Times like these...

[Ranndom]

Are what make the firearm community the best community on the planet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmFxzp45DOc

[myriverse]

Never been in a situation that could have been improved by a gun.

[Nocsucow]

love it..... bet it was a blast!!!!

[iruinedyourday]

In an era where mass shootings are at a ridiculously all time high, this community things its appropriate to shoot machine guns off of trucks and post videos on the internet to glorify them.

Community is trash.

[Lurikeen]

I've never met an anti-gun liberal yet who doesn't love to go out shooting. They're like Baptists who drink beer. They can't get enough. :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6Ex2rVOUWs

<
<
<

[Lune]

Man all those killing machines gave me a huge boner. I too enjoy fantasizing about wrapping my cold dead hands (https://youtu.be/N0Wn3Eey6dY) around an anti-tank rifle and using it to unzip a home intruder's torso. Operator as fuck son.

[Flunklesnarkin]

This is what libruls actually believe

https://i.imgur.com/Sk70fqI.jpg

[Aviann]

Never been in a situation that could have been improved by a gun.

You've never had a gun then, buttercup.

[Orruar]

Never been in a situation that could have been improved by a gun.

Well I suspect being at the shooting range would be improved by having a gun. Otherwise you're just sitting around watching others shoot, and that's not half as fun.

[iruinedyourday]

hehe I like how conservatives have a super detail oriented and wide breadth of imagination about how something they like could be good, but when they hear about something like socialism they are like THAT'S NAZI SHIT END OF CONVERSATION.

[Orruar]

In an era where mass shootings are at a ridiculously all time high...

Where do you get your information? Mass shootings are not at an all time high, let alone a ridiculous one. Do you just make up your own facts to best support whatever stupid opinion makes you feel good?

http://wmbriggs.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/mass.shootings.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-nb5PYLgTAOQ/Vg7PMGtbRGI/AAAAAAAAGnQ/RRIgTdaKi84/s1600/shooting%2B3.jpg

http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/School-Firearm-Deaths-K-12-Univ.jpeg

[iruinedyourday]

can we just leave this thread as a snarky comment thread cus it was p goog up until now. I will try to add one more

Cool data on gun violence, hmm does that come from the cdc? oh no thats right gun fanatics ban anyone doing any non biased meaningful research. (http://www.mintpressnews.com/congress-quietly-extends-ban-on-cdc-research-on-gun-violence/207237/)

Where did you get yours the NRA? nice, ill refrain from discussing this with you on this forum from this point forward.

http://media2.giphy.com/media/Fml0fgAxVx1eM/giphy.gif

But before I go, here's another conservative graph that proves all your points, linking graphs without citing sources is fun yay!

http://static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com/politifact%2Fphotos%2Fmega-center-release-graphic.jpg

Graphs are drawings they dont mean anything right? You juse use them to prove a point! yay!

http://24.media.tumblr.com/6100827635b3ef4bbfac7c4473803ed5/tumblr_mkfh3sMSd81rfi2izo2_400.gif

[Flunklesnarkin]

Stastics and numbers

*yawn*

http://img.pr0gramm.com/2015/09/05/e9351e0c929e0b97.jpg

[iruinedyourday]

I like how this pic basically sums up everything that no life virgins require to go on a shooting spree.

[Nocsucow]

I like how this pic basically sums up everything that no life virgins require to go on a shooting spree.

wtf is wrong with you??? where are your balls? nm I don't mind people like you. . when shit hits the fan people like you will be easy to take from in our time of need.

[iruinedyourday]

when shit hits the fan this will be you getting rescued after shooting all your neighbors

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view1/1220533/the-mist-ending-o.gif

[Lune]

wtf is wrong with you??? where are your balls? nm I don't mind people like you. . when shit hits the fan people like you will be easy to take from in our time of need.

Oh god he actually fantasizes about the collapse of society, lol

In your fantasy I bet you're a cool, calm, and collected gunslinger who everyone looks to for strength and guidance.

Nice to know the rule of law and a strong government is the only thing keeping scum like you from stealing from your neighbors, though.

[Nocsucow]

Oh god he actually fantasizes about the collapse of society, lol

In your fantasy I bet you're a cool, calm, and collected gunslinger who everyone looks to for strength and guidance.

Nice to know the rule of law and a strong government is the only thing keeping scum like you from stealing from your neighbors, though.


the law is not keeping me from doing shit.... I just know I've paid money and time for numerous types of training to prepare me for pretty much anything. .. sorry if you're weak pathetic sheep.

[VesperianSorrow]

wtf is wrong with you??? where are your balls? nm I don't mind people like you. . when shit hits the fan people like you will be easy to take from in our time of need.

Post disaster looter type confirmed. Please don't breed.

[iruinedyourday]

funny how gun fanatics jump to anger so quickly kek

[Orruar]

Where did you get yours the NRA? nice, ill refrain from discussing this with you on this forum from this point forward.

So when presented with evidence contradicting your stupid opinions, you attack the source of the data (which is not the NRA) and then claim that you won't discuss this topic any further. And then you wonder why people don't bother engaging you with facts and instead just insult your obvious sub-80 IQ.

I can understand why you wouldn't want to continue discussing this topic though. In the last two discussions, you managed to contradict yourself in under 24 hours. Even someone with a mental disability would be embarrassed to continue doing that.

[iruinedyourday]

god look orrur wont quit lol just stop you obviously are not capable of having a rational debate so i wont get into it with you.

that said, how many times do i have to say the evendince you presented is not valid and fake and you are full of poop

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Iruindyourday's new thing is to claim a thread has gone to shit whenever his own narrative writes himself into a corner.

[iruinedyourday]

no my new thing is not to get into cyclial arguments with people that just ad hominem and provide no evidence for any of their statements.

[Nocsucow]

Post disaster looter type confirmed. Please don't breed.

daughter turned 7 .... son due in January. ..

[Flunklesnarkin]

post more girl pics


https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/61/2e/f4/612ef41d30135ad9b65fc2cc9996791e.jpg

[iruinedyourday]

get rid of the gun and add more girls i say, and hell throw in one dog why not.

http://www.damplips.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/naked-girls.jpg

[Lojik]

I personally don't have guns or have a desire to shoot them, but I think other people owning (legal) guns creates more positive externalities than negative.

[iruinedyourday]

I dont mind people owning guns either, its the like juiced up roided out extreme culture that we have surrounding them that I dont like.

[Lune]

I've paid money and time for numerous types of training to prepare me for pretty much anything. .. sorry if you're weak pathetic sheep.

http://i.imgur.com/wWgEB80.jpg

[sOurDieSel]

better watch out or iruinedyourday is going to cry to sirken and 'shut this thread down' rofl

[Orruar]

you obviously are not capable of having a rational debate

that said, how many times do i have to say the evendince you presented is not valid and fake and you are full of poop

Ah yes, the hallmark of rational debate. Calling someone's "evendince" fake rather than engaging with facts that run counter to your opinion.

And the sources for all of these could be found by a simple google search of the graph's title. Since I'm concerned you might not be able to perform this task properly, here are the links along with information on where the source data came from.

http://wmbriggs.com/post/7031/
The data are from Grant Duwe, director of research and evaluation at the Minnesota Department of Corrections, from his book Mass Murder in the United States: A History, reported by the Washington Post.

http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44126.pdf
This comes from the Congressional Research Group, which is a non-partisan part of the Library of Congress, whose job it is to collect data for the Congress of the US.

http://crimeresearch.org/2014/06/updated-information-on-k-12-school-shootings-deaths-the-number-of-deaths-has-been-declining-over-time/
The graph was created by the Crime Prevention Research Center. You can debate the impartiality of this group, but the data comes directly from the National School Safety Center, which is an impartial and non-partisan group. Here is the data source, so that you can confirm the numbers for yourself (not that you'd bother to spend an ounce of energy researching facts that don't conform to your preexisting world view)
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=c2Nob29sc2FmZXR5LnVzfG5zc2N8Z3g6NWFlZDdjZjBj MGY1Yjc3Mw

[Lune]

The fact that mass murders are declining isn't all that important. The meaningful figure is the relatively high rate of mass murders in the US compared to our peers... not that it has all that much to do with guns though. I'd blame the excessive individualism, isolation, and alienation inherent in our culture and economy that breeds mental illness and hopelessness, before I'd blame guns.

[iruinedyourday]

The thing with your comparison's orrur is they are putting gang related shootings, maphia shootings drug related, CRIME (which yes IS down) and compairing them to school shootings or public shootings where normal kids or beta cuck freaks are taking thier parents and thier own legally bought guns and shooting up the place. THAT type of shooting is on the rise and thats what im talking about.

All i have to say is its fucking ridiculous that you are going to sit there and aruge argue argue about this jesus you are a broken fucking record.

[iruinedyourday]

not that it has all that much to do with guns though. I'd blame the excessive individualism, isolation, and alienation inherent in our culture and economy that breeds mental illness and hopelessness, before I'd blame guns.

I blame gun culture and all the look how awesome guns are! Ninjas of the future shoot machineguns at shit woo fuck yea guns!

Guns should be something we respect not fucking treat like a jet ski.

[Lune]

I blame gun culture and all the look how awesome guns are! Ninjas of the future shoot machineguns at shit woo fuck yea guns!

Guns should be something we respect not fucking treat like a jet ski.

I don't think most mass murderers are gun enthusiasts, though. Some of them are. The Columbine kids were. But I think that was only incidental.

I just can't see how the will to commit a mass murder is in any way tied to gun machismo. I think if you believe gun culture is conducive to mass murder, you'd have to also believe playing violent first person shooters is conducive to mass murder. I've loved Grand Theft Auto my entire life, and I think it's awesome to yank someone out of their car, bust their head open with a machete, and then murder a couple cops and pedestrians in cold blood. Does that mean I have any less respect for cops, pedestrians, and machetes in real life? No. I wouldn't like it if somebody tried to ban my Grand Theft Auto in some rash and ill-advised crusade to stop gun violence, and I think we owe responsible gun enthusiasts the same courtesy.

That's not to say I wouldn't be in favor of requiring a robust licensing process and registration associated with firearm ownership, especially when it's something outrageous like a .50 cal sniper rifle or heavy machine gun. Of course, that's not gonna stop me from making fun of some rednecks, because being a gun nut often goes hand in hand with some other idiosyncracies, like hating the federal government, survivalist fantasies, and libertarianism. I mean, look how quickly a little provocation in this thread was able to summon someone like Nocsucow to brag about how he can't wait to shoot his neighbors. I'm pretty sure Noc would still be a sociopath whether he had a gun or not. Why America seems to produce so many people like him, I'll never know.

[iruinedyourday]

I don't think most mass murderers are gun enthusiasts, though. Some of them are. The Columbine kids were. But I think that was only incidental.

I just can't see how the will to commit a mass murder is in any way tied to gun machismo. I think if you believe gun culture is conducive to mass murder, you'd have to also believe playing violent first person shooters is conducive to mass murder. I've loved Grand Theft Auto my entire life, and I think it's awesome to yank someone out of their car, bust their head open with a machete, and then murder a couple cops and pedestrians in cold blood. Does that mean I have any less respect for cops, pedestrians, and machetes in real life? No. I wouldn't like it if somebody tried to ban my Grand Theft Auto in some rash and ill-advised crusade to stop gun violence, and I think we owe responsible gun enthusiasts the same courtesy.

Well, the difference between grand theft auto and pro gun extremists enthusiasts is.. one is a video game and the other is real life.

For example, if someone posts about GTA and we talk about GTA and blowing up a building or steeling a car in GTA, we're talking about how much fun a video game is.

Gun culture says that people are going to kill you, that you need to defend yourself, that if you dont shoot first then you're going to get shot, that you can solve problems with guns, that its your right to solve problems with guns, that people you disagree with are idiots, that idiots are worthless, that people who are worthless are criminals that criminals should be shot, that all your problems can be solved with a gun.

That is talking about real life. They insist that this is a REAL concern. Just like nosc, he trains in the art of self defense to protect himself from REAL life. Not a video game.

Its no surprise to me why someone who is already unstable and lives at home and posts anonymously on the internet, gets inspired to do something stupid with a gun in these situations, especially if they are not just surrounded with guns and gun culture on anonymous forums, but they are surrounded with it in their homes schools and social circles.

The first responce from anyone who is pro gun, even if they are one of the 'good smart ones who are trained in gun use', even in this thread is, 'you're a fucking idiot pussy in real life'... how can you expect that attitude to NOT encourage bad behavior?

nawimsayin? Im just sayin' :)

[Nocsucow]

Well, the difference between grand theft auto and pro gun extremists enthusiasts is.. one is a video game and the other is real life.

For example, if someone posts about GTA and we talk about GTA and blowing up a building or steeling a car in GTA, we're talking about how much fun a video game is.

Gun culture says that people are going to kill you, that you need to defend yourself, that if you dont shoot first then you're going to get shot, that you can solve problems with guns, that its your right to solve problems with guns, that people you disagree with are idiots, that idiots are worthless, that people who are worthless are criminals that criminals should be shot, that all your problems can be solved with a gun.

That is talking about real life. They insist that this is a REAL concern. Just like nosc, he trains in the art of self defense to protect himself from REAL life. Not a video game.

Its no surprise to me why someone who is already unstable and lives at home and posts anonymously on the internet, gets inspired to do something stupid with a gun in these situations, especially if they are not just surrounded with guns and gun culture on anonymous forums, but they are surrounded with it in their homes schools and social circles.

The first responce from anyone who is pro gun, even if they are one of the 'good smart ones who are trained in gun use', even in this thread is, 'you're a fucking idiot pussy in real life'... how can you expect that attitude to NOT encourage bad behavior?

nawimsayin? Im just sayin' :)

odds are so far that if anyone goes nutz on these forum's they're likely to use a blunt object . such as mace or maybe even a Bo staff. with mace attacks at a all time high right now I think we should ban all 1h and 2hb's .

[iruinedyourday]

you say I have no balls, but im the only one here standing in a room full of extremists gun lovers and saying, 'yo u muthafuckas is stupid!'

takes some balls if you ask me kek

[Nocsucow]

you say I have no balls, but im the only one here standing in a room full of extremists gun lovers and saying, 'yo u muthafuckas is stupid!'

takes some balls if you ask me kek

are you really standing in a room full of gun extremist? because it's seems to me like you're on a elf sim forum being a pussy

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I have balls on the internet.

Yeah, let's see you in real life. Oh wait, I already know your type, the type who pulls a fire alarm on a college campus to run out a speaker with a "problematic" opinion because actually debating them would give them a platform. We can't go around giving people guilty of wrongthink a platform now...

[iruinedyourday]

are you really standing in a room full of gun extremist? because it's seems to me like your on a elf sim forum being a pussy

now thats the kind of snarky comment I can pras

http://i.imgur.com/PVFSBsQ.gif

[iruinedyourday]

Yeah, let's see you in real life. Oh wait, I already know your type, the type who pulls a fire alarm on a college campus to run out a speaker with a "problematic" opinion because actually debating them would give them a platform. We can't go around giving people guilty of wrongthink a platform now...

cool ad hominem your arguments are strong.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Prove me wrong fairy boy.

[Nocsucow]

now thats the kind of snarky comment I can pras

http://i.imgur.com/PVFSBsQ.gif

I know alot of pussy ass dudes in RL who hate the sight /sound of weapons . I live in TN where our guns are more important than most objects in life.. I know a few guys who drive 25 year old vehicle that barely run but has $20,000 in weaponry and ammo. I'm not a " gun extremist " but I love my weapons.. I haven't gone " overboard " but I have 5 pistols , 3 shot guns , 2 ar 15s 1 ak 47 and 1 sks , about 10,000 rounds between all weapons. I carry my glock 22 and 1 if my ar's in my truck everywhere , my wife carries her 380 in her car and has a judge in her purse. I'm not paranoid at all. instead of asking me why do I have so much and carry that with me.... ask yourself why not?.. I'm protected, my wife is protected , most importantly. .. my kids are protected..

[Sidelle]

I can practically hear you popping a boner as you describe your guns... Lol. Serious question: do any of your guns have names? Be honest... :)

[Nocsucow]

I can practically hear you popping a boner as you describe your guns... Lol. Serious question: do any of your guns have names? Be honest... :)
lol no I have not named my weapons.... lmfao.. I need to tho.. I'm going to call my everyday carry Sidelle :)

[Orruar]

The thing with your comparison's orrur is they are putting gang related shootings, maphia shootings drug related, CRIME (which yes IS down) and compairing them to school shootings or public shootings where normal kids or beta cuck freaks are taking thier parents and thier own legally bought guns and shooting up the place. THAT type of shooting is on the rise and thats what im talking about.


Except that if you actually read my sources, they explicitly do NOT include gang and other crime-related shootings. From the first link:

Duwe defines a mass public shooting as an incident in which four or more victims are killed publicly with guns within 24 hours — in the workplace, schools, restaurants and other public places — excluding shootings in connection with crimes such as robbery, drugs or gangs.

Hell, you didn't even need to click on a link for the second or third graph, since it states clearly in the title or subnotes of the graph:

the murders are not attributable to any other underlying criminal activity or commonplace circumstance

non-gang.

You continue to completely ignore any evidence that runs contrary to your preexisting opinion, and then you wonder why people just resort to calling you a fucking idiot instead of actually engaging. Fucking idiot. You're wrong about mass shootings at schools being at an all time high and there no way anyone can take you seriously until you admit that reality runs contrary to what you believe.

[Orruar]

The fact that mass murders are declining isn't all that important.

It's not? If mass murders are being pushed as the reason for the need for new gun regulations, wouldn't it follow that empirical data about mass murders would be important? And when someone comes here and claims to base their opinion on the supposed fact that mass murders are at a ridiculous all time high, perhaps it's important to point out that the data actually contradicts that viewpoint. Of course, that doesn't really apply in this case, since we all know iruinedyourday just bases his opinion on whatever stupid thought floats through his head and makes him feel like a good person. It's that kind of anti-scientific thinking that all people of reason should be fighting against.

I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time -- when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness...

[Lurikeen]

That's not to say I wouldn't be in favor of requiring a robust licensing process and registration associated with firearm ownership, especially when it's something outrageous like a .50 cal sniper rifle or heavy machine gun.

Fully automatic machine guns are not legal to buy in the USA unless they are collectors items, and then you have to file a hellish amount of paper work in order to purchase the collector item.

Regarding the purchase of the .50 caliber "sniper rifle." The Feds require a background check (NICS) for the purchase of long guns, shotguns, handguns and including the .50 caliber (form 4473). Some states have additional checks (like Maryland). Private sales are exempt from the back ground check in most states, but rest assured that the liberals are fighting hard, state to state, to ensure that private gun owners will be required to do a gun check before they can sell their firearm.

There is also a movement, notably in California, to have firearms dealers and retail stores perform a background check for ammunition purchases.

Any way... any law abiding citizen is going through a shit load of paperwork to buy a weapon now days. The people you should be concerned about are the law breakers who give a damn. In which case there is no amount of gun legislation that will stop them. They are going to kill you with something no matter what, and they will get a gun if they really want one. You can't stop them.

[Lurikeen]

I know alot of pussy ass dudes in RL who hate the sight /sound of weapons . I live in TN where our guns are more important than most objects in life.. I know a few guys who drive 25 year old vehicle that barely run but has $20,000 in weaponry and ammo. I'm not a " gun extremist " but I love my weapons.. I haven't gone " overboard " but I have 5 pistols , 3 shot guns , 2 ar 15s 1 ak 47 and 1 sks , about 10,000 rounds between all weapons. I carry my glock 22 and 1 if my ar's in my truck everywhere , my wife carries her 380 in her car and has a judge in her purse. I'm not paranoid at all. instead of asking me why do I have so much and carry that with me.... ask yourself why not?.. I'm protected, my wife is protected , most importantly. .. my kids are protected..

Right on! You can't have too many guns. The only issue I have is when my wife thinks I have killed the budget! :D

[Nocsucow]

Right on! You can't have too many guns. The only issue I have is when my wife thinks I have killed the budget! :D
lol my wife is very supportive in anything I do. but I know my limits on spending....

[iruinedyourday]

heh so if responsible gun owners buy piles of guns, name them, carry them around everywhere and throw them in their trucks and get agitated when someone disagree's with them.

Well shit, I dont know what to say, sounds like responsible gun owners are the problem after all!

[Nocsucow]

heh so if responsible gun owners buy piles of guns, name them, carry them around everywhere and throw them in their trucks and get agitated when someone disagree's with them.

Well shit, I dont know what to say, sounds like responsible gun owners are the problem after all!

are you fucking stupid?

[iruinedyourday]

lol jesus prove my point much?

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

heh so if responsible gun owners buy piles of guns, name them, carry them around everywhere and throw them in their trucks and get agitated when someone disagree's with them.

Well shit, I dont know what to say, sounds like responsible gun owners are the problem after all!

Wat

[Nocsucow]

lol jesus prove my point much?

you just don't make any sense and it's irritating...

[iruinedyourday]

this thread: 0/10

[Lurikeen]

heh so if responsible gun owners buy piles of guns, name them, carry them around everywhere and throw them in their trucks and get agitated when someone disagree's with them.

Well shit, I dont know what to say, sounds like responsible gun owners are the problem after all!

Can I just shoot you through my computer screen right now! :rolleyes:

Yeah, your comment is stupid. I mean no offense.

[Lune]

It's not? If mass murders are being pushed as the reason for the need for new gun regulations, wouldn't it follow that empirical data about mass murders would be important? And when someone comes here and claims to base their opinion on the supposed fact that mass murders are at a ridiculous all time high, perhaps it's important to point out that the data actually contradicts that viewpoint. Of course, that doesn't really apply in this case, since we all know iruinedyourday just bases his opinion on whatever stupid thought floats through his head and makes him feel like a good person. It's that kind of anti-scientific thinking that all people of reason should be fighting against.

What you quoted is out of context. I'm saying an increase in mass murders shouldn't be pushed as the reason for gun regulations, because I agree with you, it's factually false. The USA having a relatively high rate of mass murders, however, is factually true to the best of my knowledge. (The US leads the world in spree incidents but not fatalities per capita, obviously). Note that I don't see this as justification of gun laws. Honestly I appreciate that you went through the trouble to post those sources and I looked through them myself to see where they got their data and if they were appropriately rigorous, how their variables were defined etc, and it looked good.

Fully automatic machine guns are not legal to buy in the USA unless they are collectors items, and then you have to file a hellish amount of paper work in order to purchase the collector item.

Regarding the purchase of the .50 caliber "sniper rifle." The Feds require a background check (NICS) for the purchase of long guns, shotguns, handguns and including the .50 caliber (form 4473). Some states have additional checks (like Maryland). Private sales are exempt from the back ground check in most states, but rest assured that the liberals are fighting hard, state to state, to ensure that private gun owners will be required to do a gun check before they can sell their firearm.

There is also a movement, notably in California, to have firearms dealers and retail stores perform a background check for ammunition purchases.

You and I both know many of these laws are so poorly enforced and have so many easy loopholes and half-assed bureaucracy as to be nearly useless in many places. I know several people who have completely illegal (California) guns obtained legally (Nevada, Washington) in other places. Avoiding many of these laws is currently as easy as crossing a state line.

Any way... any law abiding citizen is going through a shit load of paperwork to buy a weapon now days. The people you should be concerned about are the law breakers who give a damn. In which case there is no amount of gun legislation that will stop them. They are going to kill you with something no matter what, and they will get a gun if they really want one. You can't stop them.

Such painfully binary logic. Of course people are still going to break laws and kill me. Does that mean we shouldn't make laws at all? This isn't a black and white issue. Good regulations and enforcement have the capacity to reduce the incidence of these events, not eliminate them. It's like saying, well, if corporations are going to go through so much trouble evading taxes, Hollywood accounting, hiding money offshore, and just basically committing tax fraud, why even bother taxing them at all, if all you do is inconvenience honest corporations? That's not how laws work.

Dylann Roof, Elliot Rodger, and James Holmes all had either a criminal record or long, documented history of serious mental illness, and were nonetheless able to pass the meager, dysfunctional background check requirements in their states and purchase guns legally. Would these scumbags have eventually obtained a firearm somehow? Maybe. Would many psychos still slip through the net? Yes. But, assuming regulations were strengthened at the federal level, it would have been far more difficult. So why not? Because you can't be bothered to fill out a little bit of additional paperwork or wait a little bit longer? There's no reason not to do these things. If you don't have a criminal record or a long history of documented mental illness, you have nothing to worry about anyway. You want to keep guns out of the hands of criminals? Then stop thinking about gun ownership as a right instead of a privilege. It isn't 1783 anymore and a musket is not an assault rifle.

If you want to drive a car, you have to demonstrate a certain level of intelligence and proficiency (the bar is low). If you want to buy a gun, you should have to demonstrate you have no criminal record and no history of mental illness, no matter where in the United States you're trying to buy a gun. That's all I'm asking. I like guns, I'm a gun owner myself, I go shooting sometimes. Gun ownership and use is a wholesome American tradition. Some people take it too fucking far.

[Nocsucow]

you should have to demonstrate you have no criminal record and no history of mental illness, no matter where in the United States you're trying to buy a gun.

I 10000% agree with this.. but.. all that shit won't stop anyone from getting a gun if they want one.

[iruinedyourday]

Can I just shoot you through my computer screen right now! :rolleyes:

Yeah, your comment is stupid. I mean no offense.

Is this your idea of a joke? or somekind of sarcasm?

I've never been even remotely unkind to you, you however have ended all our disagreements with rage and now threats of violence.


This fucking forum is shit.

[Nocsucow]

Is this your idea of a joke? or somekind of sarcasm?

I've never been even remotely unkind to you, you however have ended all our disagreements with rage and now threats of violence.


This fucking forum is shit.

have you not read some of the shit you have posted on these forums?

[Lune]

I 10000% agree with this.. but.. all that shit won't stop anyone from getting a gun if they want one.

Of course people are still going to break laws and kill me. Does that mean we shouldn't make laws at all? This isn't a black and white issue. Good regulations and enforcement have the capacity to reduce the incidence of these events, not eliminate them. It's like saying, well, if corporations are going to go through so much trouble evading taxes, Hollywood accounting, hiding money offshore, and just basically committing tax fraud, why even bother taxing them at all, if all you do is inconvenience honest corporations? That's not how laws work.

[Nocsucow]

mire laws = more punishment for the good people who do everything legit....

[iruinedyourday]

have you not read some of the shit you have posted on these forums?

considering you have never been able to have any respons other than calling me a pussy or saying what, i assume you haven't read anything Ive posted on these forums.

You guys just hate anyone who disagrees with you and I hate everyone who attacks me for disagreeing with them

[iruinedyourday]

mire laws = more punishment for the good people who do everything legit....

you act like requiring you to learn how to drive and regestering your car and paying fee's is punishment.

[Nocsucow]

you act like requiring you to learn how to drive and regestering your car and paying fee's is punishment.

you can't register a car without a license which requires you to learn how to drive and then you pay fees and money for all actions above..

[iruinedyourday]

you can't register a car without a license which requires you to learn how to drive and then you pay fees and money for all actions above..

Do you understand the metaphor I was trying to make?

[Lurikeen]

Is this your idea of a joke? or somekind of sarcasm?

I've never been even remotely unkind to you, you however have ended all our disagreements with rage and now threats of violence.


This fucking forum is shit.

Rage? Threats of violence? Oh, dear. Probably a good thing you don't own a firearm.

[Lurikeen]

Such painfully binary logic. Of course people are still going to break laws and kill me. Does that mean we shouldn't make laws at all? This isn't a black and white issue.

Binary logic? No. It is logic you willfully ignore. We could make all the laws we desire, and some of them will be good laws, but they will not stop some nutcase from picking up a rock and crushing your skull. So should we regulate what types of rocks you can own? Need a license to own a rock? I think not. However, I can bet my point has been wasted, since your mind is made up.

[iruinedyourday]

Rage? Threats of violence? Oh, dear. Probably a good thing you don't own a firearm.

who says I dont, I just dont jack off to it and talk about it like its a pet. :P

Binary logic? No. It is logic you willfully ignore. We could make all the laws we desire, and some of them will be good laws, but they will not stop some nutcase from picking up a rock and crushing your skull. So should we regulate what types of rocks you can own? Need a license to own a rock? I think not. However, I can bet my point has been wasted, since your mind is made up.

Honestly it sounds like your mind is made up. Whenever anyone has anything to say on this topic gun owners such as your self just imidiatly shut it down with arguments like comparing the deadlyness of a rock compared to a gun. Sigh.

[Lune]

Binary logic? No. It is logic you willfully ignore. We could make all the laws we desire, and some of them will be good laws, but they will not stop some nutcase from picking up a rock and crushing your skull. So should we regulate what types of rocks you can own? Need a license to own a rock? I think not. However, I can bet my point has been wasted, since your mind is made up.

If you're asking whether I'd rather have somebody try to bash my head with a rock, because the gun was illegal, then fuck yes I would. It is far more difficult to rob a bank or shoot up a school with a rock.

Regulating the professional conduct of doctors and lawyers through a medical/bar association will not stop the unethical conduct of some doctors and lawyers, so does that mean we should not make rules governing the conduct of a profession? Crooked physicians are still gonna sling opiates, so why bother, right?

Why can't you people understand that the fact that people break laws isn't an argument against the concept of laws?

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

who says I dont.

Walking contradiction if there ever was one.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Why can't you people understand that the fact that people break laws isn't an argument against the concept of laws?

The pendulum goes both ways though. Airport security for example.

[iruinedyourday]

Walking contradiction if there ever was one.

not ONCE have I said I dont agree with ownership. not even once.

Walking hypocrate that doesnt read anyone's posts and just try to ad hominem to shut up people I disagree with.

[Lune]

The pendulum goes both ways though. Airport security for example.

I don't understand, you mean airport security goes too far? Maybe they do. They aren't great at catching people either.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

not ONCE have I said I dont agree with ownership. not even once.

You've said multiple times in multiple threads that you "hate guns" and that you support universal bans. Get the fuck out of here with your bullshit.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I don't understand, you mean airport security goes too far? Maybe they do. They aren't great at catching people either.

That's the point.

Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

[Lune]

That's the point.

Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

Sacrificing liberty for security is the basic founding principle of human civilization and the social contract. We sacrifice certain liberties for certain protections inherent in the social order of civilization. It's one of the underpinnings of the political philosophy of John Locke, upon which our system is based.

Believe it or not, Benjamin Franklin was talking about specific issues regarding taxation and sovereignty on the American frontier.

[Lurikeen]

Why can't you people understand that the fact that people break laws isn't an argument against the concept of laws?

You are demonstrating how you miss the point. It isn't that your opponent has given you flawed logic, it is that you are willfully ignoring the reasoning given to you. No kidding people break laws, duh! You're assuming that people who aren't like you are nitwits. What you don't want to understand is that an armed public is actually a good resolution to certain problems of public safety (Private gun ownership Bad! More guns bad! Right?). That goes beyond your comprehension because you have adopted the lie that more regulation equals more safety. That's why your're getting bashed with rock metaphors and the like (pun intended, since I like bad puns). The point is, the regulations you desire aren't making you safe.

[Lurikeen]

Honestly it sounds like your mind is made up. Whenever anyone has anything to say on this topic gun owners such as your self just imidiatly shut it down with arguments like comparing the deadlyness of a rock compared to a gun. Sigh.

My mind is made up. I own guns. Did you think I was gunning to dump all my guns because some "dude" on a game board was crying about them?

[Lune]

You are demonstrating how you miss the point. It isn't that your opponent has given you flawed logic, it is that you are willfully ignoring the reasoning given to you. No kidding people break laws, duh! You're assuming that people who aren't like you are nitwits. What you don't want to understand is that an armed public is actually a good resolution to certain problems of public safety. That goes beyond your comprehension because you have adopted the lie that more regulation equals more safety. That's why your're getting bashed with rock metaphors and the like (pun intended, since I like bad puns). The point is, the regulations you desire aren't making you safe.

Oh yea, how could I miss that point you weren't making until now?

Where did I say I didn't want an armed public? I don't want armed criminals and lunatics. Obviously, they will still find guns. I just want to make it more difficult. Currently, as I've demonstrated, it is not very difficult.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Sacrificing liberty for security is the basic founding principle of human civilization and the social contract. We sacrifice certain liberties for certain protections inherent in the social order of civilization. It's one of the underpinnings of the political philosophy of John Locke, upon which our system is based.

I'll agree with you with the stipulation that it must be done in moderation. There is no compensating for human fallacy/greed and the more liberties you sacrifice, the closer to a totalitarian state you become.

History has proven time and time again that there's a very clear line that gets passed that causes an irreversible death sentence to be passed upon a civilization, a death sentence that never takes longer than a century and often is complete in less than three decades.

The difference with modern society is that for every real liberty taken away a false liberty is "given" to the people and the VAST majority of them don't know the difference. It's insidious and subversive and it's the reality we live in.

[iruinedyourday]

You've said multiple times in multiple threads that you "hate guns" and that you support universal bans. Get the fuck out of here with your bullshit.

Yea down the road I would prefer a socicety without guns.

But for now, my stance is, and will be gun ownership is fine, but this bullshit of jerking off to them and painting them pink and naming them is fucking gross and irresponsible and exactly the type of behavior that screams, "i am not responsible enough to own a gun"

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Yea down the road I would prefer a socicety without guns.

But for now, my stance is, and will be gun ownership is fine, but this bullshit of jerking off to them and painting them pink and naming them is fucking gross and irresponsible and exactly the type of behavior that screams, "i am not responsible enough to own a gun"

You keep beating on that strawman. Could you maybe once be aware that there's a a million positions in between "gun nut" and "anti-gun"?

[iruinedyourday]

You keep beating on that strawman. Could you maybe once be aware that there's a a million positions in between "gun nut" and "anti-gun"?

could you be aware that there is a million positions between "anti-gun" and "gun nut"?

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Try harder.

[Patriam1066]

Yea down the road I would prefer a socicety without guns.

But for now, my stance is, and will be gun ownership is fine, but this bullshit of jerking off to them and painting them pink and naming them is fucking gross and irresponsible and exactly the type of behavior that screams, "i am not responsible enough to own a gun"

Most gun nuts aren't actually violent. White rednecks aren't the people committing violent crime in America. I'm sorry that doesn't fit the narrative but it's actually a different subset of the population that glorifies violence and does nothing introspective to teach their children a different path. You'll never say a word about that though. The day I hear a liberal call out Melanin-Americans for being disproportionately violent, uneducated, and irresponsible is the day I will sell my shotgun, that I use for hunting quail and dove, and my glock, which I keep in a safe in my house just in case.

[Ranndom]

love it..... bet it was a blast!!!!

Wish i couldve gone. The majority of people at that event were youtubers, some old, some new. The rest were family/friends/ and military

[Ranndom]

hehe I like how conservatives have a super detail oriented and wide breadth of imagination about how something they like could be good, but when they hear about something like socialism they are like THAT'S NAZI SHIT END OF CONVERSATION.

Just because you like something, doesnt mean you have the right to force it on everyone.
The firearm community wants to be left alone. Nothing more. They dont care what your opinion is until you lift your bath robe and start shoving your dick into everything you dont like.

[Ranndom]

Oh god he actually fantasizes about the collapse of society, lol

In your fantasy I bet you're a cool, calm, and collected gunslinger who everyone looks to for strength and guidance.

Nice to know the rule of law and a strong government is the only thing keeping scum like you from stealing from your neighbors, though.

When i fantasize about being a criminal you know what my main fantasy is? An unarmed society.
You know what i want? a society where every man can choose without criticism on how he deems worthy to protect his family.

[iruinedyourday]

aaaaaand now the gun thread is a racist one lol

like I said this fucking section of the forums, theres a reason I took a year off from it.

[Ranndom]

The fact that mass murders are declining isn't all that important. The meaningful figure is the relatively high rate of mass murders in the US compared to our peers... not that it has all that much to do with guns though. I'd blame the excessive individualism, isolation, and alienation inherent in our culture and economy that breeds mental illness and hopelessness, before I'd blame guns.

If you want to blame anyone, blame big pharma.
They profit from increased abortions.
They profit from cancer.
Big pharma profits everytime someone in this country gets their ass handed to them.
Its only natural a business model controlled by money and suffering, takes advantage of it.

[Ranndom]

you say I have no balls, but im the only one here standing in a room full of extremists gun lovers and saying, 'yo u muthafuckas is stupid!'

takes some balls if you ask me kek

You really are a communist muslim. Apparently a fat lazy one if you consider a forum "standing in a room"

[Lune]

The day I hear a liberal call out Melanin-Americans for being disproportionately violent, uneducated, and irresponsible is the day I will sell my shotgun, that I use for hunting quail and dove, and my glock, which I keep in a safe in my house just in case.

I lean left and I'm pretty sure I've done that here numerous times. Just with the caveat that it isn't the melanin, but the culture.

When i fantasize about being a criminal you know what my main fantasy is? An unarmed society.
You know what i want? a society where every man can choose without criticism on how he deems worthy to protect his family.

Good for you? I never said anything about taking guns away unless you're a criminal or mentally ill.

Just found it hilarious this guy admits the only thing keeping him from brutalizing and looting his neighbors is the rule of law.

[Ranndom]

Fully automatic machine guns are not legal to buy in the USA unless they are collectors items, and then you have to file a hellish amount of paper work in order to purchase the collector item.


I think the problem here is a lot of youtubers upload videos without full disclosure for content purposes.
When any automatics or explosives (except tannerite and maybe a handful of others) are being used there has to be some sort of official in the vicinity.
Politicians and idiots dont know this, and they think its people just going batshit crazy.

[Ranndom]

heh so if responsible gun owners buy piles of guns, name them, carry them around everywhere and throw them in their trucks and get agitated when someone disagree's with them.

Well shit, I dont know what to say, sounds like responsible gun owners are the problem after all!

Yes, because a man who arms himself to protect his family is going to endanger his family by being the aggressor.
Well holy shit guys, WE GOT A REAL THINKER HERE

[iruinedyourday]

You really are a communist muslim. Apparently a fat lazy one if you consider a forum "standing in a room"

oh I get it you can shove your political dick in my mouth but i cant shove my political dick into yours?

cool double standard.

[Ranndom]

Just found it hilarious this guy admits the only thing keeping him from brutalizing and looting his neighbors is the rule of law.

Lol....i couldnt give a shit about laws. I do what i want, when i want, because i have an understanding of reason within my mind.
I do not brutalize and loot my neighbors because this is a society that does not call for such a thing. Now under a socialist society, well theres no private property. /chuckle.
I do what i do to survive, and for now my only crime is drinking way to much HFCS

[Ranndom]

oh I get it you can shove your political dick in my mouth but i cant shove my political dick into yours?

cool double standard.

I have no political dick. i don't identify with politics nor do i agree with them. I openly criticize all angles, however i despise some more than others. Obviously.
Besides, you could never shove yours into mine if you tried. You cant get out of your chair, and i wont kneel to bastards.

[Ranndom]

But for now, my stance is, and will be *Vehicle* ownership is fine, but this bullshit of jerking off to them and painting them pink and naming them is fucking gross and irresponsible and exactly the type of behavior that screams, "i am not responsible enough to own a *Vehicle*"

[Ranndom]

Most gun nuts aren't actually violent. White rednecks aren't the people committing violent crime in America. I'm sorry that doesn't fit the narrative but it's actually a different subset of the population that glorifies violence and does nothing introspective to teach their children a different path.
The problem is a black stereotype was created by the government and media and that community is scared to move away from that stereotype because they'd be seen as an outcast. So they let this stereotype mold them and it takes control of everything.
Of course, its not the entire community thats a problem. However, since iruinedyourday loves his numbers, You cant argue with the simple fact that in black neighborhoods violence increases. In white neighborhoods, stupid fools complain because someones house is the wrong color.

[Patriam1066]

aaaaaand now the gun thread is a racist one lol

like I said this fucking section of the forums, theres a reason I took a year off from it.

I insulted a culture. You've been doing that this entire thread. If I'm a racist, so are you.

I lean left and I'm pretty sure I've done that here numerous times. Just with the caveat that it isn't the melanin, but the culture.

Well, that makes you and Bill Maher. And he only admits it as it pertains to Islam.

And I referred to teaching and introspection. I thought it was obvious I was referring to culture, or at least nurture being more important than nature. I said melanin as shorthand because I didn't want to say something more specific. I wasn't referring to only the group that most think I was identifying.

[Orruar]

What you quoted is out of context. I'm saying an increase in mass murders shouldn't be pushed as the reason for gun regulations, because I agree with you, it's factually false. The USA having a relatively high rate of mass murders, however, is factually true to the best of my knowledge. (The US leads the world in spree incidents but not fatalities per capita, obviously). Note that I don't see this as justification of gun laws. Honestly I appreciate that you went through the trouble to post those sources and I looked through them myself to see where they got their data and if they were appropriately rigorous, how their variables were defined etc, and it looked good.


And if you notice, I was only arguing against the fallacious reasoning of iruinedyourday. I wasn't making any larger point, but simply responding to a single instance of woefully inaccurate data. So I don't understand what you're debating. Please do try and keep up.

[iruinedyourday]

And if you notice, I was only arguing against the fallacious reasoning of iruinedyourday. I wasn't making any larger point, but simply responding to a single instance of woefully inaccurate data. So I don't understand what you're debating. Please do try and keep up.

you cant argue with me becuse you dismiss everything I say without reading it and then reply to me about something else entierly. Ive tried to tell you over and over again that you do this but you just respond by ad hominem.

[iruinedyourday]

I insulted a culture. You've been doing that this entire thread. If I'm a racist, so are you.

This is what you call culture?

White rednecks aren't the people committing violent crime in America. Melanin-Americans for being disproportionately violent

deciding who is a part of what cultures based off the color of their skin?

Im sorry but this is yet another thread where the same racist scumbags all gang up on anyone who disagrees with them.

I wonder how many of you even play on p99.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Iruinedyourday seems mad when he should be happy. After all, the woman of the year has a penis.

Progress.

[iruinedyourday]

Iruinedyourday seems mad when he should be happy. After all, the woman of the year has a penis.

Progress.

Im sorry but I dont keep up with the kardashians and uppon googling your statement I see that you do. Thats just sad that you think you are so smart but you watch reality tv.

gross.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Got rid of cable TV in 2007, nice try though.

What does the Cardassians have to do with a magazine declaring him woman of the year? I'm confused at what you even googled.

[Patriam1066]

This is what you call culture?



deciding who is a part of what cultures based off the color of their skin?

Im sorry but this is yet another thread where the same racist scumbags all gang up on anyone who disagrees with them.

I wonder how many of you even play on p99.

I could've worded my opinion better, but essentially what I was saying is this: you believe white rednecks glorify violence and as a result increase it. I was saying blacks and Hispanics glorify violence AND that that result is borne by statistics, since they are, factually speaking, disproportionately represented in the numbers of those committing violent crimes.

I don't hate all Muslims. I grew up with them. But I have observed over the course of my life that compared to other peoples, they are notoriously thin skinned, unsuccessful, superstitious, and ready to subvert their mental faculties to blind, unthinking fanaticism. It's the same thing. I suppose if you're a cultural relativist who pretends that Switzerland are Somalia are actually the same, just with different circumstances, you'd disagree with both of the value judgments I'm making. However, a simple google search will show that nonhispanic whites in America commit way fewer crimes than you'd expect given their proportion of the population. Oh, and I've owned guns my entire life and never committed a violent crime.

[Pringles]

In an era where mass shootings are at a ridiculously all time high, this community things its appropriate to shoot machine guns off of trucks and post videos on the internet to glorify them.

Community is trash.

The more you post, the more ignorant I realize you actually are.

[iruinedyourday]

I could've worded my opinion better, but essentially what I was saying is this: you believe white rednecks glorify violence and as a result increase it.

no, maybe you are missunderstanding me becuse I could have worded it better. ANYONE be they redneck or not ( you are assuming I am saying rednecks, when I never have ) when ANYONE glorifies gun ownership are at fault for reasons that I described in many posts prior to this one that people cant seem to read or understand or make out any thing but BOOGA BOOGA BOOGA IM A LIBERAL BOOGA BOOGA IM GOING TO TAKE YOUR GUNS BOOGA BOOGA...

a simple google search will show that nonhispanic whites in America commit way fewer crimes than you'd expect given their proportion of the population. Oh, and I've owned guns my entire life and never committed a violent crime.

a simple google search for the definition of specious reasoning will give you an answer as to why you think whites are less violent than Hispanics.

Hmm these statistics say that crime is actually far less in mexico than it is in america :/ I Might be reading it wrong. http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Mexico/United-States/Crime

But by your logic, since these are Mexicans compared to white people, they should all be devouring each other.

Maybe you can clear it up.

anyways I digress.. please, go on tell me more about how white people are better than other races and how you are not a biased racist?

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Got rid of cable TV in 2007, nice try though.

What does the Cardassians have to do with a magazine declaring him woman of the year? I'm confused at what you even googled.


anyways I digress.. please, go on tell me more about how white people are better than other races and how you are not a biased racist?

He ain't white ya moran

[iruinedyourday]

He ain't white ya moran

Again, where did you get in the post that I called him white? You should see a doctor, you see words that do not exist.

At no point did I say that he was white, never. He did very clearly say that whites were less violant than at the very least, people of darker skin color:

White rednecks aren't the people committing violent crime in America. The day I hear a liberal call out Melanin-Americans for being disproportionately violent, uneducated, and irresponsible is the day I will sell my shotgun.

A simple google search will show that nonhispanic whites in America commit way fewer crimes than you'd expect given their proportion of the population. Oh, and I've owned guns my entire life and never committed a violent crime.

and for good measure, to show that he isnt just racist against hispanics, here is his random out of nowhere stance on Muslims:

I have observed over the course of my life that compared to other peoples, they are notoriously thin skinned, unsuccessful, superstitious, and ready to subvert their mental faculties to blind, unthinking fanaticism.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Again, where did you get in the post that I called him white? You should see a doctor, you see words that do not exist.

At no point did I say that he was white, never. He did very clearly say that whites were less violant than at the very least, people of darker skin color:

As a white, male, intersectional feminist, ally, you aren't allowed to minimize the experience of a person of color. You know this.

[Lune]

anyways I digress.. please, go on tell me more about how white people are better than other races and how you are not a biased racist?

That's not what we are saying.

White people aren't better than other races. Our culture is better than other cultures at running a stable, prosperous civilization. Many blacks are part of this culture. Unfortunately, many more aren't. The culture they are a part of tends to be toxic and dysfunctional. This is documented fact; members of this culture commit disproportionately high amounts of crime, and generally fail to reach positive outcomes in our society.

Consider the monstrous racism Chinese in California were exposed to historically, which was no better than blacks were treated in the South. (It included segregation, deportations, confiscation of property, draconian laws, lynchings, etc) Nevertheless, Chinese and most Asian diaspora have extremely good outcomes in our society. Why? Because their culture is very conducive to achievement, valuing family bonds, networking, hard work, educational attainment, and the rule of law. And of course the Jews (a culture that spans multiple "races") who, in spite of over 5,000 years of being a near-universally mistreated minority, managed to come out on top pretty much everywhere they settled.

Is culture 100% responsible for their position? No, obviously institutional racism and poverty play some role, but I don't see how you can reconcile the fact that different cultures so reliably demonstrate different outcomes, even within the same/similar race (Hmong vs. Han Chinese, Jewish vs. Non-Jewish, Sicilian vs. Lombard, Mexican vs. Cuban)

[iruinedyourday]

Look guys. I just cant have this type of conversation here. I think its not only way to loaded, but I think that there is way too much bias to have any real meaningful conversations.

Nearly everything I say is taken in the wrong context or miss interpreted into something else.

Go ahead and continue debating about it among yourselves. But Ill just have to settle with compared to all of you, I am ignorant and wrong.

Im fine with that, im wrong, you guys are right.

Take this as a victory or whatever you want. I'll post some star wars stuff here or some other game stuff maybe later on.

But I cant have these types of conversations because I dont have the energy to ask that you take what I say one way when its always taken another way.

I think lune that you and I agree about a lot of things, but when it comes to race, the way its coming off now, perhaps its because Im not fully understanding what it is that you're saying, is just too biased and you're painting much to large a stroke on stuff that you are trying to speak about in specific detail.

If I had to say one thing in reply to your post, based on your rules american culture is not better than other cultures (of the same socio-economic standing) at running a stable prosperous civilization.

Honestly the fact that a gun thread turned into a conversation about race proves that THIS community is definitely not prosperous OR stable.

And before you say that I brought race into it, I specifically said people that love guns and open carry and attack and threaten anyone that disagrees with them promotes a culture of violence. I at no point was talking about any race/region or religion. Anyone from any of those can be a part of that "community" and I think that community is negative and violent and irresponsible.

That's all. Sorry we all couldn't be pals. Enjoy your gaming.

[Lurikeen]

Oh yea, how could I miss that point you weren't making until now?

Where did I say I didn't want an armed public? I don't want armed criminals and lunatics. Obviously, they will still find guns. I just want to make it more difficult. Currently, as I've demonstrated, it is not very difficult.

Actually, I was making the same point earlier. Your point over not wanting "armed criminals and lunatics" is a red herring. Nobody posting in this thread has advocated arming "criminals and lunatics."

You say, "I just want to make it more difficult" and the point I made earlier is that it is already pretty difficult. Did you miss that post I made about how one has to fill out forms and go through a NICS check at a bare minimum, just to buy a gun? As a gun owner you should know that, but your retort was some generalization that it is so easy to by pass the system and get a gun. Your extreme example simply proves the rule by exception. More often than not the system works. So why would anyone want to make it more difficult?

The anti-gun lobby wants to make it more difficult because they want to disarm everyone. Because like you, they don't think gun ownership is a right. As you said, "Then stop thinking about gun ownership as a right instead of a privilege. It isn't 1783 anymore and a musket is not an assault rifle." (https://www.project1999.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2087665&postcount=60)

No. I will continue to think of gun ownership as a right because notwithstanding the claim of gun owning liberals such as yourself, gun ownership is our right. It goes along with property ownership and being in a position to protect ones property, family, and neighbors.

What is also telling in your claim I quote above is that you are a missing the significance of the fact that when the American Revolution was fought, many of the guns used were privately owned. The Brits would have loved it if they could have fought an unarmed population. This gets to the heart of the second amendment and the point that gun ownership is not a "privilege" as you say. Our founding fathers had the common sense to understand that an assembly of citizen soldiers might be needed in the future to fight off another tyrannical government rising up against the people. Where do you think such a "militia" is going to get their guns, if they already don't own them or possess them?

Gun ownership is a right and the regulations the federal government have in place today, restricting gun ownership, are plenty. We don't need any more.

[Lune]

Actually, I was making the same point earlier. Your point over not wanting "armed criminals and lunatics" is a red herring. Nobody posting in this thread has advocated arming "criminals and lunatics."

The claim isn't that they are advocating arming criminals and lunatics, but that they are resisting the implementation of barriers against that.

You say, "I just want to make it more difficult" and the point I made earlier is that it is already pretty difficult. Did you miss that post I made about how one has to fill out forms and go through a NICS check at a bare minimum, just to buy a gun? As a gun owner you should know that, but your retort was some generalization that it is so easy to by pass the system and get a gun. Your extreme example simply proves the rule by exception. More often than not the system works. So why would anyone want to make it more difficult?

In some states NICS is the only form of background check and does not apply to sales between private individuals, creating a massive private sale loophole. (Ie, one gun nut to another). That the system works is a patent falsehood. Everyone here in Northern California knows what a joke it is to get around our laws; you just go to Nevada or buy from a private party. Guy I knew from high school was the center of the largest drug bust in our county's history-- he now owns an AK47. I know many more similar examples, and it's a well-recognized issue (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/gun-control-debate-arguments-tougher-background-checks-state/story?id=18018348), with 96% of Americans in support of universal background checks.

The anti-gun lobby wants to make it more difficult because they want to disarm everyone. Because like you, they don't think gun ownership is a right. As you said, "Then stop thinking about gun ownership as a right instead of a privilege. It isn't 1783 anymore and a musket is not an assault rifle." (https://www.project1999.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2087665&postcount=60)

No. I will continue to think of gun ownership as a right because notwithstanding the claim of gun owning liberals such as yourself, gun ownership is our right. It goes along with property ownership and being in a position to protect ones property, family, and neighbors.

What is also telling in your claim I quote above is that you are a missing the significance of the fact that when the American Revolution was fought, many of the guns used were privately owned. The Brits would have loved it if they could have fought an unarmed population. This gets to the heart of the second amendment and the point that gun ownership is not a "privilege" as you say. Our founding fathers had the common sense to understand that an assembly of citizen soldiers might be needed in the future to fight off another tyrannical government rising up against the people. Where do you think such a "militia" is going to get their guns, if they already don't own them or possess them?

Gun ownership is a right and the regulations the federal government have in place today, restricting gun ownership, are plenty. We don't need any more.

I don't find this reasoning compelling. In the 1700's, there was far more parity between an armed populace and the federal government. If you think a bunch of obese rednecks with firearms will ever be the only thing standing between the most sophisticated military machine that has ever existed, and tyranny, I don't think you're being realistic. If a tyrannical government ever rises against the people in the USA, it will be silent and nonviolent, and due to voter apathy... as is currently occurring. (Most of our representatives literally do not even represent the interests of their constituents.) What are you going to do, go down to DC and shoot a corrupt politician?

If you really cared about keeping the government in line, and weren't just exploiting the notion to defend your guns, you wouldn't be so quick to simply abstain from voting and let it all go to hell. That attitude is 10x more dangerous than the populace not having guns. Instead, you're content to sit in your room and wait for the Feds to come in so you can blast them, because I guess you think that's a better way to defend your liberty?

Also note I don't even want to take your guns away. In spite of your slippery slope fallacy, making our joke regulations actually function isn't some ploy to eventually take everyone's guns. It may be that way for anti gun liberals, but not for me. What I'm in favor of wouldn't even affect you, and you wouldn't care if you weren't a radical.

[Lurikeen]

The claim isn't that they are advocating arming criminals and lunatics, but that they are resisting the implementation of barriers against that.

You mean more barriers, since there is no resisting the current laws if one wants to legally own a firearm. Let's be clear here.

In some states NICS is the only form of background check and does not apply to sales between private individuals, creating a massive private sale loophole. (Ie, one gun nut to another). That the system works is a patent falsehood.

Yes, let's grab an exception to the rule (which is fastly changing in many states where private sales are concerned) and then run around like chicken little and declare the "sky is falling" (i.e. "That the system works is a patent falsehood.") :rolleyes: BTW, I told you about NICS being the only check in some states, along with some other facts, in my earlier post. Looks like you didn't read it after all.

Everyone here in Northern California knows what a joke it is to get around our laws; you just go to Nevada or buy from a private party.

Generalize from the particular much, and then jump to conclusions? :rolleyes:

What you probably should state is that you know some people who "get around" California gun control laws. Then ask yourself so what? You're actually making my point for me. That is, more regulations aren't the answer, your example is a case in point. However, your anecdote is not compelling when claiming the system is failing. Nice attempt, though.

I don't find this reasoning compelling.

Not surprising.

In the 1700's, there was far more parity between an armed populace and the federal government.

An irrelevant point to the constitutionality of owning a firearm. However, the answer isn't to limit gun ownership to create a civilian population which can't protect itself from government.

If you think a bunch of obese rednecks with firearms will ever be the only thing standing between the most sophisticated military machine that has ever existed, and tyranny, I don't think you're being realistic.

Silly ad hominem which is also irrelevant to the point of the constitutionality of gun ownership.

If a tyrannical government ever rises against the people in the USA, it will be silent and nonviolent, and due to voter apathy...

That very well may be the case, but ignores the historical background of why the framers of the constitution instituted the right of a citizen soldiery (aka "militia") and private gun ownership.

If you really cared about keeping the government in line,....

More silly ad hominem which isn't relevant to the discussion at hand.

Also note I don't even want to take your guns away.

In fact, you do. You want to impose further limits upon gun sales and that certainly has the potential of "taking my guns away."

In spite of your slippery slope fallacy,

There was no "slippery slope fallacy" offered by me. However, you are doing pretty good with the fallacious reasoning here, so I don't trust that you could recognize a "slippery slope" even if you slid down one all the way to the bottom of it.

What I'm in favor of wouldn't even affect you, and you wouldn't care if you weren't a radical.

One of the most dangerous types of liberals are those who don't recognize they are liberals. You obviously have some knowledge, but you lack an essential understanding of why a conservative would not want additional regulations. In fact, only a liberal would call for additional regulations as you are doing.

Thanks for the conversation. Yours is the last word.

EDIT: Oh, and calling me a "radical" isn't terribly convincing that you aren't a liberal.

[Lune]

Nearly everything you say is based on the notion that strengthening our currently inadequate regulations regarding firearm purchase for criminals and mentally ill is part of some liberal scheme to eventually take your guns away. As long as you keep making that paranoid, unfounded connection, you're not addressing my argument. The fact that I don't have a strict constructionist view of the Constitution, and you apparently do, doesn't change that.

[Pokesan]

guess we're giving patriam a free pass to spew all the hateful garbage he wants about any race, based on him being not-white. well done!

[Patriam1066]

guess we're giving patriam a free pass to spew all the hateful garbage he wants about any race, based on him being not-white. well done!

I don't hate anyone. I just have eyes and ears. They give me sensory inputs. I can read charts about statistics.

White rednecks are not violent. White America has the homicide rate of Belgium. I'm sorry that that offends you. I really am.

I'm done with this argument though. I do think there should be background checks for gun ownership. I just despise political correctness. You guys say redneck this redneck that and become apoplectic when someone calls you on being racist. And yet I do the same thing, but directed towards nonwhites, and somehow I'm racist. Either we both are or I'm not. Pick one

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Lol @ iruinedmypants getting triggered.

Progressive stacked.

[Orruar]

White rednecks are not violent. White America has the homicide rate of Belgium. I'm sorry that that offends you. I really am.

That's a really interesting point and I was surprised when I first looked into the data and found that the non-hispanic white gun homicide rate in the US matches what we see in most of northern europe, and not too much higher than parts of europe where guns are heavily restricted (UK, France). Our higher overall gun homicide rate is heavily impacted by blacks and hispanics, but even those groups in the US have homicide rates near the average for the countries from which they come. It indicates that perhaps the US is not some crazy land where guns grow on trees and everyone is shooting each other at the drop of a hat.

Of course, this kind of data is utterly maddening to liberals, since it combines a temperance of anti-gun hysteria with very noticeable differences in outcome based on race, so it's difficult to discuss this topic with them. Still, if one wishes to seek truth, we cannot ignore what are perhaps uncomfortable data. I'm becoming more and more convinced that social and cultural norms are intertwined with biology, and that we see similar levels of violence in genetically similar people who live in different societies because one's beliefs are shaped in innumerable and subtle ways by their genetics.

[Pokesan]

cool another politics thread devolved into yelling about how bad black people are!


I'm becoming more and more convinced that social and cultural norms are intertwined with biology, and that we see similar levels of violence in genetically similar people who live in different societies because one's beliefs are shaped in innumerable and subtle ways by their genetics.

oh hey guys just offering my theory that black people are genetically predisposed to violent behavior! this is not racist how can "liberals" think im racist lol silly "liberals"

[Lune]

Gun owners don't have to over power the government. They just have stay resolute to their peaceful values and when images of the government slaughtering them shows up you will see how quickly the people turn on the government.

I'm not against gun ownership.

I swear it's like the only point you people know how to argue against is some caricatured anti-gun liberal extremist stance, which you'll go through great lengths to distill from what I say.

Strengthening regulations for gun purchases, including a universal background check in order to make it more difficult for criminals and mentally ill to obtain guns and close the private purchase loophole, does not equal Adolf Hussein Obama taking all your guns away. Do you all have criminal records? Is that why you're so adamant about this?

[Orruar]

oh hey guys just offering my theory that black people are genetically predisposed to violent behavior! this is not racist how can "liberals" think im racist lol silly "liberals"

Genetics can affect skin color, muscle composition, bone density, bone shape, bone size, jaw shape, skull shape, blood cell shape, blood composition, eye color, hair color, hair proliferation, size of genitalia, hormonal balance, and most important to this conversation, brain size, brain structure, and IQ. But oh no, to suggest that behavior, which is wholly a function of the human brain (unless you're a dualist), could possibly be influenced by genetics, that's just crazy talk! How does one so effortlessly ignore objective reality?

[Pokesan]

literally phrenology

kill yourself orruar

[Pokesan]

this isn't even 20th century racism. you're endorsing 1800s garbage nonsense.

what the fuck is wrong with you

[Lune]

Genetics can affect skin color, muscle composition, bone density, bone shape, bone size, jaw shape, skull shape, blood cell shape, blood composition, eye color, hair color, hair proliferation, size of genitalia, hormonal balance, and most important to this conversation, brain size, brain structure, and IQ. But oh no, to suggest that behavior, which is wholly a function of the human brain (unless you're a dualist), could possibly be influenced by genetics, that's just crazy talk!

I think the common argument is that these genetic traits aren't uniformly grouped between different populations of humans, because there tends to be just as much genetic variation within what we consider a race as there is between them. Things like IQ and brain size are also muddled by nutrition, poverty, etc.

Of course, it's not a very sound argument, especially when you have traits like hemophilia, sickle cell anemia, and fused rhomboid muscles that are highly clustered within otherwise "genetically diverse" populations within a single racial construct. Genetics are allowed to affect behavior in dogs, but not in humans apparently... golden retrievers and labrador retrievers have different nuances in their personality, yet are extremely genetically similar.

And talking about the implications of this, I'd be willing to bet culture is still 90% responsible for behavior. If you credit genetics for the success and prosperity (or failure) of a race, it's hard to account for the fact that merely 1,000 years ago, Europe was an unsophisticated backwater barely able to hang on against superior Arabic civilizations. Also the genetic similarity between steppe nomads, Han Chinese, and Native Americans in spite of their very disparate outcomes. It also doesn't help that it's pretty much illegal to conduct actual science about this.

How does one so effortlessly ignore objective reality? This is a well-documented phenomenon (http://www.salon.com/2015/03/05/facts_do_not_matter_the_depressing_science_that_ex plains_vaccine_trutherism_partner/) and probably one of humanity's greatest weaknesses. Very sad.

[Pokesan]

It also doesn't help that it's pretty much illegal to conduct actual science about this.



what would be the point of such research? what would be useful about it?

study finds: blacks are very bad?

[Orruar]

I think the common argument is that these genetic traits aren't uniformly grouped between different populations of humans, because there tends to be just as much genetic variation within what we consider a race as there is between them.

The "more variation within groups than between groups" argument is a red herring. Let me give an example. Let's look at something like height. For argument sake, let's say white people vary from 4'6" to 7', with an average height of 6'. Further, let's say Asians vary from 4'4" to 6'10", with an average height of 5'6". The range of heights for either population (2'6") is much greater than the difference in average height (6"), but would you then say that means the difference in average is meaningless? If someone were to say that whites were on average taller than Asians, would you claim they are incorrect because there's more variation within each group? Of course not.

Things like IQ and brain size are also muddled by nutrition, poverty, etc.

Absolutely, but there is also a strong genetic component to IQ. The current scientific understanding is that genetics determine a kind of upper limit on IQ, which can be raise slightly (5-10 points at most) by the perfect environment, but can be lowered greatly (30 points or more) by a very bad environment.

Of course, it's not a very sound argument, especially when you have traits like hemophilia, sickle cell anemia, and fused rhomboid muscles that are highly clustered within otherwise "genetically diverse" populations within a single racial construct. Genetics are allowed to affect behavior in dogs, but not in humans apparently... golden retrievers and labrador retrievers have different nuances in their personality, yet are extremely genetically similar.

Good point.

And talking about the implications of this, I'd be willing to bet culture is still 90% responsible for behavior. If you credit genetics for the success and prosperity (or failure) of a race, it's hard to account for the fact that merely 1,000 years ago, Europe was an unsophisticated backwater barely able to hang on against superior Arabic civilizations. Also the genetic similarity between steppe nomads, Han Chinese, and Native Americans in spite of their very disparate outcomes. It also doesn't help that it's pretty much illegal to conduct actual science about this.

Yeah, the lack of science in this area is unfortunate. It's not so much that it's illegal, but funding is nearly non-existent.

On the topic of culture, it's without a doubt true that both genetics and culture play a role in behavior. I'm starting to think that the two are intertwined though, and that cultures develop based on biological imperatives. For instance, if you have a culture that values a certain trait, individuals will begin being selected for that trait. If we lived in a society where food acquisition required long distance running, we would end up selecting for genes that are best for long distance running. Our cultures specialize to deal with the challenges that they face. Going back to your dog example, we've been breeding dogs for certain traits for thousands of years, and really we kind of do the same with selecting our own mates. We look for traits that we believe our children will benefit from having.

And just incidentally, the rise in Europe may actually be attributable to the black plague. There is a theory floating about that since the black plague killed so many people and tended to go after the poor more often (due to bad sanitation), that this had a side effect of raising the average IQ through a rather brutal form of selection pressure.

[Orruar]

literally phrenology

So because there was once a pseudoscience regarding the human brain, any study of the human brain is now rendered as pseudoscience? Someone better tell all those chemical engineers to stop bothering with alchemy.

Also, the difference in behavior, if it is caused by genetics, does not necessarily require a difference in brain size/structure. For instance, blacks have on average 19-21% more free testosterone than whites, and testosterone is associated with increased aggression. That is a purely hormonal cause that could offer an explanation for the data.

[Orruar]

what would be the point of such research? what would be useful about it?

A greater understanding of our world? Are you seriously arguing against the acquisition of knowledge simply because you don't like what might be learned? Talk about backwards thinking.

Even beyond the pursuit of knowledge for knowledge's sake, this information could have obvious practical use. For instance, we base a lot of social policy on the idea that we should see equal outcomes among the races. If we see that one racial group is underrepresented in a field, let's say medicine, we explain this difference as being caused by some kind of unfairness, and thus we tip the scales in favor of the race that is underrepresented. In medicine, this takes the form of blacks getting accepted to medical schools with wildly lower test scores than whites/Asians. The thought here is that if we just introduce a little unfairness for a period of time (years, maybe decades), then the problem will sort itself out and we will eventually be able to remove this unfairness and we'll have equal outcomes with no discrimination of any kind. If the difference is instead something biological, then our response to the disparity may change. Even if we were a completely egalitarian society that believed everyone should have the same standard of living, the means for achieving this would shift. Rather than attempting to force people into jobs that they are not suited for, it would be more optimal to have each person doing the job that they are best at, and then redistributing wealth to even things out. People being pushed into professions that they are not suited for adds a lot of inefficiency to the system.

[Swish]

... it's hard to account for the fact that merely 1,000 years ago, Europe was an unsophisticated backwater barely able to hang on against superior Arabic civilizations.

Talking loosely, but don't tell that to the Vikings, the Anglo-Saxons or the Celts. People think that just because Rome was crumbling/evolving that Europe was somehow on its knees.

I'd argue Europe has never looked weaker than it does currently. The EU has bound itself in all kinds of red tape and despite a bunch of laws about migration from outside the EU people can just walk on in.

Meantime people of Germany/France/UK/etc who married an American/Canadian/etc are told that they're not allowed to bring them here without a ton of legal paperwork...just jump on a truck, seems to work ;)

[sOurDieSel]

Points out government statistics that say blacks commit more violent crime and are a smaller percent of the population in America then Whites.

Gets called a racist.

Then gets told race doesn't really 'exist' and that it is just a social construct.

rofl. liberal logic 101

[Nocsucow]

Points out government statistics that say blacks commit more violent crime and are a smaller percent of the population in America then Whites.

Gets called a racist.

Then gets told race doesn't really 'exist' and that it is just a social construct.

rofl. liberal logic 101

lol right!!!!

[Ranndom]

Then gets told race doesn't really 'exist' and that it is just a social construct.



Pretty much.

[Llandris]

Cleaning up and locking this thread. I don't want to see any more of these threads or people will be getting permanent vacations.