Mass Debate: Team Rodman vs Team Kemp

Other video games, TV shows, movies, general chit-chat...this is an all-purpose off-topic board where you can talk about anything that doesn't have its own dedicated section.

Mass Debate: Team Rodman vs Team Kemp

Postby The Host on Mon Apr 11, 2005 12:59 am

Topic: Is there a gun problem in the USA? Should gun laws be changed?

Team Rodman will be the affirmative, Team Kemp will be the negative.

Make all of your posts in this thread.

The way the task works, is that the debate will be fought out on the forums in public view... which means if you think you can contribute to your team with an argument, then post it. You don't necessarily have to consult your teammates on everything you do, because you're all arguing the same thing so feel free to post whenever you want as long as it's on the topic etc.

Any questions ask in the NRS Second Task thread
Image
User avatar
The Host
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:25 pm
Location: TV

Postby Jackal on Mon Apr 11, 2005 4:03 am

Is there a gun problem in the USA? Should gun laws be changed?

Starting off, I'd say yes, the US does have a gun problem. A large quantity of the US population possesses a gun, legal or illegal, they've got one. A lot of people could argue that it's their for their own safety. Sure, it is. Fine. No problem. But if you're a 45 some old man with a washed up old wife who's tired of giving it to you night in and night out, come to think of it, you probably don't even want none from her anymore...but anyways, imagine that's you & you've got a 17 year old frustrated kid that listens to Fifteh Cenn being all gangster, why in heavens name do you have your fully loaded gun in your closet? Lock that fucker away and keep the key with you at all times.

In all seriousness, do we really need guns to protect ourselves? What are we protecting? Our family? Why? Aren't we pretty much fed up of them as it is? Why protect them? Our homes? Why? Is it that comfy? Pssh, let the robber take that stupid old TV, with the insurance money you can get yourself a plasma screen you dipshit.

Now you all respond so that I can build from there. Lazy bums. :roll:
User avatar
Jackal
 
Posts: 14877
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2003 2:59 am

Postby IronMan on Mon Apr 11, 2005 4:14 am

Well for most people, yes, that gun IS for protecting things like families and homes... and well, once again, for most people, that is their life that they are protecting. To most people, family is the most important thing. You wake up, you work 8 hour days, and what for? To support your family, to give them the same kind of life you grew up with, or better. That to me is something worth protecting.

As for the gangster kid scenario, there is a simple solution. Lock your gun away. Hide it from your kid. Does that have anything to do with gun laws? No, that's your responsibility as an owner of that gun.
Image

He shed his broken wings, but in the sky he remains.
User avatar
IronMan
 
Posts: 363
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 8:27 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Postby Indy on Mon Apr 11, 2005 4:21 am

Gun laws are hypocritical, and outragous. There are multiple reasons why, but the main one is that in a democracy, the people must have power. If the government has guns, the military has guns, and the police have guns, then it gives the government more power over the people and makes government more and more like a authoratorian government then a democracy. If a government becomes too corrupt and the people have less and less choice about what happens in there country then they have to uprise against the government. Imagine what would have happened if the people in the colonies of the United States didnt have guns, how would we have ever broke away from the corrupt government of Britain?
Image
User avatar
Indy
 
Posts: 5240
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 1:32 pm
Location: Dublin

Postby Jackal on Mon Apr 11, 2005 6:16 am

Gun laws are hypocritical, and outragous.


Right, drug laws are hypocritical too then. Bush smokes the chronic, why can't we? In fact, all laws are hypocritical.

You keep gibber gabbering about the government having more "power" over us. That's the point. If they didn't have control over us, we'd be out raping any gorgeous woman we saw, we'd be stealing PS2's from all over & we'd be getting stoned 24/7. (Again, those gangstah's, damn them!!)

Seriously, bringing up an argument such as "if the government has guns, why can't we?" is just weak. You're not in a position of power & you don't have to keep a whole country (or a large amount of people) in order. The reason police officers have guns is to maintain order. You, as a civillian have no excuse to have a gun except for protecting yourself. Last I checked a baseball-bat did just a good a job protecting someone.

