Guns.

[Yorick]

You fail to see the reality that a child with a semi can kill 100 people. A child with a knife would kill none. A child with a musket would probably wound one person before they were disarmed. The guns of today give a ridiculous advantage to the armed. The guns of the revolution did not.

If you cannot see the logic of this, I don't understand how you see things at all.

[Yorick]

Also you're ignoring the concealment factor. A person can more easily hide their small weapon, more than they could the cumbersome , two-shot guns of the revolution.

[Moiraine]

LOL Magik !

Now, now, it's very simple to prove you that you are wrong indeed : as widely different as IW members are, we all do agree to abide by the Ironworks T.O.S. ...

Now, now, you can do better than that. You know perfectly well that I was not saying that I thought an unique government for everyone was realistic - nor that it was wishable, BTW. [img]smile.gif[/img]

I did, and still do, hope and believe that humanity will be able in the near future to create an international institution whose role will be to take care of the major society problems on an international level. With real power, this time, overruling the national powers in such cases like terrorism, war policies, sects, ... Well, wrong : I sure hope humanity will, because I do think she is going right into the wall if she doesn't.

If the September 11th events didn't teach all of us that truth the hard way, then what did they teach us ?

About the difference of government between France and the US, you dodged my point and you know it. I was referring to protecting the citizens as a major role of governments in general, whatever their power structure - yours do address this role, at a federal level.

EDIT : BTW, speaking about T.O.S. rules, what about respecting Memnoch's post asking we do not post nested quotes ?

[ 05-25-2002, 07:25 PM: Message edited by: Moiraine ]

[Moiraine]

Originally posted by MagiK: The arm doesnt matter, a person kille dwith a musket ball is just as dead as when killed with an A-bomb. The problem is not the guns, it is people. A gun doesnt hop off the shelf and decide to kill someone..that takes a person with a mind and will. Your fear of more efficient tools is irrational (to me, not intrinsicly) and makes no sense to me. You are for some reason just not willing to admit, that the gun is not the cause of murder or crime. You want to blame the tool for the use and it doesnt work that way....We just have different views and apparently there is no middle ground here so we will have to be content to differ on the opinion [img]smile.gif[/img] We have the right to bear arms, arms are what they are, and unless you manage to get enough people to agree to ammend the constituion we are going to remain an armed society. All I and the 50 or 60 million law abiding gun owners ask is that you leave us alone and observe our constitutional rights, in exactly the same way we ask that you observe our freedom of religion and our other basic freedoms. Hmm If I could I would make the deal with you that I'll give up guns if you give up the right to practice, teach, or learn about any religion except for the one I choose, you would also have to worship according to my decree as well [img]smile.gif[/img] ......but I can't [img]smile.gif[/img] and I wouldnt want to live in a place like that anyway. Oh and lest you think that ludicrous, Religion is a far more dangerous thing than a gun, religion is responsible for more deaths historicly than guns are...but then I htink you know this.

Now you are twisting what Yorick says - and you know it.

You say the problem is not guns, it is people. Well, a people with no weapon has a way smaller chance to kill someone, and not at all by accident. A lunie with his fingers on the nuke button can wipe out humanity. Is that on the same scale, Magik ?

One musket means one guy possibly killing one other guy, with some difficulties. An Uzi means one guy possibly wiping out a village. Scale, again.

I do ask you respect my constitunational rights when you are in France, Magik - I don't need a gun to do so, as you have a responsible mind and I can talk to it. And if you do have a gun and don't have the according responsible level, then you are indeed a threat. Better a threat with a gun or a weaponless threat ?

Religion ... Well, so far, I've never seen anybody raising his arms and killing someone from the power of his God alone. Thus, if people did kill in the name of their religion, they did it with guns. Or the like of them existing at the time. Hence, religious men with Uzis are far more dangerous than religious men with muskets are far more dangerous than religious people without any weapon.

Guns do kill. The more powerful the gun, the more devastating the kill. Is the wisdom of humanity increasing as fast as the weapon power ?

[ 05-25-2002, 07:42 PM: Message edited by: Moiraine ]

Originally posted by Yorick: You fail to see the reality that a child with a semi can kill 100 people. A child with a knife would kill none. A child with a musket would probably wound one person before they were disarmed. The guns of today give a ridiculous advantage to the armed. The guns of the revolution did not. If you cannot see the logic of this, I don't understand how you see things at all.

Legally and responsibly owned firearms are NOT in the hands of children there are laws enough to cover that issue...enforce them! And despite the media hype this doesnt happen a lot, especailly not compared to the number of people who own guns responsibly.

Who cares if it is a child with a gun or a biggot on a pulpet that causes the death of a single or multiple persons? dead is dead. Its all dangeorus so lets make the whole world safe and make everything dangerous illegal....

You clearly aren't seeing my side of it...I cannot understand why you feel obligated to remove one of the Rights gaurenteed and held second in importance next to free speech by the founders.......I just do not get it.

Like I said, Im content to agree to disagree becaus ethere is no common ground. PAX [img]smile.gif[/img]

Originally posted by Yorick: Also you're ignoring the concealment factor. A person can more easily hide their small weapon, more than they could the cumbersome , two-shot guns of the revolution.

The 2nd ammendment does not read "...The right to bear arms, except ones we can't see" They did have concealable handguns in the revolution as well....ack no more I said I was just going to call it quits...thats it Im not going to argue with you any more.....unless you say some thing that make me

Oh and umm you just did a major issue change there dude!

[ 05-25-2002, 07:50 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

Originally posted by Moiraine: LOL Magik ! Now, now, it's very simple to prove you that you are wrong indeed : as widely different as IW members are, we all do agree to abide by the Ironworks T.O.S. ... Now, now, you can do better than that. You know perfectly well that I was not saying that I thought an unique government for everyone was realistic - nor that it was wishable, BTW. [img]smile.gif[/img] I did, and still do, hope and believe that humanity will be able in the near future to create an international institution whose role will be to take care of the major society problems on an international level. With real power, this time, overruling the national powers in such cases like terrorism, war policies, sects, ... Well, wrong : I sure hope humanity will, because I do think she is going right into the wall if she doesn't. If the September 11th events didn't teach all of us that truth the hard way, then what did they teach us ? About the difference of government between France and the US, you dodged my point and you know it. I was referring to protecting the citizens as a major role of governments in general, whatever their power structure - yours do address this role, at a federal level. EDIT : BTW, speaking about T.O.S. rules, what about respecting Memnoch's post asking we do not post nested quotes ?

Hmm didnt realize I had posted a nested quote..sorry I do try to remove them when I see them. I AM really only human, I know I dazzle everyone with my near perfection...but Im not really [img]smile.gif[/img]

As for dodging the question I didnt dodge, but I may have misunderstood what you said or ment. There is room for improvement, but I thought the UN was supposed to do the things you just mentioned?
I doubt individual governments will be willing to give up sovreignty tho....a sticky situation to say the least.

Anyway sorry againa bout the nested quote thing, really didnt realize it was there.

Originally posted by Moiraine: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: The arm doesnt matter, a person kille dwith a musket ball is just as dead as when killed with an A-bomb. The problem is not the guns, it is people. A gun doesnt hop off the shelf and decide to kill someone..that takes a person with a mind and will. Your fear of more efficient tools is irrational (to me, not intrinsicly) and makes no sense to me. You are for some reason just not willing to admit, that the gun is not the cause of murder or crime. You want to blame the tool for the use and it doesnt work that way....We just have different views and apparently there is no middle ground here so we will have to be content to differ on the opinion [img]smile.gif[/img] We have the right to bear arms, arms are what they are, and unless you manage to get enough people to agree to ammend the constituion we are going to remain an armed society. All I and the 50 or 60 million law abiding gun owners ask is that you leave us alone and observe our constitutional rights, in exactly the same way we ask that you observe our freedom of religion and our other basic freedoms. Hmm If I could I would make the deal with you that I'll give up guns if you give up the right to practice, teach, or learn about any religion except for the one I choose, you would also have to worship according to my decree as well [img]smile.gif[/img] ......but I can't [img]smile.gif[/img] and I wouldnt want to live in a place like that anyway. Oh and lest you think that ludicrous, Religion is a far more dangerous thing than a gun, religion is responsible for more deaths historicly than guns are...but then I htink you know this.

Now you are twisting what Yorick says - and you know it.

You say the problem is not guns, it is people. Well, a people with no weapon has a way smaller chance to kill someone, and not at all by accident. A lunie with his fingers on the nuke button can wipe out humanity. Is that on the same scale, Magik ?

One musket means one guy possibly killing one other guy, with some difficulties. An Uzi means one guy possibly wiping out a village. Scale, again.

I do ask you respect my constitunational rights when you are in France, Magik - I don't need a gun to do so, as you have a responsible mind and I can talk to it. And if you do have a gun and don't have the according responsible level, then you are indeed a threat. Better a threat with a gun or a weaponless threat ?

Religion ... Well, so far, I've never seen anybody raising his arms and killing someone from the power of his God alone. Thus, if people did kill in the name of their religion, they did it with guns. Or the like of them existing at the time. Hence, religious men with Uzis are far more dangerous than religious men with muskets are far more dangerous than religious people without any weapon.

Guns do kill. The more powerful the gun, the more devastating the kill. Is the wisdom of humanity increasing as fast as the weapon power ?[/QUOTE]Before guns were wide spread there was quite a lot of slaughter commited with other implements, you all are just affraid of guns for some reason and seem to have imbued them with some near maniacle force that has them wandering the street on their own killingpeople...I would as soon be afraid of a hammer and just do not understand what appears to me to be an irrational fear...note I did not say you were irrational...just that it appeared that way to me on this issue. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Attalus]

Well, I go do an operation and everything has changed. Yorick, assault rifles are forbidden in the hands of civilians, a restriction that I happen to agree with, though God knows that some of my friends do not. Laws also forbid explosives and certain military weapons, such as cannons, and you cannot arm an airplane or an automobile.Yes, indeed, they had "pocket pistols" in the late 18th century. I don't know that they had any restrictions on them, but in Texas it is illegal to carry a concealed weapon of any kind, even a knife over a certain length.

[Earthdog]

Originally posted by Attalus: Well, I go do an operation and everything has changed. Yorick, assault rifles are forbidden in the hands of civilians, a restriction that I happen to agree with, though God knows that some of my friends do not. Laws also forbid explosives and certain military weapons, such as cannons, and you cannot arm an airplane or an automobile.Yes, indeed, they had "pocket pistols" in the late 18th century. I don't know that they had any restrictions on them, but in Texas it is illegal to carry a concealed weapon of any kind, even a knife over a certain length.

In the state of Texas:
You DO have the right to carry a concealed firearm. You have to pay the fees, pass the background check (which means no felonies or Class A Misdemeanors) and and qualify with the gun you choose to carry. If you qualify with a 9mm pistol you can carry a .357 magnum. But if you qualify with a .357 you CANT carry a 9mm.

There are also other restrictions. You may NOT carry a firearm into a courthouse, school, tax office, or any local, state, or federal government building of any kind. You must be 21 years of age. You may not carry a firearm into any establishement where alcohol is served or sold. Nor may you carry a firearm into any place in which gambling is conducted, i.e. Horse racing, Dog racing, or Casino.

I used to work at Lone Star Park in Grand Prairie Texas, which is a Government run Horse racing facility. I had all the laws concerning firearms and protection of self, other person, and protection of personal or other persons property. Including the RIGHT to use deadly force if neccessary. Its been a long time since Ive worked there but I still rememer the laws if not the exact numbers as stated in the Texas Penal Code Book.

You may carry a knife with a blade from hilt to tip measuring no more than 6 inches. The blade may not have blades on both edges (top and bottom) or it is considered a DAGGER. The knife may not be opened by mechanical means or by centrifigal force. These are considered switch blades.

If you are carrying a knife longer than 6 inches it must be in a sheath and prominently displayed. A fishing knife generally runs 12 to 15 inches. You must actively be fishing or TRAVELING to or from a fishing trip. Same with hunting knives.

An interesting side note is that you may carry a knife if it is under the legal limit into a place such as Lone Star Park in Grand Prairie. Or the county tax office.

A pocket knife is not considered a weapon. Until you pull it and threaten or actually stab someone with it, it is considered a TOOL.

In Texas you have the right to carry a loaded shotgun through the middle of town. Until you point it at someone or threaten someone with it, it is condidered a TOOL. For hunting. If a cop stops you and arrests you for doing this you will be released from jail and then you will promptly sue the Police Department for False Arrest. They violated your rights.

When I was a kid I lived in Burnet County Texas. My brothers and I, perhaps a friend or two, would walk the 3 miles out to my grandparents place to do some hunting and shooting. If we didnt see any game (which we always skinned and ate) we would just shoot targets. In order to get to their place though we had to walk right through the town square.

The sherrif would just wave at us or maybe stop and ask us how we were, how were my grandparents, or "What ya gonna shoot today boys??"

"Rabbit if we can, sir. Turtles or water moccassins if we cant find anything else. Maybe even a copperhead or rattlesnake if we come across one."

Sherrif would say "Well, good luck and good huntin boys. And be careful. I dont wanna have to do no paperwork if one of ya gets hurt."

"Yes sir. We know. We're always careful,sir."

This doesnt apply to other states, only Texas. But this was back in a day where kids had respect for the law and human life. Kids can learn respect for firearms if they are TAUGHT it. Its not Micheal Jordans job to be ANY kids role model. Thats up to mom and dad. Micheal Jordan isnt the one thats there when your kids learn to crawl and then walk. He wont be there when your kid graduates from high school or gets married. He wont be there when your grandchild is born.

Saying ANYONE should be able to make the decision as to whether I can own a gun is making another of those despised Group decisions that everyone hates so much. Next thing you know youll be telling me how much toilet paper I can wipe my crack with. Then itll be what brand and what color. Do I have to use toilet paper with butterflies? Cant it be birds????

All this crap about I shouldnt be able to own a machine gun is just that..... crap. I still belive in what Thomas Jefferson said about being able to revolt if neccessay. Fight fire with fire.

What some poeple class as an assualt rifle isnt an assult rifle until ive ASSULATED someone with it. Just like the pocket knife. Ita a tool. For Hunting.

Yes Yorick Gorbachov or whoever the hell it was stood on a tank and the Russians who were revolting laid down their weapons rather than kill their own brothers, sisters, mothers, and fathers.

In the American Civil War it was brother versus brother. They fought for what they believed in. It could happen again. But by removing the right to bear arms you take away the right to fight for what you believe in. You eventually lose anything you consider a right. Speech, religion. They all become memories. Step out of line and big brother comes to take you away.

I still think Texas should Succeed.

[ 05-26-2002, 02:23 AM: Message edited by: Earthdog ]