PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Gun Control Debates
     Why disarm civilians?

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
turrican

|     |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Did you know that since 1934 when the NFA registration of personaly owned machine guns went into effect only two legaly owned NFA weapons were used in the commision of crimes?

That is 75 years and millions of guns!

In both crimes the person convicted was a police officer.

Not an anti police officer thread. I respect them very much but isnt it ironic how people think that only police/military should have these weapons?


-------
"Among the misdeeds of the British in India, history shall record the depriving an entire nation of arms as the blackest." Ghandi
 


Posts: 19 | Posted: 8:12 PM on September 26, 2006 | IP
TRIGGER

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I thought only one. There may be a technical diffrence The one I know of the gun in question was fully transferable. That could be the diffrence. The incident was where an officer took a gun that he was not licenced to have or posess and comitted a crime with it, wh at crime I don't know but I beleave it was a homicide but not positive.    


-------
MACHINE GUNS? go to WWW.hansonshoot.com
 


Posts: 127 | Posted: 4:09 PM on September 28, 2006 | IP
turrican

|     |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You are good trigger.

The second one was more recent, it seems an officer traded an NFA weapon for some kind of killer stereo set up. Not a violent crime but still a crime.


-------
"Among the misdeeds of the British in India, history shall record the depriving an entire nation of arms as the blackest." Ghandi
 


Posts: 19 | Posted: 9:29 PM on September 28, 2006 | IP
TRIGGER

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Come on.. We need to get the ATF asense of humor." But dude it was a killer stereo system,
Narly dude" Question... Do you NFA??? Noticed you have a nice avatar.

(Edited by TRIGGER 9/30/2006 at 10:09 AM).

(Edited by TRIGGER 9/30/2006 at 10:11 AM).


-------
MACHINE GUNS? go to WWW.hansonshoot.com
 


Posts: 127 | Posted: 10:08 AM on September 30, 2006 | IP
turrican

|     |       Report Post




Junior Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I do NFA quite a bit. I Pm'd you a link to some of my select fire videos.


-------
"Among the misdeeds of the British in India, history shall record the depriving an entire nation of arms as the blackest." Ghandi
 


Posts: 19 | Posted: 10:00 PM on September 30, 2006 | IP
SilverStar

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The only reason to disarm civilians is so that they can not resist when you march in and take all they have, including their liberties. Gun control has preceded every major act of genocide in moder times. Can't have people resisting extermination now can we?


-------
Darkside Enterprises were the impossible meets possible.

Tread softy and carry a big stick, preferably an AT4
 


Posts: 681 | Posted: 7:14 PM on January 8, 2007 | IP
thewolf

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from SilverStar at 7:14 PM on January 8, 2007 :
The only reason to disarm civilians is so that they can not resist when you march in and take all they have, including their liberties. Gun control has preceded every major act of genocide in moder times. Can't have people resisting extermination now can we?



very well said... so if an when the little blue helmets are in our streets...little blue helmets end up laying in the streets...





-------
my guns have killed no one...so they must be broken...

Never surrender your right to own to a moron in DC
 


Posts: 58 | Posted: 11:43 AM on March 22, 2007 | IP
simpsonsrule7

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The right to bare arms is a constitutional right of Americans.  When the citizens are armed it helps prevent the government form interfering with their lives.  Being able to buy a gun allows you to better protect yourself and your family.  Over 130,000 criminals are either killed or wounded by the victim defending themselves with a gun annually.  There were over 1.5 million cases each year, where a victim pulled out a gun and the crime was prevent without anyone being hurt.  These facts were compiled by National Institute of Justice.  If the government increased gun control, it would not decrease the amount of crime committed.  Most gangs are able to find a way to buy black market guns, so gangs would still be able to get guns.  All the violent people with guns would still have them.  It would only make it harder for a law abiding citizen to be able to buy a gun.  Increasing the amount of gun control would not make this country safer.


-------
I said word son
 


Posts: 1 | Posted: 12:44 PM on April 4, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I give up my right to bare arms.  It is too cold outside.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 07:38 AM on April 5, 2007 | IP
SilverStar

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

That would be your choice, but you have no right to impose that on me.


-------
Darkside Enterprises were the impossible meets possible.