If you had to keep a large amount of people in order and then needed a gun, I'd gladly had one to you myself. Since you don't. Hush.

As for Brokenwings, it's nice to say that but I'm sure a large percentage of the gun owners doesn't do this. I'm sure there's a larger quantity of people that have bad intentions with their guns. I'm saying there are more criminals that have a gun than "regular people that want to protect themselves".

Besides, even if say Tommy, who's totally fucked up from watchin Fifteh Cenn & smokin the chronic with cheech his dog, wants a gun, he can get it. Say pops doesn't have a gun because he is getting it regularly from the secratary and because he's getting it regularly from her, he doesn't feel the need to pop the wife back home. Fine, so Tommy can't get one at home. He can get it anywhere else. Then he can proceed to blast anyone at will GTA style.
User avatar
Jackal
 
Posts: 14877
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2003 2:59 am

Postby IronMan on Mon Apr 11, 2005 6:25 am

Ok, what does that have anything to do with gun laws? Your example of said "Tommy" can get guns irregardless of laws, so is that a problem with regulations or US mentality?

And the argument with the government is totally valid. I don't understand how you can dismiss it. NEWSFLASH: Do you know what the 2nd ammendment is for? This ammendment, that grants people the right for individuals to bear arms, is not there so that people can defend themselves against criminals, though it's a legitimate use of force. It was put there so that the citizens would be able to resist the armed forces of a tyrannical government. If you create a society where weapons are not used or allowed, you have a weak society, one in which a person necessarily has to rely on some entity other than himself for protection.
Image

He shed his broken wings, but in the sky he remains.
User avatar
IronMan
 
Posts: 363
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 8:27 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Postby Jackal on Mon Apr 11, 2005 6:35 am

BrokenWings wrote:Ok, what does that have anything to do with gun laws? Your example of said "Tommy" can get guns irregardless of laws, so is that a problem with regulations or US mentality?


I'd say with the gun laws given if obtaining a gun was a bit more difficult, not everyone could just go out and get one.

Did I say remove all guns? Quote me on it.

But saying because the government has them, I want them too is a bit far fetched. It's all nice in theory but the human psyche just doesn't work that way. The human puts it's needs in the center of everything else. A person is more likely to get a gun for personal use opposed to getting it to "protect him/herself from a government that has guns". That's a crock of shit, you know it & I know it.

A human brain doesn't work that way, it works "me me me me me". Tell me a larger quantity of the people gets a gun to be able to ward off a tyrant type government. Especially in this day & age, you tell me that's the reason they get guns. :lol:
User avatar
Jackal
 
Posts: 14877
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2003 2:59 am

Postby IronMan on Mon Apr 11, 2005 6:42 am

Um... I think you're stereotyping way too much. Look at people on these forums man, the majority of them live in the States. How many of them own guns, especially for their own personal use?

I don't see any sort of statistic out there that states that 90% of american citizens own guns for the purpose of shooting their high school teachers.

Also, I'm not saying that people get guns to repress the government. I'm saying that that is what the ammendment is there for. If you don't have that in place, your society as a whole is weakened.

And yes, sure humans put their needs in the centre of everything else. But sorry to disappoint you buddy, but that INCLUDES protecting your family. Families will possess a handgun to protect their family, and there's no way you can say that isn't true.
Image

He shed his broken wings, but in the sky he remains.
User avatar
IronMan
 
Posts: 363
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 8:27 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Postby Drex on Mon Apr 11, 2005 6:50 am

Most of us are just kids :!:
Image
User avatar
Drex
You bastards!!!
 
Posts: 6074
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 10:48 am
Location: Iquique, Chile

Postby Jackal on Mon Apr 11, 2005 6:54 am

How am I stereotyping too much? Tell me there isn't a larger quantity of "bad" people with guns than there are "good" people with guns. If this wasn't the case, crime rates wouldn't have been as high as they are.

I don't know how many people from the US post on the boards. I couldn't tell you even if I wanted to. Besides, most of the ones that do live in the states are probably underage. So what does that have anything to do with it?

I haven't brought up statistics because 90% of all statistics are just made up on the spot. I'm trying not to go all numbers on everyone because that's all they are, numbers. I'm trying to bring in the logic into the discussion. Use your logic and say there isn't a larger quantity of people who have bad intentions with their guns. Be it robbing a store, shooting an employer or shooting a teacher.

I was never talking about the amendment. You folks brought it up and used it to support your arguments as to why people get or own guns. The reason was because the government has them. When I said this argument is faulty, you brought up the amendment saying:


This ammendment, that grants people the right for individuals to bear arms, is not there so that people can defend themselves against criminals, though it's a legitimate use of force.


In other words (atleast that's how it came off), you're saying people are allowed to bare arms to defend themselves not only from criminals but they also have the right to bare arms so that the government doesn't get out of hand. Who decides that btw? Say some random person that has the gun decides Bush is a tyrant and decides to kill him, is he making good use of his right? As I said, I wasn't the one who brought up the whole amendment thing saying the reason people have guns is so that the government gets out of hand. Pssh.

About the family part, in case you hadn't noticed, the opening statement about the family was pretty much a joke. (A pretty crude one but a joke none the less.)

I won't deny there are people that get guns to protect their families, why should I? I'd probably get one if I loved my family enough. Since I'm not denying that how about you quit denying the fact there is a larger quantity of people that possess guns who have other intentions with those guns than just protecting their family.
User avatar
Jackal
 
Posts: 14877
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2003 2:59 am

Postby IronMan on Mon Apr 11, 2005 6:55 am

Not to be rude or anything, but why are you posting in everyone else's debates? Once again, I'm not trying to be mean or anything... but I thought Jae said only users in the debate should be posting... but the public can read the thread.
Image

He shed his broken wings, but in the sky he remains.
User avatar
IronMan
 
Posts: 363
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 8:27 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Postby Jackal on Mon Apr 11, 2005 6:57 am

I was pondering the same thing, Dogg & Drex, get out. + Dogg, get that pic out of here man. :x Edit your post to remove the pic or I'll ask one of the mods to have it removed.
User avatar
Jackal
 
Posts: 14877
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2003 2:59 am

Postby IronMan on Mon Apr 11, 2005 7:04 am

Well then how can we argue with you if you don't bring up statistics? Are we supposed to believe you because you said so? That makes no sense at all. I will not agree that most people that possess guns use them for bad intentions. How could you prove such a claim? By looking at the crime rate? Does the crime rate say ANYTHING about what the intentions are for people having guns?

90% of all statistics are just made up on the spot... right, facts about population size, education rates, that's all made up BS! We must not believe anything that numbers say! And as you said, I will use my logic, and I will say there isn't a larger quantity of people who have bad intentions with their gun. You know why I wouldn't make such a bold claim? Because my logic does not have the sufficient capabilities to prove that. In fact, if I were to use my logic and say that LESS people use guns for bad deeds, how would you prove me wrong?

No, we did not bring up the ammendment. Jae brought up the ammendment, this is the subject of the debate. We (or at least I) did not say that the reason we should be able to bear arms is because the government has them. I did, however, say that if the government were to totally control the society and turn us all into slaves, we WOULD have the power to stop them.
Image

He shed his broken wings, but in the sky he remains.
User avatar
IronMan
 
Posts: 363
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 8:27 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Postby Jackal on Mon Apr 11, 2005 7:13 am

All right, we'll bring up statistics then. I'll leave that till tomorrow given it's 11.13 P.M. here and I'm not up for googling gun stats. You want stats, you got em.

I didn't see Jae bring up the 2nd Amendment? I did see you do it.
User avatar
Jackal
 
Posts: 14877
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2003 2:59 am

Postby IronMan on Mon Apr 11, 2005 8:01 am

Gun laws = second ammendment.
Image

He shed his broken wings, but in the sky he remains.
User avatar
IronMan
 
Posts: 363
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 8:27 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Postby -BHZMAFIA- on Mon Apr 11, 2005 8:54 am

Topic: Is there a gun problem in the USA? Should gun laws be changed?


