Gun Issues page 58

2293 posts

Flag Post

thecarm, I left shout for you…..encouraging ya to make your point (even tho they aren’t really all that “astute”) so that it can be the initial mass that forms the center of snowballing-effect of other posters’ offerings.

But, that shit which ya responded to my post has no mass at all. It is merely a “fluff-feather” to tickle my funny-bone. YOU don’t give your age, but that post was little more than the childish: I’m rubber, you’re glue…your insults bounce off of me and stick to you.

If YOU are going to benefit from any of the “heat in this kitchen”,,,,
ya best start doing some better “cooking” yourself.

Originally posted by thecartm:

I’ve realized that people only post when other people are wrong.
Part 1 response:
Cause… O.O I don’t know…

None of that crap makes much of any sense at all.
Obviously, YOU “realize” very little of how things work on this forum.
I wouldn’t use the word wrong.
Perhaps ppl post when they merely DISAGREE w/ another poster’s point….eh?
Yes, they (might?) probably think it is “wrong”,,,,
OR, find it to be “lacking” in particular & specific areas.

AND, just what the fuck is it that YOU “_don’t know”_?
Are to now play some childish guessing game w/ ya?

2: If you believe so, you would not be trying to stop this.

WTF is your “this”?
An antecedent or reference is extreeeeemly helpful.

And anyhow, I like my representation.
Whooooodepoooh.
I’m most happy ya do.
Your graph was given harsh critique….yet, ya liked it so much ya told us ya’d leave it up anyway. Good grief.
If you think it’s wrong give a better one.
I DID GIVE a better one.
I took YOURS & modified it to represent what I thought was a better analogy.
That YOU are unable to respond and instead offer that bundle-0-bunk probably demonstrates that ya’re trying very hard to sit at the “adult table” at the big family reunion but really are out of your league.
The fact you insult my representation brings nothing to the argument. And yes, trees grow branches.
If YOU want to see a challenge to YOUR points//representations as “insults”,,,then ya truly probably ought to get outta this kitchen. Your skin is waaaaay tooooo thin.

And, a challenge to a point is exactly what an “argument” entails.
I made a challenge,,
YOU did NOTHING but make a lame “rebuttal” that: Yes, branches DO grow on trees.

12: I mean wasting time acting on gun laws. I think we should do something more general.

Well,
“do something more general”….eh?
Yeah, THAT certainly makes for a strong counterpoint….LOL
I think most anyone (including a child) can grasp the concept that if something isn’t to their “liking”, doing something else in a more general fashion might be “better”….DUH.

Afternote:
I will only reply to people who avoid personal insults, offer a view that supports the other side at least a little, and people who aren’t using biased information.

Are YOU for real?

Furthermore, at first I had no idea what tenco meant by: naive giblet.
For me, a giblet is basically the (barely?) edible organs of fowl.
BUT, I went alookin’ and found this….LOL: The slang name given to a somewhat annoying sibling, usually younger than oneself.

 
Flag Post

I must say, after seeing the walking dead, IDK about my previous posts…

 
Flag Post

Im against guns. They can cause more harm than good.

 
Flag Post

Milk drinker is from The Elder Scrolls:Skyrim. That’s all you need to know.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thecartm:

Milk drinker is from The Elder Scrolls:Skyrim. That’s all you need to know.

And therein lies the rub.

YOU arrogantly think your very limited & obscure offerings carry a huge weight.
Perhaps if ya were to bring more to the table,,,
we could take ya a lot more seriously.

Originally posted by ZSlinx:

Im against guns. They can cause more harm than good.

Howzzabout ya give us a weeeebit more of how ya come to your position on the matter?
 
Flag Post

Thanks Karma. I was beginning to wonder if I had wandered into the wrong forum by mistake. SD is a forum in which you explain your opinions, justify your statements and provide detail to help others understand where you are coming from.

The past three posts above yours really look as if they belong in OT. No substance whatsoever, and posters unwilling to create any argument at all.

 
Flag Post

Actually, you fail to support any of your own points. The crutches in which you rely are from biased opinion. Any MILK DRINKER could say what you are saying. Maybe if you got it past your thick skull that opinions suck and that you are being more than an old man DRINKING MILK you could show how you matter. Anyhow, I don’t think any gun laws would have stopped what happened at the boston marathon. Agree?

 
Flag Post

What exactly does the catchphrase “milk drinker” have to do with any sane, rational argument, cartm? You are making no sense whatsoever. Could you please explain with more detail, what the heck you are talking about?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:

What exactly does the catchphrase “milk drinker” have to do with any sane, rational argument, cartm?

Me thinks that’s why he’s using it.

You are making no sense whatsoever. Could you please explain with more detail, what the heck you are talking about?

It’s a reference to a game that talks about politics of its fictive world. Think how conservatives call liberals “free-loaders,” who need support from the government.

Originally posted by thecartm:

Actually, you fail to support any of your own points.

Actually, they do. Also, you’re not rubber and they’re not glue.

The crutches in which you rely are from biased opinion.

Except when they give their objective evidence supporting their opinion, of course.

Maybe if you got it past your thick skull that opinions suck

Isn’t that also an opinion?

Anyhow, I don’t think any gun laws would have stopped what happened at the boston marathon. Agree?

Completely irrelevant, why bother bringing it up?

 
Flag Post

Milk Drinker = Infant / Skyrim Freeloader
And I should have you know 1. Rubber cannot reverse the kinetic energy of liquids and 2. glue sticks to rubber. I’ve done it before.
There is no objective evidence, just broad, unspecific statements. Opinions suck, and that’s an opinion. Any matter of brains anyone reading this will commit suicide due to logic fallacy. And it IS relevant, seeing as how ahem FREAKING MENTAL HEALTH CARE would help, not any more darned laws. Why is it “law, law, law”? Why can’t it be something else? Also, anyone who dareth reply to this is an idiot- debate has no true winner.

 
Flag Post

Yeah… Mental health care…
Would be nice if it was that easy.

Without research and screenings mental health care will not do all that much to reduce rampages. And even with a lot of money going there, that issue is still so complex that it is practically impossible to filter out the people that might abuse their gun rights due to mental problems reliably. As far as these people are concerned it seems much more useful to me to determine risk factors that have been present in previous cases and use those alongside more global tests to check if someone is fit to own a gun and can be expected to handle it responsibly.
<dream>And once we really know what causes them to snap we can use these screenings and tests to get people into mental health care and solve that problem once and for all.</dream mode>

But then you have people who don’t commit crimes or make mistakes due to mental problems. There are people who cause harm because they don’t know how to use a weapon responsibly. This can be tackled by having people acquire a license before being allowed to own a gun with a certain number of required training sessions and a test that has to be passed.
There are people who get a gun with the intent to commit a crime. Those can partially be filtered out by performing background checks.
In both cases potential damage could be reduced by limiting the kind of weapons that you can legally get. There really is no need for private persons to own a high powered automatic weapon or any weapon that is designed for a war for that matter. People who want to shoot those can shoot them at a shooting range and leave them there. For your home you can get a weapon designed for self defense. A relatively safe handgun, a shotgun… Once the development of non-lethal weapons for self defense has progressed a bit I don’t see any reason why the average citizen would need a gun for anything other than recreation and/or maybe hunting.

You will never be able to get everyone who ends up causing unnecessary harm with a gun because there are just too many factors in play, but sensible laws can definitely help to reduce the risk.

 
Flag Post

Actually, in some states, you do need a license. But there are some people who can just walk into walmart and buy a gun. I think Walmart shouldn’t be able to sell guns.

