Moderator: Community Team
jiminski wrote:Frigidus wrote:The1exile wrote:MeDeFe wrote:Frigidus wrote:Coca-Cola is delicious.
Only if you add whiskey.
Or vodka.
Or root beer.
What?
how have you quoted so many times?
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
mandalorian2298 wrote:
I think that he is less concerned with the fact that owning guns isn't hip anymore and more with the fact that allowing every moron to own a gun for no other reason but because he really, REALLY wants to own a gun, significantly increases mortality rate. Unless you have a reason to believe that people in GB or Norway are getting killed by their form of government.
Dancing Mustard wrote:
Isn't our argument based more on the fact that the more people you give guns the more likely one of them is to go on a firearm assissted killing spree with one? Isn't our argument more about pointing out the absurdities of the "Ah needs mah gun faw pro-tech-tin mah familah... aginst guns. Its tha only way" school of thought? Isn't it usually based on pointing out that there's no compelling and logical reasons for owning guns at all, and that therefore the huge risks associated with their proliferation ought to dictate some form of severe restrictions upon their availability?
GabonX wrote:Your argument is fundamentally flawed as the assertion that the state of having guns be illegal to purchase would somehow disable people from committing acts of violence or to obtain guns is short sighted to say the least.
There are enough unregistered guns in circulation that it would be foolish to think that banning the legal purchase and ownership of firearms would disable people from going on an "assissted (check your spelling next time) killing spree."
If anything, it is the current status of people not carrying guns which enables killing sprees to occur for if even one out of every ten people carried a weapon it would be very difficult for someone to successfully kill a large number of people before they were shot. Such legislation would simply make it so that by default all gun owners would be criminals, and potentially violent ones at that.
Snorri1234 wrote:Killing sprees with guns happen far less in Europe,
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
pimpdave wrote:Snorri1234 wrote:Killing sprees with guns happen far less in Europe,
It's good to know you're going to do something about that.
Good luck.
mandalorian2298 wrote:Jenos Ridan wrote:mandalorian2298 wrote:Jenos Ridan wrote:If the UK, Japan, Sweden and all other "first world" nations that have monarcies, abolish the crown and their hereditary aristocracies (no more kings, dukes, barons, knighted people, etc.). Since, according to your vaulted exhortations, gun ownership is a barbaric anachronism, it is disgustingly hypocritical that you would allow the Crown to go unchalledged. This means, specifically for Britain; the forced abdictation of the Royals, abolishment of the House of Lords (in favor of a legislative house that fills the same role, if it is needed. If not, Britain can get along fine without it), the formal change of name from the United Kingdom to simply Great Britain and the removal of the term "royal" from such things as the British Royal Marines and the Royal Bank of Scotland Group. Similar actions are expected from other monarchial states. It is only under these conditions that the US will enact gun polices identical to those practiced in the nation of Switzerland.
Yeah, guns and monarchies are basically the same thing. I'm sure that you would no more mind being shot then I would living under a monarchy.![]()
Next topic: Should delusional patients be allowed net access?
Read the bolded part, should help you figure out my intent.
By way of Heavycola's reasoning, anything can be made to seem a barbarity.
I think that he is less concerned with the fact that owning guns isn't hip anymore and more with the fact that allowing every moron to own a gun for no other reason but because he really, REALLY wants to own a gun, significantly increases mortality rate. Unless you have a reason to believe that people in GB or Norway are getting killed by their form of government.
Jenos Ridan wrote:As for the first part, as he would say, Bollocks; Switzerland allows people to own military grade weapons (keeping fully automatic rifles in their homes and can buy ammo at any target range, which is not always used on the range, some is taken home) and yet they are not having too many massive battles between drug lords and the police.
The old "cliche", People kill People, is not a cliche, it is the truth. Russia has gun violent inspite of a strict ban on the ownership of guns by citizens, as does Austrialia. In fact I recall hearing that the rate of gun violence in Austrialia went up after the gun ban was enacted.
Jenos Ridan wrote:But whatever, 'we simply cannot allow sane, law-bidding citizens the right to defend their property and loved ones at the risk that there might be some nutjob that might kill someone.' Give me a break; there are already background checks and waiting periods on handguns and some states have 'assault' weapons bans. What more can be done without making the problem worse? Or creating new problems as well? What people fail to realise is that bans only fuel the black market demand: example, Prohibition.
Jenos Ridan wrote:The old "cliche", People kill People, is not a cliche, it is the truth. Russia has gun violent inspite of a strict ban on the ownership of guns by citizens, as does Austrialia. In fact I recall hearing that the rate of gun violence in Austrialia went up after the gun ban was enacted.
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
Jenos Ridan wrote:By the logic of that second part, I say that it is hypocritical to say that my nation is rife with outdated laws when his nation still has hereditary aristocrats. As for the first part, as he would say, Bollocks; Switzerland allows people to own military grade weapons (keeping fully automatic rifles in their homes and can buy ammo at any target range, which is not always used on the range, some is taken home) and yet they are not having too many massive battles between drug lords and the police.
MeDeFe wrote:Jenos Ridan wrote:The old "cliche", People kill People, is not a cliche, it is the truth. Russia has gun violent inspite of a strict ban on the ownership of guns by citizens, as does Austrialia. In fact I recall hearing that the rate of gun violence in Austrialia went up after the gun ban was enacted.
Yeah, I remember someone saying that in a recent thread, turned out it went up from, like, 3 cases to 12 cases in one year for all of Australia. Somewhere around those numbers.
Snorri1234 wrote:Jenos Ridan wrote:By the logic of that second part, I say that it is hypocritical to say that my nation is rife with outdated laws when his nation still has hereditary aristocrats. As for the first part, as he would say, Bollocks; Switzerland allows people to own military grade weapons (keeping fully automatic rifles in their homes and can buy ammo at any target range, which is not always used on the range, some is taken home) and yet they are not having too many massive battles between drug lords and the police.
That's because there are no drug lords in Switzerland. Neither are there many minorities/poor people, big urban areas or untrained gunowners. (Military training is mandatory.)
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
Jenos Ridan wrote:mandalorian2298 wrote:Jenos Ridan wrote:mandalorian2298 wrote:Jenos Ridan wrote:If the UK, Japan, Sweden and all other "first world" nations that have monarcies, abolish the crown and their hereditary aristocracies (no more kings, dukes, barons, knighted people, etc.). Since, according to your vaulted exhortations, gun ownership is a barbaric anachronism, it is disgustingly hypocritical that you would allow the Crown to go unchalledged. This means, specifically for Britain; the forced abdictation of the Royals, abolishment of the House of Lords (in favor of a legislative house that fills the same role, if it is needed. If not, Britain can get along fine without it), the formal change of name from the United Kingdom to simply Great Britain and the removal of the term "royal" from such things as the British Royal Marines and the Royal Bank of Scotland Group. Similar actions are expected from other monarchial states. It is only under these conditions that the US will enact gun polices identical to those practiced in the nation of Switzerland.
Yeah, guns and monarchies are basically the same thing. I'm sure that you would no more mind being shot then I would living under a monarchy.![]()
Next topic: Should delusional patients be allowed net access?
Read the bolded part, should help you figure out my intent.
By way of Heavycola's reasoning, anything can be made to seem a barbarity.
I think that he is less concerned with the fact that owning guns isn't hip anymore and more with the fact that allowing every moron to own a gun for no other reason but because he really, REALLY wants to own a gun, significantly increases mortality rate. Unless you have a reason to believe that people in GB or Norway are getting killed by their form of government.
Wow, you are obtuse. Heavycola insists that Guns = Murdur. He even once made the statement that the 2nd Amendment should be abolished as it is an anachronism, an obsolete portion of the US Constitution.
By the logic of that second part, I say that it is hypocritical to say that my nation is rife with outdated laws when his nation still has hereditary aristocrats. As for the first part, as he would say, Bollocks; Switzerland allows people to own military grade weapons (keeping fully automatic rifles in their homes and can buy ammo at any target range, which is not always used on the range, some is taken home) and yet they are not having too many massive battles between drug lords and the police.
The old "cliche", People kill People, is not a cliche, it is the truth. Russia has gun violent inspite of a strict ban on the ownership of guns by citizens, as does Austrialia. In fact I recall hearing that the rate of gun violence in Austrialia went up after the gun ban was enacted.
But whatever, 'we simply cannot allow sane, law-bidding citizens the right to defend their property and loved ones at the risk that there might be some nutjob that might kill someone.' Give me a break; there are already background checks and waiting periods on handguns and some states have 'assault' weapons bans. What more can be done without making the problem worse? Or creating new problems as well? What people fail to realise is that bans only fuel the black market demand: example, Prohibition.
