Guncrazy USA

People aren't actually lining up and giving their legally owned and Constitutional right to own a gun just because some joker like you started this fucking thread on hipforums.

Yup, I think you're better off squatting in that little corner with a bag of popcorn in one hand and wanking your dick with the other hand.

And oh yeah, fuck you by the way.

 

So, we've had the casual redneck appearance, and the senile geriatric who likes to flash his inactive penis at minors waiting at bus stops,

so all we need is the 3 page civil charter, followed by issue-evading statistics and we can continue the circle one more time from the start.

BTW Mandell you are a very funny old man.

 

I'm not telling you americans anything except the fact that you are grossly underestimating the intelligence of people on hips if you think they dont see through the libertarian agenda as right wing. You represent yourselves here (the politicaly minded of you from the usa) as being opposed to government but you are not. You represent its values very well indeed. gun owning - freedom lovinng good boy americans -- Shane runs all over the place misleading people he is an anarchist when at best he is all for moms apple pie and "The values of america is freedom we are the only free nation of the world" anarchist - ha ha ha do me a favour !!!!

All I have said in these forums is the USA perpetrates its violence from the private gun owner to its films and tv to its wars - and europe dont like it any more and real anarchists (european anarchists are just letting you know the score - think of it as the news your government dont want you to hear) to do nothing about it - is to collude in your own oppression !

 

Look-it's true that the US perpetuates a violent culture through films and other media-there's no doubt abut that, and this is one aspect of American culture that I find deplorable. That is one element of this culture that is contributing signifcantly to the whole 'culture of death' and violence, not just the simple ownership of guns. I own a gun for the simple purpose of protecting my home from criminal elements that might want to come in here and harm me and my family, and I've known plenty of people that own guns for that sole purpose that are otherwise sitting around collecting dust. And, if this government wants to deprive me of any more of my freedom than it already has, it's agents will be looking down the barrel of that same, dusty semi-automatic rifle (yes, I do clean it occasionally).

However, we also have to face facts. Simply outlawing guns at this point in American history is, as I have stated earlier, only going to take guns out of the hands of normal citizens that need them to protect themselves, and would do nothing about the huge number of guns owned by the criminal element.

I was asked a while back in this thread if I really thought violent crime was that much of a real threat in this society. Are you kidding? Even the supposedly bad-ass cops in this country that are armed to the teeth are afraid of the heavily armed crooks. That's the reason that, most of the time, to make it look like they're doing something, they'll mess with honest-looking people, and avoid the real crooks, because thay're afraid of getting plugged full of holes!

You know, I'm an idealistic, peaceful person. But I also have to face facts. And the fact is that simply outlawing guns at this point is only going to make the problem of violence worse, not better. That doesn't make me an arrogant American (which I'm not anyway)-it just means I'm realistic. Any real idealism has to be tempered with a healthy dose of realism-otherwise it just causes more problems down the road.

 

someone has to start somewhere. Someone has to end the violence of the USA - human against human, the culture of perpetual arms race. The USA is obsessed with its right to own weapons and defines which of us is allowed to own weapons. Iran cant have them, neither can other ciountries where for some reson the colour of their skin or the resources they own determine who is allowed to own weapons. Same inside the USA
dont tell me people with a different skin colour arent judged differently when it comes to handing out the guns. Violence and hypocrisy are the main tennets of the USA and its major export

 

I think that you will find that the majority of us (if not all of us) on here that are against the government making firearms illegal are also equally against the war in Iraq and the US prancing around the world invading other countries to take their natural resources. You're trying to oversimplify things and lump all Americans into one convenient little basket.

"Starting somewhere" cannot include taking guns away from normal citizens and leaving our protection from gun-toting crooks to the lazy-ass police that couldn't care less about our protection anyway, and, in fact, are simply another instrument of oppression, in many cases even worse than the criminals themselves.

And, if you're such a peaceful, non-violent European, why do you have in your sig a picture that promotes violent riots? "Europe is burning, come warm your hands". Wow, you're so superior to us violent Americans! I suppose that advocating throwing molotov cocktails around and burning up the continent is morally superior to us owning guns to protect our homes from drug-crazed gangs that want to kick our doors down in the middle of the night and rape our wives and steal our valuables? I'm sure I'm not the only one that sees the irony in that.

 

Cars have been brought up and your answere was this

So you post a rather insulting post that challenges your comments. The facts are that cars are far far greater danger to others than firearms. We would ave to remove them first along with numerous other items before we reached the level of deaths from firearms.

When in debate you cant ignore facts that pertian to your stance when you use an item is dangerous in the hands of criminals (hi speed chases, used when drunk, used when trying to assualt another ect) as well as in the hands of everyday citizens (driving in the fog, the snow, heavy rains, turning to check the baby in back, drop something on the floor ect).

Simply the argument of firearms being the problem is again lost and agian the fact has been presented, and that they firearms are a lessor threat than other everyday items alot of people own.

These are not issue evading statistics but rather arguments that challenge your statements.

 

well people with guns dont kill people bullets do.

 

caused by bullets being fired from a..???

 

ok lets take it one step at a time
a man (man1) fires a gun at another man (man2)
just as he fires a car passes between them and the bullet hits the car and bounces off

firing the gun is a sufficient but not a necessary cause of someonelse dying
now man1 fires and hits man2 but doesnt kill man2 again the pulling of the trigger is sufficient but not necessary

so what is a necessary conditon - well the bullet hits the man2 in the right place necessary to cause death - people dont kill people bullets do

only a necessary condition killed the man -
the man aimed but the chances are that death would not ensue unless he were unlucky

BTW can someone for real (I mean someone who knows) can someone tell me what it feels like to shoot a gun at another person and hit them with a bullet - what do you feel in your mind after ? and under what circumstance? have you ever shot someone - did you kill them?

 

I've never failed to qualify on the range with any weapon. But as far as I am aware I've never actually shot anyone. I have however taken a 9mm in the thigh. What does that feel like? Pour some gasoline on your bare leg. Light it on fire. Get in your car and drive to the hospital. Let them put it out and then treat you.

Same feeling, more or less.

 

OK folks, I threw in some harsh commentary earlier on, but we really needed to get back on topic with this thread, in case anyone new wanted to contribute an opinion, and found we were discussing something completely different. So apologies all round.

Zoomie, I knew a bulletwound hurts, but never realized just how much until I read your post. It's strange when we see people get shot on TV or films, because it's rare that we see them suffer much pain, unless it's a stomach wound like that scene from "Saving Pte. Ryan".

It would also be interesting to hear from anyone out there who has actually shot another human being, to tell us what they felt like afterwards. I have never been trained in the army, but I reckon I would make a useless soldier. I don't think I can pull a trigger.

 

That is the problem with alot of people who do buy firearms for protection. You should never use it to intimidate but rather if the need to pull the firearm comes you need to complete the action or all you have is a weapon that likely will be used against you. The longer you think about the situation the worse it will be both pulling the trigger and afterwards.

In a local setting pulling the trigger on another human produces different feelings from people.

Feeling fear and anger and a sense of urgency just before, a blur during and relief followed swiftly by remorse and sickness then for extensive time guilt, self hate. Then mostly nothing but relfections from time to time. Lots of nightmares that decrease.

 

I once saw a documentary where it said that the army relies on the fact that some soldiers cannot under any circumstances bring themselves to shoot the enemy. It was proven that in a gun battle about 60% - 70% of all shots were made to deliberately miss the body of another human. Is that why in your time in the army you never shot anyone? apparently only 30% to 40% of soldiers in any war actually do kill people most just shoot off target on purpose.
The army knows this as a fact apparently and its in all armies this phenomena occurs

PS trust me I am not asking only to make cheap gain from this but it infact strengthens the argument that some people only kill in exceptional circumstances and not even then ! I give up in the anti argument I am more interested now in why the pro contingent feels they should have the right and what would motivate you to kill or wound someone

 

Actually I was never in the Army. I was a linguist in the Air Force. I had to qualify in everything from the old S&W .38 revolver to the pylon-mounted M-60 7.62 belt fed automatic because we often were in hostile areas and should the need to defend ourselves ever arise...

I could never be in an offensive position because I know I could only take a life to save myself or the lives of others and even then it would probably be a spur of the moment decision to do so. So your theory is correct, at least in my case. And that also conveys my "right and motivation" as you so aptly put it. I'm not into killing, I don't even hunt.

 

Interesting.

Well clearly now the pro gun lobby in this forum has been silenced I hope after this little discussion, Yank n Burn and Dirk Pitt and others have now decided that reason prevails

Perhaps there is hope after all - I know you all do really believe now that the right to own guns is insane

 

Not pro gun at all, Im pro choice! Im for keeping my rights and freedoms, Im for seeking solutions to problems and doing my part.

 

I found a small problem. I never noticed before, because I'm not personally "into" guns, but I AM pro choice, absolutely. I was sitting in the parking lot of the local carry-out/gun store. They are offering NRA "gun safety" classes. The poster they put up in the window telling about it was printed on a large "practice target" - an outline of the human body (upper) with "points" numbered on different parts of the body. On the target, the closer you are to "shooting to kill" the more points you get. Lowest points go to shooting in the arms or hands. Highest points go to stomach, heart and head areas. What ever happened to "bullseye" targets???? It would seem that the local NRA is teaching people not how to shoot a gun safely, but how to kill another human being. I am another who would have a very difficult time shooting anyone, but if it became necessary, I COULD and WOULD shoot, but aim for feet, legs, etc. Something which would slow down, stop, or make someone think twice before continuing. But NOT kill them!

I do not know what it would be like to shoot someone, but I know I would feel justified and not have a guilty conscience if I had to, unless of course somehow I accidentally hit them in the WRONG place and actually DID kill them. I would NEVER intend to do so and as another human being I have no RIGHT to do so... But the chances of my having a gun at the appropriate time are pretty much nil.
My SON carries a bullet in his upper leg. The doctors would not remove it due to it's location. His "buddy" accidentally shot him by being VERY STUPID with a gun he had no business with (found out later it was stolen). I was there shortly after the deed, and the "buddy" who up until that point had been really cocky and pumped up and "super-cool", suddenly turned into a shaking, blubbering pile of jello. He bolted and we never heard from him again. Total jerk, but he STILL freaked out that he could have accidentally killed someone. It would take a totally cold person to pull the trigger on someone, trying to kill them, and not have some pretty harsh feelings about it.

 

Oh I thought that you had all been persuaded by the arguments and stopped posting

wooohahahahaha pro choice but anti gun???? get oudda here !
ROFLMFAO ok so lets see now - you believe that freedom is merely the freedom to choose what goods you buy? hahahaha ok ok I wont laugh at you anymore if you promise to seek some help (professional help)

Ok so basically we now establish that two people are against guns but dont mind others owning them - what a load of crap ! ROFLMAO TISF FFS CYIAMS ROFLMAO hammering the floor cant stop laughing

Ok so you are anti murderer but you want them to have the choice of whether to murder with a gun or not -

Anti Abortion then but you dont mind if the woman has the choice
Anti Iradiated food, but you dont mind if the company owner has the choice to irradiate

how does anti gunb but pro choice work

(reaches for the popcorn and potato crisps cracks open a couple of beers)

 

I never noticed before, because I'm not personally "into" guns, but I AM pro choice, absolutely.

was one of the statements a couple of posts ago. Ha - I can think of loads of examples where what that really means is "I dont really give a shit its not my responsibility to take responsibility - not my problem - I'm fuckin ok jack so fuck you "

its basically a negation of societal duty I deplore the killer but still demand his right to a weapon before he kills with it ?

dont make sense at all