Print

[Mamoruanime]

Mamoruanime

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

A gun is only as dangerous as it's wielder... and college students... are probably the worst wielders a gun can have

lol but eh I dunno

[Dracon]

Dracon

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

I'll concede that greater availability of guns will reduce the chance of a rampage of the proportions that occured in Virginia, but it just makes it more likely that a rampage will occur full stop.

The only real solution to the problem is to eliminate the availability of guns entirely. Sure, difficult, but it'll prevent the possibility of gun crime.

The problem with that is that it is impossible. Even if you kept guns from the public, real murderers that plan a rampage will still manage to get their own firearms.

And now after years of mocking him the pretending he played a massive part in our lives when really we couldn't care less just to ease our consciounse over said mocking healing can begin <_<

It's Steve Irwin all over again.

[Swoftu]

Swoftu

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

I'll concede that greater availability of guns will reduce the chance of a rampage of the proportions that occured in Virginia, but it just makes it more likely that a rampage will occur full stop.

The only real solution to the problem is to eliminate the availability of guns entirely. Sure, difficult, but it'll prevent the possibility of gun crime.

The problem with that is that it is impossible. Even if you kept guns from the public, real murderers that plan a rampage will still manage to get their own firearms.

And his point was to make it extremely hard to obtain them. There will always be people who commit crimes, but does that mean we shouldn't try to stop them?

Your point confuses me.

[Kren]

Kren

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

ah, those things never happen here.. and erm it is not normal for people to own guns.. so that might be the reason.

[Theforeshadower]

Theforeshadower

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

I'll concede that greater availability of guns will reduce the chance of a rampage of the proportions that occured in Virginia, but it just makes it more likely that a rampage will occur full stop.

The only real solution to the problem is to eliminate the availability of guns entirely. Sure, difficult, but it'll prevent the possibility of gun crime.

The problem with that is that it is impossible. Even if you kept guns from the public, real murderers that plan a rampage will still manage to get their own firearms.

And his point was to make it extremely hard to obtain them. There will always be people who commit crimes, but does that mean we shouldn't try to stop them?

Your point confuses me.

lol

• 

[Mamoruanime]

Mamoruanime

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

I'll concede that greater availability of guns will reduce the chance of a rampage of the proportions that occured in Virginia, but it just makes it more likely that a rampage will occur full stop.

The only real solution to the problem is to eliminate the availability of guns entirely. Sure, difficult, but it'll prevent the possibility of gun crime.

The problem with that is that it is impossible. Even if you kept guns from the public, real murderers that plan a rampage will still manage to get their own firearms.

And his point was to make it extremely hard to obtain them. There will always be people who commit crimes, but does that mean we shouldn't try to stop them?

Your point confuses me.

And how exactly does removing firearms from the public stop crime?

Okay, scenario for you.

A burgler walks into your home, threatens to kill your family with a knife (or *gasp* a machete!). Now you could either A) Let him, B) Grab a knife! Which is probably smaller then his machete, and risk losing your family, or C) Grab the gun.

Think about it.

[Theforeshadower]

Theforeshadower

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

I'll concede that greater availability of guns will reduce the chance of a rampage of the proportions that occured in Virginia, but it just makes it more likely that a rampage will occur full stop.

The only real solution to the problem is to eliminate the availability of guns entirely. Sure, difficult, but it'll prevent the possibility of gun crime.

The problem with that is that it is impossible. Even if you kept guns from the public, real murderers that plan a rampage will still manage to get their own firearms.

And his point was to make it extremely hard to obtain them. There will always be people who commit crimes, but does that mean we shouldn't try to stop them?

Your point confuses me.

And how exactly does removing firearms from the public stop crime?

Okay, scenario for you.

A burgler walks into your home, threatens to kill your family with a knife (or *gasp* a machete!). Now you could either A) Let him, B) Grab a knife! Which is probably smaller then his machete, and risk losing your family, or C) Grab the gun.

Think about it.

Or D: Call the police and wait and probably be killed while you wait an hour for the police to show up.

• 

[a Hint of Lime]

a Hint of Lime

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

I'll concede that greater availability of guns will reduce the chance of a rampage of the proportions that occured in Virginia, but it just makes it more likely that a rampage will occur full stop.

The only real solution to the problem is to eliminate the availability of guns entirely. Sure, difficult, but it'll prevent the possibility of gun crime.