Tread softy and carry a big stick, preferably an AT4
 


Posts: 681 | Posted: 8:59 PM on April 6, 2007 | IP
dmxx99

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from EMyers at 02:38 AM on April 5, 2007 :
I give up my right to bare intelligence.  It is too smart outside.

it fits you right


 


Posts: 65 | Posted: 1:22 PM on April 7, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Are you both so ignorant that you don't even know what "bare arms" means?


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 9:11 PM on April 7, 2007 | IP
dmxx99

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

bear arms means have guns its a older word.
If you still think the second amendment is not clear and that you think it should be repealed then get out of this country and go to china or something because I refuse to give up my guns no matter what ban or disaster happens even If the entire National guard is standing around my house yelling at me to come out I will not give them back alive I might even take a few of them with me.
 


Posts: 65 | Posted: 8:14 PM on April 8, 2007 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

He didn't say "bear arms" he said "bare arms".  Work with me here.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 07:57 AM on April 9, 2007 | IP
nurseguy

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from SilverStar at 7:14 PM on January 8, 2007 :
The only reason to disarm civilians is so that they can not resist when you march in and take all they have, including their liberties. Gun control has preceded every major act of genocide in moder times. Can't have people resisting extermination now can we?


"This year will go own in history.  For the first time, a civilized country has full gun registration.  Our streets will be safer, our police will be more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"

Adolph Hilter 1935


 


Posts: 9 | Posted: 03:32 AM on July 17, 2007 | IP
BGC TODAY

|      |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Has anyone ever heard of anything called supply and demand. If so, you should also know that there is a correlation between those two. When there is more demand to guns, there will be more in production, thus some of the guns that will be manufactured will end up in the hands of people who will be the ones that break in to your house. Then you will need to buy another one to protect yourself. And that will be the start of a paradox cycle. Do not forget that we should be trying to get rid of guns, not to find excuses to spread them around. Read this article if you want to see how much crazier this can go:
http://www.bgctoday.com/2007/07/machine-guns-for-better-future.htmlBGC TODAY
 


Posts: 3 | Posted: 4:22 PM on July 25, 2007 | IP
quatin

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

So your scenario is that we avoid the "I have a gun, but so does the burglar" and opt for the "I don't have a gun, but neither does the burglar."
 


Posts: 86 | Posted: 7:05 PM on July 25, 2007 | IP
kindrox

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Read this article if you want to see how much crazier this can go:


Boy this foolio called it with crazy.  That football player Taylor was shot in his Miami home and died in his home about a week ago.  Four burglars broke into his home, thinking he was gone playing football in Washington.

Even though they thought he was gone, and even though there were four burglars, the burglars still brought guns!

So much for the if they (think they) know you are gone, and bring enough buddies to beat you to a pulp if you do happen to be home, they will feel so secure about their crime they will leave their guns at home.  

I swear, is there a fools 101 being taught in school?

 


Posts: 54 | Posted: 7:28 PM on December 3, 2007 | IP
TRIGGER

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from quatin at 7:05 PM on July 25, 2007 :
So your scenario is that we avoid the "I have a gun, but so does the burglar" and opt for the "I don't have a gun, but neither does the burglar."


quatin The scenarios in the real world would go more like this "the burglar has a gun, but so do I " and opt for the "I don't have a gun, but the burglar still has a gun since he will not abide by the law." This is the scenario that some politicans would like  to see the public at risk not the criminal.  





(Edited by TRIGGER 12/15/2007 at 5:02 PM).


-------
MACHINE GUNS? go to WWW.hansonshoot.com
 


Posts: 127 | Posted: 4:59 PM on December 15, 2007 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The second amendment does not include the word "gun" because rights are not defined by the specific ways in which they seem to manifest; the right is the way an allowance is made naturally, not the thing humans privilege themselves by virtue of the allowance.

'Bearing arms" is an expression of the way people respond to the influence and consequence of non-violent acts for self preservation that harm or end another life.

A citizen of the united states has a responsibility that comes with the privilege of gun ownership.

As I see it, a gun is not worth keeping, and is not worth the resources spent in production. There is no such thing as a fair fight involving a firearm. The only way to rectify the inequity of the foolish abuse of the second amendment that made reason enough of an excuse for the development of firearms, is to call on the sensibility of citizens to destroy all weapons designed for selfish entitlement and privileged advantage. In this way we take a step toward a life of freedom from fear of our non-natural disadvantages invented by a society that wills not for equality of life.


