Open Carry

[MLD Woody]

I wasn't disputing any of that data for one. Two, it wasn't really a rebuttal against anything I said. I'm not doubting a lot of people die from cars, blunt objects, knives, etc. I'm saying all of those these have other, primary uses. A gun is a weapon first and foremost. Weapons are used to cause harm. That is where I think the cars to guns or hammers to guns or whatever comparisons fail.

[Legacy Fan]

But you're still missing my opening paragraph of that post. Shitheads will find other weapons when a gun isn't available. THAT'S WHY those other things with their other primary uses get brought into the discussion. They do get used by terrible people. Just like guns do. It's not a diversion. It's a steering of the discussion to seek a logical solution to the problem.

 

 

But if you still want to harp on the point that a gun's primary purpose is to kill, cause harm, whatever.. don't you think that it speaks more to the character of gun owners (the responsible ones anyway) that have all of these instruments of death at their disposal (currently 279 mil guns = 89 guns/100people) but somehow manage to overcome the uncontrollable urge to kill/harm/maim? When there are 9000 gun homicides/yr out of 279,000,000 guns?? Clocking in at a .0000325 incidence rate

[The Cysko Kid]

There's no point trying to explain anything to you. You know that. Cysko

**************************************************

Yes, because you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

 

and your chidish outbursts don't influence any legit discussion about what you "allege"

to be concerned about.

 

For every death by crazed individuals using a gun as their weapon.....

the responsibility lies with the left's political extreme maneuvering against

all gun owners, and the lack of conern over mental health issues.

 

You anti-gunners are your own worst enemy.

Cal, No offense because I like you but you're totally irrational on every topic ever. Every person here goes over the top on one thing or another but you, man, you're out there. Sometimes I think woody is right and you're just playing some colbert like character.

[The Cysko Kid]

You're a true republican. If you can't win it, filibuster it.

[Westside Steve]

I was just being devil's advocate myself. I suspect there are better methods out there than what you suggested though.

I'm sure there are methods that would be more acceptable to the public but not better.

 

If your patient really needs to quit smoking and you tell him he can cut down from 2 packs to 39 cigarettes you will probably try to comply. (I'm assuming a packet of fags is 20).

 

If somebody tells him that it doesn't seem like it will do any real good he can honestly say "well it's better than 2 packs right?"

 

WSS

[calfoxwc]

well, I just get frustratred, in a humorous kind of way, when you and others

make statements about only one person used a gun without shooting somebody,

Or claiming that gun owners have guns because they want to be a cowboy, or whatever it was.

 

blah, blah, goofy stuff. It just isn't true. woody is never right about anything, unless

he has a revelation about why he's an ignornant dorky little kid.

 

From "nobody wants to ban your guns" to "guns only kill and murder and do harm" nonsense,

to mmgw "cap and trade and taxes and fines will help us develop new energy" whatever.

 

That's bs, that's all. It goes all the way back to bashing Bush and Cheney for outing Plame.

It was freakiing everywhere, every day on this board. Every thread. But they never did.

 

You go overboard and make some emotional, but ridiculousiy erroneous claims, and you gripe

at me for going overboard in defense?

 

Besides, you're a good guy. I just never know when the goofy Cysko will emerge in a conversation.

 

The biggest problem is woodpecker. You can't just post one example. He'll ignore it, or bash it somehow,

illegimately. Then he'll claim some kind of birdbrain "victory".

 

Besides, I have this really ridiculous sense of humor. Add it all up, and I will just try to be more tolerant

over your overtheboard stuff. So. blame the woodpecker. He muddies the water around here.

[The Cysko Kid]

I'm emotional? Pot meet kettle.

[The Cysko Kid]

You do realize neither woody or myself was registered on this board during the days of bush. You may need to re-examine who you think you're talking about.

[calfoxwc]

Not at all. Some of the same trends are in vogue today, as they were back then.

