[Agykoo]

I'm not assuming anything. I'm referring to your conduct here that anyone can very well see.

You're right that there is nothing to debate. There was but you've become so offended that instead of contributing to discussion anymore you've started making ill founded jabs.

now your trying to hide your assuming, so now not only did you just assume after you got doen whining that i was suspidly assuming, but now your trying to hide it XD

hay you quoted me first. and felt that there was somethign to debate, then you crawled away whning it was over. yet now here you are back. i get you liek talking to me, but theres easyer ways ^_^
i'm not offened at all, i am having a blast watching you make a fool of your self ^_^

[Agykoo]

You admitted to having terrible English, yet you won't suspend your ego long enough to concede to something so simple, even for the sake of moving on.

i was more then ready to move on, then you came back and quoted me, i get you cant get enough of my shananagins. its ok ^_^

you cant let go of your ego long enough to stop thinking i am somehow letting my ego into this ^_^remmber i was minding my own buniues when you qouted me, you started this ^_^ your more then welcome to walk away (again) ^_^

[a blue gecko]

I'm not assuming anything. I'm referring to your conduct here that anyone can very well see.

You're right that there is nothing to debate. There was but you've become so offended that instead of contributing to discussion anymore you've started making ill founded jabs.

[Agykoo]

I'm not assuming anything. I'm referring to your conduct here that anyone can very well see.

You're right that there is nothing to debate. There was but you've become so offended that instead of contributing to discussion anymore you've started making ill founded jabs.

is this the cool new thing to do now? ^_^

[Gary]

Ive been away from this thread for a while. But to bring up another topic...

any thoughts on situations involving police shooting civilians having non-lethal toy guns? Is it justified if the civilian is uncooperative?

What about in situattions where the toy gun is obviously non-lethal? Where does justified end and crime begin?

[Agykoo]

Ive been away from this thread for a while. But to bring up another topic...

any thoughts on situations involving police shooting civilians having non-lethal toy guns? Is it justified if the civilian is uncooperative?

What about in situattions where the toy gun is obviously non-lethal? Where does justified end and crime begin?

depends on way to many factors. that and a lot of toy guys (at lest here) look real. or stupid people take off the orange cap thing at the end to make them look real.

sadly when it comes down to a split sec desion on who lives or dies you don't get the chance to hesitate and wonder if it was a toy or not. hesistation means death.

[Jack Of Shades]

I did a bit of research. Annually, in the United States, there are nearly 12 thousand more deaths related and attributed to alchohol than those relating to firearms.

Thats a pretty big difference.

We already know why alchohol cant be taken out of the equation. Prohibition was already a failed experiment.

But guns seem to be the focus of a lot of the media's agenda.

Why, if violence is so prevelant in media anyways, does the government care about limiting our ability to use firearms? The simple anwser could be that the government is limiting our ability to fight back.

Maybe its simpler, or not as simple as that.

Post any links and/or opinions you have relating to firearms here for discussion.

To be honest, when have you seen a gun walk up to a person and shoot them? Never. So when people say guns kill, they're literally morons. PEOPLE kill people, simple as that. Guns are a defense, mentally unstable people are who we need to target, not the gun. Most agree, even if you made them illegal, the bad folks will STILL have guns. Making them illegal just makes the criminal world far more rich. Not to mention, even if guns were eradicated that does not stop there. They can grab another weapon and use it, if anything, guns are good for the RIGHT MINDED people. To defend themselves against these fools that purchase firearms and use them on innocent people. Just my two cents, but GUNS are not the issue. Human nature is.

[Dryym]

Well, I guess I should give my thoughts on this.

Gun Control won't work in all countries, That has been stated before. It'd be a lot harder to implement in the US anyway as it's much bigger than England.

First we'll start with the common misconception that guns themselves are dangerous.
Using a gun isn't any more dangerous to yourself or others then construction work or electrical work. The biggest thing I think needs to be done is to make absolutely sure that the people owning guns are properly educated on gun safety.

That should be the legality to enforce, Not the right to carry guns as a whole.
That being said, The guns you are allowed to possess in the US is kind of rediculous.
Don't quote me on this, But I believe it's legal to possess this

In the US.


I don't understand it really. You aren't going to use a 50. Cal rifle for defending yourself. And unless you have a brontosaurus preserve, You aren't going hunting with it.
It just seems like a waste of money to me.


I think you should be allowed to possess firearms in your place of residence. They are fun, They give you the right to defend yourself and your loved ones.

Open carry is kind of rediculous, And I see no real practical reason to openly carry a firearm in public.
Concealed carry I think should be limited to smaller pistol firearms. The kind that would only be effective if the threat is close.
The way I see it, Save a psycho or terrorist, Nobody threatening you at gunpoint in public will be more than 3 metres (About 10 feet.) away from you.


And lastly, Remember that guns don't kill people, Physics kills people. So while we're banning everything deadly, Ban physics too. (Sorry, I had to use that terrible logic. It's too funny.)

[Not Actually Atlas]

Here is a quote from a different section that sums up my feelings on the subject.

I ran a stop sign and knocked over two cones on my drivers test. Barely passed with an 80%. Not saying that your idea for a system like a drivers license wont work, but look how many accidents happen with that system in place anyway. Doesn't seem to work too well.

Yeah, but some form of security is better than nothing, and I think transportation is the best parallel that we have. We didn't need laws to regulate the use of motorized transportation when the country was formed, because a majority of transportation was slow and easy to avoid. No one could have guessed some day a single human could run down an entire group of people just because they aren't paying attention. When automobiles were first introduced, there were alot of deaths. People were actually talking about banning the use of them because of all the casualties. But because they started to regulate the way you can legally use them, auto deaths are much rarer(although they do happen). And cars are used everyday by everyone.

Same thing with guns. When the country was formed, who would have guessed someone could sneak an assault rifle into an event and gun down an entire crowd of people? Back then, it took minutes to reload their single shot, inaccurate rifles. And now, there are alot of people who think that guns should be completely outlawed in America. But it is stupid to punish responsible gun owners for those who are not. But if we put up a system to try to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, we can at least prevent some deaths. And hopefully create jobs too, since it would require creating a new department to regulate the laws. And probably increase the demand for firing ranges and trainers.

Because doing something is better than saying "no matter what we do, there will still be gun violence. So let's not do anything at all"

[SARKASIST]

Ive been away from this thread for a while. But to bring up another topic...

any thoughts on situations involving police shooting civilians having non-lethal toy guns? Is it justified if the civilian is uncooperative?

What about in situattions where the toy gun is obviously non-lethal? Where does justified end and crime begin?

Personally, I feel if the kid was dumb enough to point something that looks exactly a gun at cops, then he should be prepared for what happens next. As far as the cops knew, they were about to be assassinated by the kid especially after the Ferguson situation. Moral of the story is, don't do dumb stuff.