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 6:20 PM on December 16, 2007 | IP
TRIGGER

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from forfunt1 at 6:20 PM on December 16, 2007 :
"Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791.

There is no such thing as a fair fight involving a firearm.


So you are asserting that the only fair fight is any fight with out a firearm? Given that in the real world humankind is plagued with predators that prey on the weak. This vile refuse will seek out the weakest among us. Any weakness they will violently exploit. All that is needed to affirm my point is to look at who the targets of violence in our society are the weak, the elderly, children and women. But the gun will level the playing field for the weaker of the human race against the predators. How you may ask? An elderly woman in a wheel chair with a gun can stand toe to toe with a 6' 220 lb 24-year-old violent male predator, with just one well-placed shot the game ends.  

Quote from forfunt1 at 6:20 PM on December 16, 2007 :The only way to rectify the inequity of the foolish abuse of the second amendment that made reason enough of an excuse for the development of firearms, is to call on the sensibility of citizens to destroy all weapons designed for selfish entitlement and privileged advantage..


The Chinese developed the firearm centuries before the second amendment was ever conceived. The sensible citizen will see the folly in your argument and will realize that to disarm is to turn over their freedom and safety to politicians. Politicians that lust for power and will in slave them and their kin if given the chance. And if they won't go peaceably  they will be subjected to atrocities as all tyrannical states do.

Quote from forfunt1 at 6:20 PM on December 16, 2007 :In this way we take a step toward a life of freedom from fear of our non-natural disadvantages invented by a society that wills not for equality of life.


In your world maybe, but in the real world they become slaves brutalized and victimized by a tyrannical state. For those who by their own ingenuity and drive rise to greatness will be striped of their accomplishments. To be distributed among those who refuse to contribute to society. Socialism destroys the human will and ingenuity in a society and condemns it to stagnation. Destroying freedom and condemning society to slavery..    




-------
MACHINE GUNS? go to WWW.hansonshoot.com
 


Posts: 127 | Posted: 7:57 PM on December 21, 2007 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I will not repeat myself. Read what I wrote, and please do not confuse what I mean by being an idiot.

You reply as if you believe people are not equal. Remember that somewhere in the balance of your fear (for uncertainty) and comfort (for certainty) there is a real world. When you see the real world, you will no longer argue nonsense to make a point; Thinking your mind may be fun, however if you intend only to use thoughts for communication you will eventually forget how to speak. It sounds to me like you are almost at that point anyway so keep it up, you're doing great!

(Edited by forfunt1 12/21/2007 at 9:15 PM).


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 8:56 PM on December 21, 2007 | IP
TRIGGER

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Well as usual your kind can't respond with out an insult, demeaning those who would disagree with you shows a lack of the ability to listen to another’s point of view. Don't you think that is a little short sited? That you think so low of me tells volumes about yourself. Since your kind can't even entertain the thought that you could be wrong on a subject only shows that you believe yourself superior and who am I to question you. That is usually an indicator of a person’s ignorance.

You side step the issue and out right dismiss a varying point of view with out any explanation or hurl insults at the person who doesn’t agree with you. Sorry I am not a sheep and will not blindly swallow the propaganda that you preach just because you say so. I know that angers you and all like you that a commoner would have the Gaul to question you and your opinions. That you can't be bothered to answer my retort means that you probably can't. I don't think you are an idiot I think you are ignorant. You have crafted an opinion on a subject where you have only half of the information and facts.      


-------
MACHINE GUNS? go to WWW.hansonshoot.com
 


Posts: 127 | Posted: 9:54 PM on December 21, 2007 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You do not seem ready to consider what I have offered.

You make a lot of noise and very little sense. That is not an insult, it is an observation. You give me facts that do not mean anything, and expect me to magically make something of them so that they remain relevant to subject; it is no fault of either of us that these "facts" have no meaning. Fact is nothing by nature. The mind endeavors to attribute something to nothing in order to consider everything, and eventually claim knowledge of the truth, or the greatest whole, everything.  

Perhaps you have seen equality before, from your perspective, and retain the experience as a vague notion. You may be asking yourself about the nature of equality, and wondering how to see equality in nature, and if you are, you have lost focus. Equality is a virtue of the right of way, there is no question about this. When you see things the way they are, you won't try to dump any of your bullshit and noise on others in order to ease the effort of resolving your own personal confusion. It is no fault of mine that you are confused about nothing, and as only confusion is created in the process of considering nothing, it is no fault of any one, as resolving it is the burden of every one in their own way of eventually realizing clarity.

Perhaps I can help you understand somethings, but in order to do so, you must be ready to read only what I write and not read anything between the lines.


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 8:26 PM on December 22, 2007 | IP
TRIGGER

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
+1

Rate this post:

Well I have always assumed that when someone calls you an idiot that it is an insult? Don't you? One question I would like to ask you. Are you a teacher/ collage professor or someone who has a doctorate degree? You seem to want to try to talk above everyone’s head, attempting to free yourself from criticism. When challenged you belittle those who criticize your opinions. In classes I have taken I have observed this phenomenon, in professors who try to make themselves relevant by trying to talk over everyone’s head so that their point of view goes unchallenged since it confuses those who are there to learn. This does everyone who wants to learn disservice by causing confusion, if you can’t apply or link what you are teaching to the real world by example then what good are your lessons. I have taught classes myself over the years and have learned to teach on the students level, don't overwhelm them with insignificant facts and obscure examples and details in an attempt to prove my knowledge and I encourage them to challenge me. Apply well-known facts and examples and apply them to the unknown in the subject that you are trying to teach. Most of all you need to be able to apply commonsense and logic to what you teach, with out commonsense and logic you will lose them. This grounds the subject making it easier to understand and follow instead of being a bunch of obscure gibberish that is only good for memorization with no application. Instead of blaming me that it is my inability to learn and comprehend, it should be that it is your inability to explain and teach that is the issue.

Know lets get back to the debate. In an earlier post you stated "In this way we take a step toward a life of freedom from fear of our non-natural disadvantages invented by a society that wills not for equality of life." In other words you are saying (In this way we take a step toward a life of freedom from the fear of firearms, elevators, flying, and escalators, etc. invented by a society that does not want equality in life.) First let me say that fear is a natural state that all life lives under whether it be natural, man made, or physiological, it makes no difference. Fear is not an emotion to be freed from it is an emotion to be conquered. Only in this way do you become truly free from fear. If not you will find that by just taking away a fear, another will just take its place.  What you propose is nothing short of the folly of trying to put the knowledge of gunpowder back into Pandora’s box. Second in nature all life is not equal so why would you want human society to be any different. To me all you are abdicating is socialism, which is to try to through artificial means make everyone socially equal. Since no one can be equal physically or mentally then you must mean socially. When you do this it causes mankind to simply exist in mediocrity and slavery instead of being free to discover their full potential. By taking away the incentive to improve and succeed you delegate everyone to nothing more than existing.  



-------
MACHINE GUNS? go to WWW.hansonshoot.com
 


Posts: 127 | Posted: 5:27 PM on December 26, 2007 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Oy vey!


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 5:06 PM on December 29, 2007 | IP
TRIGGER

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I'm not suprised. LOL


-------
MACHINE GUNS? go to WWW.hansonshoot.com
 


Posts: 127 | Posted: 02:19 AM on December 31, 2007 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Only fools assume. I did not graduate high school. I speak at my level; I encourage everyone to do so. Your criticisms are weak. I will not respond to the consideration of statements as opinions; perhaps you can understand the difference between an opinion and a statement, if not, look it up. This is a mind game, be careful not to compromise yourself by taking my statements personally.

Your professors had a job to do and a title to live up to. You had only to open your mind to consider what they had to offer. Seems to me students often refuse to understand a teacher when they think they know everything already, and are too stubborn to accept that everyone understands everything equally, and knowledge is a cop-out for the lazy and unimaginative. The professor was not confusing you; you are confused. If you had been willing to respect your college professor(s) you might have learned something from them, but that doesn’t matter as long as you got that diploma, so that you could get the job that pays for all your wonderful cars and guns. You may be familiar with the old adage that I paraphrase ‘you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink’.

Are you sure about these insignificant facts and obscure examples? I doubt you are so I’ll offer you a few examples:

(1)“…in the real world humankind is plagued with predators that prey on the weak. This vile refuse will seek out the weakest among us. Any weakness they will violently exploit.”

(2)“…the targets of violence in our society are the weak, the elderly, children and women.”

(3)“An elderly woman in a wheel chair with a gun can stand toe to toe with a 6' 220 lb 24-year-old violent male predator, with just one well-placed shot the game ends”

(4)“The Chinese developed the firearm centuries before the second amendment was ever conceived.”

(5)“Politicians that lust for power and will in slave them and their kin if given the chance. And if they won't go peaceably they will be subjected to atrocities as all tyrannical states do.”

Have you learned to apply commonsense and logic? Are you sure they work together? Perhaps this is the root of your confusion; I suggest you experience more commonsense so that you can see it for what it is, and hopefully stop abusing it with logic.

For examples of “obscure gibberish that is only good for memorization with no application” you may refer to the examples of insignificant facts and obscure examples listed above. Not included in the list is this little gem I felt deserved special attention:
“… in the real world they become slaves brutalized and victimized by a tyrannical state. For those who by their own ingenuity and drive rise to greatness will be striped of their accomplishments. To be distributed among those who refuse to contribute to society. Socialism destroys the human will and ingenuity in a society and condemns it to stagnation. Destroying freedom and condemning society to slavery.”

Have you any idea what you are trying to say? This may take you a while to understand, but you are basically arguing black and white as the same idea, and then arguing that the ideas are not equal. Are you sure of anything?

I hope you can reason this objectively, and not blame me for any limit you may apply to your self as inability to learn and comprehend. You are inventing blame to use as a negative (look this word up, it is great), and this is a logical fallacy.

I feel it is disrespectful to try and pull the ‘in other words’ trick, because it makes you sound like an idiot, and attempts to inflect the re-marks of an idiot on what I wrote.

The best I can offer as a response to the second part of your second most recent comment is… Pull your head out of your ass. Do you work for the ministry of propaganda? Are you a politician? Do you drive a ford? You sound like a model American to me, and I feel sad for you.




-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 12:15 AM on January 5, 2008 | IP
quatin

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Socialism destroys the human will and ingenuity in a society and condemns it to stagnation. Destroying freedom and condemning society to slavery..


So our country is subject to this no freedom, is enslaved and has no ingenuity? We should banish Labor Unions and Worker Protection Laws?  
 


Posts: 86 | Posted: 03:07 AM on January 15, 2008 | IP
kindrox

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Currently you have have a lot of freedoms so long as you don't try to exercise them.  Be found with a few thousand dollors in many jurisdictions and you will be subject to civil forfiture, no trial and no accusations.

Have desirable property you don't want to either sell or sell at a value you deem fit, and in many jurisdictions it will be stripped from you with little compensation.

In many jurisdictions you are not allowed to defend yourself with effective tools.

Have a very public opinion contrary to government interests?  A lot of people like that get targeted and bankrupted.

So yeah, we have lots of freedoms so long as you do what the government says and don't get out of line.
 


Posts: 54 | Posted: 11:20 PM on January 21, 2008 | IP
Stunt_Pirate

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You make a lot of noise and very little sense.
Read what you wrote, and please do not confuse what you mean by being an idiot.
Have you learned to apply common sense and logic?

I’ll elucidate my point by showing where exactly your posts fail to address anything or add anything meaningful.

You said that,
'Bearing arms" is an expression of the way people respond to the influence and consequence of non-violent acts for self preservation that harm or end another life.


Let’s dissect that statement for a minute. “‘Bearing arms’ is the way people respond”. So far so good, you define that term as the actions people take to resist. Understandable interpretation. Now let’s take the rest.
“The influence and consequence of non-violent acts for self-preservation that harm or end another life.” This part does not make sense the way you have written it. I suggest you look up non-violent. The occasions where non-violent acts cause harm or end another’s life, would not warrant a person to ‘bear arms’ against those committing the acts. These actions are known as accidents. Your interpretation defines ‘bearing arms’ as taking action against perpetrators of accidents. I somehow doubt that was the intention of the 2nd amendment.

Adding punctuation and editing for another possible meaning leaves us with, “’Bearing Arms’ is a reaction which causes harm or ends another’s life, against a non-violent act of self-preservation.” This changes the meaning to be that the government should not limit the people in harming or ending the life of people engaged in non-violent self-preservation. Still not a valid interpretation of the Constitution.

I ask that you do not repeat what you have said, as it means nothing. Instead please try and offer an actual argument that displays your opinion.

Reading comprehension is useless if the written material means nothing. I apologize if I come across as harsh, but people that debate by talking in circles, attempting to sound deep, annoy me.

