Which is more important to you, human life or your guns?

[frigidweirdo]

Yeah, let's get down to the simples, you people love your guns and couldn't give "a rat fuck" how many people die, unless it's a Muslim doing the killing, right?

Well, you have shifted to a different topic. Muzzie terrorists should not even be here. Don't confuse the issues. But, the motives of mass murderers is irrelevant in terms of your communist lust to confiscate our power to resist your Bolshevik aspirations.

Also, the UK doesn't have ghettos and all those problems, why? Maybe it's because the UK deals with its problems, the US just tries to exacerbate them.

Again, this is off topic, but I will entertain this comment for a moment.

No first-world country on earth has to deal with the problems we have in the U.S. We have a racial subculture that literally glorifies and gleefully embraces gun violence, murder, and criminal activity. The attitudes expressed by this subculture are literally the only real example of the objectification of women. (You know, bitches ain't nu'en but hoes and tricks.) It glorifies and encourages fathers to shun their responsibilities to their children, and celebrates leaving the mother for new pussy. It even glorifies violence toward women.

This subculture prevails because its members ridicule anyone who turns their back on this life style or who tries to better their life by getting an education. Anyone in this racial subculture who rejects it is labled as being a sellout, a school boy, a bitch-ass, or a "sucka" . The difference between the U.S. and U.K. has nothing to do with our gun laws and everything to do with this subculture.

THAT is difference between the U.S. and U.K. Don't start taking bows for the socialist cause. It has done nothing to help.

I'm confusing the issues. The point is that when a white guy kills people with guns it's "You can't take away our rights" and when a Muslim kills someone it's "please, take away our rights".

What you're doing is compartmentalization. It's a often used tactic of people who really don't think about things deeply, people who know what they want and will find excuses for that to exist.

The point here is one of consistency. If you're no consistent I know you're just making up excuses that fit your argument. You don't like it, well, that's your problem not mine.

If you come at me with "our rights are our rights and they cannot be touched" then I expect you to use this argument for EVERY SINGLE ARGUMENT going. Do you not think that's a fair thing to ask? If you are "Our rights are our rights and cannot be touched" with this argument and then you change for the next argument, then what?


Actually talking about the UK is very relevant. It's the closest country to the US, it's a country without many guns, and without the massive problems of the US has.

Another tactic here. One where people say "you have to prove something works before we'll introduce it" then you talk about another country and then it becomes "that doesn't prove it'll work here, you have to prove it works here in this country before we'll introduce it here in this country" circular nonsense.

Yes, no first world country has to deal with the problems the US has to deal with. Why?

"We have a racial subculture that literally glorifies and gleefully embraces gun violence, murder, and criminal activity."

Okay, it's true. Why? How have they been able to glorify a GUN CULTURE in the US and why do you think they haven't glorified a gun culture in the UK? Think about that one.

The criminal culture, the ghetto culture, why did it get to that?

My view is that the US has simply been a place telling people "everyone can make it in the US" while at the same time STOPPING people from progressing. Making education weak, refusing to deal with social issues, making sure bigger business gets all the benefits. Everything in US politics is about the rich screwing over others and the rich telling people the poor people that they want to have the rich people issues.

The whole subculture thing you're talking about exists because the US does NOT deal with its issues. The UK does.

In the UK there was a big rise in gun murders. I think it had a lot to do with the Yardies from Jamaica bringing guns in. These people didn't need visas to get into the UK and brought a lot of their problems. The UK govt dealt with the problem from lots of angles, dealing with gun violence directly, dealing with education especially with black boys, dealing with social issues especially in places like London and the problem went down.

In the US it just gets worse and worse every generation with too many people saying it's up to the individual, but the individuals are being born into despair and can't get out unless they get lucky. The rich don't want them to get out.

There is a difference, the difference is that in the US the people don't want to deal with the problems. Simples.

Who says take away our rights when an islamist attacks?

Do you want the list?

Maybe you just need to open your eyes on this forum.

However usually it's them saying "stop this thing" which doesn't impact that individual, but takes the right away and changes it to a privilege for them.

I typed in "ban islam" into the search of this forum and got the 17 pages (means there's more?) of people. Let's see

Mr Trump, ban this Islam!

Basquebromance wants to ban Islam
Sciencerocks seems to imply this
Protectionist seems to be advocating this

I could go on, but you should be able to get the point. This is just from one issue, I could find other issues too.

 

[Gracie]

A simple question.

Yesterday 26 people were shot and killed, some of them kids.

Life is going down the drain for lots of people in the US due to guns.

Which would you prefer, to keep your guns or to keep your life?

My guns, so I can keep my life. Thanks.

 

[Skull Pilot]

RGS, stay with the point.

Do you think crazies and terrorists should have access to guns?

Anyone who has been adjudicated mentally ill is prohibited from possessing firearms.

