07-14-2014 07:46 AM
4,617 ... 120121122123124 ...
tools
  1. llamabreath's Avatar
    That guy wasn't interested in shooting anyone. He wanted to get arrested. Or more likely, suicide by police.

    Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
    Where'd you take your mind reading classes?

    08-23-2013 03:29 PM
  2. msndrstood's Avatar
    What happened to being held responsible for your actions.....



    So the next time my brother in law bounces a check I can just tell him to blame the pen since it's primary function is to write? Instead of just long term loaning (giving) him the money?



    You know those FBI statistics that I told you about, the same ones I'd almost be willing to bet you didn't look at? Well according to them there are more people murdered by blunt objects such as a baseball bat, hammer etc than there are by rifles.....
    I know you're not directing this at me per se, however I read the report as well.

    Rifles, yes, guns, no. Guns kill more people than every other weapon, whether it's a knife, rock, hammer, baseball bat or scissors, than any other weapon.

    As for the pen.... Yes you could technically kill someone with a pen, but a pen has other uses, a gun is used to kill whatever the target is, there is no other use for a gun other than to maim or kill. Oh, and for target practice. But practice for what?

    People are complaining about the TM/GZ case and the uproar. Do you really want to revisit that? I stayed out of that one for my sanity, but if you can't see the problem with that case, there is no point discussing it at all. (People in general not specifically you, L2R.) I'm trying to be cool here and debate the issues at hand.

    Look, I've said before we have guns too, my thing is the open carry stuff. If you want an arsenal, go for it. Get a background check and keep your weapons locked up. But when it comes to open carry, I draw the line.

    Sent via Note II
    jdbii and Fairclough like this.
    08-23-2013 03:34 PM
  3. msndrstood's Avatar
    A race baiter "discussing"... heh, all of a sudden, he discusses.


    And yes, the bookkeeper in the school here in Atlanta did A TERRIFIC job, no doubt about it.

    But you do realize how easily he could've just shot her, right?

    Sigh. You obviously have a problem with Al Sharpton, so it's best to leave it where it's at and move on.

    And yes, he could have shot her, but he didn't. She could have shot him, If the NRA had their way, and he would be dead. And maybe a few others that happened to be in the vicinity.

    Woulda, coulda, shoulda.

    Sent via Note II
    jdbii likes this.
    08-23-2013 03:37 PM
  4. jdbii's Avatar
    Last time I checked there is a bloody good correlation coefficient between guns and gun homicides. I also checked that, since a gun restriction 16 years ago we have had 0 Massacres, were in that same time frame prior we had 102 dead from massacres.
    That a pretty good point and pretty strong evidence that gun regulation and mass shootings are related.
    Fairclough likes this.
    08-23-2013 03:49 PM
  5. Jerry Hildenbrand's Avatar
    That a pretty good point and pretty strong evidence that gun regulation and mass shootings are related.
    Where I live, there has been government and record keeping since 1764. We have very lax restrictions on guns, only the few federal regulations are in place. You also have the right to a concealed carry permit, not a case of asking permission. Everyone here has guns.

    We have had zero "massacres".
    jdbii likes this.
    08-23-2013 04:12 PM
  6. Live2ride883's Avatar
    I know you're not directing this at me per se, however I read the report as well.

    Rifles, yes, guns, no. Guns kill more people than every other weapon, whether it's a knife, rock, hammer, baseball bat or scissors, than any other weapon.

    As for the pen.... Yes you could technically kill someone with a pen, but a pen has other uses, a gun is used to kill whatever the target is, there is no other use for a gun other than to maim or kill. Oh, and for target practice. But practice for what?

    People are complaining about the TM/GZ case and the uproar. Do you really want to revisit that? I stayed out of that one for my sanity, but if you can't see the problem with that case, there is no point discussing it at all. (People in general not specifically you, L2R.) I'm trying to be cool here and debate the issues at hand.

    Look, I've said before we have guns too, my thing is the open carry stuff. If you want an arsenal, go for it. Get a background check and keep your weapons locked up. But when it comes to open carry, I draw the line.

    Sent via Note II

    Yep, you misunderstood my entire post

    Target practice, is to practice hitting your target. Which is usually a piece of paper taped to a tree, or a bail of hay, etc out on the family farm. Usually we use a bullseye type design, occasionally it will be a non-descript shadow outline. If I don't have any of those with me we will use pop cans/bottles, milk jugs, or empty soup cans, but I'm sure you get the picture.

    But in the end according to the Ohio State Constitution, open carry is my right.

    Nothing in my post was directed at anyone, it was a response to post #526.
    08-23-2013 04:18 PM
  7. llamabreath's Avatar
    Sigh. You obviously have a problem with Al Sharpton.. .
    I have a problem with him because I've been within the same breathing space with him and know he's as fake as his knockoff cologne. He marched down my street in Brooklyn for another supposed racial "atrocity" shortly after the Howard Beach incident, back in 1986.

    This was when he first realized how famous be could be by fanning racial flames anywhere and anytime he possibly could.

    08-23-2013 04:19 PM
  8. jdbii's Avatar
    Where I live, there has been government and record keeping since 1764. We have very lax restrictions on guns, only the few federal regulations are in place. You also have the right to a concealed carry permit, not a case of asking permission. Everyone here has guns.

    We have has zero "massacres".
    Good point. I would counter that piecemeal legislation/policy/regulation is ineffectual. The strongest gun control legislation in D.C or Chicago isn't going to matter if all the neighboring jurisdictions or states have much more relaxed policies. It is far to easy to arm yourself elsewhere and transport anywhere. This was an interesting article published a couple days ago by an unlikely advocate of gun regulation that highlights the problems with the USA's dysfunctional gun policies. A Convicted Murderer's Case for Gun Control - John Lennon - The Atlantic
    Fairclough likes this.
    08-23-2013 04:33 PM
  9. JHBThree's Avatar
    Where'd you take your mind reading classes?

    If he was interested in shooting people, he would have. His behavior, as reported by the eyewitnesses, is not consistent with someone that wanted to go in and shoot up the place.

    Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
    08-23-2013 05:01 PM
  10. JHBThree's Avatar
    Good point. I would counter that piecemeal legislation/policy/regulation is ineffectual. The strongest gun control legislation in D.C or Chicago isn't going to matter if all the neighboring jurisdictions or states have much more relaxed policies. It is far to easy to arm yourself elsewhere and transport anywhere. This was an interesting article published a couple days ago by an unlikely advocate of gun regulation that highlights the problems with the USA's dysfunctional gun policies. A Convicted Murderer's Case for Gun Control - John Lennon - The Atlantic
    You just proved that banning guns (or regulating them into oblivion) wouldn't even fix the problem in the US. Unless the entire planet has matching gun control regulations, the US will never be able to stop guns from getting into the hands of those that wish to commit violence with them.

    Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
    08-23-2013 05:05 PM
  11. llamabreath's Avatar
    If he was interested in shooting people, he would have. His behavior, as reported by the eyewitnesses, is not consistent with someone that wanted to go in and shoot up the place.

    Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
    Just shaking my head....

    If he was NOT interested in shooting people, he wouldn't have gone to the school loaded up with five hundred rounds of ammo!

    msndrstood likes this.
    08-23-2013 05:08 PM
  12. jdbii's Avatar
    You just proved that banning guns (or regulating them into oblivion) wouldn't even fix the problem in the US. Unless the entire planet has matching gun control regulations, the US will never be able to stop guns from getting into the hands of those that wish to commit violence with them.
    I dont recall suggesting guns should banned or regulated into oblivion, but I personally believe there is room to discuss reasonable regulation so long as the Constitution is respected. Coherent and consistent regulation can have a major impact. If legislation and national policy had a negligible impact then gun violence worldwide would be the same.
    08-23-2013 05:44 PM
  13. cdmjlt369's Avatar
    I don't understand why people are wanting stricter laws to enforce. Criminals do not care about your gun law. Law only keeps law abiding people in order. If the guy in aurora didnt have a firearm what's to keep him from waiting outside in his truck and running them down. Hit and run. It doesn't matter to the victims how they were killed. Car, gun or whatever.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using AC Forums mobile app
    08-23-2013 06:19 PM
  14. Live2ride883's Avatar
    asanatheist

    1) This: why exactly are you so stupidly irresponsible to let your family live or put your family in a dangerous place? Is holding the victim responsible for the crime.

    2) This: If person A finds situation B dangerous (in terms of high risk: keep in mind I said HIGH risk), and person A continually exposes himself to harmful situation B. So Person A now has to carry an Object A which is also just as dangerous as situation B.

    Numbers 1 & 2 are totally different conversations

    Also as far as I know, no one here has suggested or stated that guns are toys.
    08-23-2013 06:22 PM
  15. JHBThree's Avatar
    Just shaking my head....

    If he was NOT interested in shooting people, he wouldn't have gone to the school loaded up with five hundred rounds of ammo!

    Or, he wanted the police to shoot and kill him. The suspect had plenty of opportunity to kill people, and he didn't.

    Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
    08-23-2013 08:02 PM
  16. Fairclough's Avatar
    First off, an ar15 is NOT an automatic weapon
    Secondly, why would a psychologically disturbed man be allowed legal access to this type of weapon?
    I can only assume he accessed it legally, filled out all the required paperwork and did not falsify any information, etc....
    First, off an ar15 is semi automatic, thus automatic.,
    Second off, with a not so tight system - actually very like yours people can slip through.
    Third off, hasn't happened since our regulation.

    They aren't but because some people don't like something, they want it outlawed because they think it won't affect them. Cars kill more people than guns but wait, we can't ban those. I need one of those.
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    Was a car primary function to kill someone? No. Oh secondly you are allowed guns if there is a genuine need and you could prove so.

    If every person was sane, there wouldn't be any massacres. Crazy people will use anything to kill, guns included.
    Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
    Back again, we eliminated 1 object from the equation. No massacres since.

    Where I live, there has been government and record keeping since 1764. We have very lax restrictions on guns, only the few federal regulations are in place. You also have the right to a concealed carry permit, not a case of asking permission. Everyone here has guns.
    We have had zero "massacres".
    Jerry, I know Cowboys love their guns. No where you live, in America. Australia isn't a state and its a nation. I could say there was zero mass shootings where I live (My house hold) but thats making things incomparable. Could you please be the one to explain, what chanced which cause a mass shooting every year to no mass shootings.

    I dont recall suggesting guns should banned or regulated into oblivion, but I personally believe there is room to discuss reasonable regulation so long as the Constitution is respected. Coherent and consistent regulation can have a major impact. If legislation and national policy had a negligible impact then gun violence worldwide would be the same.
    Constitution should be changed with time, people use the founding fathers claim. If they knew what was best all the time you still would have a slave.
    I don't understand why people are wanting stricter laws to enforce. Criminals do not care about your gun law. Law only keeps law abiding people in order. If the guy in aurora didnt have a firearm what's to keep him from waiting outside in his truck and running them down. Hit and run. It doesn't matter to the victims how they were killed. Car, gun or whatever.
    Sent from my SCH-I535 using AC Forums mobile app
    Because its easier to kill with a gun. Obviously some obtain guns, but most - particularly the petty ones which do the armed robbery, small time crimes etc WON"T have a gun ether! Thus making the playing ground a hell a lot fairer and safer.




    Actually take some time and watch this video.
    08-23-2013 09:46 PM
  17. JHBThree's Avatar
    Constitution should be changed with time, people use the founding fathers claim. If they knew what was best all the time you still would have a slave.
    And with that its no longer worth debating the issue with you. If you can't even get the basics right, there's no way we can have a reasonable discussion about this matter.

    Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
    08-23-2013 10:00 PM
  18. Live2ride883's Avatar
    First, off an ar15 is semi automatic, thus automatic.,
    Second off, with a not so tight system - actually very like yours people can slip through.
    Third off, hasn't happened since our regulation.

    As many times as myself and other have explained the difference between automatic and semi-automatic weapons I don't see how you cannot understand the difference but here ya go.

    1) Automatic- When you pull the trigger and hold it down it will fire until a) you let go b) you run out of ammunition in the magazine.

    2) Semi-automatic- when you pull the trigger 1 round (bullet) is fired. Before the next round (bullet) can be fired you MUST release the trigger and pull it again.

    This IS the difference, it is a fact.

    Please use proper terminology when discussing firearms.....
    cdmjlt369 likes this.
    08-23-2013 10:02 PM
  19. Fairclough's Avatar
    Watch the video.
    Fact is both got banned, that is such a small difference its minute. I still haven't been told if it wasn't gun control which stopper massacres here what did.

    Posted via Android Central App
    08-23-2013 10:12 PM
  20. cdmjlt369's Avatar
    First, off an ar15 is semi automatic, thus automatic.,
    Second off, with a not so tight system - actually very like yours people can slip through.
    Third off, hasn't happened since our regulation.


    Was a car primary function to kill someone? No. Oh secondly you are allowed guns if there is a genuine need and you could prove so.


    Back again, we eliminated 1 object from the equation. No massacres since.


    Jerry, I know Cowboys love their guns. No where you live, in America. Australia isn't a state and its a nation. I could say there was zero mass shootings where I live (My house hold) but thats making things incomparable. Could you please be the one to explain, what chanced which cause a mass shooting every year to no mass shootings.


    Constitution should be changed with time, people use the founding fathers claim. If they knew what was best all the time you still would have a slave.

    Because its easier to kill with a gun. Obviously some obtain guns, but most - particularly the petty ones which do the armed robbery, small time crimes etc WON"T have a gun ether! Thus making the playing ground a hell a lot fairer and safer.




    Actually take some time and watch this video.
    2 or 3 men come in my house in the middle of the night, I want my .40 cal. Not a baseball bat, or a knife or hope that they have a conscience and decide not to harm my family. Truth is there are cases where firearms are necessary and you never know when you may need one. I would hate to have to sit there and watch something happen to one of my family members because I didn't have a firearm.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using AC Forums mobile app
    08-23-2013 10:23 PM
  21. Live2ride883's Avatar
    Watch the video.
    Fact is both got banned, that is such a small difference its minute. I still haven't been told if it wasn't gun control which stopper massacres here what did.

    Posted via Android Central App
    Actually it's a pretty huge difference..
    08-23-2013 10:29 PM
  22. Fairclough's Avatar
    In all honest - if you have to resort to a gun to protect yourself, I truly feel sorry for you my friend. Is this what has society come to, the need to have something to take life away?
    If someone came storming through my house I would notify the authorities, they do come actually. Two years ago at a sixteenth, the neighbours called the police thinking they had home invaders as guys skateboard hit their garage door. In a elderly suburb, its ok for them to panic and intriguingly call. The response was 8 police cars, a dog squad (thankfully not released), the doors of my mates house kicked in and tazer guns (they had their pistols on their side too) with their markers aim at everyone, a few boys tackled to the floor and the whole gathering was on the floor within probably a minute. Even though it was misunderstanding, the police came. They are there to protect you. If you view you wouldn't be able to call in an emergency people have buzzers installed in their home. For more serious incidents the TRG (Tactical Response Group - in American equivalents it is practically SWAT) is brought along.

    I love this fear campaign by the pro gun lobbiest. We had the exact same response by the small majority.
    08-23-2013 10:39 PM
  23. cdmjlt369's Avatar
    In all honest - if you have to resort to a gun to protect yourself, I truly feel sorry for you my friend. Is this what has society come to, the need to have something to take life away?
    If someone came storming through my house I would notify the authorities, they do come actually. Two years ago at a sixteenth, the neighbours called the police thinking they had home invaders as guys skateboard hit their garage door. In a elderly suburb, its ok for them to panic and intriguingly call. The response was 8 police cars, a dog squad (thankfully not released), the doors of my mates house kicked in and tazer guns (they had their pistols on their side too) with their markers aim at everyone, a few boys tackled to the floor and the whole gathering was on the floor within probably a minute. Even though it was misunderstanding, the police came. They are there to protect you. If you view you wouldn't be able to call in an emergency people have buzzers installed in their home. For more serious incidents the TRG (Tactical Response Group - in American equivalents it is practically SWAT) is brought along.

    I love this fear campaign by the pro gun lobbiest. We had the exact same response by the small majority.
    First of all the response time of law enforcement takes way too long. Second, I'm not going to pick up the phone in call 911 until after the threat to my family and myself has been contained. In other words my cell phone against his act of violence is only going to put me either in the hospital or dead. I don't think they are going to wait for me to complete my call to 911 before they complete their hostile act towards me. But you seem to be one of those "it will never happen to me" people. If I were to end up on the news one day I would rather it be for defending my family than being the sad story of a home invasion . And I can defend my family just fine, no need to feel sorry for me.

    Sent from my SCH-I535 using AC Forums mobile app
    Live2ride883 likes this.
    08-23-2013 10:59 PM
  24. Live2ride883's Avatar
    Also our (US) supreme court has ruled several times that the police are under NO obligation to protect individual citizens... That's why we have a second amendment that allows us to protect ourselves.

    At best the police are 30-35 minutes away when seconds count.

    A criminal set on hurting my family, or myself is going to choose the most effective, portable, and efficient tool to do that with. So why wouldn't I choose the best tool to defend against them with.
    cdmjlt369 likes this.
    08-23-2013 11:13 PM
  25. Live2ride883's Avatar
    Constitution should be changed with time, people use the founding fathers claim. If they knew what was best all the time you still would have a slave.
    Here's another common misconception made by non-Americans. You seem to think that our Constitution grants us our rights in the Bill of Rights. Our Constitution only enumerates our rights given to us by our creator.
    08-23-2013 11:28 PM
4,617 ... 120121122123124 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Larva Cartoon - FREE and FUNNY Application
    By liontyping in forum Android Apps
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-21-2014, 11:03 AM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-25-2013, 07:33 AM
  3. POI information and Gallery
    By robjulo in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 11:00 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 04:28 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD