Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Help & tips > Other/general  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 07.12.2012, 00:17
Caviarchips's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Basel Stadt
Posts: 3,979
Groaned at 99 Times in 77 Posts
Thanked 6,677 Times in 2,388 Posts
Caviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
View Post
To strike things, and to discharge a bullet. As I've said.
No, that's the mechanism by which they acheive their purpose.

The purpose of a hammer is to hit nails into wood. The purpose of a gun is to fire a bullet to kill stuff.

There are some good arguments about guns and retention. Yours isn't one of them
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 07.12.2012, 00:34
Jobsrobertsharpii's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Z-U-R-I-C-H
Posts: 2,335
Groaned at 173 Times in 124 Posts
Thanked 3,384 Times in 1,536 Posts
Jobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
View Post
No, that's the mechanism by which they acheive their purpose.

The purpose of a hammer is to hit nails into wood. The purpose of a gun is to fire a bullet to kill stuff.

There are some good arguments about guns and retention. Yours isn't one of them
I can think of so many uses for a hammer that have nothing to do with either nails or wood, but do have to do with striking things.

Equally, I can think of many uses of guns that have nothing to do with killing anything, but do involve discharging a bullet.

You're pointing out one use of each tool, ignoring all the others, and then arguing that the tool was made only for this. If that were true with hammers, why are there so many hammers on the market? Why are many of them marketed to do things that have nothing to do with either nails or wood? Likewise with guns. Why are there so many guns designed for hunting, sport shooting, or target practice if their only purpose was to kill? Why are most guns never actually used to kill anything more serious than a tin can or a paper target?
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 07.12.2012, 00:46
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
View Post
Yet, despite the huge quantity of guns in the US, gun violence is actually quite rare. Yes, it happens frequently, but when you consider the occurrences as a factor of the number of guns available, you'll find that it is actually quite rare. That being said, any instance of unwarranted violence is a tragedy.
I take exception to this; the US is not, by any measure, a "failed society." Additionally, Americans do not walk around, Wild-West-style with six-guns on their hips.
If it comes down to kill-or-be-killed, I'd rather not be the dead one, so I don't understand what point you're making...
No its not. Not even in the least. That's a paradigm sold you by the media in the US, and it has about as much efficacy as snake oil...
Those individuals would engage in violence irrespective of whether they possessed firearms, and when there are no firearms available, routinely engage in beatings, stabbings, and more. As I've said before, maybe the carnage would be less, but also maybe not...
I don't know to which theaters you're going, but I worked for a movie theater chain in the US for almost a decade, and never felt anxious about being shot. I could go so far as to say it was not even a consideration.
Gross generalization, and also very, very untrue.
I've heard about it quite often. Also, it is extremely hard to quantify the effectiveness of anything as a deterrent, because would-be assailants don't come out and announce that they would've robbed so-and-so, but the possibility of getting shot stopped them. I'll admit that guns-as-deterrents are a bit of an argument on faith, but one that can't be disproved.
Because the gun-control laws are giving the advantage to those that don't obey the law.
Wanton taking of life, so frequently because guns are so easily accessible is a sign of a failed society. Gun violence has been deemed a "US Public Health Problem." How many incidents are there where an "average citizen" carrying a gun was a deterrent to a robbery, killing, etc...in the US, compared to the number of killings, robberies etc? The Wild West is alive and unfortunately they all think they are good shooters as well!...LOL

You must of heard about the killing at the theater for the opening of the recent Batman movie? How can a society filled with so much killing, similar to a third world country not effect the everyday individual? Whether you are in a coffee shop, a theater, a club, or wherever, you just don't know who will snap since guns are so easily accessible and ANYONE can get one. This includes AK47s and the like. Children carrying guns to school, children being killed by gun shot wounds, whole families being wiped out. How can the average citizen function in such a society without undue angst?
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 07.12.2012, 00:49
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
View Post
I can think of so many uses for a hammer that have nothing to do with either nails or wood, but do have to do with striking things.
Equally, I can think of many uses of guns that have nothing to do with killing anything, but do involve discharging a bullet.
Okay, shoot...pun intended. Name at least 10!
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 07.12.2012, 01:03
slammer's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Lummerland
Posts: 5,334
Groaned at 149 Times in 105 Posts
Thanked 9,292 Times in 3,533 Posts
slammer has a reputation beyond reputeslammer has a reputation beyond reputeslammer has a reputation beyond reputeslammer has a reputation beyond reputeslammer has a reputation beyond reputeslammer has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
View Post
I think you still missed the main point, that guns were invented to kill (animals and unfortunately people as well).
Many things are more capable than bowling balls to kill, but the key difference is that these things are not invented to do that.
You said about the harm of using things improperly.
But, what is then the proper use of a gun? target practice?

I believe people should first accept that guns are meant to kill and thus, they should be treated with the proper respect and care.
That is probably the most sensible thing I have read on this thread up until now.
Guns kill, people kill with guns, it is what we do, unless you breed killing out of the human race you will get people killing people with guns, other people like to target shoot with guns.
Let me keep my guns, I promise not to shoot anybody.
Quote:
Additionally, Americans do not walk around, Wild-West-style with six-guns on their hips.
You have never been to Texas then I take it?
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 07.12.2012, 01:09
Jobsrobertsharpii's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Z-U-R-I-C-H
Posts: 2,335
Groaned at 173 Times in 124 Posts
Thanked 3,384 Times in 1,536 Posts
Jobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
Wanton taking of life, so frequently because guns are so easily accessible is a sign of a failed society.
Wanton taking of life? Yes, there's violence in the US, but guns are just a tool, not some all-powerful enabler that you make them out to be. If someone is motivated to violence, they'll find a way, gun or no.

Quote:
Gun violence has been deemed a "US Public Health Problem."
By one professor in one pop-science article, citing biased statistics...

Quote:
How many incidents are there where an "average citizen" carrying a gun was a deterrent to a robbery, killing, etc...in the US, compared to the number of killings, robberies etc?
This just reinforces my argument that current gun-control laws favor criminals.

Quote:
The Wild West is alive and unfortunately they all think they are good shooters as well!...LOL
Again, gross generalization of less-than-accurate historical paradigm...

Quote:
You must have heard about the killing at the theater for the opening of the recent Batman movie? How can a society filled with so much killing, similar to a third world country not affect the everyday individual?
FTFY, Grammar-Nazi out. Yes, I heard about this. This individual also demonstrated great prowess at making improvised explosives, so I would posit that, had guns not been available to him, he would've conducted his killing with homemade pipebombs, or the like. I wish there had been someone in the audience with the ability to defend themselves. Maybe this would've brought the wanton killing to a halt, sparing lives. Maybe not. We can Monday-morning quarterback that to death...

Again, I don't see this "so much killing." The US is not a third-world country, and claiming it is that way won't make it so.


Quote:
Whether you are in a coffee shop, a theater, a club, or wherever, you just don't know who will snap since guns are so easily accessible and ANYONE can get one.
Because one only snaps when one has a gun? An imbalanced individual will behave in an imbalanced manner, independent of any tools to which that individual may have access. Again, maybe not having a gun makes the situation less dangerous, maybe the situation becomes more dangerous from the absence of guns. Monday-morning quarterbacking...


Quote:
This includes AK47s and the like.
An AK-47 can be had anywhere in the world, for a price (even here in Switzerland), gun laws and prohibitions notwithstanding...

Quote:
Children carrying guns to school,
My father routinely carried a gun to school as a child and stored it in his locker; he was part of the school rifle team. Not one child was ever harmed or killed as a result of this. Nowadays, US schools arrest children for bringing plastic knives as part of a packaged cutlery set to school, yet we have more violence in the schools despite all the enforced prohibitions.

Quote:
children being killed by gun shot wounds,
More children die by drowning in backyard swimming pools than do from firearms. Wanna help me ban swimming pools?


Quote:
whole families being wiped out.
Thousands of people were wiped out by a small group of individuals with box cutters and screwdrivers on 9/11, so I don't see this as being unique to firearms in any way. As I've said, individuals with motivation to commit violence will find a way to commit violence. Guns are just one tool they may use...

Quote:
How can
the average citizen function in such a society without undue angst?
Man, I don't consider myself anything more than average, but I've managed to get along just fine in the US for more than 30 years.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 07.12.2012, 01:14
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
View Post
Wanton taking of life? Yes, there's violence in the US, but guns are just a tool, not some all-powerful enabler that you make them out to be. If someone is motivated to violence, they'll find a way, gun or no.
By one professor in one pop-science article, citing biased statistics...
This just reinforces my argument that current gun-control laws favor criminals.
Again, gross generalization of less-than-accurate historical paradigm...
FTFY, Grammar-Nazi out. Yes, I heard about this. This individual also demonstrated great prowess at making improvised explosives, so I would posit that, had guns not been available to him, he would've conducted his killing with homemade pipebombs, or the like. I wish there had been someone in the audience with the ability to defend themselves. Maybe this would've brought the wanton killing to a halt, sparing lives. Maybe not. We can Monday-morning quarterback that to death...
Again, I don't see this "so much killing." The US is not a third-world country, and claiming it is that way won't make it so.
Because one only snaps when one has a gun? An imbalanced individual will behave in an imbalanced manner, independent of any tools to which that individual may have access. Again, maybe not having a gun makes the situation less dangerous, maybe the situation becomes more dangerous from the absence of guns. Monday-morning quarterbacking...
An AK-47 can be had anywhere in the world, for a price (even here in Switzerland), gun laws and prohibitions notwithstanding...
My father routinely carried a gun to school as a child and stored it in his locker; he was part of the school rifle team. Not one child was ever harmed or killed as a result of this. Nowadays, US schools arrest children for bringing plastic knives as part of a packaged cutlery set to school, yet we have more violence in the schools despite all the enforced prohibitions.
More children die by drowning in backyard swimming pools than do from firearms. Wanna help me ban swimming pools?
Thousands of people were wiped out by a small group of individuals with box cutters and screwdrivers on 9/11, so I don't see this as being unique to firearms in any way. As I've said, individuals with motivation to commit violence will find a way to commit violence. Guns are just one tool they may use...
Man, I don't consider myself anything more than average, but I've managed to get along just fine in the US for more than 30 years.
Uhm...I'm still waiting for the 10 reasons for guns besides killing...or don't tell me, you've run out of bullets.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 07.12.2012, 08:38
Jobsrobertsharpii's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Z-U-R-I-C-H
Posts: 2,335
Groaned at 173 Times in 124 Posts
Thanked 3,384 Times in 1,536 Posts
Jobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
Okay, shoot...pun intended. Name at least 10!
Quote:
Uhm...I'm still waiting for the 10 reasons for guns besides killing...or don't tell me, you've run out of bullets.
Oh, whoops. Sorry, got bored with the disingenuous parroting of the media's anti gun arguments and went to bed for the night...

Why 10, besides that it is an arbitrary number you chose to use against my argument if I don't name at least that many, ignoring every other point I've discussed? If I don't name 10, then you are going to point and say, "He can't name 10! That means guns are bad..." Nevermind that one has nothing to do with the other.

  1. In mountainous regions, guns are used to initiate controlled avalanches, protecting skiers and climbers from the possibility of more severe avalanches.
  2. In geologic research, a type of shotgun is fired into the ground to generate soundwaves that are used to map subterranean geologic features.
  3. The University of Texas developed a "Tornado Gun" to discharge objects at velocities reached in tornadoes, for the purposes of developing more tornado-resistant structures and materials.
  4. Particle accelerators, such as the LHC at CERN use a gun to begin accelerating particles for scientific research.
  5. In Michigan in the US, there is an annual "Punkin-Chunkin" competition, where guns are used to fling pumpkins, sometimes over a mile.
  6. In many Bomb Disposal Units, one accepted method of destroying an explosive is to shoot a gun at it to trigger the explosive in a controlled method.
  7. Pistols are used to start track & field events, even at the Olympics.
  8. Flare guns are used to signal rescuers in the instance of one being in distress.
  9. Paintball guns are used for entertainment regularly.
  10. Nail guns are used to build houses every day. (oops, there's ten, and I'm not done..)
  11. Beanbag guns, rubber bullets, and tranquilizer guns are all less-than-lethal methods to subdue unruly individuals.
  12. And... the number one, most common use of guns, in general... Target practice!
Did you really think I couldn't come up with at least 10? The point I'm making is that guns are a tool, just one tool, that can be used improperly and kill people. There are many other tools in society that can be used to kill. The common thread between all these is the person using them. It is the mentality of the person using the gun that makes it lethal. You can take guns out of the equation, but if you don't change the individuals, you'll just end up with other kinds of violence, maybe more, maybe less, but other violence just the same...
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 07.12.2012, 08:40
Jobsrobertsharpii's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Z-U-R-I-C-H
Posts: 2,335
Groaned at 173 Times in 124 Posts
Thanked 3,384 Times in 1,536 Posts
Jobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
View Post
You have never been to Texas then I take it?
I lived there for a few years, actually...

And my US residence is in Florida, another must-issue concealed-carry state.

What's your point?
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 07.12.2012, 09:12
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
View Post
Again...

Guns were designed to discharge a bullet, not to kill.
Rubbish.
Quote:
View Post
Claiming that guns were designed to kill is akin to claiming that a hammer is designed to kill.
Err no, it isn't. It's like claiming that a bow and arrow is designed to kill, or a spear, or an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile. You talk as if the fact of using a gun to kill was discovered accidentally. I can just imagine the scenario:

Inventor: Hey, I've made this great invention, put this powder here, this bullet here, and then point it at a target over there and look - what a brilliant new sport, I'll call it target shooting.

Shooter: Oops, terribly sorry, old chap, I seem to have missed the target and hit someone who happened to be walking past. Oh, it seems to have killed them, How strange. Who'd have thought that such an innocent object could possibly kill someone?
Reply With Quote
The following 7 users would like to thank for this useful post:
  #111  
Old 07.12.2012, 09:43
Desert Rat's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Scottsdale, USA/Geneva CH
Posts: 712
Groaned at 15 Times in 9 Posts
Thanked 1,733 Times in 510 Posts
Desert Rat has a reputation beyond reputeDesert Rat has a reputation beyond reputeDesert Rat has a reputation beyond reputeDesert Rat has a reputation beyond reputeDesert Rat has a reputation beyond reputeDesert Rat has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
Rubbish.


Err no, it isn't. It's like claiming that a bow and arrow is designed to kill, or a spear, or an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile. You talk as if the fact of using a gun to kill was discovered accidentally. I can just imagine the scenario:

Inventor: Hey, I've made this great invention, put this powder here, this bullet here, and then point it at a target over there and look - what a brilliant new sport, I'll call it target shooting.

Shooter: Oops, terribly sorry, old chap, I seem to have missed the target and hit someone who happened to be walking past. Oh, it seems to have killed them, How strange. Who'd have thought that such an innocent object could possibly kill someone?
I'm a pro-gun guy, but that was funny!
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Desert Rat for this useful post:
  #112  
Old 07.12.2012, 09:45
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Bern
Posts: 196
Groaned at 3 Times in 1 Post
Thanked 177 Times in 72 Posts
EvenPar has earned the respect of manyEvenPar has earned the respect of manyEvenPar has earned the respect of many
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
View Post
Why does the 2nd amendment interest the Brits so much? Who cares, it's an entirely domestic issue, let the Americans deal with making their own laws and the consequences thereof.
As someone with children just across the border from the US I do care. 1,000 illegal handguns enter Ontario each month from the US. These are not for hunting or for target practice. They are used by gangs, "motards" like rock machine and the Hells Angels and innocent children are dying.

