A bit of a read, but I think it perfectly explains the different sides:
https://www.killology.com/sheep-wolves-and-sheepdogs
https://www.killology.com/sheep-wolves-and-sheepdogs
Guns. Good or Bad?
- Thread starter NaffNaffBobFace
- Start date
- Status
Life is an arms race, countries compete against each other to better their position and increase their wealth. Corporations compete against each other to dominate their field and increase their wealth. Communities compete against each other for access to limited resources and individuals strive to be lords and ladies. We buy big houses not because we need them but because they show well to the jones. We spend far too much on luxury cars not because they achieve getting us were we need to go better but because once again we are always in competition with each other. Guns are simply the current pinnacle of force projection and not having one gives others an edge over you. Just like in your example not having a gun allows those with a gun to take your stuff and possibly your life as you are now at their mercy. Having a gun does not guarantee that they will not still take your stuff and your life but it does level the playing field and for the most part acts as a deterrent. For we as a species do not typically go after the hard thing in life to better our position but go after the easy fruit.
As for the arms race and allowing easy access to weapons causes more problems, I cannot agree. While it is true that it does allow random acts of violence and localized tragic events like we saw in Vegas this week, over all it has helped to bring about far more freedom and stabilization. All we need to do is look back over the years and see how even when weapons were not easily obtainable there were still random acts of violence whole villages wiped out because they displeased the local ruler. Populations subjected and enslaved due to their lacking an equal weapon. We can go back to the days of Vikings and see how the arms race favored them and allowed them to ransacked most of Western Europe. And this wasn’t the pleasant please hand over your gold, this was we are going to kill all the able body males, steal your grains that you stock piled to survive through the winter and if you have any attractive ladies we will take those as well. If this is to far back in history we can look at a more recent with the attempt to stabilize Afghanistan. The reports I get back from friends and family members who have returned is not that the villagers like Taliban it’s just that they have no means to confront them. They lack weapons beyond a few rusty AK’s that have been handed down since the Russian’s attempted to control it back in 1979. So they choose to wisely follow the direction of whatever power is currently influencing their area, knowing that it changes daily. When you have no power of your own or are facing a powerful foe this typically is your only option. You do not get to opt out, you get to choose to fight for what is good and right (or not so good ) or you become subjected to the will and whims of those in power.
While guns are neither good nor bad by themselves being objects they do allow those who utilize them to dictate the terms of their existence.
As for the arms race and allowing easy access to weapons causes more problems, I cannot agree. While it is true that it does allow random acts of violence and localized tragic events like we saw in Vegas this week, over all it has helped to bring about far more freedom and stabilization. All we need to do is look back over the years and see how even when weapons were not easily obtainable there were still random acts of violence whole villages wiped out because they displeased the local ruler. Populations subjected and enslaved due to their lacking an equal weapon. We can go back to the days of Vikings and see how the arms race favored them and allowed them to ransacked most of Western Europe. And this wasn’t the pleasant please hand over your gold, this was we are going to kill all the able body males, steal your grains that you stock piled to survive through the winter and if you have any attractive ladies we will take those as well. If this is to far back in history we can look at a more recent with the attempt to stabilize Afghanistan. The reports I get back from friends and family members who have returned is not that the villagers like Taliban it’s just that they have no means to confront them. They lack weapons beyond a few rusty AK’s that have been handed down since the Russian’s attempted to control it back in 1979. So they choose to wisely follow the direction of whatever power is currently influencing their area, knowing that it changes daily. When you have no power of your own or are facing a powerful foe this typically is your only option. You do not get to opt out, you get to choose to fight for what is good and right (or not so good ) or you become subjected to the will and whims of those in power.
While guns are neither good nor bad by themselves being objects they do allow those who utilize them to dictate the terms of their existence.
A recent quote from a friend was "Take one more step and I will blow your fuckin' brains out" while he pulled out his gun on an armed assailant (the assailant was yielding a machete).
Similar quotes are used a dozens of thousand of times per year by self defending gun owners against assailants, not only in the US but worldwide.
As stated, the quotes were for balance. So far in the thread quotes used have been quite effective but only on the one side. I provided these to redress the balance.
But...
Well... did he fire or what?
Well, good people, apart from my above shitpost the discussion has come quite far.
So far we have come to the clear conclusion that outright removal of guns from American culture is something that is just not going to happen and something that most people have no real issue in allowing Americans to continue as a national custom.
Bearing in mind the question was "Guns Good Or Bad" and didn't mention any recent events or countries or constraints on the subject, it really does seem cultural as to ones general outlook on the subject.
So to move the discussion forward, what of arms controls to remove automatic weapons from circulation?
And also, how fast can semi-automatic weapons fire? If it is as quickly as a finger can pull a trigger over and over, what is the practical difference between a semi-automatic pistol and a machine pistol?
So far we have come to the clear conclusion that outright removal of guns from American culture is something that is just not going to happen and something that most people have no real issue in allowing Americans to continue as a national custom.
Bearing in mind the question was "Guns Good Or Bad" and didn't mention any recent events or countries or constraints on the subject, it really does seem cultural as to ones general outlook on the subject.
So to move the discussion forward, what of arms controls to remove automatic weapons from circulation?
And also, how fast can semi-automatic weapons fire? If it is as quickly as a finger can pull a trigger over and over, what is the practical difference between a semi-automatic pistol and a machine pistol?
No, after seeing the gun, the other guy backed off and run away.
And one other question, to play a bit of Devils Advocate as my impartiality may appear to have been a little on the 'nope' side with those quotes:
Specifically to the members of the discussion that have stated gun ownership is in the best interests of the populace, how would you recommend introducing gun ownership to a country that does not currently allow gun ownership, such as the UK?
Last edited:
This would require major constitutional reform and people to realise their inability to do anything against a corrupt system of power. It is quite interesting to me how one school mass shooting with 16 victims was reason enough for a country wide ban on handguns, while terrorist acts with cars and bombs didn't bring any legislative change besides more control and monitoring measures. It would be much easier to monitor the people getting licensed for a handgun than all this mess.
IMHO and this is going to be my last reply on the subject, nothing needs to be done about guns and their availability, besides maybe making them more easily available.
Statistics show that anti-gunner states and areas suffer more from gun related crimes than those states that are pro-gunner.
You are looking at a disease and trying to treat the symptoms instead of the cause. Governments (and I'm not talking only about the US here) should focus more on treating mental health issues and maybe locking wackjobs up in mental institutions instead of letting them roam around, being a danger to others. That same guy that shot all those people in Vegas could have driven a truck through a crowd or done something else equally destructive. The other day I was driving my car downtown, there was a crowd of protesters in front of me. If I was a wackjob I could just step on the accelerator and kill dozens. However if they were armed and started shooting at me while I was speeding towards them, I wouldn't be able to do much.
You don't need a gun to kill, just intent.
The pen and the voice is vastly important, but so is the sword and the shield. Both are needed in their own ways. For the sword can easily silence the voice, while the voice shielded can call others to the cause.
In fact we are seeing this play daily with the protests and anti-protests as they scream at each other until it leads to violence. Were both parties strongly feel in their own justification an imbalance of power would simply allow one side to silence the other.
So no I do not believe anyone is advocating the idea that if you disagree with another that you should use your weapon to convince them of their folly. But how worse would it be to be speaking the truth and be silenced by the sword with no recourse, no means for justice. So in the end it is not the weapon that should be used but the voice. The weapons purpose is to allow you an opportunity to be heard and to negotiate favorably.
Think how fewer atrocities would have taken place if everyone was on equal footing. So while I agree guns make mistakes far more deadly and costly than most other weapons in existence. The very fact that they exist at all means that by regulating and limiting all it ever achieves is allowing a few to control all.
This is an interesting question and one I think should be based on the preference, needs and desires of the population. Like all things nothing should be forced, it needs to be a choice. The same goes here they make their own choose and have made it freely. Why go against it or try and force them to choose another path. And just like this thread has had many different people all caviling discussing this subject why not allow for the open conversation on the subject or if the answer is a respectful agree to disagree then have a beer and talk about something else. Heck we can have several beers and then discuss how football is really just soccer and the UK is using the wrong word. J
But there are other countries that need to stop having the rest of the world try and police it. In these cases I ponder if giving them medical aid, food, rifles and ammunition wouldn’t be a better solution. I understand in doing so it could lead to a civil war with far more bloodshed. Which while terrible in the here and now could result in a far better and stronger future. For sometimes talks can only take place after the fight happens.
Ah, you refer to the Dunblane School Massicre in the UK.
The average live expectancy in the UK is 81 years. 14 of the victims were 5 years old, one 6 year old, and one 45 year old.
Assuming the children and teacher would each have lived to the age of 81, that is 1175 years of life snubbed out in one go.
It appears that over a millennium of life snubbed out in one go was enough for a country to ban hand guns.
I will withdraw back into my impartial mode, the thread was doing much better without my input!
Last edited:
A gun store on every corner!
Just kidding, though I've met a few Brits and Irish that would love that.
Honestly, it starts with education. For some odd reason in the USA it is now considered completely rational to teach children in public schools as young as 5 years old about 'gender expression' and how to put on a condom, but basic firearm safety and respect is believed to somehow be training them to be a mass murder.
I've read the firearm safety rules at this link multiple times but still fail to see how they could be dangerous to be taught to children:
https://gunsafetyrules.nra.org/
As mentioned by others, culture plays a huge role. However, culture is changed by teaching the youth, not by shouting at adults.
semi-automatic weapons can fire as fast as a machine gun if in the hands of a skilled individual. But as stated before it has no point beyond suppression. For real world easily accessible demonstration of this go to any speed ball court and you will find individuals who are incredible skilled at rapid fire but typically do not use it unless helping team mates push forward.
I compare it to traffic , when i look how many dummies driving a car and then ill go imagine these people owning guns ............Society is better of without guns .
I agree with you. The issue is how do you guarantee the complete removal of guns, or how do you protect the population against the corrupting nature of power?
Did you read past the part you quoted?
I just want to leave a note here:
You're awesome guys, we're having a controversal discusion here and noone is insulting others for their opinion.
This is rare, esp with "random" guys on the internet. Great job.
Now back to topic:
@Deroth thanks for the killogy link, was a nice read, to get an other view on the topic.
You're awesome guys, we're having a controversal discusion here and noone is insulting others for their opinion.
This is rare, esp with "random" guys on the internet. Great job.
Now back to topic:
@Deroth thanks for the killogy link, was a nice read, to get an other view on the topic.
I'm just waiting for that one insult just as a way to lock this thread :P
I whole heartily agree, I especially would like to thank Pander and Ezz for sharing their point of view.
- Status