A Land Without Guns: How Japan Has Virtually Eliminated Shooting Deaths

[Capt Bringdown]

A Land Without Guns: How Japan Has Virtually Eliminated Shooting Deaths (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-land-without-guns-how-japan-has-virtually-eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/) Max Fisher, The Atlantic
In part by forbidding almost all forms of firearm ownership, Japan has as few as two gun-related homicides a year.

What is the role of guns in Japan, the developed world's least firearm-filled nation and perhaps its strictest controller? In 2008, the U.S. had over 12 thousand firearm-related homicides. All of Japan experienced only 11, fewer than were killed at the Aurora shooting alone. And that was a big year: 2006 saw an astounding two, and when that number jumped to 22 in 2007, it became a national scandal. By comparison, also in 2008, 587 Americans were killed just by guns that had discharged accidentally.

Almost no one in Japan owns a gun. Most kinds are illegal, with onerous restrictions on buying and maintaining the few that are allowed. The only guns that Japanese citizens can legally buy and use are shotguns and air rifles, and it's not easy to do.

To get a gun in Japan, first, you have to attend an all-day class and pass a written test, which are held only once per month. You also must take and pass a shooting range class. Then, head over to a hospital for a mental test and drug test (Japan is unusual in that potential gun owners must affirmatively prove their mental fitness), which you'll file with the police. Finally, pass a rigorous background check for any criminal record or association with criminal or extremist groups, and you will be the proud new owner of your shotgun or air rifle. Just don't forget to provide police with documentation on the specific location of the gun in your home, as well as the ammo, both of which must be locked and stored separately. And remember to have the police inspect the gun once per year and to re-take the class and exam every three years.

Of course, Japan and the U.S. are separated by a number of cultural and historical difference much wider than their gun policies. Kopel explains that, for whatever reason, Japanese tend to be more tolerant of the broad search and seizure police powers necessary to enforce the ban. "Japanese, both criminals and ordinary citizens, are much more willing than their American counterparts to consent to searches and to answer questions from the police," he writes.
- more -> (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-land-without-guns-how-japan-has-virtually-eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/)


The observation about the US and Japan having different tolerance levels regarding police powers rings a bit hollow given our affection the Surveillance state, which I don't believe was on the table at all during the last Presidential election.
Americans are apparently OK with Big Government spying on them, warrantless wiretaps, The Patriot Act etc, but don't even think about touching our precious guns.

[DMC]

Japanese voluntarily submit to government authority. It has been ingrained in them to do so. Americans are just the opposite, our core beliefs are that government cannot be trusted. Many of our rights are freedoms from the government. Even the concept of separation of church and state was originally meant to free the church's affairs from the state, not the opposite.

No, we are not subjects.

lol Thailand, new constitution every 5 years.

[LnGrrrR]

People are fine with government surveillance as long as it doesn't directly affect them. There would be an uproar if police were allowed to inspect homes.

also, Japan is a very strange country... Like strangers meeting up to commit suicide together. America has the few odd occurrences but its not very prevalent.

[Capt Bringdown]

People are fine with government surveillance as long as it doesn't directly affect them. There would be an uproar if police were allowed to inspect homes.
As I understand the article, the police inspections apply to gun owners only, to insure that the guns are properly & safely stored. In other words, it's part of the deal if you want to own a gun. I don't think it's the case that police randomly inspect homes.
Whatever the case may be, it doesn't sound nearly as egregious an abuse of liberty as warrant-less wiretaps & the Patriot Act IMO. The long term potential is much worse. It's going to be very hard politically to reverse/contain these things.


also, Japan is a very strange country... Like strangers meeting up to commit suicide together. America has the few odd occurrences but its not very prevalent.
Just about everywhere is strange from the limited viewpoint of American exceptionalism - especially with regard to gun control.

[DMC]

As I understand the article, the police inspections apply to gun owners only, to insure that the guns are properly & safely stored. In other words, it's part of the deal if you want to own a gun. I don't think it's the case that police randomly inspect homes.
Whatever the case may be, it doesn't sound nearly as egregious an abuse of liberty as warrant-less wiretaps & the Patriot Act IMO. The long term potential is much worse. It's going to be very hard politically to reverse/contain these things.


Just about everywhere is strange from the limited viewpoint of American exceptionalism - especially with regard to gun control.

LMAO

No such as someone owning a gun that's not registered... only inspects those who followed proper procedure to get a gun.

That's uber effective.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The US is about as culturally naive as it gets.

[DMC]

The US is about as culturally naive as it gets.

Which is why you love this place so much you refuse to move to a better one.

[BradLohaus]

I'm pretty sure Japanese Americans don't commit much gun violence here either.

[Latarian Milton]

americans don't have no such high level of self discipline like the japs and it's not even close tbh. sorry to say that but americans are more similar to them chinks in terms of personalities and life attitudes, the commie law would work out fine in the US but i guess you don't wanna lose the freedom that you take for granted in the US

[The Reckoning]

it's alot easier to control people when it's an island

[Winehole23]

Guns have been regulated here from the very beginning, and haven't been eliminated yet.

[Winehole23]

They never will be. More regulation does not mean they will be either.

[LnGrrrR]

Just about everywhere is strange from the limited viewpoint of American exceptionalism - especially with regard to gun control.

While true to an extent, I have travelled to other countries, and I do read global news from time to time, as well as hearing a few stories from coworkers stationed there. There are definitely a few things which make Japan unique, and yes, weird. I'm sure others think the same of America. But Japan has to be near the top of countries whose citizens are constantly pressured into always maintaining respectability, being successful, etc etc.

If there's one thing that America breeds, it would seem to be survivability. I don't think the whole "kill yourself for your God" thing would go over well here, nor would the "kill yourself because you disrespected your boss/parents" thing either.

[LnGrrrR]

As I understand the article, the police inspections apply to gun owners only, to insure that the guns are properly & safely stored. In other words, it's part of the deal if you want to own a gun. I don't think it's the case that police randomly inspect homes.

Gun owners would throw a fit about that. Just look at the fit they're having NOW, when nothing even semi-concrete has been discussed.


Whatever the case may be, it doesn't sound nearly as egregious an abuse of liberty as warrant-less wiretaps & the Patriot Act IMO. The long term potential is much worse. It's going to be very hard politically to reverse/contain these things.

Agreed, and I'm certainly no fan of those. But by and large, unless it's personally affecting them (like having someone enter their home), most Americans won't care.

[LnGrrrR]

The US is about as culturally naive as it gets.

Eh, I don't think that's really the "fault" of the US. First off, the US is probably the biggest exporter of "culture" in the world through Hollywood, music, etc etc, so it makes sense that other countries would know about us. Second, we're rather insular, in the sense that we only border two countries. Finally, America itself is huge, and has various different cultures to it. There's not many cultures that are singular to America.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Which is why you love this place so much you refuse to move to a better one.

/yawn

Perhaps when you do not like a situation or think another place does it better you just give up and leave but I don't. I try to make my home the better place. American exceptionalism is an illusion.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Eh, I don't think that's really the "fault" of the US. First off, the US is probably the biggest exporter of "culture" in the world through Hollywood, music, etc etc, so it makes sense that other countries would know about us. Second, we're rather insular, in the sense that we only border two countries. Finally, America itself is huge, and has various different cultures to it. There's not many cultures that are singular to America.

I am not applying fault but the perception especially within a certain demographic is pretty glaring. White man's burden still has a lot of traction in this country.

[DarrinS]

I am not applying fault but the perception especially within a certain demographic is pretty glaring. White man's burden still has a lot of traction in this country.

:rolleyes

[DMC]

/yawn

Perhaps when you do not like a situation or think another place does it better you just give up and leave but I don't. I try to make my home the better place. American exceptionalism is an illusion.

You are for a gun ban, isn't that right? You are ok with the military and federal government having guns, isn't that right? You want to do away with the 2nd Amendment, isn't that right? You stand against almost everything this country was founded on. Yes, you should catch the first plane out.

[boutons_deux]

Which is why you love this place so much you refuse to move to a better one.

Love It Or Leave It. Same old ignorant bullshit

[DMC]

Love It Or Leave It. Same old ignorant bullshit

Lib take:

Patriotism: bullshit
2nd Amendment: bullshit
Religion: Bullshit
Nationalism: Bullshit
The Nation: Worst in the world
The president: Worthless piece of shit
the people: fat, lazy entitled uneducated idiots
the goal: be like some other country

Ignorant is not leaving the place, the people and the system you despise when the grass is greener over there.

[Th'Pusher]

You are for a gun ban, isn't that right? You are ok with the military and federal government having guns, isn't that right? You want to do away with the 2nd Amendment, isn't that right? You stand against almost everything this country was founded on. Yes, you should catch the first plane out.
You appear to have serious issues with comprehension. I am barely paying attention and can give you a more accurate depiction of his stance on gun control. Fucking read what people say or don't respond.

[rascal]

You appear to have serious issues with comprehension. I am barely paying attention and can give you a more accurate depiction of his stance on gun control. Fucking read what people say or don't respond.

He has blinders on and doesn't see anything but what he wants to see.

[boutons_deux]

Lib take:

Patriotism: bullshit
2nd Amendment: bullshit
Religion: Bullshit
Nationalism: Bullshit
The Nation: Worst in the world
The president: Worthless piece of shit
the people: fat, lazy entitled uneducated idiots
the goal: be like some other country

Ignorant is not leaving the place, the people and the system you despise when the grass is greener over there.

Love or Leave It. Same of right-wing, self-proclaimed "super patriot", ignorant bullshit.

[DMC]

You appear to have serious issues with comprehension. I am barely paying attention and can give you a more accurate depiction of his stance on gun control. Fucking read what people say or don't respond.

Not that your cocksucker deserves any attention other than a toothbrush, but it's near Christmas so I feel generous:

1. he's been harping on the gun bans of other nations and has called for a ban on certain types of guns here. that settles the 1st.
2. he's not called for military or government to be under a gun ban, that settles 2
3. he's scoffed at the 2nd Amendment as being antiquated. that settles 3

It's cute to watch libs try to wrestle with the fact that they've exposed themselves as socialists, as they attempt to find some plausible deniability to every statement they make on here. It's also cute how buddy libs come to their rescue.

lol lacking the courage of conviction

[Th'Pusher]

He has blinders on and doesn't see anything but what he wants to see.
This gun control nonsense sure has him fired up. He's been full throttle since the shooting. Calm down. Nobody is taking the guns he's never used to protect himself and likely never will.

[Th'Pusher]

Not that your cocksucker deserves any attention other than a toothbrush, but it's near Christmas so I feel generous:

1. he's been harping on the gun bans of other nations and has called for a ban on certain types of guns here. that settles the 1st.
2. he's not called for military or government to be under a gun ban, that settles 2
3. he's scoffed at the 2nd Amendment as being antiquated. that settles 3

It's cute to watch libs try to wrestle with the fact that they've exposed themselves as socialists, as they attempt to find some plausible deniability to every statement they make on here. It's also cute how buddy libs come to their rescue.

lol lacking the courage of conviction

:lol cling to your guns and religion.

[DMC]

:lol cling to your guns and religion.

Speaking of comprehension: I am a professed atheist.

[Th'Pusher]

Speaking of comprehension: I am a professed atheist.

Tbh, I don't really know (or care) much about you. All I know is that you have been in an emotional tailspin since sandy hook over some gun control that's never going to see the light of day. I guess you found this an opportunity to cry from your soapbox. Whatever. Keep polishing all those guns you're never going to use to protect yourself...

[ErnestLynch]

We could have a crime free society, but no one would want to live in it.

[Bill_Brasky]

If the government wants to enslave us all or whatever guns aren't gonna stop them. They have these things called tanks and airplanes that would render whatever peashooters you own pretty useless.

[cantthinkofanything]

If the government wants to enslave us all or whatever guns aren't gonna stop them. They have these things called tanks and airplanes that would render whatever peashooters you own pretty useless.

that's as ridiculous as your avatar

[rascal]

Speaking of comprehension: I am a professed atheist.

Even worse, an atheist with a gun.

[rascal]

We could have a crime free society, but no one would want to live in it.

Why not?

[Creepn]

Why not?

According to the Matrix, humans need chaos because it's in our very nature to be destructive. The perfect utopian world that was created at first was a total colossal failure.

[DMC]

I know nothing about guns but I have a valid point about guns..

Keep calling people with guns to protect you, faggot.

[DMC]

Why not?

lol idiot

Two ways: call nothing a crime or allow no one the freedom of choice

Which do you want to live in?

Dumb fuck

[Th'Pusher]

Keep calling people with guns to protect you, faggot.
I've never in my life called the police to protect me. You gun nuts are a paranoid bunch of weak minded pussies.

[rascal]

lol idiot

Two ways: call nothing a crime or allow no one the freedom of choice

Which do you want to live in?

Dumb fuck

You make no sense.

[DMC]

I've never in my life called the police to protect me. You gun nuts are a paranoid bunch of weak minded pussies.

lol "weak minded" coming from someone afraid of gun owners. Silly motherfucker, roll back over and finish your man off. When I need a woman's opinion I will slap you on the ass.

[Th'Pusher]

lol "weak minded" coming from someone afraid of gun owners. Silly motherfucker, roll back over and finish your man off. When I need a woman's opinion I will slap you on the ass.
LOL. I am not afraid of gun owners. I choose not to own one as I don't need one for sport or for 'protecting myself'. How many times have you used one of your many guns to protect yourself or a family member?

[CosmicCowboy]

LOL. I am not afraid of gun owners. I choose not to own one as I don't need one for sport or for 'protecting myself'. How many times have you used one of your many guns to protect yourself or a family member?

I racked a Model 12 on a guy trying to rip off my buddy when I was in college. didn't shoot him, though.

[cantthinkofanything]

LOL. I am not afraid of gun owners. I choose not to own one as I don't need one for sport or for 'protecting myself'. How many times have you used one of your many guns to protect yourself or a family member?

just the fact that I (or my neighbors) can own a gun provides a level of protection 365 days of the year.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You are for a gun ban, isn't that right? You are ok with the military and federal government having guns, isn't that right? You want to do away with the 2nd Amendment, isn't that right? You stand against almost everything this country was founded on. Yes, you should catch the first plane out.

Is a rocket launcher an arm?

Are citizens allowed to own rocket launchers?

Do you support this policy?

Even Scalia acknowledges that the Second Amendment is limited and he is not exactly liberal with his interpretations.

I don't want to ban 'guns.' I am weighing in my mind the efficacy of a ban on semiautomatic weapons because of the success of nations with socioeconomic and political systems similar to our own have had.

The whole 'founders' argument is horseshit. George Washington, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams were hardly a singleminded force. Much less all of them. All you do now is resort to bullshit cliches. As with most everything you write lately there is little substance to it.

I am a US citizen and using my free speech. I am not going anywhere and your sorry ass cannot do anything about it.

Deal with it, coward.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I racked a Model 12 on a guy trying to rip off my buddy when I was in college. didn't shoot him, though.

Sure and I shoved my shotgun in a mayate's face who was trying to break into my apartment. I get what you guys are talking about in terms of protection but if you cannot protect yourself with a revolver and a shotgun then you have no business 'protecting' yourself to begin with.

[CosmicCowboy]

A shotgun is my preferred short range defense weapon, but I freakin love getting into a herd of pigs out in the open with an AR.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Lib take:

Patriotism: bullshit
2nd Amendment: bullshit
Religion: Bullshit
Nationalism: Bullshit
The Nation: Worst in the world
The president: Worthless piece of shit
the people: fat, lazy entitled uneducated idiots
the goal: be like some other country

Ignorant is not leaving the place, the people and the system you despise when the grass is greener over there.

Ignorant is speaking for others that you clearly do not represent.

I love my country. I just don't love assholes such as yourself in it.
I believe that the second amendment has to be weighed with other rights and rights end when they infringe on the rights of others.
Religion is a bunch of fairy tales.
Our nation is not the best in the world in everything but we are still a great country that is best in many things.
The president is a product of our two party system that is not necessary in our constitution.
The world is full of lazy, selfish, ignorant fucks. This country is no different.
The goal is to make the US the most benficial to the citizenry using the best ideas the world has to offer. People from elsewhere have good ideas too. I am not an culturally ignorant douchebag.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

A shotgun is my preferred short range defense weapon, but I freakin love getting into a herd of pigs out in the open with an AR.

Getting your jollies off is not protection and javelina can be culled without a semiauto.

[CosmicCowboy]

They aren't javelina dumbass.

nxbIigUiLMs

[FuzzyLumpkins]

They aren't javelina dumbass.

nxbIigUiLMs

whatever hog it is, the point still stands.

[CosmicCowboy]

You don't need a car either. A bicycle or walking will get you from point A to point B.

[DMC]

whatever hog it is, the point still stands.

What stands is you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about. A javelina is a game animal, a feral hog is not. You don't cull out hogs, you eliminate them.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You don't need a car either. A bicycle or walking will get you from point A to point B.

You don't need a tank either...... oh wait.

You guys really are good at making shitty arguments.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

What stands is you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about. A javelina is a game animal, a feral hog is not. You don't cull out hogs, you eliminate them.

Lol, more semantic arguments from, dickless. It's one thing I have noticed is that other than your tired ass boring style of argument, you consistently resort to semantics when you are shown to have no penis.

[DMC]

Lol, more semantic arguments from, dickless. It's one thing I have noticed is that other than your tired ass boring style of argument, you consistently resort to semantics when you are shown to have no penis.

You mean like how you incessantly fuck with WC because he gets the semantics wrong? This isn't your subject, not your field of expertise, so you're WC in a discussion about quantum physics. I am waiting for you to say "from what I can recall".

Semantics are the proper usage of the terms, the lack of which strongly indicates a lack of knowledge of the subject. You're just responding now like a dead body twitching.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You mean like how you incessantly fuck with WC because he gets the semantics wrong? This isn't your subject, not your field of expertise, so you're WC in a discussion about quantum physics. I am waiting for you to say "from what I can recall".

Semantics are the proper usage of the terms, the lack of which strongly indicates a lack of knowledge of the subject. You're just responding now like a dead body twitching.

/yawn.

Post examples of me using semantic arguments such as you claim.

When I say that he doesn't know what he is talking about it is with things like what is a linear system. IE he is talking about linearity and it's obvious he has no idea what it means. Not that he calle dit the wrong thing but he does not understand the mathematics.

The same is with systems analysis, PDE's etc.

I will certainly correct incorrect usage but I never make it the central argument which is what you do all the time.

Oh he called a pig a javelina so just discount everything he said and I will only bring that up and try to make the argument only about this because that is my typical boring lameass argument technique.

/dickless

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Oh and given the subject of 'you did so and so to WC.'

I recall you taking dipshit to task for using google for selective confirmation bias. So I was wondering could you tell me more about how there is no evidence in a reduction of crime in Australia and then post shit from the Melbourne police commissioner stating that the city has had a reduction in homicide rate as has the rest of the province.

I loved that self ownage, Dr. Google.

[DMC]

They aren't javelina dumbass.

nxbIigUiLMs

That's pure adrenaline. Necessary though. Anyone who's seen the feral hog version of the Ho Chi Minh trail knows what I am talking about. They are incredibly destructive creatures and not nearly as easy to hunt down as one would think given their size. They are smart creatures.

[DMC]

/yawn.

Post examples of me using semantic arguments such as you claim.

I don't need to. I know you do so do you.


When I say that he doesn't know what he is talking about it is with things like what is a linear system. IE he is talking about linearity and it's obvious he has no idea what it means. Not that he calle dit the wrong thing but he does not understand the mathematics.

Right.


The same is with systems analysis, PDE's etc.

