|
Post by rmarks1 on May 26, 2014 0:22:21 GMT -5
Bob
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2014 14:12:44 GMT -5
So for Americans a "strict" gun law is a law where the police not only isn't allowed to search for illegal guns, but even if they were to find those guns per chance, they wouldn't be allowed to take it from you anyway.
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on May 26, 2014 15:27:45 GMT -5
So for Americans a "strict" gun law is a law where the police not only isn't allowed to search for illegal guns, but even if they were to find those guns per chance, they wouldn't be allowed to take it from you anyway. Would you prefer a situation where the police could search for anything "illegal" anytime they wanted? Bob
|
|
|
Post by tricia on May 26, 2014 20:00:58 GMT -5
I believe he stabbed his first three victims to death....perhaps it's time to put tougher laws on cutlery. He also injured if not killed a few with his car. I bet there was no background check performed when he bought that BMW.
I know guns are weapons and not everyone should be able just to walk in and buy one but in this case and in most cases this guy would have (and did) use whatever he could as a weapon to kill. I don't know why they keep focusing on the gun and gun laws. Maybe if some of his victims had a gun on them the injured and dead would have been fewer. The argument goes both ways.
|
|
|
Post by Roger (over and out) on May 26, 2014 20:12:54 GMT -5
Yes, I'd be in favour of stricter laws on the availability of cutlery. I hate cutlery. I even hate the word cutlery. It reminds me of the word clutter, and I can't stand clutter. I'd like to see a return to eating with our fingers, as is the norm in the Arab world as well as in India and Africa. In those countries all the food is brought to the table on a large dish, and diners simply dig in with their bare hands and grab a portion of rice or curried chicken, or whatever is on the menu. Which is obviously a far more intimate and sociable way of sharing a meal - and one that I know you, in particular, would really appreciate.
It goes without saying that we shouldn't just make knives hard to get hold of. We should also restrict the sale of forks and spoons. People often make the mistake of assuming that forks are harmless, but anyone who has ever had their eye plucked out on the end of a fork will tell you that it hurts like billy-o.
As for spoons, a large spoon can be a lethal weapon in the wrong hands. You can crack a person's skull with a large spoon, if you know just where to aim and you use enough strength. Small spoons are obviously less dangerous, though of course they can cause serious injury if they are swallowed accidentally.
|
|
|
Post by tricia on May 26, 2014 20:59:42 GMT -5
Alas, something we can agree on. You see, I too hate clutter. Clutter breeds dust and dust breeds dust mites all runnin around doin their thing and what not. Ick.
As you know, I would sooner starve than eat something that someone else stuck their butt pickin' hands in. If these kinds of things keep up, however, I'm sure that eating utensils will be a luxury that only those with the cleanest of criminal records will be able to enjoy. With guns going around shooting people and knives stabbing people on a whim, it's only a matter of time before forks start forking people and spoons, as you mentioned, start bashing people in the head. Something will need to be done.
I should probably start stocking up on plastics.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2014 21:54:25 GMT -5
So for Americans a "strict" gun law is a law where the police not only isn't allowed to search for illegal guns, but even if they were to find those guns per chance, they wouldn't be allowed to take it from you anyway. Would you prefer a situation where the police could search for anything "illegal" anytime they wanted? Bob Honestly Bob I don't care either way. I've learned a long time ago that there is no way to have a rational debate about guns with an American.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2014 21:58:29 GMT -5
I don't know why they keep focusing on the gun and gun laws. Maybe if some of his victims had a gun on them the injured and dead would have been fewer. The argument goes both ways. Shooting a gun increases the likelihood of innocents getting hurt regardless of who shoots it, it's not like only hardened career criminals ever hurt others with a gun (in fact plenty of "crime" victims tend to be innocent bystanders getting hurt by stray bullets from police guns). Honestly people in the US seem to think that owning a gun is some kind of magic talisman against crime when really all it does is make it more likely that people get hurt.
|
|
|
Post by tricia on May 29, 2014 22:14:21 GMT -5
Hi Mcans,
For some reason I thought you lived in the US? Ah well...anyway, I'm not saying that accidents don't happen or that innocent people don't get shot but here in the US (and it may be the same where you are, I don't know) it doesn't really matter how strict the guns laws are. The people who shouldn't have guns will always find a way to have them. I don't think making it harder for a person who isn't a criminal to obtain one in order to protect themselves is a good solution.
