Active Ink Slinger
0 likes
I'll ride this bus
Insert typical super smart ass comment courtesy of thepainter here.
Join the best erotica focused adult social network now
Login
Full body scans
Are full body scans at airports too intrusive?
22 votes
remaining
Yes, I don't want anyone seeing my hoohoo or haha
(8 votes) 36%
No, it's what's needed to keep us safe
(17 votes) 77%
I don't care one way or another
(8 votes) 36%
It's supposed to be light out in the morning
(2 votes) 9%
Active Ink Slinger
0 likes
Quote by Dancing_Doll
I don't know about sitting next to someone on a bus, but I sure wouldn't want to sit next to a guy like this in an internet cafe...
"Jacksonville police said a woman was killed Monday afternoon by what appears to be the accidental discharge of a concealed firearm.
Police said a man with a concealed weapons permit went into the Allied Veterans Cyber Center Internet café on the Westside in the 5800 block of Normandy Boulevard just east of Lane Avenue.
Police said the man’s gun was mishandled or dropped and discharged, striking a woman in the back. Witnesses said the gun fell from the man’s belt.
Officers said the woman in her 40s, whose name has not yet been released, died at Shands…."
Link
Total accidental deaths per year (all causes), U.S....96,000
Motor vehicle accidental deaths per year...43,000
Fatal firearms accidents per year...1,100
Defensive gun uses (DGUs) by civilians, per year...2,500,000 to 3,500,000
Fraction of DGUs in which no shot is fired...92%
Alpha Blonde
0 likes
I don't dispute the stats MrNudiePants. And I know there are many responsible concealed permit owners out there. But those stats still only reference 'accidental gun death'. The homicide numbers are much, much higher. And, for those who end up in an instant of rage while in public, the idea of having something handy that is lethal is very scary to me. Look at the cases of road rage, alcohol/drug use while in public that frays judgment, violence in bars/clubs because someone hit on your girl, or looked at you the wrong way, or arguments between couples... We all have moments of blind anger/rage and I would not want to have a gun handy during those moments...
The link below lists many such examples. I do understand what you're saying... not everyone is careless like this. But.. if they have the permits, then someone out there thought they were able to handle such a responsibility.
http://www.opposingviews.com/p/brady-campaign-obama-agrees-on-dangers-of-concealed-carry
The link below lists many such examples. I do understand what you're saying... not everyone is careless like this. But.. if they have the permits, then someone out there thought they were able to handle such a responsibility.
http://www.opposingviews.com/p/brady-campaign-obama-agrees-on-dangers-of-concealed-carry
Active Ink Slinger
0 likes
An armed society is a polite society. I carry my gun everywhere I go. I feel safer because if I had to use it I know it's him not me. I have never had to pull my gun out in self defense. If I pull it out, it's to show my friend what I just got or what I'm carrying for the day. I would rather have the gun and not need it then not have it and wish I did.
I would rather be judged by 12 then carried by 6. More law abiding citizens with guns the safer the community. A wacko isn't gonna go into a place to shoot up people if he/she knows the possibility of armed citizens is high.
More people are killed by a car wreck than by guns.
If guns kill people then a spoon made Rosie O'Donnell fat, pencils cause misspelled words and cars make people drive drunk.
I would rather be judged by 12 then carried by 6. More law abiding citizens with guns the safer the community. A wacko isn't gonna go into a place to shoot up people if he/she knows the possibility of armed citizens is high.
More people are killed by a car wreck than by guns.
If guns kill people then a spoon made Rosie O'Donnell fat, pencils cause misspelled words and cars make people drive drunk.
Go check out my new story - How Did This Happen? - John's Story
Active Ink Slinger
0 likes
Quote by Dancing_Doll
I don't dispute the stats MrNudiePants. And I know there are many responsible concealed permit owners out there. But those stats still only reference 'accidental gun death'. The homicide numbers are much, much higher. And, for those who end up in an instant of rage while in public, the idea of having something handy that is lethal is very scary to me. Look at the cases of road rage, alcohol/drug use while in public that frays judgment, violence in bars/clubs because someone hit on your girl, or looked at you the wrong way, or arguments between couples... We all have moments of blind anger/rage and I would not want to have a gun handy during those moments...