Sure, some javelinas are more equal than others.


I will certainly correct incorrect usage but I never make it the central argument which is what you do all the time.

Ok.


Oh he called a pig a javelina so just discount everything he said and I will only bring that up and try to make the argument only about this because that is my typical boring lameass argument technique.

Or you could just refrain from making stupid ass remarks that unveil your ignorance on the subject but that would require thought before acting and that doesn't seem to be your style. You have to have the answer to everything.

Here's your basic approach here:

"I don't know about hogs, don't know the difference between game animals and varmints or pests, don't know the damage they cause, never hunted one, never cared, but you need to listen to me when I say this is what you need and don't need"

Then when pointed in the right direction:

"well you know what I mean"

If we know, why do you need to tell us? Stick to correcting people about stupid cubicle shit and leave the man stuff to the men.


/dickless
No need to sign off.

[DMC]

Oh and given the subject of 'you did so and so to WC.'

I recall you taking dipshit to task for using google for selective confirmation bias. So I was wondering could you tell me more about how there is no evidence in a reduction of crime in Australia and then post shit from the Melbourne police commissioner stating that the city has had a reduction in homicide rate as has the rest of the province.

I loved that self ownage, Dr. Google.
Damn right and I own it (and him). I didn't bitch at you for using the semantic argument, just pointed out you do the same. I am very guilty of it, because I think it's a strong indicator of understanding of the subject vs some "i just read" response where people don't know what they're talking about any deeper than a passing memory.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Still waiting for the link to me making a semantic argument the basis of my position, dickless. I am more than willing to admit the mistake about the type of pig. I am still waiting for an explanation as to how your semantic distinction makes a semiauto a requirement. That was the point and your bait and switch is obvious.

Your being boring again. I have an idea: how about you address the discussion about the second amendment in the other thread rather than grandstanding on this tangent.

Link it or admit you cannot and shut the fuckup. Hell, even tell us what the semantics I was arguing over was. You obviously know nothing about me or what I value. What you are doing here amounts to intellectual cowardice.

[rascal]

I racked a Model 12 on a guy trying to rip off my buddy when I was in college. didn't shoot him, though.

Most likely an overreaction. You could have just scared him off by shouting.

Everyone likes to play the hero. I am not buying it.

[CosmicCowboy]

Most likely an overreaction. You could have just scared him off by shouting.

Everyone likes to play the hero. I am not buying it.

LOL

You have no idea. I was young and bulletproof. It was not a situation where cops could be called and there was a lot of money/product involved. Bad guys wanted both. I don't give a fuck what you do or don't buy. I prevented a homicide and negotiated an honorable solution for both parties involved.

[DMC]

Still waiting for the link to me making a semantic argument the basis of my position, dickless. I am more than willing to admit the mistake about the type of pig. I am still waiting for an explanation as to how your semantic distinction makes a semiauto a requirement. That was the point and your bait and switch is obvious.

You didn't admit shit. You said the following:

"whatever hog it is, the point still stands." -FuzzyLumpkins

That doesn't sound like any admission of a mistake I've ever heard, and you call me dishonest.


Your being boring again. I have an idea: how about you address the discussion about the second amendment in the other thread rather than grandstanding on this tangent.

When you admit there has been a mass shooting since 1996 in Australia, we can put that red herring to rest.


Link it or admit you cannot and shut the fuckup. Hell, even tell us what the semantics I was arguing over was. You obviously know nothing about me or what I value. What you are doing here amounts to intellectual cowardice.

You bolt when you're shown to be wrong, or you post some pompous ass response like " whatever hog it is, the point still stands.". Well, whether or not there was a mass shooting in Australia since 1996, your point still stands I guess that there were no mass shootings in Australia since 1996.


You're such a blow hard but you peel like an onion exposing the bullshit beneath.

[LnGrrrR]

LOL

You have no idea. I was young and bulletproof. It was not a situation where cops could be called and there was a lot of money/product involved. Bad guys wanted both. I don't give a fuck what you do or don't buy. I prevented a homicide and negotiated an honorable solution for both parties involved.

I hope you've found a better crowd of people to hang with since then. :lol

[FuzzyLumpkins]

:lol the level of butthurt I have engendered in you is startling, dickless.

I'm still here and I still do not see you linking anything with me making semantics my central argument. I see no examples. I see you being a bitch again.

You have no honor.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

And your words about me running away are pretty hollow. Especially when you refuse to talk about anything other than your shitty red herring.

Scalia and the 2nd amendment? Fuck it lets talk about semantics.
Efficacy of Aussie gun laws. Fuck it lets talk about semantics and google spam contradictory shit.
Lack of any verifiable proof of deterrence? Fuck it lets talk about semantics and claim that you proved it anyway.
Ammo capacity, rates of fire and reload times? Fuck it lets accuse him of wanting to ban guns.

I cannot speak for others but as someone who has judged 100s of CX debates, when you see someone trying this bait and switch redherring bullshit that you pull, you might s well raise the white flag. It's weak as hell.

[Borat Sagyidev]

I hope you've found a better crowd of people to hang with since then. :lol


Why? it´s not like they are dangerous with good people. Guns in the hands of a good person are like a Care Bears stare.

It makes everyone happy.
http://p.twimg.com/AtnecuACAAAdub1.jpg
http://a1.ec-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/92/84365477c5710956326da9b461e8047e/l.jpg

[DMC]

:lol the level of butthurt I have engendered in you is startling, dickless.

I'm still here and I still do not see you linking anything with me making semantics my central argument. I see no examples. I see you being a bitch again.

You have no honor.

You and CumDumpster have the same M.O.; You generalize the issues and dare people to go on long fact finding missions (though neither of you have) and then when you're shown to be the mental midgets you are, when facts slap you across the face like the cock of a scorned lover, you claim victory with the "you mad" facade. Just because you have a fat tube in your mouth doesn't mean it's a victory cigar.

You thinking you're the first person I ever educated on firearms (and now game animals and mass shootings) is amusing, self centered but amusing.

Stick to shit talking PM technicians, cubicle Jedi.


And LOL at you posting back 2 back telling me I'm butthurt. You're seething.

[CosmicCowboy]

I hope you've found a better crowd of people to hang with since then. :lol

LOL absolutely. That was my come to jesus moment. If the vato hadn't backed down I would have pulled the trigger. Thought about that one a lot.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

So what you are saying is that you still cannot come up with one example of a semantics argument I have made.

That's nice.

And dickless, that is hardly the total of either of our arguments but its pretty apparent that you are upset. Hmm, we came to the same conclusion.... and you twist that into a good thing for you...

Honorless and dickless.

[TimmehC]

Japan has no land borders for guns to be smuggled in easily, tbh.

[DMC]

:madrun :madrun :madrun

[FuzzyLumpkins]

And you try and call me out for running away....

See this is the thing, dickless. I can live with making mistakes. I made two factual errors and am okay with that. After all, you have yet to be able to make a compelling case as to how those inaccuracies invalidate any contention of mine. But I am human and will make mistakes. C'est la vie.

OTOH, you try and take me to task for using semantics arguments. That btw is a tacit admission that this favorite tactic of yours is bullshit, but I digress. When asked for a link showing this we get nothing. When asked for just an example we get nothing.

It's only that I hate semantic arguments. I can go on about Aristotelian categorization and how semantics boils down to that bullshit. I know I don't argue like that because it really speaks towards how I view epistemology.

But see, this is the thing: you are emotionally incapable of admitting you are wrong. That is the sign of a weak mind. It's the sign of an insecure intellect. So go ahead and use more smilies but we both know there is merit in you being called dickless and honorless.

[DMC]

And you try and call me out for running away....

See this is the thing, dickless. I can live with making mistakes. I made two factual errors and am okay with that. After all, you have yet to be able to make a compelling case as to how those inaccuracies invalidate any contention of mine. But I am human and will make mistakes. C'est la vie.

OTOH, you try and take me to task for using semantics arguments. That btw is a tacit admission that this favorite tactic of yours is bullshit, but I digress. When asked for a link showing this we get nothing. When asked for just an example we get nothing.

It's only that I hate semantic arguments. I can go on about Aristotelian categorization and how semantics boils down to that bullshit. I know I don't argue like that because it really speaks towards how I view epistemology.

But see, this is the thing: you are emotionally incapable of admitting you are wrong. That is the sign of a weak mind. It's the sign of an insecure intellect. So go ahead and use more smilies but we both know there is merit in you being called dickless and honorless.

So you agree with me then.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

So you are self loathing then? Is that what you are trying to say?

[DMC]

You've got 5800 posts. I have 23K. You've used the word "semantics" over 70 times. I've done so about 23 times. You do the math and it's obvious you use semantics and arguments against semantics as an escape hatch when you're getting your ass spanked. You follow that up with claims that the other poster is angry, emotional and that you've done that to them.

I've just turned the tables on you.

You will thank me later when you become a better person.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

smh

So you used the search function and could not come up with examples and then do the "i know you are but what am i.' You suck at google and vbulletin. Anyway, dickless, your trolling is boring and uninventive so I am going to go do something else. Bye.

[DMC]

smh

So you used the search function and could not come up with examples and then do the "i know you are but what am i.' You suck at google and vbulletin. Anyway, dickless, your trolling is boring and uninventive so I am going to go do something else. Bye.
Always getting bored with losing eh? You'll be back, just like a crack whore trick you'll come back to get a fix. Secretly you've got some fetish that I somehow soothe by my masculine persona.

[Capt Bringdown]

A small step in the right direction:

Gun Buyback Events Overwhelmed in Oakland, SF (http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/S-F-Oakland-gun-buyback-nets-hundreds-4121621.php)
The number of firearms turned in to police at weekend events outstripped expectations

http://ww1.hdnux.com/photos/16/67/74/3899144/3/628x471.jpg
Officers Richard Niven (left) and Jeffrey Smoak handle guns that were bought back at St. Benedict's Church in Oakland.

Arturo Hurtado of Richmond was still stricken with grief over the mass shooting in Newtown, Conn., that left 20 schoolchildren dead when he awoke Saturday morning.

So he decided to get rid of his gun - "that darn thing," he called it - and purged it from his home.

Hurtado was among hundreds of Bay Area residents who dropped off their firearms at buyback locations in Oakland and San Francisco on Saturday, collecting $200 cash for their weapon, no questions asked.

Organizers said both locations saw crowds twice as large as expected. In East Oakland, a mile-long line of cars waited on 82nd Avenue to enter a parking lot at St. Benedict's Church, with some running out of gas while idling. In San Francisco, people stood in pouring rain outside the Omega Boys Club in the Dogpatch neighborhood to exchange their guns for cash.

By the end of the day, organizers expected more than 600 guns to be turned in.

Hurtado was a rare customer. Not only was Friday's school shooting his primary motivation, but also he walked away without taking the cash.

"I'm just glad it's out of my house," he said.


Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/S-F-Oakland-gun-buyback-nets-hundreds-4121621.php

[Shastafarian]

You've got 5800 posts. I have 23K. You've used the word "semantics" over 70 times. I've done so about 23 times. You do the math and it's obvious you use semantics and arguments against semantics as an escape hatch when you're getting your ass spanked. You follow that up with claims that the other poster is angry, emotional and that you've done that to them.

I've just turned the tables on you.

You will thank me later when you become a better person.
Are you talking about real life better person or internet better person? Hard to tell when you think having 23 thousands posts is something to be proud of.

[The Reckoning]

no thanks i dont prefer my women in pornos screaming like theyre getting raped


otoh:


the US has some of the most strict regulations on alcohol (serving, bar times, age, etc) in the world, and look at how many alcohol-induced crimes and deaths are still prevalent in the US.

wake up.

[mingus]

A small step in the right direction:

Gun Buyback Events Overwhelmed in Oakland, SF (http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/S-F-Oakland-gun-buyback-nets-hundreds-4121621.php)
The number of firearms turned in to police at weekend events outstripped expectations

http://ww1.hdnux.com/photos/16/67/74/3899144/3/628x471.jpg
Officers Richard Niven (left) and Jeffrey Smoak handle guns that were bought back at St. Benedict's Church in Oakland.

Arturo Hurtado of Richmond was still stricken with grief over the mass shooting in Newtown, Conn., that left 20 schoolchildren dead when he awoke Saturday morning.

So he decided to get rid of his gun - "that darn thing," he called it - and purged it from his home.

Hurtado was among hundreds of Bay Area residents who dropped off their firearms at buyback locations in Oakland and San Francisco on Saturday, collecting $200 cash for their weapon, no questions asked.

Organizers said both locations saw crowds twice as large as expected. In East Oakland, a mile-long line of cars waited on 82nd Avenue to enter a parking lot at St. Benedict's Church, with some running out of gas while idling. In San Francisco, people stood in pouring rain outside the Omega Boys Club in the Dogpatch neighborhood to exchange their guns for cash.

By the end of the day, organizers expected more than 600 guns to be turned in.

Hurtado was a rare customer. Not only was Friday's school shooting his primary motivation, but also he walked away without taking the cash.

"I'm just glad it's out of my house," he said.


Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/S-F-Oakland-gun-buyback-nets-hundreds-4121621.php

There are a couple reasons I won't ever turn in my .357. Here's one: about five years ago I was dating a girl who was being followed in her car by at least two other men from Wallmart. She didn't have a cell with her, so she drove to my house with them tagging right behind her. She runs up to my house banging on the door to let her in. I open and she tells me what's happening. The suburban is parked in front of my house. I run to get my gun and flash it so that they can see it and they take off like the pussies they were.

What if I didn't have a gun though? Maybe I get overpowered by both of them and they rape her. This is the part liberals don't consider. Those are the kinds of things having a gun prevents. It's a personal anecdote, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who has benefited from having a weapon. I acknowledge the other side of the argument--that they've helped facilitate massacres, killings etc. But it seems as if the liberals on this board and elsewhere aren't considering the other side of their argument. Until that happens, we can't have a serious debate about fun control.

[Shastafarian]

There are a couple reasons I won't ever turn in my .357. Here's one: about five years ago I was dating a girl who was being followed in her car by at least two other men from Wallmart. She didn't have a cell with her, so she drove to my house with them tagging right behind her. She runs up to my house banging on the door to let her in. I open and she tells me what's happening. The suburban is parked in front of my house. I run to get my gun and flash it so that they can see it and they take off like the pussies they were.

What if I didn't have a gun though? Maybe I get overpowered by both of them and they rape her. This is the part liberals don't consider. Those are the kinds of things having a gun prevents. It's a personal anecdote, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who has benefited from having a weapon. I acknowledge the other side of the argument--that they've helped facilitate massacres, killings etc. But it seems as if the liberals on this board and elsewhere aren't considering the other side of their argument. Until that happens, we can't have a serious debate about fun control.

Excellent Freudian slip. Also, you could have called the police. Same chances they don't give two shits about your measly single revolver and come in and kill you both. You're lucky they didn't have legally and easily obtained AR15s.

[Wild Cobra]

Getting your jollies off is not protection and javelina can be culled without a semiauto.
Is that a new word for you, learned on the internet?

Must be since you misapplied it like you do every thing else.

[Wild Cobra]

Are you talking about real life better person or internet better person? Hard to tell when you think having 23 thousands posts is something to be proud of.
I haven't looked yet, but I'll bet that 23k is over a far longer time than The Fuzzy trolls posts are.

[Wild Cobra]

The number of firearms turned in to police at weekend events outstripped expectations

With so many people having financial difficulties, why is it such a wonder?

I wonder how many stolen ones were found too...

[Wild Cobra]

What if I didn't have a gun though? Maybe I get overpowered by both of them and they rape her. This is the part liberals don't consider. Those are the kinds of things having a gun prevents.
---
I acknowledge the other side of the argument--that they've helped facilitate massacres, killings etc. But it seems as if the liberals on this board and elsewhere aren't considering the other side of their argument. Until that happens, we can't have a serious debate about fun control.
I agree. Liberal are often like the three monkeys.

Excellent Freudian slip. Also, you could have called the police. Same chances they don't give two shits about your measly single revolver and come in and kill you both. You're lucky they didn't have legally and easily obtained AR15s.
How many minutes away are the police? Wait to call till it's a real threat might be too late. Just brandishing the gun was enough. If a call to 911 was in place, they are still often at least 3 minutes away. A lot can happen in 3 minutes.

You are the type he is talking about. You don't consider the other side of the debate.

[TSA]

Could have called the cops? Get real for a second, and tell me honestly in this situation you'd want to "hope" your house was secure from them entering. Just shut the fuck up now. No one in their right mind would rather wait for the cops then handle it as was done.

You're lucky they didn't have legally and easily obtained AR15s.believe its the other way around.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

no thanks i dont prefer my women in pornos screaming like theyre getting raped


otoh:


the US has some of the most strict regulations on alcohol (serving, bar times, age, etc) in the world, and look at how many alcohol-induced crimes and deaths are still prevalent in the US.

wake up.

You're right. We should just deregulate alcohol consumption completely.

[Shastafarian]

Could have called the cops? Get real for a second, and tell me honestly in this situation you'd want to "hope" your house was secure from them entering. Just shut the fuck up now. No one in their right mind would rather wait for the cops then handle it as was done.:lol You're a real cowboy huh? If multiple people follow me home and I have a pistol I'd rather have the cops deal with it yes. And it's precisely because these multiple people can be carrying high powered and high fire rate weapons. Hahahaha thinking that flashing a pistol or even a single gun in general will scare away people who REALLY intend to do harm.


believe its the other way around.
Believe it isn't. Unless his girlfriend and the neighbors came out blazing.

[Wild Cobra]

Really...

If they really wanted to do harm, they would do so before giving anyone a chance to call 911.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Flashing a pistol at men you don't know when they now know where you live is not the smartest idea I have ever heard.

[Shastafarian]

Really...

If they really wanted to do harm, they would do so before giving anyone a chance to call 911.
If they want to do harm they'll do it. Just because you have an AR15 to match their possible arsenal doesn't mean shit.

[Shastafarian]

Flashing a pistol at men you don't know when they now know where you live is not the smartest idea I have ever heard.

It's a good thing mingus won't give that pistol up! What could possibly go wrong?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It's a good thing mingus won't give that pistol up! What could possibly go wrong?

I completely get the desire to defend your home. I have had a gun most of my life and I 100% get not wanting to be stuck being the guy with a knife at a gun fight. But you don't need more than a rifle, revolver or a shotgun to do so. It's already bad enough if people are starting gunfights in their front yard.

[Wild Cobra]

I completely get the desire to defend your home. I have had a gun most of my life and I 100% get not wanting to be stuck being the guy with a knife at a gun fight. But you don't need more than a rifle, revolver or a shotgun to do so. It's already bad enough if people are starting gunfights in their front yard.
I don't need my WS6, but I bought it. I don't need my wide screen TV or Bluray player, but I bought them.

Who the fuck, do you think you are, to tell anyone what they need?

[Blake]

Really...

If they really wanted to do harm, they would do so before giving anyone a chance to call 911.

Or to run in and get their .357

[Blake]

I don't need my WS6, but I bought it. I don't need my wide screen TV or Bluray player, but I bought them.

Who the fuck, do you think you are, to tell anyone what they need?

If I thought I needed a weapon of mass destruction, would you tell me I don't?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I don't need my WS6, but I bought it. I don't need my wide screen TV or Bluray player, but I bought them.

Who the fuck, do you think you are, to tell anyone what they need?

A realist?

If you cannot defend your home with a rifle, revolver and a shotgun then you have no business with a weapon.

[Wild Cobra]

A realist?

If you cannot defend your home with a rifle, revolver and a shotgun then you have no business with a weapon.
I can drive to work and back in a lifeless VW. I choose, as personal preference for what I can afford, the 2002 Trans Am WS6. I don't need 340 HP to go to work and back. I can do that with a 40 HP VW if I wanted.

Who the fuck are you to tell someone what they should and should not have?

You're just a fucking authoritarian. Aren't you?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

:lol this indignant thing is cute.

You cannot have grenades or submachineguns either. You cannot take the M-60 to the range. You cannot make bombs to stop intruders.

Enforcement of regulation is by definition authoritarian and in cases of weapons there are a whole slew of examples. You seem to have a very naive concept of government.

[Wild Cobra]

But you, my Fuzzy Troll, want to go above and beyond what is reasonable.

[boutons_deux]

"beyond what is reasonable"

while what is "reasonable" for you is 300M+ guns and weak gun regulations poorly enforced.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You are welcome to say what you find reasonable. Neither of us speaks for anyone else. Your opinion that it's unreasonable is just as valid my contention that a ban of weapon types is reasonable.

You can act indignant and I will talk about gun policies and the efficacy of them in countries similar to our own like our NATO allies.

Really at the end of the day, in a realistic discussion of policy, there is zero merit in arguing that even this conservative SCOTUS would say any weapon control is unreasonable. Scalia is not exactly a constructionist and his take on the 1994 ban is already law. At that point it comes down to will of the people.

At that point you discuss the electorate. It's changing as evidenced by the black man in office right now. Hell, he was re-elected despite a stagnant economy and historically poor unemployment. It's why I laugh at comments about "America will never" this or that.

It's not 1982 anymore.

[mingus]

Excellent Freudian slip. Also, you could have called the police. Same chances they don't give two shits about your measly single revolver and come in and kill you both. You're lucky they didn't have legally and easily obtained AR15s.

This is where I differ with most liberals. They like you seem to be working of off the assumption that police in and of themselves are enough of a deterrence.

They/you should have to apologize to all the people who have been and are subject to damage that couldve been prevented or lessened had you not fear mongered/brainwashed/neutered them into not carrying a self-defense weapon. For you though, only the other side has to apologize.

[mingus]

You are changing the goal posts. This is not about people with automatic rifles. It is completely irrelevant my point/story.

And your point about calling the cops has been proven to be hollow. Cops are not a suffient detterence. The fact that you think they do tells me that you live in fantasy/MSNBC land. There are plenty of situations on record where self defense by firearm has been necessary. I read about them, but the mainstream media does not give them enough if any air ttime because they don't jive with their agenda. Wait, never mind, you will give them circulation if it happens to be a white guy shooting a black guy in self defense cause then you can spin it into a "hate" crime, and we know how much liberals love the race card.

[Wild Cobra]

Police will seldom respond until a crime is actually committed, or unless you are connected.

Wait, and it is often too late.

[mingus]

Shastafarian must have a thing for watching his loved ones getting fucked. Is Shastafarian Blake's troll?

[Wild Cobra]

Shastafarian must have a thing for watching his loved ones getting fucked. Is Shastafarian Blake's troll?
Maybe he's FuzzyChump?

[mingus]

I think regulating weapons misses the point. In most if not all of these cases of mass killings, early warning signs are there. I think that if you are housing one of these mentally unstable people and you fail to keep your guns on lock down so that they aren't accessible to these people, you shouldn't be let off the hook so easy. That's just as much of a problem IMO.

[Latarian Milton]

if my life was endangered i'd rather hope the batman would show up at the scene and rescue my ass rather than count on the cops to save me, they'll arrive but not before the crime is done and criminals gone. its your choice whether to keep some guns at home or in your car to ensure your own security or count on the police to protect your family and properties, but you don't have the right to make the choice for other people imho.

[leemajors]

Armed teachers should be flashing guns at bullies imo, seems pretty effective.

[Wild Cobra]

if my life was endangered i'd rather hope the batman would show up at the scene and rescue my ass rather than count on the cops to save me...
LOL...

Relying on someone else...

Typical liberal.

Why not do what you can to rely on yourself?

[Latarian Milton]

because im afraid the liberals would've taken my guns away from my hands and i ain't gonna fight fully armed thugs with my bare hands tbh

[Blake]

This is where I differ with most liberals. They like you seem to be working of off the assumption that police in and of themselves are enough of a deterrence.

They/you should have to apologize to all the people who have been and are subject to damage that couldve been prevented or lessened had you not fear mongered/brainwashed/neutered them into not carrying a self-defense weapon. For you though, only the other side has to apologize.

Lol fear mongering.

That's the job you and the NRA are doing.

[CosmicCowboy]

Lol fear mongering.

That's the job you and the NRA are doing.

Call it what you want. The Feinstein bill is DOA. No way that shit passes.

[Shastafarian]

Maybe it's the liberal pussy in me or maybe it's these FACTS about gun ownership

• Unintentional firearm death disproportionately affects children, with 16% of the
unintentional deaths occurring among youth under age 20.3
• Unintentional gun injuries account for 14% of all firearm deaths under age 15.3
• A gun in the home is a risk factor for household members to be shot fatally in their home.
• The risk of being killed appears particularly high among women, which reflects the increased
likelihood for a woman to be killed by her spouse, partner or family member rather than a
stranger
• People with a family member who has purchased a handgun are at increased risk of being
shot and killed
• Owning a gun may moderately increase the likelihood of fatally shooting another person
• On the whole, carrying a firearm does not guarantee protection and may increase injury
risk.**While individual circumstances vary, persons should take this into account this when
making decisions about firearm possession. Considering safety plans that provide alternatives
to firearms may be in order for individuals with minimal firearms experience.


I'll wait here for "those people don't know how to handle or hide their guns. Not our problem."

[Wild Cobra]

Maybe it's the liberal pussy in me or maybe it's these FACTS about gun ownership

• Unintentional firearm death disproportionately affects children, with 16% of the
unintentional deaths occurring among youth under age 20.3
• Unintentional gun injuries account for 14% of all firearm deaths under age 15.3
• A gun in the home is a risk factor for household members to be shot fatally in their home.
• The risk of being killed appears particularly high among women, which reflects the increased
likelihood for a woman to be killed by her spouse, partner or family member rather than a
stranger
• People with a family member who has purchased a handgun are at increased risk of being
shot and killed
• Owning a gun may moderately increase the likelihood of fatally shooting another person
• On the whole, carrying a firearm does not guarantee protection and may increase injury
risk.**While individual circumstances vary, persons should take this into account this when
making decisions about firearm possession. Considering safety plans that provide alternatives
to firearms may be in order for individuals with minimal firearms experience.


I'll wait here for "those people don't know how to handle or hide their guns. Not our problem."
OK...

16% unintended deaths in children under 20.3 years old... Seriously... 0.3 tears?

Calling a child one that is 20? How do they feel about it?

How many of these are teens exploring guns because they have pussy parents who are afraid to properly teach them?

unintended deaths of 14% of those under 15.3 years are unintentional... Again... point three years... AND--- That means 86% of death under 15.3 years are intentional...

How many teens are buying firearms legally, and do you think it will stop by adding more laws on the books...

Have you ever listened to yourself?

[Blake]

Shastafarian must have a thing for watching his loved ones getting fucked. Is Shastafarian Blake's troll?

not a very godly or intelligent post.

[Shastafarian]

Shastafarian must have a thing for watching his loved ones getting fucked. Is Shastafarian Blake's troll?

No I'm just smart enough to realize flashing a gun at people is pretty stupid. Unless that gun happens to be a rocket launcher.

[DMC]

:lol this indignant thing is cute.

You cannot have grenades or submachineguns either.

Yes you can.


You cannot take the M-60 to the range.

Yes you can


You cannot make bombs to stop intruders.

Yes you can.


Enforcement of regulation is by definition authoritarian and in cases of weapons there are a whole slew of examples. You seem to have a very naive concept of government.
You just aren't aware of the regulations, obviously. Stop talking.

[CosmicCowboy]

No I'm just smart enough to realize flashing a gun at people is pretty stupid. Unless that gun happens to be a rocket launcher.

Actually, rocket launchers make terrible self defense weapons.

[DMC]

Maybe it's the liberal pussy in me or maybe it's these FACTS about gun ownership

• Unintentional firearm death disproportionately affects children, with 16% of the
unintentional deaths occurring among youth under age 20.3
• Unintentional gun injuries account for 14% of all firearm deaths under age 15.3
• A gun in the home is a risk factor for household members to be shot fatally in their home.
• The risk of being killed appears particularly high among women, which reflects the increased
likelihood for a woman to be killed by her spouse, partner or family member rather than a
stranger
• People with a family member who has purchased a handgun are at increased risk of being
shot and killed
• Owning a gun may moderately increase the likelihood of fatally shooting another person
• On the whole, carrying a firearm does not guarantee protection and may increase injury
risk.**While individual circumstances vary, persons should take this into account this when
making decisions about firearm possession. Considering safety plans that provide alternatives
to firearms may be in order for individuals with minimal firearms experience.


I'll wait here for "those people don't know how to handle or hide their guns. Not our problem."
This is one of the stupidest posts ever on this forum.

Of course owning a gun increases the likelihood of shooting someone. The likelihood of shooting someone when you don't have a gun is nil.

The other points are just as stupid.

[Wild Cobra]

You cannot make bombs to stop intruders.
Wanna bet?

You can make it from your own pee and vasoline...

The Army's TM, Field Expedient Explosives is rather thorough. They stopped printing it long ago, and tried to take all copies of it out of circulation. An Army buddy of mine had it. I was amazed at the simple recipes in it.

[DMC]

No I'm just smart enough to realize flashing a gun at people is pretty stupid. Unless that gun happens to be a rocket launcher.

Explain the exception.

[DMC]

Wanna bet?

You can make it from your own pee and vasoline...

The Army's TM, Field Expedient Explosives is rather thorough. They stopped printing it long ago, and tried to take all copies of it out of circulation. An Army buddy of mine had it. I was amazed at the simple recipes in it.

You can legally purchase binary explosives and mix them in your own home, but you cannot transport them without a permit.

[Wild Cobra]

You can legally purchase binary explosives and mix them in your own home, but you cannot transport them without a permit.
I'm not the one disagreeing.

[DMC]

I wasn't correcting you.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

:lol. You guys build explosives and plant them in your front yard and see what happens.

Sure mixing a binary explosive like vinegar and baking soda is legal but you need a lot more rapid expansion to effectively mine your front yard.

WC likes playing with his own pee. This has been very...... ummm...... interesting.

[DMC]

:lol. You guys build explosives and plant them in your front yard and see what happens.

Nothing.


Sure mixing a binary explosive like vinegar and baking soda is legal but you need a lot more rapid expansion to effectively mine your front yard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tannerite


WC likes playing with his own pee. This has been very...... ummm...... interesting.
Ok

[CosmicCowboy]

Love me some tannerite. We set out cans at 400 yards and shoot them with the 22-250's. There is no doubt who hits it first.

[mingus]

Lol fear mongering.

That's the job you and the NRA are doing.

It is not black and white. Both sides are doing it. The link posted by your cuckhold friend in waiting clearly sows this. There is not need and it is completely irrational to turn in your gun(s). Get a safe. No one is getting into my safe. It is not that hard to be responsible and get a safe. People are completely missing the point if they think that they need to turn in their gun(s). They've been made stupid and feearful by the left who thinks that the better solution is the government taking away their gun rights--as well as the people who use and store them responsibly--when the more sensible solution is more personal accountability. That's a word the left hates however so I am not surprised.

[ChumpDumper]

It is not black and white. Both sides are doing it. The link posted by your cuckhold friend in waiting clearly sows this. There is not need and it is completely irrational to turn in your gun(s). Get a safe. No one is getting into my safe. It is not that hard to be responsible and get a safe. People are completely missing the point if they think that they need to turn in their gun(s). They've been made stupid and feearful by the left who thinks that the better solution is the government taking away their gun rights--as well as the people who use and store them responsibly--when the more sensible solution is more personal accountability. That's a word the left hates however so I am not surprised.Was your gun in your safe when those guys drove up to your house?

[mingus]

Maybe it's the liberal pussy in me or maybe it's these FACTS about gun ownership

• Unintentional firearm death disproportionately affects children, with 16% of the
unintentional deaths occurring among youth under age 20.3
• Unintentional gun injuries account for 14% of all firearm deaths under age 15.3
• A gun in the home is a risk factor for household members to be shot fatally in their home.
• The risk of being killed appears particularly high among women, which reflects the increased
likelihood for a woman to be killed by her spouse, partner or family member rather than a
stranger
• People with a family member who has purchased a handgun are at increased risk of being
shot and killed
• Owning a gun may moderately increase the likelihood of fatally shooting another person
• On the whole, carrying a firearm does not guarantee protection and may increase injury
risk.**While individual circumstances vary, persons should take this into account this when
making decisions about firearm possession. Considering safety plans that provide alternatives
to firearms may be in order for individuals with minimal firearms experience.


I'll wait here for "those people don't know how to handle or hide their guns. Not our problem."

I don't know what you are trying to prove with this post. Simply copying and pasting one-sided gun statistics is dumb.

[mingus]

Was your gun in your safe when those guys drove up to your house?

Yup.

[Clipper Nation]

You're right. We should just deregulate alcohol consumption completely.
Or maybe the average American parent should do a better job of educating their kids about basic common sense and self-control (two dying arts in this country) instead of begging the gub'mint to legislate it all away.....

What statists don't realize is that their beloved regulations don't mean shit to a population that seems to be more and more deficient in common sense and self-control by the year....

[cantthinkofanything]

Actually, rocket launchers make terrible self defense weapons.

not if you're being attacked by a bunch of dudes in a jeep

[Blake]

It is not black and white. Both sides are doing it. The link posted by your cuckhold friend in waiting clearly sows this.

How exactly do you scare someone out of buying a gun?

And lol I'm betting your God doesn't approve of your continued slanderous use of the word cuckold

[CosmicCowboy]

not if you're being attacked by a bunch of dudes in a jeep

If they are far enough away to use a rocket launcher you have plenty of time to pick them off with the AR.

[mingus]

You trying to turn this into a discussion about God is lame. There are plenty of God threads already on this board (God knows half of the were created by your God obsessed self), why not post in those instead of creating a Red Herring.

The link posted by Rastafarian should answer your question, unless you want to turn this into a lame semantical argument on the difference between giving away your weapons and not buying.

[baseline bum]

Excellent Freudian slip. Also, you could have called the police. Same chances they don't give two shits about your measly single revolver and come in and kill you both. You're lucky they didn't have legally and easily obtained AR15s.

LOL, the police don't give a shit, epsecially if that happens in a black neighborhood.

[Trainwreck2100]

well i'm sure they are tops in sword violence, and freaky porn game show violence

[Blake]

You trying to turn this into a discussion about God is lame. There are plenty of God threads already on this board (God knows half of the were created by your God obsessed self), why not post in those instead of creating a Red Herring.

You sliding the word cuck into every other post is lamer.

Just reminding you that your god is watching you.


The link posted by Rastafarian should answer your question, unless you want to turn this into a lame semantical argument on the difference between giving away your weapons and not buying.

I've done enough research and have read the logic coming from all sides of this issue outside this forum to solidify my own opinion. I'm really just having fun at your expense at this time.

FWIW, your anecdotal arguments blow.

[mingus]

How much you have researched is irrelevant. Research =/= good arguments, and unless I see something from you other than personal attacks, I'll just assume you don't have shit to bring to the table and are nothing more than my go to personal whipping boy/bitch

[thunderup]

Wow, this board is overwhelmingly and disgustingly liberal. DMC (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=20665) has taken numerous posters to the woodshed in gun related threads. Seeing all the usual libtards whimper around is hilarious.

& this is from someone who despises the GOP.

[DarkReign]

Wow, this board is overwhelmingly and disgustingly liberal. DMC (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=20665) has taken numerous posters to the woodshed in gun related threads. Seeing all the usual libtards whimper around is hilarious.

& this is from someone who despises the GOP.

None of this matters, anyway. Just know that in time, the gun-libs are going to win. As more and more people migrate to urban environs, the more they will accept not owning a gun or allowing others to. Fuzzy has his mind in the right place, but ultimately, he would quickly realize that this issue is a slippery slope that no politician intends to tread down. Obama has nothing to lose in that he cannot be re-elected, but Congress and the Senate have everything to lose.

I dont think it was a mistake that they wanted a month to investigate the possible legislation. Theyre waiting for the wind to blow and quite honestly, its already stopped blowing in places that arent a natural echo chamber.

I bought my rifle, true. Didnt pay out the nose however (holy shit right now...). I am happy with that. This "bill" about previous owners having to register and fingerprint is laughable. Good luck with that ATF!

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Wow, this board is overwhelmingly and disgustingly liberal. DMC (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=20665) has taken numerous posters to the woodshed in gun related threads. Seeing all the usual libtards whimper around is hilarious.

& this is from someone who despises the GOP.

This board isn't 'so liberal.' It's a Texas based board. What you are seeing is a good amount of people coming onto a Texas based forum and supporting the notion of gun control. That is called "the direction the wind is blowing."

[Blake]

How much you have researched is irrelevant. Research =/= good arguments, and unless I see something from you other than personal attacks, I'll just assume you don't have shit to bring to the table and are nothing more than my go to personal whipping boy/bitch

Research leads to good arguments but I already admitted that I'm not really bringing anything to the table.

I said I'm having fun at your expense. You're a raging gun toter that's not convincing anyone of anything except of how stupid you are.

lol whipping

[Wild Cobra]

This board isn't 'so liberal.' It's a Texas based board. What you are seeing is a good amount of people coming onto a Texas based forum and supporting the notion of gun control. That is called "the direction the wind is blowing."
Sure it is. I will suggest you entertain the thought that more liberals enjoy online forums than conservatives.

Anyone know of a poll?

[Blake]

Wow, this board is overwhelmingly and disgustingly liberal. DMC (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=20665) has taken numerous posters to the woodshed in gun related threads. Seeing all the usual libtards whimper around is hilarious.

& this is from someone who despises the GOP.

I sense a Ron Paul fan here.

[Blake]

Sure it is. I will suggest you entertain the thought that more liberals enjoy online forums than conservatives.

Anyone know of a poll?

too busy to look it up

[Wild Cobra]

too busy to look it up
Not that important to me. I think most people would agree the political section liberals are far more than the conservatives. Just because Texas is a red state doesn't automatically make the political forum here red.

[Blake]

Not that important to me.

Good thing since both of us are too busy to look it up

[DMC]

Sure it is. I will suggest you entertain the thought that more liberals enjoy online forums than conservatives.

Anyone know of a poll?

Based on the semantics of your statement, I'd have to agree. I don't know of many liberals who enjoy conservatives.

[Bill_Brasky]

I don't think that taking guns will solve anything. That being said, I don't really care too much for the way the NRA handled/responded to this. There are always a million coulda woulda shouldas, that doesn't change the fact that a guy with a gun killed a bunch of little kids and none of those fucks did anything about it either. Just stfu.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Based on the semantics of your statement, I'd have to agree. I don't know of many liberals who enjoy conservatives.

:lol

I'm in your room, Raleigh!

We do have you all butthurt. Your whining about our arguments to other people now. :lol

[Wild Cobra]

How many people have forgotten that a blade is the japanese weapon of choice, and the Gun is the US weapon of choice?

Any stats on Japanese blade weapon deaths, suicides, accidents, etc?

I think those of you holding on to the guns and Japanese idea must keep in mind the cultural differences, and look at those stats.

[DMC]

:lol

I'm in your room, Raleigh!

We do have you all butthurt. Your whining about our arguments to other people now. :lol

3 stalkers and counting lol

[mingus]

Research leads to good arguments but I already admitted that I'm not really bringing anything to the table.

I said I'm having fun at your expense. You're a raging gun toter that's not convincing anyone of anything except of how stupid you are.

lol whipping

I am not buying it but whatever. I think you said something retarded and was serious about it, which I then pointed out and you had no retaliation for, and you then try to act like you are just fucking with me. Funny thing is, I am not even raging. You can act like I am if it makes you feel better, though. God knows you cuckold ass needs something to feel good about.

[Blake]

I am not buying it but whatever. I think you said something retarded and was serious about it, which I then pointed out and you had no retaliation for, and you then try to act like you are just fucking with me. Funny thing is, I am not even raging. You can act like I am if it makes you feel better, though. God knows you cuckold ass needs something to feel good about.

lol not buying it. whatever it is.

God knows you need to continue to use the word cuckold to feel good about yourself.

[mingus]

lol not buying it. whatever it is.

God knows you need to continue to use the word cuckold to feel good about yourself.

I'm not buying that you've diverted this discussion for any other reason than what I said earlier.

The burden of proof is on you to show I'm in need of using the word.

[Blake]

I'm not buying that you've diverted this discussion for any other reason than what I said earlier.

The burden of proof is on you to show I'm in need of using the word.

I'm not making an argument, dumb ass. It's me and God's opinions that you need it.

And based on the number of times you've used it, it's our opinion that you need it bad.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I'm not buying that you've diverted this discussion for any other reason than what I said earlier.

The burden of proof is on you to show I'm in need of using the word.

Speaking of burden of proof, is there anything other than anecdotes and tough guy posturing that gives credence to the deterrence argument?

[DMC]

Speaking of burden of proof, is there anything other than anecdotes and tough guy posturing that gives credence to the deterrence argument?

Ever heard of Operation Ceasefire? Zero tolerance advertised to the offending groups. Or is that an anecdote?

You have to look at the common denominators for these shooters. They often want as many casualties as possible, and quite often they plan on being the last one. They aren't interested in suicide by cop though, so they do not go into zones where they might encounter opposing force. They are demented, but not retarded. You aren't deterring them by scaring them, but by making it much harder to get what they want. Even a 15 year old could put on a black suit and go into a school with small children and a few unarmed women and shoot everyone, and perhaps the officer wouldn't be able to stop all the killing, or any in every case, but we don't consider that with other things we use armed guards for, like armored trucks, banks, sporting events and such. How often to armored trucks get knocked over? Imagine the pickup was in a SUV with an unarmed female driving. How often would there be a holdup or shooting?

Deterrence.

[LnGrrrR]

I am just amazed that the NRA's argument came down to, "It's not GUNS that kill people, it's violent media!"

[Blake]

How often to armored trucks get knocked over?



STOCKTON (CBS13) – An armored truck employee was robbed of a large bag of cash on Thursday morning in Stockton.

The driver was delivering cash to an ATM machine in the 7500 block of Pacific Avenue at 11:35 a.m. As the employee took the the money bag from the truck, he heard the suspect call to him, looked up and was sprayed in the face with a “caustic chemical,” police said.

The suspect fled through the parking lot on a black mountain bike.

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2012/12/21/bag-of-cash-stolen-from-armored-truck-employee-in-front-of-atm/

[Blake]

DETROIT (WWJ) -Detroit police have recovered an armored vehicle that was stolen during a robbery.

Detroit police said it all unfolded at 7:15 a.m. Monday in the 6400 block of Strong — when two masked men approached workers servicing an ATM and disarmed them.

http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2012/09/24/breaking-armored-truck-stolen-in-detroit/

[Blake]

Armored Vehicle Stolen From School District Parking Lot In Thousand Oaks

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/10/26/armored-vehicle-stolen-from-school-district-parking-lot-in-thousand-oaks/

[Blake]

HOUSTON (KTRK) -- The search is on for the man who stole an armored truck at the Kroger in the Heights yesterday.

The FBI has been counting cash to see how much was stolen during this heist, though they never release exact figures. It was a bold robbery in the middle of the afternoon, two against one, and at the busy gas Kroger gas station on North Shepherd at 11th Street.

Business never really stopped. Pumps remained open despite gunfire in the parking lot that stopped Rosemary Perez right in her tracks.

"We heard three, then two seconds later, another three. It was six shots," Perez said.

http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=8481285

[Blake]

Armored truck stolen at gunpoint from Michigan Department of Treasury in Sterling Heights

http://www.wxyz.com/dpp/news/region/macomb_county/armored-truck-stolen-at-gunpoint-in-sterling-heights

[DMC]

Now compare that to convenience store robbery where the risk is less and the reward is much much less.

Do you want to take the stance that deterrence is a myth? Do you really believe that?

Do you think the only thing that stops most people from walking into a bank with a gun and demanding money is personal moral fiber? Surely it's the threat of a few things, like imprisonment, meeting someone with a gun, being shot... that kind of stuff. All of that is a deterrent. If it's not, then we sure have a nation of fine upstanding citizens.

[DMC]

I am just amazed that the NRA's argument came down to, "It's not GUNS that kill people, it's violent media!"

I don't think it came to that. They said the media shares some blame for these things. Even the Port Arthur shooter got much of his motivation from media reports on another shooting where they spent an insane amount of time discussing and advertising the shooter, his numbers, comparing them to other shooters etc... His lawyer said as much later.

The media didn't make these people crazy, didn't arm them, but they do their part in the training.

[Wild Cobra]

I am just amazed that the NRA's argument came down to, "It's not GUNS that kill people, it's violent media!"
Well, once they do away with our 2nd amendment right, what's to keep them from taking away our first?

[Latarian Milton]

Ever heard of Operation Ceasefire? Zero tolerance advertised to the offending groups. Or is that an anecdote?

You have to look at the common denominators for these shooters. They often want as many casualties as possible, and quite often they plan on being the last one. They aren't interested in suicide by cop though, so they do not go into zones where they might encounter opposing force. They are demented, but not retarded. You aren't deterring them by scaring them, but by making it much harder to get what they want. Even a 15 year old could put on a black suit and go into a school with small children and a few unarmed women and shoot everyone, and perhaps the officer wouldn't be able to stop all the killing, or any in every case, but we don't consider that with other things we use armed guards for, like armored trucks, banks, sporting events and such. How often to armored trucks get knocked over? Imagine the pickup was in a SUV with an unarmed female driving. How often would there be a holdup or shooting?

Deterrence.

deterrence ain't gonna work when the shooter is poised to include himself in the casualities list. cops can't frisk everyone entering the school yard and they wouldn't spot anyone as a potential shooter until he brings his gun out and starts shooting. it's not like the gunner will wait till the cops arrive and the shooting time will last no longer than an earthquake, which means the teachers and students could hardly take any actions to protect themselves unless they have their own guns at hand.

you have armed guards for banks or trucks and it only works because the robbers would assault the targets for the only purpose of taking the cash away, and it would make no sense to them if they lose their lives which makes it totally different from the case of sandy hook. you don't have no real deterrent that works against criminals who're ready to die tbh

[mingus]

I'm not making an argument, dumb ass. It's me and God's opinions that you need it.

And based on the number of times you've used it, it's our opinion that you need it bad.

By your logic, you need to use word God, because it is used heavily in your vocabulary. Is that true? Number of times word used =\= need to use that word. Moron.

[mingus]

Speaking of burden of proof, is there anything other than anecdotes and tough guy posturing that gives credence to the deterrence argument?

Your question assumes there is more than anecdotal arguments and that there is evidence in the form of reliable statistics (similar to the extent of those that state how many people die from guns by accident annually, how many people shoot themselves in themselves in the foot accidently, etc) that give it credence. I don't know if that is true. I don't know if deterrence events are kept on record and/or they've been organized in a statistically reliable way (reliable enough to say it doesn't work).

[Wild Cobra]

By your logic, you need to use word God, because it is used heavily in your vocabulary. Is that true? Number of times word used =\= need to use that word. Moron.
May I suggest you copy this somewhere for quick use:

≠

[rascal]

LOL

You have no idea. I was young and bulletproof. It was not a situation where cops could be called and there was a lot of money/product involved. Bad guys wanted both. I don't give a fuck what you do or don't buy. I prevented a homicide and negotiated an honorable solution for both parties involved.

Now you prevented a homicide. lol
Keep dreaming.

[rascal]

There are a couple reasons I won't ever turn in my .357. Here's one: about five years ago I was dating a girl who was being followed in her car by at least two other men from Wallmart. She didn't have a cell with her, so she drove to my house with them tagging right behind her. She runs up to my house banging on the door to let her in. I open and she tells me what's happening. The suburban is parked in front of my house. I run to get my gun and flash it so that they can see it and they take off like the pussies they were.

What if I didn't have a gun though? Maybe I get overpowered by both of them and they rape her. This is the part liberals don't consider. Those are the kinds of things having a gun prevents. It's a personal anecdote, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who has benefited from having a weapon. I acknowledge the other side of the argument--that they've helped facilitate massacres, killings etc. But it seems as if the liberals on this board and elsewhere aren't considering the other side of their argument. Until that happens, we can't have a serious debate about fun control.

They would have left had you had no gun. They were probably just young punks having some fun and screwing around with her because they saw that she was overeating in a panic way. You are over stating the importance of the gun.

[Wild Cobra]

They would have left had you had no gun. They were probably just young punks having some fun and screwing around with her because they saw that she was overeating in a panic way. You are over stating the importance of the gun.
I assume you have first had experience...

[rascal]

This is one of the stupidest posts ever on this forum.

Of course owning a gun increases the likelihood of shooting someone. The likelihood of shooting someone when you don't have a gun is nil.

The other points are just as stupid.

Not stupid at all. Those are facts you want to close your eyes to.

[rascal]

I think regulating weapons misses the point. In most if not all of these cases of mass killings, early warning signs are there. I think that if you are housing one of these mentally unstable people and you fail to keep your guns on lock down so that they aren't accessible to these people, you shouldn't be let off the hook so easy. That's just as much of a problem IMO.

Your a fool if you think you can identify who will carry out a mass killing. There are millions of social misfits in the country just try identifying which ones will carry out a mass killing is impossible.

[mingus]

Your a fool if you think you can identify who will carry out a mass killing. There are millions of social misfits in the country just try identifying which ones will carry out a mass killing is impossible.

What? I never said you can identify specifically who will carry out a mass shooting. But, taking preventative measures against people more prone to carry out mass shooting doesnt require that. However I think if warning signs were paid more attention to and followed through with, and on top of that these killers didn't have access to guns because of their mental instability, we could dramatically decrease the frequency of firearms (automatic or otherwise) used for mass killings. It's just easier, more politically correct, and conistent with its anti-gun agenda, for the mainstream media to blame guns rather than negligent, unaccountable people who enable these events.

Off topic, but what's funny as hell in all of this is how the Hollywood elite is seemingly MIA in this entire debate. Not surprising given 90% of movies are based on to some degree gun violence and glorification.

[monosylab1k]

also, Japan is a very strange country... Like strangers meeting up to commit suicide together. America has the few odd occurrences but its not very prevalent.

Well at least the crazy people there just kill themselves instead of a school full of kids.

[leemajors]

What? I never said you can identify specifically who will carry out a mass shooting. But, taking preventative measures against people more prone to carry out mass shooting doesnt require that. However I think if warning signs were paid more attention to and followed through with, and on top of that these killers didn't have access to guns because of their mental instability, we could dramatically decrease the frequency of firearms (automatic or otherwise) used for mass killings. It's just easier, more politically correct, and conistent with its anti-gun agenda, for the mainstream media to blame guns rather than negligent, unaccountable people who enable these events.

Off topic, but what's funny as hell in all of this is how the Hollywood elite is seemingly MIA in this entire debate. Not surprising given 90% of movies are based on to some degree gun violence and glorification.

there are no simple solutions, why are you surprised?

[LnGrrrR]

Well, once they do away with our 2nd amendment right, what's to keep them from taking away our first?

You completely missed my point. The NRA often says that GUNS don't kill people, people kill people. If you're taking that stance, then it's silly to blame violent media.

[LnGrrrR]

I don't think it came to that. They said the media shares some blame for these things. Even the Port Arthur shooter got much of his motivation from media reports on another shooting where they spent an insane amount of time discussing and advertising the shooter, his numbers, comparing them to other shooters etc... His lawyer said as much later.

The media didn't make these people crazy, didn't arm them, but they do their part in the training.

Using that logic, the gun certainly held a part in the incident as well. Without the gun, the killing spree would've been a lot harder to pull off. If you're going to hold people responsible for their own decisions, don't blame it on the media. It's a copout.

[DMC]

Using that logic, the gun certainly held a part in the incident as well. Without the gun, the killing spree would've been a lot harder to pull off. If you're going to hold people responsible for their own decisions, don't blame it on the media. It's a copout.

The problem with that is that it's the media who quickly finds ways to not hold people to their own decisions. On the same CNN page was "Do we focus too much on the shooters?" and the next story was "The shooter's father, who is he?" They have the entire stage and they no longer report news, they concoct it and use it strategically to sway public opinion. I don't care about the NRA, it wouldn't bother me if they totally dissolved. If there's culpability of an inanimate object, then there's culpability for actively programming fertile minds. The tobacco industry is still paying a huge amount for lawsuits centered around them advertising to kids. People still had the choice to not smoke however. The courts didn't really focus on that.

[Blake]

By your logic, you need to use word God, because it is used heavily in your vocabulary. Is that true? Number of times word used =\= need to use that word. Moron.

Yes, I need to use the word God in order to point out what a hypocrite you are.

similar to how I would need to use the word stupid in order to point out how stupid you are, which in turn fills my need for entertainment.

[rascal]

What? I never said you can identify specifically who will carry out a mass shooting. But, taking preventative measures against people more prone to carry out mass shooting doesnt require that. However I think if warning signs were paid more attention to and followed through with, and on top of that these killers didn't have access to guns because of their mental instability, we could dramatically decrease the frequency of firearms (automatic or otherwise) used for mass killings. It's just easier, more politically correct, and conistent with its anti-gun agenda, for the mainstream media to blame guns rather than negligent, unaccountable people who enable these events.

Off topic, but what's funny as hell in all of this is how the Hollywood elite is seemingly MIA in this entire debate. Not surprising given 90% of movies are based on to some degree gun violence and glorification.

How do you propose to take preventative measures against people who are more prone to carry out mass shootings without identifying those likely to commit the crimes?

[DMC]

How do you propose to take preventative measures against people who are more prone to carry out mass shootings without identifying those likely to commit the crimes?

Defense. How do you stop people from coming into your home to hurt you if you don't know who it's going to be?

[mingus]

Where/when have I ever stated what God I believe in? Provide a link. You don't know what you are talking about. I am a theist. I don't believe in any particular God. Me calling you a cuckold has made you crazy, apparently enough so that you have deluded yourself into thinking you have a basis for knowing what God I believe in and what value system my theism asks of me. Which, for the record, does not morally preclude me from calling you what you are--a fucking cuckold.

[mingus]

How do you propose to take preventative measures against people who are more prone to carry out mass shootings without identifying those likely to commit the crimes?

You are changing your point. You originally stated it is impossible to identify who will carry through with a mass shooting. No shit. This is not Minority Report. I responded that we can label a group of people more likely to carry out mass shootings, and take preventative measures based on that. That is not to say we can identify specifically who is going to commit mass killings.

I don't get your beef.

[DMC]

Where/when have I ever stated what God I believe in? Provide a link. You don't know what you are talking about. I am a theist. I don't believe in any particular God. Me calling you a cuckold has made you crazy, apparently enough so that you have deluded yourself into thinking you have a basis for knowing what God I believe in and what value system my theism asks of me. Which, for the record, does not morally preclude me from calling you what you are--a fucking cuckold.

ouch

[rascal]

You are changing your point. You originally stated it is impossible to identify who will carry through with a mass shooting. No shit. This is not Minority Report. I responded that we can label a group of people more likely to carry out mass shootings, and take preventative measures based on that. That is not to say we can identify specifically who is going to commit mass killings.

I don't get your beef.

No point was changed. How can you label a group of people more likely to carry out mass shootings and take preventative measures on that? You say we can? How ?

Same point. Because you need to identify who is likely to carry out mass shootings in the first place to label them in a group.

[rascal]

Defense. How do you stop people from coming into your home to hurt you if you don't know who it's going to be?

I don't live in fear of someone coming into my house and trying to hurt me.

[DMC]

I don't live in fear of someone coming into my house and trying to hurt me.

So you leave your doors unlocked?

I can see that, mentally, you're damaged goods. However, let me ask you a very simple question:

Why would anyone put valuables in a safe if they don't know who's going to try to steal them?

[mingus]

No point was changed. How can you label a group of people more likely to carry out mass shootings and take preventative measures on that? You say we can? How ?

Same point. Because you need to identify who is likely to carry out mass shootings in the first place to label them in a group.

Okay, I guess I missenterpreted what you said in the previous post.

I don't know specifically what can be done. Not because I don't think there are some good ideas, but because it is all hypothetical and I don't feeling like arguing about any further a hypothetical. But I do think a more rational, balanced, and fair approach can be taken, instead of the the one taken by liberals, which misses the point and penalizes many gun owners, the vast majority of whom never cause any problems and probably never will.

[Wild Cobra]

You completely missed my point. The NRA often says that GUNS don't kill people, people kill people. If you're taking that stance, then it's silly to blame violent media.
But those blaming guns should blame the media. Right? To what end?

[Blake]

Where/when have I ever stated what God I believe in? Provide a link. You don't know what you are talking about. I am a theist. I don't believe in any particular God. Me calling you a cuckold has made you crazy, apparently enough so that you have deluded yourself into thinking you have a basis for knowing what God I believe in and what value system my theism asks of me. Which, for the record, does not morally preclude me from calling you what you are--a fucking cuckold.

I don't buy it but whatever. #lolmingus


One of my favorite quotes is the one by Einstein that goes "Religion without science is blind, science without religion is lame".

He was a pretty smart guy.

[Blake]

ouch

lol desperate for the rain of shit to stop

[mingus]

I don't buy it but whatever. #lolmingus

Where does that say that I am morally compromising myself by calling you what you are?

Did you just look through my post history to try (and fail) to make a point about me on New Years Eve?

LOL #butthurt#

[rogues]

Where does that say that I am morally compromising myself by calling you what you are?

Did you just look through my post history to try (and fail) to make a point about me on New Years Eve?

LOL #butthurt#

:lmao the cuck hates hates theism cause it more than likely failed him in getting a stable marriage; hence his wife getting plowed by a Jesus loving man while Blake watched..

:lmao cuck queer with CD-like trolling method..

[mavs>spurs]

i feel sorry for you liberals when shit gets poppin

[Blake]

Where does that say that I am morally compromising myself by calling you what you are?

Did you just look through my post history to try (and fail) to make a point about me on New Years Eve?

LOL #butthurt#

Im saying it, idiot. I can't make it any clearer.

#dumbfuckmingus

[Blake]

:lmao the cuck hates hates theism cause it more than likely failed him in getting a stable marriage; hence his wife getting plowed by a Jesus loving man while Blake watched..

:lmao cuck queer with CD-like trolling method..

m>s with the m>s cuck fallback line method per the ol usual

[DMC]

lol desperate for the rain of shit to stop

Not like the rain of semen on your wife's face.

[Blake]

Not like the rain of semen on your wife's face.

nope

[The Reckoning]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/12/17/off-duty-cop-prevents-mass-shooting-in-san-antonio/

anyone hear of this yet? good thing someone had a gun. why hasnt this made headlines? would it have if there wasnt someone there with a gun?