Home Forums Gamescan Chat42 About
* Login   * Register * FAQ    * Search
It is currently Thu 03-28-2024 2:58PM

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 175 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed 04-25-2007 7:17PM 
Offline
Brigadier General
User avatar

Joined: Mon 07-26-2004 3:11PM
Posts: 1420

Source: VPN
Sea wrote:
Then I am happy to be wrong with the likes of the Supreme Court. Evidently, not all the human race is agreement with you. I'm sorry you live in a state of perpetual paranoia.

You're complete distrust of the humankind is an insult. kthxbye

See:http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2007/04/18/4056486-ap.html


I'm getting the feeling that the Supreme Court could rule that you should be killed and you would blindly follow. You choose to go along with whatever the government spews out, I choose to think for myself. Also Karl isn't paranoid. I've met him and he seems perfectly normal to me. We just like to wear seatbelts in case of an accident. It doesn't mean we fear accidents, we just want to be ready in case something bad happens. Also Karl doesn't distrust the rest of humankind, just the criminals.

Your news link also brings up a good point that I forgot about. The government can't magically make guns disappear, they can only put ink marks on paper to make laws. Criminals don't abide by what those ink marks say and so they will always have guns. By making gun control laws, the government is, by definition, only disarming law abiding citizens.

_________________
Don't do drugs because if you do drugs you'll go to prison, and drugs are really expensive in prison.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed 04-25-2007 7:18PM 
Offline
Lieutenant General
User avatar

Joined: Mon 11-17-2003 12:27AM
Posts: 3128
Location: The Bat Cave

Source: Fidelity
Sea wrote:
jthxv wrote:
So you disagree with cowardice? That is the only reason you have really given. If you have a big wad of one hundred dollar bills, do you make sure everyone around you sees it? If not, you are a coward, after all, you believe in transparency...


Yes, because money has the power to kill someone. You're comparing apples to oranges. If you want to compare properly, you should have used a taser or a pocket knife. But a pocket knife is small and easily fits into a pocket (hence the name).

Should we remove all the "Protected by *** Security" labels placed on secured facilities so that criminals break into houses?

http://www.jpfo.org/israel-firearms.htm


Maybe you should remember this when you bring up WMDs :roll:

Money is comparable to a handgun, because the only reason I would hesitate to carry openly, is because it might get me into a confrontation I could otherwise avoid... Just like carrying a big wad of cash.

_________________
Carney Institute of Technology

Why not outlaw MURDER instead of trying to outlaw guns?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed 04-25-2007 7:22PM 
Offline
Brigadier General
User avatar

Joined: Mon 07-26-2004 3:11PM
Posts: 1420

Source: VPN
Sea wrote:
jthxv wrote:
So you disagree with cowardice? That is the only reason you have really given. If you have a big wad of one hundred dollar bills, do you make sure everyone around you sees it? If not, you are a coward, after all, you believe in transparency...


Yes, because money has the power to kill someone. You're comparing apples to oranges. If you want to compare properly, you should have used a taser or a pocket knife. But a pocket knife is small and easily fits into a pocket (hence the name).


So money has the power to kill someone and guns don't? If I go out and flash money to a bunch of street thugs, they're going to kill me and take the money. If I walk by same street thugs with a gun on my hip, they're going to kill me and take my gun. Showing both has the power to get me killed.

A pocket knife is indeed small. So are some guns. What's the point?

_________________
Don't do drugs because if you do drugs you'll go to prison, and drugs are really expensive in prison.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed 04-25-2007 7:55PM 
Offline
The Cap'n

Joined: Mon 10-07-2002 2:13PM
Posts: 327

Source: Off Campus
Agentzak wrote:
So far owning some sort of gun is legal just about everywhere in the US but gun control laws such as the safe school zone example I showed earlier effectively ban guns without outright banning guns because actually banning guns goes against the second amendment.

I disagree with you. And so does the Supreme Court - for the last 150 years. By all means, get them to change the precedence. Or get the 2nd Amendment to read exactly how you want it to. Until such time, the 2nd Amendment will be applied to the collective protection of the militia and only to Federal government regulation. States can regulate how they so choose. This is how it is.

