mnealtx 0 #201 January 3, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote Quote"Used his head" Yup, thar we go agin - if only we wuz SMRT enuf to alredy b out the house when thet robber broke in et 3 am... 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. Again - if you cannot see the fact that the motivation of the person USING a tool is the problem and not the tool itself, then we have nothing more to discuss. In such case, keep a sharp eye on this one so it doesn't jump up and shoot someone, ok? If you REALLY want to learn about the 2nd Amendment, gun control and how it all works, do some reading at www.guncite.com - there is some excellent information there.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 235 #202 January 3, 2008 Quote In such case, keep a sharp eye on this one so it doesn't jump up and shoot someone, ok? That is hilarious. I'll keep that window open to do my part to stop gun violence."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #203 January 3, 2008 QuoteQuote In such case, keep a sharp eye on this one so it doesn't jump up and shoot someone, ok? That is hilarious. I'll keep that window open to do my part to stop gun violence. Good man - keep a close watch, now... you *KNOW* how those things just 'go off by themselves'!!Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pop 0 #204 January 3, 2008 QuoteAgain - if you cannot see the fact that the motivation of the person USING a tool is the problem and not the tool itself. 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 Quotethen we have nothing more to discuss Dont quit on me yet Mikey.7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #205 January 3, 2008 QuoteQuoteAgain - if you cannot see the fact that the motivation of the person USING a tool is the problem and not the tool itself. 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 Quotethen we have nothing more to discuss 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.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #206 January 3, 2008 QuoteThe thread was about GUNS, and is about GUNS. Only you seem to think otherwise. The context was always about GUNS. No-one but you seems to have a hard time figuring it out. The first detailed description of using "firing cannon" in warfare was in connection with a battle fought in 1126 when the Song army used it against the invading Nuchens. The so-called fire cannon was a tube made of bamboo filled with gunpowder which, when fired, threw a flaming missile towards the enemy. To be used in warfare in 1126 they had to have been invented earlier than that, unless you think they also invented a time machine a millennium ago. P.S. AD1126 is rather more than 700 years ago - having a little trouble with your arithmetic today? So make up your mind. First you talk about gunpowder (1000 years ago), then about guns (1290), now you're back on cannons. I'm going to use your favorite technique to reply... Gunpowder was invented in China c. 1000 A.D. and probably spread to Europe during the Mongol expansion of 1200-1300 A.D., but this has not been proven. The use of gunpowder in Europe was first recorded in 1313. Europeans used gunpowder for cannons, while the Chinese used it primarily for firecrackers. Despite such early knowledge of explosives and their use, China did not pursue the development of weaponry as did the West; ironically, it was through the use of cannons and guns that the Europeans were able to dominate China in the mid-to late-1800s. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pop 0 #207 January 3, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteAgain - if you cannot see the fact that the motivation of the person USING a tool is the problem and not the tool itself. 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 Quotethen we have nothing more to discuss 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #208 January 3, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAgain - if you cannot see the fact that the motivation of the person USING a tool is the problem and not the tool itself. 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 Quotethen we have nothing more to discuss 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.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #209 January 3, 2008 QuoteA gun is not a solution, its a problem. Two solutions from the news:Man Shot, Killed In Apparent Road Rage Incident "Two vehicles were at an intersection, one man got out of his vehicle and began attacking the other with a baseball bat, police said. When the man with the bat tried to attack the driver, investigators said, the second driver pulled out a gun and shot the first driver twice. The man with the baseball bat died at the hospital. The shooter had a license to carry a concealed weapon and investigators said he acted in self-defense and will not immediately face charges." Source: http://www.ksat.com/news/14959073/detail.html Shopper pulls gun, stops robbery cold "Charlie Merrell, 51, was in a checkout line at a grocery store when a masked man jumped a nearby counter and held a gun on a store employee. While the suspect was demanding cash from the workers, Merrell pulled his own handgun, pointed it at the robber and ordered him to put down his weapon. When the suspect seemed to hesitate, Merrell racked the slide on his gun to load a round in the chamber. At that point, the suspect placed his gun and a bag of cash on the counter, dropping some of the money … the suspect removed his mask and lay on the floor. Merrill, meanwhile, held the suspect at gunpoint until officers arrived and took him away in handcuffs. Merrell had a valid permit to carry the handgun, and they recovered an unloaded .380-caliber handgun and $779 cash from the suspect." Source: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59503 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pop 0 #210 January 3, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAgain - if you cannot see the fact that the motivation of the person USING a tool is the problem and not the tool itself. 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 Quotethen we have nothing more to discuss 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #211 January 3, 2008 As long as you don't harm anyone else with them, or threaten to harm someone else? Sure thing.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ExAFO 0 #212 January 3, 2008 This thread has run its course. Lock it.Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pop 0 #213 January 3, 2008 QuoteAs long as you don't harm anyone else with them, or threaten to harm someone else? Sure thing. 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #214 January 3, 2008 Quote 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. Using your logic and reasoning (or lack thereof) I shouldn't be allowed to own a car, or a knife, or a fork, or etc... because it could be stolen and used to kill someone. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #215 January 3, 2008 QuoteQuoteAs long as you don't harm anyone else with them, or threaten to harm someone else? Sure thing. 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. And if the dog hadn't stopped to shit, he would've caught the rabbit. There's no way to put that genie back in the bottle - criminals can get guns and will always be able to get guns. Making it harder for the law abiding to purchase/own a gun does nothing but make it easier for the criminal to commit his crimes. I don't know about you, but I *refuse* to put my life at the whim and mercy of criminals.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pop 0 #216 January 3, 2008 QuoteMaking it harder for the law abiding to purchase/own a gun does nothing but make it easier for the criminal to commit his crimes. 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #217 January 3, 2008 QuoteQuoteMaking it harder for the law abiding to purchase/own a gun does nothing but make it easier for the criminal to commit his crimes. 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. No, that is EXACTLY what you are saying. Read it again. So, you advocate the criminals having guns and not their victims. Nice.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pop 0 #218 January 3, 2008 QuoteMaking it harder for the law abiding to purchase/own a gun does nothing but make it easier for the criminal to commit his crimes. 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 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #219 January 3, 2008 QuoteQuoteMaking it harder for the law abiding to purchase/own a gun does nothing but make it easier for the criminal to commit his crimes. It's a little tough to believe that guns are working when we have the highest gun related murder rate in the world. And Japan has the highest suicide rate in the world - do you advocate they get rid of kitchen knives and rope?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dannydan 5 #220 January 3, 2008 Quote Quote As long as you don't harm anyone else with them, or threaten to harm someone else? Sure thing. 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. roflmMFAofffI seriously got wore out last night reading this thread! you GUYS make me so freaking tired! I get back on this evening and get to this post and FRICKIN want to go SHOOT myself literally with MY gun!and NO exafo, I do not want to to to see see this thread LocKeD, cause it is already 1/2cocked... Lets continue to "lock and load" and fire downrange Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #221 January 3, 2008 Quote 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. demand doesn't exist in a vacuum. Wave that magic wand and remove all guns owned by citizens, removing all (whatever number it may really be) stolen guns. What do criminals do? They use the other methods for acquisition. How does cocaine get into our country? Or pot from Mexico? It's not too hard to smuggle guns either, and it does happen. If you really succeed, then they use other weapons. But being robbed is the same if they use a bat or a knife or a gun, and being killed is the same regardless of methodology. The only change is you have removed the typical citizens' ability to defend themselves. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #222 January 4, 2008 It sure is fun watching you live your occupation (listed in your profile) right here on this thread! This is fun "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #223 January 4, 2008 OK OK I will assume I have been warned and I deserve it, but it was just too damed hard to resist. Sorry "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #224 January 4, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote 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. What does quoting Kleck's survey say about you? Kleck's numbers not only defy common sense, they are completely inconsistent with any DoJ analysis. So? You claim your scatter chart is good, when the UCR data shows differently. Feel free to refute his work - I look forward to reading the paper when it shows up in Criminology 1. It is not my scatter chart, I provided the (peer reviewed) source. 2. Kleck's analysis has already been refuted.... 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
mnealtx 0 #225 January 4, 2008 The peer-reviewed source that the UCR data proves wrong...gotcha. Where is the peer-reviewed rebuttal of Kleck? His work was already peer reviewed for Criminology...did Criminology review the rebuttal?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