The problem with that is that it is impossible. Even if you kept guns from the public, real murderers that plan a rampage will still manage to get their own firearms.

And his point was to make it extremely hard to obtain them. There will always be people who commit crimes, but does that mean we shouldn't try to stop them?

Your point confuses me.

And how exactly does removing firearms from the public stop crime?

Okay, scenario for you.

A burgler walks into your home, threatens to kill your family with a knife (or *gasp* a machete!). Now you could either A) Let him, B) Grab a knife! Which is probably smaller then his machete, and risk losing your family, or C) Grab the gun.

Think about it.

Or you could whip out your tazer   Or maybe you should think ahead next time and install some decent security   There are other ways to protect yourself other than guns.

[Theforeshadower]

Theforeshadower

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

I'll concede that greater availability of guns will reduce the chance of a rampage of the proportions that occured in Virginia, but it just makes it more likely that a rampage will occur full stop.

The only real solution to the problem is to eliminate the availability of guns entirely. Sure, difficult, but it'll prevent the possibility of gun crime.

The problem with that is that it is impossible. Even if you kept guns from the public, real murderers that plan a rampage will still manage to get their own firearms.

And his point was to make it extremely hard to obtain them. There will always be people who commit crimes, but does that mean we shouldn't try to stop them?

Your point confuses me.

And how exactly does removing firearms from the public stop crime?

Okay, scenario for you.

A burgler walks into your home, threatens to kill your family with a knife (or *gasp* a machete!). Now you could either A) Let him, B) Grab a knife! Which is probably smaller then his machete, and risk losing your family, or C) Grab the gun.

Think about it.

Or you could whip out your tazer   Or maybe you should think ahead next time and install some decent security   There are other ways to protect yourself other than guns.

Tazers are illegal in most states.  Security systems cost more money than a $60 shotgun.

• 

[Giverny]

Giverny

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

Well mammy, its better if there were no guns, because burglurs would have knifes,and it would be easier to dispose of them.

But Seriously, Guns Do Not Kill People. People Kill People. Anybody who can't understand this is mentally challenged. If I shoot andrew, I pulled the trigger. The gun did not kill him. I did. Taking away guns will be the next major thing that will soon lead this country to Hell.

^THEG_iv^er_ny_PROJECT

~LynkW-Surrender Global

• 

[Mamoruanime]

Mamoruanime

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

I'll concede that greater availability of guns will reduce the chance of a rampage of the proportions that occured in Virginia, but it just makes it more likely that a rampage will occur full stop.

The only real solution to the problem is to eliminate the availability of guns entirely. Sure, difficult, but it'll prevent the possibility of gun crime.

The problem with that is that it is impossible. Even if you kept guns from the public, real murderers that plan a rampage will still manage to get their own firearms.

And his point was to make it extremely hard to obtain them. There will always be people who commit crimes, but does that mean we shouldn't try to stop them?

Your point confuses me.

And how exactly does removing firearms from the public stop crime?

Okay, scenario for you.

A burgler walks into your home, threatens to kill your family with a knife (or *gasp* a machete!). Now you could either A) Let him, B) Grab a knife! Which is probably smaller then his machete, and risk losing your family, or C) Grab the gun.

Think about it.

Or you could whip out your tazer   Or maybe you should think ahead next time and install some decent security   There are other ways to protect yourself other than guns.

Thats the thing too though; a TASER propels a wire projectile and electrocutes... It's a GUN. I hope you're aware of that.



Break it down, Thomas A. Swift Electric Rifle. TASER. (Okay I kinda sounded like a DICK there lol but I know what you were getting at )

Also, there are less lethal weapons too, beanbag guns for example. Theres many many forms of guns. Not all guns fire lethal bullets.

[Theforeshadower]

Theforeshadower

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

Well mammy, its better if there were no guns, because burglurs would have knifes,and it would be easier to dispose of them.

But Seriously, Guns Do Not Kill People. People Kill People. Anybody who can't understand this is mentally challenged. If I shoot andrew, I pulled the trigger. The gun did not kill him. I did. Taking away guns will be the next major thing that will soon lead this country to Hell.

But criminals WILL STILL GET GUNS.  Does anyone not see this?  Not picking on you LynkW.  But are you all blind to believe that having a gun control law will remove the guns from the criminals?

• 

[a Hint of Lime]

a Hint of Lime

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

I'll concede that greater availability of guns will reduce the chance of a rampage of the proportions that occured in Virginia, but it just makes it more likely that a rampage will occur full stop.

The only real solution to the problem is to eliminate the availability of guns entirely. Sure, difficult, but it'll prevent the possibility of gun crime.

The problem with that is that it is impossible. Even if you kept guns from the public, real murderers that plan a rampage will still manage to get their own firearms.

And his point was to make it extremely hard to obtain them. There will always be people who commit crimes, but does that mean we shouldn't try to stop them?

Your point confuses me.

And how exactly does removing firearms from the public stop crime?

Okay, scenario for you.

A burgler walks into your home, threatens to kill your family with a knife (or *gasp* a machete!). Now you could either A) Let him, B) Grab a knife! Which is probably smaller then his machete, and risk losing your family, or C) Grab the gun.

Think about it.

Or you could whip out your tazer   Or maybe you should think ahead next time and install some decent security   There are other ways to protect yourself other than guns.

Thats the thing too though; a TASER propels a wire projectile and electrocutes... It's a GUN. I hope you're aware of that.



Break it down, Thomas A. Swift Electric Rifle. TASER. (Okay I kinda sounded like a DICK there lol but I know what you were getting at )

Also, there are less lethal weapons too, beanbag guns for example. Theres many many forms of guns. Not all guns fire lethal bullets.

Yes, but most of the time when people are talking about gun control, its implied that they mean the REAL ones that fire REAL live ammunition, which CAN and possibly will kill a man.

Seriously, you can't really call a tazer a gun.  If the Virginia-Tech incident had been with a Tazer, it wouldn't have even made front page.  The amount of devestation that REAL guns create isn't even comparagble to a tazer.  Tazers for the win.

Nonlethal weaponry should be more common.  Tazers seem like the best type of self-defense if you ask me-- I want a tazer

[Mamoruanime]

Mamoruanime

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

yeah, but Tasers are illegal and theres a high rate of heart attack and brain damage :p

[Swoftu]

Swoftu

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

I'll concede that greater availability of guns will reduce the chance of a rampage of the proportions that occured in Virginia, but it just makes it more likely that a rampage will occur full stop.

The only real solution to the problem is to eliminate the availability of guns entirely. Sure, difficult, but it'll prevent the possibility of gun crime.

The problem with that is that it is impossible. Even if you kept guns from the public, real murderers that plan a rampage will still manage to get their own firearms.

And his point was to make it extremely hard to obtain them. There will always be people who commit crimes, but does that mean we shouldn't try to stop them?

Your point confuses me.

lol

So what about all those school shootings then? Were they resolved by civilians stopping the attackers with guns? When was the last time you heard of a scenario where a bank robber was stopped by a civilian woman carrying a pistol around in her purse? Also, great way to generalize the police. Are you even paying attention to what you're saying? The police will ignore a gunshot, (a potential violent murder) to stop a speeder? you're !@#$% delusional.

And how exactly does removing firearms from the public stop crime?

Okay, scenario for you.

A burgler walks into your home, threatens to kill your family with a knife (or *gasp* a machete!). Now you could either A) Let him, B) Grab a knife! Which is probably smaller then his machete, and risk losing your family, or C) Grab the gun.

Think about it.

I love how you bring up all these selective scenarios. He wouldn't be much of a burglar if he was trying to kill your family, now would he? And It's also funny how you assume that everyone in america has guns when it's quite obvious that a lot of people here don't. Obviously if you lived in an area where there was much crime, you would already have some long edged weapon of your own, or a crossbow at least.

HERF DERF

Well mammy, its better if there were no guns, because burglurs would have knifes,and it would be easier to dispose of them.

But Seriously, Guns Do Not Kill People. People Kill People. Anybody who can't understand this is mentally challenged. If I shoot andrew, I pulled the trigger. The gun did not kill him. I did. Taking away guns will be the next major thing that will soon lead this country to Hell.

But criminals WILL STILL GET GUNS.  Does anyone not see this?  Not picking on you LynkW.  But are you all blind to believe that having a gun control law will remove the guns from the criminals?

lawl japan

[Giverny]

Giverny

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

Well mammy, its better if there were no guns, because burglurs would have knifes,and it would be easier to dispose of them.

But Seriously, Guns Do Not Kill People. People Kill People. Anybody who can't understand this is mentally challenged. If I shoot andrew, I pulled the trigger. The gun did not kill him. I did. Taking away guns will be the next major thing that will soon lead this country to Hell.

But criminals WILL STILL GET GUNS.  Does anyone not see this?  Not picking on you LynkW.  But are you all blind to believe that having a gun control law will remove the guns from the criminals?

Your right. Never really thought of this. Then guns will be the new pot.

^THEG_iv^er_ny_PROJECT

~LynkW-Surrender Global

• 

[a Hint of Lime]

a Hint of Lime

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

Well mammy, its better if there were no guns, because burglurs would have knifes,and it would be easier to dispose of them.

But Seriously, Guns Do Not Kill People. People Kill People. Anybody who can't understand this is mentally challenged. If I shoot andrew, I pulled the trigger. The gun did not kill him. I did. Taking away guns will be the next major thing that will soon lead this country to Hell.

But criminals WILL STILL GET GUNS.  Does anyone not see this?  Not picking on you LynkW.  But are you all blind to believe that having a gun control law will remove the guns from the criminals?

Your right. Never really thought of this. Then guns will be the new pot.

as Swiftu said, lawl japan

In japan its pretty much impossible to get a gun

[Theforeshadower]

Theforeshadower

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

lol

• 

[Mamoruanime]

Mamoruanime

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

I love how you bring up all these selective scenarios. He wouldn't be much of a burglar if he was trying to kill your family, now would he? And It's also funny how you assume that everyone in america has guns when it's quite obvious that a lot of people here don't. Obviously if you lived in an area where there was much crime, you would already have some long edged weapon of your own, or a crossbow at least.

HERF DERF

Oh so crossbows are okay then?

That makes this officially the most retarded debate ever! "Lets ban guns so criminals cant shoot people, but lets keep crossbows!"... <_< Swiftu, you claim to follow logic, but sometimes... I wonder about you.

The scenario's pretense is irrelevant, it's the overall situation. You know this, you're just pussyfooting around it to distract people from the fact that you cannot answer that with your foolish nonsensical and weak anti-gun argument. And heh, even I own a shotgun. It's not typical to find a house in the US without a gun of some sort.

FYI. Crossbows aren't legal here, but people have them (including me, again).

[Swoftu]

Swoftu

Re: This is the solution all right...morons...

Also, have you read the many stories of crinimals on drugs that get tasered 5+ times and still hurt someone because the taser was ineffective?

Swiftu, I used to live in Detroit.  Highest crime rate in the country.  Michigan has like 5 of the top worse crime cities in the country.  Live in my !@#$% state and tell me that cops just don't give out speeding tickets anymore.  I work as a delivery guy...All I see are the cops catching speeders.  do you now the unresolved gun crimes in Michigan? It's !@#$% horrendous.  That's because the state puts so much pressure on the police to make sure their ticket quotas are filled.  Seriously.  I have friends that are cops.  I have relatives that are cops and left becuase they were sick of how the whole system is.  Cops no longer "serve and protect" now they try to get as much money for the state as they possibly can.  Not all cops are that way but 90% of them are in my state.

Because michigan = all of america lol.

I love how you bring up all these selective scenarios. He wouldn't be much of a burglar if he was trying to kill your family, now would he? And It's also funny how you assume that everyone in america has guns when it's quite obvious that a lot of people here don't. Obviously if you lived in an area where there was much crime, you would already have some long edged weapon of your own, or a crossbow at least.

HERF DERF

Oh so crossbows are okay then?

That makes this officially the most retarded debate ever! "Lets ban guns so criminals cant shoot people, but lets keep crossbows!"... <_< Swiftu, you claim to follow logic, but sometimes... I wonder about you.

The scenario's pretense is irrelevant, it's the overall situation. You know this, you're just pussyfooting around it to distract people from the fact that you cannot answer that with your foolish nonsensical and weak anti-gun argument. And heh, even I own a shotgun. It's not typical to find a house in the US without a gun of some sort.

Weak? Who's the one coming up with idiotic scenarios of people going on rampages? "lol I own a gun,so most other people do." yep, nice statistics there man.

FYI. Crossbows aren't legal here, but people have them (including me, again).

STOP RIGHT THERE CRIMINAL SCUM.