Stop using guns to kill things!

Post Reply New Topic

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKlKUCRtRuE[/youtube]

I think what happened in Colorado is horrible. However, I do condone gun ownership for the common man. It is the only way to defend yourself against criminals who may also have guns and wish to use them against you. Not only that but it stands as a final check and balance against the possibility of tyrannical government. Governments should live in constant fear of their citizens. This is a healthy thing as it keeps them from ruling too far afield from the best interests of the citizens. Plus, in a grid down scenario (EMP, Carrington-event size solar flare, major storm, etc.) you need to be able to defend yourself when law and order break down.

Additionally, hunting is a way that man had harvested food from nature for the entirety of human existence. While I do not condone the wholesale slaughter of a herd, I do condone taking an animal or two if it is to meet the dietary needs of your family. Well regulated hunting is necessary to proper management of certain species in order to maintain healthy population sizes and keep them from encroaching on human settlements. Plus, if you live in a more primitive place, a gun may well be the only thing that stands between an apex predator and you becoming it's next meal.

In the end, guns are neither good nor evil. It is the person who pulls the trigger who decides if it will be used for good or evil. If a person in that theater with a concealed carry permit had killed the gunman before he could take any lives, then the gun would have been used for a positive purpose and not a negative one.

Killing things is what guns were intended for. It's what you kill that matters.

People who make this argument are adorable. It's like they are permanently stuck in the eighteenth century.

When the aircraft carriers start launching unmanned drones, never fear! We'll fight them off with our handguns.

Remember, guns are for three things:

1. Family protection.

2. Hunting dangerous or delicious animals.

3. Keeping the King of England out of your face.

You give technologically advanced militaries more credit that they are due. If this were truly the case then the Mujahedin would not have beaten back the Soviets and given the Americans such a run for their money. It speaks highly of decentralized guerrilla tactics that the Afghan war has lasted over ten years now and in the long term may still end up lost. Plus, the United States is now bankrupt in all but name only. It will not be able to sustain it's military budget for much longer due to it's unsustainable debt load. In order for any theoretical civil war to be won by the standing government, it needs the ability to end it quickly. The longer the rebels can drag it out through attrition, the more the odds turn in the favor of the rebels over the government they seek to depose. It's not about winning battles but rather about disruption. If you can disrupt the economic activity and stability of the powerful country long enough, you impact it's ability to wage an expensive, technologically advanced war. At this point the asymmetric strategy starts to pay off as you target the equipment, not the soldiers of the other side. It's sort of a Sun Tzu strategy and is something covered in "The Art of War".

Now I am NOT advocating a civil war here. I am merely pointing out that it is not as cut and dry as you seem to think. If you read up on recent asymmetric wars you will find the pattern I have laid out has happened several times. In the end, it is staying power, not technology that wins the day.

If anyone forbid guns - some people start to killing with knives
if the knives will be forbidden - some people start to killing with rocks and sticks
even if someone can forbid rocks and sticks - there are persons who could kill with bare hands

The problem is in human nature - and that nature should be changed

and because it's impossible, any law-abiding citizen should have right and ability to defend himself - because madmans and criminals doesn't care of any law, and they can always get dangerous weapons (for some persons even pencil could be dangerous weapon)

Its easily bare hands with rocks and sticks before the introduction of weaponary technology development. It wasn't much a killer back then until mass technology development of video games, population growth split, cultural split/clashes and that. Its fairly unlikely that it has been a same in past. The law comes first. Think about the bible (I'm not religious). Bible always insist everyone to behave. Nowadays, its less likely because of technology development causing dangerous and less private lifestyle. Internet and video games leads to massive increase in deaths relations.

Just simple as you think. You have miss several points. Didn't you watch the video I made?

I know where that's from...

The difference between the governments of modernized countries and the governments of tyranical ones is that tyranical ones don't have qualms against mass murder.

I'm a simple man, thinking simple thoughts.
That is why - when I'm working at night - I've got with me police baton and mace spray.
Because "law" is nice thing, but "human nature" not, and I prefer baton and spray to protect me from drunken mugger - you may not believe, but it works better than "law"

Last edited by GreenShadow on 21 Jul 2012, 11:41 am, edited 1 time in total.

Over here the common man rarely owns a gun, but to be honest i think in other countries its far more neccesary, and i don't own a gun myself but i do have several weapons, i don't think its the guns, its the people who use them for a wrong purpose :/ Besides if you tell an angry gunman that you're not going to shoot him, then most likely that person will say, ''Well tough luck, i will shoot you though'' That's just my point of view though, and its also a reality that even if we as common good folk don't use guns, criminals will use guns against us, so yeah x_x And even if you went back in time and stopped the invention of guns we would have found some other weapon to use, i believe that criminals would make other weapons and in turn we would need other weapons to defend ourselves with unless we want them running rampant on the streets, which does happen in places, but not everywhere, besides if we don't use guns we will probably use a bow or an axe for that matter, anyway enough rambling from me, this is just what i think and how i believe that just because you don't want to use guns that it doesn't mean someone else wont use a gun.

Yes guns are totally the culprit of mass shootings.........I call BS, banning guns is not going to prevent these things from taking place. People could still get guns illegally or they could use homemade bombs and crap like that if they really wanted.

God bless the victims and all affected by the most recent Colorado attack, and God helps us not to just treat this as another tactic in futility (to write more gun laws and stack them ontop of all the ones we already have, which do not work). In stead, let's figure out WHY this man acted this way, and look for answers there.

YES! A violent person intent to kill, WILL kill. Period.

Guns of all types, automobiles, hand tools, and guitar strings are all deadly weapons and can result in fatal accidents very easily, when in the wrong hands. Laws will never keep guns or anything else out of the wrong hands.... In fact gun bans will simply keep guns out of good, responsible, law-abiding hands.

The people who think that banning guns fixes anything, need to read the news in Australia or Canada, and it will be very clear that there are still plenty of guns in those places, and always will be. It's just that now the guns are ONLY in the hands of the criminals, while the good people have surrendered theirs, and are sitting ducks to the first criminal who takes a whim to walk in and steal, kill, rape, etc.....

Charles

I use my firearms for recreation that provides desirable sensory input. I am confident I can fend off an attacker without a firearm, but if someone needs to use one in that scenario, that's fine by me. There is a vlogger on YouTube who goes by the name of GoTimothy who claims that anyone who owns a firearm is a premeditated killer. Unfortunately, it's these people who will politicize and use these tragedies to further their own agendas. This can easily be said of Conservatives as well. What happened was nothing short of atrocious, but that doesn't mean everyone who owns firearms will mow down everyone they come into contact with. This young man obviously needed help before it got to this point.

owning a gun is my 2nd amendment right and i will fight to keep that right to own a gun. Criminals will always find a way to own a gun and use it against you. if the government had found a way to keep illegal guns off the streets do you think we would have as much crime as we do? not just in this nation but all nations. if someone had found a way to keep illegal guns off the streets where would the world be right now?!? i don't care what anyone says i will continue to fight for my right to bear arms in this nation!! !