DeletedUser
I thnk this is the funniest thing I've seen here:
Thank you for giving me the best laugh since Dubya's 8-year clown act.
Thank you for giving me the best laugh since Dubya's 8-year clown act.
DeletedUser28032
Probably a little something like this...BANG! "oh dear god my hand! quick somebody call an ambulance!" if you're going to use a gun then use one thats had some form of quality control testing on it.
DeletedUser31931
Eli. I found it pretty laughable at the time, see my response to it though.
DeletedUser35506
Tbh you americans are crazy to think you have the RIGHT to own a tool wich decimates the population of a small apartment building in a matter of minutes. This is when we're talking about semi-/automatic submachine and/or assault rifles.
Same for handguns ;especially when they come with Silencers, Laser sights, ext mags or other accessoiries wich make killing (humans) easier.
In all honesty though. I don't think any "civilian" should have the "right" to possess any firearms.
*(civilian = anyone who isn't related to either army or a policing force)
Same for handguns ;especially when they come with Silencers, Laser sights, ext mags or other accessoiries wich make killing (humans) easier.
In all honesty though. I don't think any "civilian" should have the "right" to possess any firearms.
*(civilian = anyone who isn't related to either army or a policing force)
DeletedUser34315
"Once more unto the breach!"
Why should owning firearms be a right? Well, that's been discussed to death in this thread, so I'll reply to your post solely.
ANFO decimates a building much more quickly and effectively; and is cheaper and easier to get, as well as more easily made at home.
"Assault rifles" almost always aren't actual assault rifles; the media has twisted the connotation of the word.
Silencers actually decrease ease of shooting, accuracy and the initial FPS of the fired projectile. Laser sights aren't any easier to use than iron sights, and if you're accustomed solely to laser sights, you will be inaccurate in brightly lit areas. While extended magazines could arguably make it easier to kill someone, giving you a couple more rounds before needing to reload; any experienced shooter (especially the Tri-Gun shooters, or speed round shooters) can reload in a matter of seconds, making magazine size largely irrelevant.
Earlier in the thread, it has been mentioned multiple times- gun bans do not work. Criminals still have access to firearms, while legitimate gun owners will not longer have self defense, hunting, or recreational firearms.
Why should owning firearms be a right? Well, that's been discussed to death in this thread, so I'll reply to your post solely.
ANFO decimates a building much more quickly and effectively; and is cheaper and easier to get, as well as more easily made at home.
"Assault rifles" almost always aren't actual assault rifles; the media has twisted the connotation of the word.
Silencers actually decrease ease of shooting, accuracy and the initial FPS of the fired projectile. Laser sights aren't any easier to use than iron sights, and if you're accustomed solely to laser sights, you will be inaccurate in brightly lit areas. While extended magazines could arguably make it easier to kill someone, giving you a couple more rounds before needing to reload; any experienced shooter (especially the Tri-Gun shooters, or speed round shooters) can reload in a matter of seconds, making magazine size largely irrelevant.
Earlier in the thread, it has been mentioned multiple times- gun bans do not work. Criminals still have access to firearms, while legitimate gun owners will not longer have self defense, hunting, or recreational firearms.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser15641
I think gun control might be a new exploitation in order to remove the possibility of a civil war due to the imbalance between poor people and rich people where the rich keeps getting richer, the poor keeps getting poorer, as well the uneven justice system between consumers and large corporations.
Only 10% of all the consumer trials versus corporations are a success a few years ago, so it will be a lot less for sure.
very good example of a law which got exploited is tort reforms.
Side note for beasty:A silencer can be easily as a pillow, would you like to ban pillows too?
Note to GG:Not every silencer makes the projectiles and accuracy of bullets as the latest ones have somehow killed that issue (latest sniper silencer)
Only 10% of all the consumer trials versus corporations are a success a few years ago, so it will be a lot less for sure.
very good example of a law which got exploited is tort reforms.
Side note for beasty:A silencer can be easily as a pillow, would you like to ban pillows too?
Note to GG:Not every silencer makes the projectiles and accuracy of bullets as the latest ones have somehow killed that issue (latest sniper silencer)
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
I know the feeling...
Civilian ownership of firearms isn't a right. As has been previously stated, the 2nd amendment is about militia, not private citizens.
