The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 29    Average: 3.3/5]
83 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 7261
Rating: 3.3
Category:
Date: 12/18/12 08:49 AM

83 Responses to Penn & Teller On Gun Control

  1. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 8:50 am
    Link: Penn & Teller On Gun Control - 26 minutes long, but very much worth the view.
  2. Profile photo of toonces
    toonces Male 18-29
    8 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 8:56 am
    Oh I can only imagine this discussion will be civilised.
  3. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 9:00 am
    Hmm, I wonder how @CJ feels about the rest of P&Ts Bull$hit videos, like the ones on creationism and religion...
  4. Profile photo of Finker
    Finker Male 40-49
    505 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 9:31 am
    That people don`t have the right to bear arms is as ridiculous as creationism - that should see a few people conflicted about this video.
  5. Profile photo of insane_ai
    insane_ai Male 30-39
    798 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 9:38 am
    Yep, Penn & Teller sum it up pretty well.
  6. Profile photo of nubblins
    nubblins Female 18-29
    1743 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 9:38 am
    I love the BS episode about organic foods. That needs to be shown to every goddamn piece of poo hippy I meet that gets all preachy about food.
  7. Profile photo of patchouly
    patchouly Male 40-49
    4746 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 9:38 am
    I agree with everything Penn and Teller have to say, except this.

    Not that it matters, but my opinion on this subject is simple. Allow people to have guns. Despite what you may have heard, Canadians do have guns. Shot guns, rifles and, with a permit, hand guns. That being said, military weaponry has no business being in the hands of the general public. You can`t hunt with it and it isn`t for personal protection. It is meant to kill lots of people.

    You can argue your rights all you want but then where do you draw the line? If you can have fully automatic weaponry, can you own a flame thrower? How about a bazooka? A tank? Where do you draw the line? If a line is drawn, then how do you lend credence to anything other than basic weaponry?

    Let Americans keep their hand guns. Take away any and all military weapons.

    Of course, as I mentioned, that is just my opinion.
  8. Profile photo of edana42
    edana42 Female 50-59
    2509 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 9:42 am
    1st - guns didnt shoot those children, a person did.
    HOWEVER, does society really need knock offs of the military rifle in the public`s hands? When you get right down to it, it seem to me it is an ego thing to own said rifle. And if you believe you need one to protect yourself from the government, shouldn`t you be questioning your government and not the second ammendment?
    A suggestion...if you have the need to shoot a semi-automatic let the shooting ranges provide ones that you can rent. Your need to shoot them will be satisfied.
  9. Profile photo of dm2754
    dm2754 Male 40-49
    3336 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 9:55 am
    @patchouly
    Shot guns, rifles and, hand guns are military weaponry.
    so much for darwing the line.
  10. Profile photo of Kain1
    Kain1 Male 18-29
    1473 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 10:02 am
    Isn`t their point a false dichotomy?..
    2nd amendment and freedom vs. gun control and tyranny?
    Ever been to Europe ?.. Most (if not all) European countries have very strict gun laws, only allowing hunting rifles/shotguns to people who qualify for a hunting permit.

    Yet, many European countries are even more free, and have much lower crime rates than the USA.
  11. Profile photo of Draculya
    Draculya Male 40-49
    14622 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 10:08 am
    It`s just occurred to me that if the purpose of the right to bear arms is to overthrow a corrupt government, then they`re going to need Stinger missiles to defeat air-support.
  12. Profile photo of Draculya
    Draculya Male 40-49
    14622 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 10:10 am
    @insane_ai I agree. Gun control doesn`t work. Maybe nothing short of a complete ban will work. I recommend a complete ban.
  13. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 10:16 am
    @dm2754: Hunting rifles aren`t military issue, and although I`m not positive I don`t recall seeing any military personnel with shotguns, but they may have some somewhere. Pistols aren`t technically military weapons, but @Patchouly makes an interesting point. Lines are obviously drawn, but where the lines are drawn seems to be arbitrary. What is the rationale for not letting a person own a nuclear bomb?
  14. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 10:21 am
    patchgrabber: Nice attempt at changing the subject, but it didn`t work.
  15. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 10:24 am
    patchgrabber: I don`t recall seeing any military personnel with shotguns

    Shotguns have been integral to the military since before the revolutionary war.

  16. Profile photo of skypirate
    skypirate Male 18-29
    2404 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 10:30 am
    Hunting rifles aren`t military issue
    Remington 700 is pretty common hinting rifle and military sniper rifle.
    military personnel with shotguns
    benelli m4 is a military shotgun
    Pistols aren`t technically military weapons
    ??? marines still use 1911`s (102 years later). pretty sure the army issues bertta m9`s

    thats military issue rifles, shotguns and pistols that you can buy today in the US. none of which are automatic and wouldnt be effected by a `assult weapons` ban....even though assault weapons have been banned since 1986...should be called scary looking gun ban.



  17. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 10:32 am
    @CJ: Well I suppose I stand corrected. It still doesn`t negate the point of @Patchouly`s post, though, that the lines are arbitrary.
  18. Profile photo of toonces
    toonces Male 18-29
    8 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 10:33 am
    If we want to be able to overthrow our government, we need some heavier machinery. We should vote to allow owning bombs, bombers, fighter jets, tanks heavy explosives and mustard gas for the public.

    I mean, do you seriously expect to win against the US military with some crappy second hand assault rifles?
  19. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 10:38 am
    patchgrabber: As skypirate said below, it`s a "Scary looking gun" ban that has no basis in reality.

    The parts on most modern guns are so easily interchangeable to the point you can take any gun and make it look `militarized`. How something looks on the outside doesn`t change how it works on the inside.

    It`s akin to these kids putting rear wings and fender flares on their Honda Civics. It doesn`t make them go any faster, just look flashy.
  20. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 10:48 am
    I was under the impression that the underlying reasoning behind widespread ownership of guns, including some military-level weapons, was twofold:

    1) To make a revolution easier in the event of internal tyranny.
    2) To make violent resistance easier in the event of occupation by invaders.

    In that context, widespread private ownership of things such as assault rifles makes sense. If I was holed up in the hills fighting a tyrant or invaders, I`d want an assault rifle, many bullets and many other people with assault rifles and many bullets.

    But...does it really matter with modern technology? Your camp could be detected from space and destroyed by an air strike. One modern military plane would be enough.

    But...there are still insurgents in Afghanistan et alia, so it`s obviously still possible in some circumstances.

    Also, is it worth the cost in peacetime? The USA approach to guns has a very high price.
  21. Profile photo of greenbasterd
    greenbasterd Male 18-29
    2377 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 10:55 am
    "I mean, do you seriously expect to win against the US military with some crappy second hand assault rifles?"

    see Vietnam
  22. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 10:56 am
    marines still use 1911`s (102 years later). pretty sure the army issues bertta m9`s

    And I`m pretty sure they rarely if ever use them other than as formal uniform. Swords are still in the army too, but they`re not intended for use in combat. I might be wrong, but to me "pistol + regular military = officer`s mostly ceremonial sidearm".
  23. Profile photo of spanerbulb
    spanerbulb Male 30-39
    1244 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 10:59 am
    Much stricter gun controls are coming, Obama has had gun controls on the agenda for a long time, now that he is in his last term he will push it through with the recent travesty providing all the momentum. The problem with gun nuts is that they just can`t accept when they are wrong, civilians carrying and having easy access to guns is no longer a good idea and is in fact a negative thing which leads to an unecesarry loss of life.
  24. Profile photo of Kain1
    Kain1 Male 18-29
    1473 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 11:02 am
    It`s obviously possible to have a society that`s better in nearly every way, without having a need for guns, and without the fear of tyranny.

    Isn`t that worth looking into?
  25. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 11:08 am
    I hope @Gerry is reading this thread, because I remember in another one he said "At least they aren`t blaming the gays...yet."

    Well here it is.
  26. Profile photo of insane_ai
    insane_ai Male 30-39
    798 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 11:12 am
    @Draculya: Rape and Murder are completely banned as well.

    How is that working out?
  27. Profile photo of skypirate
    skypirate Male 18-29
    2404 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 11:17 am
    rarely if ever use them

    this is true. its a last ditch effort, but they still train with them and still carry them.
  28. Profile photo of carmium
    carmium Female 50-59
    6381 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 11:32 am
    toonces: absolutely right on. American gun-packers are just wildly infatuated with the feeling that can knock down any bully in the yard. Rebelling against their own democratically (well, almost) elected government is a crock.
    The States see more than six times the per capita rate of gun killings as their biggest trading partner next door. Whatever points you want to make about gun control laws, you can`t tell me they`re doing things right.
  29. Profile photo of greenbasterd
    greenbasterd Male 18-29
    2377 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 11:45 am
    the people in control do not have your best intentions in mind... the people that control control this world are sick.. this is obvious by the wars they fight for oil. they want to control you. and you idiot anti-gun people would let them.. in the same of "safety" of course.. drat.. STOP THIS dratIN PLANET I WANT OFF
  30. Profile photo of dm2754
    dm2754 Male 40-49
    3336 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 11:57 am
    @toonces

