kallend 2,027 #26 October 31, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuote #1: "A gun's only purpose is to kill." Quote #2: "I took her to a gun range... She had never seen a real gun in her life. She had an absolute blast..." It seems that we have a contradiction there with these two quotes from you. There are two possibilities: 1) Either you are wrong with quote #1, since quote #2 proves that guns can be used for purposes other than to kill, or; 2) Your girlfriend derives great pleasure from practicing to kill. Which is it? Lots of people get pleasure from watching action movies or playing violent video games, too, without having any intention of actually being violent. Funny all the discussion we see about "stopping power" etc. in gun threads if guns** aren't designed to kill and maim. ** yes, I realize some are optimized for match purposes, but that doesn't apply to the majority of guns in circulation, so don't go all NCclimber on me.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #27 October 31, 2007 QuoteLots of people get pleasure from watching action movies or playing violent video games, too, without having any intention of actually being violent. Yep, and lots of people shoot guns without any intention of actually being violent with them. QuoteFunny all the discussion we see about "stopping power" etc. in gun threads if guns** aren't designed to kill... Ahh, but you see, that kind of "killing" is for self-defense, which is perfectly legal, and morally justifiable. Not all killing is a bad thing. But pop's "guns are designed to kill" statement doesn't recognize the validity of that - he implies only that guns are designed for nothing but bad things. And of course, there's also the sporting purposes for firearms which have nothing to do with killing or anything bad. So the fact is, he's wrong when he says that. And he needs to confess to being wrong about that, or he'll never have any credibility. QuoteI realize some are optimized for match purposes, but that doesn't apply to the majority of guns in circulation, so don't go all NCclimber on me. A gun doesn't have to be optimized for high-accuracy in order to be primarily used for sport. Regular out-of-the-box firearms can be used for either sport or self-defense. So there's no distinction to be drawn about what the majority of guns in circulation are designed for. They're just designed to shoot bullets, period. It's up to the user to determine how those bullets are to be used, whether they plink at targets, shoot vermin on their farm, or let it sit in the corner ready for self-defense. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #28 November 1, 2007 QuoteIn Canada shootings are so rare I'm not arguing that gun violent in Canada is on the same level of frequency as gun violent in the USA. I'm just pointing out that gun violence in Canada is NOT as rare as you state that it is. There was (yes it looks like it was gang related) yet another shooting yesterday as reported here in Vancouver to go along with the recent six murdered in Surrey and another deadly incident reported here in Vancouver not long ago. The same thing is happening in Calgary, Edmonton, of course Toronto and Montreal and an RCMP police officer was fatally shot up in the NWT just a few short weeks ago as well. I could go on sighting even more recent shootings, but hopefully that is not needed. We know shootings occur in the USA more than up here in Canuckville. But they do occur here at a higher frequency that the statement of "In Canada shootings are so rare". Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
