Who needs an AR-15???

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

I don't think that means we need 280 million guns.

Opinions vary.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[Skyrad 0]

Bignugget

***Also if you ever watched the show 'Yukon men'
[of course it isn't MTV with action packed stars like the folks from jersey shore and tila tequila]

but if you ever watched Yukon Men you would see one of the gentlemen hunting with an AR. He even uses iron sights.

I know you guys might not realize this, so Ill point it out directly.


Shooting bambi in the face, generally ends bambis life.


guns have no purpose EXCEPT to end life.

Thats why the Secret Service choose GUNS as their weapon of choice against a would be assassin of your beloved Obama. They are most effective at ending the life of someone/thing.

Guns weren't designed to "shoot targets at the olympics" the olympic sport was developed to SHOWCASE how well people are at shooting a tiny target (you know, like the heart of an animal or person)

Yep...same with javelin.

The javelin wasn't developed so that people could practice throwing shit a long way.

The spear was developed to kill things, and then they developed CONTESTS to compete and further the skill set of throwing a spear to kill things.

Your lack of knoweldge on firearms is evident, trying to have a discussion on them with you, is like asking someone what car they drive and being given the answer 'a red one'. Best you research a subject and engage brain before going very verbose.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[Croc 0]

OK. I will answer your question directly: I need an AR-15 to kill people, should it become necessary.

"Here's a good specimen of my own wisdom. Something is so, except when it isn't so."

Charles Fort, commenting on the many contradictions of astronomy

[propblast 0]

airtwardo

Quote

I don't think that means we need 280 million guns.

Opinions vary.

Something about opinions and assholes...

----------------------------------------------------------
It is to obvious that he hates the tool for no reason and cant come up with a real arguement. When backed into a cornor, brings pot into a discussion that isnt about it and generally cant make a arguement and keeps going to the premise that they are bad.

He has a myopic opinion that everyone goes to the grocery and buys steaks out of the freezer.

I understand the want for a utopia, but I do believe as everyone has pointed out, that this tool actually helps create a better society.

It appears as though that arguement is lost on him.

Hoplophobia. That is all it is.

Have fun skydiving, Bignugget. I am headed out to do the same.

Propblast

[Lefty 0]

Croc

OK. I will answer your question directly: I need an AR-15 to kill people, should it become necessary.

Pretty much that. Though, I would prefer to say that I need an AR-15 to keep people from killing me by killing them, if need be.

Not that I would ever buy an AR. I prefer the AK variants.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[Bignugget 0]

propblast

***

Quote

I don't think that means we need 280 million guns.

Opinions vary.

Something about opinions and assholes...

----------------------------------------------------------
It is to obvious that he hates the tool for no reason and cant come up with a real arguement. When backed into a cornor, brings pot into a discussion that isnt about it and generally cant make a arguement and keeps going to the premise that they are bad.

He has a myopic opinion that everyone goes to the grocery and buys steaks out of the freezer.

I understand the want for a utopia, but I do believe as everyone has pointed out, that this tool actually helps create a better society.

It appears as though that arguement is lost on him.

Hoplophobia. That is all it is.

Have fun skydiving, Bignugget. I am headed out to do the same.


No skydiving today for me ;[

Hate might be a bit strong.

I would certainly say:

I disagree passionately that 280 million guns in the United States makes the world a better place.


I keep going to the premise that they were designed to end life....because that's where the discussion should begin.

[Lefty 0]

Quote

I keep going to the premise that they were designed to end life....because that's where the discussion should begin.

Okay, let's begin the discussion there. Yes, firearms are designed to end life. My turn to make a point: Ending a life (human or otherwise) isn't necessarily a bad thing all the time. It can actually be a moral, justified, and beneficial action. Your turn.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[Bignugget 0]

Lefty

Quote

I keep going to the premise that they were designed to end life....because that's where the discussion should begin.

Okay, let's begin the discussion there. Yes, firearms are designed to end life. My turn to make a point: Ending a life (human or otherwise) isn't necessarily a bad thing all the time. It can actually be a moral, justified, and beneficial action. Your turn.

Let me start by saying, I don't believe violence is moral, justified, or beneficial.

As far as ending life goes,

Agreed. Hunting for food isn't (in my eyes immoral). I am for assisted and unassisted suicide, and support womens' right to choose to end pregnancy. Those are a few examples I can think of where I support ending life.

I wouldn't argue with you that sometimes ending life is the most humane thing to do for someone or something.

Guns are a great tool to use to end life. No argument there. They were designed for a purpose and serve that purpose quite well.

Does that mean I think we should have 280 million floating around? No.

My problem is the job itself, not the tool.

Since the job itself (ending life, violently or otherwise) is never going to go away, in my eyes having 280 million less ways to do it, is a good thing.

Some of you passionately disagree, that's fine. I would still try to help you out were I to witness someone committing acts of violence against you. But maybe its just how I was raised.

[Lefty 0]

Quote

Let me start by saying, I don't believe violence is moral, justified, or beneficial.

As far as ending life goes,

Agreed. Hunting for food isn't (in my eyes immoral). I am for assisted and unassisted suicide, and support womens' right to choose to end pregnancy. Those are a few examples I can think of where I support ending life.

I wouldn't argue with you that sometimes ending life is the most humane thing to do for someone or something.

Guns are a great tool to use to end life. No argument there. They were designed for a purpose and serve that purpose quite well.

Does that mean I think we should have 280 million floating around? No.

My problem is the job itself, not the tool.

Since the job itself (ending life, violently or otherwise) is never going to go away, in my eyes having 280 million less ways to do it, is a good thing.

Some of you passionately disagree, that's fine. I would still try to help you out were I to witness someone committing acts of violence against you. But maybe its just how I was raised.

Ah. So your point depends on a magic wand being waved and all the unjustified violence and the need for justified responses to it disappearing. Guns are just a side issue, it seems. It's a pleasant thought, but not really one that can be argued over in a practical sense. No need to beat my head against a wall trying to convince you otherwise, then.

Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful.
-Calvin

[champu 1]

Lefty

Okay, let's begin the discussion there. Yes, firearms are designed to end life. My turn to make a point: Ending a life (human or otherwise) isn't necessarily a bad thing all the time. It can actually be a moral, justified, and beneficial action. Your turn.

Well and, despite being designed to kill, they don't necessarily have to kill people or even be fired to get the job done. Police all carry guns and few ever actually have to shoot anyone with them.

In some cases people they are "used on" will fair better than other weapons. Compare an AR-15/Remington 870/whatever your preference and a baseball bat when used for home defense by a fit but not particularly large or intimidating person. If all I have is a baseball bat I pretty much have to try and sneak up on the person and hit them with it to defend myself. I'm not going to confront someone who broke into my house holding a baseball bat, and I'm certainly not going to hide with the baseball bat and hope they just go away. Meanwhile you can point an AR-15/Remington 870 at someone and say "get out of my house or I'll shoot you." Or you can cycle the bolt/slide without even getting them in view and if they recognize the sound, that might be enough of a deterrent and they'll get out of your house.

With guns, no one has to get hit over the head with a baseball bat.

[lawrocket 3]

[Reply]His question implied both were unarmed, and the one simply physically outmatches the other.

[oldwomanc6 38]

Bignugget

***

Quote

I keep going to the premise that they were designed to end life....because that's where the discussion should begin.

Okay, let's begin the discussion there. Yes, firearms are designed to end life. My turn to make a point: Ending a life (human or otherwise) isn't necessarily a bad thing all the time. It can actually be a moral, justified, and beneficial action. Your turn.

Let me start by saying, I don't believe violence is moral, justified, or beneficial.

As far as ending life goes,

Agreed. Hunting for food isn't (in my eyes immoral). I am for assisted and unassisted suicide, and support womens' right to choose to end pregnancy. Those are a few examples I can think of where I support ending life.

I wouldn't argue with you that sometimes ending life is the most humane thing to do for someone or something.

Guns are a great tool to use to end life. No argument there. They were designed for a purpose and serve that purpose quite well.

Does that mean I think we should have 280 million floating around? No.

My problem is the job itself, not the tool.

Since the job itself (ending life, violently or otherwise) is never going to go away, in my eyes having 280 million less ways to do it, is a good thing.

Some of you passionately disagree, that's fine. I would still try to help you out were I to witness someone committing acts of violence against you. But maybe its just how I was raised.



And how do you propose the removal of "280 mil" guns to be carried out?

lisa
WSCR 594
FB 1023
CBDB 9

[regulator 0]

Ahh yes I remember quite well when I was around 12 my parents went to mexico and it was the day we were going to leave and my parents were loading up on bottles of mexican vanilla and some weird bottle of booze my dad wanted. Me...yeah I had my eyes on this switchblade I passed by before. I had enough money and I went and bought it. I would say within a week of me flipping that cheap blade back and forth it crapped out before I knew it. It found its way into the trashcan.

[Bignugget 0]

Lefty

Quote

Let me start by saying, I don't believe violence is moral, justified, or beneficial.

As far as ending life goes,

Agreed. Hunting for food isn't (in my eyes immoral). I am for assisted and unassisted suicide, and support womens' right to choose to end pregnancy. Those are a few examples I can think of where I support ending life.

I wouldn't argue with you that sometimes ending life is the most humane thing to do for someone or something.

Guns are a great tool to use to end life. No argument there. They were designed for a purpose and serve that purpose quite well.

Does that mean I think we should have 280 million floating around? No.

My problem is the job itself, not the tool.

Since the job itself (ending life, violently or otherwise) is never going to go away, in my eyes having 280 million less ways to do it, is a good thing.

Some of you passionately disagree, that's fine. I would still try to help you out were I to witness someone committing acts of violence against you. But maybe its just how I was raised.

Ah. So your point depends on a magic wand being waved and all the unjustified violence and the need for justified responses to it disappearing. Guns are just a side issue, it seems. It's a pleasant thought, but not really one that can be argued over in a practical sense. No need to beat my head against a wall trying to convince you otherwise, then.

Not at all what I said.

In fact I said violence will never disappear. Emphasis added to my original comments in case you missed it.

[Bignugget 0]

oldwomanc6

******

Quote

I keep going to the premise that they were designed to end life....because that's where the discussion should begin.

Okay, let's begin the discussion there. Yes, firearms are designed to end life. My turn to make a point: Ending a life (human or otherwise) isn't necessarily a bad thing all the time. It can actually be a moral, justified, and beneficial action. Your turn.

Let me start by saying, I don't believe violence is moral, justified, or beneficial.

As far as ending life goes,

Agreed. Hunting for food isn't (in my eyes immoral). I am for assisted and unassisted suicide, and support womens' right to choose to end pregnancy. Those are a few examples I can think of where I support ending life.

I wouldn't argue with you that sometimes ending life is the most humane thing to do for someone or something.

Guns are a great tool to use to end life. No argument there. They were designed for a purpose and serve that purpose quite well.

Does that mean I think we should have 280 million floating around? No.

My problem is the job itself, not the tool.

Since the job itself (ending life, violently or otherwise) is never going to go away, in my eyes having 280 million less ways to do it, is a good thing.

Some of you passionately disagree, that's fine. I would still try to help you out were I to witness someone committing acts of violence against you. But maybe its just how I was raised.



And how do you propose the removal of "280 mil" guns to be carried out?

Well step one is get people to agree that having 280 million less ways to kill each other is a good thing, not a bad thing.

Step 2, elect me supreme dictator general.


----But in all honesty----

I am perfectly aware i am an idealist. I know they will never remove 280 million guns from the United States.....

It doesn't change my belief that the world and specifically the United States would be better off with 280 million less ways to kill each other.

[Bignugget 0]

lawrocket

[Reply]His question implied both were unarmed, and the one simply physically outmatches the other.

Or four simply outmatch the other. It happened to Bernard Goetz. A man who was always physically outmatched. He equalized it. Yes, life sucks for the runt. The crippled. The elderly. The weak. Women.

Goetz was denied a permit for a gun because he couldn't demonstrate sufficient "need." Fundamentally, self-protection against death or great bodily injury is not considered a "need." Get the shit beaten out of you. Hope someone calls the police and enjoy the hospital stay.

Guns are an equalizer. The small and meek are equals with the large and strong. When you've got "victim" written on you from birth and cannot afford security or escorts 24/7, a weapon is nice to have.

Note: I saw the discussion earlier about banned weapons. Brass knuckles are a good example of a widely banned weapon that does not wreak mass destruction but is banned, anyway. Switchblades are another weapon that are no more harmful than another typ of knife. They do, however, present an advantage as a defensive weapon due to the speed in which they can be deployed. Of course, they present little to no offensive advantage. (Note: I, myself, think that a weapon with a spring is bound to fail when a person needs one).

So why are switchblades banned? I cannot think of a legitimate reason other than to find a reason to arrest the type of people who would carry a switchblade. Or brass knuckles. Probably based on the Hollywood presentation of gansters and criminals as carrying switchblades. Get rid of switchblades and get rid of criminals.

Ban nunchuks. Ban throwing knives. Why? Think of some decent reasons.

[dmcoco84 4]

Quote

Step 2, elect me supreme dictator general.

Where I would then assassinate you... with my smuggled Full Auto AK-47, from China.

You are not an idealist.... you are a delusional-ist; who ignores human nature and history.

[Bignugget 0]

You can't skip step 1.

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

The point being that these "toys" can do some serious damage... More than your average handgun.

You just make that up? You have any ballistics data to back that up? Any statistical analysis of fatalities due to firearm or caliber types?

Didn't think so.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[dmcoco84 4]

You've been speaking about the quantity of firearms in the USA... not the entire world; I can quote you if you like. If you are going to backtrack on that, there are far more than 300 million in the entire world.

Where I'm also curious how you will be able to collectively suck the knowledge of how to make (not only AR, AK rifles, but any version of a firearm/rifle) them, out of the collective minds of those on the planet... and prevent new one from being made.

Or maybe its simple, we should send all the firearm makers/designers and anyone who has knowledge about making firearms, to concentration camps.

But of course the panel of experts that are assigned to determine if you have that knowledge, will then also have to be sent to the concentration camps.

And of course, we should send all the Jews too!

Jews... its always their fault.



You are not an idealist. You are bored, and pathetic.

[AggieDave 6]

quade

"You are entering a world of pain." -- Walter Sobchak

This isn't Nam, there are rules...

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[ryoder 1,387]

AggieDave

***"You are entering a world of pain." -- Walter Sobchak

This isn't Nam, there are rules...

Come on Dave, it's just--it's Nataly.
So her toe slipped over a little, it's just a thread.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[AggieDave 6]

ryoder

******"You are entering a world of pain." -- Walter Sobchak

This isn't Nam, there are rules...

Come on Dave, it's just--it's Nataly.
So her toe slipped over a little, it's just a thread.

Do you see what happens Larry...

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[devildog 0]

Kennedy

knives over six inches

I can kill you with a 1" knife or a butter knife. Just sayin' :)

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

[turtlespeed 212]

Lefty

Quote

I keep going to the premise that they were designed to end life....because that's where the discussion should begin.

Okay, let's begin the discussion there. Yes, firearms are designed to end life. My turn to make a point: Ending a life (human or otherwise) isn't necessarily a bad thing all the time. It can actually be a moral, justified, and beneficial action. Your turn.

Weapons of any kind, including guns, were developed to protect the user by means of injuring another up to and/or including ending the life of the person or people intending harm to the weapon holder.

Weapons are a form of protection.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun