Bad324 Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 obviously that's an enforcement problem... like Chicago and New York.. it's not like they can just stop everyone at the border of those cities and search them for guns. They buy the guns somewhere else (somewhere they are perfectly legal to buy and sell, and readily available), and bring them along.and this is why we all are saying a ban won't work. If you can't beat em, join em. What makes you think that it can be enforced everywhere in the US where it seems almost all law enforcement units are rarely equipped to handle everything? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 he United States has 90 guns for every 100 citizens, making it the most heavily armed society in the world, a report released on Tuesday said.U.S. citizens own 270 million of the world's 875 million known firearms, according to the Small Arms Survey 2007 by the Geneva-based Graduate Institute of International Studies.About 4.5 million of the 8 million new guns manufactured worldwide each year are purchased in the United States, it said."There is roughly one firearm for every seven people worldwide. Without the United States, though, this drops to about one firearm per 10 people," it said.http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/08/28/us-world-firearms-idUSL2834893820070828do you honestly think a gun ban would get every last one of these guns turned in? are you stoned? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 banning guns doesnt make them "difficult to get your hands on", it just makes it illegal to do sodo you know how fucking huge the illegal arms market is???How do we make guns as hard to acquire as tanks?how do we make guns as hard to acquire as nukes?"you can't" is a defeatist attitude.Maybe this country isn't ready for that, so be it, but if the country were ready for it, we could do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 How do we make guns as hard to acquire as tanks?how do we make guns as hard to acquire as nukes?"you can't" is a defeatist attitude.Maybe this country isn't ready for that, so be it, but if the country were ready for it, we could do it."defeatist attitude"? realistic attitude. you really do live in looney toon land. guns will never be as hard to acquire as tanks and nukes. thats the dumbest thing ive ever read. they are produced by the millions, world-wide, they are compact and easy to conceal and transport, and the price is relatively cheap, even for "illegal" gunshow many tanks can you put in a duffle bag and smuggle across the border? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 (edited) http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/08/28/us-world-firearms-idUSL2834893820070828do you honestly think a gun ban would get every last one of these guns turned in? are you stoned?No, again... that's why I'm not proposing that we ban them as an act of policy...What I'm saying is that the country would be a better place without guns.The pro-gun culture fuels and protects the use of guns for crimes.If we decided as a country that it was a priority, then we could get it done...Why do you keep complicating this?What I'm proposing is a change in the culture and change in the attitude, not a sweeping change in policy, an order handed down from the government...I'm suggesting we evolve...and how much better things could be if we did. Edited July 25, 2012 by magley64 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 What I'm saying is that the country would be a better place without guns.you mean just like england right? they are so much better off without them. you must have missed this.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKdBxpKqUvs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidgetTodd Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 I think the consensus is that he was after the "glory" of a mass murder. It makes sense to do it where there is the least probability that someone will fight back with equal force.Please refrain from bringing logic and and other sensible statements into Magz illogical gun hating argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 "defeatist attitude"? realistic attitude. you really do live in looney toon land. guns will never be as hard to acquire as tanks and nukes. thats the dumbest thing ive ever read. they are produced by the millions, world-wide, they are compact and easy to conceal and transport, and the price is relatively cheap, even for "illegal" gunshow many tanks can you put in a duffle bag and smuggle across the border?why are guns produced by the millions worldwide?because there is a GIANT market for them, and they are legal...(high demand)if there were a very narrow market, and a very high penalty for producing them, it probably wouldn't be worth the risk...Why are they cheap? because there are millions of them worldwide being produced (high supply)if they were expensive, rare, and illegal, they would be much harder to acquire... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidgetTodd Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Magz I am really starting to wonder about you man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 why are guns produced by the millions worldwide?because there is a GIANT market for them, and they are legal...(high demand)if there were a very narrow market, and a very high penalty for producing them, it probably wouldn't be worth the risk...Why are they cheap? because there are millions of them worldwide being produced (high supply)if they were expensive, rare, and illegal, they would be much harder to acquire...oh ok....so a world-wide gun ban.wow. ok magz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Please refrain from bringing logic and and other sensible statements into Magz illogical gun hating argument.again, I don't hate guns, I just think that they are unnecessary in a civilized world. If you're at war, fine...Hunting? seems like cheating, but whatever (generations of people hunted before guns were invented)... but just to carry around on your person day to day? how paranoid are you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coyote Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 ...I just think that they are unnecessary in a civilized world. Agreed. Too bad humans, generally speaking, are not and have never been civilized. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 oh ok....so a world-wide gun ban.wow. ok magz.no, a worldwide rejection of the purpose of a gun...Cars kill a lot of people, but they weren't designed with the explicit purpose of killing people. They were designed to carry people from place to place... in their development, they have become more efficient at doing that, carrying people from place to place faster, and more comfortably, using less fuel...Guns on the other hand, in their development have become more efficient at killing people, firing more bullets faster and more accurately...You can't get past the design intent... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Agreed. Too bad humans, generally speaking, are not and have never been civilized.I'm definitely an often disappointed optimist, but I believe most of us are... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 no, a worldwide rejection of the purpose of a gun...oh ok then. this makes perfect sense. a world-wide rejection on the purpose, which you have stated is "to kill people".....so basically, if everyone in the world just decided "hey, lets not kill people anymore....magley says itll be better"....youre such a smart person.you really should be up for a nobel peace prize for your amazing humanitarian work Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 maybe some day we can try it my way... your way seems to be working so well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidgetTodd Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 but just to carry around on your person day to day? how paranoid are you?Well, I have 3 bullet holes in me and one bullet still in my body because it was more risky to remove than to leave in. My now Ex has 1 bullet hole in her. We are both still alive today because I carry and didn't think twice about unloading on them. I don't call that paranoid, I prefer the term prepared Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidgetTodd Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Agreed. Too bad humans, generally speaking, are not and have never been civilized.Rep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Well, I have 3 bullet holes in me and one bullet still in my body because it was more risky to remove than to leave in. My now Ex has 1 bullet hole in her. We are both still alive today because I carry and didn't think twice about unloading on them. I don't call that paranoid, I prefer the term preparedwho shot at you, and why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shittygsxr Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 no, a worldwide rejection of the purpose of a gun...Cars kill a lot of people, but they weren't designed with the explicit purpose of killing people. They were designed to carry people from place to place... in their development, they have become more efficient at doing that, carrying people from place to place faster, and more comfortably, using less fuel...Guns on the other hand, in their development have become more efficient at killing people, firing more bullets faster and more accurately...You can't get past the design intent...necessity is the mother of invention Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kawi kid Posted July 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 We should make chicken fucking legal.*FULL RETARD MODE ENGAGED! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 (edited) I'm not a chicken rights activist, or a chickenatarian, or even a secular chickenist... do what you want with the chickens.. Edited July 25, 2012 by magley64 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jblosser Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Well, I have 3 bullet holes in me and one bullet still in my body because it was more risky to remove than to leave in. My now Ex has 1 bullet hole in her. We are both still alive today because I carry and didn't think twice about unloading on them. I don't call that paranoid, I prefer the term preparedYou should have sung Kum-fuckin'-baya with the bad guy(s), you paranoid person you.I for one am glad that you carried that day and are still around to tell us about it.I know Magz won't care (because anyone who believes in a higher power is just a worshiper of a fairy tale, and he's <way> too smart, sophisticated, and educated for that sort of nonsense) , but if you believe the Bible or the Koran (Qu'ran?), Cain killed Abel (or the other way 'round, i forget). The third person on the earth killed the fourth. So much for that whole 'peace and harmony' thing. Sucks, but violence and death, unfortunately, are a part of life. Ironic, isn't it?Ever watch Nat Geo? See some tribe of people in a jungle in East-by-God wherever that has little to no contact with the rest of the world? Killing goes on there, too.If I knew for a fact that I would never, ever need to defend myself or my boy (and I hated putting holes in targets at the range), then I would get rid of any and all firearms I might happen to own - if I hadn't already lost them in that horrible smelting incident.The above is submitted with all due respect to Mr. Magley. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 todd got shot because he goes to bad places and his elbows are midget-sized and therefore unable to be thrown with sufficient force to stop threats.silly todd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonik Posted July 25, 2012 Report Share Posted July 25, 2012 Magz' date=' you're wrong. Look at Mexico, for just one example. Some of the most strict gun control laws on this continent and people are being shot to death all the time. Prohibition will not fix the problem. It will just give those that desire to do evil that much more resolve.[/quote']Their laws might be more effective if the Obama administration stopped running find down there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.