8-year-old boy kills himself with AK-47

[buttonjockey308]

@jsgoddess

No, we haven’t “found” that. We have the 2nd amendment, which means that people believed it would be so at one point. However, their opinion is still opinion.

So, if you want to rephrase to “We believe that having…” I’d have little quarrel, even less if you said, “Many of us believe that having…”

The ‘opinion’ of the framers of the constitution has stood the test of time. In part, because of Amendment number 2, we remain free of the type of tyranny that our ancestors fled their homelands to avoid. We remain uninvaded by a foreign enemy (notice I didn’t not say we were free from attack), and those who wish to defend their homes are free to do so. 232 years of experience is more than enough to state that the right to bear arms has been found to do all the things I mentioned and more. I will grant you that the law of unintended consequences has reared its ugly head, but these aren’t simple opinions, these are facts, even if you choose not to believe them, they are no less true.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@buttonjockey308

The ‘opinion’ of the framers of the constitution has stood the test of time. In part, because of Amendment number 2, we remain free of the type of tyranny that our ancestors fled their homelands to avoid. We remain uninvaded by a foreign enemy (notice I didn’t not say we were free from attack), and those who wish to defend their homes are free to do so. 232 years of experience is more than enough to state that the right to bear arms has been found to do all the things I mentioned and more. I will grant you that the law of unintended consequences has reared its ugly head, but these aren’t simple opinions, these are facts, even if you choose not to believe them, they are no less true.

What are you smoking?

We’re free of foreign invasion because 26% of the adult population are gun owners? I can just imagine the heated debate in the Politburo over that:

“Yevgeny, what is the current state of readiness of our tank divisions?”
“They are at full readiness, Defense Minister”
“Then I want you to prepare a plan for an invasion of the United States.”
“But… but… Defense Minister… they have guns! We cannot hope to defeat such an adversary, with their rifles in every Wal-Mart!”

[wonky]

@buttonjockey308

The ‘opinion’ of the framers of the constitution has stood the test of time. In part, because of Amendment number 2, we remain free of the type of tyranny that our ancestors fled their homelands to avoid. We remain uninvaded by a foreign enemy (notice I didn’t not say we were free from attack), and those who wish to defend their homes are free to do so. 232 years of experience is more than enough to state that the right to bear arms has been found to do all the things I mentioned and more. I will grant you that the law of unintended consequences has reared its ugly head, but these aren’t simple opinions, these are facts, even if you choose not to believe them, they are no less true.

Saying it over and over still doesn’t make it a fact and correlation does not equal causation. The framers had an opinion. You share that opinion. Even if everyone were to share the opinion, it would still be an opinion.

The lack of invasion probably has a lot more to do with geography than guns. Note: This is also an opinion.

[gonzomax]

I do not get it. A kid kills himself using a weapon he obviously could not handle. Then gun lovers want to argue whether it was a real machine gun or not. He is real dead. Technically it wasn’t a machine gun. So technically he is not dead. Stop that crap. He should not have been allowed to handle the weapon. It was wrong.

[Maeglin]

@buttonjockey308

No. YOU haven’t.

The truth of history escapes you.

But you understand it? How do you know you understand the truth of history?

[Guinastasia]

@buttonjockey308

The ‘opinion’ of the framers of the constitution has stood the test of time. In part, because of Amendment number 2, we remain free of the type of tyranny that our ancestors fled their homelands to avoid. We remain uninvaded by a foreign enemy (notice I didn’t not say we were free from attack), and those who wish to defend their homes are free to do so. 232 years of experience is more than enough to state that the right to bear arms has been found to do all the things I mentioned and more. I will grant you that the law of unintended consequences has reared its ugly head, but these aren’t simple opinions, these are facts, even if you choose not to believe them, they are no less true.

Um…well, you know, I’m holding in my hand a pen. Said pen keeps the bears away. How do I know? Well, there aren’t any bears in my house! See!

:rolleyes:

Look, I have no problem with responsible gun ownership. I do have a problem with gun stupidity. I also see that your argument is insanely cracked.

[Jack_Batty]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

What are you smoking?

