Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 2/18/03 05:37 PM, EvilEgbert wrote: Simple question: Why is there much more dommestics gun related crime (and accidents) in the US then in Europe.
Now answer this question for yourself and you'll see my point.

i'll answer your question. the reason europe has less gun related crime/accidents is because of their own gun restrictions. the same logic applies here: take cars away, and accidents will decrease. do you want to do that, too? it would certainly make high speed police chases easier. why all the focus on guns? how about knife control? people kill people with knives. do you want to take those away, too?

you make it sound like guns are made for crime. they're not. i don't know what gave you that idea. guns are made for hunting, self-defense, ect. crime is a misuse of a gun like spraying an aerosol can in someone's eyes.

you make it sound like guns are made for crime. they're not. i don't know what gave you that idea. guns are made for hunting, self-defense, ect. crime is a misuse of a gun like spraying an aerosol can in someone's eyes.

See? This is the view I've had on gun control. I don't see why people don't see it like that. Less guns doesn't necessarily mean less crime...it means a bigger black market for the guns and people with black market links aren't the most savory people on the planet.

At 2/18/03 10:29 PM, swayside wrote: i'll answer your question. the reason europe has less gun related crime/accidents is because of their own gun restrictions. the same logic applies here: take cars away, and accidents will decrease. do you want to do that, too? it would certainly make high speed police chases easier. why all the focus on guns? how about knife control? people kill people with knives. do you want to take those away, too?

you make it sound like guns are made for crime. they're not. i don't know what gave you that idea. guns are made for hunting, self-defense, ect. crime is a misuse of a gun like spraying an aerosol can in someone's eyes.

The main function for a gun is killing which is good if it's done for hunting (for food not fun). The secundary function of a gun is self defense against other people with a gun. I don't know about you but I prefer not having to defend myself against a gun over defending myself against a gun WITH a gun.

As for your knife/car examples, those were not designed to kill. A car brings you to work everyday and a knife cuts your bread. My point: You can kill anyone with everything but a gun makes it to easy, you can run away from a knife but there's no running away from a gun.

You used aerosol cans as a comparison.
What if millions of people in the US carried them around, kept them in their houses, etc.
Threatened people with them? Sprayed people with them?
Would you be so against gun control if you were a victim?

At 2/19/03 07:01 AM, Ted_Easton wrote: You used aerosol cans as a comparison.
What if millions of people in the US carried them around, kept them in their houses, etc.
Threatened people with them? Sprayed people with them?
Would you be so against gun control if you were a victim?

i don't know why most of you assume that circumstances could change my views. if i was shot, my stand on gun control would remain the same. besides people already carry mace. do you want to ban that?

At 2/19/03 05:47 AM, EvilEgbert wrote: I don't know about you but I prefer not having to defend myself against a gun over defending myself against a gun WITH a gun.

What if gun control laws mean defending yourself against a gun WITHOUT a gun? As I said before, even if you ban guns, people determined to commit crimes will find ways to obtain them. Law-abiding citizens wouldn't be able to defend themselves, unless they also illegaly obtained a gun, and then they wouldn't be law-abiding citizens anymore, would they?

even if you ban guns, people determined to commit crimes will find ways to obtain them.

Yeah, that's what I said. Hah.

At 2/19/03 07:43 AM, TheEvilOne wrote: What if gun control laws mean defending yourself against a gun WITHOUT a gun? As I said before, even if you ban guns, people determined to commit crimes will find ways to obtain them. Law-abiding citizens wouldn't be able to defend themselves, unless they also illegaly obtained a gun, and then they wouldn't be law-abiding citizens anymore, would they?

I'm sure there are people out there that would threaten someone with a gun if only it was easier to get one. Now it's so difficult (or dangerous) to get one they just don't bother, and use other ways to make their statement.

At 2/19/03 05:47 AM, EvilEgbert wrote: The main function for a gun is killing which is good if it's done for hunting (for food not fun). The secundary function of a gun is self defense against other people with a gun. I don't know about you but I prefer not having to defend myself against a gun over defending myself against a gun WITH a gun.

As for your knife/car examples, those were not designed to kill. A car brings you to work everyday and a knife cuts your bread. My point: You can kill anyone with everything but a gun makes it to easy, you can run away from a knife but there's no running away from a gun.

So your saying that if a guy is gonna shoot you and you dont have a gun and cannot defend yourself, you would rather it be that way? So in other words, say your in an ammunitions rack and outside, accross the street is a person killing people. Now you have the opportunity to stop this man but your not going to because you dont want to get killed while holding a gun.

Another thing, guns are not make to kill. They are made to fire a small piece of copper and lead toward wherever the gun is pointed. Where that bullet goes is up to the person holding the gun. Not to the gun itself.

At 2/19/03 07:01 AM, Ted_Easton wrote: You used aerosol cans as a comparison.
What if millions of people in the US carried them around, kept them in their houses, etc.
Threatened people with them? Sprayed people with them?
Would you be so against gun control if you were a victim?

Im not Swayside but i wouldnt care if someone threatned me with an aerosol can. I would wear goggles =D. Also, aerosol cans are a good comparison. It doesnt matter the magnitude of the item, it matters the context the comparison is used in. Just like stealing, if you steal $100 dollors or 1 penny it doesnt matter, you are still stealing.

At 2/19/03 07:01 AM, Ted_Easton wrote: You used aerosol cans as a comparison.
What if millions of people in the US carried them around, kept them in their houses, etc.
Threatened people with them? Sprayed people with them?
Would you be so against gun control if you were a victim?

Im not Swayside but i wouldnt care if someone threatned me with an aerosol can. I would wear goggles =D. Also, aerosol cans are a good comparison. It doesnt matter the magnitude of the item, it matters the context the comparison is used in. Just like stealing, if you steal $100 dollors or 1 penny it doesnt matter, you are still stealing. The point swayside was trying to convay was that if someone threatned you with whatever, what are you going to do to that person? Take his object away and say "nono" or punish the person himself?

At 2/19/03 07:02 PM, Sirterox wrote:

At 2/19/03 07:01 AM, Ted_Easton wrote:

Just like stealing, if you steal $100 dollors or 1 penny it doesnt matter, you are still stealing.

I hear this one far too much

At 2/19/03 07:13 PM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote:

At 2/19/03 07:02 PM, Sirterox wrote:

At 2/19/03 07:01 AM, Ted_Easton wrote:

Just like stealing, if you steal $100 dollors or 1 penny it doesnt matter, you are still stealing.

I hear this one far too much

Yes the infamous phrase that all of us have heard. Fits quit quite well dont it?

At 2/19/03 07:13 PM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote:

At 2/19/03 07:02 PM, Sirterox wrote:

At 2/19/03 07:01 AM, Ted_Easton wrote:

Just like stealing, if you steal $100 dollors or 1 penny it doesnt matter, you are still stealing.

I hear this one far too much

repetition doesn't make it any less true.

If guns were banned in the United States the same thing would happen with them as happened with alchohol during prohibition and is happening with drugs today.

A large black market would form around it and criminals would prosper while the left of us are left without defense.

I suggest that all of you go out immediately and buy one of these....you know for defense

http://www.smith-wesson.com/Products/Firearms/m500.htm

damn link

http://www.smith-wesson.com/Products/Firearms/m500.htm

Welll fuck it

At 2/20/03 08:51 PM, implodinggoat wrote: Welll fuck it

lol

At 2/20/03 08:48 PM, implodinggoat wrote: If guns were banned in the United States the same thing would happen with them as happened with alchohol during prohibition and is happening with drugs today.

A large black market would form around it and criminals would prosper while the left of us are left without defense.

I suggest that all of you go out immediately and buy one of these....you know for defense

I totaly agree with you. No one can prove me wrong when i say that guns are not deadly unless they are in the hands of a person with murderous intent.

At 2/20/03 09:09 PM, Sirterox wrote:

I totaly agree with you. No one can prove me wrong when i say that guns are not deadly unless they are in the hands of a person with murderous intent.

accidents happen.

What happend it.Need help...
tratra tatata ...
the gun cannot changes your life person.

Um... I didn't say about stealing the 100$. That was Sirterox.

At 2/20/03 09:28 PM, swayside wrote:

At 2/20/03 09:09 PM, Sirterox wrote:

I totaly agree with you. No one can prove me wrong when i say that guns are not deadly unless they are in the hands of a person with murderous intent.

accidents happen.

Yeah yeah, shut up swaside.

At 2/21/03 07:09 PM, Sirterox wrote:

At 2/20/03 09:28 PM, swayside wrote:

At 2/20/03 09:09 PM, Sirterox wrote:

I totaly agree with you. No one can prove me wrong when i say that guns are not deadly unless they are in the hands of a person with murderous intent.

accidents happen.

Yeah yeah, shut up swaside.

don't push it. i'mn probably your greatest ally in this topic.

Personally, myself being trained to wield all sorts of firearms. I bieleve that a person should have the right to own guns only if they are properly trained. And i agree with the first couple of posts felons and criminals should not be able to obtian firearms.

At 2/21/03 08:07 PM, Jax_Cross wrote: Personally, myself being trained to wield all sorts of firearms. I bieleve that a person should have the right to own guns only if they are properly trained. And i agree with the first couple of posts felons and criminals should not be able to obtian firearms.

good points. i think gun ownership should be policed, not restricted. also, like ex-cons can't work at casinos, i don't think ex-cons should own guns.

At 2/21/03 08:58 PM, swayside wrote:

At 2/21/03 08:07 PM, Jax_Cross wrote:

good points. i think gun ownership should be policed, not restricted. also, like ex-cons can't work at casinos, i don't think ex-cons should own guns.

Now if we could only get some of these guys in the Senate, all would be well.

At 2/21/03 09:42 PM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote:

Now if we could only get some of these guys in the Senate, all would be well.

if only...

I think guns should be banned for definite. Think back to the washington sniper his gun was bought online. Guns are that easy to get hold of i cant believe it. If guns were banned they would be a helluva lot harder to get hold of. As for people protecting their homes with guns i dont believe it does. Think of the amount of times a kid has shot himself or arsed around with his dads guns or any other major fuck ups with the family. I do think law enforcement should have guns though but NOT ordinary people.

People say that if you were attacked with a gun and you had no gun because of guns being banned are missing the point.
Take away the right to buy guns and take them off people and there WILL be less killing. It doesnt matter if people still have knives coz theres still the same amount of knife killings with guns banned as there are without. Think of how easy it would be for a terrorist to buy and ak and seriously fuck up your home town or whatever.