If you aren’t working to ban all knives. And Facebook. You, too, are part of the EVIL!!11!!, murder supporting, problem.
Am I doing this right?
Right, because an unarmed woman can stop a man with a hammer or a knife or a screwdriver or a bat …:rolleyes:
[quote=“Lumpy, post:98, topic:757299”]
39 matches for “gun” on page one, 143 (so far) on page two; TL;DR, so I’m just going to say:
Here’s my suggestion- change the First Amendment to permit the government to do the following:[ul]
[li]Censor the media from sensationalizing public massacres[/li][li]Enact a new Hayes-style code to stop Hollywood’s glorification of gun violence[/li][li]Ban “slaughter training” first-person shooter games that desensitize youths to gore and death[/ul]What’s that? You say that would be an intolerable intrusion on peoples’ rights? Tough.[/li][/QUOTE]
Except there’s no reason to think any of that would do anything but increase the rate of violence.
As well, freedom of speech is important in ensuring people’s freedom,while one of the primary function of gun advocacy is destroy people’s freedom as much as possible. Both directly through terror tactics, and by encouraging people to focus on the useless “right” to own a gun while the rights that *actually matter *are taken away.
Pro-gun people don’t care about free speech, opposing torture or false imprisonment or any other form of human rights; they’d cheerfully see the world turned into a totalitarian dictatorship as long as they could clutch their stupid guns.
Nor do I believe for a moment that a significant number of pro-gun people felt any sympathy whatsoever about the killings. Some didn’t care; most probably cheered inside. Both because the victims were “sinners”, and because they saw an opportunity to push their holy gun fetish. Human life is meaningless to them; guns are important.
I’m pro-gun; I’m also, uh, pro-free-speech. And I’m anti-false-imprisonment; after all, I certainly don’t want to be falsely imprisoned – or tortured – just like I don’t want to be deprived of free speech, or of guns. And, great guy that I am, I often default to the whole do-unto-others thing, and so advocate for the rights of others.
Are you quite sure that pro-gun people don’t care about free speech? Because I’ll abandon one principle or the other if you can convince me, I guess.
Well since anti-gun people are rapists and cannibals and torture atheists to death the pro-gun people aren’t looking so bad.
I don’t think that’s a very good argument - the Tsarnaev brothers detonated two bombs in a huge crowd of people, killing 3 (and injuring/maiming more than 260 others). They had to build those bombs themselves.
Now let’s suppose that they could legally purchase fragmentation grenades at a store. How much worse could things have been?
Or, let’s suppose that the Orlando shooter wasn’t able to purchase an AR-15 but had to build his own gun. Do you think that fewer people would have been killed?
And for the record, no I am not a “gun grabber”.
In the UK, we actually do have some fairly stringent laws against just carrying knives around. You can’t sell them to underage people, you can’t carry one around without good reason, the blade of an always-carry knife has to be under 3 inches in length, some types of knife (like switchblades) are just straight up completely banned, and so on. A very quick Google suggests that French laws are of similar if not harsher provision; there’s a very good chance that the killer here was in fact committing a crime before he killed because of them.
Laws which control in part the use of and sale of knives are sensible precautions.
Why do you keep repeating AR-15? The asshole in Orlando didn’t use one.
[quote=“Lumpy, post:98, topic:757299”]
39 matches for “gun” on page one, 143 (so far) on page two; TL;DR, so I’m just going to say:
Here’s my suggestion- change the First Amendment to permit the government to do the following:[ul]
[li]Censor the media from sensationalizing public massacres[/li][li]Enact a new Hayes-style code to stop Hollywood’s glorification of gun violence[/li][li]Ban “slaughter training” first-person shooter games that desensitize youths to gore and death[/ul]What’s that? You say that would be an intolerable intrusion on peoples’ rights?[/li][/QUOTE]
I’d say that those things fundamentally do not cause violence and have not been shown to have any connection to violence, so… Yeah.
Tell that to all the police officers who were involved an an extended shootout with the Tsarnaev brothers. Remember the marathon wasn’t the only time they struck. A few days later they shot officer Sean Collier to death, stole a car, and caused a citywide lockdown. Many other police officers were injured that day.
You are absolutely correct-he had a Sig Sauer MCX. Is this another of those guns that people supposedly use all the time as hunting rifles, or can we safely call this one an “assault rifle” without repercussion?
Its good to know that you are back on the Dope posting the well reasoned dispassionate wisdom that you are known for.
Men are more dangerous than guns. Men commit 85% of the murders in the United States. Guns are only used in 67%. I’ll support your gun ban when you support putting all men behind bars at the age of 16. You know, for safety.
Bless your heart. Even you don’t believe the nonsense you write. If on the minuscule chance you do, steal some change from your mom’s Crown Royal bag and buy a history book. Read it. Learn that state sanctioned violence, aka the government, of various nations is orders of magnitude (google that if it confuses your) greater than lone nuts.
So what you’re saying is that we should learn to love mass killings?
Lousy analogy: men are people, guns are not.
Getting rid of every last gun in the US (which, for the record, I don’t support doing) would not be anywhere near as heinous an offense against human rights as imprisoning even one single man merely for being a man would be.
Edit: Also, the “other and more important intended purposes” distinction so often used about cars in comparison to guns is even more relevant with respect to men, of course.
No you can’t.
Gotcha-the rights of guns are equal to the rights of human beings.
People are more harmful to the environment than fossil fuels. 100% of the power plants and cars that emit carbon into the atmosphere are built, designed and operated by people.
I’ll support regulation of fossil fuels and pollutants when you support putting all polluters behind bars. You know, to stop global warming.
Wasn’t an analogy. It was a stupid statement to contradict another stupid statement. Sorry, I should’ve used a snark symbol, my apologies.
Just because people disagree with you doesn’t make them evil.