I have no objection to hunting if one has taken a hunting course and passed examinations that include the safe use of a rifle or shotgun as well as the most humane way to kill prey. I eat meat so it would be illogical not to agree that a well regulated hunt is ok. But pistols are for the police and military. They have no legitimate purpose in the hands of the public. Semiautomatic and automatic weapons fall into the same class.

If you read the second amendment it opens with "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State..." so regulate - require permits, training and restrict some classes of firearm. If people must fire pistols and automatic weapons let them do so at gun clubs where they will also be stored.

Despite the problem of firearms entering Canada illegally the system of regulation in Canada keeps gun related homicide rates lower than in the US. That is not because ownership rates are dramatically lower, they are not. But the regulatory system has been stronger.

No system is perfect. Yesterday was the 23rd anniversary of the école polytechnique massacre. 14 women were killed before the gunman took his own life. More stringent gun control was introduced, including better screening, training and registration (since then the registry portion has been revoked).

I know that the most dangerous part of any gun is the nut behind the butt-plate. I have been the victim of a home invasion (yes, in the house when the criminals entered to steal stuff) fortunately nobody had a gun - them or me. Bullets are dumb they do not stop at the "bad guy". I was angry and upset. But I am glad that I was not armed. Nobody was hurt and stuff can be replaced. Lives, even those of criminals are precious.

Stop tha carnage, regulate the militia.
Reply With Quote
The following 5 users would like to thank EvenPar for this useful post:
  #113  
Old 07.12.2012, 10:13
Jobsrobertsharpii's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Z-U-R-I-C-H
Posts: 2,335
Groaned at 173 Times in 124 Posts
Thanked 3,384 Times in 1,536 Posts
Jobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
Rubbish.


Err no, it isn't. It's like claiming that a bow and arrow is designed to kill, or a spear, or an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile. You talk as if the fact of using a gun to kill was discovered accidentally. I can just imagine the scenario:

Inventor: Hey, I've made this great invention, put this powder here, this bullet here, and then point it at a target over there and look - what a brilliant new sport, I'll call it target shooting.

Shooter: Oops, terribly sorry, old chap, I seem to have missed the target and hit someone who happened to be walking past. Oh, it seems to have killed them, How strange. Who'd have thought that such an innocent object could possibly kill someone?
What you're arguing, though, is that because ONE use of firearms is to kill, that this is perhaps their ONLY or PRIMARY use. Nobody but a fool will deny the lethality of firearms- they CAN kill. I will even admit that the first intended use of firearms had to do with fighting and warfare, but this is not and has not been the primary use of firearms throughout history, and as we have progressed, humans have come up with more and more firearms uses that have nothing to do with killing.

We catalog killing and warfare because it is more morbidly fascinating than going about and documenting the millions of rounds a year (maybe tens of millions?) that are discharged with no harmful intent or consequences. This morbid fascination creates incorrect perceptions of the dangers of firearms. Again, there is no denying firearms are dangerous and must be used properly; however I will argue that these uninformed, incorrect, and sometimes ignorant perceptions of firearms have created an environment where we don't teach ourselves how to properly respect and use them, and THIS causes them to be used in inappropriate ways, such as killing.

As to mentally disturbed individuals, such as those cited in the one post, they are irrational; no amount of speechifying or legal prohibitions is likely to make an impact. If they haven't identified themselves prior to "snapping," what can society do to protect itself?
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 07.12.2012, 10:46
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
View Post
Oh, whoops. Sorry, got bored with the disingenuous parroting of the media's anti gun arguments and went to bed for the night...

Why 10, besides that it is an arbitrary number you chose to use against my argument if I don't name at least that many, ignoring every other point I've discussed? If I don't name 10, then you are going to point and say, "He can't name 10! That means guns are bad..." Nevermind that one has nothing to do with the other.

  1. In mountainous regions, guns are used to initiate controlled avalanches, protecting skiers and climbers from the possibility of more severe avalanches.
  2. In geologic research, a type of shotgun is fired into the ground to generate soundwaves that are used to map subterranean geologic features.
  3. The University of Texas developed a "Tornado Gun" to discharge objects at velocities reached in tornadoes, for the purposes of developing more tornado-resistant structures and materials.
  4. Particle accelerators, such as the LHC at CERN use a gun to begin accelerating particles for scientific research.
  5. In Michigan in the US, there is an annual "Punkin-Chunkin" competition, where guns are used to fling pumpkins, sometimes over a mile.
  6. In many Bomb Disposal Units, one accepted method of destroying an explosive is to shoot a gun at it to trigger the explosive in a controlled method.
  7. Pistols are used to start track & field events, even at the Olympics.
  8. Flare guns are used to signal rescuers in the instance of one being in distress.
  9. Paintball guns are used for entertainment regularly.
  10. Nail guns are used to build houses every day. (oops, there's ten, and I'm not done..)
  11. Beanbag guns, rubber bullets, and tranquilizer guns are all less-than-lethal methods to subdue unruly individuals.
  12. And... the number one, most common use of guns, in general... Target practice!
Did you really think I couldn't come up with at least 10? The point I'm making is that guns are a tool, just one tool, that can be used improperly and kill people. There are many other tools in society that can be used to kill. The common thread between all these is the person using them. It is the mentality of the person using the gun that makes it lethal. You can take guns out of the equation, but if you don't change the individuals, you'll just end up with other kinds of violence, maybe more, maybe less, but other violence just the same...
All of the guns you mentioned could kill a human being like here in a paint ball incident, if used for that purpose. Therefore, the "average citizen" should not have easy access to guns designed to specifically cause extensive harm to another human beings such as glocks, AK47s, machine guns...and the like. Good list though...
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 07.12.2012, 10:46
Caviarchips's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Basel Stadt
Posts: 3,979
Groaned at 99 Times in 77 Posts
Thanked 6,677 Times in 2,388 Posts
Caviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond reputeCaviarchips has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

The levels of blind faith in old laws and reliance on semantic arguments about how guns can be used for avalanche control are what make me see ever more clearly that over time, the US will slip slowly down the ranks of countries in the world and will become, like my home country, an ex-power.

These blind and fundamental beliefs which are held by many individuals in the US - like guns, like skin colour, like homosexuality etc etc - has caused a stagnation in the country because the politicians will never have the courage to change things because the centre of gravity holds onto these beliefs like some hold onto the attitudes and flags from the Civil War.

I was thinking about the point PD made about - why do Brits care? Well, I love the USA, I take every possible opportunity to visit. I love the plurality of the metropolitan areas, I love the food, the sport and the diversity of the country. But I care about this stuff because the US has all the ingredients to be a force for good in the world for decades to come - but when smart people can't embrace the position that making access to guns much more difficult will reduce the number of people murdered by guns, when bright and eloquent people like JRH construct tired, cliched and gymnastic defences which effectively boil down to having a tattoo on the forehead saying "I am a gun guy", then it is no different - in my eyes - to banning women from driving in Saudi, or any of the other fundamentalist religious beliefs that we sneer at as being old fashioned.

And the worst part is......you guys have been so conditioned that you no longer see how ridiculous your positions are.

I cannot for a second image that I will get away with this without a groan fest, but my points are heartfelt and I'm geniunely not trying to be argumentative, but people are dying.....fathers, brothers & sons are dying ....32 people per day. And no freedom to shoot deer is worth that
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank Caviarchips for this useful post:
  #116  
Old 07.12.2012, 10:47
slammer's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Lummerland
Posts: 5,334
Groaned at 149 Times in 105 Posts
Thanked 9,292 Times in 3,533 Posts
slammer has a reputation beyond reputeslammer has a reputation beyond reputeslammer has a reputation beyond reputeslammer has a reputation beyond reputeslammer has a reputation beyond reputeslammer has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
View Post
I lived there for a few years, actually...

And my US residence is in Florida, another must-issue concealed-carry state.

What's your point?
A tongue in cheek remark over the stereotype, singular purpose, just to wind you up.
Like a watch..
..did it work?
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 07.12.2012, 10:49
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

The original guns were cannons. They were designed to blow up city walls, along with anyone who was standing on or near them. Rifles, muskets and handguns were all much later inventions. It's a bit daft, therefore, to claim that guns were originally designed for anything other than smashing stuff up and killing people.

Having said that, to say that the modern purpose of a gun is necessarily tied to its original purpose is equally as daft. It's like claiming that our genitalia are simply for the purpose of procreation and we shouldn't use them for any other purpose, like recreation or procrastination.

Guns in the 21st century are as much - if not more - to do with sport and recreation as they are to do with killing people. Why punish the law-abiding gun collector because some people are criminals?
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank for this useful post:
  #118  
Old 07.12.2012, 10:50
Jobsrobertsharpii's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Z-U-R-I-C-H
Posts: 2,335
Groaned at 173 Times in 124 Posts
Thanked 3,384 Times in 1,536 Posts
Jobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
All of the guns you mentioned could kill a human being if used for that purpose. Therefore, the "average citizen" should not have easy access to guns that can cause this type of harm to another human being.
So could hammers, screwdrivers, bowling balls, kitchen knives, extension cords, cars, plastic bags, swimming pools, baseball bats, bleach, etc etc etc...

Let's gather all your details every time you go to the hardware store or grocery store, because you might suffocate someone with your grocery bag...
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 07.12.2012, 10:53
Jack of all trades.'s Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Basel
Posts: 813
Groaned at 22 Times in 15 Posts
Thanked 667 Times in 325 Posts
Jack of all trades. has a reputation beyond reputeJack of all trades. has a reputation beyond reputeJack of all trades. has a reputation beyond reputeJack of all trades. has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Piers Morgan is a puppet. Nothing more, nothing less.

Some people would be content to be ignorant rather than take even a little trouble to acquire valuable knowledge. That's where people like Piers Morgan step in. They provide information for the very ignorant and uneducated.

Piers Morgan does not believe in anything except what is required to get the job done.

I think Jessie Ventura is a bit of a low life but the interview with him and Piers Morgen just shows how incredibly slimy Morgan realy is...

But don't expect Morgan to change his views, ever. That is now too dangerous an option to take.

Foolish people like Morgan think they know it all. But the truly intelligent people know that they have so much more to learn. Not easy to be aware of one's own ignorance.

I feel very sorry for Morgan, what he has done to himself. He may have money and lots of it but in the things that matter he is very poor...
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 07.12.2012, 10:58
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: The 2nd Amendment as explained by a Brit

Quote:
View Post
So could hammers, screwdrivers, bowling balls, kitchen knives, extension cords, cars, plastic bags, swimming pools, baseball bats, bleach, etc etc etc...

Let's gather all your details every time you go to the hardware store or grocery store, because you might suffocate someone with your grocery bag...
We're on the subject of guns here...besides why use a plastic bag, or extension cord when a gun can get the job done much faster and in larger quantities too! Let's see plastic bag: one...gun: 50
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
stupid brit, swissaussie, twit




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Swiss Social Insurance (the Säule system) explained in English ElJeFe Finance/banking/taxation 2 09.09.2012 19:51
Britain to win as many immigrants as medals by close of 2012? JBZ86 General off-topic 0 07.08.2012 20:02
Halloween explained to Aargau youths... by the police. Rangatiranui Swiss politics/news 22 29.10.2011 01:12
Dental Tariff as set by the SSO JasonD Family matters/health 4 06.07.2011 23:39


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 00:16.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0