PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

siriusbliss wrote:
p.s. by the way, a year ago today a 'troubled student' killed 25 students at Virginia Tech, which is a 'gun free' zone. If ONE student had a gun, the outcome would've been different.

One student DID have a gun, that was the problem. Are you advocating allowing guns into schools/colleges/universities?

"p.s. by the way, a year ago today a 'troubled student' killed 25 students at Virginia Tech, which is a 'gun free' zone."

And i guess he had one hell of a job to get hold of his guns as well?

I guess you are one of the god fearing inbreds Obama was talking about.

You don't often see these kind of mass murders in civilized countries..

The answer to gun violence is not more guns. That is so absurd.

Bush wears a cowboy hat, do you? Yeehaw!

siriusbliss wrote:braincell (singular) is an appropriate name.

It may be too late. Yeah, move to China. That'll show 'em.

G

p.s. by the way, a year ago today a 'troubled student' killed 25 students at Virginia Tech, which is a 'gun free' zone. If ONE student had a gun, the outcome would've been different.

Sorry that guns are to be blamed.

Mr Arkadin wrote:

siriusbliss wrote:
p.s. by the way, a year ago today a 'troubled student' killed 25 students at Virginia Tech, which is a 'gun free' zone. If ONE student had a gun, the outcome would've been different.

One student DID have a gun, that was the problem. Are you advocating allowing guns into schools/colleges/universities?

Again, you need to get the paradigm, rather than be driven be inadvertent ignorance.

I'm no advocate of guns, I AM an advocate of the right to bear arms. A couple months prior to Virginia tech incident, a student drew a gun at a nearby law school to shoot teachers and students, only to be fired upon by another student who DID have a gun - and this school is NOT in a 'gun-free' zone.

Inextricably allowing guns levels the field with these people that want to kill. It's a known statistic that crime goes down in towns where guns are allowed. I'm not going to be able to be the first line of defense with a baseball bat, if someone breaks into my house with a gun.

Iraq is a gun free zone. See how far that's gotten us?

If only criminals and police can have guns, then the crime goes up - the police cannot get there in time.

It's an unfortunate state of affairs in the US where kids are doped up on anti-depressants and brainwashed by stupid media exploits, thinking that they need to resort to gun-violence to make a statement.

The so-called 'liberal' stance of disarming everyone does NOT work.

Oh, and FUCK BUSH and OBOMBA...

and braincell - calling me an imbred just shows how truly ignorant you are - either that or you're just fucking with us.

Greg

Apparently some people want the United States to be like Iraq with any group able to purchase weapons and bombs to carry out what they feel is a justified action in their war. I have heard this sort of mentality from Gary who dreams of an armed revolution against the government of the United States of America. This is rubbish. If you boys want to play with guns then why don't you just get a good video game? Thankfully, most of us don't think violence is a good idea. Innocent people including children are being shot every day and all I hear from you gun lovers about this is either silence or that we should live with these needless deaths just so that you paranoid maniacs can feel a little bit safer . How selfish! How F&cking selfish you are!

I don't think ordinary people with no training should be the judge jury and executioner!

It's clear that most teachers and students don't want guns in school. It's called being educated. Maybe you should try it.

If it is easy for you to get a gun it is also easy for bad people, evil people, insane people and drunk people to have a gun, so how does that make you and the rest of us safer?

siriusbliss wrote:
Again, you need to get the paradigm, rather than be driven be inadvertent ignorance.

Sorry for being ignorant. i'll try harder next time .

siriusbliss wrote: If only criminals and police can have guns, then the crime goes up - the police cannot get there in time.

well not really. i mean things are pretty bad in the UK crime-wise, but even with an unarmed population and unarmed police i don't see mass shootings in the street - and i live in South East London which is supposed to be notorious for gun crime. i'm amazed i dare go out of my house in the morning.

siriusbliss wrote: The so-called 'liberal' stance of disarming everyone does NOT work.

It's not perfect but it seems not so bad in the UK, even with the recent gun incidents (inspired by USA gangster culture being cool - but that's a whole other debate).

Mr Arkadin wrote:

siriusbliss wrote:
p.s. by the way, a year ago today a 'troubled student' killed 25 students at Virginia Tech, which is a 'gun free' zone. If ONE student had a gun, the outcome would've been different.