 

I will admit to old arguments and fraudulent, really stupid and outlandish claims

from years before, do affect my responses.

 

Okay, I'll work on it. But woodpecker is really just a woodpecker on the board.

So, that's just the way it is.

[Osiris]

Not at all. Some of the same trends are in vogue today, as they were back then.

 

I will admit to old arguments and fraudulent, really stupid and outlandish claims

from years before, do affect my responses.

 

Okay, I'll work on it. But woodpecker is really just a woodpecker on the board.

So, that's just the way it is.

You and Woody should just ignore each other.

[MLD Woody]

I am pretty sure he is just playing a character. He has to be... has to....

[MLD Woody]

But you're still missing my opening paragraph of that post. Shitheads will find other weapons when a gun isn't available. THAT'S WHY those other things with their other primary uses get brought into the discussion. They do get used by terrible people. Just like guns do. It's not a diversion. It's a steering of the discussion to seek a logical solution to the problem.

 

 

But if you still want to harp on the point that a gun's primary purpose is to kill, cause harm, whatever.. don't you think that it speaks more to the character of gun owners (the responsible ones anyway) that have all of these instruments of death at their disposal (currently 279 mil guns = 89 guns/100people) but somehow manage to overcome the uncontrollable urge to kill/harm/maim? When there are 9000 gun homicides/yr out of 279,000,000 guns?? Clocking in at a .0000325 incidence rate

 

Right, but does that other weapon have the same capacity to kill/injure/etc as a gun?

 

If terrible people are going to keep doing terrible things we should but them in a position where they have as little access as possible to an instrument that amplifies their ability to do those terrible things.

[Legacy Fan]

 

Right, but does that other weapon have the same capacity to kill/injure/etc as a gun?

killing is killing, so yes, regardless of the weapon used, when it kills you, you're dead.

 

If terrible people are going to keep doing terrible things we should but them in a position where they have as little access as possible to an instrument that amplifies their ability to do those terrible things.

This red font is as close as I can get to representing the aneurism I'm experiencing currently. My nose is bleeding. Thanks.

Don't feel like addressing that incidence rate?

 

I've already rolled over on the "gun = angel of death" take that you're hung up on because you're deaf to the discussion. I've acknowledged it and moved on (did it in the 2nd paragraph of my last post actually). So let's address that incidence rate.

 

How is it that with 279,000,000 guns, we're only averaging 9000 gun homicides a year if it is the gun itself that is the harbinger of death?

[calfoxwc]

You could kill far more people in a "no-gun" zone church,

using gasoline and locked doors.

 

Hey, I saw it in a movie, so....

 

say, there's 325 people in the church.

 

No gun could do that. We need gasoline buying background checks. And make

it very hard to get. You don't need all that gas. Just limit all of America

to one quart of gasoline per year. Better yet, ban gasoline altogether, you

libs don't need it. You can drive to wherever on a bike. How many obese

folks are there? That would be a beneficial side effect.

We should be embarrassed that ObaMao hasn't issued an obama mafia imperial decree, fatwah or something.

[calfoxwc]

Don't feel like addressing that incidence rate?

 

I've already rolled over on the "gun = angel of death" take that you're hung up on because you're deaf to the discussion. I've acknowledged it and moved on (did it in the 2nd paragraph of my last post actually). So let's address that incidence rate.

 

How is it that with 279,000,000 guns, we're only averaging 9000 gun homicides a year if it is the gun itself that is the harbinger of death?

 

didn't want woody to "lose" this question. Sorry, Legacy

[Westside Steve]

You could kill far more people in a "no-gun" zone

Yeah especially with a gun because, well, no law abiding citizen would have one, you know, to shoot you!

WSS

[MLD Woody]

Don't feel like addressing that incidence rate?

 

I've already rolled over on the "gun = angel of death" take that you're hung up on because you're deaf to the discussion. I've acknowledged it and moved on (did it in the 2nd paragraph of my last post actually). So let's address that incidence rate.