Most definitely there is a gun problem in the USA, because there are too many people in the country getting to guns and using them whenever they feel like it which is where the gun laws come in. In the US, 20,000 are killed by guns each year and one main reason that gun laws should be changed is because children always look at guns as toys and they can end up killing themselves or even their parents, relatives etc.
Image
User avatar
-BHZMAFIA-
 
Posts: 4608
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 9:49 am
Location: Memphis

Postby Doobie on Mon Apr 11, 2005 8:59 am

SbHzMaFiA wrote:
Topic: Is there a gun problem in the USA? Should gun laws be changed?


Most definitely there is a gun problem in the USA, because there are too many people in the country getting to guns and using them whenever they feel like it which is where the gun laws come in. In the US, 20,000 are killed by guns each year and one main reason that gun laws should be changed is because children always look at guns as toys and they can end up killing themselves or even their parents, relatives etc.


you said it yourself , guns aren't the problem , people are , and parents should educate their kids about guns . its not about guns its about the people in the world and how the media image corrupts peoples minds . guns are supposed to be for safety and protection , not for murder . the laws shouldnt be changed because the laws are good enough . its not lke changing the laws are going to change the people , they are still going to find a way to get a hold on guns .
New York Knicks
User avatar
Doobie
didn't do it.
 
Posts: 3662
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 3:51 am
Location: NYC

Postby cyanide on Mon Apr 11, 2005 9:02 am

BrokenWings wrote:Gun laws = second ammendment.


So what? It's a piece of paper telling us what to do and how to live our lives. Sure it gives us the "freedom" to own firearms as "defense." But really, what good are firearms other than murder? Oh wait, that's the purpose of the damn thing, to freaking kill people.

The second amendment goes as, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." So it not only gives the police and the military to use these arms to protect citizens, but citizens can use them to protect themselves? Seriously, the citizens of the United States is living under constant fear every single damn day. You go on the streets, and what do you see? You see doors bolted locked, you see the ghettos and you wouldn't want to be a white guy caught dead in Harlem. All because of freaking guns, we're not protecting ourselves from terrorists, but we are the terrorists! Every single citizen that has the right to bear arms is a terrorist themselves, because they have the power to threaten, the power to injure, the power to murder, and the power to terrorize. With all of this, over a destructive device called the gun, any citizen has the potential to inflict fear on people.

And you want stats? Back in 1994, there are about 192 million firearms owned by American citizens. You think it's fun to walk down the street carrying a gun, worrying about somebody beating you to the draw first? What if somebody has access to a gun, let's say a 16 year old kid. Instead of the kid going to counselling because of depression, the kid has plans of revenge because his dad owns a firearm. So the kid gets the firearm and murders innocent classmates and shoots himself. That sounds familiar, *coughs*Columbine*coughs* And what about those gang warfare? Do you think the police has enough dealing with crack dealers and thiefs? Nooo, they gotta stop the gang warfare and risk their lives because those fucks also own guns. Wouldn't it be much easier to breathe and live on the streets without living in fear when all guns are outlawed, or at least regulated to rifles for hunting only?

With guns off the streets, you'll see a dramatic decrease in deaths, an increase in well being, not having to live in fear or constant threat, and so many innocent civilian deaths prevented as well as making the police and military focus more on important things than dealing with domestic issues.
if you were killed tomorrow, i WOULDNT GO 2 UR FUNERAL CUZ ID B N JAIL 4 KILLIN THE MOTHA FUCKER THAT KILLED U!
......|..___________________, ,
....../ `---______----|]
...../==o;;;;;;;;______.:/
.....), ---.(_(__) /
....// (..) ), ----"
...//___//
..//___//
.//___//
WE TRUE HOMIES
WE RIDE TOGETHER
WE DIE TOGETHER
User avatar
cyanide
Dat steatopygous
 
Posts: 9197
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 6:09 am
Location: US's toque

Postby Doobie on Mon Apr 11, 2005 9:20 am

with guns off the street , maniacs will just find another way to get rid of people , whether it be using chemicals , bombs , knives , etc.... Death will always be a partof the circle of life. the world will never be perfect , and guns are what we need to least worry about right now , what if we get attacked by terrorrist , roaming the streets killing everyone , and not one person has protection , what will happen , We all die . Honestly man , guns aren't the bad things , its the people and their education.
New York Knicks
User avatar
Doobie
didn't do it.
 