One student DID have a gun, that was the problem. Are you advocating allowing guns into schools/colleges/universities?

they were always there in the past! for some reason we haven't been killing eachother like crazy until things like prozac and paxil came around. EVERY SINGLE MASS MURDERER IN THE LAST FEW YEARS HAS BEEN ON SERATONIN UPTAKE INHIBITORS, and yes, a few guns held by students and there wouldn't have been such an incident. those stupid, chicken cops did nothing while that guy killed everyone. they waited until he finished, there's much more that happened there than meets the eye. the woman who was supposed to be his girlfreind had never even met him or seen him before, according to friends and family....

every place where people are allowed to carry concealed weapons, the crime rate plummets. this is cold, hard, fact. there's no promise that having a weapon will save you, but it's almost 100% that the government won't be able to do anything but clean up afterward. THE GOVERNMENT CANNOT AND WILL NOT KEEP YOU SAFE.

also, braincell, you're a real prick to be putting these words into my mouth all the time! i NEVER said that i want an armed rebellion. i have said that the founding fathers, i private letters, in the declaration of independance and in the constittution, made it VERY clear that the threat of armed rebellion by the population is the ONLY way to keep the government from becoming tyrranical, and that when and if it does become tyrranical, it's the people's RIGHT and DUTY to remove that government. there's a big difference between the two statements. of course, you're not trying to argue rsationally and fairly between two respectfull parties, you're just falling back on rhetoric and absurdity.

I don't play with guns, and I don't play video games, and I don't like violence.

Please stop mangling misperception with the truth.

Greg

exactly, people don't have to fit in with your narrow reality, b.

stardust wrote:Disarmed or armed you WILL get robbed or beaten by a professional with a clear goal.

Talking to a black belt Karate friend of mine he clearly said, that there is no protection against violence and a visible arm will provoke even more violence from nervous attackers...

So the entire 'defense' story is totally depending on the situation.

that's why you put the gun away, hidden. it's not a toy! also, who's talking about a pro? if you're dealing with a pro, then OH WELL...or you better be a pro yourself, because no one else can save you.....again, reductio ad absurdum.

braincell, I'm not a gun lover.
You need to wake up.

I WANT non-violence, and live a non-violent life, but if someone breaks into my house _I_ am the first line of defense. That's all there is to it. I should have the right to defend myself. In places where you don't have that right, there is MORE crime. This is a known statistic that the gun-grabbers and liberals don't want to believe.

Sure, setting up systems to de-brainwash people of their violent tendencies is a novel idea, but it's not working.

Passivity and all the other fake-liberal non-violence stuff is fine until you're in a situation you can't handle.

I'm even a meditator, so you don't see me pushing 'gun loving right-wing' belief systems. I'm all for peace and love, believe me.

Greg

siriusbliss wrote: In places where you don't have that right, there is MORE crime. This is a known statistic that the gun-grabbers and liberals don't want to believe.

Well i hope i'm not being ignorant again, but are you saying we have more crime (relatively) in the UK and Europe or say Japan than in the USA? Nonsense. Presumably because we don't have guns the streets should be full of crims. They're not.

I'm sure people in Tokyo a would disagree that they are less safe than the United States. We are the laughing stock of the world. Even though we have tons of guns, some people are demanding even more guns be sold.

If owning a gun is a "right" as Gary put it, then why is there no outcry from the Japanese and Europeans about their rights being violated? In fact, I am not aware of any place where there is tight gun control and people are demanding more guns.

If someone breaks into your house, you ought to consider the back door. Don't try to be Rambo.

Mr Arkadin wrote:

siriusbliss wrote: In places where you don't have that right, there is MORE crime. This is a known statistic that the gun-grabbers and liberals don't want to believe.

Well i hope i'm not being ignorant again, but are you saying we have more crime (relatively) in the UK and Europe or say Japan than in the USA? Nonsense. Presumably because we don't have guns the streets should be full of crims. They're not.

then WHY do you ned cameras everywhere to keep an eye on everyone? don't say that it's to protect against terrorism, because you're more likely to die of lightning strike than by terorist. even more ridiculous, in the major London terrorist events, all the cameras mysteriously failed where the action happened...

the reason you have less crime is because of tribal unity and monoculture. in the parts of town that have many cultures in opposition and where people are disturbingly poor or disadvantaged crime is rampant, in Tokyo AND in London! both are VERY violent places. people don't commit crimes just because they have guns.

garyb wrote:
then WHY do you ned cameras everywhere to keep an eye on everyone? don't say that it's to protect against terrorism, because you're more likely to die of lightning strike than by terorist. even more ridiculous, in the major London terrorist events, all the cameras mysteriously failed where the action happened...

