Guns.

[Sir Taliesin]

Guns DO kill. QB]

Sorry Yorick, a firearm is simply a tool. Without a hand to weld it and a brain to tell that hand what to do, it's a useless hunk of metal. It's no more deadly than a large rock, club, bow and arrow or any other inadment object. All these can also kill, but again each in themselves isn't deadly unless there is a brain behind it.

Comparing a firearm to a nuclear bomb is like comparing a tennis shoe to super tanker. I don't really see your correlation there.

[quote]Originally posted by Yorick:

The gun is irrelevent to the success of a revoltion, not irrelevent to crime, mass murder, accidental murder, dorky teen-goes-psycho murder or any other form of gun crime. The argument, that "people kill people" etc is ludicrous when one applies it to a nuclear bomb. Are those against gun control against nuclear disarmament also? Pro Gun, pro-bomb? If not it's a hypocrisy. Both are created as tools to either end human life, or coerce through threat of ending human life. Unlike an axe or a knife, they have no other created purpose than these. Yes people use them as recreation, but this is a restricive use. Not using it as intended. The issue is, do we forsake individual freedoms, for safety? Historically this has been an area where Americans have been reluctant to go. No I don't want to stop shooting racoons on the weekend so that a teenager can't shoot his classmates. No I don't want to pay more tax so the health system gets better and more affordable. No I don't want to be forced to drink less if I'm driving, so innocents aren't killed by some (legal) nut who would be over the limit in most other countries. And that's cool. In general America, like Australia, values individuality where East Asian cultures value conformity. As long as people are aware of the correlation, and make an informed decision this is o.k. Where people believe that they are an island - that they are both unaffected, and unable to effect circumstances - they are living in delusion and denial. Guns DO kill. If you can live with that, and weigh up the cost to justify no gun controls, then fine. [img]smile.gif[/img] Vive le difference.

Ok Yorick now you are starting to show that you don't know what guns are for for the average gun owner in the USA. Not all guns even most guns are ment for ending human life, most guns sold in the US are made for a variety of reasons, one of the bigger ones being Hunting, You seem to have no grasp of what guns are in rural areas..and the MAJORITY of the US is rural not city. You have traveled a lot, but have you actually drive from one side of the country to the other?

Where I grew up it is still very rural, people use guns to hunt for meat, most of Pennsylvania is low economy low income, so loads of people supplement their meat with game animals. We used/use guns to kill varmits (thats bunnies and gophers and groundhogs to you city folk) which do billions of dollars in damage to regular home owners accross the country not just the farmers. Porcupines are another pest in central PA and will in fact quite litteraly eat you out of house and home by eating the walls. These are just a few uses for guns that go on every day that no one living in a city ever hears about or even considers. Oh and the rat population is also partly kept in check with guns....there are many useful non-human killing purposes for guns, guns are not our problem, people are our problem...and for the record, I think the US would be nuts if they ever signed a "absolutley no nukes in the arsenel" treaty. I know for a fact that right now there is a very clear and specific need for a particular type of nuclear weapon that is just now being designed and this weapon will always be needed in the inventory....not for mass destruction of populaces or some foreign government's threatening military....it is a device used for targeting very deep underground manufacturing plants that are burried more than a thousand feet deep. So again I say..the weapons are tools..their use is up to humans and humans are the problem if any.

Amother point, the drinking and driving laws weren't passed to protect innocent people....they were passed to protect the wallets of the fat cat insurance companies.....

Punish the criminals in a fashion that is undeniably horrible and not more comfy than the homes they came from and you will see a decline in the number of crimes.

Abolishing the second ammendment is NOT an answer. Did you look at the Statistics that Sir. T put up?? People still kill people with or without legal guns.

Anyway you do bring up interesting points that at least make sense. [img]smile.gif[/img] Sorry if I sounded too ernest in this I jsut dont know how to write in a different manner...

Errr I just noticed your "no gun controlls" statement....who said no controls?? We already have over 900 laws concerning guns nation wide, felons are not allowed to own guns at all, we have to pass background checks and obtain permits and licenses...Id say that there is an abundance of "controls" on guns.

[ 05-24-2002, 01:32 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

Originally posted by Earthdog: [qb] [180 kids??? The law shouldnt have to work very hard to build up a case against the guy especially considering he ADMITTED to it. Life without parole in solitary. Let him rot in solitary for a couple years and then put him in general population.

Unfortunately up here in the States things have kind of gone amok with the lawers and civil rights..so it takes a loooooong time to prosecute any criminal...unless they are in a city and part of some ethnic minority..then things seem to move along quite quickly.....dut that is another matter all together.

[Epona]

Originally posted by Sir Taliesin: quote: Originally posted by Sazerac: quote: Originally posted by Sir Taliesin: Epona and Donut MOVE away from there!

EVERYONE who was involved in the altercation needs to drop it...including YOU, Sir Taliesin. Everything has settled down nicely, and we don't need it getting started up again by singling people out.

To put it bluntly (and forgive my choice of epithet), crusted-over dogshit won't stink until someone takes a stick and stirs it up again. QUIT STIRRING.

-Sazerac[/QUOTE]Excuse me Saz, but please go back to my post and read the line that directly precedes what you have quoted. I believe that I to joined your chorus to tone down the heated debate.

As for what I was talking about in the quote you took from my post, I refer to Donut's statement on page 5.

"What I will agree with you on is that you are more likely to be a victim of crime in England than in the USA but I haven't heard anyone disputing this. If you live where I live in London it is even more dangerous. If you live in Central London (like Epona) you are virtually a crime statistic waiting to happen."

If I offended Donut or Epona I'm sorry. I should have added Donut's statement to the Bold Letters in my original post. I was not angry with them or anyone else here.[/QUOTE]Agreed Sir T. In the context of the previous quote from Donut, your larger than life contribution to the debate was in actual fact hilarious - I was in no way offended whatsoever - because I knew straight away what you were referring to.

Made me laugh, and yes, I am moving as soon as contracts have been finalised on the sale of my apartment. Hopefully I can avoid getting shot or stabbed in the meantime LOL, I've managed for 8 years to avoid any major problems here, unlike my unlucky lodger who got stabbed practically on my doorstep (he was OK but needed stitches). Hoping to buy a house further North in London possibly.

[Epona]

Originally posted by MagiK: Errr I just noticed your "no gun controlls" statement....who said no controls?? We already have over 900 laws concerning guns nation wide, felons are not allowed to own guns at all, we have to pass background checks and obtain permits and licenses...Id say that there is an abundance of "controls" on guns.

Absolutely, I would just like to point out that I am not in favour of a free for all on gun ownership. People with a criminal record should be barred, and licensing I'm in favour of.

[Yorick]

MagiK you presume much about me. I lived for four years in the Australian outback. In Northwest Australia, I, with my father, would visit cattle properties the size of European counties, or New England states. I'm familiar with the use of guns for farming. Australia has an amount of ownership allowed for farming.

The reality is the gun is still used to end life. Handguns, semis, uzzis etc, to end human life.

Ok so there's a difference, but not a big one. Guns kill period.

As far as driving across the country, in the short time I've been here, I've driven from Vegas to Cuidad Jarez and back (via New Mexico, Arizona etc). From New York to Boston. I've taken a bus from Nashville to Jersey, seen Atlanta, Philadelphia, Conneticut, Rhode Island, Jersey.

Do I qualify for an opinion yet?

In my own country, my family drove over from Perth to Sydney.
I've driven from Melbourne to Cape Tribulation in far north Queensland. I've been to Broken Hill, Darwin, and Alice.

Does this qualify me for an opinion MagiK or am I still just "city folk"

I stand by what I say.

Until people are prepared to forsake certain freedoms for safety, gun crime will be an issue.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by MagiK: Punish the criminals in a fashion that is undeniably horrible and not more comfy than the homes they came from and you will see a decline in the number of crimes..

It has been proven deterrance is not a crime reducer.

[Sazerac]

Originally posted by Sir Taliesin: Excuse me Saz, but please go back to my post and read the line that directly precedes what you have quoted. I believe that I to joined your chorus to tone down the heated debate. As for what I was talking about in the quote you took from my post, I refer to Donut's statement on page 5. "What I will agree with you on is that you are more likely to be a victim of crime in England than in the USA but I haven't heard anyone disputing this. If you live where I live in London it is even more dangerous. If you live in Central London (like Epona) you are virtually a crime statistic waiting to happen." If I offended Donut or Epona I'm sorry. I should have added Donut's statement to the Bold Letters in my original post. I was not angry with them or anyone else here.

My apologies to you, Sir Taliesin. I *did* read the line directly before that: this is how it reads:

BTW, Guys let's keep this a nice topic! We had another Firearms related discussion some weeks ago that wasn't near this cantakerous. Let's keep this one the same way. Epona and Donut MOVE away from there!

To me that sounded like you were singling them out for participating in a fracas, instead of addressing a completely different issue. I know understand what was going on by the context. It would help, in future, to keep the issues separate, even by numbering them or using bulleted lists, to avoid confusion. Just a suggestion. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Carry on!

-Sazerac

[Sazerac]

Oh, BTW...

This topic is growing pretty fast. Ziroc has requested that we keep threads to no more than 300 posts so that they don't get too large and unweildy. Whenever we reach 300, would someone please start a new thread (Guns part II or something like that) and then I or another mod will lock off the old one.

Thanks!

-Sazerac

[Epona]

Originally posted by Sazerac: To me that sounded like you were singling them out for participating in a fracas,

Fracas? Moi? [img]graemlins/angel.gif[/img]