mnealtx 0 #126 January 2, 2008 QuoteThe more legal guns there are, the more legal guns are stolen, the more find their way to the criminals. The bigger the supply, the cheaper the guns become, the easier and cheaper they are to acquire for criminals. Keep in mind supply and demand from Eco 101. Less guns, equals less guns stolen, equals less guns on the market, equals higher prices. Guns for criminals become more expensive.[/repely] Yeah, how's that working with your supply of chronic, hmm? Or anything harder, for that matter. QuoteLegal guns have been known to be part of accidents that have killed or injured people, including kids. Legal guns have been known to escalate situations that could have been simply deal with words. A person is more likely to attempt suicide with a gun in the house. Our society embraces guns, and we have the highest murder rate in the world. It's not just the availability of guns, but the attitude we have about them. We love them, and we die from them (look at USA gun murder rate.) And legal guns are also used between 400k - 2 million times a year to prevent crime and save lives - I would say the good outweighs the bad. QuoteAnd i am not talking about just guns. I’m talking about all warfare material. There is no good reason why your average Joe needs to have access to guns, tanks, bombs, etc. Instead of guns, people should buy insurance in case their materialistic things get stolen. And there are bullet proof vests for those fearing everyday they will be shot at. Ok... so you're a proponent of the 'lay down and die' tactic. That's fine, it's your choice. However, you have ABSOLUTELY no right to force that choice upon me.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #127 January 2, 2008 QuoteQuote you wish to debate the use, then let's do so. If you want to infer that they were "designed to kill", then you're going to have to come up with hard proof - anything less is an argument from emotion. That's funny. I asked to proove that guns are made to save lives, and you are now the third person to answer me with a "no...you show proof". Hey...I asked first. That's because you CAN'T prove it in either direction. The USE of the tool trumps it.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DJL 235 #128 January 2, 2008 Quote I'm not "ignoring the point of the device" at all. Mike and yourself are arguing that use=design (and specifically bad use). You conveniently forget that guns are used up to 2 million times a year (by some estimates) to PREVENT crime and SAVE lives. Based on the above, it seems that you could equally say that "guns are designed to save lives". If you wish to debate the use, then let's do so. If you want to infer that they were "designed to kill", then you're going to have to come up with hard proof - anything less is an argument from emotion. Why are you being defensive about this? I applaud that guns can be used to protect yourself. I'd get a concealed permit if I could take my gun into national parks where I'm more concerned about drunk rednecks than bears. If the Chinese were worried about protecting themselves then they'd have built a great big wall. If they wanted to attack people then they would have built something that could fire a projectile."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #129 January 2, 2008 Defensive? No...just tired of trying to debate facts with people that refuse to deal in them. You are inferring that guns are designed to kill - ok, prove it with hard facts. You can't. You can discuss the USE of them all day long, good and bad, but usage does NOT equal proof of design. In fact, if they WERE "designed to kill", then we need to go back to the drawing board and figure out something better, because they're not very good at it based on mortality statistics.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #130 January 2, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteA gun is made to safe lives. 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."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 #131 January 2, 2008 rushmc, why is this even debatable and why would you think otherwise? In a broad sense, you are most likely correct. In the context of the gun control debate, it is a worthless useless statement. (not your statement)"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
mnealtx 0 #127 January 2, 2008 QuoteQuote you wish to debate the use, then let's do so. If you want to infer that they were "designed to kill", then you're going to have to come up with hard proof - anything less is an argument from emotion. That's funny. I asked to proove that guns are made to save lives, and you are now the third person to answer me with a "no...you show proof". Hey...I asked first. That's because you CAN'T prove it in either direction. The USE of the tool trumps it.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 235 #128 January 2, 2008 Quote I'm not "ignoring the point of the device" at all. Mike and yourself are arguing that use=design (and specifically bad use). You conveniently forget that guns are used up to 2 million times a year (by some estimates) to PREVENT crime and SAVE lives. Based on the above, it seems that you could equally say that "guns are designed to save lives". If you wish to debate the use, then let's do so. If you want to infer that they were "designed to kill", then you're going to have to come up with hard proof - anything less is an argument from emotion. Why are you being defensive about this? I applaud that guns can be used to protect yourself. I'd get a concealed permit if I could take my gun into national parks where I'm more concerned about drunk rednecks than bears. If the Chinese were worried about protecting themselves then they'd have built a great big wall. If they wanted to attack people then they would have built something that could fire a projectile."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #129 January 2, 2008 Defensive? No...just tired of trying to debate facts with people that refuse to deal in them. You are inferring that guns are designed to kill - ok, prove it with hard facts. You can't. You can discuss the USE of them all day long, good and bad, but usage does NOT equal proof of design. In fact, if they WERE "designed to kill", then we need to go back to the drawing board and figure out something better, because they're not very good at it based on mortality statistics.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #130 January 2, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteA gun is made to safe lives. 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."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 #131 January 2, 2008 rushmc, why is this even debatable and why would you think otherwise? In a broad sense, you are most likely correct. In the context of the gun control debate, it is a worthless useless statement. (not your statement)"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
DJL 235 #132 January 2, 2008 QuoteDefensive? No...just tired of trying to debate facts with people that refuse to deal in them. You are inferring that guns are designed to kill - ok, prove it with hard facts. You can't. You can discuss the USE of them all day long, good and bad, but usage does NOT equal proof of design. In fact, if they WERE "designed to kill", then we need to go back to the drawing board and figure out something better, because they're not very good at it based on mortality statistics. Oh yeah, well you can't prove that I can't prove it. SO THERE!"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #133 January 2, 2008 Quote Quote vests can and have been viewed as an offesive weapon Yeah...ok...I have heard two things now in this thread....Guns were designed to save lives, and bullet proof vests are offensive weapons.....LMAO You are really out there now. Why? because guns HAVE saved thousands if not millions of lives. Your a smart guy (just ask yourself) I will bet you can figure it out"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 #134 January 2, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Edited to add: Guns were designed to be used to kill...gun powder wasnt. We are talking about guns in here. Keep up. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Still having a bit of trouble separating use from design...but you're getting there. Good job, young padawan. No Mike..guns are used for what they are designed to do (end life)...everything else about guns, such as target shooting, is secondary. (yes, there are guns made specifically for sport, but that's not what the Chinese designed guns for. Then it should be VERY easy to find hard PROOF of that, should it not? I recall a study showing something like a 15-20% mortality rate for handgun shootings, if I recall correctly. For something that was "designed to kill", that's a pretty shoddy showing. Knives were designed to disembowel enemies in battle....every other use of them, from cutting tape to cutting dinner, is secondary. Yes, there are knives made specifically for buttering bread, but that's not what knives were designed for. FACTUALLY disprove the above. You can't, because it's a plea to emotion. You're starting to do better, with realizing it is the USE of a tool that is important. Are you asking him to prove the null too?"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
mnealtx 0 #135 January 2, 2008 Quote Oh yeah, well you can't prove that I can't prove it. SO 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 #136 January 2, 2008 Quoteguns HAVE saved thousands if not millions of lives. Your a smart guy (just ask yourself) I will bet you can figure it out Oh yeah, well prove it."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #137 January 2, 2008 QuoteQuoteguns HAVE saved thousands if not millions of lives. Your a smart guy (just ask yourself) I will bet you can figure it out Oh yeah, well prove it. http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.htmlMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 235 #138 January 2, 2008 I don't see millions on there...sorry. Ok, time to go home. I drive a tank with a big fuckin' gun turret on the top. But I use the barrel of the gun to....um....help ease my way through traffic. Therefore you have to say that it's a traffic-open-upper, not something that was designed to kill people. And if you think otherwise then prove it."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #139 January 2, 2008 Maybe you should have actually READ it, instead of looking for a pretty graphic, then. FIRST SENTENCE: "There are approximately two million defensive gun uses (DGU's) per year by law abiding citizens." Third sentence: "Prior to Dr. Kleck's survey, thirteen other surveys indicated a range of between 800,000 to 2.5 million DGU's annually." Sixth sentence: "Using a smaller sample size than Kleck's, this survey estimated 1.5 million DGU's annually. " Have a good night.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 235 #140 January 2, 2008 QuoteMaybe you should have actually READ it, instead of looking for a pretty graphic, then. FIRST SENTENCE: "There are approximately two million defensive gun uses (DGU's) per year by law abiding citizens." Third sentence: "Prior to Dr. Kleck's survey, thirteen other surveys indicated a range of between 800,000 to 2.5 million DGU's annually." Sixth sentence: "Using a smaller sample size than Kleck's, this survey estimated 1.5 million DGU's annually. " Have a good night. What's a defensive gun use?"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #141 January 2, 2008 Quote Maybe you should have actually READ it, instead of looking for a pretty graphic, then. FIRST SENTENCE: "There are approximately two million defensive gun uses (DGU's) per year by law abiding citizens." Third sentence: "Prior to Dr. Kleck's survey, thirteen other surveys indicated a range of between 800,000 to 2.5 million DGU's annually." Sixth sentence: "Using a smaller sample size than Kleck's, this survey estimated 1.5 million DGU's annually. " Have a good night. "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 #142 January 2, 2008 QuoteQuoteMaybe you should have actually READ it, instead of looking for a pretty graphic, then. FIRST SENTENCE: "There are approximately two million defensive gun uses (DGU's) per year by law abiding citizens." Third sentence: "Prior to Dr. Kleck's survey, thirteen other surveys indicated a range of between 800,000 to 2.5 million DGU's annually." Sixth sentence: "Using a smaller sample size than Kleck's, this survey estimated 1.5 million DGU's annually. " Have a good night. What's a defensive gun use? Your kidding,... ..... right?"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
DJL 235 #143 January 2, 2008 Quote Your kidding,... ..... right? Nope. Define their use."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #144 January 2, 2008 QuoteQuote Your kidding,... ..... right? Nope. Define their use. I'm tired of spoon-feeding you - if you want the info, read the damn page and the reports listed to. If you honestly can't figure out what a defensive use is, you probably SHOULDN'T be discussing the overall subject of firearms at all.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #145 January 3, 2008 Quote What's a defensive gun use? Kinda like this, but different. mode> Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #146 January 3, 2008 *beats Dave with a large, smelly dead fish*Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #147 January 3, 2008 Quote *beats Dave with a large, smelly dead fish* Oh sure, just cuz you happend to have a large, smelly dead fish that was designed to beat me... How am I supposed to fight back against that? Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #148 January 3, 2008 Quote Quote *beats Dave with a large, smelly dead fish* Oh sure, just cuz you happend to have a large, smelly dead fish that was designed to beat me... How am I supposed to fight back against that? Blues, Dave With your own fish, of course... it would be a DLSDFU. djl: that would be a Defensive Large Smelly Dead Fish Use - didn't want you to get confused.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #149 January 3, 2008 Quote Quote Quote *beats Dave with a large, smelly dead fish* Oh sure, just cuz you happend to have a large, smelly dead fish that was designed to beat me... How am I supposed to fight back against that? Blues, Dave With your own fish, of course... it would be a DLSDFU. That'd be great, if they weren't banned here. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #150 January 3, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote *beats Dave with a large, smelly dead fish* Oh sure, just cuz you happend to have a large, smelly dead fish that was designed to beat me... How am I supposed to fight back against that? Blues, Dave So, you're a defenseless victim for some criminal with a LSDF... not good, dude. With your own fish, of course... it would be a DLSDFU. That'd be great, if they weren't banned here. Blues, Dave Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
