The Forum › General Chat FileCabi.net Forum (2007–2008)

Gun control.

1. MCMXCIISalvaged from archive
   Why do people keep insisting that the possibility that victims carry guns deters crime? If I was a mugger, I'd be a mugger for a reason (say I had fuckall money left and I needed a hit). If I know my victim might blow my head off, I would make sure they couldn't and probably shoot first, or at least get more firepower. How does that make anyone safer?
2. AfronaughtSalvaged from archive
   Quote: Originally Posted by MCMXCII View Post How does that make anyone safer? Get one of these... Then they cant get a bigger one than yours.. http://www.whatsthelatest.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/… Better yet... you'll feel safer driving one of these.... http://www.shopmetrospy.com/ppc_promo_images/600_shopmetr…
3. MCMXCIISalvaged from archive
   I was hoping you'd not post in this thread Afro. You have a real experience of this, so you would naturally argue for guns as means of self defence. However in the larger scope of things, not considering the very unlikely event that you unfortunately found yourself in, what do you think? Also, tank is shooped!
4. AfronaughtSalvaged from archive
   Quote: Originally Posted by MCMXCII View Post I was hoping you'd not post in this thread Afro. You have a real experience of this, so you would naturally argue for guns as means of self defence. However in the larger scope of things, not considering the very unlikely event that you unfortunately found yourself in, what do you think? Also, tank is shooped! hehehe.. Ok. Firearms have been around for a long time now. and even before the advent of gunpowder. people have always carried a weapon of some sort, and was primarily for defence, either for themselves or their property. History has shown when you disarm people, the become helpless and relyant on some contolling body. Whether it's the Serfs of the Middle ages or the Warlords of central and western africa today. If by some magical force.. Guns were removed from the world... there will still always be a victim and a perpertrator, and there will always be some sort of method for one human to kill another human. Gun control sould really mean creating and establishing a system in which an owner of a Firearm is Mandated to recieve full Proper training on how to use a firearm, when to use a firearm, and the implications of using a firearm. I'm sure you heard this countless times... Tahking guns away from Honest Law abiding people only serves to disarm those people... Criminals dont abide by the law. Then if regulations are set in place where Law abiding people are requred to have proper training in using and Carrying a firearm, and the legal implications of doing so... then they would have an advantage over Criminals, who still aqure their firearms Illegally. Thus not being trained in self defence and combat tactics using firearms. Also it would make the Average citizen More resposible in carrying a firearm. ..... Just a thaught.
5. GodMattSalvaged from archive
   Quote: Originally Posted by Afronaught View Post hehehe.. Ok. Firearms have been around for a long time now. and even before the advent of gunpowder. people have always carried a weapon of some sort, and was primarily for defence, either for themselves or their property. History has shown when you disarm people, the become helpless and relyant on some contolling body. Whether it's the Serfs of the Middle ages or the Warlords of central and western africa today. If by some magical force.. Guns were removed from the world... there will still always be a victim and a perpertrator, and there will always be some sort of method for one human to kill another human. Gun control sould really mean creating and establishing a system in which an owner of a Firearm is Mandated to recieve full Proper training on how to use a firearm, when to use a firearm, and the implications of using a firearm. I'm sure you heard this countless times... Tahking guns away from Honest Law abiding people only serves to disarm those people... Criminals dont abide by the law. Then if regulations are set in place where Law abiding people are requred to have proper training in using and Carrying a firearm, and the legal implications of doing so... then they would have an advantage over Criminals, who still aqure their firearms Illegally. Thus not being trained in self defence and combat tactics using firearms. Also it would make the Average citizen More resposible in carrying a firearm. ..... Just a thaught. This.
6. Cymru am bythSalvaged from archive
   ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.
7. MontysDoubleSalvaged from archive
   Quote: Originally Posted by MCMXCII View Post Why do people keep insisting that the possibility that victims carry guns deters crime? If I was a mugger, I'd be a mugger for a reason (say I had fuckall money left and I needed a hit). If I know my victim might blow my head off, I would make sure they couldn't and probably shoot first, or at least get more firepower. How does that make anyone safer? This. Thing is, gun control won't remove guns from the hands of determined criminals so on that count it's pointless, but making people jump through beauracratic hoops or prove a need for a gun will -for law abiding citizens- reduce gun deaths by accident and domestic violence. Fact is, the random sicko with a gun who simply wants to kill a random person is a very, very rare thing compared to the fucked up family member who goes batshit insane and kills the kids or wife. Needless to say, having a gun at hand makes such an act terribly easy.
8. MCMXCIISalvaged from archive
   Quote: Originally Posted by MontysDouble View Post Needless to say, having a gun at hand makes such an act terribly easy. Yeah. And it's a lot more fun with a kitchen knife. No but really, I second that argument.
