Isn't congress trying to push for a new AWB? Lots of posters here bitched about how easy it is to get "assault rifles" in the US and nobody needs to have one.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Well that's a strawman because I haven't seen anyone here argue for banning rifles. But I do like the idea of making an argument for the other side, then using spurious data to refute it. Its a really good debate tactic.
KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
It's not to make you more responsible - its to slow down a potential murderer. Using your same retarded logic, please tell me why you need a magazine, pistol grip and retractable stock? So you can live out your rambo fantasy?-Sh1fty- wrote:
Please tell me how giving AR-15s fixed magazines and not allowing me to put a pistol grip and retractable stock on my mini 14 makes me more responsible. I can't own a pistol yet but anybody over 21 here can buy a 7 round 1911. They can't get a double-stacked 14 round magazine though because obviously only criminals use those.
Cybargs wrote:
It just shows how little rifles come into play when you talk about total homicide in the US, so banning them would be kinda retarded.
KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Well that's a strawman because I haven't seen anyone here argue for banning rifles. But I do like the idea of making an argument for the other side, then using spurious data to refute it. Its a really good debate tactic.
KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
There is too much at stake with me possibly hitting my head and falling down. I'm now going to wear a helmet outside at all times.
Last edited by 13rin (2013-01-08 12:58:29)
Yeah... don't let simple maths from the article you cite yourself get in the way of a spurious argument...-Whiteroom- wrote:
Clubs and hammers... vs shotguns vs rifles....multiple weapn stat vs songle weapon stat vs single weapon stat.
Rifles and shotguns=679
Clubs an hammers=496
Point?Macbeth wrote:
Lifeless pieces of metal people.
Which still doesn't invalidate my point of this entire idiotic crusade of confiscation reinvigorated by exploiting a tragedy through means of mass media disinformation. Oh, that stat equates to roughly 3 three days worth of knife attacks in England. Don't let your dumbassery get in the way of your fail logic.Jaekus wrote:
Yeah... don't let simple maths from the article you cite yourself get in the way of a spurious argument...-Whiteroom- wrote:
Clubs and hammers... vs shotguns vs rifles....multiple weapn stat vs songle weapon stat vs single weapon stat.
Rifles and shotguns=679
Clubs an hammers=496
Do you agree with licensing and registration of cars?Macbeth wrote:
Lifeless pieces of metal people.
You sound paranoid. Crusade of confiscation? Exploiting a tragedy through mass media disinformation? Are you taking atg pills?13rin wrote:
Which still doesn't invalidate my point of this entire idiotic crusade of confiscation reinvigorated by exploiting a tragedy through means of mass media disinformation. Oh, that stat equates to roughly 3 three days worth of knife attacks in England. Don't let your dumbassery get in the way of your fail logic.Jaekus wrote:
Yeah... don't let simple maths from the article you cite yourself get in the way of a spurious argument...-Whiteroom- wrote:
Clubs and hammers... vs shotguns vs rifles....multiple weapn stat vs songle weapon stat vs single weapon stat.
Rifles and shotguns=679
Clubs an hammers=496
I think you misunderstood my post or have been ignoring my other ones. Probably both since I have spent the entire time of this recent debate cycle taking snipes at gun culture and posting news of shootings and massacres that have happened since. I made the same car/gun comment a few days ago.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Do you agree with licensing and registration of cars?Macbeth wrote:
Lifeless pieces of metal people.
A gun is a piece of metal as much as a buiding is a pile of sand. ~30 people a day die from guns, and close 20 of those kill themselves. This doesn't take into account any injuries, just deaths. Seems to me if over half of gun deaths are self-inflicted, we have a problem.
I agree there is too much attention put on guns. The overwhelming majority of gun owners are responsible. Just like the majority of drivers are responsible. But I still have to obey speed limits, register my car, get a license, insurance, and follow the regulations no matter how stupid, all so I can drive a 'lifeless piece of metal'.
But to try to trivialize the debate by reducing a gun to a 'lifeless piece of metal' is ignorant in my opinion.
Here is what one of our US Senator's said a few years ago.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
You sound paranoid. Crusade of confiscation? Exploiting a tragedy through mass media disinformation? Are you taking atg pills?13rin wrote:
Which still doesn't invalidate my point of this entire idiotic crusade of confiscation reinvigorated by exploiting a tragedy through means of mass media disinformation. Oh, that stat equates to roughly 3 three days worth of knife attacks in England. Don't let your dumbassery get in the way of your fail logic.Jaekus wrote:
Yeah... don't let simple maths from the article you cite yourself get in the way of a spurious argument...
No one's coming to take your guns dude. Calm down.
Last edited by RAIMIUS (2013-01-08 14:56:36)
That is more than a few years ago, that is 17 years ago. You can do that same thing for the other side of the gun control debate and pretty much any debate, there will always be people suggesting the extreme, but that does not mean that the extreme is likely to happen. As many people on here have pointed out, guns are way too thoroughly ingrained in American society for any law to even come close to a "crusade of confiscation." You can't even propose preventing the sale of a few guns, not taking them away from those who already have them, and all of a sudden people are suggesting you be tried for treason.RAIMIUS wrote:
Here is what one of our US Senator's said a few years ago.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
You sound paranoid. Crusade of confiscation? Exploiting a tragedy through mass media disinformation? Are you taking atg pills?13rin wrote:
Which still doesn't invalidate my point of this entire idiotic crusade of confiscation reinvigorated by exploiting a tragedy through means of mass media disinformation. Oh, that stat equates to roughly 3 three days worth of knife attacks in England. Don't let your dumbassery get in the way of your fail logic.
No one's coming to take your guns dude. Calm down.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blXkl9YVoHo
The only reason she didn't enact a gun confiscation program was lack of agreement from other lawmakers.
She is also going to release a new "Assault Weapons Ban" proposal that will certainly be called "reasonable restrictions."
The "slippery slope" argument is actually valid with regards to certain subjects. While most people aren't that extreme, some of the ones trying to shape the agenda actually are!
first semester at ucla?KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
I've written her letters of disgust at her policies and positions on more than one occasion.
west-phoenix-az wrote:
if jesus had a gun he'd be alive today
Jaekus wrote:
>5 guns
coke wrote:
He is still alive, he just ascended to heaven...-Whiteroom- wrote:
If Jesus had a gun, he'd still be alive.
unnamednewbie13 wrote:
If Jesus had a gun, he'd have been worshiped as a god.
Wait...
and why the fuck would we want that?west-phoenix-az wrote:
if jesus had a gun he'd be alive today
That's cool. I've always laughed at you. It's not like you've really every said anything worthwhile in these parts. I saw that error when I posted it, but was too busy to fix it, as I also do other things with my time. I chuckled at the time as I also figured you couldn't resist. And I was right, you predictably jumped all over it like a some sort of retarded kangaroo, remaining totally lost as to the topic at hand. GG. Here's some more from that report, Jaekaroo:Jaekus wrote:
Haha. Since you can't add up I can't really take anything you say seriously.
Next time use the calculator on your PC. It's located via the Start Menu (which is that button typically down the bottom left that says START).