Guns.

[Sazerac]

Originally posted by Donut: Yes - you DID misquote me. I was replying to a post about murders in general NOT about murders by firearm. And that's the second time you have made the mistake of thinking that I am a young person. I am older than you are and therefore by your own admission: I need show no respect for your opinion. I am more experienced in life than you are and therefore I am always right and you are always wrong.

Originally posted by MagiK: Who is misquoting now? My comment on children having no opinions of interest to me about child rearing has nothing to do with this. AND I DID specify CHILDREN and people who have never been parents. Since there is noone on the planet that can consider me a "Child" chronologicly your comment is false from the start. I also never said ANYTHING about RESPECT with my comment. AND lastly THIS thread is about firearms more commonly called Guns So...Pardon me if I assume you are being on topic in your posts and not completely out in left field. And why do I keep mistaking you for a child? I think Ill refrain from commenting on that since it wouldnt serve any useful purpose. How can you be so hypocritical in your comments? You sit there and misquote me left and right then bash me for assumeing you are on topic? Man I really do not understand you.

Originally posted by Donut: Slightly defensive reply there Magik. I seem to have hit a nerve. You should not assume my comments were based purely on the child rearing thread. There have been a succession of diatribes from you in which you speak of your disrespect for the opinion of young people. I was merely taking your mistaken viewpoint to it's logical nonsensical extreme. The debate about firearms and deaths caused by them cannot be disentangled from the debate about murder of any form. The two go together. As for your thinly disguised insult about me being a child I shall treat it with the same disrespect that I treat all of your trollish tripe. PS. Please don't waste your time PM'ing me an apology this time.

Originally posted by MagiK: No you didnt hit a nerve, you pissed me off, a completely different thing all together I assure you. Rather than debate an issue in a straight up manner you seem to seek to confuse and obfuscate, you pissed me off. It take a lot to get me angry, especially in a silly forum thread, however YOU seem to delight in debasing half of the serious discussions I have started. Then have the gall to turn around and accuse me of comitting the offense that you your self seem to delight in useing. In person It wouldn't have been a thinly veiled anything. As for apologizing, I apologize when I have done something I discover was wrong, this time Im in the right, that is exactly why I believe you a child. You NEVER admit you are wrong, or have done wrong. I do admit that I do a disservice to children when I act like I always assume that it is only the children that are like this, but in actuality it is only because I expect better from so called adults. Edit: Please Donut, in the future, feel free to ignore my trollish tripe. Id rather not have you derailing the discussions of people who want to address the issue that is being discussed.

Guys, the two of you may chronologically be adults, but you are behaving like children in a most unbecoming way. In fact, I've seen many "kids" here who can conduct themselves far more maturely than what the two of you have shown here today.

Please take this dispute O.F. -- it is unproductive and disruptive to the flow of the thread. If you can't resolve the dispute, please resolve to ignore each other.

Thanks,
-Sazerac

[Donut]

I have resolved to do just that Saz.

[Sazerac]

Originally posted by Donut: I have resolved to do just that Saz.

Thanks, Donut. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Cheers,
-Saz

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: I never threaten any one. I do promise, and on occasion even speculate but never threaten.

MagiK?

"I do promise" sounds like a threat. I'd be careful here mate. This is thin ice you're treading on.

What are you saying?[/QUOTE]Yorick I know it sounds threatening because he is doing what he always does, we WERE talking about insults being veild, then he twisted it around to sound like it was a physical threat....My statement if read in its original form is saying that my INSULT would not be veild.

Originally posted by Sazerac: quote: Originally posted by Donut: Yes - you DID misquote me. I was replying to a post about murders in general NOT about murders by firearm. And that's the second time you have made the mistake of thinking that I am a young person. I am older than you are and therefore by your own admission: I need show no respect for your opinion. I am more experienced in life than you are and therefore I am always right and you are always wrong.

Originally posted by MagiK: Who is misquoting now? My comment on children having no opinions of interest to me about child rearing has nothing to do with this. AND I DID specify CHILDREN and people who have never been parents. Since there is noone on the planet that can consider me a "Child" chronologicly your comment is false from the start. I also never said ANYTHING about RESPECT with my comment. AND lastly THIS thread is about firearms more commonly called Guns So...Pardon me if I assume you are being on topic in your posts and not completely out in left field. And why do I keep mistaking you for a child? I think Ill refrain from commenting on that since it wouldnt serve any useful purpose. How can you be so hypocritical in your comments? You sit there and misquote me left and right then bash me for assumeing you are on topic? Man I really do not understand you.

Originally posted by Donut: Slightly defensive reply there Magik. I seem to have hit a nerve. You should not assume my comments were based purely on the child rearing thread. There have been a succession of diatribes from you in which you speak of your disrespect for the opinion of young people. I was merely taking your mistaken viewpoint to it's logical nonsensical extreme. The debate about firearms and deaths caused by them cannot be disentangled from the debate about murder of any form. The two go together. As for your thinly disguised insult about me being a child I shall treat it with the same disrespect that I treat all of your trollish tripe. PS. Please don't waste your time PM'ing me an apology this time.

