Guns. Good or Bad?
- Thread starter NaffNaffBobFace
- Start date
- Status
Yep... obviously the winner... lol. Last I looked at we were talking about people... not winning.
I can't help to notice the shallowness and disdain the world has for the US... it makes me SICK as a human.
Who else would have a monkey in a space suit with a US flag and test symbol.
That sends the message people of TEST and Americans are stupid... if I wanted to play your pathetic game.
Last edited:
I think this is total bull. I don't know any American that does not want to protect our kids, rather it is a battle of two different ideologies that disagree on how to protect our kids.
Here are 7 ways I am all in favor of protecting our kids none of which will infringe on my, or anyone's rights to defend themselves.
https://townhall.com/columnists/kevinmccullough/2018/02/18/how-to-eliminate-school-shootings-overnight-n2450380
https://townhall.com/columnists/kevinmccullough/2018/02/18/how-to-eliminate-school-shootings-overnight-n2450380
@sum1 everyone knows Russia or China could kick the shit out of the UK and Europe ass without a sweat. Then what keeps them from doing it? The US... yet the UK and Europe spit in our face every opportunity they get. Mark my words... in the next 30 years we will be bailing them out again... just like ww1 and ww2. This generation that mocks the US will regret it.
Last edited:
I think our generation will soon be tested, whether it is here in the states, or on a distant shore (Mars if Musk has anything to say about it) I dread the day if it comes, but I will be as ready as I can be for it, I just pray we are wrong.
I'm sorry to so harsh... but they (UK, Germany, and Europe in general) need to accept the reality they are not as perfect as the claim to be. I hope I wrong too... but the strategic models suggest otherwise.
A disarmed population of lemmings and metrosexuals... what could be easier.
Last edited:
My generation has already been tested... I was one of the first in for this 16 year war. There are many bad things about war... but a potential invader hates having to combat battle hardened veterans in a unconventional conflict rings terror for the enemy (that is a pro/deterrent for the US).
Last edited:
Personally I think this is a very difficult topic to break down to good/bad. To put it as simple as possible, a gun is a tool but all be it a very powerful one. It is down to the user to determine how that tool is used.
There is truth on all sides, there is most definitely more than one side. As I see it, yes not everyone should have the ability to own a firearm. Someone that has violent history or mental issues that can relate to violent or suicidal tendencies, this powerful tool most likely is too much for them to handle. There is also truth behind the saying of "an armed society is a polite society". With that am I saying that all should have a firearm? No, see the statement before that. The best safety is the mind.
With this being a very powerful tool, I'm not against needed training. Remember a car is a very powerful tool as well, but all states require some training and ability to pass a test. As a motorcycle commuter I see way too many idiots not knowing how to handle what they drive on a daily occurrence (seriously why does some 16yo child need the ability to driver a Suburban if only themselves are going to be in it or a soccer mom in an STR SUV) . Why not something that is much more compact and more powerful? Something that would prove that the user has the ability to control it and maintain it. I know people that are very much against it ( It's my 'Merican right! ), but also know others that own multiple firearms and are for that as well. One is air-guard after being active infantry. He still has his deployment, customized M4. He has to take tests to make sure that he knows how to take care of it and handle it properly. He is also a gunsmith as a hobby, and at his wedding him, the best man, and the groomsmen were carrying their 1911 or 9mm. He understands that it is a military grade weapon and not normally allowed by civilians in Iowa, so the test is the price to pay in order to keep it and use it.
There is no perfect system on handling citizens and firearms as well. If anyone thinks something can be implemented nationwide easily, HA. America is a very large and spread out country and even in this age there are relatively remote areas. As well states have the ability to override federal laws but at a price.
So in short, it is a tool. A VERY powerful tool that can easily be misused. It comes down to the user. The best firearm control is the mind and knowing how to use/care for it.
There is truth on all sides, there is most definitely more than one side. As I see it, yes not everyone should have the ability to own a firearm. Someone that has violent history or mental issues that can relate to violent or suicidal tendencies, this powerful tool most likely is too much for them to handle. There is also truth behind the saying of "an armed society is a polite society". With that am I saying that all should have a firearm? No, see the statement before that. The best safety is the mind.
With this being a very powerful tool, I'm not against needed training. Remember a car is a very powerful tool as well, but all states require some training and ability to pass a test. As a motorcycle commuter I see way too many idiots not knowing how to handle what they drive on a daily occurrence (seriously why does some 16yo child need the ability to driver a Suburban if only themselves are going to be in it or a soccer mom in an STR SUV) . Why not something that is much more compact and more powerful? Something that would prove that the user has the ability to control it and maintain it. I know people that are very much against it ( It's my 'Merican right! ), but also know others that own multiple firearms and are for that as well. One is air-guard after being active infantry. He still has his deployment, customized M4. He has to take tests to make sure that he knows how to take care of it and handle it properly. He is also a gunsmith as a hobby, and at his wedding him, the best man, and the groomsmen were carrying their 1911 or 9mm. He understands that it is a military grade weapon and not normally allowed by civilians in Iowa, so the test is the price to pay in order to keep it and use it.
