pop

You know I've been very lucky in that I have had a chance to live in more countries then 95% of the people on here will get to visit in their life time, and in that I had a chance to learn other cultures and their political views. I am also lucky in that I get to travel yearly around the world and speak with people outside our borders. The general peception the world has of Americans is that they are gun loving, uneducated, fat, and ignorant. I cant really argue with gun loving. We have the highest gun related murder rate in the world. I cant ague with uneducated. In 12th grade I was doing the same math I was doing in 5th grade in the USSR. I cant argue with fat....just look around. But I have always backed up Americans on the ignorance issue. A country that is the greatest Empire of our time cannot possibly be ignorant. Reading some of the opinions in this thread makes me want to revisit my views on Americans and ignorance. I am moving on to another topic. 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

It's a little tough to believe that guns are working when we have the highest gun related murder rate in the world. 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

I am not even talking about making it harder to own gun. I don’t believe guns (and any other warfare objects/tools) should be manufactured and sold to average citizens. The more guns you take off the market and continue to keep off, the less there are to go around for the criminals...approximately 300,000+ less per year. 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

It's pretty awesome

I can tell you I wouldnt harm anyone with it, but I cant say the same for the person who one day robs my house and takes my unsecured weapons from me. I cant guarantee that another innocent life will not be lost through the use of my stolen weapons, but I know if I wasnt allowed to own this stuff, it wouldnt have been stolen from my huose in the first place. 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

Really? You think its okay to own an atomic bomb, as long as we dont use it? If that's the case Iran shuold get one. It's only an object...it cant do anything. We all shuold get one....just in case that bad guys come around. Is it okay to own a kilo of cocaine as long as its not being used? Our laws do not see it that way Dont quit on me yet Mikey. Atom bombs? C'mon, dude...put down the blunt. Go read up on the purpose of the second amenment and get back to me. I know its a reduiculous example, but the point I am making is that there are tons of "objects" that are illegal for a reason, and they are illegal whther being used or not. Some even have positive qualities (coke used to be used in minor surgeries to reduce blood flow and minimize pain). You are arguing its the use, and not the tool. I am arguing its both. Yes, it's a rediculous example. The tool is not self aware - it takes a human to use it, for good or ill. I want to buy dynamite and live grenades for decoration. Should I be able to do that? 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

Really? You think its okay to own an atomic bomb, as long as we dont use it? If that's the case Iran shuold get one. It's only an object...it cant do anything. We all shuold get one....just in case that bad guys come around. Is it okay to own a kilo of cocaine as long as its not being used? Our laws do not see it that way Dont quit on me yet Mikey. Atom bombs? C'mon, dude...put down the blunt. Go read up on the purpose of the second amenment and get back to me. I know its a reduiculous example, but the point I am making is that there are tons of "objects" that are illegal for a reason, and they are illegal whther being used or not. Some even have positive qualities (coke used to be used in minor surgeries to reduce blood flow and minimize pain). You are arguing its the use, and not the tool. I am arguing its both. 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

Really? You think its okay to own an atomic bomb, as long as we dont use it? If that's the case Iran shuold get one. It's only an object...it cant do anything. We all shuold get one....just in case that bad guys come around. Is it okay to own a kilo of cocaine as long as its not being used? Our laws do not see it that way Dont quit on me yet Mikey. 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

Yeah, thats a touchy subject in itself. Cant say Im aginst it, but I owuldnt want to see an innocent person fry either. 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

Where was this guy's head? (livendive example: http://www.wapt.com/news/14962750/detail.html How about taht black guy, the expert, who shot himself in the foot, in front of the class, whilke claiming to be an expoert. Where was his head. A gun is not a solution, its a problem. Oh, bullshit again. If you TRULY cannot separate an inanimate object from some idiot's USE of that object, then I'm done talking to you. Enjoy the Brady Bunch/VPC websites - you'll be right at home. Guns make it really simple to kill someone. It works better then beating someone to death with a book, afterall that's what its designed to do. That's why guns are the number one choice of weapon for military and police officers. 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

Where was this guy's head? (livendive example: http://www.wapt.com/news/14962750/detail.html How about taht black guy, the expert, who shot himself in the foot, in front of the class, whilke claiming to be an expoert. Where was his head. A gun is not a solution, its a problem. 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

The survey didn't ask that question. Of course not....that question wouldnt surve the purpose. 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

Just an FYI for you - your A and B in the post are both included as DGUs in Kleck's survey. Actually *READING* the data I presented would have shown you that. Again, this shows that you want to argue from emotion and misconception and not facts. So why do you omit this data when arguing your point? And I cannot find the data for point C. Could use help on that from your expertise on the subject. 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

The possible results in your scenario range from no harm/no loss up to death. Do you have some sort of point to the question? The point is that while this data may be correct, you cant draw conclusions from it. There is nothing in that data that says that the outcome would have been any different in each scenario had the "defendant" NOT had and used a gun. For all we know had the defendant used his head instead of the gun, the outcome would have been the same for each scenario. This 400K-2M is not good data. 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

Mike, lets take a look at this statement and data objectively. What you are saying is that a crime occurs, a gun is used, and the outcome of event is positive. Let’s break that down further. There are actually 3 scenarios that can happen to have a positive outcome A. Crime occurs, gun is present and used in defense, outcome positive – You gave data on this of 400k - 2 million B. Crime occurs, gun is present but not pulled out in defense, outcome positive – conveniently this data is missing in your argument C. Crime occurs, no gun is present by defendant, outcome positive – this data is missing too. Let’s look further at A. The unknown in this data is what would have happened had the defendant not pulled out the gun, or did not have a gun in the first place. Mike, you and I know both know that a percent of the outcomes would have still been positive even without the use of the gun….we just don’t know what the percent is, but we know it exists. Also, how come you don’t mention all of the same scenarios, but with a negative outcome. This data is important to look at as well to consider the validity of the one piece of data that you cherry picked. Feel free to find that data and post it. I can’t argue with that rebuttal 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/01/03/dna.exoneration.ap/index.html Ever since we got good at DNA testing we quite often hear of cases similar to the one I posted a link too. What you rarely hear about is how the government repays these people who have, for example in this case, spent half their live locked up. I would imagine the government owes these people pretty much a free ride for the rest of their lives. No taxes by the IRS, free medical, monthly income, housing, etc. I don’t actually know what the government does in these cases, if anything. What do you think? Are these people owed anything, and if so, what and how much? 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

Prove to me that guns were invented to save lives, and not take them. If YOU can prove the null to that question you will have done it yourself. "I cant prove it". Your right, you can't. Talk about taking quote out of context. Holy shit. WEAK! 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

Mike, lets take a look at this statement and data objectively. What you are saying is that a crime occurs, a gun is used, and the outcome of event is positive. Let’s break that down further. There are actually 3 scenarios that can happen to have a positive outcome A. Crime occurs, gun is present and used in defense, outcome positive – You gave data on this of 400k - 2 million B. Crime occurs, gun is present but not pulled out in defense, outcome positive – conveniently this data is missing in your argument C. Crime occurs, no gun is present by defendant, outcome positive – this data is missing too. Let’s look further at A. The unknown in this data is what would have happened had the defendant not pulled out the gun, or did not have a gun in the first place. Mike, you and I know both know that a percent of the outcomes would have still been positive even without the use of the gun….we just don’t know what the percent is, but we know it exists. Also, how come you don’t mention all of the same scenarios, but with a negative outcome. This data is important to look at as well to consider the validity of the one piece of data that you cherry picked. 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

I loved your PM to me. It went something like this: "you have less brains than a streaming pile of dogshit How in the hell do you surmise that I should do as you say, I am a disabled veteran, limited funds, a child to raise, a house to pay for, and yet you say crap like that? Go choke yourself. You go bounce off the ground from 35 feet and 35kts and tell me how it is afterwards." Right on man. I now have tons of respect for you and your records... 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

Noun 1. low explosive - an explosive with a low rate of combustion explosive - a chemical substance that undergoes a rapid chemical change (with the production of gas) on being heated or struck firework, pyrotechnic - (usually plural) a device with an explosive that burns at a low rate and with colored flames; can be used to illuminate areas or send signals etc. high explosive - a powerful chemical explosive that produces gas at a very high rate 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

You should put as much work into gettting your jump numbers up as you are with your posts. 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

That;s what a low explosion is. For someone who claims to be an expert, you should know that. Or are is this just your typical blah blah blah? 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

I do not claim o be an expoert in gun powder. But what does that have to do with the gun related death toll in this country? 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

Gun powder is a low explosive. Check out these two lnks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_explosive#Low_explosives and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_powder 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

wow...you took the words right out of my mouth...i was going to ask you the same thing. This thread is about guns,...not gun powder. The gun propels the bullet. The powder is the agent that allows for that to happen. You fire a gun (pull a trigger), there is a low explosion, and the bullet is propelled. I love how gun owners always want to get technical. Example a gun doesn’t kill, but propels lead. Yeah ok...and my car doesn’t take me from A to B. I only use it for its for its fuel combustion. Gun owners always forget to add why someone wants to propel the lead. People kill and guns are used to kill. Everything else about guns is secondary. By the way…you have awesome copy and paste skills. Chicks dig guys with skills. Edited to add: Guns were designed to be used to kill...gun powder wasnt. We are talking about guns in here. Keep up. Low explosion eh? Wow I did not know that gun powder exploded, please tell me more. Gun powder is a low explosive. Check out these two lnks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_explosive#Low_explosives and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_powder 7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer