BF2S Forums 3 Bullsh*t Arguments from Pro Gun Fraternity

So many gun threads right now, my head is spinning and it`s getting late !

Some good arguments in this thread by ATG as to why violence occour.

http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=70340


And a couple of questions for the gun nuts !

1. Why do you not follow the 2nd ammendment to it`s full potential, yes you have the right to bear arms to protect yourself and defend your kins against a corrupt government, why stop at just owning the gun - why not rebell against the government you hate with that very same gun ?

2. Why is it when statistics shows the US to have the without question highest deaths by handguns ratio you have to try and diminish that fact by saying suicides, police-shootings and self defence is part of that stastictic ? ... you have the highest ratio final, doesn`t matter who pulled the trigger or why ... you have the highest ratio !!!!

3. And like someone mentioned on the news today and its been stated in this forum: If the students had handguns that would have saved lifes ...... are you fucking deranged, 1 student had a handgun and he fucking shoot 32 to death and wounded 30 others ..... in what other country in the world is it deemed nessesary for students to arm themself ? .... dont you see this is specially for the US, no other country in the world is even close !

Next !

usmarine2005 wrote:

..4) Why didn't these shootings happen when gun laws were WAY more liberal?

When was that ? ... 1791 ?

As another poster further up stated after being presented with statistics from 1999 he answered that the death by handguns ratio was going down, make up your minds here people when you argue - do you have more or less deaths by handguns and since when and why ?

And just check it usmarine, you did have a schoolshooting in 1999 also when the laws wasn`t so strict as they are now !

usmarine2005 wrote:

..4) Why didn't these shootings happen when gun laws were WAY more liberal?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman
They did.

PureFodder wrote:

usmarine2005 wrote:

..4) Why didn't these shootings happen when gun laws were WAY more liberal?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman
They did.

He was a jarhead though.  Not some young kid.

Varegg wrote:

So now it MUST be student that pulls the trigger, funny how the rules of debate change all the time !

1 August 1966 - Sniper Charles Whitman kills 14 people and injures dozens at University of Texas
20 April 1999 - Two teenagers at Columbine High School, Colorado, kill 13 before killing themselves
21 March 2005 - A teenager on an Indian reservation in Red Lake, Minnesota, kills nine

What is your point?

james@alienware wrote:

Guns are for the armed forces and specialist police units.




NOT CIVILIANS.

Tell that to a farmer in Montana.

usmarine2005 wrote:

Varegg wrote:

So now it MUST be student that pulls the trigger, funny how the rules of debate change all the time !

1 August 1966 - Sniper Charles Whitman kills 14 people and injures dozens at University of Texas
20 April 1999 - Two teenagers at Columbine High School, Colorado, kill 13 before killing themselves
21 March 2005 - A teenager on an Indian reservation in Red Lake, Minnesota, kills nine

What is your point?

That this have happend before so the argument of more liberal gunlaws being the reason for the increased violence and deaths by handguns doesn`t hold water !

Your millitary kills people all over the world at an impressing rate, is it so strange your citizens at home starts to value another human life less ?

i don´t need a gun to enlarge my penis....

bob_6012 wrote:

Ok, so ya made a case. Let's first examine you. You are from England, have you ever been in the USA? Who are you to judge our laws? You believe marijuana should be legalized, however this is my own personal observation and mine alone. It is MY right to purchase a firearm if I so choose, so since the constitution was written over 200 years ago it's no longer applicable to today? I own 8 firearms, and I keep one of them at the ready in case I need it. Why is it a bullshit argument if I use it for self-defence, if someone is going to enter my place of residence illegally I'm going to use it for defence, not to kill them but it is a widely known fact that the sound of a pump action shotgun chambering a round is a great deterrent to anyone trying to break into a house. I am going to get a concealed and carry licence here in a month. Why you may ask. Because if I need that firearm just once then it was worth it, I'm not going to go out and kill someone but if I or any of my loved ones in my presence are threatened I will defend myself. And the last note, I don't care if there's a waiting period on guns, in my state there is not. If one has the money and is in good standing with the FBI then it is not hard to get a gun and I'm not sure why you even bothered to put it in here. Guns are not bad, it is irresponsible owners that create the problems. If they would keep their weapons locked up like the law says they should we wouldn't be having as big of a problem with the wrong people having weapons. If someone wants a firearm that badly they will do whatever they can to get one. So why should you punish the law abiding citizens because some assholes can't follow the law?

I have been to the USA and I am from the UK. Personally, since to some extent we did allow the Independance of America and probably have a slight, if not rather twisted, influence on your present culture I would feel it fair of us to comment.

In my eyes, if your so frightened of someone entering your house that you own 8 firearms, including pumpaction shotguns, it seems you don't have much faith in your fellow citizens or your government to protect you from a threat. Its quite similar to your nuclear deterent, if we own one and you own one, we wont kill eachother will we? Unfortunately there are those who do own weapons and kill people - like the recent Virginia shootings. This is both tragic and a symbol of America's stupidity, why not make gun ownership a little harder so that not every crazy South Korean can lock and load and head down the the local Uni they go to and wipe out what 32 people?

Guns are not bad, true, but they are there for a bad purpose, to kill people. To use the old line of its the 'owner' to me is like hiding yourself behind a perspex screen, everyone can see how stupid you look, but you feel protected.

Your comment on the fact that those who want firearms will get one anyway is true but the way you see punishment on 'law abiding citizens' as unfair is to me ridiculous. You don't seem to understand the point this post is making. Its like our Anti-terror laws in the UK, the idea is the guilty will be punished and the innocent protected. The punishment is universal for the harm that those few cause, that is what all law is for, whether it be for murder or theft. Not everyone does it, but unlike theft, firearms are the things that get alot of people killed very quickly because they are sold so freely. If you put laws on this sort of thing, you would have these College shootings and you would have less gun crime because of it.

The liberal approach doesn't work with guns, the more there are the more chance they will be used for the wrong reasons. Cut out the sale of so many differing gun types and you'll have less murders with guns...simple

I mean how the hell can you justify killing people with an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth.

usmarine2005 wrote:

Varegg wrote:

That this have happend before so the argument of more liberal gunlaws being the reason for the increased violence and deaths by handguns doesn`t hold water !

One example of a deranged mind with weapons training is not very good proof.

And it wasn't a handgun.

One example ? ...... i could probably find dozens pr year ! ... and you aint exactly a wizard at proving a point either usmarine !

Varegg wrote:

One example ? ...... i could probably find dozens pr year ! ... and you aint exactly a wizard at proving a point either usmarine !

usmarine2005 wrote:

Look my point is simple, why when I was in school there was no fear of this, no metal detectors, no police...etc ?

And to think -- I was debating whether it would be a good idea to own a firearm once i move out. Now i get the entire debate section talking about it and doing my research for me .

So how about those gun laws in Florida .?

james@alienware wrote:

Guns are for the armed forces and specialist police units.




NOT CIVILIANS.

you = fail