Now me, I don't own a gun. I feel like I'm too nervous of a person and I'm afraid I'd accidentally shoot one of my kids or something in the middle of the night if they come in unexpectedly and I'm startled. I had a Rottweiler for 13 years and I used to tell people that she was better than a gun because I didn't have to aim her. She'd have for sure caused a lot of damage to anyone who tried to harm me and she wouldn't have made the mistake of mauling the wrong person so that's the safest option for me.
There are always going to be crazy people, evil people, and people who just do bad things and they'll use whatever they have available. I don't think it's unreasonable for people to have protection against that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2014 21:29:25 GMT -5
No I'm not from the US, born and raised in Austria.
My grandfather was a cop, and even though being a cop means that you're allowed to own a gun privately over here, he never did. When he retired from the force, he was offered to keep his old service gun, and his response was "What would I do with a goddamn gun at home?" Despite interacting with crime and criminals on a daily basis, he never felt insecure enough to keep a weapon at home.
I've been in the army myself, I've had training with guns, but I've never felt that carrying one makes me feel more secure. If anything, I've felt more in danger with a weapon than without.
I'm not saying that your feelings are wrong, but I think it's all too easy to delude ourselves thinking that a gun will make us actually safer, even if they may make some of us feel safer.
|
|
|
Post by rmarks1 on May 30, 2014 21:39:38 GMT -5
No I'm not from the US, born and raised in Austria. My grandfather was a cop, and even though being a cop means that you're allowed to own a gun privately over here, he never did. When he retired from the force, he was offered to keep his old service gun, and his response was "What would I do with a goddamn gun at home?" Despite interacting with crime and criminals on a daily basis, he never felt insecure enough to keep a weapon at home. I've been in the army myself, I've had training with guns, but I've never felt that carrying one makes me feel more secure. If anything, I've felt more in danger with a weapon than without. I'm not saying that your feelings are wrong, but I think it's all too easy to delude ourselves thinking that a gun will make us actually safer, even if they may make some of us feel safer. I've lived in New York all my life. That includes the 1970's and 1980's when there was a high rate of street crime. I was mugged in 1978 and spent 5 days in the hospital while they were waiting to see if I had a concussion. In 1975, some friends in New Jersey who had several guns invited me for some target practice in an abandoned quarry. That was the only time I ever fired guns, never before or since. I never had a desire to own a gun or felt the need to do so. However, if other people want to own guns, I see no reason to stop them, any more than the over 30,000 deaths in traffic accidents every year is a reason to stop people from owning cars. Bob
|
|
|
Post by Roger (over and out) on May 31, 2014 14:16:24 GMT -5
You're kidding, right? If you wake up in the middle of the night and there are three crackheads in your house you are definitely gonna wish you had a gun. And if you do have a gun, you're gonna be a million times safer than you are if you don't have one. There's nothing delusional about it.
|
|
|
Post by tricia on May 31, 2014 15:08:48 GMT -5
You're kidding, right? If you wake up in the middle of the night and there are three crackheads in your house you are definitely gonna wish you had a gun. And if you do have a gun, you're gonna be a million times safer than you are if you don't have one. There's nothing delusional about it. I agree....and who the hell taught you the word crackhead?
|
|
|
Post by Roger (over and out) on May 31, 2014 15:22:06 GMT -5
Oh, I picked up all my street language from some foul-mouthed blonde (ahem) woman in Illinois...
|
|
|
Post by tricia on May 31, 2014 15:52:48 GMT -5
Wow....and here I was thinking I was the only blonde woman you spoke to in Illinois.
|
|
|
Post by Roger (over and out) on May 31, 2014 16:34:24 GMT -5
Is that where you are!? It's a small world, isn't it.
|
|
|
Post by debutante on May 31, 2014 17:20:53 GMT -5
My Dad (a WW2 veteran) owned a gun. I don't believe I ever saw it through most of my childhood. He was the only one who knew where it was kept. Presumably, this was to prevent it from falling into the hands of children.
I saw the gun exactly once during my childhood. During the 1968 Democratic convention -- it was on the kitchen table sans clip (which, he kept in his pocket). The newspapers of the day were predicting riots -- so Dad felt the need to have this item readily available in case anyone broke in the house. Even though it technically wouldn't have worked without the clip -- he still made it clear that nobody was to go near the thing for as long as it was on the table.
