Gun ban solution to mass murders?

Yet, like a hammer, or a tire, a gun is a tool.

I disagree. Having it for defense is about just that; having it fore defense. It has nothing to do with social control as the vast, vast majority of guns in this country are not used to exert any form of control over any other person. No one is being suppressed or controlled by me owning guns.

I've answered this repeatedly, here and in another. You aren't, apparently, interested in any of the answers I have given.

Not at all. They are two entirely different issues. As I have pointed out, gun owners can be, and are, involved in numerous activities aimed at fixing various social problems that our country faces. These activities rarely, if ever, involve guns.

No, I don't think that the threat of social unrest is so great. I've said before that I view such a scenario as very unlikely.

 

Sig

To repeat - A hammer was designed to beat metal. I suppose it could be used as a weapon but I’ve never thought of it as such, it resides in my tool box in the basement, and the last time I used it was to put up party decoration a joyous affair.

A tyre was designed as a wheel for a vehicle, I don’t think it could be used as a weapon, its locked in the boot of the car outside. As I’ve said I’m not even sure if it is fit for purpose.

A gun was designed as a devise for killing or maiming people it can be used for recreational purposes but it function is as a weapon.
The fact that so many pro-gunners seem to see no difference is part of my theory.

To repeat - As I’ve said many Americans attitude toward guns is just one aspect of a more general attitude of intimidation in US society.
You say you are not part of that attitude but I’m still unsure if that is true or not.
*
You said - I don't ignore the bigger picture. I just have a different idea on how that bigger picture should be handled
I asked what is was.
You reply - I've answered this repeatedly, here and in another. You aren't, apparently, interested in any of the answers I have given.
But please point to where, I’ve been reading your post and I’ve seen no explanation of your ideas, I ask again can you actually point them out?
*
Anyway as I’ve already pointed out attitudes to social problems (and how to fix them) are very important in any gun debate, because they seem to get to the heart of why many people are pro-gun.

To me most things are connected as I say to me being pro-gun often seems to be a symptom of some attitudes and mentality that I’ve noted.

Well I also think these things are unlikely in fact I’m so unafraid of them that I don’t even think in terms of a ‘just in case’ gun, while you have two ‘just in case’ guns and are thinking about getting another and you keep at least one in a bedside safe that you know you can open in under 5 seconds

 

Round and round we go. I think I am ready to get off this ride.

 

Sig

A pity since I think I was getting closer to showing that you did fit in with my theories, but then again maybe you had worked that out as well and that’s why you are pulling out.

*

 

Not in the slightest. It has come to the point where I believe you refuse to accept that your theory has holes and is flawed. You believe what you believe not because you know it to be true, but instead because you want it to be true, despite evidence and examples to the contrary. That's fine, I can accept that and certainly don't hold it against you.

Looking forward to when we next "clash" in a thread, whatever the topic may be.

 

Sig

Oh I’m not saying it hasn’t got holes and flaws only that you haven’t shown any, just asserting I’m wrong because you are telling me I’m wrong.

I see no evidence or examples and although you mention them you have so far not being able to produce them when I ask you to.

Same, I mean it is difficult to be faced with things you might not want to face.

What’s the point if you run away when things start getting difficult for you?

 

Hmmmm, strange how others in this thread have seen them but you keep missing them.

Running away? You know, despite our disagreements here, I felt as though you and I were at least able to discuss the topic as adults, without the need to petty jibes and backhanded comments. Seems I was wrong. There comes a point, and I think you'll agree, where further discussion is pointless.

 

Sig

LOL - Well maybe they could show me where they are because even when asked again you clearly can’t. And ok lets not call it running away, you’re ex-military would you prefer it if I called it a strategic retreat?
Look its fine if you want to drop out of a discussion when things get tough for you, lets just leave it at that, i mean in the end its just a bit of fun.

 

This thread has 19 pages, along with many pages in another thread, of me explaining my reasoning for purchasing firearms (which didn't involve fear), me explaining my reasoning behind the "what if" scenarios, me explaining what I would do to help alleviate potential food shortages, me explaining what I do in my local community to help educate people in regards to food production, and so on. You, apparently, have chosen to ignore them. I am not going to go back and point out every single time I answered every single one of your questions. If you feel you have the time, be my guest. I can lead a horse to water, but I can't make that horse drink. Especially when the horse apparently doesn't want to drink.

 

Sig

Yet you have two ‘just in case’ guns and a desire for another - one of which is by your bedside in a safe you know you can open in under 5 seconds.

You fear there could be social unrest or a revolution and that’s why you have ‘just in case’ guns.

You - as an individual - doing a spot of gardening. Which is fine but as pointed out you don't seem to think wider than that.

While saying that you don’t care about and would do nothing for others who by your own admission are so low as to be in the gutter.

As explained none of them actually show up any flaws or holes in my theories and when I ask you to explain why you think they do you seem unwilling or unable to do so.

Again it basically comes back to you telling me I’m wrong because you are telling me I’m wrong. The problem is that the deeper we go the more you seem to fit into the theories, I’m not sure you do and I could be wrong, but we are not going to find out if you are unwilling to debate.

 

This thread just made me want to puke, I can't even read the whole thing.

But at least it got a little better when 2 Brits started arguing back and forth about guns in the US. You guys really are clueless about the way these guns work and the gun culture, as pointed out by people in here who have experience. It's a joke. It's like watching two lesbians argue about how to give a blowjob.

Don't you guys get like 4 weeks of paid holiday by your government? You should come to Florida and shoot some fucking guns with me. I bet you would leave with a more rational understanding of the issue, and not regurgitating whatever you've heard or read. You'd probably be like damn, our country sucks, we have no freedom!

 

Gun control advocates are like snake oil salesmen in the old West.

The salesmen would go from town to town, hawking coloured water with some alcohol in it as a cure for everything from gout to syphillis. They then travelled on and were rarely able to be challenged as to the failures of the product.

If they were challenged, they inevitably said "Oh I didn't appreciate just how bad your problem was, sir. Have another bottle free". And they then travelled on.

Gun control is the same. It never works as its proponents assert that it will. And when it doesn't, they will say "it's because we need more, stronger, more oppressive, more invasive laws. THEN it will work".

And so the roundabout goes around, with more and more resources devoted to policing and prosecuting the lawful while the criminals make merry in the knowledge that they will rarely, if ever, be challenged.

The idea that a criminal who will disobey a law against rape, theft or murder will obey a law against owning a 20 round magazine is idiotic. Put that concept in any other context and you'd be certified.

 

Deviate

Sorry but again you are telling us we are wrong because you are telling us we are wrong – you don’t seem to have any rational or reasonable counter arguments.

 

Green

I’ve already that with you in Post 139 - here

http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?p=7572770#post7572770

You had no rational answer then have you one now?

To repeat - I’m not against the law abiding and responsible people owning a gun

But according to the FBI virtually all the guns in criminal hands were once purchased legally but then sold on or stolen.

So how responsible is it to have guns around that could be easily stolen?

Once again I ask - Do pro-gunners want guns out of the hands of criminals

I know the default answer for many is simply – that can’t be done – but please would they go beyond that - do they want guns out of the hands of the criminal and irresponsible?

And if so how far are they willing to go to achieve that?

 

I always love the sight of a moderator on hipforums quoting the FBI. I love hippies who want more governmental meddling in our lives.

How about you think for yourself....

 

Balbus

How come I managed to 'get it' about 6-7 pages ago, and you keep coming in repeating yourself, having a few days off and then coming back and repeating yourself? Is any sane person going to go back to what was said three weeks ago (apart from you)?

There might be holes, but there doesn't have to be - you just don't have to apply it to all 'pro-gunners' - which you claim you are not wishing to do. Although you keep pestering people to the point of boredom, imho.

 

The US has even managed to over-complicate annual leave.
UK: 28 calendar days (5.6 weeks) These may include the Bank/Public holidays which otherwise would be unpaid (approx 7-8 a year).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_statutory_minimum_employment_leave_by_country
US None bwahahahhaha - no wonder you guys are so tense.

 

OdonII

Get what? I mean what is it that you think you have got?

 

There is no use providing someone like you rational arguments. As I said, come shoot guns with me. Then see how you feel. Have you even seen or held an "assault rifle"?

 

That he was initially stating that you had no point, and nobody, through his experiance, who owned a gun bought one through fear. Then said, ok, maybe it's half an half. The half that doesn't fall into your theory is the one he is in. Then you have tried to hang him with 'just in case' and a rather blustering notion of getting a gun in 5 seconds flat.

Him:Just for clarification, my pistol safe is within arms reach of my bed. I don't have to leave my bed to access it.
(which suggests he can get it easily but not under 5 seconds)

Me: Siq, seems the type of person who likes guns, wants a gun, can get a gun, and buys a gun - the end.
Him: Pretty much what it comes down to.

Being prepared is not the same as being afraid. I do not fear being robbed. I do not fear being attacked. I do not fear a revolution coming to my doorstep.