Is it WRONG to own guns, rifles, swords, knives, etc.?

Page 30 of 33 [ 523 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33  Next


Is it wrong to bear arms?
Yes 19%  19%  [ 15 ]
No 81%  81%  [ 66 ]
Total votes : 81

jfrmeister
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 447
Location: #2309 WP'er

17 Sep 2007, 10:12 pm

The_Chosen_One wrote:
Here is my final solution to all you gun lobby rednecks: ........


A more appropriate phrase couldn't be found.

I knew there was a reason for the group "Jews for the Preservation of the Second Amendment".


_________________
"The christian god is a being of terrific character; cruel, vindictive, capricious and unjust" - Thomas Jefferson


jfrmeister
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 447
Location: #2309 WP'er

17 Sep 2007, 10:14 pm

The_Chosen_One wrote:
The government should have a 3 month gun amnesty where EACH AND EVERY PERSON has the chance to hand in their weapons. They can receive less than market value because they are considered a non-necessary tool. After that amnesty, then the police and armed forces can under government order do a house to house search for any weapons not handed in, regardless of whether they were legally obtained or not. All said weapons either handed in or confiscated will be melted down as scrap, and recycled to be used for other more useful purposes. Failure to comply with this would mean a mandatory prison term of no less than 5 years.


This proposal sure makes random drive-by shootings look like the better alternative. :roll:


_________________
"The christian god is a being of terrific character; cruel, vindictive, capricious and unjust" - Thomas Jefferson


Flagg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,399
Location: Western US

17 Sep 2007, 10:21 pm

jfrmeister wrote:
The_Chosen_One wrote:
Here is my final solution to all you gun lobby rednecks: ........


A more appropriate phrase couldn't be found.

I knew there was a reason for the group "Jews for the Preservation of the Second Amendment".


Godwin's Law just died a little.

Don't hurt Godwin, avoid Hitler and Nazi references in political threads.(joking)

This message has been broadcast by a worried forumer.



jfrmeister
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 447
Location: #2309 WP'er

17 Sep 2007, 10:26 pm

Flagg wrote:
jfrmeister wrote:
The_Chosen_One wrote:
Here is my final solution to all you gun lobby rednecks: ........


A more appropriate phrase couldn't be found.

I knew there was a reason for the group "Jews for the Preservation of the Second Amendment".


Godwin's Law just died a little.

Don't hurt Godwin, avoid Hitler and Nazi references in political threads.(joking)

This message has been broadcast by a worried forumer.


After reading enough of TCO posts, how can the comparison be avoided? :wink: :lol:


_________________
"The christian god is a being of terrific character; cruel, vindictive, capricious and unjust" - Thomas Jefferson


greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

17 Sep 2007, 10:33 pm

jfrmeister wrote:
Flagg wrote:
jfrmeister wrote:
The_Chosen_One wrote:
Here is my final solution to all you gun lobby rednecks: ........


A more appropriate phrase couldn't be found.

I knew there was a reason for the group "Jews for the Preservation of the Second Amendment".


Godwin's Law just died a little.

Don't hurt Godwin, avoid Hitler and Nazi references in political threads.(joking)

This message has been broadcast by a worried forumer.


After reading enough of TCO posts, how can the comparison be avoided? :wink: :lol:

C'mon, he wasn't the only one, snake321 is also to blame, they were equally the same.


_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?


calandale
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,439

17 Sep 2007, 11:08 pm

tcorrielus wrote:
Huh...I thought this thread was locked for good. So what goin on now? Are we now allowed to say anything in this thread?


Anything appropriate.

The thread was locked because
a flame war broke out. It was
reopened because some of
us wanted to speak on the issue.

Looks like a couple of hotheads
just can't keep from stirring trouble
though.



jfrmeister
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 447
Location: #2309 WP'er

17 Sep 2007, 11:18 pm

greenblue wrote:
jfrmeister wrote:
After reading enough of TCO posts, how can the comparison be avoided? :wink: :lol:

C'mon, he wasn't the only one, snake321 is also to blame, they were equally the same.


I don't see snake321 advocating totalatarianism as a solution to all of societies ills.

TCO is the biggest advocate of the thought police I've ever seen.


_________________
"The christian god is a being of terrific character; cruel, vindictive, capricious and unjust" - Thomas Jefferson


calandale
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,439

17 Sep 2007, 11:22 pm

It's not TCO's opinions which are
the problem. Everyone has a right
to argue their case. Some of the
posters were going beyond polite
debate though.



jfrmeister
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 10 Aug 2007
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 447
Location: #2309 WP'er

17 Sep 2007, 11:53 pm

calandale wrote:
It's not TCO's opinions which are
the problem. Everyone has a right
to argue their case. Some of the
posters were going beyond polite
debate though.


I think TCO's opinions are part of the problem. They are very Stalinistic, and although he has the right to state them, it's only expected that that viewpoint is going to draw harsh criticizms.... and insults.

BTW, TCO was probably slinging more insults than anyone that I saw.


_________________
"The christian god is a being of terrific character; cruel, vindictive, capricious and unjust" - Thomas Jefferson


BazzaMcKenzie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,495
Location: the Antipodes

18 Sep 2007, 3:10 am

jfrmeister wrote:
calandale wrote:
It's not TCO's opinions which are
the problem. Everyone has a right
to argue their case. Some of the
posters were going beyond polite
debate though.


I think TCO's opinions are part of the problem. They are very Stalinistic, and although he has the right to state them, it's only expected that that viewpoint is going to draw harsh criticizms.... and insults.

BTW, TCO was probably slinging more insults than anyone that I saw.