Originally posted by MagiK: No you didnt hit a nerve, you pissed me off, a completely different thing all together I assure you. Rather than debate an issue in a straight up manner you seem to seek to confuse and obfuscate, you pissed me off. It take a lot to get me angry, especially in a silly forum thread, however YOU seem to delight in debasing half of the serious discussions I have started. Then have the gall to turn around and accuse me of comitting the offense that you your self seem to delight in useing. In person It wouldn't have been a thinly veiled anything. As for apologizing, I apologize when I have done something I discover was wrong, this time Im in the right, that is exactly why I believe you a child. You NEVER admit you are wrong, or have done wrong. I do admit that I do a disservice to children when I act like I always assume that it is only the children that are like this, but in actuality it is only because I expect better from so called adults. Edit: Please Donut, in the future, feel free to ignore my trollish tripe. Id rather not have you derailing the discussions of people who want to address the issue that is being discussed.

Guys, the two of you may chronologically be adults, but you are behaving like children in a most unbecoming way. In fact, I've seen many "kids" here who can conduct themselves far more maturely than what the two of you have shown here today.

Please take this dispute O.F. -- it is unproductive and disruptive to the flow of the thread. If you can't resolve the dispute, please resolve to ignore each other.

Thanks,
-Sazerac[/QUOTE]DOne! But I would like to point out saz, that I never physicaly threatened anyone as I stated in my post to Yorick, The conversation thread was about INSULTS being veiled. I let him tick me off and that was stupid.

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by Dramnek_Ulk: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: In 1999 Law enforcement agnecies from accross the USA declined to back a bill to further restrict handguns and firearms rights of citizens. Instead they proposed that current laws be enforced and harsh punishments be meted out. In the 1990's prsecution of firearms violations declined 97%, police arrested the criminals but the Justice department declined to prosecute. To fix the current problems, enforce the current laws, with stiff penalties, do not punish those who do not break the law...you keep ignoring the fact Dram, that the vast majority of gun owners never did anything wrong..so why target them?

Straw man, [/QUOTE]Dramnek, on this rare occasion I actually agree with your P.O.V. I am against guns, and believe in restricting my freedom to own one so that others are safer.

I reject the statement guns don't kill people, people kill people, for a few reasons.

1.Guns can go off by accident and kill.
2.The gun serves no other purpose than to end life. It is a tool of death. Two humans on the other hand, can create life.
3.A child can kill 6 -10 adults with a gun, and without would not even kill one.

HOWEVER, and this is why I'm replying to you, using "Straw Man" as a parrotlike reply to someones argument, is not only deaf, insulting, name calling and cause diminishing, it is also trollishly antagonising.

Give it a rest mate.[/QUOTE]In reply Yorick I would like address your bullets (pun intended)

1. not if properly handled. Lots of things are dangerous if you do not use them properly

2. None of the Gunsd I own and use regularly have taken any life. They serve their purpose of recreation. (paper targets and soda cans dont count as life) EDIT: Oops forgot my deer rifle...so only one of my guns has taken a life...sorry for the error.

3. A child with a pipe bomb (made from easily obtained household chemicals) can do as much or more damage than a kid with a gun. It isnt hard to figure out how to construct one.

Your points are all valid, but still don't show a good reason to ban firearms...in my opinion at any rate.

[ 05-23-2002, 12:06 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[Sir Heinrich Godfrie IV]

Originally Posted by: Donut -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by: Sir Heinrich Godfrie IV quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted By: Donut So there is no burglary in the US then - is that what you are saying? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- come on get real. burglaries happen LESS often per capita within the US than in countries that have self-defenseless citizens. guns are a deterient. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Absolute rubbish. Where are the facts to back up this ridiculous statement.

Donut, in regards to your question/statement i want to apologize for what i wrote. I do not have any valid evidence or statistics to back up this (true or untrue) statement that i made. I was merely going off of my memory of what a friend of mine told me. I since asked him if it is indeed a founded fact and he said that he neither heard of this broad statement, nor remembers telling it to me. After I rejogged his memory he said that I am probably refering to a finding that he HEARD about in reference to the increase of home-burglaries in CANADA after they outlawed, confuscated and destroyed their citizens firearms. This was quite irresponsible of me to make a "factual" statement without providing sources and findings to back it up. I ought to have done my own research on this topic and not rely on heresy by others to back up my own convictions.

BUT...(I'm sure you knew this was coming), I still am a strong beleiver in the logic behind the idea that more legally armed (and well trained i must add) citizens equals a safer society. Like I said, I need to do my own research on the topic of "gun control" and WILL BE in the coming days.

Also, in regards to your attempt at correcting the legitimacy of the Churchill quote I had in my signature....

Originally Posted By: Donut BTW - given the respect that Winston Churchill has in the US I think it only right to point out the inaccuracy in the the quote in your sig. Firstly there is no record of Churchill ever using these words. Secondly, even if he had, both of the words 'Liberal' and 'Conservative should be capitalised because they refer to political parties rather than fixed political ideologies. It is the same as describing someone as a democrat or a Democrat. The first meaning someone who believes in democracy and the second meaning a supporter of the Democrat party.

I have found a source that also knows of this such quote. I will say that this qoute (look at bottom of post) is SLIGHTLY different from what i originally had on my signature but nevertheless, it is essentially the same in meaning.

My original signature--> "If you are not liberal by age 20 then you have no heart, and if you are not conservative by age 40 then you have no mind." -Winston Churchill

Source--> http://www.greenleafenterprises.com/main.asp?p=qu
Obviously you will find it under "C".

I want to explain that the original source for my first quote of Churchill was from the brilliant William F. Buckley Jr.
More specifically from his book, "Let Us Talk of Many Things", a book consisting of Buckley's personal favorite speeches that he himself had made over his lifetime. However I want to mention that i do not (at this time) have the exact page from within this book, that I believe (99.99% sure) I originally obtained my first version of Churchill's snappy quote.

Hopefully I have cleared up any confusions.

[Memnoch]

Just seconding what Saz said. I don't care who started it, or what the problem is - but threats against another member, thinly veiled or otherwise, are not acceptable here. Whatever happened to treating people with respect, despite what their opinion is?

Donut and Majik, you guys should know better - both of you trolling each other, baiting each other - it's disgraceful - and I know how old you both are. But to resort to even a HINT of violence - over words that someone typed on a screen - is totally unacceptable, Majik. If someone did that to someone else in my house in the midst of a discussion I would ask them to leave. Be lucky that I'm taking into account the fact that Donut baited you. If you can't control your temper in a discussion, don't get involved. Call a mod if you feel you're being baited - that's what we're here for.

Any more of this type of behaviour and this thread will be locked. Self-control and respect, please.

[Dundee Slaytern]

Originally posted by MagiK: Firearm deaths are non-existant but Im pretty much sure that most in the west would not enjoy living under a system where you can be jailed for spitting your gum out on the pavement. Dude... who told you that? Coz I would like to slap him around a few times for making that exaggerated comment. You do not get jailed for spitting gum on the pavement. Spitting is punishable by fine, ranging from $500-$1000. In addition( and this is not directed to you, but to everybody), possession of chewing gun is legal, despite what many in the West( or any other country for that matter) believe. It is the sale of chewing gum that is illegal. True, you cannot possess more than 5 boxes( each box 20 packs, each pack 5 sticks) of chewing gum but seriously, nobody needs that much gum. Heck, I have a jar containing 3 boxes in front of me. I have yet to see a policeman banging down my door and arresting me. Singapore is a very safe, clean and wonderful city, but the residents are paying a pretty hefty fee in the lack of freedoms You know, this one is subjective. Yes, our system is not as 'free' as other systems, and it is a general opinion that the people feel the government is not open enough. However, if you have been following the local events around here, the government has started( an important definition, since it does not imply an overnight change, but a step towards that change) to open up. During the recent parliment, the issue of the people's freedom was discussed and ways on how to make the government more 'friendly' or approachable, for lack of a better word, to the people. However, if you ask me, while I believe Singapore can do more to open up, we are already considerably more free than a lot of countries. The system is strict, but not tyrannical. It is important to put things in perspective. and government oversight of their lives Eh? You have to be more specific here, because our government ensures that there is excess housing, sufficient water/electricity/gas, an efficient public transport network, etc... ... The only complaint I can think of is that there is not enough free and accessible entertainment in Singapore, [img]tongue.gif[/img] but I think that is not what you meant. Please clarify. not to mention the cameras that seem ubiquitous. Such as? The cameras that catch stupid speeders who risk other people's lives? The cameras that catch people trying to cheat the road gantries? The cameras that catch the morons who think they can beat the red light? The cameras that monitor every ATM machine? Etc... ... Which camera is bugging you? There was a really interesting documentary on the Learning channel awhile ago about the place. I think it was when that american kid was sentenced to being caned. Ah yes... Micheal Fay... ... He vandalised property and got butt-whipped. If not for the then US President Clinton's request to lower the sentence, he would have been punished more( aka more caning). It always bugged me because it was not as though we were going to hang him. He knew the rules, he chose to break them, he should have been made to suffer the full consequences, but heck no, just because some people from, USA the Superpower, think caning is barbaric( which I do not), he had to get special treatment... ... I hold no ill-feelings towards Americans, but I really get annoyed by the fanatical minority who tend to think they have superior Human Rights... ...

[Suzaku]

*Looks at last page, gets confused and lost, goes to first page, reads thread starter, comes back and gets on topic*

When I read books about how future science fiction and technologically advanced societies have hacking wars to take over each other's brains, and some end results yield "the primitive yet effective metal slug killing someone", I think that guns are just as threatening as anything else that could be used as a weapon, like a golf club or knife, which, saldy they are sometimes.

Now as the banning stuff, guns outlawed would make generally people feel safer, I would, but people would find substitutes, or get them illegally like everything else. In Japan firearms are banned except for law enforcement forces, and I support this. But problems like this will exist as surely as the people will...

Oh yeah, I found this quote, but don't use it as an excuse eh? "Fight crime. Shoot back."

[ 05-23-2002, 12:44 PM: Message edited by: Suzaku ]