Posts: 3662
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 3:51 am
Location: NYC

Postby -BHZMAFIA- on Mon Apr 11, 2005 9:26 am

you said it yourself , guns aren't the problem , people are , and parents should educate their kids about guns . its not about guns its about the people in the world and how the media image corrupts peoples minds . guns are supposed to be for safety and protection , not for murder . the laws shouldnt be changed because the laws are good enough . its not lke changing the laws are going to change the people , they are still going to find a way to get a hold on guns.


If guns weren't allowed, you could protect yourself with your fists. There shouldn't be no need for guns if guns weren't allowed period or at least were only allowed to a certain amount of people that have special reasons for a gun. If the argument is about people not educating their children that well, then that has to go for drugs, driving, school and everything else. So that's why there is a gun problem in the US because as long as people live, everyone won't be perfect so educating kids wouldn't exactly help the others that died because kids aren't killing 20,000 people a year.
Image
User avatar
-BHZMAFIA-
 
Posts: 4608
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 9:49 am
Location: Memphis

Postby cyanide on Mon Apr 11, 2005 9:26 am

DoobieKnicks wrote:you said it yourself , guns aren't the problem , people are , and parents should educate their kids about guns .


That's hilarious. Do you honestly believe that'll work? "Sonny boy, this dangerous weapon is called a gun. Now, guns aren't used to kill for no reason, they are used to kill for a reason. Now that reason is called, 'self defense.' Now, do you understand why we own guns?"

"Fuck that shit, pa, I got called a cracker at school today, and I'm gonna fucking blow that motherfucker's head off!"

Seriously, do you think kids are any more rational than adults when it comes to using guns? Do you think even educating kids about alcohol is going to make a difference? Please.

its not about guns its about the people in the world and how the media image corrupts peoples minds .


Well, of course the media corrupts people's minds. You said it best. That's why we have violence with guns on tv every single day, video games with guns, and movies with guns. That's good enough to corrupt people's mind. Oh shit, there's guns all over the streets. It's in the second amendment??!?! Oh fuck. Ok, maybe you're wrong about the, "it's not about guns" part.

guns are supposed to be for safety and protection , not for murder .


That's a big barrel of laughs! Shit, somebody's breaking into my house right now! Good thing I have a gun for "safety and protection!" Blam, blam! Uh oh... I think he's dead. But that's ok, I used it for safety and protection! Think about it, when it comes to guns, "safety and protection" and "murder" goes hand in hand, and one can't go without the other. Now, if we didn't have guns, safety and protection could be using your damn fists or a baseball bat. At least it would punish and teach a lesson rather than fatally punish without a lesson learned.

the laws shouldnt be changed because the laws are good enough . its not lke changing the laws are going to change the people , they are still going to find a way to get a hold on guns .


Yeah, it's good enough to witness Columbine, innocent people dead every day, for gun accidents where kids are playing with a gun and it goes right through their head. Seriously, guns are a problem in the US, and something needs to be done. I'm sure people are tired of living on the streets in fear because of a destructive weapon called a gun. And you know what, even if we outlawed guns, of course people are still going to try to get their hands on guns. But think about it, if you wanted to kill somebody, would you go through all the trouble to try to get a gun? It's certainly a lot easier to have that motivation when you have a gun under the pillow because the "second amendment" says so. :roll:
if you were killed tomorrow, i WOULDNT GO 2 UR FUNERAL CUZ ID B N JAIL 4 KILLIN THE MOTHA FUCKER THAT KILLED U!
......|..___________________, ,
....../ `---______----|]
...../==o;;;;;;;;______.:/
.....), ---.(_(__) /
....// (..) ), ----"
...//___//
..//___//
.//___//
WE TRUE HOMIES
WE RIDE TOGETHER
WE DIE TOGETHER
User avatar
cyanide
Dat steatopygous
 
Posts: 9197
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 6:09 am
Location: US's toque

Postby The X on Mon Apr 11, 2005 10:26 am

DoobieKnicks wrote:with guns off the street , maniacs will just find another way to get rid of people , whether it be using chemicals , bombs , knives , etc

I could just imagine that, instead of a drive-by, they throw some chemical concoction. Come on, it won't happen. As far as knives, I would prefer to be face with someone wielding a knife rather than a gun. At least I'm got a shot at survival and defending myself.