Jenos Ridan wrote:mandalorian2298 wrote:Jenos Ridan wrote:mandalorian2298 wrote:Jenos Ridan wrote:If the UK, Japan, Sweden and all other "first world" nations that have monarcies, abolish the crown and their hereditary aristocracies (no more kings, dukes, barons, knighted people, etc.). Since, according to your vaulted exhortations, gun ownership is a barbaric anachronism, it is disgustingly hypocritical that you would allow the Crown to go unchalledged. This means, specifically for Britain; the forced abdictation of the Royals, abolishment of the House of Lords (in favor of a legislative house that fills the same role, if it is needed. If not, Britain can get along fine without it), the formal change of name from the United Kingdom to simply Great Britain and the removal of the term "royal" from such things as the British Royal Marines and the Royal Bank of Scotland Group. Similar actions are expected from other monarchial states. It is only under these conditions that the US will enact gun polices identical to those practiced in the nation of Switzerland.
Yeah, guns and monarchies are basically the same thing. I'm sure that you would no more mind being shot then I would living under a monarchy.![]()
Next topic: Should delusional patients be allowed net access?
Read the bolded part, should help you figure out my intent.
By way of Heavycola's reasoning, anything can be made to seem a barbarity.
I think that he is less concerned with the fact that owning guns isn't hip anymore and more with the fact that allowing every moron to own a gun for no other reason but because he really, REALLY wants to own a gun, significantly increases mortality rate. Unless you have a reason to believe that people in GB or Norway are getting killed by their form of government.
Wow, you are obtuse. Heavycola insists that Guns = Murdur. He even once made the statement that the 2nd Amendment should be abolished as it is an anachronism, an obsolete portion of the US Constitution.
By the logic of that second part, I say that it is hypocritical to say that my nation is rife with outdated laws when his nation still has hereditary aristocrats. As for the first part, as he would say, Bollocks; Switzerland allows people to own military grade weapons (keeping fully automatic rifles in their homes and can buy ammo at any target range, which is not always used on the range, some is taken home) and yet they are not having too many massive battles between drug lords and the police.
The old "cliche", People kill People, is not a cliche, it is the truth. Russia has gun violent inspite of a strict ban on the ownership of guns by citizens, as does Austrialia. In fact I recall hearing that the rate of gun violence in Austrialia went up after the gun ban was enacted.
But whatever, 'we simply cannot allow sane, law-bidding citizens the right to defend their property and loved ones at the risk that there might be some nutjob that might kill someone.' Give me a break; there are already background checks and waiting periods on handguns and some states have 'assault' weapons bans. What more can be done without making the problem worse? Or creating new problems as well? What people fail to realise is that bans only fuel the black market demand: example, Prohibition.
Hey. Hugh Grant is a sexy piece of man candy.protectedbygold wrote:I'll up the stakes - We will get rid of Miley Cyrus if Britain stops Hugh Grant from making any more movies. Everyone wins
Jenos Ridan wrote:Austrialia had a FOUR-HUNDRED PERCENTincrease in gun violence as result of a ban? I've heard stories but that just takes the cake!
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
heavycola wrote:let me share a secret with you:
Communism will win.
Jenos Ridan wrote:heavycola wrote:let me share a secret with you:
Communism will win.
Sure it will...............
Over my rotting corpse.
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
MeDeFe wrote:Jenos Ridan wrote:heavycola wrote:let me share a secret with you:
Communism will win.
Sure it will...............
Over my rotting corpse.
So in... 50 years tops? How old are you anyway?
Jenos Ridan wrote:I meant to imply that the Bolsheviks would have to kill me first (as in rotting on some battlefield somewhere, different context than the normal usage of that expression).
luns101 wrote:Jenos Ridan wrote:I meant to imply that the Bolsheviks would have to kill me first (as in rotting on some battlefield somewhere, different context than the normal usage of that expression).
The Mensheviks, on the other hand, would be patient enough to wait around for your demise.![]()
luns101 wrote:They should not be confused with the Chicksheviks, who vowed to bring about the revolution of society through shoe sales, cheesy romantic movies, and usually all went to the bathroom together.
Users browsing this forum: colorrush