^^in short, no, i'm a realist. we're never going to stop all crime. but the stats i showed earlier seem to indicate that we can go a long way to stopping most criminal use of guns.

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 1:28 PM. Reason : ^^]

8/9/2006 1:27:41 PM

Quote :

"canada has more guns per person than us, yet a much smaller percentage of the population gets killed by guns. what does that say?"

That there are more factors than the number of legally owned guns out there?

8/9/2006 1:28:13 PM

Cause this is going nowhere...

8/9/2006 1:29:14 PM

what does that say about americans? why are we so anxious to use them?

8/9/2006 1:29:26 PM

might have to do with people like mcfaggot who don't want to lose any of their precious stuff.

8/9/2006 1:30:16 PM

Quote :

"what does that say about americans? why are we so anxious to use them?"

We're a high-strung, aggressive society compared to some.

Quote :

"might have to do with people like mcfaggot who don't want to lose any of their precious stuff."

It's not about my "precious stuff". It's about wanting there to be potential consequences being weighed in the mind of a guy that just wants to walk into my apartment wielding a gun.

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 1:31 PM. Reason : .]

8/9/2006 1:30:26 PM

yee-haw!

8/9/2006 1:31:40 PM

Quote :

"might have to do with people like mcfaggot who don't want to lose any of their precious stuff."

Yes, the reason that there are so many gun deaths are because homeowners shoot so many break-in criminals.

Are you fucktarded or something? Why don't you find the statistic on the number of people killed during break-ins trying to protect their stuff vs. those killed in the ghetto over drugs and gang territory. I bet it isn't the homeowners doing most of the killing.

8/9/2006 1:35:25 PM

id imagine the options of someone robbing peoples homes at gunpoint is pretty slim. id be interested in seeing a study on how handgun ownership affects them.

8/9/2006 1:35:34 PM

Quote :

"Why don't you find the statistic on the number of people killed during break-ins trying to protect their stuff vs. those killed in the ghetto over drugs and gang territory."

so why does everyday joe need a handgun to protect his family from robbers again?

8/9/2006 1:37:28 PM

I doubt many breakins occur when people are home -- I agree with you on that one. Still doesn't mean we should remove a variable from the criminal's head.

Quote :

"so why does everyday joe need a handgun to protect his family from robbers again?"

Apparently he doesn't, since we can instantly judge the intent of all people breaking into your house with a gun. We know they'd never hurt you ahead of time, so why not just let them on in without any threat of consequences.

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 1:38 PM. Reason : .]

8/9/2006 1:37:44 PM

again, home invasion is about the worst argument in my opinion. you could still have shotguns/rifles and the amount of ppl involved in that type of break in is a TINY percentage to begin with.

you'd be much better to sticking with on-street muggings.

this is, of course, assuming you are just out to protect your family. if you wanna shoot the criminals to punish them for breaking in with or without harm in mind, then i guess we just have a difference of opinion here.

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 1:40 PM. Reason : .]

8/9/2006 1:39:58 PM

Because on the rare occasion that a gun-wielding robber breaks down your door at 1:40 am, you can stop him.

Why do you buy insurance if most people don't die prematurely?
That's the kind of question you just asked.

You are so far gone.

8/9/2006 1:40:33 PM

because if kids play with my insurance, they don't die.

8/9/2006 1:41:37 PM

insurance doesnt have a chance to be used incorrectly

8/9/2006 1:42:07 PM

Ban everything with a potential safety risk in the face of negligence.

8/9/2006 1:43:24 PM

we do ban things that have a substantial safety risk and have little to no purpose.

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 1:45 PM. Reason : or at least unjustified]

8/9/2006 1:44:35 PM

I think we've demonstrated that handguns do have a purpose.

They are intended to be used to stop a person, whether via inflicting facedeath or not.

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 1:45 PM. Reason : ah you changed your post :-/]

8/9/2006 1:45:41 PM

Quote :

"whether via inflicting facedeath or not."

huh?

8/9/2006 1:46:54 PM

I'm saying either you disable or kill the fucker when you use a gun.

8/9/2006 1:48:00 PM

Quote :

"huh?"

BOOM

HEADSHOT

8/9/2006 1:49:06 PM

Much better reply than mine.

8/9/2006 1:50:02 PM

ban AWP as well

8/9/2006 1:50:41 PM

Campfags

8/9/2006 1:51:00 PM

are people going to start calling you McDanger now when they wanna say something inflamatory? cuz you didnt leave much room for namecalling.

either way i think the whole handgun issue is really up in the air. i understand why some ppl want them and all, i just dont personally see the need over a hunting weapon. gotta draw the line somewhere and im just not a huge fan of firearms.

8/9/2006 1:53:42 PM

8/9/2006 1:54:46 PM

Quote :

"are people going to start calling you McDanger now when they wanna say something inflamatory? cuz you didnt leave much room for namecalling."

Haha I guess -- unintended consequences, man. I started a poll to rename me, and this is what TWW came up with.

Quote :

"either way i think the whole handgun issue is really up in the air. i understand why some ppl want them and all, i just dont personally see the need over a hunting weapon. gotta draw the line somewhere and im just not a huge fan of firearms."

I'd agree with that. The only reason I'd say they have any sort of necessity over a hunting weapon is probably safety. Some glocks you can throw into the wall and they won't go off, you HAVE to pull the trigger. Not to mention it'd be easier to store, and using one in a crowded area (narrow hallway, furniture) is easier.

8/9/2006 1:57:19 PM

Quote :

"ban handguns- -home invasion has no net change in protection of your family "

cyrion are you serious? ban handguns and then theres no net change in protection of your family? i know plenty of people whose only gun in their household is a handgun...there have also been plenty of instances where the victims of a robbery were shot...cant argue this topic though...too many people that want to give criminals the benefit of the doubt over law abiding citizens...pathetic

8/9/2006 3:22:05 PM

wtf

I'm a law abiding citizen, why do you feel I should not own a "legal" AK or "legal" AR?

8/9/2006 3:39:24 PM

because they want to tell you how to live your life

their proposed bans and regulations are to secure the safety of you not killing your family members accidentally or accidentally killing a poor down-on-his-luck robber because you are obviously not capable of living your own life

8/9/2006 3:45:31 PM

8/9/2006 3:46:52 PM

i roll my eyes when i cant formulate verbal arguments

8/9/2006 3:47:19 PM

Your eyes must be spinnaz

8/9/2006 3:48:04 PM

I agree though


I know I am not going to use my firearms in a crime and I keep them secure

I guess they are just protecting me and my family from myself

THANKS GUYS!!!!

8/9/2006 3:49:49 PM

What kind of gun was the Homeowner using?

<-Another pro-gun liberal

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 3:57 PM. Reason : ]

8/9/2006 3:57:13 PM

As if 90% of liberals weren't pro-gun

The problem here is that all these rednecks can't or won't distinguish between pro-regulation and anti-gun.

8/9/2006 4:04:22 PM

the problem is all these pussies want to do the supreme court's job and interpret the constitution to their own liking

8/9/2006 4:05:14 PM

there is plenty of damn regulations already


eventually people are going to have to prosecute the criminals like they should be prosecuted

8/9/2006 4:06:43 PM

i'm glad i still have a bunch of pre-brady magazines

hey do any of you liberals know what magazines are?

*liberals google "magazines"*

8/9/2006 4:08:22 PM

Quote :

"cyrion are you serious? ban handguns and then theres no net change in protection of your family? i know plenty of people whose only gun in their household is a handgun...there have also been plenty of instances where the victims of a robbery were shot...cant argue this topic though...too many people that want to give criminals the benefit of the doubt over law abiding citizens...pathetic"

id imagine they'd own a different gun instead if they owned it for protection. thats why there is no net change.

8/9/2006 4:12:27 PM

Quote :

"As if 90% of liberals weren't pro-gun The problem here is that all these rednecks can't or won't distinguish between pro-regulation and anti-gun."

And those on the left can't or won't distinguish between pro-regulation of abortions and anti-abortion...you know, like making 12 year olds tell their parents.

I agree with you Boondocks, gun-regulation is fine by me. Especially registration, which I have no problems with. But just remember that it some who want to ban all guns hide behind this "regulation" crowd the same way anti-abortionists hide in with that "regulation" crowd.

8/9/2006 4:12:46 PM

^^probably so...if you say "you cant have handguns" they would probably still want a firearm to protect their family "just in case"

but why shouldnt they be able to have handguns?

-----------

8/9/2006 4:13:18 PM

id bet the true anti-abortionists are almost equal in number to the pro-abortion-regulation crowd though.

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 4:14 PM. Reason : ^ i feel they are a lot easier to misuse, maliciously conceal, etc]

8/9/2006 4:14:01 PM

So will TreeTwista10 or pwrstrkdf250 have to eat the biscuit when the music stops?

8/9/2006 4:14:19 PM

to the "pro regulation" people that want "registration"

you are first and foremost aware that you must register and have a criminal background check for handguns, correct?

whereas shotguns and rifles you dont have those background checks

so since legally obtaining a handgun is more difficult than legally obtaining a long gun, why does everybody attack handguns?

ps this isnt directed at boonedocks because he doesnt know shit

8/9/2006 4:15:12 PM

ahah, you just don't want to lose to me.

again.

8/9/2006 4:16:50 PM

long guns require a NICS check at the time of purchase also


^^^ why the attack?

because I don't want ANY rights infringed upon?

I guess I'm a backwards soggy biscuit playing yokel right

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 4:17 PM. Reason : ...]

8/9/2006 4:17:33 PM

^^i appreciate you conceding now if you could just keep quiet, thanks

^dont worry about him...he likes to lump people into two groups...smart people like him, and dumbass rednecks and hippies and oil companies like you and me

8/9/2006 4:17:51 PM

id have no problem registering hunting weapons, once i got rid of handguns. some things are particularly dangerous (especially in todays world) and i dont think it hurts to watch them (guns, certain medications, certain machinery, explosives, etc)

[Edited on August 9, 2006 at 4:18 PM. Reason : id eat said biscuit if it was from bojos]

8/9/2006 4:18:01 PM

ok cyrion

how do you get rid of the tens of thousands of handguns "owned" by criminals?

because a solution of "take them from them when they're arrested" sounds like it wouldnt do much good

also what about the criminals who have shotguns and rifles and use those for crime?

8/9/2006 4:19:25 PM