White House to Push Gun Control

[nick1985]

Yup, lesser of two evils.

So self defense is justifiable according to you.

Glad you came around to our side. :thumbsup:

 

[HAL9000]

Except that you admitted in the last thread you have no ammo for the shotgun. So what are you going to do? Use it as a club?

Sorry the guy didn't say I had my shotgun that has no ammo in the hypothetical situation. This question was asked before in previous thread, please see that for answer.

 

[HAL9000]

So self defense is justifiable according to you.

Glad you came around to our side. :thumbsup:

You didn't read my other thread did you, I've always been of the opinion that self defence is justifiable... What's your point?...

Hi People

I have been informed recently that the majority of people on this forum would argue that "Killing is fine" is that the case?! Here's a poll. let me know.

Neckarb

Edit: to clarify, when I say "Killing" I mean taking a life.


For some reason I was in a thread a minute ago, and quite a few people were saying killing is fine, a very finite statement with many repercussions I was told that most people agree with that statement.

For me the notion to kill anything is unacceptable except in self defence.

I apologise for the crudity of the question, particularly how non-specific it is, but the validity of that statement is what I am trying to assess. I have no other information to provide as that is the statement what was originally made

The statment originated in: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2133856

Which was dealing with killing a Coyote however it soon derailed and ended up discussing the rather non-specific statement that "Killing is fine" all encompassing killing in general. This I took issue with and wanted a wider opinion than those in the thread.

Here I am.

I should also add this question is from a Moral perspective. "Morally/ ethically" fine.

 

[nick1985]

You didn't read my other thread did you, I've always been of the opinion that self defence is justifiable... What's your point?...

So what are you even arguing with your whole "immoral" argument? Cold-blooded murder is immoral? No shit. Self defense is not? No shit.

What are you even saying?

 

[Genx87]

How does one overpower somebody with a gun when they dont own a gun??? Quite the contradiction.

 

[irishScott]

So self defense is justifiable, yet you allow laws that deny others the ability to effectively perform said. Nice.

 

[HAL9000]

So what are you even arguing with your whole "immoral" argument? Cold-blooded murder is immoral? No shit. Self defense is not? No shit.

What are you even saying?

No idea, I didn't start the argument about killing I just stated that I believe killing to be immoral, you guys went mental and starting asking questions.

How does one overpower somebody with a gun when they dont own a gun??? Quite the contradiction.

It was a hypothetical situation:

Man raping your wife.

You have a gun.

What do you do?

I was responding to that, no contradiction.

So self defense is justifiable, yet you allow laws that deny others the ability to effectively perform said. Nice.

Because by making guns illegal you can start to remove the need to defend yourself with a gun.

 

[Kirby]

Such a baseless blanket statement.

You are going to tell me the purpose of that over/under is to kill?

Goddamn. One day I'm going to own a Beretta over/under. Those things are fucking sexy.

http://www.berettausa.com/products/so-10/

 

[Genx87]

No idea, I didn't start the argument about killing I just stated that I believe killing to be immoral, you guys went mental and starting asking questions.



It was a hypothetical situation:



I was responding to that, no contradiction.



Because by making guns illegal you can start to remove the need to defend yourself with a gun.

I find it interesting in your hypothetical you have a gun and the rest of us dont.

 

[bfdd]

Neckarb has a shotgun, and quite a good clue about firearms, he just doesn't think that people should be able to own whatever gun they want for whatever reason

Do you believe the government should be able to own whatever gun they want for whatever reason?

 

[nick1985]

Because by making guns illegal you can start to remove the need to defend yourself with a gun.

How would one defend themselves against more than 1 attacker? How would a small woman defend herself against a built male?

 

[HAL9000]

Goddamn. One day I'm going to own a Beretta over/under. Those things are fucking sexy.

http://www.berettausa.com/products/so-10/

I've got one!

It's a Beretta Gold e: http://www.reviewcentre.com/reviews81406.html

 

[HAL9000]

I find it interesting in your hypothetical you have a gun and the rest of us dont.

Jesus man! Read the thing. It's not my hypothetical. Fuck.

Do you believe the government should be able to own whatever gun they want for whatever reason?

No I don't.

How would one defend themselves against more than 1 attacker? How would a small woman defend herself against a built male?

Pepper Spray/ Taser... No idea, we manage.

 

[irishScott]

Because by making guns illegal you can start to remove the need to defend yourself with a gun.

*sigh* I'm not going to get into how criminals will always be armed, we don't live on an island the size of Michigan (1 state out of 50), and already have 270,000,000+ privately owned firearms. Imagine if every citizen in the UK owned 4-5 guns. That's how many we have.

It would take either serious violations of the Constitution or 100 years to get to low gun crime levels. A century of armed criminals and disarmed prey is not worth it.

 

[nick1985]

Goddamn. One day I'm going to own a Beretta over/under. Those things are fucking sexy.

http://www.berettausa.com/products/so-10/

It only has 1 purpose. To kill

 

[HAL9000]

*sigh* I'm not going to get into how criminals will always be armed, we don't live on an island the size of Michigan (1 state out of 50), and already have 270,000,000+ privately owned firearms. Imagine if every citizen in the UK owned 4-5 guns. That's how many we have.

It would take either serious violations of the Constitution or 100 years to get to low gun crime levels. A century of armed criminals and disarmed prey is not worth it.

Wow 100 years, Better start now.

 

[bfdd]

Jesus man! Read the thing. It's not my hypothetical. Fuck.



No I don't.



Pepper Spray/ Taser... No idea, we manage.

Then the government and the rest of the world can ask me to disarm when they do.

 

[irishScott]

Jesus man! Read the thing. It's not my hypothetical. Fuck.



No I don't.



Pepper Spray/ Taser... No idea, we manage.

Except for the fact that pepper spray and tasers are considered "offensive weapons" and are illegal to the average UK citizen. Illegal in the sense of jailtime for ownership.

 

[HAL9000]

It only has 1 purpose. To kill

True, that's what it was built for, which is why I don't own any ammunition.

 

[HAL9000]

Then the government and the rest of the world can ask me to disarm when they do.

Why because you need to defend your self agains the army?

Except for the fact that pepper spray and tasers are considered "offensive weapons" and are illegal to the average UK citizen. Illegal in the sense of jailtime for ownership.

A good point, I didn't realise we were talking about the UK, girls I know carry deodorant instead, seems to work.

 

[irishScott]

Wow 100 years, Better start now.

Or not start at all, and use that time to elevate our economy to eliminate the conditions that cause crime in the first place. In the meantime allow our citizens a fighting chance against criminals.

 

[nick1985]

Pepper Spray/ Taser... No idea, we manage.

Your violent crime rose after the gun bans. You dont manage well.

 

[HAL9000]

Or not start at all, and use that time to elevate our economy to eliminate the conditions that cause crime in the first place. In the meantime allow our citizens a fighting chance against criminals.

Yep that could work, assuming that you can eliminate all crime rather than eliminating the means to commit said crimes...

 

[HAL9000]

Your violent crime rose after the gun bans. You dont manage well.

No it didn't only after the irrelevant gun ban of 1997/8 the actual gun ban in 1988 showed a decrease in violent crime.

Also violent crime with a gun is worse than violent crime with a bat.

 

[bfdd]

Why because you need to defend your self agains the army?



A good point, I didn't realise we were talking about the UK, girls I know carry deodorant instead, seems to work.

You said people don't need to own whatever gun they feel like. People run the government. You also stated that the government should not be able to own whatever gun they feel like. So unless everyone else wants to disarm as well, I'll keep my guns thank you very much. It's called leading by example, so unless the USA government wants to disarm completely, it shouldn't expect that of its citizenry.