• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

School shooting: but don't mention guns!

scarlettinlondon said:
I found your comment offensive. I am sure I am not alone in this.
Click to expand...

Having lived, worked with and befriended Frenchmen, I can assure you that the overwhelming majority of them would consider your reaction to my comment somewhat irrational if not outright bizarre.

OTOH, Perhaps I've just been associating with the wrong crowd...
 
Last edited:
scarlettinlondon said:
StankApe said:
I wonder if the anti-gun people notice how much they sound like Pro-lifers? It's the same appeal to emotion, irrational fear mongering, and both based on "think of the children!!!!"

equally useless
Click to expand...

Again no.
I am anti gun and I do not sound like a pro lifer. This is because I have never made any reference to the abortion debate in this thread. The only way in which you could tell if I was a pro lifer is through my direct references to that issue. If you mean to be insulting by insinuating that I am a pro lifer because of my stance on guns, you have succeeded. I am suitably insulted.



I am pro choice.
Click to expand...

Interesting because a lot of the pro life anti choice proponents are gun proponents.

Meet Robert Prey

Robert Prey said:
How Many Sandy Hook Elementary School Kids Might Have Been Saved If A Teacher Had a Gun?

School massacres are limited in Israel where all teachers are armed. The solution to gun crime is more guns.

See:
"More Guns, Less Crime" by John Lott.

Banned from Public Schools" The Ten Commandments including'

"Thou Shalt Not Kill"

Schools should teach morality; not condoms on cucumbers.
Click to expand...

Robert Prey said:
Condoms on cucumbers teach kids immorality, leading to pregnancy, STDs and spiritual despair.
Click to expand...

Robert Prey said:
Joey McGee said:
It's true, especially when one's girth exceeds the norm.

That's why we have abortion as a backup dude, makes it 100%. duh!
Click to expand...
Yeah,, murder is definitely the one fool proof back-up.
Click to expand...

[/QUOTE]




Looks like a pro gun pro lifer.


Outside the US, in other OECD countries, people tend to be more pro choice and more anti gun than the US.
 
gumboot said:
I think it would be fair to say that your problems started with rascist colonial policies, and I think it would be fair to say that these rascist colonial policies were driven more strongly by Dutch colonists than British colonists. The same thing happened in New Zealand, except that we really only had the British, and their enthusiasm for rascism wasn't as great as the Dutch, and didn't last as long. Ditto for Australia.
Click to expand...

I wish our problems started with racism.

Interestingly the difference between Cape Dutch and English homesteads in South Africa was that the servants and family ate together in the kitchen in Cape Dutch households and in the English homesteads the servants were confined to the kitchen whilst their masters ate in the dining room.
Also the " Dutch" who fought the English in the Boer War had indigenous support in their efforts as the English were not exactly highly regarded.

The Dutch were really just simple farmers with a simplistic religion which guided them to invent the concept of Apartheid.
The English on the other hand were clever opportunist who simply used the situation to benefit from the resulting cheap and non-unionised labour.

So take your pick at who started and taught the new black masters how to perpetuate the inequalities still apparent and growing in South Africa.

Verwoerd may have been the architect of Apartheid, but Cecil John Rhodes was the funder of the building.
 
AlBell said:
Are you trying to convince congress to class double-action revolvers as assault weapons?
Click to expand...

Perhaps old single action revolvers are OK, but the newer "assault revolvers" with their speed loaders for maximum carnage and with both double and single actions for twice as many ways to kill people... these have no place on our streets.
 
What was it Eddie Izzard(I think) sai.

"Guns don't kill people, people kill people

So do monkeys if you give them a gun"
 
Looks like a pro gun pro lifer.


Outside the US, in other OECD countries, people tend to be more pro choice and more anti gun than the US.
Click to expand...

You're using HIM as an example of what pro "anything"ers think?

I think I found your problem....
 
Autolite said:
Well, it could be argued that the 'idea', at least here in Canada, was to placate the masses by fabricating the facade of increased public security.

