Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Congrats, gun lovers, you've done it again Options · View
Ruthie
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 11:56:53 AM

Rank: Story Verifier
Moderator

Joined: 10/21/2010
Posts: 2,698
Location: United States


You should learn some facts about the people you quote. Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership is a project of the Second Amendment Foundation, an organization started by Alan Gottleib. Gottlieb is an ultra conservative who makes lots of money off of right wing causes.

There are plenty of studies showing that children in homes with guns are more likely to be killed than those in homes without guns. Alan Gottleib isn't interested in the lives of children. What he's interested in is making money off of promoting his right wing ideology.

It doesn't matter if the child is an infant or an adolescent. A child is a child, and a life is a life. My facts are correct. The facts you present are skewed by the agendas of the people who pay for and promote them. My opinion is provable by scientific studies. I know the facts. I read them from both sides. I don't just look for whatever wingnut shares my beliefs and start quoting them.

You're wrong on this subject.
lafayettemister
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 12:02:02 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,437
Location: Alabama, United States
Gun lovers did not kill this little girl. People who own guns or support the freedom to own guns, did not shoot this girl or have any responsibility for her death. That's like saying people who believe in the First Amendment are responsible for Princess Diana's death.

The parents of the little boy are responsible. It's gender stereotyping, but what does a little boy need a pink gun for? Which brings us to the gun, it's irresponsible for any gun manufacturer to make a gun small enough for a child to use while at the same time making it look like a toy. A pink gun for a grown adult is one thing, too big and heavy for a child to "play" with. But this size in that color screams for some kid to think it's a toy.

Let's lay blame where it belongs, at the feet of the parents. The outcome of this event was tragic. But in a parental way it's the same as not watching your kid when he puts his hand on a hot stove, gets into an unlocked medicine cabinet, opens the kitchen drawer with all the knives, walks unsupervised around a swimming pool. Leaving a weapon, loaded or unloaded out for anyone especially a kid to get to is irresponsible, stupid, and unthinkable.

I support gun ownership, but I wouldn't call myself a gun lover. Either way, I'm not responsible for this or any other tragedy involving guns.





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
Ruthie
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 1:10:52 PM

Rank: Story Verifier
Moderator

Joined: 10/21/2010
Posts: 2,698
Location: United States
lafayettemister wrote:
Gun lovers did not kill this little girl. People who own guns or support the freedom to own guns, did not shoot this girl or have any responsibility for her death. That's like saying people who believe in the First Amendment are responsible for Princess Diana's death.

The parents of the little boy are responsible. It's gender stereotyping, but what does a little boy need a pink gun for? Which brings us to the gun, it's irresponsible for any gun manufacturer to make a gun small enough for a child to use while at the same time making it look like a toy. A pink gun for a grown adult is one thing, too big and heavy for a child to "play" with. But this size in that color screams for some kid to think it's a toy.

Let's lay blame where it belongs, at the feet of the parents. The outcome of this event was tragic. But in a parental way it's the same as not watching your kid when he puts his hand on a hot stove, gets into an unlocked medicine cabinet, opens the kitchen drawer with all the knives, walks around a swimming pool unsupervised. Leaving a weapon, loaded or unloaded out for anyone especially a kid to get to is irresponsible, stupid, and unthinkable.

I support gun ownership, but I wouldn't call myself a gun lover. Either way, I'm not responsible for this or any other tragedy involving guns.


What does the death of Diana Spencer have to do with the first amendment to the U. S. Constitution? She was killed in Europe. They aren't under our constitution. Blame does belong to the parents. I haven't said a word about repealing or limiting the Constitution. What I object to is parents knowingly keeping guns in their home. You don't need the government to force you to be responsible. Keeping a gun in a home with a child is irresponsible. Giving a four year old a weapon is even more irresponsible. People shouldn't do it.

You are defending the indefensible.
LOVES4PLAY
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 1:12:35 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/14/2010
Posts: 944
Location: JUST A CLICK AWAY, United States
Bryon ; several years ago i purchased an AR-15, .223,out of state, 8 days later i bought a Rugger .243. from the same dealer. Wash. state did a back ground check. later in the month i tried to purchase a Rugger P-108 .357 WHILE OBTAINING A Spring Field .40 semi auto.. I COULD NOT BUY A HAND GUN OUT OF STATE..THIS POLICY IS SHARED BY SEVERAL STATES .. I THINK.
=================================================================================================================================================
("That is trickier than it might seem as a firearms dealer in NH who accepts a MA license to sell a gun is knowingly abetting a crime in MA, a fact that will quickly be discovered when the background check is run"). Bryon not sure i follow your preceding statement..IS IT A STATE LAW?

It would seem that unless it is illegal For the NH. dealer to sell to out of state buyers , or that is illegal for a MA.. resident to purchase a firearm from out of state there really shouldn't be a violation of state laws.just my thoughts.
lafayettemister
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 1:29:59 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,437
Location: Alabama, United States
CoopsRuthie wrote:


What does the death of Diana Spencer have to do with the first amendment to the U. S. Constitution? She was killed in Europe. They aren't under our constitution. Blame does belong to the parents. I haven't said a word about repealing or limiting the Constitution. What I object to is parents knowingly keeping guns in their home. You don't need the government to force you to be responsible. Keeping a gun in a home with a child is irresponsible. Giving a four year old a weapon is even more irresponsible. People shouldn't do it.

You are defending the indefensible.



It's irrelevant that it happened in Europe. The point is our Constitution protects the Freedom of the Press, but that doesn't mean that supporters of that right are responsible for the careless actions of everyone else. But, if you prefer. It's like holding all people who support Freedom of Religion responsible for the actions of pedophile priests. Even if those people are Protestant, atheist, agnostic, Jewish,..... Supporting something does not mean a person is burdened by the illegal and/or stupid actions of others who carry the same beliefs.

I never said you did say anything about repealing or limiting the Constitution. Nor did I say anything about anyone who does or does not want to change the 2nd Amendment. If you object to parents with children having a gun in their house, it's your opinion to have. Keeping a gun in a home with a child is irresponsible... in your opinion. I know dozens of kids who grew up with guns in their home, they didnt' kill anyone. I have no objections to a gun being stored properly and safely in a home with children. Mandating them out of the homes with children would be an open invitation to criminals to have an easier time selecting homes/people to victimize.

I'm not defending the indefensible. I'm not defending anyone, to be honest. I'm just saying that factually, a gun supporter who lives in any of the other 49 states besides Kentucky has no responsibility in her death. They did nothing wrong or right to need to be defended. Neither do the poeple in Kentucky, just the moron parents who let it happen. I'm saying they were in the wrong, totally and 100%. I also spoke against a real gun that is pink and toy-sized.

I'm sorry, but if my post on the matter does not fit into the narrative you already have planned out to argue in your head, that's on you.





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
Nyaeve80
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 1:37:11 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/28/2013
Posts: 235
Location: Barcelona, Spain
one_winged_angel wrote:

For example, if someone's about to attack you, you can shoot them in the leg, if you use a bomb, you're likely to blow up both them and yourself, not to mention anyone who's standing too close, granted that you just happen to have a bomb handy.


I live in Europe so I might be mistaken but I seem to remember that no one ever teaches people to "shoot someone in the leg" when they are training to use a handgun. You are taught to shoot at the centre of the chest, correct me if I am wrong.

The love of weapons, be they handguns, rifles or others, is totally disproportionate to their actual use. Most weapons are not used correctly, not stored correctly and not considered correctly.

I have a quintessentially British viewpoint. Guns should be only in the possession of the police. Any other weapons are only for sports or hunting and those should be under strict control. I cannot conceive, under any circumstances, why anyone would need a weapon in a domestic scenario. If you can, if you can imagine a situation where you might need it, perhaps you are living in the wrong country.
Guest
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 1:39:52 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 674,138
CoopsRuthie wrote:


What I object to is parents knowingly keeping guns in their home. You don't need the government to force you to be responsible. Keeping a gun in a home with a child is irresponsible. Giving a four year old a weapon is even more irresponsible. People shouldn't do it.

