SHOOTING at the OLYMPICS

[F19_Klunk]

funny read on an extremely serious topic... amazing that so many suffers from severe paranoia.

Comparing USA with countries by such as Syria and Libya, governed by dictators who willingly slaughters the population? Are you for real??

Btw....no one today is seriously arguing to take away all guns from homes in the States.. (and actually trying to do so would be a nightmare for anyone who cares about liberty and privacy, given that guns are stashed everywhere and may well outnumber people in America.) Instead, most proposals seek to regulate rather than prohibit--limiting the amount and type of ammunition, restricting the number of guns one can buy etc etc.

who needs a bloody machinegun!?!? I tell you who: crazy f**cs.

are you seriously promoting is should be this easy to buy a *** AK47???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baPgr_tw79Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raaP5...feature=relmfu

if you think this guy is crazy, u need a reality check.

[Zorin]

Originally Posted by F19_Klunk

funny read on an extremely serious topic... amazing that so many suffers from severe paranoia.

Comparing USA with countries by such as Syria and Libya, governed by dictators who willingly slaughters the population? Are you for real??

Well, there must be a common "iissue" that leads to a similar gun related death toll in those countries

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by F19_Klunk

funny read on an extremely serious topic... amazing that so many suffers from severe paranoia.

Comparing USA with countries by such as Syria and Libya, governed by dictators who willingly slaughters the population? Are you for real??

Yes, I am for real. After all why else was the second amendment included? Certainly not to raise up against a democratic government in the tradition of a justice state, n'est pas?

That this debate is purely hypothetical should be obvious. As obvious that the US won't be ruled by some sort of regime anytime soon. Which in return makes the possession of weapons kinda pointless to begin with.

[F19_Klunk]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

... Which in return makes the possession of weapons kinda pointless to begin with.

Amen to that...

[Outlaw]

Just for the record...

It has been illegal to purchase a fully automatic weapon (ie, "machine gun") in the US for over 70 years UNLESS you have gone through the licensing process which requires months and an extensive FBI background check. Furthermore, your inventory is limited to THE SINGLE SERIAL NUMBERED WEAPON for which the license noted. Therefore you need a license for EACH weapon.

The only significant use of fully automatic weapons in recent US history were the two bank robbers in LA. Amazingly enough THE ONLY DEATHS WERE THE TWO PEOPLE WITH THE AUTOMATIC WEAPONS.

Additionally, most gun death statistics include accidents and suicides WHICH HAVE NO MEANING IN THE CONTEXT OF GUN CRIMES.

Even better, some gun death statistics include LEGAL SHOOTINGS IN WHICH A CITIZEN KILLED AN ATTACKER!!!!!

Often times the FBI statistics classify adult dependents of the head of household as "children" if they are 21 years or younger. So a 21 year old depressed college student who commits suicide is included in the same group as a 6 year old who accidentally kills themselves (or a playmate) with a firearm that was not properly secured.

Even a brain dead monkey can see HUGE HOLES in the statistics used by the anit-gun lobby.

--Outlaw.

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by Outlaw

Just for the record...

It has been illegal to purchase a fully automatic weapon (ie, "machine gun") in the US for over 70 years UNLESS you have gone through the licensing process which requires months and an extensive FBI background check. Furthermore, your inventory is limited to THE SINGLE SERIAL NUMBERED WEAPON for which the license noted. Therefore you need a license for EACH weapon.

I am not worried about the guy getting his background checked and then a license. I am afraid of the children discovering the keys to the weapons locker, the guy having to sell his weapon for liquidity reasons on the black market, the guy robbing the house of the one having a machine gun lying around, the guy losing his job and wife having a blackout moment. The list goes on.

The only significant use of fully automatic weapons in recent US history were the two bank robbers in LA. Amazingly enough THE ONLY DEATHS WERE THE TWO PEOPLE WITH THE AUTOMATIC WEAPONS.

Well, now we know, if a criminal uses a fully automatic weapon, he will be the one to end up dead. I am sure other criminals learned that lesson and won't ever repeat that.

Additionally, most gun death statistics include accidents and suicides WHICH HAVE NO MEANING IN THE CONTEXT OF GUN CRIMES.

Yeah, but with gun related killings in general.

Even better, some gun death statistics include LEGAL SHOOTINGS IN WHICH A CITIZEN KILLED AN ATTACKER!!!!!

And that is positive, why....? Most people here come out of an attack with a broken nose at best. Hardly with bullet holes. But then again, even the criminals here know they do not have to expect a gun when they enter a house, and in return do not feel the need to bring their own. Result...lots of people actually getting old, both victims and criminals, both having chances to actually tell stories to their grandchildren.

Often times the FBI statistics classify adult dependents of the head of household as "children" if they are 21 years or younger. So a 21 year old depressed college student who commits suicide is included in the same group as a 6 year old who accidentally kills themselves (or a playmate) with a firearm that was not properly secured.

Well, that is the problem with firearms. They are made to kill. That is their only and original purpose. Now when someone gets killed...well, wouldn't have seen that coming.

Even a brain dead monkey can see HUGE HOLES in the statistics used by the anit-gun

--Outlaw.

If you are ague gun crime only, yes. If you argue common sense of so many households in a country that hardly has a concept of integrated society and the responsebilities coming with having free access to firearms, things look a bit different. This might work in Switzerland, a country that is on one page society wise and actually is amall enough that people get to know each other. But even there you have your eventual madman.

[Outlaw]

Originally Posted by Bewolf

I am not worried about the guy getting his background checked and then a license. I am afraid of the children discovering the keys to the weapons locker, the guy having to sell his weapon for liquidity reasons on the black market, the guy robbing the house of the one having a machine gun lying around, the guy losing his job and wife having a blackout moment. The list goes on.

You miss the forest for the trees. The point is that fully automatic weapons are a statistical non-entity in crime. Harping on the subject, as some do, merely highlights one's ignorance of the true situation

Originally Posted by Bewolf

Well, now we know, if a criminal uses a fully automatic weapon, he will be the one to end up dead. I am sure other criminals learned that lesson and won't ever repeat that.

See above.

Originally Posted by Bewolf

Yeah, but with gun related killings in general.

Once again, forest for the trees. If absolute numbers are the only criteria for determining increased regulation then firearms should be relegated pretty low on the list.

Originally Posted by Bewolf

And that is positive, why....? Most people here come out of an attack with a broken nose at best. Hardly with bullet holes. But then again, even the criminals here know they do not have to expect a gun when they enter a house, and in return do not feel the need to bring their own. Result...lots of people actually getting old, both victims and criminals, both having chances to actually tell stories to their grandchildren.

"Most people..."???? What about the ones that aren't in your, "most" category? What about the ones that were killed, raped, permanently injured, scarred (emotionally or physically), etc?

I don't feel the need to die so that, "most", people won't.

If you want to be a victim, fine, that's your choice, but don't force me to be one.

Originally Posted by Bewolf

Well, that is the problem with firearms. They are made to kill. That is their only and original purpose. Now when someone gets killed...well, wouldn't have seen that coming.

Continuing the trend...forest for the trees.

My only point is that the statistics are purposely skewed for shock value and the studies are purposely designed to mislead.

On a related note, including adult suicides is so beyond asinine it can't even be described. If an adult wants to off themselves, that's their decision and they should be allowed to do so.

Originally Posted by Bewolf

If you are ague gun crime only, yes. If you argue common sense of so many households in a country that hardly has a concept of integrated society and the responsebilities coming with having free access to firearms, things look a bit different. This might work in Switzerland, a country that is on one page society wise and actually is amall enough that people get to know each other. But even there you have your eventual madman.

I think it's pretty obvious that I was arguing gun crime only. Regardless, common sense should not have to rely on lies and misrepresentation.

IMHO, lies and misrepresentation should be left to the ignorant morons (on both sides of gun control).

--Outlaw.

[Zorin]

Originally Posted by Outlaw

You miss the forest for the trees. The point is that fully automatic weapons are a statistical non-entity in crime. Harping on the subject, as some do, merely highlights one's ignorance of the true situation



See above.



Once again, forest for the trees. If absolute numbers are the only criteria for determining increased regulation then firearms should be relegated pretty low on the list.



"Most people..."???? What about the ones that aren't in your, "most" category? What about the ones that were killed, raped, permanently injured, scarred (emotionally or physically), etc?

I don't feel the need to die so that, "most", people won't.

If you want to be a victim, fine, that's your choice, but don't force me to be one.



Continuing the trend...forest for the trees.

My only point is that the statistics are purposely skewed for shock value and the studies are purposely designed to mislead.

On a related note, including adult suicides is so beyond asinine it can't even be described. If an adult wants to off themselves, that's their decision and they should be allowed to do so.



I think it's pretty obvious that I was arguing gun crime only. Regardless, common sense should not have to rely on lies and misrepresentation.

IMHO, lies and misrepresentation should be left to the ignorant morons (on both sides of gun control).

--Outlaw.

Wow, you are one scared guy. Best example yet why your societiy is in shambles if it prodcues people who only feel save if they can cling to a firearm.

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by Outlaw

You miss the forest for the trees. The point is that fully automatic weapons are a statistical non-entity in crime. Harping on the subject, as some do, merely highlights one's ignorance of the true situation

Fair enough, but has not been the focus anyways. The problem comes with firearms in general, by their very nature.

Once again, forest for the trees. If absolute numbers are the only criteria for determining increased regulation then firearms should be relegated pretty low on the list.

Which in return begs the question, why the heck are there so many people bound to kill each other in the US? That is, if you do not want to be compared to third worls countries.

"Most people..."???? What about the ones that aren't in your, "most" category? What about the ones that were killed, raped, permanently injured, scarred (emotionally or physically), etc?

Those ones are still not killed, raped, permanently injured or scarred by use or threat of firearms, which still gives them hellova lot more chances to fight back or avoid it all together.

I don't feel the need to die so that, "most", people won't.

Who does? But even if there are lots of ways to threaten, injure or kill people, not a single one is so easy and effortless as is a gun. And worse, a criminal with a firearm can be the weakest of guys, a guy you personally would have no problem getting down. Yet this weapon in his hands equalizes everything. You can be as trained or ready as you want to be, no chance here.

Why does this matter? Because in most cases, you will be unprepared when faced with a gun. So going to your locker room at home and take it out or even trying to get it out of your holster won't help you much anyways in such a situtation.

If you want to be a victim, fine, that's your choice, but don't force me to be one.

See above. I can at least define what kind of victim I am. One with a chance or one without. Reality is not Hollywood, with clear sides and enemies whom you are prepared to welcome propperly.

Or to use a propper example. Most fighters in WW2 were not shot down in dogfights. Most never saw their attackers. So let's leave the rightnousness at the doorsteps, okay?

My only point is that the statistics are purposely skewed for shock value and the studies are purposely designed to mislead.

Possible. That is why I rely on gut feeling when it comes to issues like that. And that gut feelings tells me that there are underlying reasons for the conditions in the US compared to other western nations. Guns may not be the root of that, but they sure fuel the results. Usually using gasoline to put out a fire has ...mixed results.

On a related note, including adult suicides is so beyond asinine it can't even be described. If an adult wants to off themselves, that's their decision and they should be allowed to do so.

Agreed.

I think it's pretty obvious that I was arguing gun crime only. Regardless, common sense should not have to rely on lies and misrepresentation.

Agreed as well.

IMHO, lies and misrepresentation should be left to the ignorant morons (on both sides of gun control).

--Outlaw.

And yep. Though it also requires an open mind "towards" both sides.

Because, you see, I actually do believe that the US, in it's current form, won't be able to move away from guns. They created a sitation that is not changeable over night. Criminals would run amok without civil gun owenership.
However, to actually argue for guns as a matter of principle instead out of temporary nessecity is what makes me wonder so much.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by F19_Klunk

funny read on an extremely serious topic... amazing that so many suffers from severe paranoia.

Comparing USA with countries by such as Syria and Libya, governed by dictators who willingly slaughters the population? Are you for real??

And what's the difference with a bloody oligarchy that sends thousands of youths to fight a war that is not theirs and die for nothing but enriching their own pockets? Are YOU for real?!

Btw....no one today is seriously arguing to take away all guns from homes in the States.. (and actually trying to do so would be a nightmare for anyone who cares about liberty and privacy, given that guns are stashed everywhere and may well outnumber people in America.) Instead, most proposals seek to regulate rather than prohibit--limiting the amount and type of ammunition, restricting the number of guns one can buy etc etc.

who needs a bloody machinegun!?!? I tell you who: crazy f**cs.

are you seriously promoting is should be this easy to buy a *** AK47???

Good luck with that. Besides, I haven't heard of any "crazy f***s" going on a killing spree with their MG42 or M60 lately, have you? But I tell you what, I would like to see you meeting one of these gentlemen and addressing them in that way.. you wouldn't get shot, you'd probably get a lecture in manners and humiliated by them and their down to earth attitude. Gun lovers don't use them against people, they will do all they can to keep their beloved guns. Last time I checked mowing people with machineguns wasn't ranking high in the list of popular social activities..

if you think this guy is crazy, u need a reality check.

he's not crazy, he's a victim, what you expect one that lived such a shocking experience to say? We all react to violence in different ways, there's people that killed and saw people dying around them during the war and keep on living a normal life, others don't.

Just get to know guns and the people that use them before judging them, don't feed yourself with the garbage you find on the internet.