The link below lists many such examples. I do understand what you're saying... not everyone is careless like this. But.. if they have the permits, then someone out there thought they were able to handle such a responsibility.
http://www.opposingviews.com/p/brady-campaign-obama-agrees-on-dangers-of-concealed-carry
Unfortunately, what you say so eloquently is true. But it's impossible to legislate away every danger in our lives. Psychos will always be around. Criminals will always be around. Unless we lock ourselves in padded cells and never come out, we never know what's coming at us around the next corner. I prefer to live like a man. Like a FREE man, responsible for his own actions, and willing to take whatever precautions I can to protect my loved ones.
Active Ink Slinger
0 likes
Quote by Dancing_Doll
I don't dispute the stats MrNudiePants. And I know there are many responsible concealed permit owners out there. But those stats still only reference 'accidental gun death'. The homicide numbers are much, much higher. And, for those who end up in an instant of rage while in public, the idea of having something handy that is lethal is very scary to me. Look at the cases of road rage, alcohol/drug use while in public that frays judgment, violence in bars/clubs because someone hit on your girl, or looked at you the wrong way, or arguments between couples... We all have moments of blind anger/rage and I would not want to have a gun handy during those moments...
The link below lists many such examples. I do understand what you're saying... not everyone is careless like this. But.. if they have the permits, then someone out there thought they were able to handle such a responsibility.
http://www.opposingviews.com/p/brady-campaign-obama-agrees-on-dangers-of-concealed-carry
Brady campaign is a bunch of idiots who don't know what they are talking about. I can guarantee no one is going to do something stupid if they know others around them are carrying. That's the whole point to carrying concealed, NO ONE KNOWS YOU HAVE A GUN. My right to carry will never be infringed and many will agree with that.
Taking away our guns only protects the criminals.
Go check out my new story - How Did This Happen? - John's Story
Active Ink Slinger
0 likes
I actually leave my gun in my truck when I go to a bar. Most bars and clubs don't allow people to carry. Which I'm fine with that because people do stupid shit when they're drunk.
Go check out my new story - How Did This Happen? - John's Story
Lurker
0 likes
How did this turn into a pro vs anti gun thread (laughs)...only on Lush...Look, anything can be a weapon in the right hands...
Alpha Blonde
0 likes
Quote by Remington
I actually leave my gun in my truck when I go to a bar. Most bars and clubs don't allow people to carry. Which I'm fine with that because people do stupid shit when they're drunk.
Very true... Although isn't it scary when everyone comes out of the bar while drunk... to their guns and their vehicles? It might be difficult for some people to resist the temptation to use either/or.
Not always... just saying... this would factor into my mind when the club closes.
Thank god for taxis... LOL
Lurker
0 likes
Amen, chef. As a Concealed Weapon Permit holder myself, you won't know if I'm carrying unless I choose to let you know. I have the feeling your hubby and I would get along.
I see why we're on the same page now. We live in the same place and had to take the same CWP course.
Lurker
0 likes
@MrNudiePants
Hitler was very smart/inteligent man, he developed national consciousness really high, he established new laws so could proside his plan..
I didn't ever get across the fact that the Jews had any weapon. Yes the law was there so he/the army could get into their houses searching for gold/money..
I will have to research and raed through the artical you recomended and I will get back to you but I need few days of gun in my head.
Soviet Union they were disallowed by their communist dictator to have any weapon. We obviously bouth said the same thing..
"..Stalin (Russia) communist country. Do you really think that those leaders at that time would let their citizant to have guns at home like you in USA have? so they can oppose them with guns, no I dont think so..."
Hitler was very smart/inteligent man, he developed national consciousness really high, he established new laws so could proside his plan..
I didn't ever get across the fact that the Jews had any weapon. Yes the law was there so he/the army could get into their houses searching for gold/money..
I will have to research and raed through the artical you recomended and I will get back to you but I need few days of gun in my head.
Soviet Union they were disallowed by their communist dictator to have any weapon. We obviously bouth said the same thing..
"..Stalin (Russia) communist country. Do you really think that those leaders at that time would let their citizant to have guns at home like you in USA have? so they can oppose them with guns, no I dont think so..."
Active Ink Slinger
0 likes
Quote by Dancing_DollQuote by Remington
I actually leave my gun in my truck when I go to a bar. Most bars and clubs don't allow people to carry. Which I'm fine with that because people do stupid shit when they're drunk.
Very true... Although isn't it scary when everyone comes out of the bar while drunk... to their guns and their vehicles? It might be difficult for some people to resist the temptation to use either/or.
Not always... just saying... this would factor into my mind when the club closes.
Thank god for taxis... LOL
I'm not arguing that point. Anything could happen while drinking. People do tend to pull a gun after the club if something arises. I don't go to the bar looking for trouble. I go to have a good time and maybe chat with some females. Whatever happens afterward doesn't involve anger or hostility, unless of course, the female I happen to be talking to has a jealous boyfriend. That has happened a couple times. I usually walk away.
I'm not arguing the fact it happens, but it doesn't happen as often as people like to think..
Go check out my new story - How Did This Happen? - John's Story
Active Ink Slinger
0 likes
Quote by Loislane
How did this turn into a pro vs anti gun thread (laughs)...only on Lush...Look, anything can be a weapon in the right hands...
I've got MY weapon right here..... (Muahhhhhhh ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa)
Lurker
0 likes
Wow. Looks like I got things a little off track with my comments about guns. Sorry about that. Its a good topic though. Just thought I'd fan the flames a bit...
An armed society is a polite society? Is that why the USA leads the developed world in incidents of gun related crime and homicides? The argument that arming the general populous will decrease crime is ridiculous and has absolutely no evidence to support it. I amazed that some people out there still believe that arming the population will decrease crime. One of the main factors in crime rate is having a large number of the population inhabiting the lowers tiers of socioeconomic status. Combine that with an easy accessibility of guns and voila!...increased rates of gun crime.
Now I know lots of Americans love their guns. They're cool. They're fun. I get it. I've shot an Uzi before and it was fun as hell. But don't try and rationalize it by pretending that your love of guns is somehow serving a purpose by protecting society.
And please, please, please, can we not quote the constitution like it was handed down by the gods. The second amendment refers to the forming of militias in a time when communities in the newly formed nation were still believed to be under threat of attack. This was 1791 people. It doesn't mean that "Billy Bob" gets to have a semi-automatic with amour piercing bullets.
England had a similar statement in their bill of rights in 1689. It's now considered obsolete. Why? Because its fucking old! Times change and some laws (although important in the 1700s) become irrelevant over time. If you want to use 18th century semantics as a loophole so you can shoot beer cans off fence posts, go nuts though.
I actually find it funny that (some) Americans cling to the 2nd amendment "with their cold, dead hands" while the most prime principle involved in the founding of your nation (you know, that thing about all men being created equal) was ignored for the first 200 years of American History.
Now I don't mean to trash the USA. (Trust me, I've defended the US more times than I can remember). But this reflex reference to the constitution as the be-all and end-all gets a little tiresome. It's almost a get-out-of-jail-free card when it comes to intelligent discussion. Its almost as irritating as when people quote the bible to justify their beliefs or actions.
PS. Does anyone know where I can buy an Uzi? Cause that shit was awesome.
An armed society is a polite society? Is that why the USA leads the developed world in incidents of gun related crime and homicides? The argument that arming the general populous will decrease crime is ridiculous and has absolutely no evidence to support it. I amazed that some people out there still believe that arming the population will decrease crime. One of the main factors in crime rate is having a large number of the population inhabiting the lowers tiers of socioeconomic status. Combine that with an easy accessibility of guns and voila!...increased rates of gun crime.
Now I know lots of Americans love their guns. They're cool. They're fun. I get it. I've shot an Uzi before and it was fun as hell. But don't try and rationalize it by pretending that your love of guns is somehow serving a purpose by protecting society.
And please, please, please, can we not quote the constitution like it was handed down by the gods. The second amendment refers to the forming of militias in a time when communities in the newly formed nation were still believed to be under threat of attack. This was 1791 people. It doesn't mean that "Billy Bob" gets to have a semi-automatic with amour piercing bullets.
England had a similar statement in their bill of rights in 1689. It's now considered obsolete. Why? Because its fucking old! Times change and some laws (although important in the 1700s) become irrelevant over time. If you want to use 18th century semantics as a loophole so you can shoot beer cans off fence posts, go nuts though.
I actually find it funny that (some) Americans cling to the 2nd amendment "with their cold, dead hands" while the most prime principle involved in the founding of your nation (you know, that thing about all men being created equal) was ignored for the first 200 years of American History.
Now I don't mean to trash the USA. (Trust me, I've defended the US more times than I can remember). But this reflex reference to the constitution as the be-all and end-all gets a little tiresome. It's almost a get-out-of-jail-free card when it comes to intelligent discussion. Its almost as irritating as when people quote the bible to justify their beliefs or actions.
PS. Does anyone know where I can buy an Uzi? Cause that shit was awesome.
Artistic Tart
0 likes
Quote by DamonX
PS. Does anyone know where I can buy an Uzi? Cause that shit was awesome.
I know a guy.5HuwFQzxl8nYrONB
Active Ink Slinger
0 likes
Quote by LadyXQuote by DamonX
PS. Does anyone know where I can buy an Uzi? Cause that shit was awesome.
I know a guy.YUmovltcwYM0dW65
And if that falls through, I know a different guy...
Quote by DamonX
And please, please, please, can we not quote the constitution like it was handed down by the gods.
Well, we could. But if we were discussing American civil liberties, it wouldn't be a very long discussion. Like it or not, the Constitution (properly capitalized, please) is the foundation that America was built on. Any time the politicians pass a new law, and "We The People" feel that the law is unjust, what's our recourse? We take it to court and test the law to see if it's unconstitutional. You can't do that in England.
Still, though, you seem to think that the Second Amendment is old, outdated. For the sake of argument, let's assume it is. Okay, what OTHER Amendments are old, and outdated? Is the First Amendment outdated? Or do you think the government SHOULD be able to force us all to go to their church of choice? Maybe you think the government SHOULD be able to tell us what we can say and what we can't. We don't need that pesky old First Amendment protecting our right to free speech.
And how about the Fourth Amendment? Aren't we in several "Great Wars" right now? We have the "war on drugs", and the "war on terror." Wouldn't it be so much easier to fight these wars if the cops didn't need to go before a judge and get a pesky warrant before they bust down your door and fuck up all your shit? Right. Fourth Amendment is out.
Same goes for the Fifth Amendment. We'll never be able to convict these criminals if we don't coerce them into testifying against themselves. Don't need THAT amendment. And that goes as well for the Sixth. Fuck 'em. Trial by their peers and all that. Just throw 'em all in a hole and forget about 'em is my advice. And we might as well forget about the Eighth, if we're gonna throw out the Fifth and Sixth. If we're gonna force them to confess, and then throw them in a hole without a trial, then what's a little cruel and unusual punishment on top of it?
(sigh)
The Amendments were added to the Constitution for a reason. They're a constant reminder, to anyone who cares to read them, of all the things the government is FORBIDDEN to do to the citizens of this country. The Second Amendment isn't about raising an army. The Constitution that you disparage so much defines "militia" as every able-bodied man between the ages of 18 and 45. The Second Amendment was written to ensure that these able-bodied men could never be disarmed by the government, in case they were ever needed to fight on behalf of those that aren't so "able-bodied". "Well regulated" means well armed, well trained in marksmanship and tactics, and discipline. It meant that these men should be ready at a moments notice to act in defense of their land and their neighbors. These traits are commendable, but are sadly lacking in these "modern" times.
Lurker
0 likes
I in no way meant to trash the entire constitution. I just think as rational human beings, we should be able to decipher what apsects are still relevant. Freedom of speech? relevant. Freedom of press? relevant. Freedom to form militias? not so much. You have the 2nd largest army in the world. Pretty sure you're ok when it comes to defense. With the most advanced military in the world, I'm sure you and your M-16 can take a day off. Because, obviously you're under imminent threat of invasion! Or is it the forces of the evil Obama that seek to take away your precious firearms so that he can enact his evil health care plan? In that case, you should blockade yourself in a cabin ruby ridge-style...or pull a Timothy Mcveigh and really show 'em....
All jokes aside though...If you want to own a gun, fine. Just don't try and rationalize it with some over-romantisized ideal of "freedom".
PM me about that Uzi connection though
All jokes aside though...If you want to own a gun, fine. Just don't try and rationalize it with some over-romantisized ideal of "freedom".
PM me about that Uzi connection though
Smiley Guru
0 likes
Quote by DamonX
And please, please, please, can we not quote the constitution like it was handed down by the gods. The second amendment refers to the forming of militias in a time when communities in the newly formed nation were still believed to be under threat of attack. This was 1791 people. It doesn't mean that "Billy Bob" gets to have a semi-automatic with amour piercing bullets.
...
Now I don't mean to trash the USA. (Trust me, I've defended the US more times than I can remember). But this reflex reference to the constitution as the be-all and end-all gets a little tiresome. It's almost a get-out-of-jail-free card when it comes to intelligent discussion. Its almost as irritating as when people quote the bible to justify their beliefs or actions.
...
what apsects are still relevant. Freedom of speech? relevant. Freedom of press? relevant. Freedom to form militias? not so much. You have the 2nd largest army in the world. Pretty sure you're ok when it comes to defense.
The Constitution is the highest law in the land, and is the insurance against tyranny. The second amendment was not intended merely as a means to establish an army (Militia) it was so that the people would be protected from the government, because the founding fathers knew that unless the government is enslaved it will enslave the people.
I suggest you reread even the very short section of the bill of rights that I posted. These are not freedoms the people are allowed. These are restrictions placed on the government.
Remember from the President all the way down make an oath to uphold the Constitution.
Now when you want to talk about freedoms being releveant, how about we look at not infringed?
Speech: How about a "free speech zone" where you get to protest in a fenced off area with storm troopers surrounding you and corralling you and arresting you...
Like at the DNC and RNC 2008
Free speech it's for the old too!
Freedom of the Press, how about something relevant like reporting on the oil spill in the gulf and taking photos?
Fourth Amendment: The right of the peolpe to be secure in their persons, houses , papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supoported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, abd the person or things to be seized.
We started here with full body scans, but how about we consider illegal wiretapping, recording e-mails and phone conversations as a mater of course, have you heard of "sneak and peak?" That is where a government agency hacks into your computer, without a warrant, and searchs your hard drive. The unpleasantness at the airport is only the tip of the iceberg on this one.
We do live in a modern age and air travel is how we cross great distances quickly. It is not magic. There is no reason that we should be subject to an illegal search before we board a plane. The best security people will tell you that the screening is a show. they are reinforcing to public that they should feel safe when disarmed. Is that reality? "Don't worry the man with the gun over there, on our payroll, is looking out for you."
We live in a day when a 4000 page document (the Patriot Act) was railroaded through congress after what is at best described as a questionable event. That document seeks to gut the protections spelled out in the Bill of Rights.
So yes, I'd say all these Amendments are relevant.
The freedom that makes the Unitesd States great is not the freedom to choose your own brand of beer or bitch about what's on TV. The freedom that makes The United States great is that you and I have protecion from and a say in the government, guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
It's not our given right to enjoy those freedoms, it's our duty to protect them.
Lurker
0 likes
Face it Damon no Constitution=NO democracy=NO freedoms as we know it.
Active Ink Slinger
0 likes
Quote by DamonX
I in no way meant to trash the entire constitution. I just think as rational human beings, we should be able to decipher what apsects are still relevant. Freedom of speech? relevant. Freedom of press? relevant. Freedom to form militias? not so much. You have the 2nd largest army in the world. Pretty sure you're ok when it comes to defense. With the most advanced military in the world, I'm sure you and your M-16 can take a day off. (Unless you feel the need to patrol the border to shoot Mexicans or course). Because, obviously you're under imminent threat of invasion! Or is it the forces of the evil Obama that seek to take away your precious firearms? In that case, you should blockade yourself in a cabin ruby ridge-style...or pull a Timothy Mcveigh and really show 'em....
All jokes aside though...If you want to own a gun, fine. Just don't try and rationalize it with some over-romantisized ideal of "freedom".
PM me about that Uzi connection though
This obviously works better if you're an American, but still... here's a little exercise for you. Who is your most hated politician? The one person you think is most corrupt, most incorrigible. For some, it's George Bush, for others, Barack Obama. Really doesn't matter who it is. Ask yourself how happy you would be if the only firearms in existence were in the hands of that person and his supporters...
Constant Gardener
0 likes
One of the most eloquent synopses I have ever read, in almost ten years...touching all the major points of concern for all Americans.
Bravo!
Bravo!
Quote by Playmale
Fourth Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses , papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized.
We started here with full body scans, but how about we consider illegal wiretapping, recording e-mails and phone conversations as a mater of course, have you heard of "sneak and peak?" That is where a government agency hacks into your computer, without a warrant, and searches your hard drive.
The unpleasantness at the airport is only the tip of the iceberg on this one.
We do live in a modern age and air travel is how we cross great distances quickly. It is not magic. There is no reason that we should be subject to an illegal search before we board a plane. The best security people will tell you that the screening is a show. they are reinforcing to public that they should feel safe when disarmed. Is that reality? "Don't worry the man with the gun over there, on our payroll, is looking out for you."
We live in a day when a 4000 page document (the Patriot Act) was railroaded through congress after what is at best described as a questionable event. That document seeks to gut the protections spelled out in the Bill of Rights.
So yes, I'd say all these Amendments are relevant.
The freedom that makes the United States great is not the freedom to choose your own brand of beer or bitch about what's on TV. The freedom that makes The United States great is that you and I have protecion from and a say in the government, guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
It's not our given right to enjoy those freedoms, it's our duty to protect them.
The same GQP demanding we move on from January 6th, 2021 is still doing audits of the November 3rd, 2020 election.
Active Ink Slinger
0 likes
I'm glad I boarded that Shortbus. The only shooting happening here also comes from the hips but it's all normal functions of the human body! 
Insert typical super smart ass comment courtesy of thepainter here.
Lurker
0 likes
Gee, how did I manage to piss off both the right and left wing?
I think if you read my second last post, you'll see that I have no problem with the constitution. Rather, I have a an issue with those that misinterpret it to suit their own agendas. Do you own a gun because you feel that your freedom is in danger? Or because its fun to shoot stuff? The rest of the western world seems to get along just fine without flooding their populations with firearms. Or is your "right" to have a ridiculously high murder rate as well?
As for limiting the powers of government...I'm with you. I'm not sure how I got pegged as some freedom hating fascist, but I can assure you, I have no problem with life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness. I'm fine with a little public dissent as well, if its a cause that I believe in. I just don't see airport scanning as a huge violation of my civil rights. i actually feel more violated when US customs agents ransack my car every time I drive across the border. I get patted down and have my pockets checked every time I walk into night club...is that a violation?
Of course you can give the "slippery slope" argument. I get it. Today its airport scanning, tomorrow we'll all be living in some Orwellian dystopia, blah blah, blah. But the problem with slippery slope arguments is that they are based on assumptions and not facts, thus making for pretty poor discussion. Scan me or don't scan me. It won't affect me either way.
I think if you read my second last post, you'll see that I have no problem with the constitution. Rather, I have a an issue with those that misinterpret it to suit their own agendas. Do you own a gun because you feel that your freedom is in danger? Or because its fun to shoot stuff? The rest of the western world seems to get along just fine without flooding their populations with firearms. Or is your "right" to have a ridiculously high murder rate as well?
As for limiting the powers of government...I'm with you. I'm not sure how I got pegged as some freedom hating fascist, but I can assure you, I have no problem with life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness. I'm fine with a little public dissent as well, if its a cause that I believe in. I just don't see airport scanning as a huge violation of my civil rights. i actually feel more violated when US customs agents ransack my car every time I drive across the border. I get patted down and have my pockets checked every time I walk into night club...is that a violation?
Of course you can give the "slippery slope" argument. I get it. Today its airport scanning, tomorrow we'll all be living in some Orwellian dystopia, blah blah, blah. But the problem with slippery slope arguments is that they are based on assumptions and not facts, thus making for pretty poor discussion. Scan me or don't scan me. It won't affect me either way.
Active Ink Slinger
0 likes
Quote by DamonX
Gee, how did I manage to piss off both the right and left wing?
Do you own a gun because you feel that your freedom is in danger?
Yes.
Quote by DamonX
Or because its fun to shoot stuff?
Yes! lol
Quote by DamonX
The rest of the western world seems to get along just fine without flooding their populations with firearms. Or is your "right" to have a ridiculously high murder rate as well?
Okay, just for the fun of it, I tried to make a quick project of researching worldwide gun ownership, and then correlate that to worldwide murder rates. I didn't break out non-firearm-related murders from the rest of the pack - I just don't want to take that kind of time today. The top ten countries, in terms of gun ownership are:
1. United States... Guns Per 100: 90.............Murder rank: 24th
2. Yemen............Guns Per 100: 61..............Murder rank: 27th
3. Finland............Guns Per 100: 56..............Murder rank: 30th
4. Switzerland.....Guns Per 100: 46..............Murder rank: 56th
5. Iraq...............Guns Per 100: 39.............. Murder rank: Not listed. (Possibly because the ongoing military actions make "murder" a questionable term.)
6. Serbia............Guns Per 100: 38..............Murder rank: Also not listed. (Possibly due to lack of data?)
7. France............Guns Per 100: 32.............. Murder rank: 16th
8. Canada...........Guns Per 100: 31.............. Murder rank: 30th
8. Sweden...........Guns Per 100: 31..............Murder rank: 45th
8. Austria ...........Guns Per 100: 31.............. Murder rank: 65th
The countries with the highest murder rate were India, Russia, and Columbia, which come in at #31, #24, and #26 (respectively) in terms of gun ownership. Food for thought. But relax, Damon. I'm not pissed off at you. There are scads and scads of misunderstandings that non-gun-owners have about gun owners. We're all bloodthirsty morons with low IQ's and one eye brow. We're all alcoholics, and spouse abusers. We're all ticking time bombs, just waiting for the wrong moment to be set off. Right? When in reality, WE'RE JUST LIKE YOU. We love life, we love our fellow man, and we don't know where the tunnel goes when we reach the ends of our lives. One thing we DO know is that we're willing to fight for our lives, and our liberties. And most of us are willing to fight for our neighbors' lives, as well.
All data came from these two sites:
Gun Ownership
Murder Rates
Active Ink Slinger
0 likes
I find this thread to be fascinating. There are a lot of good arguments on both sides. I'm not usually one to argue what will end up being a stalemate of opinion. I'm also not as eloquent as others.
Personally I'm very pro gun ownership. So you know where I stand. I've also thrown a few hand grenades which is a freaking kick in the pants of fun. Everyone should get to do that at least once.
When it comes down to it those that want to harm others will find ways to do so. If you take away firearms from a population then it will be blades that will become a weapon of choice. And anyone with a basic knowledge of chemistry can easily create a very destructive device. Ammonium Nitrate is readily available at Wal-mart. I'm not going to tell you the name of the product that it is sold under but I will tell you that it is rather pure. Ammonium Nitrate mixed with a few other choice chemicals can cause a large amount of destruction. Some orange juice, diesel fuel, and Styrofoam can cause serious problems as well. A few household cleaning products can not only cause great explosive destruction but also produce deadly gases that would kill anyone who stuck around after the blast.
So thats it really. No products are extremely harmful by themselves but if you combine the right things together the results can be explosive. People will harm others if they have guns or not. There is, unfortunately, people who just want to do harm to others.
Personally I'm very pro gun ownership. So you know where I stand. I've also thrown a few hand grenades which is a freaking kick in the pants of fun. Everyone should get to do that at least once.
When it comes down to it those that want to harm others will find ways to do so. If you take away firearms from a population then it will be blades that will become a weapon of choice. And anyone with a basic knowledge of chemistry can easily create a very destructive device. Ammonium Nitrate is readily available at Wal-mart. I'm not going to tell you the name of the product that it is sold under but I will tell you that it is rather pure. Ammonium Nitrate mixed with a few other choice chemicals can cause a large amount of destruction. Some orange juice, diesel fuel, and Styrofoam can cause serious problems as well. A few household cleaning products can not only cause great explosive destruction but also produce deadly gases that would kill anyone who stuck around after the blast.
So thats it really. No products are extremely harmful by themselves but if you combine the right things together the results can be explosive. People will harm others if they have guns or not. There is, unfortunately, people who just want to do harm to others.
Thousands of user submitted stories removed from the site. You are nothing without your users or their freely submitted stories.
Smiley Guru
0 likes
Quote by DamonX
Gee, how did I manage to piss off both the right and left wing?
Easy, you insulted and dismissed the document that defines our Republic.
Quote by DamonX
...tomorrow we'll all be living in some Orwellian dystopia, blah blah, blah.
Funny you should mention Orwell, many of the things described in "1984" already exist in some fasion.
Here are some comparisons to 1984 and "now" (I'm not sure when "now" was)
Here is a page of predictions and where we were at in 1981.
Remember....
Artistic Tart
0 likes
That poster about fascism? I think that's true.
Make fun of people who cry about their rights all you want, but governments that take rights don't really ever give them back. Slippery slope is made up of assumptions? I think a history of real slippery slopes in past governments would tell us that they aren't assumptions, they are predictions based on history.
But hell ya, it's easier just to piss on it all and make fun, then watch everyone give you 8 paragraphs of response to flippant comments- I get that. And no, I don't think guns make life safer either, but I'll also say that I just recently found myself in a place where I fucking regret not having mine on me. So the solution is take all of them away? Guarantee me that motherfuckers like ones that live around me and that I have to run into won't have them, and I'll hand mine over. Until then? Hell. No.
Make fun of people who cry about their rights all you want, but governments that take rights don't really ever give them back. Slippery slope is made up of assumptions? I think a history of real slippery slopes in past governments would tell us that they aren't assumptions, they are predictions based on history.
But hell ya, it's easier just to piss on it all and make fun, then watch everyone give you 8 paragraphs of response to flippant comments- I get that. And no, I don't think guns make life safer either, but I'll also say that I just recently found myself in a place where I fucking regret not having mine on me. So the solution is take all of them away? Guarantee me that motherfuckers like ones that live around me and that I have to run into won't have them, and I'll hand mine over. Until then? Hell. No.
Alpha Blonde
0 likes
Quote by MrNudiePants
Okay, just for the fun of it, I tried to make a quick project of researching worldwide gun ownership, and then correlate that to worldwide murder rates. I didn't break out non-firearm-related murders from the rest of the pack - I just don't want to take that kind of time today. The top ten countries, in terms of gun ownership are:
1. United States... Guns Per 100: 90.............Murder rank: 24th
2. Yemen............Guns Per 100: 61..............Murder rank: 27th
3. Finland............Guns Per 100: 56..............Murder rank: 30th
4. Switzerland.....Guns Per 100: 46..............Murder rank: 56th
5. Iraq...............Guns Per 100: 39.............. Murder rank: Not listed. (Possibly because the ongoing military actions make "murder" a questionable term.)
6. Serbia............Guns Per 100: 38..............Murder rank: Also not listed. (Possibly due to lack of data?)
7. France............Guns Per 100: 32.............. Murder rank: 16th
8. Canada...........Guns Per 100: 31.............. Murder rank: 30th
8. Sweden...........Guns Per 100: 31..............Murder rank: 45th
8. Austria ...........Guns Per 100: 31.............. Murder rank: 65th
All data came from these two sites:
Gun Ownership
Murder Rates
Just out of curiosity because maybe I am reading these stats wrong (although let's face it, it's easy enough to cook the books to use stats to prove whatever one wants these days).
When I looked up the site you mentioned and referenced, pertaining to murders with firearms by country, the USA comes up as 4th. I'm not sure if you were just looking at "murder rank" instead of "murder by firearms" (the latter being the most important stat for this particular debate). I looked up the stats in a number of ways (even by homicide by firearms per capita etc).. and the USA consistently makes the top 10. The only countries higher are those that were active participants of the arms trade (which is a whole other debate), and/or countries with active caste systems and drug cartels. Just sayin'...
Rank Countries Amount
# 1 South Africa: 31,918
# 2 Colombia: 21,898
# 3 Thailand: 20,032
# 4 United States: 9,369
# 5 Philippines: 7,708
# 6 Mexico: 2,606
# 7 Slovakia: 2,356
# 8 El Salvador: 1,441
# 9 Zimbabwe: 598
# 10 Peru: 442
# 11 Germany: 269
# 12 Czech Republic: 181
# 13 Ukraine: 173
# 14 Canada: 144
Reference: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-crime-murders-with-firearms
Active Ink Slinger
0 likes
Quote by Dancing_Doll
Just out of curiosity because maybe I am reading these stats wrong (although let's face it, it's easy enough to cook the books to use stats to prove whatever one wants these days).
Click on the per capita tab at the top of those stats. That would make it murders divided by number of populace, not actual total of those murdered.
This falls in line with his other stats of gun ownership per capita. I believe Mr. Nudepants was trying to keep the base unit the same. So he wasn't trying to add inches and centimeters together.
You were also looking at a different set of stats than Mr. Nudepants was.
Thousands of user submitted stories removed from the site. You are nothing without your users or their freely submitted stories.
Alpha Blonde
0 likes
Quote by JilliciousQuote by Dancing_Doll
Just out of curiosity because maybe I am reading these stats wrong (although let's face it, it's easy enough to cook the books to use stats to prove whatever one wants these days).
Click on the per capita tab at the top of those stats. That would make it murders divided by number of populace, not actual total of those murdered.
This falls in line with his other stats of gun ownership per capita. I believe Mr. Nudepants was trying to keep the base unit the same. So he wasn't trying to add inches and centimeters together.
You were also looking at a different set of stats than Mr. Nudepants was.
Yes... however... when I look up "Murders with Firearms Per Capita" the US still makes the top 10, just as I had stated in my post above... It's only when you look up "murders overall per capita" that the USA falls to the middle of the pack... Since we are talking guns and homicide, I figured these are the stats that matter for this particular debate.
# 1 South Africa: 0.719782 per 1,000 people
# 2 Colombia: 0.509801 per 1,000 people
# 3 Thailand: 0.312093 per 1,000 people
# 4 Zimbabwe: 0.0491736 per 1,000 people
# 5 Mexico: 0.0337938 per 1,000 people
# 6 Belarus: 0.0321359 per 1,000 people
# 7 Costa Rica: 0.0313745 per 1,000 people
# 8 United States: 0.0279271 per 1,000 people
reference: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita