Another idiot with a gun

[ready4ONE 5,400]

As I stated to my good good friend natty, lets see if gun control does work or not.

Australia

• You can be imprisoned for as little as 3 years for murder. (Punishment is weak)
• Farmers can keep a riffle or shot gun
• Hand guns are restricted for use at gun clubs].
• High power weapons of any sort are banned period. Heck, even air riffles are not permitted anymore.

US

We all know the drill here. Anything short of a ballistic missile is covered by the second amendment.

People murder by means of a firearm

Australia

1 every ~ 10,080 minutes.

United States

1 every 56 minutes

Hmm let me see, which approach is working. This one is going to be tough.

And of course, never having the luck to go to Australia, I must be left to my own devices and assume Australian's are at the mercy of a dictatorship style government which forces them to work at gunpoint for peanuts by their hated fascist armed forces and are powerless to control their own destinies by virtue of their gun-less state?

Surely this must be the case, as the Australian dictatorship has foisted *gasp* socialized medicine upon their powerless, weaponless people...

Horrors!

[Ban Hammer 14,234]

at least i'm a bit more broad minded about gun ownership and have some expertise in the matter, as opposed to you.

I don't purport to be a gun expert. As to how 'broad minded' I am regarding gun ownership - that's guess work on your part. The only things you know for certain about my opinion on guns is that it's foolish to assume a cavalier attitude about firearms in order to further an agenda. Foolish in the extreme. That it's foolish to believe that gun owners are some how safer than non gun owners and that there is no correlation between legal gun ownership and gun crime and finally that this notion that gun ownership rights guarentee the integrity of freedom as being about as foolish a notion as you can get. That's all you know because that's all I have ever posted.

what i do know is this - any time there is something about taking away guns, you're there......

As a response to what I posted, that's meaningless.

as are 100% of your posts on the topic of guns..........

kinda like some are when gun laws and ownership is explained to them?

personally, i tend to think we'll see more and more instances like this as the left wingers continue their campaign to paint gun owners as "nutcases" "weirdos" and so on. and as more and more fall for the rhetoric and dispose of their means of self defense, that's just more unarmed victims for the dregs of society to prey upon.

As much as we'll continue to see actual lunatics killing their own families with legally purchased firearms.

that was a post about the ability of self defense......

kinda like some are when gun laws and ownership is explained to them?

personally, i tend to think we'll see more and more instances like this as the left wingers continue their campaign to paint gun owners as "nutcases" "weirdos" and so on. and as more and more fall for the rhetoric and dispose of their means of self defense, that's just more unarmed victims for the dregs of society to prey upon.

*sigh*

Charles you are just so seriously over-reaching.

I give up.

gun grabbers are usually over reaching too. i'm quite happy that many vj'ers are not on the judicial bench.

[Peikko 1,575]

Oh joy the 'you are wrong because I say so even though I cant actually provide any counter argument to any of the points you raised' post. Brilliant work Charles, way too go.

[Ban Hammer 14,234]

Oh joy the 'you are wrong because I say so even though I cant actually provide any counter argument to any of the points you raised' post. Brilliant work Charles, way too go.

given you probably don't know half the time which end of the gun to hold when firing it, we don't pay much attention to what you have to offer in discussions like these.

[Peikko 1,575]

Except Charles, you do, you just fail to address the issues I raise, preferring instead to address the wants in my character as if that somehow makes your argument for you. Doesn't wash, you lose.

[justashooter 430]

Except Charles, you do, you just fail to address the issues I raise, preferring instead to address the wants in my character as if that somehow makes your argument for you. Doesn't wash, you lose.

you're one of those characters that wants a lot.

[Ban Hammer 14,234]

Except Charles, you do, you just fail to address the issues I raise, preferring instead to address the wants in my character as if that somehow makes your argument for you. Doesn't wash, you lose.

maybe because your issues need a tissue. while i see a bunch of chest thumping about how britain and australia did this or that, so f'ing what: both are islands, it won't work in the usa. the usa can't even keep people from crossing the border, as shown by the large amount of illegals in the country. the same for drugs.

and yet the mental midgets seem to think if we ban guns, all will be well. when you decide to come out of your fantasy land, lemme know.

[The Dude 206]

As who my employer is, I'm privy to quite a bit of info that I can't share. However, I can tell you charles that there are companies out there that still produce those rounds. They simply modify one aspect of them and sell them under the radar. Yes, I do agree that someone trained could reload smaller magazines quickly enough that they could pump out almost as many rounds as a high capacity. However, I'm not worried so much about those with that sort of training. Someone with law enforcement, or military training could do a lot more damage with a lot less than your average citizen. Those people are also a lot smaller in number.

How can you honestly defend having high capacity magazines or assault rifles?

armour piercing ammo is not banned from private possession or use. it is prohibited from comercial sale if designed for use in pistols. there are container boxes full of the stuff out there and i can buy more tomorrow if i run out of black tips. incendiaries, too. trouble with APIT, though, is it sets the woods on fire and i lose decent marketable timber.

"assault rifles" and high capacity magazines in private hands is what the 2nd amendment is all about. having a populace as well armed as the standing military is what keeps America free from enemies foreign and domestic. it is what guarantees your right to compose drivel on the internet for me to answer.

So much fail in one post, I don't even know where to start. Lets begin with the premise that this is exactly why there shouldn't be these sorts of munitions or weapons. Your analysis of the 2nd ammendment is inane at best. That is the reason it was written, in the 18th century when we had no standing professional military. The nature and capacity of our country, citizens and military have drastically changed.

[Peikko 1,575]

Except Charles, you do, you just fail to address the issues I raise, preferring instead to address the wants in my character as if that somehow makes your argument for you. Doesn't wash, you lose.

maybe because your issues need a tissue. while i see a bunch of chest thumping about how britain and australia did this or that, so f'ing what: both are islands, it won't work in the usa. the usa can't even keep people from crossing the border, as shown by the large amount of illegals in the country. the same for drugs.

and yet the mental midgets seem to think if we ban guns, all will be well. when you decide to come out of your fantasy land, lemme know.

When you can actually address the points I have raised, not the ones that you think I should have raised, presumably because they are easier to deal with, let me know.

Except Charles, you do, you just fail to address the issues I raise, preferring instead to address the wants in my character as if that somehow makes your argument for you. Doesn't wash, you lose.

you're one of those characters that wants a lot.

You need an education.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't see what the fuss is about personally - the title of the thread is correct:

Another idiot with a gun.

[The Dude 206]

I don't see what the fuss is about personally - the title of the thread is correct:

Another idiot with a gun.

But you know how these threads go. They quickly devolve into a "You can't take my guns away" and "slippery slope" type of argumetnts completely devoid of any actual argument.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't see what the fuss is about personally - the title of the thread is correct:

Another idiot with a gun.

But you know how these threads go. They quickly devolve into a "You can't take my guns away" and "slippery slope" type of argumetnts completely devoid of any actual argument.

Of course.

Meanwhile, the story continues to be about an idiot. With a gun.

[The Dude 206]

I don't see what the fuss is about personally - the title of the thread is correct:

Another idiot with a gun.

But you know how these threads go. They quickly devolve into a "You can't take my guns away" and "slippery slope" type of argumetnts completely devoid of any actual argument.

Of course.

Meanwhile, the story continues to be about an idiot. With a gun.

And any attempt to suggest that there be better care taken to make sure and test that mentally unstable people don't have access to guns is tantamount to suggesting the government coming in and monitoring what we eat and watch on t.v.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

From what I've read on this and other threads preventing this sort of thing invariably comes down to ensuring that everyone should be allowed to carry a gun for protection, because you just never know when your father, brother, or uncle will snap and start shooting.

"Johnny dear, what have I told you about wearing your gun at the dinner table?"

"** off b!tch! How dare you infringe on my constitutionally enshrined, God ordained holy rights! I don't trust any of you bastards as far as I could kick you! and if dad tries to slap me again I'll blow his motherfucking head off!"

Edited September 9, 2009 by Private Pike

[natty bumppo 297]

yea we know ... in the BY world ... rights are selective and irrelevant

Not my world, it's called the developed world natty

your world where it's fashionable to enforce the rights you like ... ignore those you don't. where equal enforcement of rights/ law is selective. gotcha ....