Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Total ban

3 (5%)

Strict laws, harsh penalties, strict regulation and record-keeping with check-ups every so often

23 (38.3%)

Something in between

9 (15%)

As it stands now

6 (10%)

Total freedom

17 (28.3%)

Abstain

2 (3.3%)

Total Members Voted: 59

[nenjin]

Using a gun is no different to using any other object with the intent to hurt, its a weapon, and since when has any nation banned all weapons?

This tired ass argument again? For someone preaching about the "real world" you do like to reduce a complex argument down to a nonsensical conclusion. A rock can kill people. When they invent a gun that shoots 1000 rocks a minute at 200 meters, we'll talk about banning that too. You want to talk about the real world, let's talk about reality instead of some bullshit "ipso facto" logic that hasn't changed this debate or solved anything since the first guy puked it up.

[piratejoe]

I must say mainiac, you've been disckish even by your standards.

It's a conversation whose cornerstone is supposed to be trivializing murder.  That is the unspoken ground rules of these debates.  The entire format sanitizes and avoids blame.  There is no knowledge here so it's ignorance being treated as wisdom.  Honestly I wish there was a way for me to be more dickish about the ridiculous farce this whole thing is.

Since when does self defense count as murder?

It doesn't.  But it does count as the bullshit made up fantasy world that we use to sanitize this discussion.

Translation: I cant think of anything better to say in my defense so im going to use bs.

I must admit mainiac, every time piratejoe post, I feel better about you.

... Well, thanks for confirming my suspicions that im useless at arguments, now i have one less box to tick off.

Using a gun is no different to using any other object with the intent to hurt, its a weapon, and since when has any nation banned all weapons?

This tired ass argument again? For someone preaching about the "real world" you do like to reduce a complex argument down to a nonsensical conclusion. A rock can kill people. When they invent a gun that shoots 1000 rocks a minute at 200 meters, we'll talk about banning that too. You want to talk about the real world, let's talk about reality instead of some bullshit "ipso facto" logic that hasn't changed this debate or solved anything since the first guy puked it up.

Does it really matter? If people want to kill each other no matter what they will find a way and a excuse. thats the world we live in... im less and less arguing about the fact we should have guns arent i. huh.

[Sheb]

Ok, piratejoe: how about we install deathswitches on everyone that anyone can activate at will? After all, if people wants to kill other people, they'll just find a way, so it shouldn't matter, right?

[MonkeyHead]

Does it really matter? If people want to kill each other no matter what they will find a way and a excuse. thats the world we live in... im less and less arguing about the fact we should have guns arent i. huh.

Yes, it does matter. Just as people for whatever reason might want to kill does not mean we should allow said killings to be easy to carry out. Why accept the desires of those who wish to be inhuman?

[nenjin]

Does it really matter? If people want to kill each other no matter what they will find a way and a excuse. thats the world we live in... im less and less arguing about the fact we should have guns arent i. huh.

Translation: I don't have any real ideas or thoughts, I'm just peddling low-level concepts like "Oh since people kill each other anyways we should do nothing" because they're black and white and don't require any change on anyone's parts, or any critical thinking.

Gotcha. Thanks for participating.

[scriver]

So, I want to share from my perspective as a Swede, but first some info: We have a fairly live hunting culture here, both out of necessity and for hobby, and plenty of "hunting tourism" from Germany and other countries, so Swedes own a lot of guns. Third or fourth highest percentage, if I recall correctly. You are required to be licensed to use weapons for any purpose (self defense us not considered a valid reason).

The last decade or so we've had a lot of focus put on violent crimes involving guns (and grenades) by gang members - I'm only going to say that it feels like they've been increasing in regularity and victims as I lack info on whether it's truth it just a "spotlighting effect". Every time there's a particularly gruesome shooting our politicians start aping American liberals about more gun regulation and prohibition, particularly of what I guess would translate roughly into "assault guns" or "fully automatic rifles". But these kind of guns ate almost never the kind of guns the gang murders are commuted with, and even in the few cases they were, they weren't legally owned. Because that's the thing - because of the EU open internal borders Sweden has a basically unhindered route for old Russian-made weapons (and grenades) from the Balkan countries. Forbidding some old Swedish farts from owning automatic rifles certainly won't stop the gangs from getting to those illegal guns.

So regulation and prohibition is just empty politicians' talk to me, an attempt to seem like you're doing something while actually accomplishing nothing, by copying American solutions to American problems, espoused by supposedly left wing American politicians. The only way to do something about actual criminals using guns for crime is to clamp down on those smugglers.

So yeah, the EU regulation looks like complete bullshit to me. Empty words which does nothing about the problem and only infringes on the rights and privileges of ordinary citizens.

I don't know if any of this is applicable to the rest of yours' situations, but there it is.

I must admit mainiac, every time piratejoe post, I feel better about you.

No. Two dumb stones do not ein stein make.

[piratejoe]

Does it really matter? If people want to kill each other no matter what they will find a way and a excuse. thats the world we live in... im less and less arguing about the fact we should have guns arent i. huh.

Yes, it does matter. Just as people for whatever reason might want to kill does not mean we should allow said killings to be easy to carry out. Why accept the desires of those who wish to be inhuman?

You are taking what i said out of context, and i know it wasn't a accident, don't worry i know im not wanted anywhere, doesn't mean i will leave though.

Does it really matter? If people want to kill each other no matter what they will find a way and a excuse. thats the world we live in... im less and less arguing about the fact we should have guns arent i. huh.

Translation: I don't have any real ideas or thoughts, I'm just peddling low-level concepts like "Oh since people kill each other anyways we should do nothing" because they're black and white and don't require any change on anyone's parts, or any critical thinking.

Gotcha. Thanks for participating.

Question, should i leave all the forums i am in to make you pricks happy because i honestly cant give a shit about this stupid argument anymore? honestly...

I must admit mainiac, every time piratejoe post, I feel better about you.

No. Two dumb stones do not ein stein make.

i honestly dont care anymore...

[Wolfhunter107]

Welcome to the club, piratejoe.

[piratejoe]

Welcome to the club, piratejoe.

Not exactly, after all you don't where a mask hiding your true feelings about everything as you try to block out your thoughts with music and fourmgames, thanks anyway for the invention. Also i bet one of you is going to continue to go after me just for saying this.

[TempAcc]

My vision is pretty much the same as Scriver's (which means I'm agreeing with a swede, now that's a rarity for you). The regulations and prohibitions have done practically nothing to affect gun related crimes, and instead only clamped down on the rights of normal citizens with no criminal record. So my argument is a simple one: if taking an individual's rights in regards to something hasn't done anything significant to solve the problem, then why maintain said restrictions? Taking individual rights should be an exception in regards to trying to solve problems in society, not the rule.

"Lets make a law to deal with it" is rarely the best of ideas, specially when said law can't be enforced because the things it wants to regulate usually fall into the category of "things that happens when people don't give a shit about the law/organized crime related things".

[SirQuiamus]

"Lets make a law to deal with it" is rarely the best of ideas, specially when said law can't be enforced because the things it wants to regulate usually fall into the category of "things that happens when people don't give a shit about the law/organized crime related things".

As a lawyer, you're surely aware that the same logic can be applied to every law there is. :-D

[mainiac]

I must admit mainiac, every time piratejoe post, I feel better about you.

I believe the scientific term for this is the Clinton-Trump effect.

[TempAcc]

As a lawyer, I can defend any point and make it a valid option depending on the occasion :v

Buuuuut I do dislike that people are always so enthusiastic about giving up rights (or rights that they do not make use of, but remains available to them) in exchange for some unproven reward in security/stability. If it hasn't done its job, you study why it hasn't and change it, you don't sit on it and hope it will one day magically affect the issues it was supposed to affect.

[Strife26]

As a lawyer, I can defend any point and make it a valid option depending on the occasion :v

Buuuuut I do dislike that people are always so enthusiastic about giving up rights (or rights that they do not make use of, but remains available to them) in exchange for some unproven reward in security/stability. If it hasn't done its job, you study why it hasn't and change it, you don't sit on it and hope it will one day magically affect the issues it was supposed to affect.

You put the important part of the paragraph in the parenthetical. Those rights other people use are just chump change. If they really mattered *I'd* use them, of course.

[Shadowlord]

This thread looks like a raging inferno at this point. Maybe thebiggerfish had the right idea locking the orlando thread before it got this out of control.