You are defending the indefensible.


I grew up in a household with guns and it was made very clear by my parents that guns were not toys, I knew the guns were in the house, but I never even saw them until my parents decided that I was mature enough to learn how to use them. The responsibility of keeping children safe from the guns in the house lies with the parents.

A gun company that caters to children simply should not exist.
Guest
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 1:47:27 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 674,138
Nyaeve80 wrote:


I live in Europe so I might be mistaken but I seem to remember that no one ever teaches people to "shoot someone in the leg" when they are training to use a handgun. You are taught to shoot at the centre of the chest, correct me if I am wrong.

The love of weapons, be they handguns, rifles or others, is totally disproportionate to their actual use. Most weapons are not used correctly, not stored correctly and not considered correctly.

I have a quintessentially British viewpoint. Guns should be only in the possession of the police. Any other weapons are only for sports or hunting and those should be under strict control. I cannot conceive, under any circumstances, why anyone would need a weapon in a domestic scenario. If you can, if you can imagine a situation where you might need it, perhaps you are living in the wrong country.


I was taught that if someone is coming at you, you go for the least lethal shot first. I don't think I'd want to live with a person's death on my conscience when it could have been avoided.

As for not knowing a situation where one would need a gun in a domestic setting. . Have you been watching the news at all?

So you think people who keep guns for personal defense should move? Ok, is your house open? And how soon can all of us move in?
lafayettemister
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 1:57:28 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,437
Location: Alabama, United States
According to preventioninjury.org

In 2002, more than 1.2 million unintentional poisonings among children ages 5 and under were reported to U.S. poison control centers and an estimated 111,870 children ages 14 and under were treated in hospital emergency rooms for unintentional poisoning. Nearly 80 percent of these injuries were to children ages 4 and under. 96 children ages 14 and under died as a result of unintentional poisoning. Children ages 4 and under accounted for more than 45 percent of these deaths.

I only post these numbers to illustrate that an unsupervised child in an irresponsible home can do great harm. In my house we have some strong narcotics because of back pain issues. Lortab, percocet, muscle relaxers, anti inflammatory, and numerous other drugs. Just like my gun, they're locked up where my baby girl can't get to them. If I'd left them unsecured and she'd get to them and hurt or kill herself or share with a friend and hurt/kill them, it wouldn't be because the big bad drugs did it. It would be because I'm a shitty parent. Legally obtained guns and legally obtained drugs can both be useful and both be deadly in the hands of a child. The responsibility of preventing those things is the duty of parents.


Gun lovers have done nothing in this case. Irresponsible parents did.

edit... the bleach, cleaning supplies, chemicals are also child proofed








When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
stickmancqb
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 2:17:38 PM

Rank: Advanced Wordsmith

Joined: 3/6/2012
Posts: 91
Location: Texas, United States
LadyX wrote:


No, I wasn't serious; not even a little bit.

I'll leave you and yours to your deranged paranoia, clutching your guns in fear, when nobody's actually coming after them. Yes, you can find the occasional politician that expresses a desire to see all guns outlawed, but outside of your conspiracy-prone fear-logic, the idea of gun seizure and eradication is a straw-man argument at best. Nobody in their right mind thinks that's actually going to happen, but it works out for the gun industry to keep that fear alive among their minions and devotees. More guns get sold that way, so it makes perfect marketing sense.

There's no room for negotiation, let alone compromise anymore, apparently. That's how we get these creepy line-in-the-sand talking points in response to the mere suggestion of expanded background checks, or regulation to eliminate gun marketing to children.

It makes me somewhat embarrassed to have once owned and carried a gun, honestly. At the very least, I know I wasn't this big of a creep about my rights to do so.


I guess my deranged paranoia stems from the fact that the GOVERNMENTS of the 20th century killed more people in mass than all other centuries combined. I prefer to have the ability to defend my freedoms against an oppressive government than to be led to slaughter like many Jews, Russians, Chinese, turning, and and countless other people's.