Anyone convicted of a felony is prohibited from possessing firearms

So what laws do you propose will do the same things as the laws we already have?

We need to enforce the laws we have and we need to enforce them with mandatory, extremely harsh, prison time

 

[Skull Pilot]

It is already ILLEGAL for them to have firearms dumb ass.

Prove it.

18 U.S.C. § 922 - U.S. Code Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 922 | FindLaw
 It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person--

 is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;

 is a fugitive from justice;

 is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act ( 21 U.S.C. 802 ));

 has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;

 who, being an alien--

 is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or

 except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act ( 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(26) ));

 who  [FN2] has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;

 who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship;

 is subject to a court order that restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child, except that this paragraph shall only apply to a court order that--

 was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had the opportunity to participate;  and

 includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child;  or

 by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury;  or

 has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

 

[Skull Pilot]

A simple question.

Yesterday 26 people were shot and killed, some of them kids.

Life is going down the drain for lots of people in the US due to guns.

Which would you prefer, to keep your guns or to keep your life?

MY FUCKING GUNS ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE LIVES OF WORTHLESS SHIT STAINS WASTING OXYGEN!!!

GUNS >>>>>>>>> PEOPLE


Fuck your false dichotomy. Fuck your communist revolution. We don't give a shit about human life. We give zero fucks about thinking of the children. Fuck those worthless spawn. The right to rid ourselves of tyranny and put down an authoritarian, rights-killing communist revolution is more important the human life.

We're keeping the motherfucking guns, and getting more!!! We're going after machine guns, bitches. It is ON!!!

Here are some pictures

And I didn't kill any of those people so there is no reason to prohibit me from owning guns

 

[Skull Pilot]

Not when you take into account the number of legal guns, no. Illegal guns do over 92% of the killing here.

Human life, saved by an armed lawful citizen. Example in point-

Florida dad fires gun to stop 17-year-old daughter's attempted kidnappers, cops say

But the reality is that STILL four times more people die in the US than in most other First World countries.

Go figure.

So, you have people stopping killings, which means that the number of killing attempts in the US is through the roof.

Yes, when you take into account the number of legal guns, the homicide rate is STILL four times lower.

I'm confused.

The homicide rate of the UK was still 4 times lower before all their gun laws bans and confiscations.

Explain that.

Murder rate of the UK in 1950 .8 per 100000
Murder rate of the US in 1950 4.5 per 100000

The murder rate is affected by far more variables than just guns

 

[Skull Pilot]

A simple question.

Yesterday 26 people were shot and killed, some of them kids.

Life is going down the drain for lots of people in the US due to guns.

Which would you prefer, to keep your guns or to keep your life?

Which is more important to you, human life or your guns?

My guns took no human life yesterday. Or last week. Or last month. Or in the last year.

No, but the fact that guns are easy to obtain means that people are able to get guns easily and some of them will use those guns.

So your logic here is that some people will kill with guns so no one can own guns?

Do you want to apply that standard to all laws?

 

[Geaux4it]

Which is more important to you, human life or your guns?

My guns took no human life yesterday. Or last week. Or last month. Or in the last year.

No, but the fact that guns are easy to obtain means that people are able to get guns easily and some of them will use those guns.

You asked about my guns.....why are you changing the subject now?

Stop being so ridiculous.

Which is more important to you, human life or your guns?

My guns have never taken a human life. Never.
Not even once.

Why do you have a problem with my guns?

Because you being able to get guns means others can get guns. Others get guns and they do use them.

Or do you dispute this?

All that matters is what I do with my guns. Not what someone else does with theirs. Irrelevant

-Geaux

 

[JakeStarkey]

The gun bunny logic is that legislation has not yet worked, so we should forget all legislation.

Nope.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A simple question.

Yesterday 26 people were shot and killed, some of them kids.

Life is going down the drain for lots of people in the US due to guns.

Which would you prefer, to keep your guns or to keep your life?

Which is more important to you, human life or your guns?

My guns took no human life yesterday. Or last week. Or last month. Or in the last year.

No, but the fact that guns are easy to obtain means that people are able to get guns easily and some of them will use those guns.

So your logic here is that some people will kill with guns so no one can own guns?

Do you want to apply that standard to all laws?

I discuss agree with FW, and I disagree with you as well. You logic is the laws we have no, so we should have no laws.

You two are the extremes of the the argument.

 

[frigidweirdo]

A simple question.

Yesterday 26 people were shot and killed, some of them kids.

Life is going down the drain for lots of people in the US due to guns.

Which would you prefer, to keep your guns or to keep your life?

My guns, so I can keep my life. Thanks.

But so other people die.

Which is better.

The UK where the murder rate is 1/4 of the murder rate of the US, where you're not going to die, and where others don't die

Or the US where the murder rate is 4 times higher, and you need a gun to protect yourself and where others are dying much more than the UK and where you're more likely to die? But you have a gun.

 

[Anathema]

But so other people die.

Which is better.

It's not my problem to worry about other people. In fact part of the reason to hsve guns is because I don't trust other people yo put my or my family's well being above their own.

 

[frigidweirdo]

A simple question.

Yesterday 26 people were shot and killed, some of them kids.

Life is going down the drain for lots of people in the US due to guns.

Which would you prefer, to keep your guns or to keep your life?

Which is more important to you, human life or your guns?

My guns took no human life yesterday. Or last week. Or last month. Or in the last year.

No, but the fact that guns are easy to obtain means that people are able to get guns easily and some of them will use those guns.

So your logic here is that some people will kill with guns so no one can own guns?

Do you want to apply that standard to all laws?

I discuss agree with FW, and I disagree with you as well. You logic is the laws we have no, so we should have no laws.

You two are the extremes of the the argument.

I'm not really sure you know really what my views are here. I've not really got started on this yet, I'm just trying to make you understand one point.

To be clearer, there is the individual and there is society. Sometimes things can be done for the individuals and sometimes they can be done for society.

Murder is illegal because people don't want to live in a society where they are threatened with death. Society controls things and individuals can be happy and the balance is there.

Drink driving is something that people feel people shouldn't be able to do. Some people think it's a pain in the ass because they want to go drinking then they want to go home. But people feel that other people die so it's a bad idea.

With guns too, where is the balance? You want your guns. There are some good reasons for wanting guns, just as there are reason for drink driving and good reasons to kill someone.

But where's the balance? 10,000 people a year dying because of gun murders. People feeling unsafe at festivals, at churches, all over the place.

Banning guns is not the only solution, and it's not an easy solution either. It won't bring instant success.

However, like I've said before, unless the political system changes, nothing will change. As long as the Koch brothers and others are spending billions telling people what to think, all that will happen is more disaster, and it isn't the Koch brothers, or Soros or any of the billionaires who are getting shot. Like WW1, it was the rich who started it and the poor who lost their lives.

 

[frigidweirdo]

But so other people die.

Which is better.

It's not my problem to worry about other people. In fact part of the reason to hsve guns is because I don't trust other people yo put my or my family's well being above their own.

So why do you live in a society? You should just be in a place with no laws, you against the world. I bet you don't last 5 minutes.

 

[frigidweirdo]

No, but the fact that guns are easy to obtain means that people are able to get guns easily and some of them will use those guns.

You asked about my guns.....why are you changing the subject now?

Stop being so ridiculous.

Which is more important to you, human life or your guns?

My guns have never taken a human life. Never.
Not even once.

Why do you have a problem with my guns?

Because you being able to get guns means others can get guns. Others get guns and they do use them.

Or do you dispute this?

All that matters is what I do with my guns. Not what someone else does with theirs. Irrelevant

-Geaux

Yep, I'm sure that 14 year old girl, dead in Texas, feels the same thing.

 

[Anathema]

So why do you live in a society? You should just be in a place with no laws, you against the world. I bet you don't last 5 minutes.

I have no problem with Law and Order, or Society in general. I just prefer a proper society over an improper ine. I'm against a lawless, chaotic society thst doesn' work; which is whst I see in the US currently. To thst end, I do my best to remain on the edges of American Society; interacting with it when I must and avoiding it as much as possible.

 

[frigidweirdo]

So why do you live in a society? You should just be in a place with no laws, you against the world. I bet you don't last 5 minutes.

I have no problem with Law and Order, or Society in general. I just prefer a proper society over an improper ine. I'm against a lawless, chaotic society thst doesn' work; which is whst I see in the US currently. To thst end, I do my best to remain on the edges of American Society; interacting with it when I must and avoiding it as much as possible.

But then again other people prefer a little more freedom. There should be a balance.

 

[Anathema]

Yep, I'm sure that 14 year old girl, dead in Texas, feels the same thing.

Then maybe her parents will think twice about spending time in unsecured places with no means to defend themselves. It's truly tragic thst it took the loss of their daughter to teach them thst lesson.

 

[Anathema]

But then again other people prefer a little more freedom. There should be a balance.

FREEDOM for what?... to act immorality or illegally? To do things contrary to the most basic values and standards of decency?

FREEDOM has become just a synonym for Chaos in American Society, and that's antithetical to a functioning society.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yep, I'm sure that 14 year old girl, dead in Texas, feels the same thing.

Then maybe her parents will think twice about spending time in unsecured places with no means to defend themselves. It's truly tragic thst it took the loss of their daughter to teach them thst lesson.

And is that how people want to live? Like I said, it's like being outside of society, in the wilderness, afraid of things. Society is supposed to be about protection, instead society is attacking.