quote:
Faelynn LeAndris spewed forth this undeniable truth:
Based off a time when the biggest threat to the american public was native attacks, and wild animal deaths, or the possibility of an overseas invasion.Also from a time where the American population numbered in the thousands, barely millions, as compared to modern day America. Many alterations have been nessesary over the years, which comprises most of the amendments.
It's not 1776 anymore.
While I agree to these idea's and there should be controls, I.E. There is no justification for a private citizen to own Assault weapons, or working assault weapons. However, The Right to Bare arms implies that we retain the ability to dissolve government. Ann Implication that shouldn't be removed, It was good in 1776, today in 2002, will still be good in 3012.
quote:
Pyscho had this to say about pies:
While I agree to these idea's and there should be controls, I.E. There is no justification for a private citizen to own Assault weapons, or working assault weapons. However, The Right to Bare arms implies that we retain the ability to dissolve government. Ann Implication that shouldn't be removed, It was good in 1776, today in 2002, will still be good in 3012.
I ask you this? What do you define as an assault weapon?
An assault weapon is fully automatic. It is hard as hell and cost thousands of dollars to get one as a civilian.
Now if you mean something like the AR-15, then you need to do more research. These weapons are no more dangerous than any other and are actually used in even Fewer crimes than your average bolt action Rifle.
quote:
From the book of Khyron, chapter 3, verse 16:
So... am I correct in assuming that you feel like the next alteration should be removing "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" from the constitution?
Actually no, I'm just riding the other side of the fence for kicks, seriously. 
I have my concealment licence, I have my federal certification for firearm use (Yeah it's 6 years old, I need to renew it....)
But one thing that has to be said is this is an arguement on two sides of the extreme.
quote:
A sleep deprived Azizza stammered:
Fae I could spend all day destroying your arguments and opinions. However since I dont' have a lot of time I will leave you with a few facts. :P1: Your average gun owner goes to the range at least once a month. Police go one or twice a year. Trust me. Police have much less training thank most CCW carriers.
Incorrect. Texas regulation requires constant upkeep by the individual officers in order to retain arms. The once a year trials are recerts. There is a difference. And you can probably ask Pesco on that one, if you are unsure. Also you are assuming an average, whereas you are negating the casual owner that has a stash. Hardcore gun owners yes, as well as NRA advocates and members. They are not, however, the majority.
quote:
2: More children die in Swimming pools than do by gunshots every year.
This is using an unrelated point in order to cause someone to form a logical responce based on two tragedies. Pools, Lakes, Oceans, are more frequented and are million person activities.
quote:
3: More people die from Doctors screwing up than do by gunshots every year.
True, to an extent. You also have to study, train, intern, test out of, and qualify for a licence in order to practice medicince. Your point?
quote:
4: The Statistics that show how many people die from gunshots every year includes not only innocent people, but criminals shot by police and other criminals, not to mention accidental shootings by police, suicides, etc. That 8000 or so takes on a very different picture when you break it down doesn't it.
Incorrect, as suicides still fall into "arms in the wrong hands" category. Police incidents, which are correctly added to the statistic occur when armed forced is nessesary. Usually in responce to armed force. All it states by adding in those numbers is that, the police were better than the criminals. Point?
quote:
5: The whole gun control idea is based on the idea that the federal goverment can control interstate comerce. this is the ONLY way they were able to do any gun control in the first place. This fact is often overlooked now adays.
The 2nd Amendment can not be broken. Just like the 1st, 3rd, 4th, etc can not be.
This could be closely linked to anarchy oppionation. It is also an assumed opinion, and based on fanatical conspiracy theory.
quote:
Finally I thinkyou missed the Point that this is making fun of things the Gun control Movement say. Reading thier site makes me want to laugh and cry. THey almost always make fools of themselves and fankly the only people I have ever met that trully support gun control were either Idiots, or didn't actually study the topic. And no reading HCI's website is not studying.
Nope, didn't miss the point, I knew what it was. I was just rationalizing some of the points of view. Since you'd like to attack the gun control lobbyist point of view as being laughable. A lot of the same can be said for the NRA Extremist point of view as well... Ted Nugent anyone? The pro gun NRA is as laughable as the control lobbyists. And as I said, I bear arms, so I am not uneducated to the subject. Unless you'd like to think I'm an idiot.
Why civillians would need long range automatic weapons is beyond me. If all of the situations described you won't need to snipe someone a hundred meters away or fire a burst of bullets (that may actually be rather harmful). A center-mass shot from a light handgun is enough to disable an attacker to the point where he presents no threat to an armed person afaik.
quote:
Faelynn LeAndris probably says this to all the girls:
Actually no, I'm just riding the other side of the fence for kicks, seriously.
Honestly, I thought as much 
You seem the type that would be anti-gun-control more than pro-gun-control.
quote:
But one thing that has to be said is this is an arguement on two sides of the extreme.
Much like the thread we had about legalising marijuana? Most political issues nowadays are far too black and white... there's not enough grey area
quote:
This one time, at Azizza camp:
I ask you this? What do you define as an assault weapon?
An assault weapon is fully automatic. It is hard as hell and cost thousands of dollars to get one as a civilian.Now if you mean something like the AR-15, then you need to do more research. These weapons are no more dangerous than any other and are actually used in even Fewer crimes than your average bolt action Rifle.
When I say assult wweapons I do mean Full autos, Not Going to use it to hunt, and I highly doubt it really gives much of an advantage in the realm of self defense.. shit even the US Milatary switched the M-16 from full auto to Semi and burst. Submachine guns, I fail to see how they are more viable than and semi hand gun for self defence, cause I am danmed sure your not going hunting with them.
As For Your comment on Bolt action being used In more crimes , well shit thats because they are much more common than assult rifles, being they are the most common Hunting rifels.
I personally think pointing to the 2nd amendment as a reason to keep guns accessable to the public isn't a very good one since the reasons for having guns in the time of its creation are far different than the reasons for having them today.
quote:
Do you really think they just happened to write the 2nd ammendment for thier time and not for future use.
3rd Amendment: No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Has that ever really been a problem since the time this amendment was written?
quote:
This one time, at Azizza camp:
I tell you what Fae. Lets set up a situation.
You are getting money out of an ATM machine at night. You have no choice on the time due to your work.
As you head back to your car you see a man slip in between you and the vehicle. You sense some movement to the side and and quickly turn to see another man has somehow gotten in the way of your only other escape route. At least one of them seems to have a weapon (not a gun) and they are getting closer to you. Actiung in a threatening way and demanding your money.Now in your little world you give them your money and beg them not to hurt you.
When it happened to me, I pulled my weapon and told them to not get any closer.
They ran off and I lived.two days later they caught both guys along with a 3rd person. Guess what? The people that had turned over thier money were beaten anyway and one woman was almost raped by them. But I am sure in your opinion that this is better than defending yourself.
Okay assume that you put someone in the place of this who buys a gun for personal protection. Now it has been left up to this individual to train and learn how to use this weapon. They may or may not get around to it. Now put that individual in this situation, thier reaction time and skill vs the reaction time and skill of the assailant. Assailant is probbably unstable. They are more used to the situation. This individual winds up having thier own weapon used against them, and this individual is dead, and the enemy just got a free gun. Thats assuming the assalaint was unarmed to begin with, or just had a knife or something. Add in them having a gun. They are going to be on edge and nervous as it is, you yourself said you were in this situation. So put you, with your gun, against an unstable edgy, nervous individual.. Are you 100% sure your reaction time will be faster than thiers, that you can pull your gun and fire before they can shoot you with thier already drawn weapon?
Also if the individual was smart, and the assailaint was unarmed, They would have had some self defense training, minus weapons, to make them prepared. While not bringing a weapon into the matter, to possibly get them killed.
You are assuming too much, and giving your self too much credit for a successfull encounter. With that attitude towards confrontation, I'm surprised you're still alive.
quote:
Another situation.
You are woken in the middle of the night by a sound. You arn't sure what it was but you know something isn't right. So you get up and go to look outside your bedroom. You see fully grown form outside your childrens bedroom. They are trying to open the door which for some reason seems blocked from the other side. You see another man sized form come up to the top of the steps. This one has a knife that looks like it came from your kitchen.In your situation you call 911 and pray they get there fast enough. even though you live a good bit away from the nearest police station and it could be 15 minutes at least.
WHen it happened to my Ex she grabbed her phone called 911 then she got her .357 revolver and burst into the hallway. She told the men to leave and when one came at her she shot the SoB. He was hit in the shoulder and went down. Dropping the other Knife that she had not seen. The second guy ran and was caught 3 hours later when he tried to steal another car.
So tell me. Which solution is better? Yours where people can't defend themselves? or mine where people have the option to protect themselves.
Even the worse of the Gun control groups is forced to admit that there are over 200,000 defenseive uses of a gun each year. In many of these the gun is never fired and it is not even reported much of the time. SOme estumated put the number as high as 600,000-700,000.
I refese to be a sheep.
I think you confuse the use of gun control and restrictions on, and truely, unnessary firearms for self defence. Many weapons can be purchased, and utilized under the gun control acts, and are are fully functional in the above encounter senario. This point is moot in the fact that it is legal, even under gun control. Arms that have been banned, and restrictions that have been made thusfar, don't remove the possibility of self defence as described above. You loose some of, non self defence oriented firearms, etc. So this doesn't apply.
quote:
Gevarien / Modrakien had this to say about the Spice Girls:
There is a difference between small arms for your personal protection and rifles etc.Why civillians would need long range automatic weapons is beyond me. If all of the situations described you won't need to snipe someone a hundred meters away or fire a burst of bullets (that may actually be rather harmful). A center-mass shot from a light handgun is enough to disable an attacker to the point where he presents no threat to an armed person afaik.
Exactly. 
But you see, NRA Extremist don't see this that way, they are just losing some of thier precious guns. Which have no real use to the common individual outside of purely entertainment use. Notice what Azziza just said about the nightim encounter of a stalker in your home. This is why this argument is playing off two sides of the extreme.
And I'm sorry, but NRA has WAY too many extremists, just like the control lobbyists do, but I'd side more with the control lobbyist on some of thier points, even being who I am, than I would for some of the crap the NRA wants to throw out there. Some of those people are good examples themselves of WHY some Gun Control is a GOOD Thing. Ted Nugent is a friggin nutcase...
quote:
JooJooFlop painfully thought these words up:
I thought Ted Nugent used bows.
He does. He's also an advocate for the NRA, and a nutcase...
Ofcourse he openly supported anarchy as a formal type of government on occasion as well... He's.. not.. all.. there...
Would make shoot-outs a lot more interesting.
What do you think a hunting rifle is going to do against someone in a tank? Being able to overthrow the government is not an option.
quote:
When the babel fish was in place, it was apparent Naimah said:
Ok your talking like your little NRA buddies are going to be able to effectivly form a militia and do something against the government army.
And you're talking like soldiers of the United States Army would fire upon United States citizens if ordered to.
The chain of command only goes so far, then people start thinking for themselves.
quote:
Everyone wondered WTF when D wrote:
And you're talking like soldiers of the United States Army would fire upon United States citizens if ordered to.The chain of command only goes so far, then people start thinking for themselves.
Estimations are that the Armed forces would split pretty much 50/50 if this ever come to pass. Remember that people in the Military are not mindless drones. They are American just like any other. I honestly don't want to ever find out for a fact how they would split.
I would however like bloodsage's imput on this one.
quote:
Azizza had this to say about Duck Tales:
I would however like bloodsage's imput on this one.
Tired of being owned in a discussion normally and want to take it to the extreme?
quote:
»Waisztarroz« had this to say about pies:
Tired of being owned in a discussion normally and want to take it to the extreme?
Nah but am pretty tired of you.
Seems to me that so far no one has been able to provide one shred of evidence to refute anything I have said. I just wanted the opinion of somone from the armed forces..
Seriously though, Im not being sarcastic.
quote:
This one time, at Azizza camp:
Seems to me that so far no one has been able to provide one shred of evidence to refute anything I have said.
What were we trying to refute again exactly?
The bit about how assault weapons (anything but handguns and hunting rifles) should/shouldn't be accessable to civilians or the bit about the need for the public to be armed in case a militia needs to be formed should the armed forces attempt a coup or something?
quote:
The logic train ran off the tracks when Azizza said:
It really comes down to this. And call me an extremist if you will:
....
I would just as soon not turn out like Germany before WW2. Remember that Hitler was elected.
WTF does gun control have to do with Germany Pre WW2, a country beaten and so dirt poor that the paper money it made was better off burning for cooking than spending, and Germany go this way because the rest of erupt took a huge amount of reparation for WW1 out of Germany. I fail to see How The lack of guns or gun control has anything to do with Hitlers election, because Hitler was a very charismatic individual and a small god at oratory and speeches, even though he was as evil as Satans left nut.
Dude unless all my History and Political science professors are wrong, and I doubt it because they have nifty little abbreviation ad the end of their names, and I don't think you do, The second amendment still exists as I said before, it implies the people have the power to dissolve the government, by force if needed.
See our founding father really like what this dude Locke had to say about how a government should run and the ideals and the contracts it should have. If you really think that the right for citizens to carry guns allows us to protect the others, you are smoking some good stuff.
O and The Thing about US soldiers Firing on United States citizens, I think there is some little technicality about the military not being able to be used in such a matter. The National guard, but not the full-blown military.
quote:
Naimah was naked while typing this:
You think if there was a revolt of the american people the government wouldn't try and use the military to stop it? What fantasy world do you live in?
quote:
Naimah had this to say about the Spice Girls:
You think if there was a revolt of the american people the government wouldn't try and use the military to stop it? What fantasy world do you live in?
They might try to use, but as I said there is some little legal thingie that would prevent them, i.e. If given the order, the order would be illegal and would not be followed... depending on who the type of person receiving the order. I think its fairly newish thing though, because the army been used to put down revolts, but that was like before things like the FBI and all the different government agencies existed for law enforcement.
However there is a huge difference between some little fanatic group with guns and a true revolution. Not to mention the metric assload of government processes that would have to fail before the people decided the government has ceased to do what it promised.
quote:
Azizza had this to say about Pirotess:
Nah but am pretty tired of you.
And that was my first comment in the thread!
quote:
And I was all like 'Oh yeah?' and Koosh Man was all like:
It's funny. Not serious. Laugh, goddammit.
It probly was intended to be funny, but then again. I happened to be writing a speach about gun violence in today's society, and I just got back from seeing Bowling for Columbine. So, your list hit right at a time I was pissed about the constitutional right to grab a gun. Bad timing I guess.
2. Washington DC's low murder rate of 69 per 100,000 is due to strict weener dog control, and Indianapolis' high murder rate of 9 per 100,000 is due to the lack of weener dog control.
3. Statistics showing high murder rates justify weener dog control but statistics showing increasing murder rates after weener dog control are "just statistics."
4. The Brady Bill and the Assault Weeners Ban, both of which went into effect in 1994 are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates, which have been declining since 1991.
5. We must get rid of weener dogs because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time and anyone who would own a weener dog out of fear of such a lunatic is paranoid.
6. The more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals.
7. An intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a 3ft weener will get angry and kill you.
8. A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking weener dog and a dead rapist at her feet.
9. When confronted by violent criminals, you should "put up no defense -- give them what they want, or run" (Small Dog Control Inc. Chairman Pete Shields, Weener Dogs Don't Die - People Do, 1981, p.125).
10. The New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about weener dogs; just like Weeners & Greyhounds has some excellent treatises on heart surgery.
11. One should consult an automotive engineer for safer seatbelts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a surgeon for internal medicine, a computer programmer for hard drive problems, and Martha Stewart for weener dog expertise.
Eh, too lazy to finish it, but you get the idea.
quote:
Palador ChibiDragon's fortune cookie read:
1. Banning weener dogs works, which is why New York, DC, & Chicago cops need weener dogs.2. Washington DC's low murder rate of 69 per 100,000 is due to strict weener dog control, and Indianapolis' high murder rate of 9 per 100,000 is due to the lack of weener dog control.
3. Statistics showing high murder rates justify weener dog control but statistics showing increasing murder rates after weener dog control are "just statistics."
4. The Brady Bill and the Assault Weeners Ban, both of which went into effect in 1994 are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates, which have been declining since 1991.
5. We must get rid of weener dogs because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time and anyone who would own a weener dog out of fear of such a lunatic is paranoid.
6. The more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals.
7. An intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a 3ft weener will get angry and kill you.
8. A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking weener dog and a dead rapist at her feet.
9. When confronted by violent criminals, you should "put up no defense -- give them what they want, or run" (Small Dog Control Inc. Chairman Pete Shields, Weener Dogs Don't Die - People Do, 1981, p.125).
10. The New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about weener dogs; just like Weeners & Greyhounds has some excellent treatises on heart surgery.
11. One should consult an automotive engineer for safer seatbelts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a surgeon for internal medicine, a computer programmer for hard drive problems, and Martha Stewart for weener dog expertise.
Eh, too lazy to finish it, but you get the idea.
quote:
Palador ChibiDragon stopped staring at Deedlit long enough to write:
8. A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking weener dog and a dead rapist at her feet.
I don't know why, but I had this image of a weener dog smoking a ciggy and saying to the corpse, "Was it good for you too, baby?" after reading that.
quote:
So quoth Pyscho:
WTF does gun control have to do with Germany Pre WW2, a country beaten and so dirt poor that the paper money it made was better off burning for cooking than spending, and Germany go this way because the rest of erupt took a huge amount of reparation for WW1 out of Germany. I fail to see How The lack of guns or gun control has anything to do with Hitlers election, because Hitler was a very charismatic individual and a small god at oratory and speeches, even though he was as evil as Satans left nut.
Dude unless all my History and Political science professors are wrong, and I doubt it because they have nifty little abbreviation ad the end of their names, and I don't think you do, The second amendment still exists as I said before, it implies the people have the power to dissolve the government, by force if needed.
See our founding father really like what this dude Locke had to say about how a government should run and the ideals and the contracts it should have. If you really think that the right for citizens to carry guns allows us to protect the others, you are smoking some good stuff.
O and The Thing about US soldiers Firing on United States citizens, I think there is some little technicality about the military not being able to be used in such a matter. The National guard, but not the full-blown military.
I swore to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
'Sides, it's already happened once. Civil War, anyone?
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Bloodsage got all f'ed up on Angel Dust and wrote:
I swore to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.'Sides, it's already happened once. Civil War, anyone?
You swore to defend the Constitution... part of said constitution is the right of the citizens of the US to bear arms.
Do you, personally, beleive that right should be revoked?
quote:
Khyron had this to say about Knight Rider:
You swore to defend the Constitution... part of said constitution is the right of the citizens of the US to bear arms.Do you, personally, beleive that right should be revoked?
The right to bear arms has never been in danger. This is something a lot of advocates fail to remmeber.
The inability to bear certain TYPES of firearms, doesn't not remove the right to bear arms at all. Limitations and restrictions such as background checks, waiting periods, etc etc, also do not remove the right to bear arms because those who would be denied the right to gain a weapon because of these restrictions already violated the American trust in one way or another.
The right to bear arms isn't an issue. The right to bear unnessary, and limited amounts of arms does not violate this right.
Many handguns, many types of rifles, all forms of bows, and various other arms are still available even under gun control acts.
quote:
ACES! Another post by Faelynn LeAndris:
The right to bear arms has never been in danger. This is something a lot of advocates fail to remmeber.The inability to bear certain TYPES of firearms, doesn't not remove the right to bear arms at all. Limitations and restrictions such as background checks, waiting periods, etc etc, also do not remove the right to bear arms because those who would be denied the right to gain a weapon because of these restrictions already violated the American trust in one way or another.
The right to bear arms isn't an issue. The right to bear unnessary, and limited amounts of arms does not violate this right.
Many handguns, many types of rifles, all forms of bows, and various other arms are still available even under gun control acts.
Can I get a scoped AR-15 and pretend I'm a counter-terrorist and run around in the woods killing those bastard terrorist deer, under gun control acts?
Assuming that hunting rifles are accurate enough to snipe with anyways. Even then, it would kinda cheapen the hunt, wouldn't it?
quote:
JooJooFlop had this to say about the Spice Girls:
No, but you can probably attatch a scope to a hunting rifle and pretend various furry woodland creatures are terrorists.Assuming that hunting rifles are accurate enough to snipe with anyways. Even then, it would kinda cheapen the hunt, wouldn't it?
What do you mean, pretend?
Those bastard Deer are plotting to bring the country down from the inside. I KNOW IT. Bastard Deer.
quote:
Khyron had this to say about Matthew Broderick:
Can I get a scoped AR-15 and pretend I'm a counter-terrorist and run around in the woods killing those bastard terrorist deer, under gun control acts?
Exactly my point.
Wanna get really bad about it. As long as the American civilian retains the right to weild a knife of any type, then they are still not in technical violation of the constitution since you are 'technically' concidered armed.
NRA activists like to cry foul and attack the governement because they chose to restrict certain types of firearms that, to be perfectly honest, the common individual has no point in ever owning in the first place as most of them are unsuitable for hunting, and in a self defence standpoint is definite overkill.
The second amendment hasn't been breeched, and is in no danger of such.
quote:
From the book of Faelynn LeAndris, chapter 3, verse 16:
Exactly my point.Wanna get really bad about it. As long as the American civilian retains the right to weild a knife of any type, then they are still not in technical violation of the constitution since you are 'technically' concidered armed.
NRA activists like to cry foul and attack the governement because they chose to restrict certain types of firearms that, to be perfectly honest, the common individual has no point in ever owning in the first place as most of them are unsuitable for hunting, and in a self defence standpoint is definite overkill.
The second amendment hasn't been breeched, and is in no danger of such.
Friend of mine has an AR-15. It's a damn neat gun, and honestly I'd like one of my own sometime
I really do gotta go to the range more often...
