UncleBeer,
I think the first two posts are fine, irreverent and to the point, posted when the thread hadn’t turned into a slanging match.
The third is taken out of context, as are all three to be honest. Didn’t really make a very good job of that did you?
Something I forgot to mention
Perhaps you should revisit the exchange Re: trigger locks as you obviously failed to comprehend the first time around.
Irreverent - disrespectful, profane, rude.
Reasonable - rational, sane, level-headed.
So your statements are reasonable and irreverent. Interesting concept. Let’s see how that works, ‘profanely rational,’ ‘disrespectfully level-headed,’ or ‘sanely rude.’ Hmm, I’ll leave it to the others to choose their favorite, or they are welcome to make up their own from any of the synonyms availble.
As for taking your posts out of context, the first two are copied in their entirety. In fact the initial example I provided is your first post in this thread. How in hell can this be “out of context?”
Meanwhile-back in the UK.
Carry a gun when you’ve got a criminal record gets you 8years if you are lucky
,maybe 10 if not .Let one off at nothing in particular=12+ .Hit anybody with as much as a pellet non-life threatening=15 up to think of a number.Do a job with a banana under a coat to put the frighteners on 5years rising to quite a lot and you think giving 5years for illegal possesion is tough-not 1/2 tough enough.
Villains know what to expect if they carry a gun on a job.They could get them if they wanted ,it’s hardly worth it -this came to you 2nd hand from former gunmen in my jail all doing loads of time all well fed-up.
WOW! At the risk of getting drawn into this charming little slap-fest, I have to state that this is the most mind-bogglingly stupid thing I’ve heard in a long time (and particularly surprising in that Lex’s prior comments here seemed rational and well-informed). Let’s break it down, shall we.
All the laws that can be in place regarding gun control without egregiously altering the Constitution already are, for the most part. WRONG! In case you haven’t noticed in this country we have a patchwork of different state and local laws on gun control, overlaid with some spotty federal regulation. I live in New York, where it is almost impossible to buy a handgun, but if I (or one of neighbors involved in the informal pharmaceuticals business) want to get a gun, all we have to do is drive down to Virginia or some other state with weak gun laws and pick one up. Just about every state law could be significantly tightened up without running afoul of the gun-lover’s precious Second Amendment. By the way, has any significant gun control legislation ever been thrown out on Second Amendment grounds (specifically, Second Amendment, not federalism or Commerce Clause or some other doctrine).
Just to take a major example that is in the news just a bit these days, how about waiting periods for background checks at gun shows. That’s a law that’s under consideration to close a major loophole that let those wacky Columbine kids pick up those nifty firearms. Can anyone rationally suggest that putting in waiting periods at gun shows (like the waiting periods for regular dealers) would run afoul of the Constitution?
All the guns that kill students in high school and all the guns that kill first-graders and all the guns used in violent crime are obtained illegally. WRONG! Most of the guns used when kids started shooting rampages at schools were taken from relatives, many of which obtained them legally. How many first-graders are killed in accidents with legal guns, or from domestic violence caused by owners of legal guns? And there’s damn little to prevent a violent criminal from obtaining a gun to use in his or her next crime, and nothing to prevent a would-be criminal from picking up a gun to use in his or her first violent crime (except in those states that have strong gun laws).
If you make more laws, you are not going to lower these things happening. And you are not going to make them harder to get either. WRONG! Of course more effective gun laws will make guns harder to get, particularly for the criminals. If there are uniform laws requiring registration of guns and owners, background checks, and waiting periods so these can be accomplished, we will reduce the number of guns circulating among those who shouldn’t have them. And it may not prevent some gun crime, but it sure will limit the ability of each new generation of criminals (or more important, homicidal sickos) to immediately get all of the guns they can carry.
“Really? Do you have a valid cite for that, or is it just emotive posturing?”
-Russell
Do I really need one? Do you actually think that the 17 year-olds buy their handguns legally? You can’t be that stupid.
And shotguns: Yeah, in most states you need to be 18 to buy one. They are pretty cheap.
