Visit the Ironworks Gaming Website Email the Webmaster Graphics Library Rules and Regulations Help Support Ironworks Forum with a Donation to Keep us Online - We rely totally on Donations from members Donation goal Meter

Ironworks Gaming Radio

Ironworks Gaming Forum

Go Back   Ironworks Gaming Forum > Ironworks Gaming Forums > General Discussion > General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-21-2002, 06:06 AM   #81
the new JR Jansen
Drizzt Do'Urden
 

Join Date: May 8, 2002
Location: chocolate land
Age: 49
Posts: 696
Quote:
Originally posted by Sir Heinrich Godfrie IV:
quote:
Posted By: JR Jansen
The point is that owning an SMG is overkill. It is legal in certain states of the US to own it. Again, i don't have anything against responsible people owning a pistol or rifle but an SMG IS overkill.
It's all about untrained, and even worse, unbalanced people owning a gun. That's why so many people get shot over, well, nothing, if you think about it. If the criminal has a gun and you don't, i agree that, to put it mildly, you are at a disadvantage. But it's rather easy for untrained and unstable people to get one legally. The threat doesn't lie solely with the criminals. If you allow such a free selling of guns, overpowered guns to people who aren't carefull enough with them or are not totally balanced, you're going to get 'accidents'. Why do you need a very powerfull gun to protect yourself when a normal pistol will do ? This is my point. Again i do not have anything against trained and balanced people owning a gun but why does it have to be a powerfull one ?
what do you mean by saying that the primary problem is untrained unbalanced people having a gun?

correct me if i'm wrong but the vast majority of murders within "civilized" nations happens in the inner city and other crime infested areas, do they not? therefore it's not about mentally ill individuals getting or finding a gun and using it, it's about CRIMINALS and thugs who ARE mentally balanced using it for the wrong reasons.

and like i said earlier i do not think that SMGs have much use, unless you live in a war-zone.

although i want to mention that the swiss government REQUIRES their citizens to own a machine gun. atleast thats what i was told by someone who knows alot on this subject. if that is true, then why do we not hear about people going on murderous rampages over there??
[/QUOTE]Where did i say that part about that being the PRIMARY problem. You are just so paranoid about the criminal part. I said that the criminals aren't solely the problem. You are putting words in my mouth. This looks like typical NRA stuff. Change the subject a lot and put words in other peoples mouths. I still don't see why people should be allowed to run around with guns of a certain power level. Even if it costs a lot to register them. Some guns, even handguns, should be outlawed just because they are way to powerfull.
__________________
JR<br /><br /><br /><br />It\'s me. The guy with the cloak big enough for a fire giant and the long nose.<br />Owner of the most visited woodshed in Ironworks\' history.
the new JR Jansen is offline  
Old 05-21-2002, 08:46 AM   #82
MagiK
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by Donut:
[
quote:
Posted By: JR Jansen

You are wrong again. The vast majority of murders are not committed by criminals. The majority of murders are committed by family or by people who are known to the victim.

Switzerland again! I'll go through this once more because you are new to the board. Men in Switzerland are required to own a rifle (not a machine gun!). The rifle must be kept in a sealed container. They are issued with 20 rounds of ammunition which must also be kept sealed. The type of ammunition used is not available to be purchased so there is no possibility of them getting more. There are regular checks to make sure that the ammunition has not been used. It is difficult (although not impossible) to use a rifle to commit crime because you can't conceal it. The limited ammunition makes it difficult to go on a rampage. I hope that you can pass this information on to your friend who knows a lot about this subject.

Switzerland has the second highest handgun ownership in the western world and has the second highest number of gun related deaths. I'll leave it to you to work out which country is number one in both of these statistics.

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.

Churchill was originally a member of the Conservative (Tory) party at the age of 25, switched to the Liberal (Whig) party at 35 before returning to the Conservative party.[/QB][/QUOTE]Umm Donut...if you comit murder...you ARE dy definition a murderer, wether you are family or not. Second, where did you get the statistic that most "Firearm" murders are caused by family members? I think if you check your figures that there may be a high incidence of family killing family but that the methods of murder are not usually firearms, though they too have been used for this act.

If you look at the numbers of people who own firearms, and the numbers of firearms that exist in this country, you will see that the percentage used for criminal purposes are miniscule (less than 1% I believe) So how come you guys don't go after things that are misused by a higher percentage? such as Alcohol or tobacco or drugs...oooo wait.....let me think here...we have spent billions trying to stop these ILLEGAL items aand have failed miserably..so why do you think gun control would work any differently?
 
Old 05-21-2002, 08:51 AM   #83
MagiK
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by the new JR Jansen:
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Heinrich Godfrie IV:
quote:
Posted By: JR Jansen
The point is that owning an SMG is overkill. It is legal in certain states of the US to own it. Again, i don't have anything against responsible people owning a pistol or rifle but an SMG IS overkill.
It's all about untrained, and even worse, unbalanced people owning a gun. That's why so many people get shot over, well, nothing, if you think about it. If the criminal has a gun and you don't, i agree that, to put it mildly, you are at a disadvantage. But it's rather easy for untrained and unstable people to get one legally. The threat doesn't lie solely with the criminals. If you allow such a free selling of guns, overpowered guns to people who aren't carefull enough with them or are not totally balanced, you're going to get 'accidents'. Why do you need a very powerfull gun to protect yourself when a normal pistol will do ? This is my point. Again i do not have anything against trained and balanced people owning a gun but why does it have to be a powerfull one ?
what do you mean by saying that the primary problem is untrained unbalanced people having a gun?

correct me if i'm wrong but the vast majority of murders within "civilized" nations happens in the inner city and other crime infested areas, do they not? therefore it's not about mentally ill individuals getting or finding a gun and using it, it's about CRIMINALS and thugs who ARE mentally balanced using it for the wrong reasons.

and like i said earlier i do not think that SMGs have much use, unless you live in a war-zone.

although i want to mention that the swiss government REQUIRES their citizens to own a machine gun. atleast thats what i was told by someone who knows alot on this subject. if that is true, then why do we not hear about people going on murderous rampages over there??
[/QUOTE]Where did i say that part about that being the PRIMARY problem. You are just so paranoid about the criminal part. I said that the criminals aren't solely the problem. You are putting words in my mouth. This looks like typical NRA stuff. Change the subject a lot and put words in other peoples mouths. I still don't see why people should be allowed to run around with guns of a certain power level. Even if it costs a lot to register them. Some guns, even handguns, should be outlawed just because they are way to powerfull.
[/QUOTE]First off this sounds like Im way angrier than I am..these are just questions I have, and my writing style seems to be lacking today
Or maybe not just today [img]smile.gif[/img]

Whats wrong with the NRA? They are useing the democratic process to support their views, how is that any different from people who use it to support other views? And don't go giving me that republican/NRA conspiracy crap, for 40 years the Democrats controlled the House and Senate and did nothing to get rid of guns.

As for "Powerful guns" Exactly what is the difference between getting killed with a .22 cal target pistol and getting killed with a 155mm Howitzer? Either way you are DEAD.
 
Old 05-21-2002, 10:24 AM   #84
caleb
Horus - Egyptian Sky God
 

Join Date: April 10, 2001
Location: Tacoma, WA, U.S.A.
Age: 39
Posts: 2,615
Well if a criminal has more powerful guns then the cops then theres a greater chances innocents will be hurt
caleb is offline  
Old 05-21-2002, 01:00 PM   #85
MagiK
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by caleb:
Well if a criminal has more powerful guns then the cops then theres a greater chances innocents will be hurt
How so? that doesnt make any sense...you could arm every police person with his own M1 main battle tank and it wouldnt stop criminals from committing crimes, the power of their weapon has little or nothing to do with how many crimes a person commits. The people are not committing crimes because they have guns. They are committing crimes because they have socio-pathic type tendancies, issues or concerns, the gun is only one method of arming yourself, they could as easily have pipe bombs, zip guns (home made weapons) knives, machette's swords, clubs, golf clubs, a car or any one of a billion other things that can be used to kill people.
 
Old 05-21-2002, 01:19 PM   #86
Dramnek_Ulk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by MagiK:
First off this sounds like Im way angrier than I am..these are just questions I have, and my writing style seems to be lacking today
Or maybe not just today [img]smile.gif[/img]

Whats wrong with the NRA? They are useing the democratic process to support their views, how is that any different from people who use it to support other views? And don't go giving me that republican/NRA conspiracy crap, for 40 years the Democrats controlled the House and Senate and did nothing to get rid of guns.

As for "Powerful guns" Exactly what is the difference between getting killed with a .22 cal target pistol and getting killed with a 155mm Howitzer? Either way you are DEAD.[/QB]
The NRA uses their power to subvert the democratic process through lobbying and other such niceties, their commitment to a regressive right wing agenda and their support of that nutcase john ashcroft is very telling.
 
Old 05-21-2002, 01:21 PM   #87
Dramnek_Ulk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by Sir Heinrich Godfrie IV:
Amen brother! Amen!

for those who still think that GUNS are the problem (Dramnek), i want to let you know that every fall there is a thing called hunting. and where i live there are hundreds of thousands of people who head out into the woods (within Minnesota & Wisconsin). and nobody gets murdered! and for that matter, very very very few people get killed accidentily.

sooo wwhat dooes that prove??? hhmm...need i say more??[/QB]
Here in Britain, very few criminals carry guns or many other people for that matter. And the murder rate is much smaller than in the U.S.A, look at the figures, a disarmed populace is a safer populace.
The criminals that do have them mostly use them on each other. You see, if you do carry a gun the police come and shoot you.
There is *ALWAYS* going to be ways to get hold of a gun if you really want to. But it makes sense to makes it as hard as possible to get hold of them as possible, since this will make it harder for crimes to get hold of them.
Anyway the whole your better off if you have a gun argument is flawed, since if your victim potentially could own a gun, you are going to take one along, you might also choose to shoot first since your victim might have access to a gun.
If however your victim is not likely to have a gun, you are not likely to have to take one along.
If you look at the figures for murders, in countries where guns are more easily aviavlile, they are always higher, and more murders are always committed with firearms.
In countries where guns are tightly controlled, murders figures are always lower & less murders are committed with firearms. Evidence proves this to be correct.
The choice is yours, freedom to own guns *AND* to be killed by one, or no chance of owning a gun, but at least a smaller chance of being murdered.

For example:

In 1976 the murder rate per 100,000 in the U.S. was 9.1, but in England and Wales 1.1.

[ 05-21-2002, 01:28 PM: Message edited by: Dramnek_Ulk ]
 
Old 05-21-2002, 01:50 PM   #88
MagiK
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by Dramnek_Ulk:
quote:
Originally posted by MagiK:
First off this sounds like Im way angrier than I am..these are just questions I have, and my writing style seems to be lacking today
Or maybe not just today [img]smile.gif[/img]

Whats wrong with the NRA? They are useing the democratic process to support their views, how is that any different from people who use it to support other views? And don't go giving me that republican/NRA conspiracy crap, for 40 years the Democrats controlled the House and Senate and did nothing to get rid of guns.

As for "Powerful guns" Exactly what is the difference between getting killed with a .22 cal target pistol and getting killed with a 155mm Howitzer? Either way you are DEAD.
The NRA uses their power to subvert the democratic process through lobbying and other such niceties, their commitment to a regressive right wing agenda and their support of that nutcase john ashcroft is very telling.[/QB][/QUOTE]You are saying that lobying...and lobbyists are illegal and not part of the american political process? Im afraid if you look at it that way then there are quite a few bigger worries than the NRA, the NRA is not even close to being the biggest lobby in DC, ever heard of the AFofL CIO? The Teamsters? The Sierra club? The NRA is playing the game by the rules that 40 years of Democratic majority has developed, don't blame them for playing by the oppositions rules.

By the way, there is NO such thing as a Right wing agenda....every group has its own agenda, the right wing is no more organized than any other group of a hundred million or so people, and you can also toss out the BS about the "Vast right wing conspiracy" too.
 