    wow someone who gets it! you don`t even live in the US and still you get it!
    the Amendment 2 is about protecting the people from the government.
    so we can overthrow them if they take our rights a way.
  31. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 12:43 pm
    That last shot, was drating awesome.
  32. Profile photo of MacGuffin
    MacGuffin Female 30-39
    2602 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 12:46 pm
    I love the argument that gun ownership is about being able to protect yourself against your own government. Sounds like such a lovely place to live.
  33. Profile photo of dm2754
    dm2754 Male 40-49
    3336 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 12:51 pm
    @MacGuffin
    don`t you live in the same place as the I.R.A?
    how is the british occupation going for you?
    :-)
  34. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 12:52 pm
    ...says the woman who lives under the rule of the government we overthrew.
  35. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 12:53 pm
    dm, she`s Scottish, not Irish lol. Her people have never known freedom, except in a movie. ;)
  36. Profile photo of Mikeoxsbiggg
    Mikeoxsbiggg Male 30-39
    1502 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 12:58 pm
    I understand the overthrow of tyrany part. Good luck with that against the US military...
  37. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6171 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 1:41 pm
    Draculya-"Maybe nothing short of a complete ban will work."

    The reality is that even a complete ban will NOT work. A ban would be just a law, and criminals have been known to break a law occasionally.

    Mikeoxsbiggg-"Good luck with that against the US military..."

    If the military were ever turned against the populace, a vast portion of said military would immediatly begin defending the populace from the government. They would have help (armed populace).
  38. Profile photo of dm2754
    dm2754 Male 40-49
    3336 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 1:43 pm
    @Mikeoxsbiggg
    >>Good luck with that against the US military.

    says the guy from the country that burned down the White House
  39. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 1:50 pm
    Yeah. If the Government suddenly became an aggressor to the people, we the people would have the advantage.
  40. Profile photo of FoolsPrussia
    FoolsPrussia Male 30-39
    3446 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 2:01 pm
    As a counter, here is a discussion about interpretations of the 2nd Amendment prior to the last 30 years or so: Link
  41. Profile photo of botfly
    botfly Male 50-59
    616 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 3:20 pm
    @ Fools Why should something wich is stated clearly need interpretation unless you don`t uderstand it?
  42. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 3:24 pm
    I understand the overthrow of tyrany part. Good luck with that against the US military...
    As a serious question, why does the anti-gun crowd always jump to the most extreme example while attempting to dismiss the fact that firearms can effectively be used to prevent tyranny?

    Does the City of Eau Claire and its police force have tanks, missiles, etc? Of course not. There have been many instances of citizens legally defending themselves from local governments. In addition, there are documented instances in which local authorities deterred unlawful federal actions with the threat of firearm-backed encounters.

    Lastly, who here believes that the US military would engage in a widespread attack on the citizens of this country? Not to mention that domestic offensive use of the military is unconstitutional.
  43. Profile photo of botfly
    botfly Male 50-59
    616 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 3:30 pm
    Obama pisses on the constitution every morning
  44. Profile photo of mischeif954
    mischeif954 Male 18-29
    616 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 4:33 pm
    Following the same logic, why not let every person, have a nuclear weapon I wouldn`t mess with someone with nuclear capabilities.

    Are they suggesting we should have guns in zones that are gun free zones? Like schools, airports, federal buildings?
  45. Profile photo of ginger5010
    ginger5010 Male 30-39
    6 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 4:55 pm
    If you think Adam`s story is impossible,, last week my aunt`s step son basically made the small fortune of $7111 workin a fifteen hour week in their apartment and there roomate`s mother`s neighbour has been doing this for nine months and easily made more than $7111 part-time On there laptop. use the instructions at this site, Great70dotcom
  46. Profile photo of 8BitHero
    8BitHero Male 18-29
    5414 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 5:20 pm
    Good post. I still don`t like guns, BUT, I took on some of the points made.

    But I still have questions
    So what does that make me? Someone living in Europe? Am I defenseless or am I on the same level as everyone else? Everyone has a gun criminal or civilian, yet here they don`t.