But it is a fact:
The overwhelming majority of guns used in violent crime are stolen or purchased illegally on the black market.
You want a cite? Try checking these websites: www.msn.com www.msnbc.com www.cnn.com
Any time you hear about a shooting, check it out at any of these places. Look for where the gun came from. More laws aren’t going keep this type of crime from happening.
Or you can try checking this out: www.watchthenewsorreadthepaperyouflamingmoron.com
I don’t feel the need to cite something that is blatantly fucking obvious to anyone who is up on current events, you cretin.
It’s like I posted “The pope wears a funny hat,” or “Clinton is a lecher,” and you ask for a cite for it!
Jackass.
“Winners never quit and quitters never win, but those who never win and never quit are idiots.”
I was trying to figure out which post I wanted to quote to make this point, and since this one is the most Pit-worthy, it won out.
I actually think it is reasonable to ask for a cite about whether or not guns that cause death are obtained legally or not. Of course, I disregard any and all suicides.
That being said, I think on another thread we did the math and figured out that something like .006% of guns were used to kill or injure somebody everyyear. (actually a pretty good safety record) That % included justfied uses as well.
I think the VAST MAJORITY of guns that are used in crimes are obtained illegally. However, in all my gun debate statistic gathering I have never seen a statistic on this. So I have to admit that this is a FEELING, not neccesarily a fact.
That being said, this much up there is false:
Actually, you would not be able to buy a gun legally in VA. The only way you would be able to is if you had a VA resident buy it for you.
Of course that is reffered to as a straw man purchase and is illegal.
If you knew a private individual who was selling a gun, then I THINK you could purchase it. I also think that same transaction would be legal in NY.
The problem here is that gun laws are so vague. There is no reason people should be at risk for breaking paperwork laws.
Please specify…It is a little hard to argue with such a broad statement.
Most of us on the pro-Bill of Rights want a Supreme Court case. You see, they have never really dealt with a SPECIFIC 2nd Amendment case. We feel fairly secure in these words…
…Shall not be infringed.
The problem is that a case has to be appealed by the loser to get a chance at the Supremes. Both sides have been a little hesitant to test their whole theory on anything less than what they see as a strong case. The Emerson case was a possibility, but I am not sure if it was apealed or not.
Your waiting period would KILL all gun shows. Kill them. No more. This is an unnacceptable loss to the gun community.
Baaaahhh… Baaahhh…
I see you are a sheep that has never learned to think for yourself. (this is the pit after all)
That loophole you are talking about…
Is not a loop hole. The Federal Government has regulated how federally licensed dealers operate. They are now trying to license private individuals. Since this is not interstate commerce, they have ZERO authority to enforce this law.
Now about the Columbine thing…
WRONG. It is hard to make a case when you constantly get the facts you base your opinion on wrong.
The kids at Columbine used someone to make their purchases for them. They needed to be 18, so they used what is called a “Strawman” to purchase guns for them. In addition, the purchaser had no record and would have passed the background check.
Have you ever been to a gun show?
Have you ever tried to purchase a weapon from one?
I doubt it judging from your false perceptions of them.
Let me help you out if you are having trouble understanding it.
There would be this part of the Constitution:
**“Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. **”
And then most likely this part:
"Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
If a particular state tried it, then we would finally get to see how the 14th Amendment applied to the Second and the States.
Well, fair is fair. I think a cite is required either way on this.
I hope you don’t believe that fairy tale # HCI and CLinton were throwing around about 13 dead kids a day. You realize of course to get to 13, they had to include “children” older than Monica was when she was sucking off the prez.
The number of 1st graders killed by handguns each year are probably around 10.
How abou the best trigger lock yet invented, JAIL?
Have you ever looked up Project Exile? Punch it into a search engine and see what you find. I am tired of posting about it.
It is basically a program that the NRA busted it’s butt to get started in Richmond, VA. All they do is enforce existing federal gunlaws. Murders have dropped over 50% in 2 years.
Ahhh…Unfortunately, Freedom is not Free.
If we did everything possible to PREVENT possible crimes instead of PUNISHING actual crimes, we would not be a free country.
