Print

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

[Dwarf]

Are you guys actually suggesting that laxer gun control would have made the situation better? Do you honestly think that if that guy who broke in had of been able to get his hands on a gun easily that he would have been the only one harmed? That possibly a member of a terrorist sect wouldn't be a much better shooter and find it much easier to pull the trigger than a cartoonist or his granddaughter? And that if he had of been shooting police rather than charging them with a knife and an axe he wouldn't have had a much higher chance of injuring/killing one. You know, I can't see any way in which making it easier to acquire guns could possibly of made this situation better.

My thoughts exactly. Gun laws in USA are fitting to the wild west, when police was... scarce at best.
Today, it's ridiculously easy to get a handgun in the USA.
YOU CAN EVEN BUY FUCKING SNIPER RIFLES ON THE INTERNET.
How fucking ridiculous is that?! It's not necessary to smuggle it or to buy it on the black market. Everything you need for long-range assassination goodness is away only a few days with mail!
And don't shit me, nobody needs an M82A1 for defending his freaking land or house.

[/raeg]

I don't know much about gun laws (and in the Philippines, they're rather convoluted apparently) so would I be mistaken in assuming that you'd have to have a permit before they sell you such a thing?

No. In part of the USA, you can literally walk into a gun shop and buy weapons like that.

[Creamcorn]

Are you guys actually suggesting that laxer gun control would have made the situation better? Do you honestly think that if that guy who broke in had of been able to get his hands on a gun easily that he would have been the only one harmed? That possibly a member of a terrorist sect wouldn't be a much better shooter and find it much easier to pull the trigger than a cartoonist or his granddaughter? And that if he had of been shooting police rather than charging them with a knife and an axe he wouldn't have had a much higher chance of injuring/killing one. You know, I can't see any way in which making it easier to acquire guns could possibly of made this situation better.

My thoughts exactly. Gun laws in USA are fitting to the wild west, when police was... scarce at best.
Today, it's ridiculously easy to get a handgun in the USA.
YOU CAN EVEN BUY FUCKING SNIPER RIFLES ON THE INTERNET.
How fucking ridiculous is that?! It's not necessary to smuggle it or to buy it on the black market. Everything you need for long-range assassination goodness is away only a few days with mail!
And don't shit me, nobody needs an M82A1 for defending his freaking land or house.

[/raeg]

I don't know much about gun laws (and in the Philippines, they're rather convoluted apparently) so would I be mistaken in assuming that you'd have to have a permit before they sell you such a thing?

Have you ever tested this theory?

Even so, yes a gun company can be held for a weapon used against someone in most cases but they can't be held fully responsible for the underlying motives of a murderer. If anything, this man could have easily blown up something (I'm treading a fine line here) by simple purchasing the right stuff and going onto some certain websites.

Sure the cops say he was good enough with his axe and knife to actually get the Danish police force to have to shoot at him but his only problem was that he used the wrong method for a man who was easily prepared for such a situation. If he had a gun, would that have made him successful, who knows? He's probably in some sort of "barred from the public" area right now.

(I'm no expert on anything, I just happen to love all of my amendments and even the ugly ones like the second one. Their unalienable, promised by no one but given to the people because they choose so to keep it.)

[Cthulhu]

My thoughts exactly. Gun laws in USA are fitting to the wild west, when police was... scarce at best.
Today, it's ridiculously easy to get a handgun in the USA.
YOU CAN EVEN BUY FUCKING SNIPER RIFLES ON THE INTERNET.
How fucking ridiculous is that?! It's not necessary to smuggle it or to buy it on the black market. Everything you need for long-range assassination goodness is away only a few days with mail!
And don't shit me, nobody needs an M82A1 for defending his freaking land or house.

[/raeg]

Jealous much?

Sure, we don't need sniper and assault rifles to defend our homes, but that doesn't make them not awesome.

[Aqizzar]

(I'm no expert on anything, I just happen to love all of my amendments and even the ugly ones like the second one. Their unalienable, promised by no one but given to the people because they choose so to keep it.)

You do realize that the word "Amendment" by definition means it was changed once and can be again.  Like the 18th for instance.

As much as it makes me feel like an asshole for saying, every time I see this topic since it was posted, it makes me want to grind my teeth in frustration.  Not for any of the content, but because Strife misspelled "extremist".

[Creamcorn]

(I'm no expert on anything, I just happen to love all of my amendments and even the ugly ones like the second one. Their unalienable, promised by no one but given to the people because they choose so to keep it.)

You do realize that the word "Amendment" by definition means it was changed once and can be again.  Like the 18th for instance.

As much as it makes me feel like an asshole for saying, every time I see this topic since it was posted, it makes me want to grind my teeth in frustration.  Not for any of the content, but because Strife misspelled "extremist".

Like I said, no expert; I'm actually starting to get a little scared about this topic's existence.

[sonerohi]

We have sweet as hell gun laws here in America.

[Dwarf]

Jealous much?

Sure, we don't need sniper and assault rifles to defend our homes, but that doesn't make them not awesome.

...

The stupidity in this commentary is obvious.

[Virex]

Are you guys actually suggesting that laxer gun control would have made the situation better? Do you honestly think that if that guy who broke in had of been able to get his hands on a gun easily that he would have been the only one harmed? That possibly a member of a terrorist sect wouldn't be a much better shooter and find it much easier to pull the trigger than a cartoonist or his granddaughter? And that if he had of been shooting police rather than charging them with a knife and an axe he wouldn't have had a much higher chance of injuring/killing one. You know, I can't see any way in which making it easier to acquire guns could possibly of made this situation better.

Are you serious? I see nobody talking about gun and gun laws. The post before you uses it as a metaphor for acting violently against anyone openly hostile, which while understandable doesn't have to be the best option. It's the idea of letting people tire themselves out by just not responding in any meaningfull way. If a terorist treathens the president, increase his security and carry on the same way. If a terrorist blows up a building, rebuild the building and carry on. That way terrorism isn't having the effect it aims for, namely disjointing society and causing fear.

Of course this can never work, since even if the authorities do not respond, the people and the media will respond and that alone is enough to cause a serious backlash.

[Aqizzar]

The stupidity in this commentary is obvious.

Trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls.  Everybody in this topic thinks everyone else is serious while they themselves are joking.

[Cthulhu]

This is the worst thread in the history of threads.

[ChairmanPoo]

I've seen worse.

[Jreengus]

Are you guys actually suggesting that laxer gun control would have made the situation better? Do you honestly think that if that guy who broke in had of been able to get his hands on a gun easily that he would have been the only one harmed? That possibly a member of a terrorist sect wouldn't be a much better shooter and find it much easier to pull the trigger than a cartoonist or his granddaughter? And that if he had of been shooting police rather than charging them with a knife and an axe he wouldn't have had a much higher chance of injuring/killing one. You know, I can't see any way in which making it easier to acquire guns could possibly of made this situation better.

Are you serious? I see nobody talking about gun and gun laws. The post before you uses it as a metaphor for acting violently against anyone openly hostile, which while understandable doesn't have to be the best option. It's the idea of letting people tire themselves out by just not responding in any meaningfull way. If a terorist treathens the president, increase his security and carry on the same way. If a terrorist blows up a building, rebuild the building and carry on. That way terrorism isn't having the effect it aims for, namely disjointing society and causing fear.

Of course this can never work, since even if the authorities do not respond, the people and the media will respond and that alone is enough to cause a serious backlash.

I was referring to this post:

Panic room? A panic room!? Around here we just blast dem with our guns. But I guess not everyone is as lucky as Arizonians  . Oh its in Europe, that explains a lot 

And another post I quite possibly imagined as I can no longer find it. :/

[Duke 2.0]

Heh, this thing all over again. I have no sympathy for either party. The extermists deserve to be shot for being stupid. And Westergaard deserves a bounty on his head for being a dick.

Islam prohibits pictures and depictions of Muhammad because it's akin to turning him into an idol, which means that you're worshipping him. It's a direct insult to everything the religion stands for. They take it seriously. They developed a whole new style of art that prevents the depiction of any living thing.

Drawing, even joking about it as a grave cultural insult.. a simple joke picture is more offensive than publishing the picture of one's father getting raped by dogs. Imagine it being in newspapers, who are doing it just for the sake of controversy.. not for information, but as a deliberate middle finger to millions of people. It's a taunt saying "Fuck you. We are a peaceful democracy. Violence is not the answer, so you can't do anything about it. I can say whatever I want, and if you try to kill me, the police will protect me."

Really, this whole deal with terrorism would be over if people said "What's wrong?" instead of "Fuck off. We have bigger guns." When you say you have a bigger gun, they try to shoot your back, or even your granddaughter with a small one. Hey, Westergaard said he doesn't care about his own life. What about that of his granddaughter?

I'm not saying I agree with it, but that's just how people on the other side of the world think.

Spoiler: Excuse me while I get my axe (click to show/hide)

 So if it offends me it makes the situation alright?
 This topic is about extremism. I'm sure most Muslims, while offended, knew well enough that you do not kill people. This topic is about extremists who go the extra mile to show their outrage.
 
None of this gun crap. None of this other people bringing up other crap that they are bothered by. None of this un-chill off-topicness. Chill out, think over man argument what is not inflammatory, and make a new topic. This paragraph is directed not at the quoted post but the whole later half of the thread. Muz actually stayed on topic and presented a good other side to it.