Discussion: The Second Amendment III

[Kable24]

Wow, so 100 million or so gun owners and we all are planning on killing someone. That will bring that pesky population issue to a screeching halt.

I either get a good chuckle or a shaking my head moment from the silly stuff dnno1 posts.

 

[Spider - Man]

The mere fact that you bought a gun with the intent was to protect yourself and your family means you plan to kill someone.

Only to you. Broader minder people know that if you buy a car that can go 180 mph, it doesn't mean you bought it with the intent to drive it at that speed. For myself, if anyone broke into my house, I think firing a warning shot and letting them know I have a gun would be enough to convince them to leave. If not, it may get more serious but only as a last resort. Sad that you can only think in absolutes.

Just out of curiosity, how would you protect your family if someone with a gun broke in? I guess if they only had a hammer you'd be protected by 'assualt with a deadly weapon' right?

Not likely since it doesn't happen every day. Got anything else?

But he didn't do that. He used firearms.

You seem to be missing the point. If the guy was planning on killing some kids in a school and couldn't because all guns had been banned so he drove his truck into a crowd of them on the playground, killing a dozen or so, did it really make a difference that the guns were banned? No, the kids got killed anyway. The reason that crazy people aren't killing people in other ways is because they can get guns. Take away the guns and they'll find another way so the net result is the same: crazy people killing people. What part of that can't you get into your head?

 

[dnno1]

Wow, so 100 million or so gun owners and we all are planning on killing someone. That will bring that pesky population issue to a screeching halt.

I either get a good chuckle or a shaking my head moment from the silly stuff dnno1 posts.

Most of them, yes.

 

[Spider-Who?]

Se la vie.

First off, you mean "c'est la vie". Secondly, that is a TERRIBLE mindset to have towards the possible condemnation of someone where evidence is extremely faulty, especially considering your stance on guns in america. Though I'm really not surprised that is your response.

The mere fact that you bought a gun with the intent was to protect yourself and your family means you plan to kill someone.

There is a HUGE difference between someone planning to kill someone (I'm assuming you know the meaning of the word "plan") and someone buying a gun for recreational use or as a means to protect one's family. It's kind of a cliche saying at this point, but it's no less true: 99.9999% of gun owners say that they pray they NEVER have to use their gun.

You don't like people owning guns? Too bad. C'est la vie.

 

[Spider-Who?]

Most of them, yes.

I would very much like to see your evidence of this. Because looking at the correlation between law-abiding gun owners, and the number of gun-related deaths, I would think that it's rather obvious you are wrong.

 

[Destructus86]

Se la vie.



The mere fact that you bought a gun with the intent was to protect yourself and your family means you plan to kill someone.



Not likely since it doesn't happen every day. Got anything else?



But he didn't do that. He used firearms.

Really? I think you are confusing prepared and planning.

How about instead of guns they use vehicle bombs?

 

[Spider-Who?]

It's like one of us saying that because you don't own a gun, you plan to allow an intruder to hurt, rob, rape or kill your family. It's totally asinine.

 

[dnno1]

Only to you. Broader minder people know that if you buy a car that can go 180 mph, it doesn't mean you bought it with the intent to drive it at that speed. For myself, if anyone broke into my house, I think firing a warning shot and letting them know I have a gun would be enough to convince them to leave. If not, it may get more serious but only as a last resort. Sad that you can only think in absolutes.

Just out of curiosity, how would you protect your family if someone with a gun broke in? I guess if they only had a hammer you'd be protected by 'assualt with a deadly weapon' right?

Although with misuse it can, automobiles were not designed for killing. That is not the case with a firearm. I doubt you would be firing a warning shot with an intruder in your home. You don't know what he might have. If you draw a firearm it should be because you are in fear of your life. If you draw and fire a warning shot, then it begs the question whether you were really in fear or not. I find it hard to believe that they teach that in firearms class.

You seem to be missing the point. If the guy was planning on killing some kids in a school and couldn't because all guns had been banned so he drove his truck into a crowd of them on the playground, killing a dozen or so, did it really make a difference that the guns were banned? No, the kids got killed anyway. The reason that crazy people aren't killing people in other ways is because they can get guns. Take away the guns and they'll find another way so the net result is the same: crazy people killing people. What part of that can't you get into your head?

How often do people drive their car to mow down school children? Vehicular homicide comes with very stiff penalties in most states and that does not happen as much as gun deaths.

 

[dnno1]

Really? I think you are confusing prepared and planning.

How about instead of guns they use vehicle bombs?

Being prepared requires planning, so you are still planing to kill. Explosives are controlled. That's why you don't see so many car bombings here in the US.

 

[dnno1]

Retired Gen. McChrystal To MSNBC: ‘Serious Action Is Necessary’ On Gun Control
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/retired-...c-serious-action-is-necessary-on-gun-control/

 

[hippie_hunter]

Most of them, yes.

You're delusional. People who buy guns are typically people who buy them for hunting, protection, sport shooting, collecting, and other reasons.

 

[dnno1]

You're delusional. People who buy guns are typically people who buy them for hunting, protection, sport shooting, collecting, and other reasons.

You are still killing (even if it's animals) so it doesn't change what I have said. It's delusional to even deny that fact.

 

[Spider-Who?]

Being prepared requires planning, so you are still planing to kill.

People prepare by knowing the laws and target practicing. And 9.9/10 they're looking at it from the point of view of recreational enjoyment and basic familiarity with the weapon, not how awesomely they're going to shoot a bad guy. I have a few guns. I enjoy shooting them at the range, nothing more. If my life were in danger, yes, I do have a means to protect myself, but that is not why i purchased said weapons, it is not a situation I ever hope to be in and I have no plans on killing anyone.

I'm curious:

What do you think goes through the mind of someone who purchases a gun for recreational use (target shooting, collectiong, etc)?

How do you think a person who buys a gun for personal protection "plans" to kill? Do you think they walk through their house and say "Ok, when a bad guy comes in through the window, I'll stand over here...no, wait...over here, fire two shots into his chest, and if he's still moving, I'm going to John Woo jump over the couch - remember to release the doves, when i do, sweatheart - and after the barrell roll, I'll shoot him again in his stupid face."

 

[hippie_hunter]

You are still killing (even if it's animals) so it doesn't change what I have said. It's delusional to even deny that fact.

You don't have to buy a gun for hunting. You can buy one to shoot for fun. And killing an animal isn't comparable to killing a human being.

 

[enterthemadness]

You don't have to buy a gun for hunting. You can buy one to shoot for fun. And killing an animal isn't comparable to killing a human being.

Why? Don't animals have emotions? And to be fair, they don't have nukes or start say, World Wars.

Anyway,...

http://2012thebigpicture.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/vermont-to-require-non-gun-owners-to-pay-a-fine/

Hmmm...well....as a Libertarian...I dunno how I feel about this, but if the fine was reduced from $500 to $100, I honestly don't give a damn.



^ I posted that onto my wall, but Vermont may look into making NON GUN OWNERS register and pay a $500 fine. And to be, outside of the large fine, I don't see a problem. If the fine money goes towards police depts that is. And it's State law, not stupid Fed Law, so I don't see a problem. And I don't live up there. Is this fine one payment a year, or can it be in payments?

 

[mrvlknight21]

dnno1 has made the argument before that anyone who buys or carries a gun does it because they plan to kill. Last time he was involved in this argument, he even said that cops carry guns because they WANT to shoot someone. I believe a mod spoke to him about some of those ignorant statements last time.

He even talked about how "humanoid targets" are proof that gun owners are preparing to kill someone. Go check out the old second amendment thread for some laughs, I think it starts around page 21-22.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

dnno1 has made the argument before that anyone who buys or carries a gun does it because they plan to kill. Last time he was involved in this argument, he even said that cops carry guns because they WANT to shoot someone. I believe a mod spoke to him about some of those ignorant statements last time.

I've lived in a house with numerous guns and I've never had an inkling to go kill somebody. Owning a gun doesn't mean you are planning to kill someone. Just can't reason with someone who doesn't understand that.

 

[Kable24]

Just out of curiosity, how would you protect your family if someone with a gun broke in? I guess if they only had a hammer you'd be protected by 'assualt with a deadly weapon' right?

He has a sign that says "gun free zone", so they know not to have guns when they rob him.

 

[Figs]

dnno1 has made the argument before that anyone who buys or carries a gun does it because they plan to kill. Last time he was involved in this argument, he even said that cops carry guns because they WANT to shoot someone. I believe a mod spoke to him about some of those ignorant statements last time.

He even talked about how "humanoid targets" are proof that gun owners are preparing to kill someone. Go check out the old second amendment thread for some laughs, I think it starts around page 21-22.

Some people are just incredibly ignorant, biased and brainwashed. Just look at Excel with his blind love of Obama.

 

[Schlosser85]

Most of them, yes.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about on this topic, and should probably stop before you make yourself look even more ignorant than you already have.

That's not a moderator "order", just a random friendly suggestion.

 

[Figs]

Most of them, yes.

What I don't get is why you are so hardcore about banning all guns? Did a close family member of yours die by gun violence?? Personally I think you're just buying into the media's ******** and can't think for yourself.

 

[Kelly]

Oh, I think Dnno1 can think for himself just fine, he has just found a group of people that will debate with him until the cows come home...and there is nothing that Dnno loves to do more on here than argue...: )

 

[Spider-Who?]

Why? Don't animals have emotions? And to be fair, they don't have nukes or start say, World Wars.

We don't eat humans or use our skin and hair for clothing, tools, etc.

I am a huge animal lover, and would NEVER go hunting - hell, I've teared up the two times I've run over a squirrel - but I would have to agree that killing animals for food is entirely different than killing a human.

 

[enterthemadness]

We don't eat humans or use our skin and hair for clothing, tools, etc.

I am a huge animal lover, and would NEVER go hunting - hell, I've teared up the two times I've run over a squirrel - but I would have to agree that killing animals for food is entirely different than killing a human.

Love how everybody is readin first part of post, but not the fact Vermont may or may not force non-gun owners to register and pay a fine. looooooool.

 

[Spider-Who?]

Love how everybody is readin first part of post, but not the fact Vermont may or may not force non-gun owners to register and pay a fine. looooooool.

Figured I'd wait till I've read more than one article on it before expressing any thoughts on the matter.