As for the comments about how the government owns bigger and badder weapons; The taliban and it's subsidiaries have success held off the might of our military for the better part of 12 years. That is a country with a 1st grade education and weapons that are by in large substandard to what we have.


It's amazing that people think that just because this is America, we are immune to such possible events. We are always just one generation from loosing all of our freedoms.
ByronLord
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 2:34:40 PM

Rank: Forum Guru
Moderator

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 769
Location: Massachusetts, United States
stickmancqb wrote:


I guess my deranged paranoia stems from the fact that the GOVERNMENTS of the 20th century killed more people in mass than all other centuries combined. I prefer to have the ability to defend my freedoms against an oppressive government than to be led to slaughter like many Jews, Russians, Chinese, turning, and and countless other people's.

As for the comments about how the government owns bigger and badder weapons; The taliban and it's subsidiaries have success held off the might of our military for the better part of 12 years. That is a country with a 1st grade education and weapons that are by in large substandard to what we have.


It's amazing that people think that just because this is America, we are immune to such possible events. We are always just one generation from loosing all of our freedoms.


The problem with that line of argument is that as far as most Jews are concerned, the people waving the guns about look much more like the folks wearing the jackboots in Germany than the government they claim to be saving them from.

When people wave a gun in my face as the NRA supporters keep doing when they are losing the argument, it only makes me more certain that they are the enemy of freedom.

Wayne LaPierre and every member of the NRA murdered that little girl just as surely as they pulled the trigger themselves.

And yes, I do want to take every gun away from you all. They are the tools of satan. The only purpose of a handgun is to kill people. Buying or owning a hand gun is the moral equivalent of murder.

stickmancqb
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 2:46:46 PM

Rank: Advanced Wordsmith

Joined: 3/6/2012
Posts: 91
Location: Texas, United States
ByronLord wrote:


The problem with that line of argument is that as far as most Jews are concerned, the people waving the guns about look much more like the folks wearing the jackboots in Germany than the government they claim to be saving them from.

When people wave a gun in my face as the NRA supporters keep doing when they are losing the argument, it only makes me more certain that they are the enemy of freedom.

Wayne LaPierre and every member of the NRA murdered that little girl just as surely as they pulled the trigger themselves.

And yes, I do want to take every gun away from you all. They are the tools of satan. The only purpose of a handgun is to kill people. Buying or owning a hand gun is the moral equivalent of murder.


A handgun is a tool of satan??? Its pretty weird because when me and my wife were held up at knife point in a cvs parking lot and I drew my weapon and the asshole flead, I was thinking it was my saving grace.

The stupid in your comments are so absolutely remarkable that I can't even comment. If you blame me because I am a life member of the NRA for the death of that girl, go Fuck yourself with a rusty crow bar. I am in no way responsible for the actions of anyone but myself.

I have a question for you. Do you drink and do you drive a vehicle?? If you do both of those things then I hold you personally responsible for every drunk driving accident in the entire country. How is that for double standard!
emersonbosworth
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 3:29:58 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/9/2013
Posts: 272
Location: United States
Here is my rifle,
Here is my gun.
One is for shooting.
One is for fun.

Of course a person should be able to own a gun, rifle, pistol. I prefer a 12 gauge shot gun, you just point it. It takes about a hour for the cops to get to my place, where my 357 or shot gun is just a second away.

Stupid question.
sprite
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 5:37:40 PM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness
Moderator

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 16,663
Location: My Tower, United States
emersonbosworth wrote:
Here is my rifle,
Here is my gun.
One is for shooting.
One is for fun.

Of course a person should be able to own a gun, rifle, pistol. I prefer a 12 gauge shot gun, you just point it. It takes about a hour for the cops to get to my place, where my 357 or shot gun is just a second away.

Stupid question.


the argument, at least mine is, 1) should you be allowed to own an assault rifle and 2) should you have to go thru a back ground check before obtaining your shotgun and 357. it's that simple. if you are cleared, then go ahead, i'm fine with your shotgun and 357. is that really asking too much?

Live, love, laugh.
Guest
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 5:56:34 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 674,138
ByronLord wrote:

The problem with that line of argument is that as far as most Jews are concerned, the people waving the guns about look much more like the folks wearing the jackboots in Germany than the government they claim to be saving them from.

When people wave a gun in my face as the NRA supporters keep doing when they are losing the argument, it only makes me more certain that they are the enemy of freedom.

Wayne LaPierre and every member of the NRA murdered that little girl just as surely as they pulled the trigger themselves.

And yes, I do want to take every gun away from you all. They are the tools of satan. The only purpose of a handgun is to kill people. Buying or owning a hand gun is the moral equivalent of murder.


I guess that means this woman is a murderer for defending herself and her kids. Or this one who defended herself and her son. Or even this 11 year old. Murderers all of them for defending themselves?
oi812
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 6:46:28 PM

Rank: Rookie Scribe

Joined: 4/24/2013
Posts: 4
Location: United States
That particular gun has a shorter length of pull and it is much easier for them to shoot accurately. All of my kids and grand kids learn gun safety and how to shoot. That way if someone shows them a gun they know how dangerous it is and to leave it alone and get a adult asap! It also teaches them patience and self control as well as concentration. They do not have access to them and should not but they do respect them. This is our second amendment right to protect us from a tyrannical government and should never be messed with in anyway. I do not or agree with all of the laws of these great UNITED STATES but thats what makes it the best country in the world. If the guns bother people that much they should move to a country that bans them!
Dani
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 7:44:44 PM

Rank: Big-Haired Bitch
Moderator

Joined: 12/25/2010
Posts: 5,758
Location: Under Your Bed, United States
one_winged_angel wrote:


I guess that means this woman is a murderer for defending herself and her kids. Or this one who defended herself and her son. Or even this 11 year old. Murderers all of them for defending themselves?


Well, yeah. By definition, murder is murder, no matter the justification. I'm sure a shot to the leg or somewhere that didn't warrant death would have done the trick.


Guest
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 7:48:01 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 674,138
slipperywhenwet2012 wrote:


Well, yeah. By definition, murder is murder, no matter the justification. I'm sure a shot to the leg or somewhere that didn't warrant death would have done the trick.


There was no mention of anyone dying in any of those 3 cases, sure the attackers were injured, but they were hospitalized afterwards.
elitfromnorth
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 8:11:14 PM

Rank: Brawling Berserker

Joined: 2/12/2012
Posts: 1,635
Location: Burrowed, Norway
oi812 wrote:
That particular gun has a shorter length of pull and it is much easier for them to shoot accurately. All of my kids and grand kids learn gun safety and how to shoot. That way if someone shows them a gun they know how dangerous it is and to leave it alone and get a adult asap! It also teaches them patience and self control as well as concentration. They do not have access to them and should not but they do respect them. This is our second amendment right to protect us from a tyrannical government and should never be messed with in anyway. I do not or agree with all of the laws of these great UNITED STATES but thats what makes it the best country in the world. If the guns bother people that much they should move to a country that bans them!


So you firmly believe that if there were restrictions on what kind of weapons you could buy, then the US would, just because now the people can't arm themselves as they want, would rapidly or slowly turn into a totalitarian dictatorship?

"It's at that point you realise Lady Luck is actually a hooker, and you're fresh out of cash."
sexyblonde91
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 8:33:49 PM

Rank: Active Ink Slinger

Joined: 2/29/2012
Posts: 13
Location: United States
I dont agree with guns being targeted for children of such a young age but i do believe that once children are old enough to understand gun safety they should be taught....My family has guns but we use them for hunting and if we ever needed them for self defense in our house...but when they are not in use they are unloaded and locked in a safe...But everyone is entitled to their own opinion but i know once my son is old enough to understand guns then im going to teach him how to handle them properly...
Dani
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 8:41:39 PM

Rank: Big-Haired Bitch
Moderator

Joined: 12/25/2010
Posts: 5,758
Location: Under Your Bed, United States
one_winged_angel wrote:


There was no mention of anyone dying in any of those 3 cases, sure the attackers were injured, but they were hospitalized afterwards.


Well since that's the case, what does murder have to do with anything with any of these cases? I never said I was against guns. But full-fledge, assault weapons...where the intention is murder. I have no problem with self defense. That being said, I'll never carry.

The thing is, no one's trying to take anyone's guns away. But there should be requirements and limitations on those who can have them. No one ever wants to look at the big picture. All anyone sees is "It's mine, and I want it. And you can't stop me." Gun CONTROL is not the same as gun banning.

Again, back to the above cases, especially the ones where children was involved. Their parents protected them...not the children. There is no reason I would ever want my child to have a gun manufactured for them. And I'd never want my child to see me shoot a gun, if I can help it. I'll never understand how anyone WOULDN'T see that as a problem.


MrNudiePants
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 9:06:35 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,211
Location: United States
CleverFox wrote:


So how many home intruders have you actually had? How many times has somebody tried to illegally gain entry into your house and you successfully defended your home with the firearms you keep there?

As far as defending yourself from a tyranny, if it gets to the point where guns are needed then it is already too late. I assure you, whatever firearms you have that the military has many more and many more effective weapons. The most you will be capable of doing is a token guerrilla resistance.

Now you made a stupid joke about this 2 year old girl's death being one for the Darwin Awards. The Darwin Awards are for people that do stupid things that take themselves out of the gene pool. This little girl did nothing stupid. Her parents did.

As far as trying to stop the child soldiers in other countries I do something I doubt you have ever thought of doing. I try to regulate the weapon manufactures here in the good old USA that export weapons to the war torn areas. Did it ever occur to you that the gun manufacturers make a nice tidy profit by keeping those conflicts alive?


Good Lord. If you're going to refer to my previous posts, at the very least, you should try and stay truthful about them.

I never once brought up home invaders.

I never once brought up tyranny.

I never once brought up the Darwin Awards.

Stop lying.

As for all your hard work against American gun manufacturers helping out child fighters in third-world countries...

Do you honestly think American guns are going to Africa? If so, not only are you naive, but you're totally ignorant of the way the firearms industry works. ALL guns made in America have serial numbers and are tracked from manufacturer to distributor. Exporting a firearm to any country other than an ally permitted by our State Department to purchase it is a felony good for 25 years in the federal pen. Which leads me to ask the following questions:

1. Do you really think the executives at Colt are going to risk their multi-million dollar careers to illegally sell a few rifles to African warlords?

2. Do you really think those warlords are going to fork over a thousand bucks apiece for M-4s or AR-15s when they can easily get Com-block surplus AK-47s and AK-74s for the equivalent of $45-$50 each right there in Africa?

Get real.
MrNudiePants
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 9:24:29 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,211
Location: United States
CoopsRuthie wrote:


You should learn some facts about the people you quote. Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership is a project of the Second Amendment Foundation, an organization started by Alan Gottleib. Gottlieb is an ultra conservative who makes lots of money off of right wing causes.

There are plenty of studies showing that children in homes with guns are more likely to be killed than those in homes without guns. Alan Gottleib isn't interested in the lives of children. What he's interested in is making money off of promoting his right wing ideology.

It doesn't matter if the child is an infant or an adolescent. A child is a child, and a life is a life. My facts are correct. The facts you present are skewed by the agendas of the people who pay for and promote them. My opinion is provable by scientific studies. I know the facts. I read them from both sides. I don't just look for whatever wingnut shares my beliefs and start quoting them.

You're wrong on this subject.


No, I just have a different opinion than you. That doesn't make me wrong, or you right. The fact is, any time a child dies of a gun-related reason, some ADULT fucked up. Any time a child drowns, or gets electrocuted, or dies of an accidental drug overdose, somewhere, there's an ADULT that ought to get horsewhipped to death. I don't blame the swimming pool manufacturers, despite the fact that kids are a lot more likely to down than any other form of accidental death.

The whole point of this thread is to real against guns and gun manufacturers, when it's the fucking PARENTS that are to blame.
CleverFox
Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013 10:42:07 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 484
Location: United States
MrNudiePants wrote:


Good Lord. If you're going to refer to my previous posts, at the very least, you should try and stay truthful about them.