After the climate of that week died down -- the gun disappeared again until he died. Before he passed away, he left me strict instructions to call my cousin immediately upon his death and have her come pick up the gun (she is a police detective). It was in her hands within 72 hours.
I got into a terrific argument with a friend of mine when I casually mentioned this story. He is a flaming liberal and went berserk and called my Dad a gun-nut. I told him my father knew how to handle guns (even the big ones aboard a battle cruiser). My friend (now my ex-friend because of this conversation) replied that he knew guns and that my Dad didn't. This idiot is a Civil War reenactor and plays with toy guns on a pretend battlefield -- so of course, he thinks he knows more than someone who saw actual combat in a real war.
Nevertheless, he kept insisting that my Dad had over-reacted by keeping the gun on the table and that made him a "nut". In his liberal viewpoint, people didn't have a right to defend themselves or even, presumably expect that they might have to defend themselves and their family. I haven't spoken to this jackass since then and I doubt I ever will again. I have a problem with anyone who says anything about my Dad.
Unfortunately, my husband (who was sitting at the other side of the table) didn't hear this conversation. He later told me that if he had -- he would have told him to shove it. A friend of his family died during another city riot (pulled from a car surrounded by rioters and killed on his way home from work). But I doubt even that story would have shut up that big mouth with no brain.
I am for gun ownership if the person is fully trained in the usage of said item.
That being said, I don't own a gun.
--Debutante
|
|
|
Post by tricia on May 31, 2014 17:50:50 GMT -5
Is that where you are!? It's a small world, isn't it. It is where I am! I could have sworn I had mentioned it to you....maybe I'm thinking of someone else. I agree, yes, small world.
|
|
|
Post by Roger (over and out) on May 31, 2014 18:51:24 GMT -5
Ah, now I remember. No, the woman I'm talking about isn't a real blonde (although she's ditsy enough to be one). She isn't an organized, respectable married woman like you : )
|
|
|
Post by tricia on May 31, 2014 19:49:32 GMT -5
Oh now don't go putting me on a pedestal! Really...I have my flaws. A bad dye job not being one of them, but I have some.
|
|
|
Post by Roger (over and out) on May 31, 2014 20:18:54 GMT -5
Don't put yourself down. I'm sure you don't have any flaws worth mentioning. Apart from snoring, being a midget (that pedestal might come in handy...), using a ton of tissue paper in public bathrooms, snorting when you laugh, having stumps for toes, being tone deaf and being as strait-laced as a Carmelite nun, what flaws could you possibly have?
|
|
|
Post by tricia on May 31, 2014 20:34:04 GMT -5
Straight lace your ass. To be just as kind I would like to mention some of *your* flaws that aren't worth mentioning but I'm on my phone and don't have the extra couple of hours. :-)
...and you forgot horrible taste in men.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2014 21:24:24 GMT -5
I've never heard of anyone wanting to take guns away from people. What gun control advocates want is for anyone purchasing a gun is to first have a background check done on them so that no criminals or mentally disburbed folks end up getting a gun. That's it. Honest. And of course, background checks are not perfect. So, does not perfect mean just forget it? Marriage maybe not turn out perfect, so forget it? What is pefect? Tell me. And to have a few days waiting period. It's not perfect, and won't prevent suicde by gun or killing people, but it's at least helpful, why not? . I know the NRA and lots of folks don't like it. So, that's it. That's the entire guns control argument. You can have your gun. Have it all. I don't care anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Roger (over and out) on May 31, 2014 22:46:29 GMT -5
Background checks aren't perfect, as you say - but in a lot (most?) of these shooting spree cases, the perpetrator wasn't subjected to any background checks at all. You can buy a gun in the US at any arms fair, without any checks of any kind, in some states. So maybe there's some room for improvement there. But A/ even if there were thorough background check on every person who bought a gun, this doesn't mean that they can't "flip" at some later date, and B/ guns are always going to be available on the black market. So 100% gun control will never be possible.
I would prefer it if there were no guns at all. The very fact that some deranged idiot can walk up to you, or a member of your family, and shoot them in the head for no reason is outrageous. As is the fact that any frustrated 17-year-old loser can get hold of an automatic weapon and kill a bunch of schoolchildren.