9. AfronaughtSalvaged from archive
   Quote: Originally Posted by MCMXCII View Post Yeah. And it's a lot more fun with a kitchen knife. No but really, I second that argument. In Asia... the most commonly used wepon in Fatal domestic violence cases are stabbings. As I said... people will just find another way to kill each other.. Whats next after geting rid of guns? Getting rid of Knives?.. then Sharp objrcts?.. and Bludgeoning weapons?
10. MCMXCIISalvaged from archive
    Don't get me wrong, I sort of like guns for what they are, not what their purpose is. I am fascinated by the technology and their application in warfare, their impact on History. I would be all for having a gun for collecting purposes but not for self-defence as it makes you more of a target.. At least from my point of view. In America and other parts of the world, things might be very different. In the US the distrust for the authorities is a reason for citizens to bear arms and the argument behind the Second Amendment. In other countries where law enforcement is too weak or too corrupt, I can also see the purpose of taking matters in your own hands. It's just that where I'm from and where I'm at, that makes no sense.
11. boo_cockySalvaged from archive
    Quote: Originally Posted by MCMXCII View Post Don't get me wrong, I sort of like guns for what they are, not what their purpose is. I am fascinated by the technology and their application in warfare, their impact on History. I would be all for having a gun for collecting purposes but not for self-defence as it makes you more of a target.. At least from my point of view. In America and other parts of the world, things might be very different. In the US the distrust for the authorities is a reason for citizens to bear arms and the argument behind the Second Amendment. In other countries where law enforcement is too weak or too corrupt, I can also see the purpose of taking matters in your own hands. It's just that where I'm from and where I'm at, that makes no sense. I might be misunderstanding what you mean here...but, in the US, it's not a distrust of authorities that pushes people to want to bear arms. The LAST thing a law abiding citizen wants to do is kill a cop or authority figure. I don't have time to search right now, but I'd be willing to bet that the percentage of cops killed by LEGAL guns in the US is astronomically low. It IS our RIGHT to bear arms, and it's almost been completely taken away. Take that away and we might as well wipe our ass with the Constitution and Bill of Rights...lock up the borders completely, force ONE religion on all citizens and require that they practice, take away freedom of speech, etc. There's a reason our forefathers got out of England. With that said, I took the course to carry a concealed weapon over a year and a half ago and still haven't gone to my local PD to apply for my permit. I'm all for Americans having the CHOICE and right to bear arms, I just haven't gotten around to acquiring one yet and won't do so unless I know it can be safely stored and used in my home by all family members.
12. MCMXCIISalvaged from archive
    Quote: Originally Posted by boo_cocky View Post I might be misunderstanding what you mean here...but, in the US, it's not a distrust of authorities that pushes people to want to bear arms. The LAST thing a law abiding citizen wants to do is kill a cop or authority figure. I don't have time to search right now, but I'd be willing to bet that the percentage of cops killed by LEGAL guns in the US is astronomically low. It IS our RIGHT to bear arms, and it's almost been completely taken away. Take that away and we might as well wipe our ass with the Constitution and Bill of Rights...lock up the borders completely, force ONE religion on all citizens and require that they practice, take away freedom of speech, etc. There's a reason our forefathers got out of England. With that said, I took the course to carry a concealed weapon over a year and a half ago and still haven't gone to my local PD to apply for my permit. I'm all for Americans having the CHOICE and right to bear arms, I just haven't gotten around to acquiring one yet and won't do so unless I know it can be safely stored and used in my home by all family members. What I meant to say was that in my eyes, that might be what your "founding fathers" had in mind: that every citizen should have the right to bear arms so that they could not be bossed around, by a colonial power or their own government, to ensure their complete freedom..