Old 05-21-2002, 01:54 PM   #89
MagiK
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by Dramnek_Ulk:
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Heinrich Godfrie IV:
Amen brother! Amen!

for those who still think that GUNS are the problem (Dramnek), i want to let you know that every fall there is a thing called hunting. and where i live there are hundreds of thousands of people who head out into the woods (within Minnesota & Wisconsin). and nobody gets murdered! and for that matter, very very very few people get killed accidentily.

sooo wwhat dooes that prove??? hhmm...need i say more??
Here in Britain, very few criminals carry guns or many other people for that matter. And the murder rate is much smaller than in the U.S.A, look at the figures, a disarmed populace is a safer populace.
The criminals that do have them mostly use them on each other. You see, if you do carry a gun the police come and shoot you.
There is *ALWAYS* going to be ways to get hold of a gun if you really want to. But it makes sense to makes it as hard as possible to get hold of them as possible, since this will make it harder for crimes to get hold of them.
Anyway the whole your better off if you have a gun argument is flawed, since if your victim potentially could own a gun, you are going to take one along, you might also choose to shoot first since your victim might have access to a gun.
If however your victim is not likely to have a gun, you are not likely to have to take one along.
If you look at the figures for murders, in countries where guns are more easily aviavlile, they are always higher, and more murders are always committed with firearms.
In countries where guns are tightly controlled, murders figures are always lower & less murders are committed with firearms. Evidence proves this to be correct.
The choice is yours, freedom to own guns *AND* to be killed by one, or no chance of owning a gun, but at least a smaller chance of being murdered.

For example:

In 1976 the murder rate per 100,000 in the U.S. was 9.1, but in England and Wales 1.1.[/QB][/QUOTE]Lets see, wales = the size of a good coffee cake.....USA = the size of a continent.....wales = small reletively homogenous population.....USA = vastly diverse population. Wales = 2 or 3 religious factions, USA = dozens You cannot compare apples and oranges Dramnek, we would still have more murders per 100,000 population than wales, even if there were no guns, guns arent the cause of the problem and to endlessly repeat the same numbers over and over doesnt make the situation any more true.

Let ME repeat GUNS are not causing the problem.

Guns are not even the #1 cause of non-accident or disease related death in this country.

And since we are talking statistics here is one for ya, The USA also has a huge lead in hamburgers consumed per 100,000 vs wales.....gee a hamburgerless society is a safer society.

[ 05-21-2002, 02:00 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]
 
Old 05-21-2002, 02:03 PM   #90
Epona
Zartan
 

Join Date: March 1, 2001
Location: London, England
Age: 52
Posts: 5,164
Quote:
Originally posted by Dramnek_Ulk:
Here in Britain, very few criminals carry guns or many other people for that matter. And the murder rate is much smaller than in the U.S.A, look at the figures, a disarmed populace is a safer populace.
Guns don't commit murder. People commit murder, sometimes using guns, more often using knives or heavy blunt objects. If you think hardly any criminals in the UK carry guns, try living in Hackney.

It is not the availability of guns that causes people to commit murder, it is social and/or mental problems. I have a rack of knives in my kitchen, but having access to them does not make me feel like murdering someone. People get stabbed a lot round here, perhaps I should be disarmed 'just in case' and made to chop my vegetables with a butter knife, in case I should suddenly decide to go and stab someone through the neck with my rather nice shiny stainless-steel chefs knife.

[ 05-21-2002, 02:07 PM: Message edited by: Epona ]
__________________
[img]\"http://www.wizardrealm.com/images/epona.gif\" alt=\" - \" />
Epona is offline  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
kotor guns Rokc Cadarn Miscellaneous Games (RPG or not) 6 09-01-2004 08:18 AM
About modern guns Bozos of Bones General Discussion 11 08-29-2003 11:10 AM
Do ya like guns??? Larry_OHF General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 126 02-12-2003 09:21 AM
Guns ??? Bad Mr. Frosty General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 6 05-29-2002 06:25 AM
Guns 2 Ar-Cunin General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 5 05-27-2002 10:49 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2024 Ironworks Gaming & ©2024 The Great Escape Studios TM - All Rights Reserved