 

How is it that with 279,000,000 guns, we're only averaging 9000 gun homicides a year if it is the gun itself that is the harbinger of death?

I don't see what there is for me address. I'm not claiming that anyone that owns a gun is going to kill someone. I'm just trying to shed on how dumb the "ban all cars" or "ban all knives" arguments are. Those items, and guns, are fundamentally different. For the reason I mentioned.

[Osiris]

I don't see what there is for me address. I'm not claiming that anyone that owns a gun is going to kill someone. I'm just trying to shed on how dumb the "ban all cars" or "ban all knives" arguments are. Those items, and guns, are fundamentally different. For the reason I mentioned.

Additionally, there are the facts:

 

"According to FBI Homicide data, in 2011 – the latest year for which detailed statistics are available – there were 12,664 murders in the US. Of those, 8,583 were caused by firearms.

 

To break the total homicide numbers down by percentages: Guns 68%, Knives 13%, Blunt objects 4%, Personal weapons (hands, feet) 6%, Other 9%."

 

http://gunfaq.staging.wpengine.com/2013/02/murder-weapons-2011-guns-68-knives-13-blunt-objects-4-personal-weapons-6-other-9/

[Legacy Fan]

No shit they're different. They produce a similar outcome though (drunk driving and gun homicides). You're suggesting that reducing the number of guns would reduce the gun deaths. By the same accord wouldn't drunk driving deaths be reduced if there were less drinks or less cars?

 

But you're not acknowledging that logic, which is why the guns/cars/knives comparisons continue to be made.

 

So again I ask, if the gun has "FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT" capabilities of death due to that capability being the sole purpose of the gun's existence (according to you and others), why is there such a low incidence rate of gun deaths per total guns?

 

 

Or you could acknowledge that you just don't like guns, and because you were told they were bad somewhere along the way (maybe in a fairy tale book or essay) you're going to stick to that belief, denying the data & evidence I just provided that would suggest that guns may not be what is actually bad.

[Legacy Fan]

*ahem*

[gftChris]

I'll be honest, I'm a little tired of going over the 'well lets just ban cars/hammers/swimming pools/pillows then' argument.

[MLD Woody]

You're "data and evidence" do nothing to disprove what I'm saying. I'm NOT saying that every gun is a murder waiting to happen. No shit there's way less murders by guns then there are guns. There are a fuck ton of guns in this country. I'm saying a gun is a fucking weapon first and foremost, its not a car or kitchen knife or hammer...

 

I agree with Chris. This is getting old.

[calfoxwc]

It's getting old? Then stop with the old rationalizations that

would also apply to other weapons.

 

Get a genuine grip on yourselves and your arguments.

 

somebody gets murdered with a gun, you antigunners go ballistic and

yell "we have to do something, this is terrible".

 

But let a murder happen with a knife, etc... you don't give a frak.

 

Then we call you out on your hypocrisy, and you go into rationalizations further, in cya mode.

 

Condense all the bickering, and you all are using as a political platform against people

you don't like. Trust me, that is a whole lot "older".

[Westside Steve]

I'll be honest, I'm a little tired of going over the 'well lets just ban cars/hammers/swimming pools/pillows then' argument.

okay then. I appoint you pledge representative to the finding new and different ways to talk about the same three subjects committee!

 

I'll expect a report on my desk first thing in the morning.

 

[Legacy Fan]

You're "data and evidence" do nothing to disprove what I'm saying. I'm NOT saying that every gun is a murder waiting to happen. No shit there's way less murders by guns then there are guns. There are a fuck ton of guns in this country. I'm saying a gun is a fucking weapon first and foremost, its not a car or kitchen knife or hammer...

 

I agree with Chris. This is getting old.

if the gun's primary purpose is to kill/injure, then that's exactly what you're saying.

 

 

 

If there happens to be another factor at play, the problem is not with the gun then, yes?

[DieHardBrownsFan]

I think Chris is childseat/peckerhead's father.