So an 8 year old is killed by a machine-gun and it's no ones fault?

by Simon 165 Replies latest social current

  • thetrueone

    Do you agree with my thoughts about the easy availability of buying any gun in the States in comparison to other countries. ?

  • Mary
    Simon said: The "right to bear arms" was written when people had muskets. Not automatic assault rifles.

    BINGO. But holy crap, try telling a Yankee that and they go mental with their 'I-have-a-Right-to-bear-arms' mentality. What I find most disturbing is that in many states, they do neither a criminal record check nor a mental health background check on someone before handing them a gun.

  • journey-on

    Lots of misinformed people on this forum. Some of you actually have the dumbass idea that gun stores are in every mall and are selling weapons to anybody and everybody.

    buying any gun in the States in comparison to other countries. ?

    I need to add this to the "Things You Don't give a sh*t about" thread.

  • TD
    Do you agree with my thoughts about the easy availability of buying any gun in the States in comparison to other countries. ?

    I don't think that can be denied. Firearms are much more prevalent here.

    I think all countries struggle to find a balance. I had an acquaintance who always wanted to visit Great Britain. She finally did and was attacked by a couple of hoodlums over there who knocked out her front teeth with a beer bottle. In the scuffle she pulled out a tiny little 2" pocket knife to defend herself and for that was criminally charged and narrowly escaped serving a prison sentence. It made the national news here. Everyone was outraged including the most enthusiastic gun control advocates.

    Maybe that constitutes getting along just fine in Great Britain, but it doesn't work here. The citizens of Great Britain have not allowed other countries to empty their prisons into theirs in recent history and I doubt that Canada has either. Even if you factor firearms completely out of the picture, the U.S. is still a much more violent place to live and everyone believes you have a right to be on an equal footing with an assailant.

  • WontLeave


    There are websites that will give you pretty exhaustive lists of various logical fallacies for reference.

    The way you keep guns out of the hands of people who suck is the price, psychological tests, restricting availability to convicted criminals, etc. Sure, a few crackpots and criminals have guns, but guess what: Making more laws won't cause them to go away. I only suggest availability, not proliferation. I talk about the right to bear arms and you suggest "tanks and stuff distributed amongst people". The idea that some people shouldn't have weapons, so therefore nobody should be able to have them is about the same as "Some people should be locked up, so all people should be locked up." Sure, there are those who shouldn't have weapons, just like there are those who shouldn't be allowed to vote, because they're too stupid or evil. Your argument only allows one side of the equation to be armed: The government - and government has proven time and again it has a tendency toward stupid and evil. That's the mentality of feudal Europe and Orient. Maybe a disarmed public is going smoothly right now, but roll the clocks back 70 years and how were they? How about 200 years? 500 years? 1000 years? Armed government has a long history of abusing unarmed people.


    In all honesty, handguns shouldn't be more favored than most guns the US government bans, according to the 2nd Amendment. Since the Constitution isn't protecting a right to prevent crime, but empower the citizens against tyranny, it doesn't make sense. The argument for a handgun is to protect from criminals, not armed government personnel. Granted, many military officers carry a sidearm and the majority of police do too. When something like Waco happens or when citizens have had enough government corruption and rebel, the SWAT team and military will have much bigger guns than a Glock 19. The only purpose a handgun serves is to kill civilians and that is not protected under the US Constitution. Even when a police officer knows he's going into a gun fight, he gets the shotgun out of the trunk, because handguns don't cut it.

  • bohm

    The idea that some people shouldn't have weapons, so therefore nobody should be able to have them is about the same as "Some people should be locked up, so all people should be locked up."

    well, i think you got the analogy right, problem is that i never said the first thing. Im gonna give you a point for not mentioning hitler, thought.

    Your argument only allows one side of the equation to be armed: The government

    no i do not. i think the idea that ordinary people should have surface to air missiles and tanks is an awfull one, and one you only suggest because your tied up in pro-gun rethoric that does not allow such minor differentiations.

    Why do i need to hear the same sorry strawman every time? please try to understand this: I am not saying USA would be a better place if all civilian weapons was removed. I dont really care, its not what i am arguing for or against.

  • FlyingHighNow

    I don't think any government should tell healthy, law abiding citizens they have no right to arms. I do think citizens have no good reason to have oozies and to think their 8 year old children are capable of shooting one safely.

  • thetrueone

    I think some of of the problem that persists in the States is since the purchasing of guns have been so easily available over such a length of time

    to the citizenship, i t sets into to peoples minds if bad guys come at me with a gun, I better have one myself to protect myself,

    which eventually perpetuates the purchasing of more guns by the public.

    The gun manufactures exploit this apparent fear to further push sales adding lobbyists in Washington to block any attempts on restrictions.

  • mkr32208
    If I lived in a border town, and violence began to spill over into my neighborhood and gangs began to threaten my family, and the government is taking years to figure it out, and the local police force is practically useless, I wouldn't be worried about "smarter".

    I am relieved that you aren't worried about 'smarter...'

    So your only worried about Mexican gangs? Or is it the hundreds of vicious violent canadian gangs that have your titties in a twist? Here's an idea shut off fox "news" for a second so you can hear me. Are they still talking about that guy that ONE guy who got killed on the jet ski and then the ONE police officer who got killed several weeks later while investigating? Ok we had 2 people shot last night in my city and two the night before three weeks ago we had a cop car get shot up. We lose on average one "person" every other day to violent crime and we are a fairly small city. I put person in quotes because I don't consider gangbangers of any nationality to be human.

    Maybe you should stop worrying so much about those horrible Mexicans and start worrying about the homegrown gangs? I expect to see you driving through downtown Jacksonville indiscriminately spraying bullets at random #$%$ers any day now...

    God really? I read this entire thread, no wonder the US sounds like a bunch of fucking hillbillies to the rest of the world. Yes we have heavily armed criminals do you know how they GOT armed? Most of them are armed with stolen firearms. You get a machine gun, you do have to leave it home (unless you are going to a political rally then of COURSE you take it) but most workplaces forbid them so if you bring them they get left in your car or you leave them in your house so when the bad guys break into either the car OR house now they have a new gun, or a PILE of new guns! What fun! So you think we should be able to own machine guns ok in 6 months now we have criminals running around armed with machine guns as well. Oh and FYI when a mugger goes to 'work' he does NOT leave his machine gun home. Just saying...

    And quite frankly the idea that you are going to fight the US army, well it's kind of stupid. And if you're going to be a resistance fighter well why don't you look at history and see who was more successful the resistance fighters who ran around out in the woods with machine guns or those who used single shot small pistols they could hide and walk right up to enemy leaders with? I think the french resistance from WW2 could give you an answer to that question. Or ANY assassin, when was the last time an assassin cut down a leader with an AK-47? Can do it, they SEE you coming. You want to fantasies and beat off while imagining yourself in Red Dawn well when you finish you can cum on a fake gun it feels just the same and won't ruin the finish on the weapon.

    Machine guns are good for one thing, spraying bullets on a battle field or into an indiscriminate crowd at your local McDonald's. There is NO reason NONE to own a machine gun.

  • journey-on

    ----sigh.....Yet ANOTHER one-layered surface thinker, not to mention an inability to read thoroughly. Nobody is advocating what you are describing, mkr. You're the one that sounds like an uneducated peabrain.

    1 in 10 illegals coming across the border are non-Mexican. Among those are Yemenis, Pakistanis, and other middle easterners. But, I guess your p.c. sensitivity will just write that little fact off as nothing. There are an estimated 15-20 million illegals in our country and they're not all Mexican. You do the math (if you're capable).

Share this