The laws brought into force would only be complied with by people not inclined toward criminal behavior. I previously mentioned that it's like forcing a dog with no teeth to wear a muzzle. Ineffective laws are a political ruse.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure these people sit around a table and decide "he he he ! Those fools will never know what hit'em !" while twirling their mustaches. I think they think they're making laws that'll make a difference.
 
thaiboxerken said:
We should absolve all gun control. That will ensure peace because everyone will be afraid to use a gun knowing others will shot them down immediately. It works in Somolia , after all.
Click to expand...

I believe that in Somalia the local authorities keep a fairly strict control on who gets to carry a gun.
 
DavidJames said:
Once again, that is a self serving interpretation of the beliefs and motives of those with whom you disagree.

It's a classic straw man fallacy and has no business in this forum. It's your straw man that must be dispelled.
Click to expand...

Please explain what my straw man is. I'm honestly confused. What is it that you think I'm saying?
 
Belz... said:
I'm not sure these people sit around a table and decide "he he he ! Those fools will never know what hit'em !" while twirling their mustaches. I think they think they're making laws that'll make a difference.
Click to expand...

Well, I think we've established that the 'anti' crowd, for one thing, are keen on restricting firearms based only on the gun's cosmetic appearance. There have been links posted that underscore this agenda.

How could anybody rationalize this concept as possibly being an effective, practical deterrent to the criminal use of firearms? It gives the impression that these people really do not understand the true nature of the problem and that there is no restriction or law too absurd if it advances their goal of the complete banning of private firearm ownership.*

They don't seem to understand that they must approach the issue in a logical manner if they want to maintain any sort of credibility...

*Divide and conquer looks to be another technique. Have you noticed the disdain for handguns and semi-autos exhibited by some hunters? They apparently don't realize that once these 'assault weapons' are banned from private ownership, the next step is to rid society of those 'evil' bolt action sniper rifles.
 
Last edited:
Autolite said:
Well, I think we've established that the 'anti' crowd, for one thing, are keen on restricting firearms based only on the gun's cosmetic appearance. There have been links posted that underscore this agenda.

How could anybody rationalize this concept as possibly being an effective, practical deterrent to the criminal use of firearms? It gives the impression that these people really do not understand the true nature of the problem and that there is no restriction or law too absurd if it advances their goal of the complete banning of private firearm ownership.

They don't seem to understand that they must approach the issue in a logical manner if they want to maintain any sort of credibility...
Click to expand...
It might help if you try not to imagine the 'anti crowd' as a single group with common purposes and reasons. You could describe me as being part of that crowd, and nothing you say applies to me; I suspect I am not unique in this.
 
Autolite said:
Some might consider it to be ethically questionable if one is the type who counts on the police for help when needed but will vilify those willing to be proactive about their own personal security. But we're not just talking about the police. Some act with disdain at the concept of having a gun in the house, yet will not hesitate to phone their nearest neighbour who does have one when there's trouble...
Click to expand...

Strange. If there is a situation that a gun might help resolve, I call the police. Calling a neighbor with a gun will probably just escalate the situation.
 
thaiboxerken said:
Strange. If there is a situation that a gun might help resolve, I call the police. Calling a neighbor with a gun will probably just escalate the situation.
Click to expand...

This is assuming the neighbor with the gun would even agree to come over. Castle Doctrine or even Stand Your Ground wouldn't be much of a legal defense if you left your house to flank a burglar in the neighbor's house.
 
NoahFence said:
You're using HIM as an example of what pro "anything"ers think?

I think I found your problem....
Click to expand...

True, but it was claimed that the anti gun proponents sounded like pro lifers.

I was merely pointing out that in general in the US, bible-belt conservatives tend to be against both gun control and abortion, whilst pro choice tends to co-occur with pro gun control.
 
Last edited:
scarlettinlondon said:
Again no.
I am anti gun and I do not sound like a pro lifer. This is because I have never made any reference to the abortion debate in this thread. The only way in which you could tell if I was a pro lifer is through my direct references to that issue. If you mean to be insulting by insinuating that I am a pro lifer because of my stance on guns, you have succeeded. I am suitably insulted.



I am pro choice.
Click to expand...

derp!

No, you totally missed the point. i wasn't saying "you anti gun people sound like you are also pro lifers"

I was saying "you anti gun people are constructing arguments based on emotion, special pleading and "save the children" in the same manner as the pro life crowd"

In other words, you sound LIKE them, but not ARE them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom