Take their guns?

Wanna take their guns?

  • Total voters
    13
Come on you all give Watermark some love. Think what you were doing at 19. It wasn't hanging on a chat board trying to take guns away. Instead of arguing with him give him some props that he obviously needs. For real.
 
charver said:
:D

I just got to the part where the Aussie said that after giving up his weapons he "felt like a Jew in Nazi Germany".

You couldn't spoof this stuff better.
Click to expand...
I did feel sorry for the family who made their living hunting, they actually lost their business.

I just can't see Americans lining up, quietly handing over $5000 guns of antiquity, their protection and their hunting rifles. They could at least have gotten a nice hat for their trouble.
 
Damocles said:
I did feel sorry for the family who made their living hunting, they actually lost their business.

I just can't see Americans lining up, quietly handing over $5000 guns of antiquity, their protection and their hunting rifles. They could at least have gotten a nice hat for their trouble.
Click to expand...

Neither can i.

I can't speak for Australia but Britain has never had the kind of relationship with guns that America has and we have never been a gun owning society. Even before the weapons ban it was very unusual for households to own guns, aside from a very small minority of collectors and sportsmen. There has never been a cultural acceptance of guns in the home.

America, obviously, is very, very different.

Leaving aside the pros and cons of a gun-owning society, Britain is always a bad example to use when arguments are made on gun rights, or gun control, in the States.
 
charver said:
Neither can i.

I can't speak for Australia but Britain has never had the kind of relationship with guns that America has and we have never been a gun owning society. Even before the weapons ban it was very unusual for households to own guns, aside from a very small minority of collectors and sportsmen. There has never been a cultural acceptance of guns in the home.

America, obviously, is very, very different.

Leaving aside the pros and cons of a gun-owning society, Britain is always a bad example to use when arguments are made on gun rights, or gun control, in the States.
Click to expand...

You and damo are correct I think. In my household alone there are 18 long guns (rifles and shotguns) and 4 handguns. That is pretty much the norm for where I live. Then you have collectors who have antiques worth thousands as well as those who have guns as heirlooms. It would be very difficult or impossible for the government to get people to just turn them in.
 
Leaning, You are an exception to the rule. Some reasonable replublicans exist.

Charver. I expect that Australia is somewhat of an exception as well since it was founded by England. Even thought it somewhat started as a prison work colony.

America is pretty much unique in it's love of Guns. Unless we compare the USA to some middle eastern countries ?
 
OK, I'll let you slide for calling me a republican. That's a dirty trick here.......republicans are extremists only on the side of the rich and the corporations, against public education and not concerned at all about the poor. Man, if someone I didn't like called me a republican......that'd be fightin' words. :)
 
charver said:
Neither can i.

I can't speak for Australia but Britain has never had the kind of relationship with guns that America has and we have never been a gun owning society. Even before the weapons ban it was very unusual for households to own guns, aside from a very small minority of collectors and sportsmen. There has never been a cultural acceptance of guns in the home.

America, obviously, is very, very different.

Leaving aside the pros and cons of a gun-owning society, Britain is always a bad example to use when arguments are made on gun rights, or gun control, in the States.
Click to expand...

Charv, gun nuts are obsessed over guns. They are very common in America and hold sway far beyond their actual numbers. It is not uncommon at all to see a righty saying that the 2nd amendment is the most brilliant part of the constitution, surpassing such trivial things as freedom of religion and speech. It's legal in Florida to shoot to kill a person who stole your wallet in a crowded store, and even if you kill several bystanders you wouldn't be liable for damages from the families of your victims. This has reduced crime and improved freedom by 3 trillion percent.

It's also not uncommon to see the gun nuts claiming incredible crime reducing statistics coming from their gun laws. For instance, the crime wave in Britian is completely due to your handgun ban, even though like only 0.1% of the British population owned a handgun before the ban. Concealed carry laws are completely responsible for the reduction in crime in the 90's, even though areas where concealed carrying wasn't allowed had a 30% reduction in murders and areas where concealed carrying was allowed had 18% reduction in murders.

Gun nuts aren't reasonable people, and unreasonable people are the most fun to troll. So I just like to go around telling them I want to repeal the second amendment, send them to prison, and/or take their guns.
 
Last edited:
Watermark said:
Charv, gun nuts are obsessed over guns. They are very common in America and hold sway far beyond their actual numbers. It is not uncommon at all to see a righty saying that the 2nd amendment is the most brilliant part of the constitution, surpassing such trivial things as freedom of religion and speech. It's legal in Florida to shoot to kill a person who stole your wallet in a crowded store, and even if you kill several bystanders you wouldn't be liable for damages from the families of your victims. This has reduced crime and improved freedom by 3 trillion percent.

It's also not uncommon to see the gun nuts claiming incredible crime reducing statistics coming from their gun laws. For instance, the crime wave in Britian is completely due to your handgun ban, even though like only 0.1% of the British population owned a handgun before the ban. Concealed carry laws are completely responsible for the reduction in crime in the 90's, even though areas where concealed carrying wasn't allowed had a 30% reduction in murders and areas where concealed carrying was allowed had 18% reduction in murders.

Gun nuts aren't reasonable people, and unreasonable people are the most fun to troll. So I just like to go around telling them I want to repeal the second amendment, send them to prison, and/or take their guns.
Click to expand...

WM, have you lost your mind? If you open fire in a crowded mall and kill bystanders, you are liable under the law for criminal and civil punishment.

And if you are going to try and explain things, at least be honest about it. The sarcasm makes you seem even more ignorant than normal.

The violent crime rates DID drop in Florida after the "shall issue" laws came on the books concerning CCW permits. And they dropped yet again when the castle law was extended away from the home.
 
Solitary said:
WM, have you lost your mind? If you open fire in a crowded mall and kill bystanders, you are liable under the law for criminal and civil punishment.

And if you are going to try and explain things, at least be honest about it. The sarcasm makes you seem even more ignorant than normal.

The violent crime rates DID drop in Florida after the "shall issue" laws came on the books concerning CCW permits. And they dropped yet again when the castle law was extended away from the home.
Click to expand...

The violent crime rates dropped everywhere in the 90's. It had nothing to do with concealed carry or the shoot first law. The only unifying factor in the crime drop over the entire nation in the 90's was the booming economy. And areas without concealed carry permit laws DID experience a greater drop in murder rates than areas with - not proof that the concealed carry laws increase murder rates, but proof that if it had any effect on it at all it was insigifigant compared to the factors that made crime drop in every place, regardless of policy, in the US.
 
WM, and your bullshit about the "It's legal in Florida to shoot to kill a person who stole your wallet in a crowded store, and even if you kill several bystanders you wouldn't be liable for damages from the families of your victims.".

Check the facts, if they don't interefere with your emotional nonsense.

"Under Florida law, there is no “duty to retreat” if you are attacked in any place you have a lawful right to be. Instead, you may stand your ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if you reasonably believe it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to yourself or others."

That is what the law actually means, and that does not include opening fire in a crowded mall because someone stole your wallet.

And there were predictions that Florida would see a huge jump in firearm related deaths after the law was passed.

Can you find evidence of this??
 
Florida adopted a right-to-carry law in 1987. Between 1987 and 1996, these changes occurred:

Homicide rate in FL dropped 36%, and dropped 0.4% nationwide.

Firearm homicide rate dropped 37% in Florida, and went up 15% for the USA.

In Florida the handgun homicide rate dropped 41% and went up 24% nationwide.

( http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#Right-To-Carry Laws )
 
Solitary said:
Florida adopted a right-to-carry law in 1987. Between 1987 and 1996, these changes occurred:

Homicide rate in FL dropped 36%, and dropped 0.4% nationwide.

Firearm homicide rate dropped 37% in Florida, and went up 15% for the USA.

In Florida the handgun homicide rate dropped 41% and went up 24% nationwide.

( http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#Right-To-Carry Laws )
Click to expand...

Well that's over a limited scope Solitary. One single pattern isn't enough to arrive at a conclusion.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/issues/concealedcarry/

More guns = more crime, or at the very least they impede reduction of the crime rate. A 1999 study by the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence (formerly the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence), using FBI crime statistics, demonstrated that relaxing CCW laws may have an adverse effect on a state's crime rate.10 Between 1992 and 1998, the violent crime rate in states which kept strict CCW laws fell by an average of 30%. The violent crime rate for the states that had weak CCW laws during this same time saw their violent crime rates drop by only 15%. Nationally, violent crime declined by 25% during that same period.11 These numbers indicate that states with stricter CCW laws have found more effective ways to reduce their crime rates than simply letting more people carry hidden handguns.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top