Theyyyyyyyyy're GREAT!

Guns are great for many obvious reasons...
Self Defense
Create a Militia
Hunting
etc.

I literally cannot think of how a gun can be bad, other than in the wrong hands, obv. Someone plz explain.

Thanks
Your fav troll,
84o

PS i will explain why i posted this later, it really has a purpose. swear.

plz don't call me an idiot, a troll, stupid, etc. This really does have a purpose. Please in a sophisticated piece of literature, explain why guns are bad.

I think they're good.

I love this guy

guns are necessary obv. Though if you really wanted to generate meaningful discussion it would be best to start by writing an article of your own then provide rebuttals. Otherwise this just makes you look like a stupid idiot troll so gtfo troll

On November 13 2008 00:55 vegable wrote: I love this guy guns are necessary obv. Though if you really wanted to generate meaningful discussion it would be best to start by writing an article of your own then provide rebuttals. Otherwise this just makes you look like a stupid idiot troll so gtfo troll

the whole reason i wrote this is b/c everyone hates guns on this site and i get so much shit for it. I am writing a paper for my ethics class, i need it to be 4 pages, but i only have like 2 1/2, and i need some arguments so i can berate anything anyone says. I thought about it today, and i literally think i can disprove anyone who thinks guns are bad. I might agree with you're argument, but overall, the good outweighs the bad.

I thought it was funny if the left-winged people took guns away, then it would probably cause a war, and it would be a bunch of people protesting VS the NRA hahahahahhaah PWND.


just thought of something else.. they take guns away, it starts a war, they don't like war, so they protest the war and give us guns back???
makes sense???
vicious cycle??
opinions??

War brings peace(Yes the Irony), but when guns are involved, it makes war quicker.

Imo, guns suck. Imaging going to war with a fucking sword and shield, liek its diablo 2. would be mad crazy, wearing breast plate, leg armor, stuff like that. Only hand to hand combat.

I would love to just slice someones head off in this type of war, movie 300 sums its all up.

On November 13 2008 01:07 Subaru wrote: War brings peace(Yes the Irony), but when guns are involved, it makes war quicker. Imo, guns suck. Imaging going to war with a fucking sword and shield, liek its diablo 2. would be mad crazy, wearing breast plate, leg armor, stuff like that. Only hand to hand combat. I would love to just slice someones head off in this type of war, movie 300 sums its all up.

fuck that, what if he's strong and it goes thru ur breast plate but that receives most of the blow and now you are alive with half a sword in your stomach but its not enough to kill you?? And you can't remove the sword b/c then you bleed to death.
When one .30-06 will do the job.

best of both, ff8 gunblade

rofl at create a militia.
Tell me how creating a militia would have any effect whatsoever against the modernized weaponry of today.

Yeah, me and my 20 closest buds are going to go invade Washington. Lets do this. We'll hide in trees and blindside them like Mel Gibson in The Patriot!

On November 13 2008 01:27 sniderstyle wrote: rofl at create a militia. Tell me how creating a militia would have any effect whatsoever against the modernized weaponry of today. Yeah, me and my 20 closest buds are going to go invade Washington. Lets do this. We'll hide in trees and blindside them like Mel Gibson in The Patriot!

That's the problem right now anyway, we don't have access to fully auto weapons so resistance is futile.

Fortunately, I believe there would be a military insurrection before the army would mass kill civilians...here's hoping anyway.

Luckily, Washington is full of gangs with fully auto weapons.

On November 13 2008 01:27 sniderstyle wrote: rofl at create a militia. Tell me how creating a militia would have any effect whatsoever against the modernized weaponry of today. Yeah, me and my 20 closest buds are going to go invade Washington. Lets do this. We'll hide in trees and blindside them like Mel Gibson in The Patriot!

Well thats the problem right there. Because of "Gun laws", we cannot fight the United States Military if we had to. When i say "if we had to" i literally mean if we had to. I'm not saying "woo hoo go rebel" or anything like that, what i am saying is if the US Government ever became so corrupt and we elected someone who turned around and was power hungry and was like Hitler or something, and it was obvious to everyone, it is up to the United States citizens to act. Thats the whole reason we have the 2nd amendment, as you will see in my paper...

The actually reason which just about no one realizes is that the Second Amendment is not for hunting or self defense. The Second Amendment is not for the protection of its nation’s citizens from one another. When created, it was at a time where you had to hunt for food. There was no other way of eating. If you did not hunt, you did not eat, and you died. Everyone had a gun for survival, to hunt for food. The people in charge of creating the Bill of Rights did not have the slightest idea that microwaves and restaurants and groceries would exist and hunting for survival would be basically non-existent. The reason the Second Amendment exists is based solely on the fact that they were fighting a revolutionary war, they abandoned their homeland, rebelled against the King of England and deserted a corrupt government, and they understood that it was very possible it could happen again. They knew that in the future the American Government that they were in the process of creating could become just as corrupt as the last government they just rebelled against, and to prevent this from happening they gave the people the power to revolt, if need be. This is why all guns should be available to the American citizens, including automatic weaponry. Hitler, Castro, and Stalin’s first act after receiving power of dictatorship took guns away from their citizens to prevent a revolt. It’s a proven fact that whoever has the firearm has complete control over the other party. If something were to happen, and someone were to take control of the presidency and change laws into another form and take too much power, the first thing they would do, like Hitler, is take guns away from its people so that he controls everything. We cannot let this happen. "The tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants" (Thomas Jefferson)

QFT


Hence the whole "civil war" that we had. Yes, the south who rebelled lost, but many accomplishments were made that would not have been if it weren't for the war. For example, we ended slavery and expressed our disappointments to the North, which we then fixed, and after reconstruction had a better, stronger, more closely knit US than ever before.

On November 13 2008 00:41 eightfourO wrote: Guns are great for many obvious reasons... Self Defense Create a Militia Hunting etc. I literally cannot think of how a gun can be bad, other than in the wrong hands, obv. Someone plz explain. Thanks Your fav troll, 84o PS i will explain why i posted this later, it really has a purpose. swear.

Your hands are the wrong hands. Ill gladly entrust a gun to lets say Nazgul or frozenarbiter, but you can see the difference in theirs and yours attitude dont you?

I love guns too, but im fully okay with looking at them in the museums, okay with people having them in private collections after proper licensing, okay with shooting them at the ranges(in civilized countries ranges rent out guns). Having a gun under your pillow however is sociopathic.

fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity.

This post is so tilting, if you want a debate plz say more than basically GUNS ARE GOOD.
If I'd want to counter-attack your arguments I'd have to start with explaining that the cow goes moo-moo.

On November 13 2008 01:27 sniderstyle wrote: rofl at create a militia. Tell me how creating a militia would have any effect whatsoever against the modernized weaponry of today. Yeah, me and my 20 closest buds are going to go invade Washington. Lets do this. We'll hide in trees and blindside them like Mel Gibson in The Patriot!

To answer your question more precisely, a militia (according to the 2nd amendment) SHOULD have the same weaponry as the US Army. However, b/c of gun laws (in some cases are very good) a militia cannot be created with the same weapons as they're opponet, thusly the power is in the US Governments hands, not the People. Benjamin Franklin - "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the outcome of the vote."


Also, we did exactly what you just said about mel gibson in the Revolutionary War, which by the way gave you your freedom so it is possible.

On November 13 2008 01:39 barbieman wrote: fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity. This post is so tilting, if you want a debate plz say more than basically GUNS ARE GOOD. If I'd want to counter-attack your arguments I'd have to start with explaining that the cow goes moo-moo.

lol u are new to this site. 135 posts. you don't know...

Fine. Here is my paper thus far.......

Normative Ethics Gun Control versus The Second Amendment The most prevalent, important issue that effects everyone within the nation. Both sides of the debate and even the people in the middle all have very valid causes on why their side is right. You have the far right-winged proponents saying everything should be legal, if you want a fully automatic assault rifle, it’s your right to be able make that purchase and use it for your needs, whatever they be. The government should trust its citizens. Then you have the far left-winged debaters arguing for a complete ban on all guns in every aspect except for the military. Hunting to them is murder and not needed, all guns are for is killing people, and nothing good can come from them. There are also people closer to the middle who tend to lean either left or right. The moderate-left respect the right to own a firearm, but believe that safety needs to be the highest priority, even if it includes sacrificing accuracy (which is actually less ethical, thus defeating the purpose of the left-winged agenda of trying to achieve better ethical views of the right side). The moderate-right however, tend to understand that there is only one purpose for fifty-caliber sniper rifles and fully automatic firearms. All viewpoints have extremely valid reasons for why they stand by their decisions. Each stance on the issue is understandable and correct – to an extent. That extent is where basic logic and ethical thinking become a factor, which is why the Second Amendment and its supporters are the most correct in their thinking. The actually reason which just about no one realizes is that the Second Amendment is not for hunting or self defense. The Second Amendment is not for the protection of its nation’s citizens from one another. When created, it was at a time where you had to hunt for food. There was no other way of eating. If you did not hunt, you did not eat, and you died. Everyone had a gun for survival, to hunt for food. The people in charge of creating the Bill of Rights did not have the slightest idea that microwaves and restaurants and groceries would exist and hunting for survival would be basically non-existent. The reason the Second Amendment exists is based solely on the fact that they were fighting a revolutionary war, they abandoned their homeland, rebelled against the King of England and deserted a corrupt government, and they understood that it was very possible it could happen again. They knew that in the future the American Government that they were in the process of creating could become just as corrupt as the last government they just rebelled against, and to prevent this from happening they gave the people the power to revolt, if need be. This is why all guns should be available to the American citizens, including automatic weaponry. Hitler, Castro, and Stalin’s first act after receiving power of dictatorship took guns away from their citizens to prevent a revolt. It’s a proven fact that whoever has the firearm has complete control over the other party. If something were to happen, and someone were to take control of the presidency and change laws into another form and take too much power, the first thing they would do, like Hitler, is take guns away from its people so that he controls everything. We cannot let this happen. "The tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants" (Thomas Jefferson) Another reasonable anti-gun idea used by the left side is that they believe guns will increase crime. This is very untrue. “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.” (MilSurpStuff). This has been proven before. According to www.mcsm.org/kennesaw.html, a town in Georgia has actually made mandatory to own at least one gun, unless they got permission from the city to not carry. During a sixteen year span from 1980 to 1996, the towns population has nearly tripled from 5,000 to more than 13,000 residents, yet there have only been three murders in that time span; two by knife, and only one by gun. No one has heard of this ordinance, and Chuck Baldwin believes this is why: “With all the attention that has been heaped upon the lawful possession of firearms lately, you would think that a city that requires gun ownership would be the center of a media feeding frenzy. It isn't. The fact is I can't remember a major media outlet even mentioning Kennesaw. Can you? The reason is obvious. Kennesaw proves that the presence of firearms actually improves safety and security. This is not the message that the media want us to hear. They want us to believe that guns are evil and are the cause of violence. The facts tell a different story.” The fact of the matter is that only people who obey the law are the ones that will not carry, if a law that prevents guns from bring carried is passed. Criminals will always be able to get weapons, and when the difference between life and death is seconds, police can take minutes. As self defense, firearms are the most logical choice for obvious reasons.

Town in georgia = GENIUS PLZZZZ GO READ THAT.

On November 13 2008 01:39 barbieman wrote: fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity. This post is so tilting, if you want a debate plz say more than basically GUNS ARE GOOD. If I'd want to counter-attack your arguments I'd have to start with explaining that the cow goes moo-moo.

Noooo fighting for peace is like fucking to feel good b/c u just got laid 5 minutes afterwards...

The whole point of advancing technological weaponry is to create a large disparity between the killing effectiveness of 'us' and 'them'. So whether it be guns, daggers or rocks it doesn't matter. The purpose(s) for owning a gun or any weapon will vary but ultimately what matters is the individual's motives. The reasons you listed above:

self defence
hunting

are perfectly valid and obviously practical. But you will have to elaborate on the militia part. If your instructor just asked you guys to write a 4 page paper on "is gunz guud???" then thats hardly worthy of an ethics paper assignment, much less a 5th grade journal entry. Paper should be easier than NL2 yo

you can beat NL2 without help can't you?

On November 13 2008 01:35 SfydjkLm wrote: Show nested quote + On November 13 2008 00:41 eightfourO wrote: Guns are great for many obvious reasons... Self Defense Create a Militia Hunting etc. I literally cannot think of how a gun can be bad, other than in the wrong hands, obv. Someone plz explain. Thanks Your fav troll, 84o PS i will explain why i posted this later, it really has a purpose. swear. Your hands are the wrong hands. Ill gladly entrust a gun to lets say Nazgul or frozenarbiter, but you can see the difference in theirs and yours attitude dont you? I love guns too, but im fully okay with looking at them in the museums, okay with people having them in private collections after proper licensing, okay with shooting them at the ranges(in civilized countries ranges rent out guns). Having a gun under your pillow however is sociopathic.

Well first off, i wouldn't let anyone i didn't know in person touch a gun around me. Who knows what is behind a computer.
Secondly, i am a licensed hunter, with a license in Hunters Education, making a 91 and 84 on both tests you have to take to pass.
Third off, i don't have a gun under my pillow, it's in the closet, unloaded, with ammo hidden in another room. And it's in a case.

ok my post is a little late but if your theme is gun control vs second amendment then i'm out ( don't know shit about politics)

but remember kids, morality =/= legality!

On November 13 2008 01:51 vegable wrote: The whole point of advancing technological weaponry is to create a large disparity between the killing effectiveness of 'us' and 'them'. So whether it be guns, daggers or rocks it doesn't matter. The purpose(s) for owning a gun or any weapon will vary but ultimately what matters is the individual's motives. The reasons you listed above: self defence hunting are perfectly valid and obviously practical. But you will have to elaborate on the militia part. If your instructor just asked you guys to write a 4 page paper on "is gunz guud???" then thats hardly worthy of an ethics paper assignment, much less a 5th grade journal entry. Paper should be easier than NL2 yo you can beat NL2 without help can't you?

i hate writing and 2nl is sketchy..

I don't think it was funny, I just felt like it had to happen. Sorry.

Back to creating a military... An extreme majority of military personnel is conservative and would be pissed if guns were taken away from citizens/themselves when they are citizens again. If something were to happen, most of the military would leave and create a militia...and probably bring supplies they would need along. Also, shit you think it would be hard to get automatic weapons?? go anywhere... like i dunno, mexico, venezula, columbia...they would be happy to deal with anyone involving the black market.

Murders... Chicago has a law that you CANNOT have a weapon within city boundries.
15.6 people are murdered per year for every 100,000 people living in chicago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Chicago

3 murders since 1980 in Kennesaw, Georgia, a town of 21,000 people. 1980 they had a law passed mandating that the head of the household MUST have a firearm in the house. They have seen an 89% decrease in ALL CRIMES since this law in 1980.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw...of_resulting_burglary-rate_statistics


PLEASE READ
http://www.mcsm.org/kennesaw.html

no disrespect 84o... but personally i think gun control is good to prevent shit like this happening:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia)

Bryant passed by at least two people. Ahead of him were Nanette Mikac (Née Moulton) and her two young children, Madeline, 3, and Alannah, 6 years old. Nanette was carrying Madeline and Alannah was running slightly ahead. By now they had run approximately 600 metres from the car park. Nanette told Alannah, "We're safe now, pumpkin." Bryant opened his door and slowed down. Mrs Mikac moved towards the car, apparently thinking he was offering them help in escaping. Several more people witnessed this from further down the road. Someone then recognised him as the gunman and yelled out "It's him!". Calmly, Bryant told Mrs Mikac to get on her knees. She did so, saying, "Please don't hurt my babies". Bryant then shot her in the temple, killing her, before firing a shot at Madeleine, which hit her in the shoulder, before shooting her fatally through the chest. Alannah ran off and hid behind a tree. Bryant shot twice at Alannah, as she ran behind the tree, missing. He then walked up, pressed the barrel of the gun into her neck and fired, killing her instantly.

probably different here though since there are a lot less gangs, crime and weapons dealing + Show Spoiler +

so the "bad" guys probly cant get guns as easily as in the USA.

i always thought the days of swords and shields were much better than this day an age where a stray bullet can kill you in combat.

then it was much more skillful in times of war

i think guns are +ev for all countries, although who receives them should be much more limited than it is now.

swords > guns > random bullets < life

GL
Ryan

lachlan, you cannot prevent people from being crazy. The determined individual will always be able to get a gun. The world is corrupt and most definitely an ugly place.

If guns were outlawed, the law abiding would have no guns while the gangs and criminals would get them from other countries and out the backdoor if they didn't already have them. So I can see really no point to outlawing them.

On November 13 2008 02:27 lachlan wrote: no disrespect 84o... but personally i think gun control is good to prevent shit like this happening: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia) Show nested quote + Bryant passed by at least two people. Ahead of him were Nanette Mikac (Née Moulton) and her two young children, Madeline, 3, and Alannah, 6 years old. Nanette was carrying Madeline and Alannah was running slightly ahead. By now they had run approximately 600 metres from the car park. Nanette told Alannah, "We're safe now, pumpkin." Bryant opened his door and slowed down. Mrs Mikac moved towards the car, apparently thinking he was offering them help in escaping. Several more people witnessed this from further down the road. Someone then recognised him as the gunman and yelled out "It's him!". Calmly, Bryant told Mrs Mikac to get on her knees. She did so, saying, "Please don't hurt my babies". Bryant then shot her in the temple, killing her, before firing a shot at Madeleine, which hit her in the shoulder, before shooting her fatally through the chest. Alannah ran off and hid behind a tree. Bryant shot twice at Alannah, as she ran behind the tree, missing. He then walked up, pressed the barrel of the gun into her neck and fired, killing her instantly. probably different here though since there are a lot less gangs, crime and weapons dealing + Show Spoiler + (except maybe sydney and melbourne). so the "bad" guys probly cant get guns as easily as in the USA.

It's a terrible incident, and i wish these things never would never happen. Obviously i don't want 35 innocent people including woman and children murdered. I hope this scumbag gets the worst day of his life everyday in prison, if he didn't get the death penalty. However lachlan, i see your point, and it is very valid, makes sense. The thing is, this is always going to happen. I don't know if he obtained the gun legally or not, but thats besides the point. If this nutcase has already made it up in his mind that he is going to take innocent lives, then hes going to do it no matter what. If you make every gun in the world illegal, the only people that are going to obey the law are the people that are not crazy, and won't kill innocent people. Only the good guys obey the law, so only the good guys won't have guns. The bad guys are then left to go do whatever they want, they have all the power to do whatever they want. I don't know the laws of Australia, but we had a similair situation at a University...


Virginia Tech University...
33 students were murdered by a crazy man who killed himself when policed arrived minutes after the initial phone call for help was made. This happened at VT and so many people were killed because it was a "Gun Free Zone". All the people that obey the law didn't have firearms, obv. It's against the law to have one on campus. So now you have a madman that has already made the decision he is going to go through a dormatory and kill as many people as possible until police arrive, and then kill himself. It took them 2 minutes to get there lachlan. thats 2 minutes of free time to kill as many people as possible for him.
Take this and turn it into australia and that situation: The dorm will represent Australia where i am guessing they have very tight gun control and not many people (if any) have a gun. If someone was in that dorm with a hand gun, who was licensed and proven to be sane, he could have saved 30 lives. *BANG BANG* realize what has happened, get the gun, figure out a plan of action and execute that plan. It's extremely possible that 30 lives could have been saved. This is evident when there was a man with a sniper rifle back in the 1950's in a tower at the University of Texas. He was in a tower, 300+feet in the air sniping people as they were going to class. No one could get in the tower, and a pistol isn't going to shoot 100 yards up in the air, and if you miss, who knows where the bullet is going, and if by chance you do get a bullet in the small window with a pistol 100 yards in the air, it's very unlikely you will hit him as he is hiding back in the shadows of the tower. Luckily, this was back when you COULD have weapons at UT, and the hunters with their rifles in their dormatory sniped the sniper, and saved who knows how many lives.


Please read this Lachlan...
http://www.mcsm.org/kennesaw.html

and visit Kennesaw, Georgia's WIKI site that i linked in a previous post.
89% reduced crime rate OF ALL CRIMES since 1980 when it was mandatory that you had to have a firearm.

you annoy me so fcking much eightfago

what stakes do you play so i can sit at your tables and take your money and disuade you from ever visiting this site again since you no longer play poker

On November 13 2008 02:56 CrownRoyal wrote: you annoy me so fcking much eightfago what stakes do you play so i can sit at your tables and take your money and disuade you from ever visiting this site again since you no longer play poker

Grade A post jackwad. Everyone's been mature and we've been having a great discussion and learning a lot from each other until this. W2G. No seriously. We're learning from each other's experiences and whats important to them, and you want to take all my poker money bc you disagree with me. Real mature. Quit asking for stakes from me, go back to playing WoW, and live in your bubble loser. "eightfago" wow. thank God i have a life.

I am sure milkman is next.

rofl jackwad

hahahaha

--- Nuked ---

You aren't doing this to learn anything you are doing it for attention and to show everyone how fucking retarded you are or something

You don't post anything constructive, you just post incoherent shit that i can't even read because it's so terribly constructed and laid out. Your views on everything are wrong and you aren't interesting.

I pretty much just fucking loathe everything about you. just thought i'd fill you in on my opinion of you, you jerkwad.

it's a fact that people who own guns are less likely to commit crimes than someone who doesn't and I don't even disagree with liberal gun control, who gives a fuck if you're going to kill someone you're going to do it.

i'm not against any of 8fagos ideas i just can't even read more than a sentence of anything he writes because it's sooooooo horribly written. I could write better in swahili than 8fago can in his native tongue.

Yes sir, guns are great.

+ Show Spoiler +

lol devon is here, ya'll come in groups then??

Anyway

You aren't doing this to learn anything you are doing it for attention and to show everyone how fucking retarded you are or something

already said i'm doing this to write a paper, so obv you can't read/interpret what you've read.


Devon -
Already said i hate writing, i'm not good at it, i am not done with my paper, and i haven't revised it. So yes, it's of poor quality.

Yes, if someone is attacking me with a gun, i'm going to kill them. Already made that decision. So i am a law abiding citizen who accidently sees a drug deal. They have to kill me now. Because of twats like you who take my gun away, i'm dead. But hey i have a gun for self defense, i can kill these two people and continue to live. Sounds right to me. Oh wait we got rid of guns!!! wtf are these drug dealers doing w/ them if we got rid of them?? Ahhh they deal drugs and kill people b/c they're in a gang. Assholes are breaking the law. makes no sense. I'm not going to give someone power and be someones bitch. You can.

"Cave Men"
Yeah well i take pride in being able to hunt and provide for myself and not having to be reliant on someone else. Obv you are the governments bitch and do w/e they say and take all these free handouts and suck their cock. Thats cool. If you don't want to man up and provide for yourself, and be dependent your whole life, it's your choice. I'm what we call "independent". It's nice.


And hey we both agree on one thing
GO USA

On November 13 2008 03:15 Guillaume wrote: Yes sir, guns are great. + Show Spoiler +

OK well i've already said this A MILLION TIMES but i'll do it again. I'm not for pointless murder and destruction. I am for protecting one'self from situations where he was innocently put into a scenario that he could be killed, I am for the 2nd amendment protecting my rights as a US Citizen to be free and continue to be free. And i'm for hunting.

Well this thread has been taken over by left winged cock sucker devon and his gang of protesters, so i'm going to go to bed.

Good Night LP and happy hunting =)

if you're writing this paper for a class i think you will have better luck with plagiarizing and hoping to get away with it rather than turning this shit in and getting an automatic F.

(I'm really being serious)

On November 13 2008 02:12 eightfourO wrote: Back to creating a military... An extreme majority of military personnel is conservative and would be pissed if guns were taken away from citizens/themselves when they are citizens again. If something were to happen, most of the military would leave and create a militia...and probably bring supplies they would need along. Also, shit you think it would be hard to get automatic weapons?? go anywhere... like i dunno, mexico, venezula, columbia...they would be happy to deal with anyone involving the black market.

Ok, so why do guns need to be legalised if the army can just steal all the supplies they need and create a militia?


Which of course wouldn't happen because if you know any history you'd know the vast majority of people to take over a country (95%+) had the military behind them or were in control of the military themselves (how else do they 'take over').

If you think the average soldier would 'revolt and create a militia' you obviously don't know too much about army's because the ONE thing you do in the army is what you're told by your superior officers. Basically the vast majority of Americans would just be like "Oh no we've been taken over thats annoying hopefully they'll go away or someone ELSE will do something about it." And the minority that do decide to revolt would get pwnd.

Not trying to be horrible but if you write in a paper that if guns are taken away from the average citizen that the army would be 'pissed off' and revolt because they are conservative, well your paper will come back with red lines right through that part because not only is it complete guess work but is completely inaccurate. Like saying if the right to play blackjack is taken away, all poker players would take their cards and fight the casino's where in reality although the majority of poker players belive you should be able to play blackjack they don't care that much to fight against the casino where they play and lose their money for it. Which we might do but in reality its very unlikely isn't it, so to say it so matter of fact is just plain... guesswork (doesn't go very well in papers).

Ok i saw this b4 bed and it's a legit response...

the ONE thing you do in the army is what you're told by your superior officers.

So all you need is a few members of higher rankings to realize that America is being turned into something that was never intended and the rights and freedoms are being taken away, and there goes a nice big chunk following him. If need be, i gaurantee there will be plenty of people to join.

Devon, seriously...Read everything on this website.
http://www.mcsm.org/kennesaw.html
89% reduction in ALL crimes in the town of Kennesaw, Georgia, which in 1980 enacting all of it's population to own a firearm. 3 murders in 16 years. Town of currently 21,000 people. It's amazing. 89% less rapes, 3 murders in SIXTEEN YEARS all because of MORE GUNS.

guns are bad becouse they can give give any retard power.

On November 13 2008 03:29 brambolius wrote: guns are bad becouse they can give give any retard power.

A tard with power is not goint to have power for long.

Devon, if someone was using you as a human shield and had a gun to your head, and i had a .30-06 250 yds away, i could save your life.
yeah guns are bad.

On November 13 2008 01:00 eightfourO wrote: the good outweighs the bad.

Dude, the only good thing about guns is that they are fun to shoot.

guns for defense is a joke, since the "bad people" you want to defend against can also have guns.

sure, a helpless person can use a gun to defend himself.

then again, a person fully able to handle himself becomes a helpless person when confronted with a gun.

its a vicious circle obviously, and if you think otherwise, get some perspective plzkthx

On November 13 2008 03:31 eightfourO wrote: Show nested quote + On November 13 2008 03:29 brambolius wrote: guns are bad becouse they can give give any retard power. A tard with power is not goint to have power for long.

LOL under what rock have u been living????

I mean, I'm not american so I can't even pretend to think like you guys, sometimes it shocks me.. (to be honest not so much in the last few years as it did pre 9/11 when literally every American I spoke to online used to be so ignorant and say things like. "You're only pissed off cos we saved yer ass in WW2," or "America could go over there and kick your ass anyday," or (which I still here quite often actually unlike the other two (probably because I'm speaking to older Americans these days) "Everyone only hates America because they're jealous."

This is OT but America needs to get over this early 90's thinking that everyone wants to catch up and be as good as the USA because the simple FACTS are that its not 1945-95 anymore the rest of the world HAS caught up, the scandanavian countries are the happiest people in the world with some of the best healthcare etcetc.


EightFourO what you essentially just said to be that if this 'right' was taken away you 'guarantee' that a bunch of the top generals would realise that all their rights and freedoms are being taken away and a big chunk of soldiers would follow him. Well thats just complete guesswork and I think that its very unlikely. In my opinion (I know very little about you) you must live in quite a small American town and be relatively young/naive (which isn't necessarily a bad thing - I was talking to my girlfriends nephew the other day and he was telling me about how the RAF (royal air force) is the best airforce in the world and it's nice to think like that when you're young or in general anyway but the fact is it's simply not true. The simple facts are that the generals most likely wouldn't cause civil war over this. Yes its nice to think that the rights in your constitution are factual and no American would let them change. However these rights in your constitution have changed and evolved slowly over time - I'm not going to research it at the moment but off the top of my head I'm sure when you finally earned your independence the citizens weren't restricted as to what kind of gun they could have I'm sure they could have the most advanced rifle that was around at the time.

However when technology improved the interpretation of these 'fundamental US rights' changed, yet the vast majority of Americans (ie non NRA) accept the fact that they can't have full automatic machine guns and rocket launchers etc. The constitution is ammended and re-interpreted all the time, don't be fooled and think otherwise.

And this is exactly what would happen in this case they'd be a bit of kur-fuffle about it all and then 90-99% of Americans would accept the change.

Oh and you're whole tone in this thead is wrong for example your quote

"I just read this before bed and its a legit response"

Honestly people don't need your approval before it is a legit response.

On November 13 2008 03:33 eightfourO wrote: Devon, if someone was using you as a human shield and had a gun to your head, and i had a .30-06 250 yds away, i could save your life. yeah guns are bad.

omfg this fails on SOOOOO many levels.

--- Nuked ---

Oak Cliff, well the average life of someone in a gang is 19. (first thing i saw on google)...and they shoot a gun sideways. I've talked to a police officer, he doesn't even get nervous because he knows that a bullet is not going to hit him when they shoot sideways like idiots. Therefore, a tard won't have power long.

--- Nuked ---

On November 13 2008 03:36 brambolius wrote: Show nested quote + On November 13 2008 03:33 eightfourO wrote: Devon, if someone was using you as a human shield and had a gun to your head, and i had a .30-06 250 yds away, i could save your life. yeah guns are bad. omfg this fails on SOOOOO many levels.

people can hit a quarter from 2 miles away. i would hope i could hit a 4in circle from 250 yds with a scope...

Devon QFT I didn't want to be somewhat insulting to eightfourO because I'd like to have a reasonable discussion - doesn't seem likely... When I used to walk to school with my friends aged 11-13 we used to have conversations like this.. Yet I think they actually were more intellectual.

Two week ban because im sick of your stupidity