Agentzak wrote:
So you ignore the true life saving capabilities of CC just because you're worried about how cowardly other people are? Society won't change if we hide or show weapons because *gasp* it doesn't actually make a bit of difference to society.

Please explain that Switzerland, Israel, France, England, China and the rest of the world. I'm sure many people in those countries would disagree with you.

Agentzak wrote:
The only difference it makes is to the person carrying it because their chances of getting killed go way up when they proudly and openly display their weapon not to mention the annoying comments, glares, and stares that they would have to endure. The only reason that you want them to openly carry is so that they can be ridiculed while sacrificing tactical advantage against attackers.

Damn you caught me. If embarrassment is enough to stop you from carrying, then perhaps you shouldn't carry. Security through obscurity is no security at all.

Agentzak wrote:
Also as a side note, many people in the US, especially Florida, would be just thrilled to legally carry around their gun openly if it wasn't for the fact that open carry is illegal and concealed carry is not so their only option is to CC.

This is that state's right. If the citizens don't like it, they can elect new legislators.

Agentzak wrote:
Ok, how about a knife then. If the hot girl has a knife you have no legal right to demand that she show it to you. If she has a gun you also have no legal right to demand that she show it to you.

This is illegal on campus, thus I don't need to know. People break laws all the time without you knowing it. You couldn't demand to see the gun either - but it'd still be illegal.

Agentzak wrote:
If you truly believe that opening carrying is somehow safer then you might like this one idea I have. How about we make everyone carrying AIDS carry around a big bright sign that says, "Hey I got AIDS." AIDS is way more dangerous than guns because way more people die from AIDS than guns. That way I can run away from these people so I won't catch AIDS.

If a person has AIDS, they are legally responsible to inform people they may infect. If a person knowingly with AIDS has sex, they can be tried for a felony.

----
Agentzak wrote:
Then don't do it. Simple as that. I disagree with smoking but I acknowledge someone's right to smoke.

I don't.

Agentzak wrote:
States don't "allow" it. Alaska and Vermont are the only two states that really understand how it is supposed to work.

The Supreme Court, many district courts and many State Supreme Courts disagree with you. You can say they're wrong all you want, it won't change until you bring a case up.

-----

If the founding fathers truly wanted to make the 2nd Amendment an individual right, why did they not accept Madison's original amendment:
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well-armed and well-regulated militia being the best security of a free country; but no person religiously scrupulous of baring arms shall be compelled to render military service in person." (source:http://faculty.ncwc.edu/TOConnor/410/410lect11.htm)

The 2nd Amendment has NOT been incorporated into the 14th, and is thus NOT an individual right, and is the purview of the States. Don't like it?? .. go the Supreme Court and get it changed.

--sea


Top
 Profile E-mail  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed 04-25-2007 7:56PM 
Offline
The Cap'n

Joined: Mon 10-07-2002 2:13PM
Posts: 327

Source: Off Campus
Agentzak wrote:
So money has the power to kill someone and guns don't? If I go out and flash money to a bunch of street thugs, they're going to kill me and take the money. If I walk by same street thugs with a gun on my hip, they're going to kill me and take my gun. Showing both has the power to get me killed.

A pocket knife is indeed small. So are some guns. What's the point?


You don't get sarcasm much... Sorry.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed 04-25-2007 8:12PM 
Offline
The Cap'n

Joined: Mon 10-07-2002 2:13PM
Posts: 327

Source: Off Campus
Agentzak wrote:
I'm getting the feeling that the Supreme Court could rule that you should be killed and you would blindly follow. You choose to go along with whatever the government spews out, I choose to think for myself.

Then you definitely know nothing about me.

People have been throwing Federalists quotes at me this whole debate as evidence that their opinion was right... but I use the Supreme Court to back me up, and all of a sudden I'm "following the man." I'm damned if I do, damned if I don't.

There is no point in carrying this conversation on - so it finally ends.

--sea


Top
 Profile E-mail  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed 04-25-2007 8:20PM 
Offline
Lieutenant General
User avatar

Joined: Mon 11-17-2003 12:27AM
Posts: 3128
Location: The Bat Cave

Source: Fidelity
Sea wrote:
If the founding fathers truly wanted to make the 2nd Amendment an individual right, why did they not accept Madison's original amendment:
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well-armed and well-regulated militia being the best security of a free country; but no person religiously scrupulous of baring arms shall be compelled to render military service in person." (source:http://faculty.ncwc.edu/TOConnor/410/410lect11.htm)


Separation of church and state. [/i]

_________________
Carney Institute of Technology

Why not outlaw MURDER instead of trying to outlaw guns?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed 04-25-2007 8:26PM 
Offline
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Tue 04-12-2005 9:19PM
Posts: 821
Location: GBH

Source: Fidelity
Sea wrote:
You're complete distrust of the humankind is an insult. kthxbye


My complete distrust? IF I didn't trust people and IF I was paranoid, I may have a very similar view to yours: people shouldn't be allowed to handle themselves with weapons in self-defense or in the defense of other innocents (or self-defense at all...). But, I DO trust people, because I know that most act honestly and responsibly with firearms... and I trust that someone who holds the responsibility that comes with a CCW permit (or owning a firearm at all) will use that power when necessary, and exhibit restraint when its use is uncalled for, and am willing to accept the risks that come with that freedom.

To say that it is wrong for us to want to own guns to defend ourselves and our family, friends, or whomever else is in need at the time is preposterous.

Anyhow, this is good:

Lt. Colonel Dave Grossman wrote:
One Vietnam veteran, an old retired colonel, once said this to me: "Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident."

This is true. Remember, the murder rate is six per 100,000 per year, and the aggravated assault rate is four per 1,000 per year. What this means is that the vast majority of Americans are not inclined to hurt one another.

Some estimates say that two million Americans are victims of violent crimes every year, a tragic, staggering number, perhaps an all-time record rate of violent crime. But there are almost 300 million total Americans, which means that the odds of being a victim of violent crime is considerably less than one in a hundred on any given year. Furthermore, since many violent crimes are committed by repeat offenders, the actual number of violent citizens is considerably less than two million.

Thus there is a paradox, and we must grasp both ends of the situation: We may well be in the most violent times in history, but violence is still remarkably rare. This is because most citizens are kind, decent people who are not capable of hurting each other, except by accident or under extreme provocation. They are sheep.

I mean nothing negative by calling them sheep. To me it is like the pretty, blue robin's egg. Inside it is soft and gooey but someday it will grow into something wonderful. But the egg cannot survive without its hard blue shell. Police officers, soldiers and other warriors are like that shell, and someday the civilization they protect will grow into something wonderful. For now, though, they need warriors to protect them from the predators.

"Then there are the wolves," the old war veteran said, "and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy." Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world and they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial.

"Then there are sheepdogs," he went on, "and I'm a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf." Or, as a sign in one California law enforcement agency put it, "We intimidate those who intimidate others."

If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen: a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath--a wolf. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? Then you are a sheepdog, a warrior, someone who is walking the hero's path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed.

Let me expand on this old soldier's excellent model of the sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. We know that the sheep live in denial; that is what makes them sheep. They do not want to believe that there is evil in the world. They can accept the fact that fires can happen, which is why they want fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers, fire alarms and fire exits throughout their kids' schools. But many of them are outraged at the idea of putting an armed police officer in their kid's school. Our children are dozens of times more likely to be killed, and thousands of times more likely to be seriously injured, by school violence than by school fires, but the sheep's only response to the possibility of violence is denial. The idea of someone coming to kill or harm their children is just too hard, so they choose the path of denial.

The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, cannot and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheepdog that intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.

Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn't tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports in camouflage fatigues holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, "Baa." Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.

Understand that there is nothing morally superior about being a sheepdog; it is just what you choose to be. Also understand that a sheepdog is a funny critter: He is always sniffing around out on the perimeter, checking the breeze, barking at things that go bump in the night, and yearning for a righteous battle. That is, the young sheepdogs yearn for a righteous battle. The old sheepdogs are a little older and wiser, but they move to the sound of the guns when needed right along with the young ones.

Here is how the sheep and the sheepdog think differently. The sheep pretend the wolf will never come, but the sheepdog lives for that day. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America said, "Thank God I wasn't on one of those planes." The sheepdogs, the warriors, said, "Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference." When you are truly transformed into a warrior and have truly invested yourself into warriorhood, you want to be there. You want to be able to make a difference.

While there is nothing morally superior about the sheepdog, the warrior, he does have one real advantage -- only one. He is able to survive and thrive in an environment that destroys 98 percent of the population.


Emphasis mine

_________________
"You talk to God, you're religious. God talks to you, you're psychotic."


Top
 Profile  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed 04-25-2007 8:33PM 
Offline
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Tue 04-12-2005 9:19PM
Posts: 821
Location: GBH

Source: Fidelity
Sea wrote:

Agentzak wrote:
So you ignore the true life saving capabilities of CC just because you're worried about how cowardly other people are? Society won't change if we hide or show weapons because *gasp* it doesn't actually make a bit of difference to society.

Please explain that Switzerland, Israel, France, England, China and the rest of the world. I'm sure many people in those countries would disagree with you.



Comparing the US to other countries is deeply flawed since, if you didn't realize this, CCW isn't the only variable separating our society from theirs.

_________________
"You talk to God, you're religious. God talks to you, you're psychotic."


Top
 Profile  
    
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed 04-25-2007 8:34PM 
Offline
Brigadier General
User avatar

Joined: Mon 07-26-2004 3:11PM
Posts: 1420

Source: VPN
Sea wrote:
Please explain that Switzerland
What do you want me to explain to a country that trusts their citizens so much that they let them store fully automatic weapons in their home?

sea wrote:
Damn you caught me. If embarrassment is enough to stop you from carrying, then perhaps you shouldn't carry. Security through obscurity is no security at all.
I didn't say embarrassment was a good enough reason to stop carrying. Heck, soccer moms making comments would allow me the opportunity to explain to them why I'm carrying and maybe they would see that I'm not such a bad guy after all. The problem I would have with openly carrying it around in public would be that criminals are under no such obligation and would promptly take me down by surprise. I'm sort of having trouble understanding why "security through obscurity is no security at all." Passwords are obscure and they provide one of society's primary means of security.

sea wrote:
This is illegal on campus, thus I don't need to know. People break laws all the time without you knowing it. You couldn't demand to see the gun either - but it'd still be illegal.
Wait, so when someone does something illegal, you don't need to know? People that do something illegal are technically called criminals and you just showed that you don't need to know what the criminals are doing while you need to know what the law abiding citizens are doing. Instead of people like prophet actually trying to work to legitimately change stupid laws, maybe he should just start illegally carrying on campus and be a criminal because it sounds like no one cares about what criminals do.

sea wrote:
If a person has AIDS, they are legally responsible to inform people they may infect. If a person knowingly with AIDS has sex, they can be tried for a felony.

gun owners have no such legal requirement to inform because the only people that they expect to shoot are criminals and criminals lose their right to a warning when they start attacking. Even so, most gun owners are nice enough to show way more restraint than most would expect. Also if a person knowingly murders someone else with a gun, they can also be tried for a felony.


sea wrote:
The Supreme Court, many district courts and many State Supreme Courts disagree with you. You can say they're wrong all you want, it won't change until you bring a case up.

Actually the Supreme Court has to choose my case. In today's society with many people's irrational fear of guns, I don't feel like being a test case. In a few years when all guns are banned and criminals rove the streets then I would be a test case because I would have the people's support. By then it would be too late.

sea wrote:
If the founding fathers truly wanted to make the 2nd Amendment an individual right, why did they not accept Madison's original amendment:
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well-armed and well-regulated militia being the best security of a free country; but no person religiously scrupulous of baring arms shall be compelled to render military service in person." (source:http://faculty.ncwc.edu/TOConnor/410/410lect11.htm)

Because then they couldn't force people to join the army if they were poor and didn't own any guns. They would claim that they didn't own guns because of their beliefs, not because they were poor.

sea wrote:
The 2nd Amendment has NOT been incorporated into the 14th, and is thus NOT an individual right, and is the purview of the States. Don't like it?? .. go the Supreme Court and get it changed.


The 14th is about equal protection under the law, not about people's rights. It says that you can't deny citizenship to a black person born in the US. It doesn't say anything about guns. I'd take it to the Supreme Court but they probably wouldn't hear my case.

Sorry I didn't pick up on the sarcasm. It's hard through the net.

_________________
Don't do drugs because if you do drugs you'll go to prison, and drugs are really expensive in prison.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
    
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 175 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group