 
Flag Post

My science teacher gave us an overview of how the design of bullets evolved to the present day. The ammunition evolved to be more than just just injury, the bullets evolved into weapons of sheer destruction. For example, hunting rifles tend to have ammunition that pierces the target while assault rifles have some type of bullet with jagged edges or slit tips that break apart upon contact. So he proposed the question, “why do people argue about the guns when the bullets are equally dangerous?” That being said, ammunition should be put into question. A gun is essentially nothing without the bullets.

I agree with him really. The access to more dangerous ammunition increases the lethality of the weapon itself. No matter if its a hand gun or a SMG. In all

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by brandenzard:

My science teacher gave us an overview of how the design of bullets evolved to the present day. The ammunition evolved to be more than just just injury, the bullets evolved into weapons of sheer destruction. For example, hunting rifles tend to have ammunition that pierces the target while assault rifles have some type of bullet with jagged edges or slit tips that break apart upon contact. So he proposed the question, “why do people argue about the guns when the bullets are equally dangerous?” That being said, ammunition should be put into question. A gun is essentially nothing without the bullets.

I agree with him really. The access to more dangerous ammunition increases the lethality of the weapon itself. No matter if its a hand gun or a SMG. In all

A gun AND a bullet are BOTH essentially nothing without someone behind the trigger.

The same way a bow will not loose arrows at soon-to-be victims once a shiny new arrow is invented/modified.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thecartm:

Actually, in some states, you do need a license. But there are some people who can just walk into walmart and buy a gun. I think Walmart shouldn’t be able to sell guns.

So first you mention that sometimes you don’t need a license.

Then instead of saying Walmart should require license, you say that they shouldn’t be able to sell guns.

Unlogic.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by PatriotSaint:

Then instead of saying Walmart should require license, you say that they shouldn’t be able to sell guns.

Unlogic.

Hypothetically, would it be easier or harder to break into Walmart to steal the guns?

Also, he could just think that needing a licence to get a gun at Wal-mart isn’t enough.

Originally posted by PatriotSaint:

A gun AND a bullet are BOTH essentially nothing without someone behind the trigger.

Though, It still could fire (or blow up) if stored improperly or hit.

Also robots. It probably wont be commercially available anytime soon, but it does mean the phrase “without someone behind the trigger” has to be used a little less literally.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by tenco1:

Also robots. It probably wont be commercially available anytime soon, but it does mean the phrase “without someone behind the trigger” has to be used a little less literally.

SWORD. A now-defunct robot that was trialled in Iraq. It would roll about on tank treds, select probable targets itself, and wait for authorisation to fire from a remote operator. One of several reasons it was discontinued, was that the gun mount had a tendency to track on its own. It has been replaced with a newer model now, I think it was MAAS, but not sure if that was a SWORD replacement or a related project, off the top of my head.

Putin was making noises at one point about putting completely autonomous gun turrets along his western border, such that they track targets and fire on their own authorisation, but nothing has come of it yet. Tech is not quite ready really, (machine vision still has a ways to go before it can reliably tell if a person is armed or not) but the basics are in place, and it is perfectly feasible.

 
Flag Post

Hopefully, the following will (ha ha ha ha) “enlighten” jhco et.al. pro-gun-nuts on just how deluged their concepts on the issues are:

This editiorial from my local newspaper just might FINALLY do the trick:

Disconnect between Congress, public on guns.
Is there a bigger disconnect between Congress and the public than on expanding background checks for gun purchases? National polls show 90 percent or more of the public support expanded checks. Locally [Wichita metro area], 84 percent support requiring every gun buyer to go through a criminal background check, according to a SurveyUSA poll conducted for KWCH, Channel 12. [We are a VERY “red” state, but even not all Republicans here are all THAT stupid Yet a carefully crafted measure failed in the U.S. Senate Wednesday, with Kansas Sens. Pat Roberts and Jerry Moran among those voting against it.

Could the reason my Congressional representatives voted NO because of this

The only background “checks” they must be interested in are the ones from the NRA that they can put in their bank accounts….eh?

 
Flag Post

If YOU are SO educated about guns, about some ‘Assault Rifle Ban’, then without looking it up, what is an assault rifle? If you have to look this up, than you have no place here.
PS: Your s*tty argument is a poll of opinion. You are using opinion as solid evidence of an argument. The public doesn’t know about guns. They think they’re SO smart because they say James Bond use a gun.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thecartm:

Not reading posts you are replying to is never a good idea.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thecartm:

If YOU are SO educated about guns, about some ‘Assault Rifle Ban’, then without looking it up, what is an assault rifle? If you have to look this up, than you have no place here.

And this drivel is germane to my post…..HOW?

PS: Your s*tty argument is a poll of opinion.

Did I present it as anything else?
Seriously, what is “wrong” with YOU?

You are using opinion as solid evidence of an argument.

Are not YOU doing the very same thing?
And, as I said above….where did I present my post as being anything other than based on a poll?

The public doesn’t know about guns. They think they’re SO smart because they say James Bond use a gun.

Wow-0-wow…
another opinion from YOU “as solid evidence of [for] an argument.”
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
But, from MY experience in life….ya are correct about SOME of the public (the ones YOU “hang out” with?). However, hour ridiculous hyperbole there totally defeats your already pathetic post.
 
This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

Hopefully, the following will (ha ha ha ha) “enlighten” jhco et.al. pro-gun-nuts on just how deluged their concepts on the issues are:

This editiorial from my local newspaper just might FINALLY do the trick:

Disconnect between Congress, public on guns.
Is there a bigger disconnect between Congress and the public than on expanding background checks for gun purchases? National polls show 90 percent or more of the public support expanded checks. Locally [Wichita metro area], 84 percent support requiring every gun buyer to go through a criminal background check, according to a SurveyUSA poll conducted for KWCH, Channel 12. [We are a VERY “red” state, but even not all Republicans here are all THAT stupid Yet a carefully crafted measure failed in the U.S. Senate Wednesday, with Kansas Sens. Pat Roberts and Jerry Moran among those voting against it.

Could the reason my Congressional representatives voted NO because of this

The only background “checks” they must be interested in are the ones from the NRA that they can put in their bank accounts….eh?

Saw this this morning and I think it addresses this point. I will say the author here understates the passion of gun control, but I think the overall point that this is a non-issue for a lot of constituents for many senators is spot on.

 
Flag Post

Not only should everyone have a weapon to defend themselves and/or everyone around them, they should also have EOD training, extensive knowledge of martial arts, first aid (or at least CLS) understanding, and the knowledge of how to do all these things in an NBC environment. That’s just for civilians, too. If you think for a moment that this is ridiculous to teach our citizens this at say, grade school level, you obviously don’t understand how dangerous this world is, and you’re a stupid weak minded no heart liberal who hates their country.

 
Flag Post

There is so much misinformation on this thread, I hardly know where to begin. You who are from other countries have no idea about America and our laws, yet you keep spouting off as if you are our representatives in the congress. Stop, you do not know our laws and you sound like fools telling us how we should handle our affairs. The few on here who actually have an idea of what they are talking about keep getting shouted down. If you want to learn, listen to them. Don’’t try to explain our laws or way of life from just what you read on the internet or heard from a guy who visited here once.

Think about this. Our government is heading down the road to tyranny. There is no doubt about it. They have encroached on American freedom for years and now have kicked their agenda into overdrive. These elitists hate our Constitution because it ties their hands, but they are making inroads into dismantling it. The 2nd Amendment is just one area they are working at destroying. Another is the 4th Amendment and they have just about usurped it. The house, democrats and republicans have passed the Serpa bill and it now goes to the senate where it is sure to pass and of course Obama will sign it. This law will take away the 4th Amendment of being safe in our personal affects. A warrant will no longer be needed to search your home or build large databases on the American people. The internet will be a prime feeding ground for politicians. When this passes, and if it is not challenged with a lawsuit, they will have broken the Bill of Rights. But hey, isn’t’ that what you people are hoping for?