We’re free of foreign invasion because 26% of the adult population are gun owners? I can just imagine the heated debate in the Politburo over that:

“Yevgeny, what is the current state of readiness of our tank divisions?”
“They are at full readiness, Defense Minister”
“Then I want you to prepare a plan for an invasion of the United States.”
“But… but… Defense Minister… they have guns! We cannot hope to defeat such an adversary, with their rifles in every Wal-Mart!”

Obviously you’ve never seen Red Dawn. Them Rooskies don’t stand a chance.

[Maeglin]

@buttonjockey308

The ‘opinion’ of the framers of the constitution has stood the test of time. In part, because of Amendment number 2, we remain free of the type of tyranny that our ancestors fled their homelands to avoid. We remain uninvaded by a foreign enemy (notice I didn’t not say we were free from attack), and those who wish to defend their homes are free to do so. 232 years of experience is more than enough to state that the right to bear arms has been found to do all the things I mentioned and more. I will grant you that the law of unintended consequences has reared its ugly head, but these aren’t simple opinions, these are facts, even if you choose not to believe them, they are no less true.

You could have saved a few bytes by just saying “post hoc ergo propter hoc” fallacy. Fallacy is kind of the opposite of truth.

[Petrobey_Mavromihalis]

@buttonjockey308

we remain free of the type of tyranny that our ancestors fled their homelands to avoid.

Is this really what it’s all about?

Because that’s a daft argument. People don’t fall under a tyranny because they lack the means to fight back. People fall under tyranny either because they want to, or beacuse they are not paying attention. That is a lesson from history.

[buttonjockey308]

@Jack_Batty

I hate this fucking argument.

When someone dies because of a car it is an accident. That is, that car did something it is not designed to do. Cars are not designed to kill. Guns are.

Accidental shooting or no, when someone dies as a result of a gun, that gun has fulfilled its purpose. That’s why guns should be regulated far more than cars.

I’m constantly baffled that cars need to be registered and car drivers need to be licensed and of a certain age and able to pass a test and retested periodically and if they fuck up they aren’t allowed near cars … but when the same criteria butts up against guns, we get all the little-dick ammo-freaks screaming about impinging rights.

It’s bullshit.

Jack. I understand your argument and to a degree, you’re right. Still, if a person is found unfit to drive they are not unable to purchase or own a vehicle, just unable to drive it. Unable as in prevented by law, not physically. On the other hand, if you are a felon or adjudged deliquent or insane, you cannot legally be sold a gun (state by state variations apply. Those who choose to own guns must, in most states register themselves as owning a firearm, if they carry, they must register the gun and be certified in it’s use, and carry only that particular gun. You as a driver don’t buy a jeep, get tested on a jeep and then sell it to buy a toyota and have to retest your drivers license, do you?

Further, the right to bear arms is one guaranteed by the Constitution whereas the “right” to drive is issued, very much like gun permits/registrations on a state by state basis and not guaranteed except where mentioned in the Declaration of Independence where driving can be construed as part of " life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".

Finally, the reason I drew the line between guns and cars is because cars, pools, pillows, sheet plastic and lighters are all more statistically dangerous to children when used in a manner their manufacturers did not intend. Smith and Wesson does not create their products with the intent of blowing holes in children. No matter how those on the anti-gun bandwagon want this to be so. These are products being used in stupid ways by stupid people with horrible results.

[Kalhoun]

@buttonjockey308

I both agree and disagree with this. At the root of this is the undeniable fact that guns are tools. They are neither good nor evil. That said, would this man have allowed his son to fire this weapon if there weren’t so many movies, video games, stories, TV shows, media in general involving or discussing firearms?

Who knows? You don’t know what motivated this man, nor do I, you are likely correct, but the end result is that his child is dead and he is responsible. This fact unhinges everything ‘fun and cool’ about shooting an automatic.

People with lousy judgement also have kids and cars and licenses to drive them which according to the CDC kills more kids by a damn site than guns do, still, I’d bet the same thing.

Usually the kids are more than a couple years past toilet training age and they receive training prior to driving their deadly weapon.

Or on second thought, you’re right. Let’s give all the second and third graders automatic weapons. It’s not anyone’s fault. These things just happen.

[Terrifel]

@buttonjockey308

If you say so, skippy. :rolleyes:

Guns bad. Got it. When come back, bring cogent arguement.

I doubt any argument would affect the belief that history proves America is God’s favorite country.

How would you change such a person’s mind? Citing figures? Bible study? What sort of evidence will demonstrate conclusively that God doesn’t favor America over all other nations?

[buttonjockey308]

@Guinastasia

Um…well, you know, I’m holding in my hand a pen. Said pen keeps the bears away. How do I know? Well, there aren’t any bears in my house! See!

:rolleyes:

Look, I have no problem with responsible gun ownership. I do have a problem with gun stupidity. I also see that your argument is insanely cracked.

What then, do you suggest be done?

I hold this man, the father of this child, responsible for the death of his son. I do not hold the gun, the people who make the gun or the people who held the show responsible.

As far as my argument, believe it cracked if you wish, but do you deny the role of the gun in American history? Can you envision an America in it’s current state without the role that the firearm played?

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@buttonjockey308

Finally, the reason I drew the line between guns and cars is because cars, pools, pillows, sheet plastic and lighters are all more statistically dangerous to children when used in a manner their manufacturers did not intend. Smith and Wesson does not create their products with the intent of blowing holes in children. No matter how those on the anti-gun bandwagon want this to be so. These are products being used in stupid ways by stupid people with horrible results.

Smith and Wesson creates their products with the intent to blow holes in things. One of those things is people. I don’t believe that makes them criminally or civilly liable for creating those products, but I do believe it negates any argument about the gun being “just a tool”.

Guns are by far the most effective readily available killing tools. There’s a good reason why people don’t go on killing sprees armed with cars, pools, pillows, sheet plastic or lighters.

[buttonjockey308]

@Kalhoun

Usually the kids are more than a couple years past toilet training age and they receive training prior to driving their deadly weapon.

Or on second thought, you’re right. Let’s give all the second and third graders automatic weapons. It’s not anyone’s fault. These things just happen.

When did I say that Kalhoun? When exactly?

This child is dead. His father is responsible. How do I in my supposedly cracked argument promote handing out automatic weapons to third graders?

[buttonjockey308]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Guns are by far the most effective readily available killing tools. There’s a good reason why people don’t go on killing sprees armed with cars, pools, pillows, sheet plastic or lighters.

Never the less, when it comes to children, all of those things are more dangerous than the gun.

That data shifts quickly once the ages go up, but speaking only of children between 5 and 15, this is statistical fact.

[buttonjockey308]

@Petrobey_Mavromihalis

Is this really what it’s all about?

Because that’s a daft argument. People don’t fall under a tyranny because they lack the means to fight back. People fall under tyranny either because they want to, or beacuse they are not paying attention. That is a lesson from history.

So people WANT to be under a tyrannical regime? Hm. I suppose that’s possible, though I’m not one of those people, and as far as paying attention, well, that’s money in the bank right there, and another lesson from history.

[buttonjockey308]

@Terrifel

I doubt any argument would affect the belief that history proves America is God’s favorite country.

How would you change such a person’s mind? Citing figures? Bible study? What sort of evidence will demonstrate conclusively that God doesn’t favor America over all other nations?

Frankly, I don’t know and may I never have to find out.

In case you missed it, I don’t buy in to that, or God, at least as these nutwads understand God.

[Maeglin]

@buttonjockey308

Never the less, when it comes to children, all of those things are more dangerous than the gun.

That data shifts quickly once the ages go up, but speaking only of children between 5 and 15, this is statistical fact.

I am actually not sure that this is true. If you are simply looking at the probability of death from various objects, it will be very misleading. The statistic to consider is the probability of death conditional on handling various objects.

[Guinastasia]

@buttonjockey308

What then, do you suggest be done?

I hold this man, the father of this child, responsible for the death of his son. I do not hold the gun, the people who make the gun or the people who held the show responsible.

As far as my argument, believe it cracked if you wish, but do you deny the role of the gun in American history? Can you envision an America in it’s current state without the role that the firearm played?

I didn’t say it was the gun’s fault. I was taking issue with your argument that the US still exists and has never been invaded because of the 2nd Amendment. There’s a HELL of a lot more to it than that.
Oh, and I do INDEED hold the people who held the show responsible. Did you READ the advertisement for the event? It’s linked on the first page of the thread-“other fun stuff we’re not allowed to mention?”) Obviously, they knew damned well things weren’t on the up and up and didn’t seem to give a shit.