13. MontysDoubleSalvaged from archive
    This is a good post: Quote: Originally Posted by Afronaught View Post hehehe.. Ok. Firearms have been around for a long time now. and even before the advent of gunpowder. people have always carried a weapon of some sort, and was primarily for defence, either for themselves or their property. History has shown when you disarm people, the become helpless and relyant on some contolling body. Whether it's the Serfs of the Middle ages or the Warlords of central and western africa today. If by some magical force.. Guns were removed from the world... there will still always be a victim and a perpertrator, and there will always be some sort of method for one human to kill another human. History is full of a lot of ideas that were taken as writ-in-stone truths or pillars of societies, but are now either nonexistent or rare and near universally abhorred: Slavery, human sacrifice, waging total war for lebensraum... As you point out, there are still a lot of fucked up groups around exerting power through arms, but there's an alternative: A peaceful society under rule of law where arms are only in the hands of police and soldiers. Of course, crims will also have guns but that's the only justification for the police needing them. This goes straight to what MCM said: "In other countries where law enforcement is too weak or too corrupt, I can also see the purpose of taking matters in your own hands. It's just that where I'm from and where I'm at, that makes no sense." It's true that gun control -even elimination by some magical force- won't be a panacea; where there's a will to violence there's a way. Guns provide a particularly easy way, so why not just get rid of them? Quote: Gun control sould really mean creating and establishing a system in which an owner of a Firearm is Mandated to recieve full Proper training on how to use a firearm, when to use a firearm, and the implications of using a firearm. I'm sure you heard this countless times... Tahking guns away from Honest Law abiding people only serves to disarm those people... Criminals dont abide by the law. Then if regulations are set in place where Law abiding people are requred to have proper training in using and Carrying a firearm, and the legal implications of doing so... then they would have an advantage over Criminals, who still aqure their firearms Illegally. Thus not being trained in self defence and combat tactics using firearms. Also it would make the Average citizen More resposible in carrying a firearm. ..... Just a thaught. A very good thought indeed. Sounds a lot like basically requiring anyone who wants a gun to undertake much of the same training a police officer takes. GG
14. AfronaughtSalvaged from archive
    Quote: Originally Posted by MCMXCII View Post Don't get me wrong, I sort of like guns for what they are, not what their purpose is. I am fascinated by the technology and their application in warfare, their impact on History. I would be all for having a gun for collecting purposes but not for self-defence as it makes you more of a target.. At least from my point of view. In America and other parts of the world, things might be very different. In the US the distrust for the authorities is a reason for citizens to bear arms and the argument behind the Second Amendment. In other countries where law enforcement is too weak or too corrupt, I can also see the purpose of taking matters in your own hands. It's just that where I'm from and where I'm at, that makes no sense. Thats a bit of an oxymoron. A firearm is a weapon, it's purpose is to Kill, Many people own firearms for diferent reasons, some for sport, some as collectors, and so on. I have owned one, for the purpose of self defence, and I have used it in that capacity, and I have taken someones life with it. In many countries, Thailand included, authorities think that by preventing the public from owning a firearm is going to resolve gratuitous violence. In my opinion I think they are dead wrong. In My opinion the best solution is education and training. Geting a certificate from a shooting club in weapon proficiency is not enough. I've seen cases in South Africa, where people who carry firearms are killed with their own gun because they were never taught how to properly use it in a situaion that requires a quick thinking and judgement.
15. Josh85Salvaged from archive
    yeh.. gun control is a tough subject. Personally i'm all for it. Gun control for everyone else that is. Me, I'm quite happy with an unlicenced one
16. MontysDoubleSalvaged from archive
    Quote: Originally Posted by Josh85 View Post yeh.. gun control is a tough subject. Personally i'm all for it. Gun control for everyone else that is. Me, I'm quite happy with an unlicenced one <coughbullshitcough> I thought that dude wanted five grand for it?
17. Josh85Salvaged from archive
    Quote: Originally Posted by MontysDouble View Post <coughbullshitcough> I thought that dude wanted five grand for it? lol no the 5 grand was for a Tec-9 ... brand new, in the box. With heaps of ammo & sich. http://api.ning.com/files/aE9pF2mAEmZdzFhe248mUqKm8tNYVn1… But that's a fucken rip-off. lol
18. MCMXCIISalvaged from archive
    Quote: Originally Posted by Josh85 View Post lol no the 5 grand was for a Tec-9 ... brand new, in the box. With heaps of ammo & sich. http://api.ning.com/files/aE9pF2mAEmZdzFhe248mUqKm8tNYVn1… But that's a fucken rip-off. lol A Tec-9? The coolness factor of that gun is pretty much rock bottom...
19. AfronaughtSalvaged from archive
    I prefer the FN FS2000 http://sgcusa.com/images/supporting_images_large/FN_FS200…
20. TillySalvaged from archive
    Quote: Originally Posted by Afronaught View Post I prefer the FN FS2000 http://sgcusa.com/images/supporting_images_large/FN_FS200… I've heard good things about that weapon. One of the few bullpups that truly can be fired ambidextrously because of where it ejects the casings. Personally, I have the highest hopes for the Bushmaster ACR. http://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/… It's pretty much a 21st century reimagining of the AR-15 platform, using an AR-18 type system.
21. MontysDoubleSalvaged from archive
    Quote: Originally Posted by Afronaught View Post In Asia... the most commonly used wepon in Fatal domestic violence cases are stabbings. As I said... people will just find another way to kill each other.. Whats next after geting rid of guns? Getting rid of Knives?.. then Sharp objrcts?.. and Bludgeoning weapons? Yeah, that's a valid point there Afro; but you overlook that, unlike a chef's knife, a gun is designed to kill; having no other purpose apart from being wielded as a threat to do so or hanging over the fireplace. Last year, I believe, an idea was floated in the UK that it'd be a good idea to ban knives with points, the rationale being it would be more difficult to stab with them. The idea was roundly derided then rapidly disappeared. Does that sound like the thin end of a nanny state wedge to you?
22. Supplemental PersonaSalvaged from archive
    Humanity loves a scapegoat, so in many cases we blame the tool and try to abolish it's existence rather than accept the slight increase in risk and enjoy greater freedoms. That's what modern society attempts, to balance freedoms with draconian laws that limit personal freedom under the guise of "safety." Unfortunately, these laws are applied inconsistently and often illogically. For instance they won't be abolishing cutlery or automobiles anytime soon, and both are as deadly as any firearm (ask kindergardeners in China). People do horrible things and tool chosen won't stop terrible things from happening.
23. Echo1Salvaged from archive
    it needs to be up to the individual person. thats what the whole idea is. i understand your argument mcm but i still think its the typical, outta sight outta mind, if i ignore it itll go away and never happen kinda crap. if you say me owning a gun puts me at more risk, then so be it. i still feel safer being able to fire back. if you dont and would rather be unarmed. be my guest. but dont work to take it away from the rest of us who dont feel like running around in circles til the cops show up.
24. JooXSalvaged from archive
    ... not in the mood for this one right now.
25. usoSalvaged from archive
    The best strategy for gun control is to use both hands.
26. MCMXCIISalvaged from archive
    Quote: Originally Posted by uso View Post The best strategy for gun control is to use both hands. Or a recoil-reducing stock and climb-reducing muzzle break!
27. Echo1Salvaged from archive
    http://images.lazygamer.co.za/2009/08/dualWield.jpg like ehhh?????
28. MCMXCIISalvaged from archive
    Quote: Originally Posted by Echo1 View Post http://images.lazygamer.co.za/2009/08/dualWield.jpg like ehhh????? What? I like guns, that has nothing to do with this! Just because they fascinate me doesn't mean they should be freely and readily available.
29. Echo1Salvaged from archive
    Quote: Originally Posted by uso View Post The best strategy for gun control is to use both hands. Quote: Originally Posted by Echo1 View Post http://images.lazygamer.co.za/2009/08/dualWield.jpg like ehhh????? Quote: Originally Posted by MCMXCII View Post What? I like guns, that has nothing to do with this! Just because they fascinate me doesn't mean they should be freely and readily available. i uh.. huh? http://smileydatabase.com/s/300.gif
30. MCMXCIISalvaged from archive
    Quote: Originally Posted by Echo1 View Post i uh.. huh? http://smileydatabase.com/s/300.gif How are you not getting the joke? "Gun control"? How to literally control a gun? With both hands? http://smileydatabase.com/s/300.gif
31. Echo1Salvaged from archive
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37467424...d_news-europe/ end thread.
32. Josh85Salvaged from archive
    Quote: Originally Posted by Echo1 View Post http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37467424...d_news-europe/ end thread. lol yeh. That's what i was telling my boss today. If everyone had guns, someone could have stopped him... instead he was able to go on for ages killing HELPLESS people without anyone stopping him. if those people had guns, they might have had a chance to defend themselves. not much of a rampage though. Pales in comparison to Martin Bryant.
33. loadrunnerSalvaged from archive
    The guy with the gun is in control... But I think its good people can legaly carry guns, Criminals do so. If they know everyone can carry a gun, even the psygo ones, they'll be a lot carefull when trying to rob someone
34. Echo1Salvaged from archive
    the whack jobs who are gonna shoot people are gonna do it either way. might as well be able to shoot back.
35. loadrunnerSalvaged from archive
    It seems you have 4 seconds before the bullet starts to hurt badly(when you get shot, and don't get into shock). Enough time to unlock a gun and shoot em in the head, the neck, and to be sure you got him, one in the hart.
36. Echo1Salvaged from archive
    i meant if you see whats going on before you or other people are hit. or before more people are hit.
37. usoSalvaged from archive
    Quote: Originally Posted by MontysDouble View Post http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/Zippozeppo/taxi.jpg Someday a real rain will come and wash all this scum off the streets.
38. MCMXCIISalvaged from archive
    I see others have been watching Future Weapons with Mack!
39. TillySalvaged from archive
    Quote: Originally Posted by MCMXCII View Post I see others have been watching Future Weapons with Mack! I'd let Mack take a dump on my chest.
40. freestyler_3Salvaged from archive
    http://xboxit.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/dw2-300x300.jpg This will reduce the amount of people with guns by 99.99~%

Reply

Sign in or create an account to reply to this old topic.

Want your old post taken down? Get in touch.