There is no perfect system on handling citizens and firearms as well. If anyone thinks something can be implemented nationwide easily, HA. America is a very large and spread out country and even in this age there are relatively remote areas. As well states have the ability to override federal laws but at a price.
So in short, it is a tool. A VERY powerful tool that can easily be misused. It comes down to the user. The best firearm control is the mind and knowing how to use/care for it.
By the OPs logic they would ban Muslims, Christians, gays, and anything else they felt as undesirable.
Last edited:
I agree with @smeggy that everyone that decides to get a gun should know how to use it, and train with it. What a lot not from the US (and something that changes state to state) For Example where I live I wanted to get a CDW (Consoled deadly weapon) license. To do so I had to set through a day-long course do a written test, a gun range test, and show that I knew how to clean my firearm. Then I send my application to the State office where they made sure I am not a felon or anything, send it to my local office when I could pick it up. This license lets me "hide" my firearm in public, where I am from you can walk with a gun holstered on your hip or the like, (this is called open carry) I am allowed to have it under my shirt or jacket I just have to identify my status if I ever get stopped by the cops so they know I have a gun, and it is hidden. People outside the states may not know how much work is required to do some things with guns. If you have any question I would be more then happy to set aside any myth from fact for those that do not know.
I didn't want to post here again, since I said everything I wanted to say but
And just because I'm curious "but the strategic models suggest otherwise" what are you talking about here?
I hope your joking, It's sometimes hard to make out in a thread like this one here. Just because we don't want to give everyone access to guns doesn't mean we want to give the government total control. (BTW Hitler's party was extreme right wing not extreme left wing, don't let the "Socialist" in NSDAP fool you)
In the EU we still have our net neutrality because we don't want to give away control. Very un-american to give away your net neutrality.
I really don't think the US is the only thing between us and WW3. But that is going way off topic.
Noone is saying that any country in the EU is perfect. But regarding mass-shootings and gun violence (the topic of this thread) I think we are in a better position and I don't think it's because America has more insane people as it was mentioned earlier. But you have to try to get the guns away from those insane people. Don't ban guns, but why not make harder background checks and so on, so that it is harder for the black sheep to get weapons like this. Life and politics is not black and white. You have to fine-tune stuff like gun-control.
And just because I'm curious "but the strategic models suggest otherwise" what are you talking about here?
Give me a moment, this thread is 17 pages long it'll take a while to get to the Original Post as I have to wait for each one to load, scroll to the top of the page and then select the next one. I'm getting there. On page 6.
Page 2
I don't blame you, the cafe on that page is a wonderful place to stop and enjoy a quick coffee.
Aye, nothing better than a cup or two on a rainy day.
Right, Page 1, finally.
Thats useful.
So lets just take that little checklist and see how many are in the Original Post:
Gays
Muslims
Christians
Anything else the Original Poster personally finds undesirable (Mass shootings and Massacres of the innocent)
So lets get this back on track shall we? We were getting somewhere.
And less of the personal comments, or i'll accuse you of projecting. This is why I invite people to remove their personal comments because you never do know what you are actually saying about yourself when you are resorting to personal comments.
I have derailed my own thread, now i'm putting it back on the tracks again.
Piles of corpses at concerts, clubs, shopping malls and schools because one citizen decided that was how they were going to roll.
What is going to be done about it? Because Agreeing to Disagree isn't working.
Oh! It was meeeeeeee!
Thats useful.
So lets just take that little checklist and see how many are in the Original Post:
On The List:
Gays
Muslims
Christians
Anything else the Original Poster personally finds undesirable (Mass shootings and Massacres of the innocent)
Hmmmm, don't read any reference to a call for Gay Control on any Gay over .38 caliber? Can't see a Semi-Automatic Christian curb suggestion either? can't see a call to limit the availability of Drum Roll magazine Muslims? What I do see a reference to is one of the worst massacres in US history that left 59 dead and hot damn 527 injured! http://metro.co.uk/2017/10/03/59-dead-and-527-injured-by-multi-millionaire-armed-with-23-guns-6972556/
So lets get this back on track shall we? We were getting somewhere.
And less of the personal comments, or i'll accuse you of projecting. This is why I invite people to remove their personal comments because you never do know what you are actually saying about yourself when you are resorting to personal comments.
I have derailed my own thread, now i'm putting it back on the tracks again.
Piles of corpses at concerts, clubs, shopping malls and schools because one citizen decided that was how they were going to roll.
What is going to be done about it? Because Agreeing to Disagree isn't working.
Last edited:
- Status