DoobieKnicks wrote: and guns are what we need to least worry about right now , what if we get attacked by terrorrist , roaming the streets killing everyone , and not one person has protection , what will happen

That scenario doesn't sound too plausible to me. What kind of terrorist are you talking about? Most terrorist acts are one-off hits against some sort of landmark or politically significant site that is usually densely populated. They don't usually walk around wielding guns and roaming the streets. If they are, then this points to bad gun control laws that allow them to get possession of these weapons :wink:

With the lack of gun control laws, guns DO fall into the wrong hands. You say that people should be educated. Well I believe that not everyone is born good, and there are many bad seeds who will find a way to get guns, whether they are protected or not. At least with tighter gun control laws, the US would make it harder for these individuals to get the guns. I think deterrence is a big key.

I also believe they should ban the sale of certain types of weapons, as they did in Australia after a gun massacre many years back. They banned the sale of automatic and semi-automatic weapons in Australia to the public. The question is why does a person need an uzi or another semi-automatic weapon to protect themselves? Come on, that's gun control gone crazy.

Personally, I don't like the thought of ordinary citizens believing they have the right to take the law into their own hands. That's what the police is there for. The less guns available to the public, the better.


Anyways, I'm at work so I'll respond more later
User avatar
The X
is
NLSC Team Member
 
Posts: 11499
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Brisbane

Postby Indy on Mon Apr 11, 2005 10:27 am

Right, drug laws are hypocritical too then.


yes, they are.

You keep gibber gabbering about the government having more "power" over us. That's the point. If they didn't have control over us, we'd be out raping any gorgeous woman we saw, we'd be stealing PS2's from all over & we'd be getting stoned 24/7. (Again, those gangstah's, damn them!!)


why? do you push and shove people to get on the bus just because there arent cops around? if you dont see cops around do you go around beating people up? Does the government stop people who want to be stoned 24/7 from doing so?


Seriously, bringing up an argument such as "if the government has guns, why can't we?" is just weak. You're not in a position of power & you don't have to keep a whole country (or a large amount of people) in order. The reason police officers have guns is to maintain order. You, as a civillian have no excuse to have a gun except for protecting yourself. Last I checked a baseball-bat did just a good a job protecting someone.


So we should just put our lives in the control of police and the government even if they become corrupt? What if the government has no checks or balances anymore? In a democracy the people are one check, they have to be. A democracy is a government of the people, if electing different officials isnt changing anything anymore, the people need to take the initiative themselves to make change.

If you had to keep a large amount of people in order and then needed a gun, I'd gladly had one to you myself. Since you don't. Hush.


This isnt about keeping people in order, its about fighting back against the ones who are supposed to be keeping people in order but are doing a damn shitty job of it. Its bullshit to say power never corrupts people, thats ignorant as hell. Look at the labor riots, look at the democratic convention of 1972, look at the thousands of people that get harrassed by cops every day. What if it gets worse? The cops have guns, we dont. The people have no voice and like i said before, that makes government authoritarian, not democracy.[/quote]
Image
User avatar
Indy
 
Posts: 5240
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 1:32 pm
Location: Dublin

Postby cyanide on Mon Apr 11, 2005 10:46 am

IndyPacers67 wrote:So we should just put our lives in the control of police and the government even if they become corrupt? What if the government has no checks or balances anymore? In a democracy the people are one check, they have to be. A democracy is a government of the people, if electing different officials isnt changing anything anymore, the people need to take the initiative themselves to make change.


Whoa, whoa, whoa, hold the phone! The police and government are already corrupt. The democracy the States are living in are technically checks and balances, but there's always an imbalance of power. If this is a democracy, it is being run by the people, and right now, the States are supposedly run by the people. It is not, though, since we all know the government runs the people, no matter what. And if the so called second amendment is something the people will want to follow, so be it, but these people need to be educated about how destructive guns are.

This isnt about keeping people in order, its about fighting back against the ones who are supposed to be keeping people in order but are doing a damn shitty job of it. Its bullshit to say power never corrupts people, thats ignorant as hell. Look at the labor riots, look at the democratic convention of 1972, look at the thousands of people that get harrassed by cops every day. What if it gets worse? The cops have guns, we dont. The people have no voice and like i said before, that makes government authoritarian, not democracy.


You're right, the government is doing damn shitty job of keeping people in order. Because people like us gun-toting freaks are allowing this to happen. Well, the government wouldn't do a good job of keeping us in order anyway, but at least the second amendment could be removed for a damn good reason. This isn't the 1800's where the constitution have to be untouchable. We all know guns are destructive, and the purpose here, is to protect the people. Giving guns to people isn't going to protect anybody. If we, the people, entrust the military and police to protect us, then it's a lot smarter than every man for himself. The cops have guns, so we don't have to live in constant fear, knowing that cops are doing their jobs. Of course, there are corrupt cops, but that's up to us to make sure that we weed out the corrupt ones, rather than carry a gun to protect us from a corrupt cop. Now, how often do people protect themselves from a corrupt cop? Come on, guns don't belong to the people, because as proven, there's so many people killed in the States every year because of guns.
if you were killed tomorrow, i WOULDNT GO 2 UR FUNERAL CUZ ID B N JAIL 4 KILLIN THE MOTHA FUCKER THAT KILLED U!
......|..___________________, ,
....../ `---______----|]
...../==o;;;;;;;;______.:/
.....), ---.(_(__) /
....// (..) ), ----"
...//___//
..//___//
.//___//
WE TRUE HOMIES
WE RIDE TOGETHER
WE DIE TOGETHER
User avatar
cyanide
Dat steatopygous
 
Posts: 9197
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 6:09 am
Location: US's toque

Postby IronMan on Mon Apr 11, 2005 10:56 am

Can you really be that naive? Do you honestly think that by outlawing guns, you'll make crime disappear? Just like that, everything will be okay? Come on, be serious.

Get this in all your heads: GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. Guns do not operate by themselves, they don't have a mind of their own. The problem is not guns.

Do you think if someone were to commit a crime, they would actually purchase a gun legally? It's on records people, how stupid would someone be to do that? Trace the gun, trace the person. And do you honestly think banning guns will deter people from using guns as a weapon? Does banning weed make people want to smoke up less? The truth is, people WILL go through the "trouble" to get weed even though it is illegal. And well, it's just as easy to get a gun.

Cyanide, education is extremely important in today's society. I don't know what kind of world you live in, but it is very effective. And if you educate the youth about guns, yes they will become more rational as they grow up. Why do you think the government invests so much in sex ed and drug seminars?

And cyanide, a gun is ten times better for protecting than a bat. Hm, let's see, the robber has a gun and you're swinging a bat? I wonder who will win. And don't be so blinded by Hollywood, this isn't a movie. When you've got a gun and someone's walking around your basement, firing a shot in your house can be enough to scare that person off. You don't have to participate in some kind of Denzel Washington shoot off in your house. Hold him long enough to call the police.

If you really wanted to, you could want into a school with a piece of string and produce the same results as Columbine. It's not the guns that are the problem, it's people.

Gangs, criminals, murderers, they will get those guns irregardless of what kind of laws are in place. Look at other countries that enforce gun control. Is crime non-existant? No, it's just as big of a problem as in the US. Guns are the only way for people to protect themselves in their homes.
Image

He shed his broken wings, but in the sky he remains.
User avatar
IronMan
 
Posts: 363
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 8:27 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Next

Return to Off-Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests