or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › killing Trayvon
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

killing Trayvon - Page 139

post #2071 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spats View Post


@ Piob: OK, at home: guns pretty useless most of the time there as well. Call and tell me how it goes down next time 20 dudes who want your ass are out in the street in front of your house. Give me lots of details about what a special gun yours is and how not one of them had even a peashooter. I'm thinking if this nightmare were ever to arise, you'll want a direct line to the cop shop or better yet, be in your car across town. Fuck the constitutional issue.

This is better. Stop acting like it's about concealed carry permits and just come out and say it. Ban all guns from civilian ownership.
post #2072 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

This is better. Stop acting like it's about concealed carry permits and just come out and say it. Ban all guns from civilian ownership.

Not at all what I'm saying. Let me spell it out and then move on: a) Guns are lousy personal protection. b) Guns are way too often involved in lethal killings, many of them accidental, all of them final. And don't forget the serious and permanent injuries when the shooting isn't fatal.
c) There are WAY too many guns sloshing around in this "civil" society.
d) It ain't about the constitution, it's about the money. Follow it, the money trail. Guns are durable and rarely get destroyed or trashed and thus the civilian gun industry would trickle down to very little if there wasn't a constant manufactured demand for them, like any other consumer product.
e) I don't have any realistic hope that there is a solution to this mess but we obviously stand alone against the thinking of the rest of the world on this. I suspect we are held captive by our own mythology and the propaganda that constantly keeps it fresh.
post #2073 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spats View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

This is better. Stop acting like it's about concealed carry permits and just come out and say it. Ban all guns from civilian ownership.

Not at all what I'm saying. Let me spell it out and then move on: a) Guns are lousy personal protection. b) Guns are way too often involved in lethal killings, many of them accidental, all of them final. And don't forget the serious and permanent injuries when the shooting isn't fatal.
c) There are WAY too many guns sloshing around in this "civil" society.
d) It ain't about the constitution, it's about the money. Follow it, the money trail. Guns are durable and rarely get destroyed or trashed and thus the civilian gun industry would trickle down to very little if there wasn't a constant manufactured demand for them, like any other consumer product.
e) I don't have any realistic hope that there is a solution to this mess but we obviously stand alone against the thinking of the rest of the world on this. I suspect we are held captive by our own mythology and the propaganda that constantly keeps it fresh.

So guns are everything bad but don't ban them? confused.gif
post #2074 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

So guns are everything bad but don't ban them? confused.gif

Yes. They have their uses, and they ARE constitutionally protected for some purpose or other. But they can be regulated, even now. Right now there are just, as I said, WAY too many lying about for the average moron to access. It should be especially hard to possess a gun of the type that is easy to conceal and to do a lot of impromptu damage with. If that cuts into gun manufacture, importation and sales, too bad. But that is the lobby you'd be up against, if you wanted to regulate gun access and ownership.
post #2075 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spats View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

So guns are everything bad but don't ban them? confused.gif

Yes. They have their uses, and they ARE constitutionally protected for some purpose or other. But they can be regulated, even now. Right now there are just, as I said, WAY too many lying about for the average moron to access. It should be especially hard to possess a gun of the type that is easy to conceal and to do a lot of impromptu damage with. If that cuts into gun manufacture, importation and sales, too bad. But that is the lobby you'd be up against, if you wanted to regulate gun access and ownership.

But back to Owens. Concealed has nothing to do with it but you still went on a rant. He would have been best served by a "street sweeper" long gun. You are not being consistent.

Also, do you feel only exceptional morons should be able to possess guns?
post #2076 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

But back to Owens. Concealed has nothing to do with it but you still went on a rant. He would have been best served by a "street sweeper" long gun. You are not being consistent.
Also, do you feel only exceptional morons should be able to possess guns?
OK, I'll play. Caveat: I didn't read the Fox (or Huff) article nor am I particularly interested in the details that make men drool over the tables at the gun show. I was merely responding to what Aturk wrote, something about how "great" (sarcastic) it was no one had a gun. I said something like, "unlike Martin v. Zimmerman, at least no one was dead." I didn't know or care what was concealed; no rant. And I love a contrafactual as much as the next guy, so yeah, if he'd been in control of the situation and he'd had my model 12 riot, he'd be in better shape today. See, I am the one exception I trust. smile.gif YMMV.
post #2077 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spats View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

But back to Owens. Concealed has nothing to do with it but you still went on a rant. He would have been best served by a "street sweeper" long gun. You are not being consistent.
Also, do you feel only exceptional morons should be able to possess guns?
OK, I'll play. Caveat: I didn't read the Fox (or Huff) article nor am I particularly interested in the details that make men drool over the tables at the gun show. I was merely responding to what Aturk wrote, something about how "great" (sarcastic) it was no one had a gun. I said something like, "unlike Martin v. Zimmerman, at least no one was dead." I didn't know or care what was concealed; no rant. And I love a contrafactual as much as the next guy, so yeah, if he'd been in control of the situation and he'd had my model 12 riot, he'd be in better shape today. See, I am the one exception I trust. smile.gif YMMV.

So you're the exceptional moron? wink.gif
post #2078 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

So you're the exceptional moron? wink.gif

Yeah, you can be an ordinary one.cheers.gif Who cares.
post #2079 of 6250
sums it up very well
post #2080 of 6250
I see Dershowitz has ripped the special prosecutor. Says she has very likely committed a crime by evidence suppression in the PC affidavit and that she has overcharged him by going for second degree. Says if there are riots due to Z getting aquitted on 2nd degree, which Dershowitz feels will happen, it is the prosecutor's fault for not going for a more reasonable charge.
post #2081 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spats View Post

Amazing indeed. The fact is he didn't have a big gun. He got beat half to death. Of course gun nuts are going to say, "if he'd had a big ol' gun, he would be fine today." I like that so much, I'm going to adopt it as my personal credo: "everything will go down my way when I point my big ol' gun at you." If I was twelve, I could believe it would be the way to go. I'd always come out on top.

People successfully defend themselves with firearms every single day in this country, but that's none of your concern, apparently.

Scenario 1: You're beaten to a bloody pulp by a group of men armed with baseball bats, brass knuckles and other blunt objects. You might die, you might not.

Scenario 2: Same group of men approach you with the same weapons, but this time you're given a firearm to defend yourself. When you start shooting, one of the other men could potentially have a firearm, we don't know (this completely ignores the fact that you retain the element of surprise, putting any one of this men who might have a gun at a significant disadvantage).

I can't imagine anyone with an ounce of common sense choosing scenario 1, but what do I know. Then again, I've grown up around firearms, and know how to use one. If it's a foreign concept to you, I could understand that you might be a little skeptical of defending yourself with such a weapon.
post #2082 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by suited View Post

People successfully defend themselves with firearms every single day in this country, but that's none of your concern, apparently.
Scenario 1: You're beaten to a bloody pulp by a group of men armed with baseball bats, brass knuckles and other blunt objects. You might die, you might not.
Scenario 2: Same group of men approach you with the same weapons, but this time you're given a firearm to defend yourself. When you start shooting, one of the other men could potentially have a firearm, we don't know (this completely ignores the fact that you retain the element of surprise, putting any one of this men who might have a gun at a significant disadvantage).
I can't imagine anyone with an ounce of common sense choosing scenario 1, but what do I know. Then again, I've grown up around firearms, and know how to use one. If it's a foreign concept to you, I could understand that you might be a little skeptical of defending yourself with such a weapon.

Scenario 3: You grip up (meaning act like you have a gun when you don't or do) and let the punks know you will not be punked. They walk away and you go home. Win for all.*

Too many people take the fact that since they are puss gives them the right to shoot. Law enforcement included.

*I have a personal story if you're interested.
post #2083 of 6250
Regarding gun ownership, I can see long guns, particularly in rural areas. Handguns are more difficult for me to rationalize.

A question for Americans -- does everybody agree that they do not belong in schools?
post #2084 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by eg1 View Post

Regarding gun ownership, I can see long guns, particularly in rural areas. Handguns are more difficult for me to rationalize.
A question for Americans -- does everybody agree that they do not belong in schools?
Yes, I agree.
post #2085 of 6250
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by suited View Post


I can't imagine anyone with an ounce of common sense choosing scenario 1, but what do I know. Then again, I've grown up around firearms, and know how to use one. If it's a foreign concept to you, I could understand that you might be a little skeptical of defending yourself with such a weapon.

the argument usually comes down to that. I pretty much agree with spats. I don't think we should take away peoples guns, but I think that it isn't such a smart idea to use one for personal protection. and I know how to use one, they aren't foreign to me at all. I would say that the example used above is a good example of an instance where a firearm could have been used to influence the situation, but those are pretty rare.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › killing Trayvon