 


Posts: 38 | Posted: 5:40 PM on February 14, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Hee hee he he he heee :-) how old are you man? Seriously, are you in your thirties? Did you go to college? I'll bet you are much better at arguing and displaying opinion then me, and I'll be glad to keep it that way.

I hope you enjoy reading what I write as much as you seem to.


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 8:09 PM on February 14, 2008 | IP
Stunt_Pirate

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

21 as of tomorrow and yes, in college.

I am not trying to say that I am better than you. I am merely attempting to point out that if you intend to share your opinion, do so in a way that makes sense to someone other than yourself, otherwise why bother?

Debate is important in order for people to form their own opinions, both sides should be shown. However sides that don't argue anything, merely confuse the issue at hand.

As George Eliot said "Blessed is the man who, having nothing to say, refrains from giving wordy
evidence of the fact."
 


Posts: 38 | Posted: 9:03 PM on February 14, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You crack me up ;-) Thanks man.

Opinions do not make sense. I do my best to keep any residual opinions (from my age of education) to myself, and I have come close to resolving all but a few of them on my own. It seems you may not understand what I mean, and that is okay with me. I do not voice my vision for validation.



-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 9:36 PM on February 14, 2008 | IP
TRIGGER

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Stunt_Pirate I wouldn't bother trying to debate him he is scholar only in his own mind.



-------
MACHINE GUNS? go to WWW.hansonshoot.com
 


Posts: 127 | Posted: 7:29 PM on February 21, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Hey now, careful there dude. Just because you're a fat-old-angry-white dude, doesn't mean I'm a scholar. :-)


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 5:52 PM on February 23, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

oops! did I say that?

I forgot to add gun-toting, card-carrying-american psycho. I get ahead of myself sometimes ;-)


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 5:55 PM on February 23, 2008 | IP
SilverStar

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

What s rong with gun-toting?


-------
Darkside Enterprises were the impossible meets possible.

Tread softy and carry a big stick, preferably an AT4
 


Posts: 681 | Posted: 4:43 PM on March 29, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Let me see... well nothing is wrong with gun-toting I guess. Just as long as those that chose to carry guns, do for me, and every one else that chose not to, a favor; Shoot themselves, or another gun-toting psycho before an unarmed person gets shot.

Is is too much to ask that only people with guns get shot, or shot at? It sounds fair to me.

So maybe we can make it a "law" in this country that only people with guns can be shot or shot at. And this law applies to every one including cops! If a cop has a gun, then anyone else can legally shoot or shoot at them, and the cops cannot even point their guns at any one without a gun. And, if a person with a gun, shoots some one that does not have a gun, the only punishment (with NO alternative) is to be shot by the same weapon in the same part of the body as their victim. So, if a cop shoots an unarmed kid (for any reason) it is time to shoot the cop. This sounds like justice to me.

I don't care if some jerk even has a badge giving them license to kill, making them out to be high and mighty with their guns strapped to their sides, if they decide to use those guns unjustly, they had better be ready to die by them.

So go ahead and carry that gun, you'll get what is coming to you, and for your sake I hope it does not come as a surprise!


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 7:26 PM on April 3, 2008 | IP
Ethmi

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from forfunt1 at 7:26 PM on April 3, 2008 :
Let me see... well nothing is wrong with gun-toting I guess. Just as long as those that chose to carry guns, do for me, and every one else that chose not to, a favor; Shoot themselves, or another gun-toting psycho before an unarmed person gets shot.

Is is too much to ask that only people with guns get shot, or shot at? It sounds fair to me.

So maybe we can make it a "law" in this country that only people with guns can be shot or shot at. And this law applies to every one including cops! If a cop has a gun, then anyone else can legally shoot or shoot at them, and the cops cannot even point their guns at any one without a gun. And, if a person with a gun, shoots some one that does not have a gun, the only punishment (with NO alternative) is to be shot by the same weapon in the same part of the body as their victim. So, if a cop shoots an unarmed kid (for any reason) it is time to shoot the cop. This sounds like justice to me.

I don't care if some jerk even has a badge giving them license to kill, making them out to be high and mighty with their guns strapped to their sides, if they decide to use those guns unjustly, they had better be ready to die by them.

So go ahead and carry that gun, you'll get what is coming to you, and for your sake I hope it does not come as a surprise!



Here's an idea: rather than disarming people and making them prey to those who refuse to give up their arms, why don't YOU get a gun?  And why do you imply that all gun owners are murderers?  I guess, since I'm a gun owner, then I can't be an ordinary, law-abiding citizen, huh?


-------
I like Swedish women.
 


Posts: 68 | Posted: 01:20 AM on April 4, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I will not get a gun because I feel alive; if you felt alive, you would not have (a) gun(s) either.

Actually, you have raised an interesting issue; you are an "ordinary, law-abiding citizen" as far as the united states is concerned. Citizens of the u.s. are trained to be reasonable, and consider senses a liability limited to only "personal conduct" in "personal space". So when american citizens socialize, they must disregard their feelings so that they do not appear to contradict or challenge the rule of the consensus mind. The fact that so many people have guns in the u.s. is only helping america become a hell-on-earth, but people will not acknowledge that they feel this on the "streets" because they will probably be shot!

I don't imply that all gun owners are murderers; I say people only have guns, in the first place, because they are going to be murderers someday. What use is a gun if you don't shoot somebody with it?

If you do not want to shoot and kill somebody, get rid of the gun; keep it around long enough and it will help you murder somebody. This is not a matter of if, it is a matter of when.


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 01:48 AM on April 4, 2008 | IP
Ethmi

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from forfunt1 at 01:48 AM on April 4, 2008 :[/b]
I will not get a gun because I feel alive; if you felt alive, you would not have (a) gun(s) either.


I don't own a gun because I don't feel alive.  I own guns because I would like to BE alive.


Actually, you have raised an interesting issue; you are an "ordinary, law-abiding citizen" as far as the united states is concerned. Citizens of the u.s. are trained to be reasonable, and consider senses a liability limited to only "personal conduct" in "personal space". So when american citizens socialize, they must disregard their feelings so that they do not appear to contradict or challenge the rule of the consensus mind.


That's a pretty, un-American additude, saying that we don't have the right to express our opinions.  Obviously, not only do you ignore the second amenment, but you ignore the first one as well.

The fact that so many people have guns in the u.s. is only helping america become a hell-on-earth, but people will not acknowledge that they feel this on the "streets" because they will probably be shot!




Once again, if they have a gun, they have the option to shoot the attacker rather than be shot.  But sure enough, self-defense is murder, huh?



I don't imply that all gun owners are murderers; I say people only have guns, in the first place, because they are going to be murderers someday. What use is a gun if you don't shoot somebody with it?


Uses of a gun
Hunting
Scaring crooks out of your house
Defending against an invading army

If you do not want to shoot and kill somebody, get rid of the gun; keep it around long enough and it will help you murder somebody. This is not a matter of if, it is a matter of when.


My dad has owned guns for 56 years, and in all that time, he has not shot a single person.  My Grandpa owned guns for 74 years until he died, and he never shot anyone either.


-------
I like Swedish women.
 


Posts: 68 | Posted: 9:25 PM on April 6, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

huh... Poor idiot. I hope I am not around when you decide to do something on your own...

The human is the only thing that thinks it is alive.

There is no way to express an opinion, as only no-thing-trying-to-live has an opinion. If you wish to express yourself, go right ahead, and test the reaction of the consensus mind to your feelings.

At least you can cop-out on your condition being hereditary. Your father and grandfather were insane, and they taught you how to be as well. Of course they may have told you the reasons for having guns, but did they ever tell you how the guns made any sense? I bet they didn't even try, because they could not feel the moment to begin.


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 10:28 PM on April 6, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Oh, and if you haven't figured this out yet, I am not an "american", and I do not support anybody that claims to be, or anything claimed to be whatever "american" is.


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 8:26 PM on April 7, 2008 | IP
Ethmi

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from forfunt1 at 10:28 PM on April 6, 2008 :
huh... Poor idiot.


You must be refering to yourself.

I hope I am not around when you decide to do something on your own...


Yeah, you're definetley refering to yourself.


The human is the only thing that thinks it is alive.

There is no way to express an opinion, as only no-thing-trying-to-live has an opinion. If you wish to express yourself, go right ahead, and test the reaction of the consensus mind to your feelings.


Why should I care what they think about me?  To express your views - including your idiotic views against guns - you need to not care what certain groups of people will think about you.  It's just that for us sentient people, the opposing group is a bit larger.


At least you can cop-out on your condition being hereditary. Your father and grandfather were insane, and they taught you how to be as well. Of course they may have told you the reasons for having guns, but did they ever tell you how the guns made any sense? I bet they didn't even try, because they could not feel the moment to begin.


Guns make sense because if a crook tries to break into your house, you have the means to prevent them from doing you and your family any harm.  We need guns because the crooks won't give up their guns just because the government told them to.  They've already broken laws, and they won't hesitate to break another one.  So why take guns from law-abiding citizens and leave them as bait for the criminals?


-------
I like Swedish women.
 


Posts: 68 | Posted: 8:51 PM on April 7, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

If you claim sentience, you must admit that there are no forces, or interests, in actual opposition or contradiction to the senses.
As senses are natural-way expressed, and there is no other way then natural, how is there to be an "opposing group"?

You continue to demonstrate that you are only capable of negotiating reasonable terms; how am i to see that you are sentient until you stop being logical, and start making sense?

(Edited by forfunt1 4/7/2008 at 10:26 PM).


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 9:46 PM on April 7, 2008 | IP
Stunt_Pirate

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
+1

Rate this post:

Ah, it now becomes clear why you don’t usually try to make arguments; they turn out like these gems. So owning a gun means that you can’t feel alive? Somehow I doubt you can substantiate that argument. In fact, you can’t actually feel alive unless you own a gun and the only way to true enlightenment is clubbing a baby seal.  See, I can say random shit also and yet it doesn’t make it accurate. I don’t make arguments like that because I can think; if you could think you wouldn’t use arguments like that either.

The criminal is an illusion. So clearly there is no such thing as “murder.” You are using the term murder to avoid suffering the consequences of your actions. If someone is shooting at you it is clear that you made an enemy by not accepting who you are. The person with the gun is just using their right-by-way of resisting non-violence. Clearly as all people are equal, you are just letting your fear get in the way of seeing the real world.

Notice how little sense you actually make? You advocate killing everyone who has a gun because there is a chance they can kill you. Yet you don’t agree with someone killing someone with a gun so that they don’t get killed. This is why I think you are an idiot.

 


Posts: 38 | Posted: 04:38 AM on April 8, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

This isn't math... or is it? In your world, things may seem to work like clock-work, with the axiomatic precision of 2, and the consistency of 2 + 2 = 4. I see how you apply the rules of logic and linear-relevance dynamics to my words in order to draw out my conclusion; this is only fair, as I am sure you have an intelligent mind, capable of doing practically anything it is taught; I do not have that luxury. My mind takes a back seat to my senses, and when it is called on (at times such as these) to hazard a translation of my sense into reasonable terms, it has no chance to recollect, or rehearse, the etiquette of debate.

So, I can not follow any rules of 2 + 2, because they do not make sense to me. You will find all the holes you look for in my arguments, and you have already demonstrated that you are willing to look for them and capable of finding them. I hope you do not see any inconsistency in my sentiment, because I have not yet intended to contradict myself, though I may have neglected to refine my language to an exact science, and limit my liability to intellectual scrutiny.

You expect arguments from me that I cannot make, and I am sure I will not learn how; this is my choice. There is a present sense of living, that is all but impossible to express with words, especially when words are governed by the rules of language. I am not willing to trade my present sense for any current rule, or convention, just to guarantee that I am not misunderstood by some mind.

I come across as harsh sometimes, or perhaps abrasive, and I mean to be so; I get emotionally involved in these correspondences. I have meant every word I have typed in this forum, and I don't intend to revise any of my statements.

(Edited by forfunt1 4/8/2008 at 5:58 PM).


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 4:41 PM on April 8, 2008 | IP
Ethmi

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from forfunt1 at 9:46 PM on April 7, 2008 :
If you claim sentience, you must admit that there are no forces, or interests, in actual opposition or contradiction to the senses.
As senses are natural-way expressed, and there is no other way then natural, how is there to be an "opposing group"?


To me, the opposing group is you, and the anti-gun people.

You continue to demonstrate that you are only capable of negotiating reasonable terms; how am i to see that you are sentient until you stop being logical, and start making sense?


If you had half a brain in your head logics would make sense to you.


(Edited by forfunt1 4/7/2008 at 10:26 PM).






-------
I like Swedish women.
 


Posts: 68 | Posted: 6:58 PM on April 8, 2008 | IP
forfunt1

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Well, Ethmi, I guess we just aren't going to see eye to eye.


-------
-yo
 


Posts: 163 | Posted: 5:32 PM on April 9, 2008 | IP
    
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.