I never once brought up home invaders.

I never once brought up tyranny.

I never once brought up the Darwin Awards.

Stop lying.

As for all your hard work against American gun manufacturers helping out child fighters in third-world countries...

Do you honestly think American guns are going to Africa? If so, not only are you naive, but you're totally ignorant of the way the firearms industry works. ALL guns made in America have serial numbers and are tracked from manufacturer to distributor. Exporting a firearm to any country other than an ally permitted by our State Department to purchase it is a felony good for 25 years in the federal pen. Which leads me to ask the following questions:

1. Do you really think the executives at Colt are going to risk their multi-million dollar careers to illegally sell a few rifles to African warlords?

2. Do you really think those warlords are going to fork over a thousand bucks apiece for M-4s or AR-15s when they can easily get Com-block surplus AK-47s and AK-74s for the equivalent of $45-$50 each right there in Africa?

Get real.


My mistake, you said "Darwin wins again." How humane of you.

To answer your questions, I think most of the US guns are going to Central and a South America (after all, Africa isn't the only continent with third workd contries)for those child soldiers and I am sure plenty of those warlords (whether in Africa or Central or South America)know how to fake an end use certificate and I doubt very much the executives at Colt are too worried about the US justice department coming after them, after all they have their Washington lobbyists doing there jobs and even if it gets to court they will just claim ignorance about the end use certificates. But you are right about the African Warlords just because they can get the guns cheaper elsewhere, not because the US executives wouldn't be more than happy to sell to them.

Maybe you haven't mentioned home intruders but the two reasons I hear over and over from the gun loving segment of the population is to fight off an totalitarian government and for home protection. Now you may keep guns for hunting and target practice but I doubt very much that you keep high capacity rifles with 30+ round clips for those purposes.

So go right ahead and be a responsible gun owner. Just remember one mistake is all it takes. And most of all remember that you don't even have to be the one making the mistake and you can still be paying the ultimate price. So let firearms be bought with no training required what so ever. Just think about how your neighbor can have a killing machine and have no clue how to use it. One shot being taken in panic is all it takes. You can do everything right and still pay the price for another's stupidity.

Is it so much to ask that if my neighbor wants to own a gun that he or she is required and gets proper safety training so as not to be a danger to me?
TheCrimsonKing
Posted: Saturday, May 04, 2013 1:54:30 AM

Rank: Advanced Wordsmith

Joined: 5/1/2012
Posts: 66
Location: Kentucky, United States
Magical_felix wrote:


I am not kidding.

If guns don't kill people and people kill people... Bombs (or any other banned weapon) do not kill people either, people kill people. This is the most common defense of guns. So why are bombs illegal and not something like an assault rifle? Neither of which kill people unless a person uses them. Why must my rights be stomped on!


Ok, since sarcasm clearly doesn't work... you are a giant fucking moron if you actually can't see a difference. It's called hyperbole jackass. You'll notice that I actually did answer your question. Guns are used for defense and hunting. Although, I think it would be hilarious if a landmine blew up one of those watchtower society assholes about to knock on my door.
MrNudiePants
Posted: Saturday, May 04, 2013 7:32:31 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,211
Location: United States
CleverFox wrote:


My mistake, you said "Darwin wins again." How humane of you.

To answer your questions, I think most of the US guns are going to Central and a South America (after all, Africa isn't the only continent with third workd contries)for those child soldiers and I am sure plenty of those warlords (whether in Africa or Central or South America)know how to fake an end use certificate and I doubt very much the executives at Colt are too worried about the US justice department coming after them, after all they have their Washington lobbyists doing there jobs and even if it gets to court they will just claim ignorance about the end use certificates. But you are right about the African Warlords just because they can get the guns cheaper elsewhere, not because the US executives wouldn't be more than happy to sell to them.

Maybe you haven't mentioned home intruders but the two reasons I hear over and over from the gun loving segment of the population is to fight off an totalitarian government and for home protection. Now you may keep guns for hunting and target practice but I doubt very much that you keep high capacity rifles with 30+ round clips for those purposes.

So go right ahead and be a responsible gun owner. Just remember one mistake is all it takes. And most of all remember that you don't even have to be the one making the mistake and you can still be paying the ultimate price. So let firearms be bought with no training required what so ever. Just think about how your neighbor can have a killing machine and have no clue how to use it. One shot being taken in panic is all it takes. You can do everything right and still pay the price for another's stupidity.

Is it so much to ask that if my neighbor wants to own a gun that he or she is required and gets proper safety training so as not to be a danger to me?


You think? How about you do the research, so you actually know? US-made guns are not being found in child-soldiers' hands, period. That whole part of your argument is simply false.

And the point of this thread has nothing to do with the right to keep and bear arms, self defense, of any other points you've raised. Keep your strawmen out of it. Or, start yet another "Guns R bad, mkay?" thread, so you can promote those views, once again.
Guest
Posted: Saturday, May 04, 2013 7:36:36 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 674,138
slipperywhenwet2012 wrote:


Well since that's the case, what does murder have to do with anything with any of these cases? I never said I was against guns. But full-fledge, assault weapons...where the intention is murder. I have no problem with self defense. That being said, I'll never carry.



I was just addressing ByronLord's statement that, "buying a handgun is the moral equivalent of murder."
MrNudiePants
Posted: Saturday, May 04, 2013 7:46:05 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,211
Location: United States
ByronLord wrote:


Wayne LaPierre and every member of the NRA murdered that little girl just as surely as they pulled the trigger themselves.

And yes, I do want to take every gun away from you all. They are the tools of satan. The only purpose of a handgun is to kill people. Buying or owning a hand gun is the moral equivalent of murder.


Bullshit. I had nothing to do with this, and neither did any other gun owner or NRA member. Saying that guns are"tools of Satan" is like saying "penises are tools of Satan because they can be used to commit rape" or "cars are tools of Satan because they can be used to get away from bank robberies."

Tools can't take action. They can only be used, or misused.
Buz
Posted: Saturday, May 04, 2013 7:57:35 AM

Rank: The Linebacker
Moderator

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 7,384
Location: Atlanta, United States
As I stated before, there are enough laws on the books already to prosecute the parents of that child, charging them with felonies.

Any parents so irresponsible as to leave unsecured guns around will eventually cause harm to their kids or someone else's through some kind of neglect whether it be with their automobile, poison, or whatever.

I do not have any children yet, but I already secure my guns in a very responsible manner. They are always locked up in gun safes, a heavy steel gun cabinet, or in my gun safe room (which is more like a vault.)

When I do have children I do plan on teaching them safe & proper gun use when they get old enough. They will not have access to the guns at all without my supervision. That is how I was raised, and my many relatives were raised. Hunting and gun use (and ownership) is a strong part of my culture and it is a guaranteed freedom by the US Constitution.

I believe there will come a day when the US government does try and confiscate all the guns. That will be when the government has become so overbearing and oppressive that any semblance of democracy, liberty and freedom has ceased to exist. By then the government will also decide who will or will not be allowed to have children.

LadyX
Posted: Saturday, May 04, 2013 8:11:08 AM

Rank: Artistic Tart
Moderator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,813
Quote:

As for the comments about how the government owns bigger and badder weapons; The taliban and it's subsidiaries have success held off the might of our military for the better part of 12 years. That is a country with a 1st grade education and weapons that are by in large substandard to what we have.


So your plan would be to become the "cold dead hands" Taliban and start a civil war over it? Hmm.

Regardless, I do understand that the fearful handgun owner and the avid hunter don't want a reality where they can't have them. Most of us agree that they should have them. The gun-nuttery comes into play when the discussion of assault rifles and background checks draws a cavalcade of absolutist "don't take my guns" talk. 0-60 in two sentences. Failure to not flip out in a common-sense discussion is what looks insane, not gun ownership itself.

The government cannot and will not take all guns away without repealing the 2nd Amendment. To not believe that requires a leap in paranoia that's kind of beyond discussion. And if the amendment is repealed, it's the law of the land. To rebel against that would be criminal.

Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.