On the other hand, people have a right to defend themselves and protect their property. If armed intruders gain access to a person's home - and they can often do that by ringing the doorbell - the situation is potentially catastrophic for the homeowner and his or her family. The intruders will normally be in complete control. They can do whatever they like. Even if their original intention was to rob the place, they can end up committing serious assaults, rapes, murder.
What's to stop any predator - thief, rapist, serial killer - forcing their way into any house and victimizing the occupants? Only one thing: the knowledge that the occupants might be armed. "Is there a gun in the house?" is the first question intruders typically ask once they've gained access to someone's home.
If they knew that no home had a gun, it would be open season for rapists and predatory pedophiles and sadistic killers. It is only the fear that their victim might be armed, or that they'll be interrupted by somebody who is armed, that forces them to select their targets carefully.
If you have a radio or a scanner that can pick up the police frequency, listen to it in the early hours of the morning. You can look out your window, or walk through the streets, and see nothing. It's all quiet. But when you listen to the police messages you get an idea of what's really going on. 911 calls reporting suspicious behavior, intruders, attempted burglaries etc. And it goes on non-stop. There's an army of criminals out there, walking or driving around, looking for houses to rob, women to rape, children to abduct. Junkies looking for money to buy their next fix. That's the reality. And the bad guys always have the advantage. They have the element of surprise. Often they work in packs. They're almost always armed with either guns or knives. And they're desperate to get what they want.
How are people supposed to protect themselves if they aren't allowed to own a gun? Is the idea that it's just tough luck if they're targeted by criminals? So you got robbed/raped/murdered in your own house. That's too bad. But at least none of the perpetrators was killed or injured.
To me that's as unacceptable as handing out guns free to anyone who wants one.
I also do not like the idea of the forces of the state being armed while the people they are supposed to be serving are denied the right to own weapons. The original justification for the right to bear arms was to provide the people with the means to protect themselves against the government. Anti-gun campaigners say this is an antiquated idea. I don't agree. In recent decades successive governments have given themselves and the police, army and intelligence services more and more powers, while at the same time reducing and undermining people's rights and freedoms. There is an imbalance between the increasing power of the state and the decreasing power of the citizen. The police used to exist to protect and serve the people. Today, their primary function is to protect the government (and its corporate masters) and control the people. It is not inconceivable that at some point there will be a direct confrontation between the people and the forces of the state.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2014 23:10:46 GMT -5
Why the F##K is this question being asked over and over and over again!!! Who the hell keeps perpetuating these damn lies to make people crazy? That's the answer to the questin I would like to know. Maybe someday I will want to own a gun. I will do it the right way. Get background checked, get my gun registered. Get training. All that!!! So stop backing the NRA with their lies!!! I give up. Really, I don't care. Let the entire U.S. go bererk like Bob wants it to. have your fun. You all are the freaks. And compared to no panties, they are the ones who are absolutely sane and right!! It makes no sense for me to keep posting on this subject because you all will keep LYING!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2014 23:12:03 GMT -5
And why the hell do I keep posting here to put up with all this crap!!! You know you're liars, and yet you keep doing it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2014 23:34:32 GMT -5
Okay, here's an article about Gun Control and what it is. You can take it or leave it. At this point I'm disgusted with the topic and with FACTS as a whole. I was better off when I was felt too bad to post and seems like everyone else was better off, too. NOBODY IS ASKING ANYONE GO GIVE UP THEIR GUNS! As if what I report ever means any kind of shit to anyone! www.opensecrets.org/news/issues/guns/index_arch.php
|
|
|
Post by Roger (over and out) on May 31, 2014 23:56:00 GMT -5
The anti-gun lobby is campaigning for a ban on private gun ownership, or, failing that, more stringent rules on who can buy and own a gun, and on the type of gun they can own.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2014 1:09:12 GMT -5
You're kidding, right? If you wake up in the middle of the night and there are three crackheads in your house you are definitely gonna wish you had a gun. And if you do have a gun, you're gonna be a million times safer than you are if you don't have one. There's nothing delusional about it. Yea, that's pretty much the attitude of a person who has no idea how real life gunfights play out.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2014 1:14:57 GMT -5
However, if other people want to own guns, I see no reason to stop them, any more than the over 30,000 deaths in traffic accidents every year is a reason to stop people from owning cars. Bob They do require you to have a driver's license before you're allowed to drive a car in the US, though, don't they?
|
|