany there?
-
OK. Good point.
Have they been taken over?
Is it Nazi Germany there?
That is not the point. the right to bear arms is in the bill or rights, it is the law of the land. That applies to the state and national level. The is a process to amend the constitution, trying to circumvent it with more unconstitutional laws is to put it bluntly un-American. He is saying if you are don't like the laws of the land there are other countries that may better suit you.
-
And if you dont want to pay taxes there is other countries more suited to you.
Does that mean we cant discuss lowering taxes in the US?
-
Well since it only took 2 pages to invoke Goodwins law..............
And you have cited an example of the constitution being amended, 16th.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
-
Well since it only took 2 pages to invoke Goodwins law..............
And you have cited an example of the constitution being amended, 16th.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Does that mean you should fuck of if you dont like taxes?
And what value does a doc from 1778 have when your kid just got its brain blown out at a Batman movie?
-
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Does that mean you should fuck of if you dont like taxes?
And what value does a doc from 1778 have when your kid just got its brain blown out at a Batman movie?
You really take the cake for being the most uninformed, idiotic, delusional, uneducated, brain dead, brain washed, moron on this board.
-
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Does that mean you should fuck of if you dont like taxes?
And what value does a doc from 1778 have when your kid just got its brain blown out at a Batman movie?
No it means the government can collect tax, and the 16th amendment is specific to income tax. If you don't like the the tax rate since it is not specified, you vote for those who will lower it. The 2nd amendment is crystal clear, and tying to write laws to circumvent it is unconstitutional end of story.
What value does a doc for 1778 hold, gee apparently free speech is a pretty big deal. Hell I can site instances of people offing themselves because of speech. Should we limit that one as well? Or maybe the government should be able to create and force all of us into a religion? Perhaps they should just be able to search your house and take your shit for no reason.............