Yeah yeah, but it takes longer, and requires dedication & intelligence. Oh and somebody might notice your bulk purchases of fertilizer and fuses. Seriously, we've done this all before...
I don't really know that much about the aforementioned stuff, so I'll take your word for it. But the fact reminds that all that stuff is military grade, and shouldn't be available to private citizens.
Correction - a gun ban in America wouldn't work. And I'm really not going to go into that any further because I really don't want to get back into that circular argument.
Right...so you think that gun control is basically the government attempting to seize more power and turn America into a dystopia. Thanks for that insightful view.
Source please.
LOL! Dude, I don't even have to ridicule that...that slippery slope fallacy you're sliding down right now does it all for me.
DeletedUser15641
Hot coffee, a documentary film about tort reforms.
Do you really need a source, so how about a documentary?
Its actually not only seizing power but also making a monopoly.
Do you really need a source, so how about a documentary?
Its actually not only seizing power but also making a monopoly.
DeletedUser
Still waiting for the source...some kind of link would be appreciated...
That's...kinda the same thing...
DeletedUser15641
DeletedUser
Hm, interesting. Completely OT though.
DeletedUser
Indeed, propaganda is used quite extensively by the military industrial complex to encourage continued sale of arms, to encourage external wars, to encourage fear on the notion of losing the right to buy arms, which in itself increases the sale of arms, etc and so on.
Bills are being worked on to implement expansion of laws to prevent felons, mentally disturbed, and non-citizens from purchasing and possessing firearms. And somehow, quite effectively, the military industrial complex has suckered people into a frenzy about potentially losing their rights. Increasingly interesting is the realization that 74% of NRA members agree that background checks should be expanded, and yet the seat holders of NRA, who are paid quite handsomely by weapons producers, continue to rage against it and have gone so far as to threaten Congressmen with campaign finance blacklisting.
I.e., NRA isn't representing their members, they're representing the U.S. military industrial complex, which wields 43% of all financial transactions in the world.
So really, who do you think is posing the propaganda?
Bills are being worked on to implement expansion of laws to prevent felons, mentally disturbed, and non-citizens from purchasing and possessing firearms. And somehow, quite effectively, the military industrial complex has suckered people into a frenzy about potentially losing their rights. Increasingly interesting is the realization that 74% of NRA members agree that background checks should be expanded, and yet the seat holders of NRA, who are paid quite handsomely by weapons producers, continue to rage against it and have gone so far as to threaten Congressmen with campaign finance blacklisting.
I.e., NRA isn't representing their members, they're representing the U.S. military industrial complex, which wields 43% of all financial transactions in the world.
So really, who do you think is posing the propaganda?
DeletedUser34315
According to the US supreme court, it's a right of individuals.
That's a very good point. As hellstromm, victor, and others have said, what sort of works for the UK wouldn't work in the US.
DeletedUser28032
I think we gave up on the idea of the "Full Ban" quite a while ago in return for the suggestion of more controls which then sparked the argument...I mean debate over the Bushmaster rifle and whether or not it was a military weapon or not and whether or not the civilian market should be alowed to purchase it.
As for the Anfo thing, bombs are the weapon of choice for terrorists as they cause alot of collateral damage and are not generally used by muggers, burglars or the menatally disturbed. If all the guns were to disappear tomorrow (Using Magic!) then using the UK (I think Kuwait was mentioned as well?) as a test case you're more likely to end up with a knife problem.
Anyway let the arguments commence! :laugh:
As for the Anfo thing, bombs are the weapon of choice for terrorists as they cause alot of collateral damage and are not generally used by muggers, burglars or the menatally disturbed. If all the guns were to disappear tomorrow (Using Magic!) then using the UK (I think Kuwait was mentioned as well?) as a test case you're more likely to end up with a knife problem.
Anyway let the arguments commence! :laugh:
DeletedUser
http://forum.the-west.net/showpost.php?p=667923&postcount=390
And Duduie, care to explain why I'm wrong? You failed to respond to the point (other than LOLing) when HS and I posted it before. And now you have shown exactly the same reaction. So please explain why we are wrong. "Nananana you're wrong" Really isn't a good counterargument.