If you don't take it personally, its rather amusing to watch :P



Agent80s
Butterfly
Butterfly

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 15
Location: Perth, Western Australia

18 Sep 2007, 3:14 am

<phew!> This discussion was hot wasn’t it?
I wanted to contribute to it a bit more but the discussion moved quicker then I could keep up with.

Suffice to say my gripes about gun law bureaucracy in Australia seemed a bit small & esoteric in the grand scheme of the subject matter.
I suppose my earlier post is more a case of my dislike for a particular society trend casually referred to as “Nanny-ism”. A social structure that seems to be based on the principals of “You Cant Do This!” & “You Cant Do That!”.
This is an issue that extends further then just firearms.

In any case the whole “right to have” with firearms seems to be too vast an issue for any individual to be able to digest both intricately and holistically. Being unable to do this means that a truly informed decision that takes into account everyone’s individual situation is simply beyond the scope of human intelligence.
This is probably why we have to chop an issue up into little pieces, study the pieces, and then try to comprehend not just the parts of the system but the interaction of those parts within the system.
This is why we generalise, categorise, and often make decisions based on statistics.

Anyway, back to the gun issue.
They way I see it, there’re two opposing sides on this issue that seem to accuse one another of being unnecessary afraid.
To me both sides seem to be somewhat afraid.
You have the people that will never give up their firearms due to their need for self-defence in a presumably imminent situation wherein their life will be threatened.
On the other hand, you have the people who feel that if they are in an area where guns are legal they WILL be shot and soon..<period>.

Why is this? I think its media sensationalism again.
24hrs day, 7 days a week. “Tragedy!, Evil!, Madness!”
With this kind of stuff being blasted into your head all the time you can’t help but think that the world is a frightening nightmare.
Certain people will react to this fear differently.
Some will buy a gun in order to be prepared for what trouble this world (as the news has led them to believe) will throw towards them. They have accepted the media’s projection of a “scary world” and have adapted in accordance with their expectations.
They feel that everyone (or almost everyone) should have access to whatever means necessary to protect themselves and survive in this apparently hostile world.

Others may react differently by instead loudly advocating for a world where none of the bad things they’ve seen on the news ever happens.
They have also accepted the “scary world” model presented by the media but believe instead that they should try to change this world rather then adapt to it. Their ideal usually involves the removal of all but the most innocuous of items from common populace, a totally strict set of laws to live by, and a comprehensive system for boundless law enforcement.

Both are extremes, and both seem like an over-the-top reaction.
When I see CNN (or any other US new channel), I get the impression that they are trying to project the US (and the world in general) as an unbelievable dangerous place where no one is safe.
But I believe there are just as many quiet, boring, “nothing ever happens here”, parts of the US as there are here in Australia.
Places where the worst you might encounter on the street is a roving Jehovah’s Witness on a door-to-door mission.

I remember when my Dad went to San Francisco back in 1985.
I was a kid back then and (due to news & film) believed that living in America must have been like living in an action film.
My Dad told me that most Americans just live out their day-to-day lives without incident just like their counterparts in Britain and Australia.

Thus now older (much older) and wiser (I hope :) ) then I was back then, I have become somewhat sceptical of what the see or read from the mainstream media.
Although I know the news seldom lies, I am aware that they will deliberately spice up a report to make it interesting. So I always bear in mind that I may not have enough information on the full story of a report to be able to get a truly definite understanding of the situation.
I also try to ignore anything within a report which I feel is unnecessary emotive. By removing these emotional evaluations from a report, you get the bare facts.
It is surprising how many reports are made up mostly of opinionated fluff.



BTW
I’d like to say thanks to all the American’s here that managed to refrain from insulting Australia (or Australians) despite some clear provocations being slung at the US (and US culture) from certain other Australian’s here.



Danielismyname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,565

18 Sep 2007, 3:33 am

It's wrong and dangerous to own a mind; I propose a buyback scheme. Think ‘bout it, it’d prevent so many needless deaths -- it'd cure everything too (it's probably the only answer to all of life's problems too)!

After all, the mind is the most dangerous weapon of them all.



Flagg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,399
Location: Western US

18 Sep 2007, 3:43 am

Agent80s: Utter genius, your post contained a lot of insight.



calandale
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,439

18 Sep 2007, 4:19 am

BazzaMcKenzie wrote:
If you don't take it personally, its rather amusing to watch :P


If ya gots the guts to wade through it all.



Pandora
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Age: 64
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,553
Location: Townsville

18 Sep 2007, 7:34 am

jfrmeister wrote:
The_Chosen_One wrote:
The government should have a 3 month gun amnesty where EACH AND EVERY PERSON has the chance to hand in their weapons. They can receive less than market value because they are considered a non-necessary tool. After that amnesty, then the police and armed forces can under government order do a house to house search for any weapons not handed in, regardless of whether they were legally obtained or not. All said weapons either handed in or confiscated will be melted down as scrap, and recycled to be used for other more useful purposes. Failure to comply with this would mean a mandatory prison term of no less than 5 years.


This proposal sure makes random drive-by shootings look like the better alternative. :roll:
But how would a drive-by shooting happen if all the weapons were confiscated?


_________________
Break out you Western girls,
Someday soon you're gonna rule the world.
Break out you Western girls,
Hold your heads up high.
"Western Girls" - Dragon


MrMark
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jul 2006
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,918
Location: Tallahassee, FL

18 Sep 2007, 8:51 am

jfrmeister wrote:
I think TCO's opinions are part of the problem. They are very Stalinistic, and although he has the right to state them, it's only expected that that viewpoint is going to draw harsh criticizms.... and insults.


Criticizm (of ideas) is acceptable, insults are not.


_________________
"The cordial quality of pear or plum
Rises as gladly in the single tree
As in the whole orchards resonant with bees."
- Emerson