Life is not fair. Life is not perfect. But a free country with all it’s inherent risks is better than China or Russia.
You are such a moron.
Does this logic apply to illegal drugs?
People who are not supposed to have guns are ALREADY not buying them from a legal dealer. More restrictions on law abiding citizens will do NOTHING to the way a criminal aquires a gun.
Billdo, my man, I missed you while making my last reply.
Here’s what I have to say:
Billdo:
Thanks!
AND
Billdo (bolding mine):
Huh? The first bold section would alter State’s rights. Remember that little Civil War thing?
As for the second bold section, in most states this is illegal. Transporting firearms across state lines is illegal, unless you are travelling in your vehicle (extension of your home) and unless you are permanantly moving, and unless ad nauseum.
AND
Billdo (bolding mine):
Oh. They went to a gunshow and bought all those nifty firearms. And here I thought they were obtained illegally. Silly me, I read the paper.
Their aunt buys them a couple of shotguns at a gunshow. So I must accede that you have a point there.
The Tec-9 was bought illegaly and the guy who sold it to them got 6 years.
The other two guns are still under investigation, but I bet they got them illegally.
And
Billdo (bolding mine):
“taken from relatives”? You mean like stealing? That’s not obtaining them illegaly?
AND
Billdo (bolding mine):
WTF? Are you high? Criminal=law breaker, right? And you think that making laws is going to keep guns out of the hands of people who don’t give a fuck about the law?
Or maybe you mean that if we make it illegal for law abiding citizens to buy guns, or make it a pain in the ass, then there will be less guns for criminals to steal. This is a retroactive solution if I ever heard one.
A more contradictory, ignorant, autonomous response I have never heard.
Are you even potty trained? Try forming your own opinion AFTER you consider the facts, nimrod.
“Winners never quit and quitters never win, but those who never win and never quit are idiots.”
I LOVE GUNS! I don;t care what all you “saftey freaks” think. Gimme a gun, and you take whatever you want, we’ll see who wins okay?! As a matter of fact, i am going to buy a gun tomorrow! A 9mm semi, bring it on safe people!
What kinda pit is this? I like my BBQ extra hot and spicy, so I’ll just take these in order:
The “Gun in my home make it more likely that my family will get hurt” is the lamest “SCARY NUMBER” from HCI’s number hacks; 49 times 1 in 100,000,000 is still vanishingly small.
Your hypothetical burglar has no legal or rational claim to “self defense”, as he has no earthly business being in another person’s home, regadless of his violent intentions, or lack thereof. Ergo, dead bad guy/live homeowner=Good!
God, what kinda panty-waist weenie boy are you? You piss me the fuck off! I wanna kick yer ass so hard you get pissed and hit me back, just to prove that you’re a human-fucking-being, and not one of the pod people!
Just do us all a favor: put a sign on yourself saying “I’m carrying large sums of money, and I don’t believe in violence” and wear it into any ghetto of your choosing.
Sayonara, SHITHEAD!
3)RTFirefly: You got deep pockets? Deep enough to pay for all those innovations you mentioned, for every home in America? What about those of us who don’t own homes? You think my land lord’s goona appreciate me digging up his property and making all of those modifications to his property?
Oh wait, I already know your asinie reply:
“Move into a place that already has those things!”
OK, sure, I’ll fork up an extra hundred a month to have a “Secure Rental Property”, when I can purchase a handgun for a couple hundred, spend less than that on several boxes of ammo and range time to become familiar with the devices operation, and, most importantly, READ THE FUCKING MANUAL!
Firearms manuals come with all the mechanical and safety info necessary for ANY gunowner to safely store, handle, disassemble, clean and reassemble their firearms, and usually have some good advise about the safe implementation of your firearm.
Anbd it doesn’t raise my electric bill one miliwatt-second.
4)Al Zheimers: you are the worst, you New World Order Socialist Swine! You and your ilk I will take great deranged pleasure in seeing destroyed in as slow, painfull manner as my sick, twisted gun-toting mind can cancoct! Fuck you and your gun-grabbing politicos, you spineless, mindless sycophant!
You wanna know what kinda safety and marksmanship training the U.S. Army gave me?
Less than the NRA’s three page “Firearm Safety” pamphlet, free at participating gun-stores.
Nice try, but : :DING:: thank you for playing!
6)KarlGauss: do you have a magnetized steel plate in your ass? Because that’s the only explanation I can think of for your total lack of comprhension of even basic statistical mathematics, as you obviusly have your pug shoved so far up your poop-shoot that the gauss field is interfering with your neural activity, assuming of course, that you had any to begin with.
Comaparitive anlysis: You are an idiot, We are not.
Roll that up and smoke it, Sparky. That’s what Preparation-H is for.
7)Felice: Nice points, as I’m sure they readily apply to you.
Reasons a gun is better than a dog:
A gun doesn’t require innoculations against a disease that’ll turn it psycho.
Guns are harder to steal than dogs; I can steal your dog with a pound of grounf beef
A dog can bite anyone approaching your house without provocation. A gun will go off only after you pull the trigger.
Guns have never unexpectedly and inexplicably attacked a child.
Guns don’t go off by accident; People accidentally discharge tham through their own carelessness.
Guns will keep you from being in a position where you have to hope someone else will come defend you.
You don’t have to worry about your gun going off and attacking the kids in the next yard playing in their sandbox.
And the criminal with the gun will just as happily shoot your dog as he will you!
Guns are not territiorial or possessive, and do not need to be restrained from attacking the mailman or the neighborhhod children.
If you read your owner’s manual, you won’t shoot yourself while attempting to clean your weapon. Idiot!
But if I have a gun, my hands are free of pooper-scoopers and leashes, and I have the opportunity to rid the world of one more piece of wasted genetic material sucking the life and vitality out of society.
Guns are also good for hunting, self defense, and clean, wholesome AMERICAN fun: plinking, and I’ll spend a shitload less money on ammo and range time than I will on rabies and distemper, neuter/spaying, grooming, feeding and cleaning a gun than on a dog.
MadHun: Your father was a Nazi and your mother smelled of wienerschnitzel! Stay on your side of the pond and within the lines on the map, and maybe us sick, demented gun-toting Americans won’t come back over there and burn your country down. Again!
Oops! I forgot; we NEVER LEFT! Yeah, that’s right, I fucked your sister, and she chugged my dick and swallowed, and she loved it because it tasted of MEAT, not ‘spargel’.
Go talk to yourself in the mirror and see if you can convince your reflection, because the only thing you’re doing here is wasting space that could’ve been occupied by an intelligent poster.
Thomas Jefferson, of Virginia:
“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” – Proposed Virginia Constitution, 1776
“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Jefferson’s "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764
Thomas Paine, of Pennsylvania:
“[A]rms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. . . Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them.” – Thoughts On Defensive War, 1775
Tell you what, Bucky, I’ll make a wager with you:
I’ll wager $30,000, about $7,000 worth of firearms, and my Jeep, against the right to peddle your wife and daughter as crack-whores, if you’ll consent to let me fire ONE round from my 9mm at you in your Kevlar vest from 7 yards.
If you can get up and kick my ass (or do anything at all, for that matter) without medical assistance afterwards, you win.
Do we have a bet?
Bjorn: do us all a favor and go stick your head into one of those volcanoes you have lying around that piss-ant rock we laughingly acknowledge as a country. Go eat some herring and look at the northern lights, snapperhead!
MadNun: you too irresistable to pass up on. Gun racks in supermarkets? Have you ever been to this country, schnitzel-head? Lay off the Jagermeister and brake fluid, your brain may actually begin to work and you
Oh, and by the way…
Another solid example of why gun control does not equal crime control!
And how law-abiding citizens, responsible to themselves, their community, their state and their country are absolutlely ZERO threat to themselves, their families, their communities, their states and their country!
ExTank
Death to War Monkeys!
Aaaah yes…take the word irreverent and use whichever definition best suits you. It was the “lacking proper seriousness” or “SATIRIC” definition I was angling for. By that I simply mean my initial contribution wasn’t meant to be a definitve argument against owning guns, more a casual sideswipe at the wide-eyed loners out there who give their guns names like “Betsy” (you know who you are). Incidentally, where do you get the notion that “irreverent” has anything to do with profanity or rudeness?
Yes, you took my posts out of context because you removed them from the context of the thread. Understand?
Lexicon
If I use any words you don’t understand, get a grown up to help you. If you don’t understand the concept of asking logical questions based on information supplied, get a grown up to help you.
What does
Logically, you appear to say that all the laws that can be put in place, have already been implemented. Apart from the ones which have not.
You said
When I asked
you started ranting
and called me a jackass.
Would you agree that your response was simply more emotive posturing?
Can you find anywhere in your earlier posts where you said that the only people who kill students in high school are other students? I couldn’t see any such reference, nor did I suggest in my response that I was considering only schoolkids. Did I say anything about 17 year olds buying handguns? You may consider me a stupid jackass for questioning your information, but do try to base your misguided, infantile posturing on some semblance of reality, and pay attention and try to understand what people are actually saying.
The Straight Dope is an interesting forum for one such as yourself, who holds blindingly obvious personal opinions above reasoned and supported evidence.
Russell
Ahhhh…
Ex-Tank my man 
I only wish you didn’t live so far. I would love to go shooting with you.
That was like a breath of fresh air here in the pit.
If you have to be in the minority, at least we are in an armed minority
(and I actually think we are in the majority, we just lost the press)
Tank, just so that we use our invective to insult the proper ethnic groups, I believe TheMadHun is a jock, not a kraut, (his sig notwithstanding).
Tom~ (yankee-imperialist-running-dog-gringo)
Freedom and Ex Tank - please let me tag along…and Uncle Beer too!
Count me in. I’ll print up some of my custom targets.
Interesting spiel. Shame it’s all for nothing as I am Scottish, you know Scotland, the country that invented pretty much all the important shit you use every day.
Supermarket was perhaps the wrong word, but can’t you guys buy guns in Walmart, usually located next to the toy gun section? I’ve been to your country (escaped there from Canada whilst visiting relatives). Have you ever been to mine? Sorry, forgot that you’re a fuckwit and probably wouldn’t know where it was.
I suggested making the whole subject of fire-arms taboo in the same way say incest is taboo…you guys don’t have a big problem with incest do you? Oops, just spotted the flaw in that argument…
You’re really getting steamed up about this aren’t you? It’s quite funny really, but if you follow my posts you’ll find they were mere ideas, generalisations and assertions…I don’t claim to be an expert on either American society or firearms. As I’ve repeatedly stated I was giving an opinion, a fucking opinion you fuckin idiot. You obviously give more of a fuck about this than I do, to be honest I’d happily walk away from this thread if it weren’t for total pricks like you talking utter drivel. You really need to see a psychiatrist about anger management and your schizophrenia (you obviously think you’re Rambo). You are probably the best advert for strict gun-control I’ve ever seen with your wild ravings, to be honest you sound a bit unstable and the idea of a fucking headcase like you possessing a gun is frightening.
I’m still here because people responded to my post, you dickhead. You know, you represent the exact stereotype I have of gun-worshipping America: a “fuck you” attitude, xenophobic to the extreme and pea-brained with it. Limp-dicked Eurotrash? Just remember where your countries roots are, boy.
Wow. That one was really long. I’ll offer a more succinct expression:
Has any one of you considered that a firearm-obsessed society may simply be a Darwinian machination produced by American society to control itself?
That’s just a radical sociological theory.
{NOTE NOT ENTERING DIRECTLY TO THIS DISCUSSION AGAIN, BUT HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY}
Since this is The Pit, people need to understand that it’s a free for all.
If you want a rational discussion that does not invoke much of the emotion that The Pit does, then go over to GD and debate in a civil manner. Otherwise people need to put their wimpy selves at The Pit door and deal with what may follow.
Flame me if you will, I don’t care but that’s the deal folks.
{DONE}