[!@#$%!]

and i forgot to say

LOOK MA, IT'S REVEREND WRIGHT'S THREAD!

[Cantankerous]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

I wish you would pull your little handgun on me, see how quick it is mine. and that my good friend, is what happens in homes across America all the time. you dont need those guns, guns just hurt people.

sometimes people need to be hurt.

for example:
someone's trying to hurt me or someone close to me? i have no problem with popping a cap in their ass. or their knee, or their shin, or their shoulder.

someone's threatening me or someone close to me with lethal force?
i have no problem with blowing their fucking head off. and i'm a good shot.


i am not usually an advocate of violence but sometimes it's the only way to get through to people. for example,
my best friend called me hysterically because her boyfriend beat her. and i mean beat. she had a broken toe, a black eye, and a split lip plus the expected bruises etc.
solution? i went to his house and knocked two of his teeth out and told him if he ever pulled that shit again that the next time anyone saw him would be in a casket.
did it happen again?
...what do you think?

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

guns hurt people, and so they have far less univeral appeal then do drugs.

are you fuckin shittin me?

every day i have the urge to muder some deserving motherfucker.

it's one of the basic human drives.

check it out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSm8rAOaLtE

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

are you fuckin shittin me?

every day i have the urge to muder some deserving motherfucker.

it's one of the basic human drives.

check it out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSm8rAOaLtE

perhaps I should have been more specific. The desire to actually and tangibly kill some one is not as universally appealing as drugs. Both are illegal, both happen all the fucking time, but clearly one happens more then the other. In this regard, the sheer evidence of everyday reality testifies that drugs are more universal in appeal then gun violence. this does not mean that violent urges and thoughts are not common, it means people can control their violence urges more often then their drug ones.

Originally Posted by Cantankerous

i am not usually an advocate of violence but sometimes it's the only way to get through to people. for example,
my best friend called me hysterically because her boyfriend beat her. and i mean beat. she had a broken toe, a black eye, and a split lip plus the expected bruises etc.
solution? i went to his house and knocked two of his teeth out and told him if he ever pulled that shit again that the next time anyone saw him would be in a casket.
did it happen again?
...what do you think?

where was a handgun involved in any of this? [it seems like you solved this problem farely well without having to result to gun violence]

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

perhaps I should have been more specific. The desire to actually and tangibly kill some one is not as universally appealing as drugs. Both are illegal, both happen all the fucking time, but clearly one happens more then the other. In this regard, the sheer evidence of everyday reality testifies that drugs are more universal in appeal then gun violence. this does not mean that violent urges and thoughts are not common, it means people can control their violence urges more often then their drug ones.

murder beats suicide any day! i'd rather kill someone other than myself. anyway i gotta go have a fun weekend yo.

 

[Cantankerous]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

perhaps I should have been more specific. The desire to actually and tangibly kill some one is not as universally appealing as drugs. Both are illegal, both happen all the fucking time, but clearly one happens more then the other. In this regard, the sheer evidence of everyday reality testifies that drugs are more universal in appeal then gun violence. this does not mean that violent urges and thoughts are not common, it means people can control their violence urges more often then their drug ones.

where was a handgun involved in any of this? [it seems like you solved this problem farely well without having to result to gun violence]

no, i didn't use a gun, but i did bring it with me in case things got ridiculously out of hand, which fortunately they did not.
but the point was that violence is necessary in some situations whether you have to resort to using a firearm, which is an extreme measure, or not.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

murder beats suicide any day! i'd rather kill someone other than myself. anyway i gotta go have a fun weekend yo.

 

california, a prophet on a burning shore,
california yeah I'll be knocking on your golden door...

you know women like this make up 1.4286% of the overall population of california! [this is one of those jokes where you have to take out yr calculator]

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by Cantankerous

no, i didn't use a gun, but i did bring it with me in case things got ridiculously out of hand, which fortunately they did not.
but the point was that violence is necessary in some situations whether you have to resort to using a firearm, which is an extreme measure, or not.

I was not challenging violence with this thread, I was challenging gun violence in this thread. Violence is another issue for another thread.

[Cantankerous]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

I was not challenging violence with this thread, I was challenging gun violence in this thread. Violence is another issue for another thread.

thank you for clarifying

[Anngella]

Originally Posted by evollove

Well, hash is illegal, but I bet you have that.

Wonder how many illegal guns are in the UK? Someone look it up. Quick!

How 'bout some restrictions? Why is the debate always: tons of guns for everyone vs. none for no one? How about:

-mandatory firearm training? A month, at least.
-criminal record for violent offense? ever? sorry, no gun.
-Guns must be purchased through liscenced, regulated gun stores only. No more of this "stop at Wal Mart for some diapers and a semi-auto" shit.
-Underaged kids can get guns at gun shows. Adios gun shows.

Add your own reasonable restriction to the list.

Agreed.
It would be impossible to have either extreme - with this kind of thing you have to meet in the middle. Otherwise you're just being unrealistic and there won't be any changes done, just pointless bickering.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by Anngella

Agreed.
It would be impossible to have either extreme - with this kind of thing you have to meet in the middle. Otherwise you're just being unrealistic and there won't be any changes done, just pointless bickering.

the California method is exactly what you propose, only extreme. Extremely limited sales of handguns, extremely regulated dealership access, and now, extreme regulation of handgun ammunition sales. The entire thing makes it very difficult for a person on the street, who is looking for a firearm to commit crime, to gain access to a loaded handgun. After all, you dont rob somebody with grandpas strap, you have to get one from the street which is "burned"

it must be unregistered to anyone known, it must be as new as possible, and you must also be able to get ammunition, generally the dude selling the guns does not sell ammo, it is not big five. The regulations of handgun sales and distribution to citizens in California has at the same time regulated the availability of black market handguns, which as I have continually repeated, is in decline. This is the evidence that extreme regulation legally and also socially [many people in california, after so many years of gun violence, actually want nothing to do with them and feel ownership of guns is more dangerous for the family] can and does restrict the flow of weapons into the streets and the hands of criminals, meaning the average Californian is less likely to need a gun against a criminal attempting to harm them because the criminal is less likely to have a gun as well. This is not idealism, this is the reality of California's experience with extreme gun control. We are by far the most European of any states in the US with our own personal stance against handgun ownership.

[acousticrock87]

My point was that some good people in America do want them, and some people do need them because there will always be the risk of being faced with one. Making something illegal does not make it disappear, and gun sales do not reflect gun circulation. For every 100,000-300,00 sold per year, many of those are still on the street. And guns can be made elsewhere. If there are criminals with guns, setting your own gun down will not convince them to do the same. They're criminals.

And I would argue that drugs are more violent than guns. Drugs are the reason most people die here, and the people that kill for drugs aren't going to put the guns away. That doesn't make drugs bad, it means certain people are bad. The same people who make guns dangerous. The same people that would make knives dangerous if they didn't have guns.

Cars are another huge cause of death. Should we make cars illegal?

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by acousticrock87

My point was that some good people in America do want them, and some people do need them because there will always be the risk of being faced with one.

So people in America absolutly need handguns then? Please explain that to me again.

Making something illegal does not make it disappear, and gun sales do not reflect gun circulation.

How many times must I repeat myself, yes it does. In California the decline in gun sales is also marked by a decline in guns on the streets. I am not making this up, this is our experience. Law enforcement agencies report this, the courts report this, and the streets report this. Guns are down every year, and the police arrest folks with guns less and less every year, because Cali is becoming a dry town for handguns. Within five years you will barely be able to find anywhere to buy the bullets thanks to new regulations.

Cars are another huge cause of death. Should we make cars illegal?

so at the end of the day, there need be no real issues, just stick your tounge at me and say nah nah I like guns now?

[acousticrock87]

Well, this will likely go in circles since I think we're both just reemphasizing the same points, but I'm really not necessarily pro guns, either. I just strongly believe that they will always be here to some extent, and I believe that there are good uses for them. Cutting down and making them very hard to get a hold of is a good thing, for sure, but I think they have their purposes. In law enforcement, despite their occassional abuse, I think they have a place. I think it's ridiculous for them to pull 20 guns on a guy after a televised high speed chase, but one or two could save lives. If every gun on the planet disappeared, maybe it would be a good thing, but I can't see that happening ever.

[acousticrock87]

I think our main difference is that you're much more optimistic than I am.

[Anngella]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

the California method is exactly what you propose, only extreme. Extremely limited sales of handguns, extremely regulated dealership access, and now, extreme regulation of handgun ammunition sales. The entire thing makes it very difficult for a person on the street, who is looking for a firearm to commit crime, to gain access to a loaded handgun. After all, you dont rob somebody with grandpas strap, you have to get one from the street which is "burned"

it must be unregistered to anyone known, it must be as new as possible, and you must also be able to get ammunition, generally the dude selling the guns does not sell ammo, it is not big five. The regulations of handgun sales and distribution to citizens in California has at the same time regulated the availability of black market handguns, which as I have continually repeated, is in decline. This is the evidence that extreme regulation legally and also socially [many people in california, after so many years of gun violence, actually want nothing to do with them and feel ownership of guns is more dangerous for the family] can and does restrict the flow of weapons into the streets and the hands of criminals, meaning the average Californian is less likely to need a gun against a criminal attempting to harm them because the criminal is less likely to have a gun as well. This is not idealism, this is the reality of California's experience with extreme gun control. We are by far the most European of any states in the US with our own personal stance against handgun ownership.

You can keep preaching about how great California is, but that's not going to change the fact that guns will always fucking exist. Is there anything you're doing to try to stop guns, or do you just sit on the internet all day and complain about it?

[terminal pharmacy]

Originally Posted by Anngella

I'm extremely paranoid everywhere I go (some is warranted, some isn't) and I would feel much safer if I had a handgun with me.
Guns aren't the only things that can kill people, they're just easy. People will always be able to obtain them, so outlawing them is pointless. May as well have them legal & regulated, in my opinion.

hmm they were outlawed in australia, except for certain things but then again we only have about 15-20 gun related deaths a year compared to what 20-30,000 in the usa. prohibition works.

i would say you would feel safer if you knew that almost every person in your country couldnt carry a weapon.....

[Cantankerous]

is the supreme court still trying to decide on what the 2nd amendment actually means?

[Cantankerous]

beat poetry gone horribly wrong