You'll get no argument from me on that. However it seems that cameras and other systems (speed cameras, parking fines etc.) are a way of criminalising the traceable - ie. the people who pay taxes and are 'on the system'. Those that live outside the system and cannot be easily traced are too difficult to go after, so suddenly a law abiding citizen who misses one council payment becomes the criminal because they can get money out of them easily. As you say, the one time we needed the cameras working (ie not to catch someone spitting gum but when there was a so-called terrorist event) the cameras weren't working. That stinks. i bet if i'd decided to slash a chair on the bus that day that camera would have been working . However i think introducing this is clouding the issue bit. Cameras don't kill people.

i don't see why you think that we should adopt your system - you're implying that the rest of the world is wrong and you're right - at bit like the paranoid man who thinks everyone else is in the wrong. Frankly you can have your system and kill each other and live in fear all you like, as it doesn't affect me and you don't expect me to embrace a foreign system. There are countries that believe stoning women is OK, doesn't mean they're right and i should adopt that system either.

PS. i live in a so-called rough area of London and i don't have to run a gauntlet of guns to get to my front door. i even go out t night. And drink.

braincell wrote:I'm sure people in Tokyo a would disagree that they are less safe than the United States. We are the laughing stock of the world. Even though we have tons of guns, some people are demanding even more guns be sold.

If owning a gun is a "right" as Gary put it, then why is there no outcry from the Japanese and Europeans about their rights being violated? In fact, I am not aware of any place where there is tight gun control and people are demanding more guns.

If someone breaks into your house, you ought to consider the back door. Don't try to be Rambo.

the back door is good if it's an option, sure....but in a pinch, i have the right to defend myself, my property and my family. period. it doesn't matter what method i use, gun, baseball bat, knife, kung fu, trap door, boobie traps, punji sticks, it's all fair and good.

those people(who don't complain) are all imperial subjects. Americans are sovereign, though there are those who don't understand that and/or would like to end that. it doesn't matter, however what they are or are not demanding. it's a stupid mindset that says we always need to be asking permission from our "authorities" for the right to live our OWN lives, the "betters" will defend their's to the death without hesitation. i'm no slave, even if they try to treat me like one.

being a "laughingstock" is not a good reason to do or not do anything.

nothing can prohibit crime in the world that we have at the moment. at best one can deter crime and wisdom says prepare to not be a victim. the way that society is set up REQUIRES that some become criminals. the biggest criminals are in charge, so how can they save us from crime?

Let`s just kill us all, so no one could do it better.

garyb wrote:
the back door is good if it's an option, sure....but in a pinch, i have the right to defend myself, my property and my family. period. it doesn't matter what method i use, gun, baseball bat, knife, kung fu, trap door, boobie traps, punji sticks, it's all fair and good.

i agree - i have a baseball bat by my bed in case of emergencies. i still wouldn't own a gun though.

garyb wrote: those people(who don't complain) are all imperial subjects. Americans are sovereign, though there are those who don't understand that and/or would like to end that. it doesn't matter, however what they are or are not demanding. it's a stupid mindset that says we always need to be asking permission from our "authorities" for the right to live our OWN lives, the "betters" will defend their's to the death without hesitation. i'm no slave, even if they try to treat me like one.

Gary, not everyone who doesn't buy into conspiracy theories is stupid. Yes i have a Queen, no i don't ask her for permission to use guns because i don't want them. Do you get it yet? I DON'T WANT THEM. i don't give a monkey's what the government do or do not allow me in terms of firearms - i do not want them. There are ways i actually could legally own a firearm in the UK and yet i can't be bothered to even check it out - because i don't want them.

i'm not brainwashed. i'm not stupid. i'm not ignorant just because i don't want what you want. And most people in the UK don't want guns (except kids who think it's cool - exactly the sort of people you don't want to have guns) - so that's 60 million stupid people. Oh well, it's comforting to know we have superior intellects capable of free thought in the USA.

stardust wrote:Thats where I am probably too much of a liberal saying that even if I would buy the evil elite story i will not defend or overcome them with a gun in my hands.

Gandhi did OK without a gun.