    Not to mention it`s a fact that less guns results in less gun crimes/death. Killing someone from a distance with a weapon. I still don`t think it`s a good idea. Add MORE gun control to your country if you want, but how do you watch over those who are able to have them....like a mentally handicapped person like recently?
  47. Profile photo of skullgrin
    skullgrin Male 18-29
    937 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 5:47 pm
    @mischeif954 following your same logic, but in reverse, maybe no one should be allowed to use steak knives. They can be used as weapons. Lets get rid of scissors too. Shoot. We should probably ban sports that throw objects because someone might get hurt.

    The point is that there is a line that must be crossed before owning weapons is unreasonable. Guns do not cross that line. Nuclear weapons on the other hand do.

  48. Profile photo of 8BitHero
    8BitHero Male 18-29
    5414 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 5:48 pm
    I love Penn and Teller. But they REALLY messed up with the whole "Back-in-time" part. Good point THEN to use an excuse for guns. Arm yourself in the face of danger. It`s a war. Fine, I get that. So then WHAT REASON would you need a gun now? Back then they had a reason, today you don`t? Just bored and feel like shooting a school or cinema? Who are you fighting there? Also back then,I doubt the 2nd Amendment thought 200 years into the future where a gun is now a rapid fire killing machine.

    12:28
    "A bad guy no longer knows who`s carrying and who isn`t" So then why does your country still have 10 000 deaths a year in places like schools, shopping centers and cinemas yet countries without guns, have around .....8?
  49. Profile photo of skullgrin
    skullgrin Male 18-29
    937 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 5:57 pm
    @8bithero

    they were pretty clear about this in the video, but we need guns now so that when the time comes and we have to fight for our freedom again we would be armed and ready. Let`s say that we didnt have guns because we`re not at war anymore like you said. Then all of a sudden the government or someone else steps in and tries to over throw us. What do we do? stand in line and get our guns? no way would the people attempting to over throw us allow that.

    Bottom line: owning guns prevents the need for us to overthrow our government since the government won`t be able to do it in the first place
  50. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6171 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 7:12 pm
    8BitHero-"So what does that make me? Someone living in Europe? Am I defenseless or am I on the same level as everyone else?"

    It makes you mostly defenseless to the 17+ guns per every 100 people that are privately held in Europe (that`s an average. May be higher or lower depending on which country in Europe you`re in).

    What? You actually thought there weren`t guns to be had where you live?
  51. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 8:27 pm
    FoolsPrussia: All BS studies with several flaws, there are far more studies and statistics that confirm that guns save many more lives than they take and prevent a lot of crimes like rape and robbery.
  52. Profile photo of jinxjinx34
    jinxjinx34 Male 30-39
    183 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 9:24 pm
    "The United Kingdom has one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world with 0.07 recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants in 2009 compared to the United States` 3.0 (over 40 times higher) and to Germany`s 0.21 (3 times higher)."- Wikipedia. I think statistics like this lend a great deal of weight to this discussion.
  53. Profile photo of jinxjinx34
    jinxjinx34 Male 30-39
    183 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 9:26 pm
    Crakrjak- How can one "prove" that a gun has saved a life or prevented a crime? Exactly how would this be measured?
  54. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 11:05 pm
    jinx:

    I posted this in another thread, but perhaps you didn`t see it. Btw, America is #19 with a violent crime rate of 470 per 100,000.

  55. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 11:07 pm
    Jinx: As you can see gun laws do not prevent crime, they just make crime easier for the criminals to commit them.
  56. Profile photo of Listypoos
    Listypoos Male 40-49
    3069 posts
    December 18, 2012 at 11:54 pm
    "As you can see gun laws do not prevent crime, they just make crime easier for the criminals to commit them."

    But your stats weren`t about gun crime, they were for violent crime. Post the stats for the ratio of violent crime involving guns and see how they compare then.
  57. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 4:01 am
    Listypoos: That`s irrelevant when the actual crime rate is so elevated because of unarmed people.

    It`s just common sense, muggers, murderers and rapists are less likely to commit their crimes if they are deterred by gun owners and concealed carry owners. The statistics back this up.

    More gun laws and gun free zones, do not make anyone safer.
  58. Profile photo of baradhili
    baradhili Male 40-49
    164 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 5:15 am
    In australia all ranged weapons need a permit to own, need to be carried dissassembled and in teh case of guns, teh parts neede to be locked seperately in a safe and the police have the right to make regular un-announced checks.

    Does this mean less murders? well stats show that teh murder rate didn`t drop that much when the gun laws went into effect. However the number of mass killings dropped pretty much to nil, gun related suicides also dropped close to nil
  59. Profile photo of SpermNinja81
    SpermNinja81 Male 30-39
    459 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 5:54 am
    I`m astounded by the belief that the US government is going to turn on it`s citizens. I`m hearing it again and again in these gun debate threads. Really? how likely is this, even if the amount of firearms were reduced or limited to less combat effective weaponry. I`ve never heard anything approaching that scenario being suggested in this country, and we`re the weirdos who gave up our guns. I have a healthy distrust of anything a politician says, sure. and some of the wars that have been started overseas might be considered criminal, but is the same armed forces who enlisted to fight FOR their country going to be compelled to attack their own citizens? I seriously doubt it. It`s also pretty unlikely that any foreign army would try to invade the US theyed just fire nukes., the biggest threat to American citizens are themselves.
  60. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 5:55 am
    @baradhili

    Quite the facist state you have going there all for "safety."

    “This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!” - Adolph Hitler, 1935, on The Weapons Act of Nazi Germany

    Now how did that work out again???
  61. Profile photo of Listypoos
    Listypoos Male 40-49
    3069 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 5:59 am
    No Crackr, that`s the way you`re choosing to interpret a set of stats that aren`t about gun crime.

  62. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 6:04 am
    As you can see everyone wanting more control has never owned a single gun. For your information an AR-15 is one of the best target shiiting rifles you can get because yes the military likes their guns to be accurate.
    I mean, do you seriously expect to win against the US military with some crappy second hand assault rifles?

    Ya that look real secondhand and crappy. The leftist solution ban an object that wasn`t legal for the shooter to have in the first place. It`s the objects fault lets not try to see what makes a person do such a thing.
  63. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 6:08 am
    dm, she`s Scottish, not Irish lol. Her people have never known freedom, except in a movie. ;)

    ROFL classic!!!
  64. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 6:13 am
    Millions of guns are used everyday for sport and recreation in the US but the anti gunheads still cling to the argument they`re just for killing. Our forefathers would be ashamed of you!
  65. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 6:18 am
    I posted this in another thread, but perhaps you didn`t see it.
    I posted how that chart is wrong in that same thread, but perhaps you didn`t see it.
  66. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 6:20 am
    •"Gun Control? It`s the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I`m a bad guy, I`m always gonna` have a gun. Safety locks? You pull a trigger with a lock on, and I`ll pull the trigger. We`ll see who wins." -- Former mobster Sammy "The Bull" Gravano, who testified against John Gotti (his former boss), admitted to killing nineteen people, and is now living under the Witness Protection Program.
  67. Profile photo of 8BitHero
    8BitHero Male 18-29
    5414 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 6:38 am
    @skullgrin
    That just makes America sound like a crap place to in. If you need a gun to save yourself from the government then that place isn`t worth living in. Also, WHO on this planet is going to try and over throw America? Like seriously dude, Korea are going to invade North America at some point?

    @MeGrendel
    I never said guns are available here, but there`s a difference between living in a country that doesn`t allow guns to be used and guns being widely available. Even though I said the U.K has around 8 deaths a year due to guns, that`s not a good thing.

    @CrakrJak
    1) Care to explain how you know the motives of those criminals and KNEW that they would commit crimes because the victim didn`t have a gun
    2) Explain how, guns are supposed to scare off criminals yet you still have some of the highest shootings in the world?
    3) When you cite the DailyMail as a NEWSWORTHY SOURCE, you`ve already lost your credibility.
  68. Profile photo of FoolsPrussia
    FoolsPrussia Male 30-39
    3446 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 7:44 am
    It never ceases to amaze me how Crakrjak can brazenly dismiss studies that contradict his point of view.
  69. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6171 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 8:10 am
    FoolsPrussia-"It never ceases to amaze me how Crakrjak can brazenly dismiss studies that contradict his point of view."


  70. Profile photo of aroc91
    aroc91 Male 18-29
    182 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 8:45 am
    @SpermNinja81

    "I`m astounded by the belief that the US government is going to turn on it`s citizens. I`m hearing it again and again in these gun debate threads. Really?"

    Tell that to the citizens of Nazi Germany and the rest of the Axis.
  71. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 8:53 am
    @aroc91

    The Wermacht (German military) were generally considered honorable by Allied and Axis forces and were generally ignorant of the horrors perpetrated by the Nazi regime and Schutzstaffel.

    The Wermacht did not attack German citizens, that was the special POLICE FORCE called the SS. Your argument supports a pro-gun stance.
  72. Profile photo of jinxjinx34
    jinxjinx34 Male 30-39
    183 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 9:49 am
    @crakrjak- oh, I see. You have provided a chart of stats from a notoriously dishonest tabloid as a rebuttal to many credible surveys. Is this the best you can do? In the very article showcasing South Africa being the 3rd most violent to the U.K. at number 1 it continues "South Africans suffer more than 20,000 murders each year - compared with Britain`s 921 in 2007." All of these "stats" have been obtained using different parameters chosen by the various institutions they are gathered from. I almost feel embarrassed for you for citing this "information" as relevant, and apparently you have done it twice! lol! "All BS studies with several flaws, there are far more studies and statistics that confirm that guns save many more lives than they take and prevent a lot of crimes like rape and robbery." What are the flaws, specifically? Where is this abundant statistical data supporting your claim? If there are "far more" studies that support you
  73. Profile photo of jinxjinx34
    jinxjinx34 Male 30-39
    183 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 10:08 am
    continued- If there are far more studies that support your position, why did you choose a tabloid article?

    @McGovern1981- "Millions of guns are used everyday for sport and recreation in the US but the anti gunheads still cling to the argument they`re just for killing. Our forefathers would be ashamed of you!" This is such a bs strawman argument. There is nobody suggesting that guns are not used for sports. Show me one person claiming that gun sports do not exist.
  74. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 11:09 am
    @jinxjinx34

    Read the comments saying "Guns are made soley for killing" it`s said in everyone of these threads. Couldn`t be more wrong.
  75. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 11:25 am
    Read the comments saying "Guns are made soley for killing" it`s said in everyone of these threads. Couldn`t be more wrong.

    Guns are made solely for killing. That`s what they`re designed for. That is the purpose of a gun.

    Many people use them for shooting targets, but that`s just human ability to use things for purposes other than the purpose they were made for. It doesn`t change the purpose they were made for.

    And don`t argue defence. That`s just silly in this context. The whole point of using a gun in defence is that it`s made solely for killing - you are using it to force someone to obey you by threatening to kill them or by killing them. Which is why you`re using something made solely for killing.

    Sure, you can also use a gun as a paperweight, a hammer, a means of opening a locked door...all sorts of things, but it doesn`t change what a gun is made for - killing.
  76. Profile photo of jinxjinx34
    jinxjinx34 Male 30-39
    183 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 11:26 am
    @McGovern1981- My point is that this isn`t an argument used in any form of intelligent debate on this issue. We both know that. For you to posture this claim as an argument held by intelligent supporters of reform only to attack it is dishonest.
  77. Profile photo of Grendel
    Grendel Male 40-49
    6171 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 11:38 am
    Angilion-"Guns are made solely for killing."

    Guns are made solely for the purpose propelling a small tapered cylindrical bit of metal away from itself at a high velocity as accurately as possible.

    The PERSON chooses what to throw it at.

    The pistol pictured below was made SOLELY for shooting at targets. Not for killing, not for threatening and surely not for concealed carry.

  78. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 12:19 pm
    Guns are made solely for killing.
    I disagree. Consider this, I shoot at a target at the range. Would you consider this a misuse of the firearm? I certainly don`t.

    Now, if you do not consider this a misuse of the firearm, then we can conclude that it is being used purposefully. Therefore, one must reach the ultimate conclusion that the purpose of a firearm is not to kill.

    What then is the purpose? In all of the cases of use in which I consider a firearm to be used properly, I find that the purpose is to propel a bullet or other projectile over some distance.

    Of course, this all hinges on your acceptance or denial that firing a gun at a shooting range is a proper way to use it.
  79. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 12:27 pm
    @Angilion

    Then when will you outlaws swords and bows and arrows? Target shootings an olympic sport is it not? SO then it can be used for sporting purposes.
  80. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 10:45 pm
    SO then it can be used for sporting purposes.

    Try reading a post before replying to it. That would stop you making irrelevant "replies", like the sentence above.
  81. Profile photo of xelous
    xelous Male 18-29
    2513 posts
    December 19, 2012 at 10:54 pm
    Said it before and i`ll say it again.

    Give us guns, don`t take them away.

    Outlaws will get them no matter what, let`s level the field a bit
  82. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    December 20, 2012 at 7:59 am
    @Angilion

    When out of arguments resort to nitpicking.

Leave a Reply