Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

The Global Gun Control Threat

global gun control repeal second amendment

  • Please log in to reply
324 replies to this topic

#181    odiesbsc

odiesbsc

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 658 posts
  • Joined:18 May 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Montana, USA

  • Some folks drink from the fountain of knowledge. Some folks just gargle and spit it out.

Posted 27 December 2012 - 08:51 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 26 December 2012 - 08:50 PM, said:

As I've stated already, Utopia is not an option. I never claimed that everybody carrying would eliminate gun violence, and I understand full well that gun control advocates do not claim to stop all gun violence.  I would just like to hear some specifics as to how the various gun control laws might be fine tuned to prevent such accidents.


I agree with you Babe Ruth. However, in almost or all the places where carry is legal, the crime rate has significanly dropped. The bad guys are going to think twice about who might be carrying and who is not. As for myself, I have extensive firearm training and I carry all the time legally. There was only one time in my 70 years that I have drawn my gun for protection and nobody got hurt.

Odie :gun:

As you slide down the water slide of life, may none of your swimming suits give you a permanent wedgie.

~Ancient Polynesian Greeting~



If the teacher has no DNA testing apperatus, you're probably safe blaming the booger you wiped on her computer screen on someone else.

~American Defense Lawyers' Ethics Training Book for Children~


#182    ninjadude

ninjadude

    Seeker of truths

  • Member
  • 11,068 posts
  • Joined:11 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

  • "dirt collects at the interfaces"

Posted 27 December 2012 - 09:41 PM

View Postpreacherman76, on 27 December 2012 - 02:11 PM, said:

The way the Bill of Rights is worded, the rights it meantions are not given to us by government, but according to it are given to us by our creator. Government hasnt given the rights, so government cant take them away. Only the creator himself can take them away. I dont expect we will be hearing from him on the matter any time soon.

You SERiOUSLY believe god gave you the right to bear arms?!

"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!""
- Friedrich Nietzsche

#183    ninjadude

ninjadude

    Seeker of truths

  • Member
  • 11,068 posts
  • Joined:11 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

  • "dirt collects at the interfaces"

Posted 27 December 2012 - 09:44 PM

View Postpreacherman76, on 27 December 2012 - 03:49 PM, said:

To let future administrations know that these rights are set in stone. Unchangeable. This is basic 6th grade American history.

If that were true, they could have expressly said so in the constitution or in those amendments. Your 6th grade must have been a hoot.

"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!""
- Friedrich Nietzsche

#184    Czero 101

Czero 101

    Earthshattering Kaboom

  • Member
  • 5,362 posts
  • Joined:24 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, BC

  • We are all made of thermonuclear waste material

Posted 27 December 2012 - 10:17 PM

View PostLiquid Gardens, on 27 December 2012 - 05:03 PM, said:

I'm not blaming you on this, I'm a product of American education also and we actually didn't cover this until high school, you're fortunate if you had it in 6th.  But I really do think you are mistaken about this, and I can't find anything to the contrary after doing a couple searches to check myself.

Kudos on the effort, LG, but Preacherman won't bother trying to find any evidence to back up his position. He rarely if ever does. He's here, just as his handle indicates, to preach his willfully ignorant beliefs viewpoint as the truth regardless of any evidence to the contrary, or the lack of any evidence in support of his beliefs.





Cz

"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe..." - Carl Sagan
"I'm tired of ignorance held up as inspiration, where vicious anti-intellectualism is considered a positive trait, and where uninformed opinion is displayed as fact." - Phil Plait
"For it is the natural tendency of the ignorant to believe what is not true. In order to overcome that tendency it is not sufficient to exhibit the true; it is also necessary to expose and denounce the false." - H. L. Mencken

#185    Liquid Gardens

Liquid Gardens

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,813 posts
  • Joined:23 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • "Or is it just remains of vibrations from echoes long ago"

Posted 27 December 2012 - 11:39 PM

View PostCzero 101, on 27 December 2012 - 10:17 PM, said:

Kudos on the effort, LG, but Preacherman won't bother trying to find any evidence to back up his position. He rarely if ever does. He's here, just as his handle indicates, to preach his willfully ignorant beliefs viewpoint as the truth regardless of any evidence to the contrary, or the lack of any evidence in support of his beliefs.

Thanks Cz, I was beginning to suspect as much after the last few replies.  It's not like there's anything wrong with being mistaken, I was 99% sure I was correct but still double-checked it.  And I don't know what there is to preach even, this isn't like the usual positions I argue against where there is an interpretative element, this is just a plain fact.

"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into"
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence" - C. Hitchens
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool" - Richard Feynman

#186    Little Fish

Little Fish

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,000 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The default position is to give a ****

Posted 27 December 2012 - 11:53 PM

what does the word 'unalienable' mean?


#187    Czero 101

Czero 101

    Earthshattering Kaboom

  • Member
  • 5,362 posts
  • Joined:24 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, BC

  • We are all made of thermonuclear waste material

Posted 28 December 2012 - 12:11 AM

View PostLittle Fish, on 27 December 2012 - 11:53 PM, said:

what does the word 'unalienable' mean?

You know, dictionary websites exist for just such occasions as this....


Just sayin'....







Cz

"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe..." - Carl Sagan
"I'm tired of ignorance held up as inspiration, where vicious anti-intellectualism is considered a positive trait, and where uninformed opinion is displayed as fact." - Phil Plait
"For it is the natural tendency of the ignorant to believe what is not true. In order to overcome that tendency it is not sufficient to exhibit the true; it is also necessary to expose and denounce the false." - H. L. Mencken

#188    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Seeker

  • Member
  • 11,278 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Dark side of the Moon

Posted 28 December 2012 - 09:50 AM

un·al·ien·a·ble  (Posted Imagen-Posted ImagelPosted ImageyPosted Image-nPosted Image-bPosted Imagel, -Posted ImagePosted ImagelPosted Image-Posted Image-)
adj.
Not to be separated, given away, or taken away; inalienable:

http://www.thefreedi...com/unalienable

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#189    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Seeker

  • Member
  • 11,278 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Dark side of the Moon

Posted 28 December 2012 - 09:52 AM

View PostCzero 101, on 27 December 2012 - 10:17 PM, said:

Kudos on the effort, LG, but Preacherman won't bother trying to find any evidence to back up his position. He rarely if ever does. He's here, just as his handle indicates, to preach his willfully ignorant beliefs viewpoint as the truth regardless of any evidence to the contrary, or the lack of any evidence in support of his beliefs.





Cz

I rarely if ever even talk to you. Dont pretend you know me.

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#190    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Seeker

  • Member
  • 11,278 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Dark side of the Moon

Posted 28 December 2012 - 09:53 AM

View Postninjadude, on 27 December 2012 - 09:44 PM, said:

If that were true, they could have expressly said so in the constitution or in those amendments.

But they went even further then that.

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#191    Liquid Gardens

Liquid Gardens

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,813 posts
  • Joined:23 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • "Or is it just remains of vibrations from echoes long ago"

Posted 28 December 2012 - 01:40 PM

View Postpreacherman76, on 28 December 2012 - 09:53 AM, said:

But they went even further then that.

And mysteriously left no evidence of it....

Seriously man, there's nothing wrong with being mistaken, everyone is sometimes.  You don't have to acknowledge your error but I wouldn't think you want to continue to dig in your heels on an incorrect position here either.  Don't believe people here, just look it up.

"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into"
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence" - C. Hitchens
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool" - Richard Feynman

#192    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,731 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 28 December 2012 - 02:09 PM

View PostLiquid Gardens, on 27 December 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:

That I think is the bad presumption that is included in your line of argument here, that, "The law is not nearly as effective as we would like to think.".  I don't know who thinks that, I think most people understand the limited effectiveness of our laws.  I'm sure you can think of legislation that would be effective eventually in achieving a decline in gun deaths if that was the only issue and objective at hand:  outlaw all guns and ammunition, over time I think it's reasonable to assume that will eventually result in less gun deaths.  The trick is balancing that draconian measure with the current rights that people have and liberty and so on.  

Mandatory training is fine, but I don't think that helps prevent a Newtown-type event.  It appears that we are always going to have a subset of people who are mentally ill (not just children), or who are just plain malicious people.  Unfortunately in the US, we have so many weapons available that it's honestly no surprise that those violence-prone people are able to get their hands on them, existing laws or not.  I don't know how you prevent devices that can kill people with the push of a button from getting in the hands of these people short of putting into place far more strict and penalizing laws than we currently have.

Again, we are very close.  Ultimately we must ask the question regarding your last sentence: "Is it even POSSIBLE to prevent dangerous devices (that are protected by the Constitution) out of the hands of the wrong people?"

We have been trying to do that for decades now to no avail, and if you include drugs too, for a century.  To no avail.

Who thinks that so many of the various gun control measures have failed?  Any disinterested observer who is willing to analyze the empirical evidence as gathered since those measures have been put into place.  By any standard you choose to use, the vast majority of gun control laws have failed to stop gun violence.  Even in cities like Chicago with very strict laws, a virtual prohibition on ownership or possession, shootings go on all the time.  That cannot be denied.

And I hate to say it LG, because I know what you'll say, but it is beginning to appear that the style of story telling and 'press releases' relevant to Sandy Hook is very similar to the style of story telling related to certain other staged events.  Yes, it's horrid, and I sure hope I'm wrong, but the similarities are downright spooky.


#193    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,731 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 28 December 2012 - 02:12 PM

View Postodiesbsc, on 27 December 2012 - 08:51 PM, said:

I agree with you Babe Ruth. However, in almost or all the places where carry is legal, the crime rate has significanly dropped. The bad guys are going to think twice about who might be carrying and who is not. As for myself, I have extensive firearm training and I carry all the time legally. There was only one time in my 70 years that I have drawn my gun for protection and nobody got hurt.

Odie :gun:

I agree 100%.

I do not carry, but have many friends that do.  In certain situations, I draw some measure of comfort when I am in their presence.  Same comfort I feel when in the presence of a cop.


#194    Czero 101

Czero 101

    Earthshattering Kaboom

  • Member
  • 5,362 posts
  • Joined:24 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, BC

  • We are all made of thermonuclear waste material

Posted 28 December 2012 - 03:48 PM

View Postpreacherman76, on 28 December 2012 - 09:52 AM, said:

I rarely if ever even talk to you. Dont pretend you know me.

I

Can

Read...


The few times we have "talked" coupled with what I have observed of your behaviour here has given me enough insight to predict that, as usual, you will still not provide any kind of support for your position and you will persist with putting forward your willfully ignorant position no matter how much evidence is presented that proves you wrong...

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, so be it... won't be the first / last time, and at least I can admit it... but I've got a good feeling I'm not, though...






Cz

Edited by Czero 101, 28 December 2012 - 03:49 PM.

"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe..." - Carl Sagan
"I'm tired of ignorance held up as inspiration, where vicious anti-intellectualism is considered a positive trait, and where uninformed opinion is displayed as fact." - Phil Plait
"For it is the natural tendency of the ignorant to believe what is not true. In order to overcome that tendency it is not sufficient to exhibit the true; it is also necessary to expose and denounce the false." - H. L. Mencken

#195    Liquid Gardens

Liquid Gardens

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,813 posts
  • Joined:23 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • "Or is it just remains of vibrations from echoes long ago"

Posted 28 December 2012 - 04:54 PM

View PostCzero 101, on 28 December 2012 - 03:48 PM, said:

I

Can

Read...


The few times we have "talked" coupled with what I have observed of your behaviour here has given me enough insight to predict that, as usual, you will still not provide any kind of support for your position and you will persist with putting forward your willfully ignorant position no matter how much evidence is presented that proves you wrong...

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, so be it... won't be the first / last time, and at least I can admit it... but I've got a good feeling I'm not, though...


FWIW, I didn't see anything wrong with your original post and statement concerning him, you have plenty of evidence to back up your conclusions.  It doesn't require that you 'know' him, that's silly.

"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into"
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence" - C. Hitchens
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool" - Richard Feynman




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users