Pro-gun vs. Anti-gun

[Watch Me Sink]

To be sarcastic:
I have a high powered toaster, not for sale.

I hunt big game with my nuclear weapons. You don't!? It gives them a nice marinated flavor of enriched Uranium.

That is all.

 

[el canadiano]

To be sarcastic:
I have a high powered toaster, not for sale.

I hunt big game with my nuclear weapons. You don't!? It gives them a nice marinated flavor of enriched Uranium.

That is all.

In an unrelated note (instead, related to nuclear weapons), I feel ashamed that some countries refuse to use U-238 in their nuclear plants when they "have" to use U-235. If you know the difference and why, you get my respect.

 

[Watch Me Sink]

Stability levels? Price of neutrons rising?

 

[Creativebot]

After a very intriguing MSN convo with Snobo, I decided to start this topic.

Are you pro-gun or anti-gun? My stance should be quite blatant. If you couldn't figure it out already, I'm anti-gun. Why? Well, Canada 14000 people in federal prison - .04% of its population in jail and ALL handguns are either prohibited or restricted in Canada. "50% of all guns used to commit crimes in Canada were smuggled from the US. The RCMP, Justice Canada, Statistics Canada, and the Toronto Police Service all say that they've heard that figure 'bandied about', but that they themselves are not the source" (http://www.panda.com/canadaguns/). The US has .75% of its population in jail, and gun laws in the States are not as strict as those in *coughliberalcough* countries such as Canada. Let's say that .75% means 750 out of 100,000 people (which it does mean). "The only other major industrialized nation that even comes close is Russia, with 627 prisoners for every 100,000 people. The others have much lower rates. England's rate is 151; Germany's is 88; and Japan's is 63" (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/world ... 53738.html). Anyways, enough with facts.

Pro-Gun. If the US banned weapons do you seriously think that crimes would decrease significantly? Answer is no. Maybe a little, but not much. It's like Marijuana, it's illegal but does that stop people from growing and smoking it? Nope. If someone came to your house and tried to harm your family and they had a gun.....you would be wishing you had one at hand to defend yourself correct? Or are you thinking using a Kitchen Knife vs Gun will win?

 

[Canadian Marksman]

Canadian Marksman, where do you draw the line when it comes to gun ownership? Remember Sadam Hussein's "gun"?

people have cannons quite legally in the US and in Canada as explosive ammunition in Canada is controlled ........please tell me the last time a bank robber or a crack head used one in a hold up

"Someone could claim to have a "gun" and it really be a piece of artillery. a "gun" could also be a long-ranged military sniper rifle, not the kind used during the civil war, but a modern-day one which is operated by two men, can shoot further than the eye can see, and could not be practically used for self-defense or even hunting due to its long-range design?

:rofl:

Dude I have never seen a "sniper gun" operated by two people and you are so full of "fail" there you don't even realize it. You are talking so far above your head you don't even realize it. I don't even think you have a clue what you don't know.

The line has to be drawn somewhere. Do you think citizens should be able to own nuclear weapons too, in case they have to hunt some really big game or defend themselves?

Nuclear devices are controlled by entirely different agencies in the USA and Canada. and are regulated up the hoop.......i guess you wasn't aware of that.

By the giant mecha I mean honking huge sniper rifles, explosive weapons,. It's not a fallacy, but an analogy.

YOU MUST BE SOME SORT OF AUTHORITY :rofl:

please keep going you sound really smart, knowledgeable and very rational :roll:

please share some more facts with us!

"and anything fully automatic" once again we didn't even go there :rofl:

keep building that straw man :rofl:

Stability levels? Price of neutrons rising?

neutrons........that is not the stability i am questioning ............there is a psychological defense mechanism called projecting.......i think some of you should read up on it.

I also think some of you are unaware how silly and irrational it makes you look when you start making things up and introducing things that are not on "topic and name calling.

 

[Nexus]

Speaking of Nuclear weapons (whomever previously posted something like that), you all should chillax and read the iTunes user agreement (it's quite an interesting read).

You also agree that you will not use these products for any purposes prohibited by United States law, including, without limitation, the development, design, manufacture, or production of nuclear, missile, or chemical or biological weapons.

-Rich

 

[Watch Me Sink]

So when you build WMD you can't include Lady Gaga's latest hit? Blasphamy.

 

[Cosmic]

@Canadian Marksman: You said that if the government regulates anything, they regulate everything, so it is not absurd for me to throw pictures like this at you:

The issue is where to draw the line. Every time I ask you that, you point and laugh. You keep spewing all this idiotic sarcasm at me just because of an entirely legitimate question.

I ask, oh great guns expert, to please tell the ignorant fools on this thread some of your infinite knowledge of all things pertaining to guns. As I am so ignorant, I want to know something or your great knowledge, just one thing. Tell me, where do you draw the line? It has to be drawn. You keep saying that you aren't talking about Mecha, cannons, Tank, RPGs, and etc, but the line has to be drawn somewhere if you're going to say that.

 

[Nexus]

Cosmic - there was a guy selling a tank on eBay not too long ago. I'm sure you could probably still find one on there... 😉

-Rich

 

[Watch Me Sink]

CM: What Cosmic said. Should civilians be able to have nuclear weapons?

And I see your alter ego disappeared.

 

[Cosmic]

Cosmic - there was a guy selling a tank on eBay not too long ago. I'm sure you could probably still find one on there... 😉

-Rich

You can find old tanks, that's fine, but state of the art stuff? No. The feds would come and get you. 😛

 

[Canadian Marksman]

@Canadian Marksman: You said that if the government regulates anything,they regulate everything

once again i did not say that

I said the line gets pretty blurry between military and and civilian firearms some that its useless to do so and if you really want to pass judgment on such things you should learn more about them. before you put on those new clothes you can't see and later find your naked

it is not absurd for me to throw pictures like this at you:

funny buts its easier to buy a SP gun than in the UK than a hand gun

http://www.tanksforsale.co.uk/VZOR 77 DANA for sale_page.htm
[url=http://www.tanksforsale.co.uk...w.tanksforsale.co.uk/Tanks_Tru ... r_sale.htm[/url]

they have classifieds too

http://www.milweb.net/classifieds.php?type=6

The issue is where to draw the line. Every time I ask you that, you point and laugh.

yes because they are already there you try to by DU, canister or air burst ammo chances are somebody is going to ask some questions i don't have a problem with that there are already laws regarding the use of explosives........and judging by the amount of these things in private hands and and the amount of people who misuse them in north America and the Europe i think those measures work quite well ..........but a rifle with a scope........that's evil

You keep spewing all this idiotic sarcasm at me just because of an entirely legitimate question.

You keep throwing insults and talking about things of which you have now idea but insist your opinion is a valid educated one

your foaming at the mouth

I ask, oh great guns expert

,

I am not an expert i know what i know , you don't even know what you don't know if you did it would be a start 😎

to please tell the ignorant fools on this thread some of your infinite knowledge of all things pertaining to guns.

I already have but your were not listening, you didn't want to hear, and my knowledge is far from infinite.

As I am so ignorant,

you said it i didn't

I want to know something or your great knowledge,

I don't know, you might have to open your mind

just one thing. Tell me, where do you draw the line? It has to be drawn.

YES because you drew it ? You are loosing that's why i don't think like you anymore.......its futile

there is not a line, the fact is many rich people have armed body guards (even in Canada) and private security companies have full auto weapons

some have tanks and even the odd helicopter and fighter jet.

but in BC they are banning BODY ARMOUR .........a passive means of self defense

the only real difference is money, so do rich people make better people? is your life worth more to you than say Donald trumps?( and the funny thing is i have nothing against rich people just the idea that some people are more equal than others.



if you went to buy an AGM84, a mk 19, a torpedo or an ssbn, some uranium 235 there would be people asking questions,i am sure there would be people knocking on your door and i can see people having to justify acquiring those items .........but we are talking small arms here hell if i went out and bought a m2 or a fn MAG(truth is few could afford them) if authorities had questions fine, but disagree with them saying I can't own one .

BTW i no interest in owning a full auto rifle .........its not what i do

anyone know the ratio of full auto guns used in crime? its extremely rare.and are more easily fabricated from stock materials than semi's that should tell you something.

I really don't care about nukes but considering the rash of nuclear attacks we haven't had i would consider current measures adequate.

You can find old tanks, that's fine, but state of the art stuff? No. The feds would come and get you.

[/quote]

OMFG!

you do it to yourself !!!!!!!!

once again the line is blurry ..........save for M1s which have DU Armour what do you consider an "old armored vehicle?

many countries use tanks and AFVs dating from WW2 and depending what you use them for they still adequately do their job.

note the lead singer of Iron Maiden has his own T-34 .......COOL :cheer:


you want to save lives ban alcohol..........wait that didn't work .......people really need alcohol

 

[Cosmic]

I guess you can pretend that you're winning and that I'm using straw man fallacies, and you can have fun pretending that I said I am educated on the matter of guns, but you're just babbling to yourself. You claimed in your post that I said I knew a lot about guns. That, sir, is a straw-man fallacy.

This is a debate where you are a competitor and the judge both, in your own eyes. everyone here is disagreeing with you, last I checked. I think scopes are fine, I think owning old replica tanks from 15 years ago is fine, and I think that owning semi-automatic rifles and handguns is fine. However, I think the line should be drawn at very dangerous weapons like very long range rifles (the kind a sniper would use today, not 15-20 years ago), automatic weapons, as they are not needed for either hunting or self defense AT ALL, and of course I don't think people should own nuclear weapons.

You keep dodging the question. You resort to insults, sarcasm, and yelling every time I ask you a question. You resort to "I'm smarter than you, you dunce" all the time. However, I don't see any evidence to suggest you are not an 8 year old sitting in mommy's basement surfing the interwebs.

 

[Canadian Marksman]

I guess you can pretend that you're winning and that I'm using straw man fallacies, and you can have fun pretending that I said I am educated on the matter of guns, but you're just babbling to yourself. You claimed in your post that I said I knew a lot about guns. That, sir, is a straw-man fallacy.

your talking about all this limitations and perameters that you have no clue about!

I think scopes are fine, I think owning old replica tanks from 15 years ago is fine,

The state of the art tank has not changed too much in 15 years

and I think that owning semi-automatic rifles and handguns is fine.

you said anything that looks military should be banned

However, I think the line should be drawn at very dangerous weapons like very long range rifles (the kind a sniper would use today, not 15-20 years ago),

once again very little has changed in that time

automatic weapons, as they are not needed for either hunting or self defense AT ALL, and of course I

really then why does the secret service have them in defence of the president

don't think people should own nuclear weapons.

ok niether do i ...........wos

You keep dodging the question. You resort to insults, sarcasm, and yelling every time I ask you a question.

Psychological projection is a form of defense mechanism in which someone attributes thoughts, feelings, and ideas which are perceived as undesirable to someone else. For example, someone who harbors racist ideas while believing that racism is socially undesirable might come to believe that a friend is racist, projecting his or her racism onto the other person. Projection may manifest in all kinds of ways, and while it may be a defense mechanism, it can also be very destructive.

You resort to "I'm smarter than you, you dunce"

please find the post where i called you a dunce ..........i said you didn't know what your talking about ......you can still be smart just not on that particular subject

However, I don't see any evidence to suggest you are not an 8 year old sitting in mommy's basement surfing the interwebs

.

and no you don't and right back at ya .

I have nothing to prove just maybe hopefully give somebody reading this some food for thought before making silly decisions.

 

[Cosmic]

your talking about all this limitations and perameters that you have no clue about!

There you go again. Can I see your ph.D please?

The state of the art tank has not changed too much in 15 years

Then maybe people should use tanks which the army no longer uses.

you said anything that looks military should be banned

don't think people should own nuclear weapons.

ok niether do i ...........wos

Well, you said that if the government suppresses anything, then that will not be the end of their suppression. If they stop you from owning nukes, then wouldn't they next aim for your pistol? In Nazi Germany, first they came for the communists, and I was not a communist so I didn't speak up. Next they came for the trade unionists, but that didn't concern me. Next they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew. When they finally came for me, no one was left to speak up.

Psychological projection is a form of defense mechanism in which someone attributes thoughts, feelings, and ideas which are perceived as undesirable to someone else. For example, someone who harbors racist ideas while believing that racism is socially undesirable might come to believe that a friend is racist, projecting his or her racism onto the other person. Projection may manifest in all kinds of ways, and while it may be a defense mechanism, it can also be very destructive.

I quote this from one of your least mature posts:

YOU MUST BE SOME SORT OF AUTHORITY

please keep going you sound really smart, knowledgeable and very rational

please share some more facts with us!

"and anything fully automatic" once again we didn't even go there

keep building that straw man

Nice...

please find the post where i called you a dunce ..........i said you didn't know what your talking about ......you can still be smart just not on that particular subject

The difference is minimal for the purpose of this discussion. This is the internet, yo0u are probably some kid sitting in your mom's basement, at least for all I know.

and no you don't and right back at ya .

I have nothing to prove just maybe hopefully give somebody reading this some food for thought before making silly decisions.

I'm not the one claiming to be the smartest person in the room.

 

[Nexus]

This is awesome...anyone got some popcorn? No? That's okay, I'm selling e-popcorn for only $5FP.

-Rich<br /><br />-- Tue Aug 24, 2010 7:32 pm --<br /><br />Cosmic - thank you, your popcorn has been brought to your seat.

-Rich

 

[Canadian Marksman]

When i said you wanted to ban anything that looked military I was wrong and was building a straw man?

......lot of guns, banning most guns, and banning all guns would be wrong, but banning this is essential:

By the giant mecha I mean honking huge sniper rifles, explosive weapons, and anything fully automatic. It's not a fallacy, but an analogy

Let me see. What can you do with military grade weapons: Sniper Rifle: Perch in some roof top and kill a passer-by. Sounds like murder. Machine Gun: Walk into McDonalds and squeeze the trigger until everyone's dead. Isn't that just a little bit over the top?

Now is that one of those sniper weapons operated by two people you were talking about ? :lol: :rofl:

keep going ! please work it all out .....you have alot of pent up rage there

-you try to prod me in to going off the deep end with your first comment.

no luck

-you spout off about things you know nothing about I call you on it

now .........now .............

its

[/img]


I have stated I don't know everything and i don't have a problem with that .....but i know somebody who does

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :lol: :lol:

I don't know why your so upset as I am not as arrogant to tell you what you need and don't need ......i am not trying to rule over your life :rofl:

 

[Cosmic]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but lookie here:



One soldier uses the rifle, the other uses the scope. Welcome to the 21st century.

 

[InfiniteJest]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but lookie here:



One soldier uses the rifle, the other uses the scope. Welcome to the 21st century.

Sorry to burst your bubble but lookie here:

One soldier uses the sniper rifle and looks through the scope on the rifle, while another spots to point out enemies the soldier with the rifle may not have noticed through the scope alone.

 

[Cosmic]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but lookie here:



One soldier uses the rifle, the other uses the scope. Welcome to the 21st century.

Sorry to burst your bubble but lookie here:

One soldier uses the sniper rifle and looks through the scope on the rifle, while another spots to point out enemies the soldier with the rifle may not have noticed through the scope alone.

Many modern day sniper rifles require the guy with the scope because of the ranges they are designed for. Thus it can be said that two people must operate it, because it's impractical without the scope.