*DAMN R6 Forum

No, I didnt just lose my viginity (that was years ago), but I did something almost equally amazing. I just purchased my first gun. A Yugoslavian AK-47

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=48407627

No, that isnt specificly the one I purchased, but it is the same model and the same dealer. This is quite possibly the most responsible / irresponsible thing I have ever done but I'm just so god damn excited.

What do you need an AK for? A smaller firearm would have been better for personal protection but I must admit that shit is badass.

Guns are stupid, and that's my personal opinion.

wanna trade with my "Schmeisser" MP40/I

 ;D

just kidding... it's not for sale... NEVER!!

They have a purpose that 99.9% of the population do not have that requrement... so in that sense i have to agree with Ethion. Its one thing to have a decommissioned 'vintage' rifle or whatever on your wall etc.. and there is historical value etc etc... but working guns for your average Joe in the states? Nuts.

We've been here before though...

Guns aren't stupid... People are stupid.

This is similar to the quote that guns don't kill people, stress and high blood pressure kill people

 ::sniper::  Nice jerk.  I have the Mac 90 it's the non full auto version of the AK, although I agree with Haz that you shoulda got a hand gun first, well at least I did, my small collection stopped after having kids. ;D :( .... no comment to the guns are stupid remark  :-X  ::wall::

Whether or not we think guns are stupid and a waste of time is something of a moot point, because they do exist, people have and use them (for both good and ill), and sticking your head in the sand is only going to get your ass shot off.

Learning how to handle firearms for purposes of self defense or because it is your job (military, police, etc), is fine, and I do intend at some point in my life to learn how to use firearms effectively.  However owning and firing guns just because it makes you happy in the pants is silly, and those are the kinds of people who, in my mind, are much more likely to commit acts needless violence with firearms, either intentionally or by accident (leaving guns in the reach of children, for example).

Now, if you'll excuse me, there are some rabbits that need hunting with my M60.  
::rambo::
::uzi::

When the Russians (Chinese, Saudis) invade, you'll be ready to fight back!

WOLVERINES!!
 ::sniper::

Oh my god, now I'm having Red Dawn flashbacks.... wonderful.

Jerk...you know where I can get an OICW/GL?  I have a bit of a squirrel problem...they keep going after my vegetables. 

Sorry LW...didn't mean to bite your joke.....saw it after I posted mine.  Now if anyone has an M136, there is a sparrow nest in my backyard....just need it to scare them away.

you can borrow my cork gun cell.

I've got a gun that shoots pieces of potato's. its fucking deadly.

i'm not talking about a potato cannon. im talking about the kind you stick in a potato.

You know, having guns for the sport of target shooting is a great sport.  It's a lot of fun and it allows me to regularly fire some of my automatic assault rifles that don't get much use (H&K MP5, M4, AK47, etc).  And then there are my handguns, bolt-action rifles, and shotguns...hell of a lot of fun getting better at shooting them!  Sure, I keep a weapon loaded for self-defense in my home, especially with all the looting that went on here after Hurricane Katrina came through...but remember in the end, it's people who kill people.  I can kill you with a gun, with a knife, with a baseball bat, or with my bare hands.  What are you going to do...outlaw my hands?[/size]

I bet there some southern law in the states that does that.

lol...No, Eth, you got that backwards...that would be a NOTHERN Liberal Commie state like say...Minnesota that would do something silly like that. Here, its always been a comfort, when I've been traveling...to know that I'm truly back Home, when I start seeing Full Gun racks in the backs of Peoples trucks..(for those that havent seen one, its a four or five slot mounted rack, that fits over the rear cab window of a pickup truck..it holds rifles..and where Im from, almost every truck owner has one, and most have two to three guns sitting in it at all times) Home at Last!!  There have been exactly TWO carjackings in a one hundred square mile radius of my original home in the last 20 years...excluding El Paso.

Another thing that gives me GREAT comfort for some reason, is knowing that much of the world is entirely clueless to the cultural merits of Gun ownership as it applys to me, and everyone that I know that owns a gun. Hearing them mis-apply the smug 'guns kill people' argument further confirms that they dont have a clue what they are talking about in relation to us. That Liberal BS would specifically NOT apply to EVERY example of gun ownership I am personally familiar with..it makes me giggle inside..like a secret joke...

Great point GS

The funny part is, that I'm the liberal commie that your talking about.

You guys almost had me convinced about the whole gun argument at one time but I must say that this is probably one of the dumbest points made on the issue... knives, baseball bats, and... yes, believe it or not, hands have other uses besides killing people.  Guns, though they may be used for the "sport" of target shooting, were created with only one purpose in mind... I feel like I'm repeating myself.  The four things that you're comparing aren't even comparible.  Now if you had compared missiles, bombs, and guns which have the same purpose then I would agree with your statement.

a few things:
a) shooting guns is not a sport... just like hunting is not a game.
b) sheix: minnesota legalized the right to carry firearms a year ago... so this "NOTHERN Liberal Commie state" wouldn't do something silly like that.  When people vote a southern republican president in office that's just how our state acts... southern and republican (saddly).  You really see that living up here in the transition between offices.
if anybody made a law like that it would be some crazy southern baptist group.
c) it's not even about the argument "guns do kill people"... nobody can argue that guns are made for the purpose of killing and maybe that's the main reason I can't support them... and yes, in reality guns DO kill people... I know, guns don't think for themselves, save that argument for somebody who cares.

Actually, you skipped right over my knife argument...yes, knives have been used as weapons since long before most other instruments of warfare.  So, that one does go along with your guns argument.  And you wanna know what guns are good for?  Why is hunting not an acceptable use of guns for you?  That use of guns is how this country came to expand from the original 13 colonies all the way to the Pacific Ocean.  Self-defense is another good reason to have a gun.  Somebody will be much less likely to break into your home (and steal you blind) if you have a gun in the house to protect yourself, your family, and your stuff.  Take the example of Marion Carl, the first Marine Corps fighter ace of World War II.  A guy broke into his house years after he retired as a Major General in the USMC.  The guy had a shotgun and General Carl protected himself and his wife with the only thing he had available...his hands.  The guy shot General Carl in the face with the shotgun and killed him, but the General did manage to save his wife's life.  Now, if General Carl had a gun in his house for self-defense, the outcome would probably have been quite different.  As it is, we lost a great national hero because some punk kid wanted to steal some shit to buy drugs with.

You will NEVER convince me that guns are unnecessary, and I honestly don't give a damn if you think otherwise.  If the day comes that somebody ever tries to harm my family, I will NOT be the victim, I guarantee you that.[/size]  ;)

Because I'm against hunting unless it's for survival... which is pretty much non-existant today.

Again, you're making a stupid comparison.  You're trying to tell me that owning a musket in the late 1700's has a similar meaning to owning an AK-47 for example today?  That's obsurd

I feel sorry for the former Major General.  I know I'm dreaming when I say this, but if people couldn't get their hands on guns in the first place (something that would have had to be done many many years ago) that punk kid wouldn't have had a gun to steal with.  Now back to reality, sure, a gun may have increased his chances of living... but my parents have never owned any gun for self defence (my dad being obsessed with history owns some old indian beaded rifles and a musket) and I still feel pretty damn safe, no less safe than I would carrying a gun.  Punk kids are at the bottom of my worries these days.

Luna-Dude,

You cant even CONCEIVE of the protection argument, being that youre from one of the safest cities in the entire UNited States...in one of the statistically safest states in the Union, so technically, you cant argue against THAT motivation for gun ownership. You yourself have pointed out that despite some of the recent headlines and murders up there, that sort of violent crime is by no means a headline dominator like it is in many southern and western states. There are 22 carjackings PER DAY here in dallas alone. If youve never lived in FEAR, (and you havent), then you are not remotely qualified to comment on the beliefs of those of us that do live in dangerous places, where Golly Shucks has been dead a LONG time, and the guy knocking on your door in the middle of the day is NOT the milkman..or utility worker..He is casing your home to take your shit and do you harm in the process...

Come live in MethTown for a few months, amid the VAST numbers of Gangs, Home invasions, aggravated burglaries and Carjackings (where 99%+ of THOSE guys ARE armed at all times)...see if you dont think you could use some extra protection. (and guess what, even if the laws changed, do you REALLY think they would throw aways THEIR guns? hint: they wouldnt)

Those guys have a name for nice, thoughtful, polite middle class white american kids like yourself...VICTIM.

You are absolutely entitled to your beliefs, but by virtue of the area, and circumstances of your upbringing, youre not qualified to judge those of us who dont live where or how you do...

Thats because Minnesota is not widely nown for its Meth Labs, and myriad Violent Narco-trafficking Gangmembers. I promise, you would NOT feel safe walking around in ANY neighborhood of South Dallas or West Forth Worth. Youre white skin and rosy cheeks would call thugs to you like a dead cow calls to the vultures... And you could not fight them off with your rave Pacifier, and raybeams of Global Peace and Love...*(written with a friendly chuckle, ok?)

And Shooting guns IS actually a sport whether you like it or agree with it. Gun competition among licenced and responsible gun owners is a VERY normal and widespread thing in this part of the country. If you take a skill, refine it, and compete over it, it's a sport. Some would argue that Curling, shuffleboard, and ice skating (northern sports) are not sports either... ;)

Nevertheless, I still wouldn't own a gun if I lived down in Dallas... that I can promise you.  That and I would never move to Texas, crime being one of my lesser reasons ;D

I'm not arguing against guns for protection... I would never own a gun, but I'm not arguing against the major, for example, owning a gun.  Simply because I wouldn't know, most of my arguements in these posts are me speaking for myself and what I believe.  If people want or need the protection of a gun they can have that for all I care... if the person is responsible and smart (I know there are a handful of legal gun owners today that do not fall under either of those) then they can go for it.

And Sheix, I agree with you that curling, shuffleboard (what the hell is shuffleboard?) are not sports either... I'm in whole-hearted belief that everybody who competes in that sport must be an athlete (to be an athlete one must be physically fit in my opinion) for it to really be a sport.  As for games, I believe games must be fun for all members participating and usually are competetive... games do not require athletes.  This is why hunting is not a sport or a game because I can't imagine the animals getting killed are enjoying getting shot.  And this is why, in my opinion, target shooting is a game because it does not require athletes.  I know, the whole athlete/sport issue has changed over the years but hey, just another one of my opinions.

So I guess Archery (one of the oldest sports on earth) isn't a sport either, huh?  I mean, come on, archery...you know the only thing a bow and arrow are good for are killing things.[/size]

no... archery is not a sport in my opinion.

Better tell the Olympic Committee...they might need to rethink what a sport is:[/size]

http://www.olympic.org/uk/sports/programme/index_uk.asp?SportCode=AR

key words, my opinion... if you want to bring it to the olympic committee go ahead ::)

Never seen Robin Hood? :P The cartoon? They never killed with it.

Yes, Im digging up an old topic...

The reason is that the mainstream media doesnt report gun interventions very often..but this one here PERFECTLY and accurately reflects my reasons for advocating safe and responsible gun ownership...and its sorta funny.

Thief-Dude is lucky he didn't get killed.
73 year olds are notoriously bad aims.

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/strange/news-article.aspx?storyid=59519

I am for gun control, at least gun control of the types of weapons that GS listed above (mp5, ak-47 etc). Those are guns used specifically to kill someone. They are powerful and completely unneccessary in civilian life.

I do find myself thinking that people should be able to own some protection. While I agree that you live in a dangerous area sheix, I cannot wholy reconcile myself with your arguement, unless it is an outright war zone (or something like hurricane katrina). If its not a war zone, isn't it the police's job to keep you safe? Doesn't anything else smell a little bit like vigilante justice to you? Also, ain't nobody preventing you from moving.

It seems to me that guns may just create more violence. Allowing guns to be sold opens up a chance for gun trafficking, or guns being stolen. It releases weapons onto the street that might not have been there otherwise. It allows people to kill cops, rob stores, vicitimize innocent people.

And GS...boxers have to register their hands as weapons...I'm just saying.

POlice 'protection' is non existent..even in less dangerous areas.
Their presence is Re-active..not Pro-active.
ie..they come to your house to rope off the crime scene AFTER you're dead..not before...

This old man would likely be killed without the posession of his gun.

And yeah spike..very realistic to have everyone that lives in dangerous territory to just pack up and move.

That statement smacks of the experience or Non experience of a young person who has yet to bea victim of violent crime..or at least crime at this level.

Platitudes like "aint nobody preventing you from moving" shows exactly how lightly people like you take the security issue.

And your last paragraph includes reasoning so inherently lacking, that im surpirsed a smart guy like you didnt catch it.

So um..what about the guns that are already there and in circulation? Not legally obtained in 99% of all crime cases.. Liberals like you prefer that law-abiding citizens STAY at the mercy of criminals who have no respect for life and property simply becuase guns make YOU uncomfortable. CRIMINALS kill cops, rob stores and victimize innocent people.. How does that fact ALWAYS escape the gun control lobby?
Must be simply denial..

Lets all just stay at their mercy i guess eh?

I guess in some of those cases, not allowing citizens to protect themselves would insure that in some of those violent offences, no CRIMINAL gets shot (liberals are famous for protecting the criminal)..the victims just lose their lives, property, dignity, and feelings of security. Brilliant logical outcome to your reasoning...

And for the record..its not 'Vigilante Justice" to shoot a criminal who is in your home WITH A WEAPON, intent on hurting you and your family...is called 'self-defence'.

Shiex i think you highlighted the problem but i come to a different conclusion.


Rather than have everyone carrying guns and some kinda 'vigilante' setup, why not sort the police out to become Pro-Active rather than Re-active. Although you need a complete society overhaul to go with it.

Yes, and just as feasible; my new idea to cut down on SOCCER violence...Just restrict the sale of beer on game days in the UK.

sounds kinda silly in hindsight dont it?

hahah   I SAID SOCCER!! woot!

It seems I've inherited my grandpa's russian WWII pistol (not sure of the kind)... what's this world coming to.  I guess he thought he would be in another war as this thing still has 2 full ammo boxes (over 900 rounds in the same WWII ammo boxes).

Crooshlet, you should keep the gun for sentimental reasons, but consider losing the shells (keep the boxes) 60 year old munutions are rarely stable..a large explosion will just give you more 'ammo' in your silly anti gun rants...

hahahahaha

 ;D

ps: let us know what it is when you get it identified....would be interesting..
pss: ok, your rants arent silly...just retarded.
ppss: lol, jk again, i actually value your opinions...

(actually, ask a gun expert his opinion on the stability vs rarity/worth)

Heres an interesting tidbit...

An off-duty Los Angeles police officer is in critical but stable condition Wednesday morning after being shot with his service weapon by his 3-year-old son while the two were in a pickup truck in Anaheim.

Enrique Chavez, 35, driving his Ford Ranger near Harbor Boulevard and La Palma Avenue, stopped shortly before noon Tuesday when the boy, sitting in the back seat, got his hands on his father’s 9mm handgun, said Anaheim police Sgt. Tim Schmidt.

“How he got it, we don’t know,” Schmidt said, adding that there were two weapons in the vehicle.

The gun went off and the bullet plowed through the back of the driver’s seat, entering Chavez’s back and exited through his chest, Schmidt said.

Chavez was able to stop the truck and call out for help.

“He sat in the driver’s seat, yelling at people to help him,” Schmidt said.

Soo...Unfortunately, this is simply more proof that guns aren’t safe in anyone’s hands. No matter how much training anyone has, or what safety procedures they take, whenever there’s a gun around, everyone present is faced with a dire threat.

Seriously....plEASE! with this hippie  bullshit.  If the officer had his wits about him, he would have known where his guns were at all times.  Plus why does he need two on him when he has a kid in his car on a regular basis.  That particular guy is obviously a careless dumbass.  Let's not lump the whole thing into a nice package for your cause.  Personally I don't own any guns, but I do recognize the right for people to want to protect themselves and thier families the way they see fit, and the right own a gun for whatver reason they want one for.  And what do you propose?  Taking guns away from our police officers?  Why don't we take away everyone's cars because some idiots drive drunk, or some children steal keys from thier parents...and sometimes old people plow over crowded sidewalks. Nice attempt at an agenda driven point of view, but its a heaping serving of Marshmallow Fluff®

Oh Boy, time to take away our police dogs too. Unfortunately, no matter how much training a dog has, or whatever safety procedures we take........everyone present is faced with a dire threat!!!!

haha life is funny unless you were this lady
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13841261/

in short, stop worrying about everyone else, life is too short to worry about what everyone else has, just move along and push down those that are weaker.

OH man its a hippy. quick ignore them as being a sensless idiot. cool end of conversation.

Kinda bypassing the whole fact that cars and dogs do not primarily exist to kill people. guns do.


Was looking for the [sarcasm] tags. couldn't find them..... ??

not sarcasm.....just life

yeah life's much happier if you decide that its ok to get by by stamping on the guy below you.

Damn that quote says a lot about American Foreign politics.

BFG  ....not everyone who owns a gun intends to kill someone or something with it.  Peace of mind maybe, protection.  Coming from Semi-Urban NY, the reason for me to own a gun would be protection straight up. if some gangsta mother f**cker decided to break and enter in my house where soon I will have a newborn baby sleeping in it along with my little wifey.   I sure as hell can bet you that one of those disgraces to society will be carrying a piece.  Unregistered and untraceable.  Oh sure some of you may say give him what he wants and let him go. I have wrestled with the thought of a home protection device such as a shotgun...where hopefully all you need to do is cock the shotty to scare off any would be shitsucker. For now I will rely on my 90lb PitBull and a Louisville slugger, but my opinions may change after the brth of my 1st child in August. 

By American Foreign Politics, you ACTUALLY mean, says alot about THREE power hungry men who happen to be in control at the moment..

Three men. thats it...

remember that as you continually paint us individuals with the broad brush of greed, and imperialsm of those three men...

Speaking of American Hippie Idots, (who rightfully deserve some igoring), in this discussion,who are all for assigning more rights and protections and respect to an illegal gun-wielding CRIMINALS with murderous intent... Please, be accurate and educated enough to assign some BLAME to those liberal hippie idiots for the Americn foreigh Policy you seem to Hate so much.....

Becuase it is ENTIRELY and 100% their fault that america has not developed its OWN oil resources, energy alternatives such as Wind Farms and Nuclear energy (they single handedly stopped the development on all THREE fronts)...placing us at the mercy of the hunt for foreign sources of petroleum.
And those loving Hippies placed us directly into the path of war over energy resources...how loving and insightful of them..

Keep that in mind when you get upset that they are not universally hugged for their progressive thinking...

The gun issue is just another avenue for them to demonstrate their contempt for the average american, and his right to protect himself.

Care to discuss death rates from Automobiles and Alcohol?

id venture so say that an item that purports to be one thing (ie alcohol=entertainment) but yields an entirely different manifestation..(crime, voilence, and car accidents) is far more insidious than an object whose use/purpose is readily admitted upfront...

No one seems ready to place any blame on alcohol, or rail aginst it in public forums, when infact, its consumption is involved in 80% of ALL crime/deaths worldwide (including britain), and 70% of automobile accidnts...and often provides liquid courage to those said gun toting criminals to encourage them to go ahead to commit their acts.. How large the outrage against alcohol? hardly proportionate...so we're witnessing SELECTIVE outrage aimed at the right to bear arms..made easier by the fact that those rights are found in AmeriKa the Horrible...

Talk about guns and self protection and we end up in the realm of coddling the criminal and taking shots at americans and their politics...

Now THERES a conversation ender..

BFG you went silly,

if my quote stood for american foreign politics, then we wouldn't have any. Notice the part that says "stop worrying about everyone else", well if we did that we wouldn't be in half the shit we are now. "And pushes the weak down?" yes, america's humanitarian aid is pushing down the weak. 

Now in a literal sense, yes it is okay to stamp on those below me. It doesn't mean i get off on it like a power hungry idiot, but that is basically how you advance in life. I'm sorry to break it to you, but life in a humanistic sense is competition. The job doesn't go to the one who says "oh you first", you don't get a patent for lending out designs in the spirit of equality and companies don't survive by dispersing all profits to it's employees.

Yes it is sad that guns exist at all and that they are used to kill, but if not guns there are other resources available. People are people and people that kill do so for whatever reasons they had at the time. Just like wars and killing on a mass scale existed before guns, it will continue to exist long after.

Hippie BS? Let me introduce myself. I have fired every weapon that was in the USMC.. way before you were even a wetspot on your folks bed.

Guns were a creation in a time of barbarism when tools like that were necessary for progress.


That same barbarism (that hasn't weeded itself out of human society for generations) is the reason why guns are still around....and still needed.

Right on BFG....alcohol is far and away a more serious problem than our society lets on.  And Marijuana is illegal!!! What hypocracy!!!  Imagine the crime rate if say weed was legal and alcohol was illegal.  I can for shit sure guarnatee that violent crimes would drop. You know how many bar fights break out because some drunk guido meathead can't handle his alcohol?  It would be funny to see if these bars serving alcohol were packing hukkas with Northern Lights, instead of Budweisers and Jello shots!

The British don't drink much do they?  I would hate to be caught at one of those English football games wearing the wrong teams' jersey after a couple of lummoxes tie one on by the way of a few gallons of Guiness.

Now for the Amerika the Horrible comment.....  Amerika the Horrible that millions of immigrants stream to every year, just to get a taste of.  The Country that when others have crisis, look to for help and support.  Now of course the media will never let on that we actually do some good during our "global romping and raping and pillaging"(theres your sarcastic insert). Real life is hard to apply the "puppy dogs and ice cream" way of thinking.  It would be nice, but unrealistic.  WE may be the most powerful nation in the world, but it is not something to be embarrased about.  Look around the globe, there are far worse things to be than American.

Just to curb your media strewn view of this place and the gun policy.  Of all the people I know ...family and friends, I would venture to say that only say 1 in 20 own some sort of firearm.  I no of no one that has been involved in a gun related incident.  We do have the right to bear arms, but normal everyday American citizens don't just assume thier right for this and go out and buy guns like cigarrettes.  I also happen to live on the north-east coast. I don't think this is a much of an issue here as it is in some other parts of the country.   I do however appreciate the fact that if I felt it necessary to go out and buy a gun for my protection, that I could at any given time.  I would do it the right way. Fill out the paperwork, apply for a license and purchase a gun that would be registered with my government. Fully legal. I would probably never fire it outside of a gun range situation, and I would hope I never have to.

The funny thing is that a lot of these people that fight for gun control, are the same people that would be crying bloody murder if we where to ammend any part of the Constitution that would take away one of the rights that they feel is appropriate.  I am not a gun nut, I am not necessarily for guns, I would never hunt (i feel animals are more innocent than any person walking around), I don't even own one.  Responsibility ultimately lands on the individual.  What might be a good idea is severe and harsh penalties for people that misuse, mishandle and are irresponsible with thier guns. I am not sure about our legal policy on this. But like drunk drivers, we have raised the penalties for it, but it still occurs.  I  would never drive drunk, so there is another example of individual responsiblity. 

The first time I ever thought about buying a gun was last summer, when there was a string of ab out 20-30 homeinvasions within a 20 mile radius of where I live. THis happened in the middle of the day, while people were home, at night not so late when people were awake.  The heat must have come down hard, because it has stopped for now.  If it continued, I can bet sure as shit that I would have picked me up a shotty. It would be much safer if we could still walk around with swords and bows and arrows, but the ones usually looking to do harm are not carrying rapiers, usually its a GAT.  I could bet they didn't buy it in the store that would be shut down if we were to controll the firearms.

Sorry if it looks like the rambling of a crazy person...one large coffee, no breakfast, and trying to respond quickly at work....and I don't have a good conversation ender. ???

Hold on i can't post properly yet, other than a few knickers got in a twist, i didn't explain myself completely before, and Cell you've got your quotes messed up matey, i'll respond asap heh.

A case of Silly Cell Anemia..

That was my post you quoted, hunny...in answer to bfg.

:)

ps. i sounded more knicker twisted than i really was...
(sorry for the 'be more accurate and educated' part). ::bussi::
i fully enjoy our debates, and respect all your views..

Its just that in reference to american politics..thers but a handful of americans that support what our administration is doing (across the board), and if we could vote tomorrow..youd see the surprising heart of america in that vote..trust me on this.

pss... in reference to gun ownership saturation, to give some geographical comparison..i live in the south opposed to cells NE, and id venture to say that fully 95% of all our households contain guns..legally, and safely held. Its more culturally embraced here, due to large cities being spread out (100+ miles between them), whereas they are packed shoulder to shoulder in cells part of the country. Guns are a way of life in the rural/semi rural south..whereas it is less so in the north, northeast, and west coast..

Just look at the number of posts I have.  I am a shit stinking spawn camping noob that's first kit pick in GhR would be the MG3 support rifle.  I was trying to quote what I thought was BFG...and now my giant reply's effectiveness has gone to shit.  This time I will manually quote Sheix....."i fully enjoy our debates, and respect all your views."  Never misconceive my tone...I feel exactly the same way.  BFG you classy bastard...the U.N could seriously use a diplomat such as yourself. Sheix...cut that mullet.

Ahahahaha i love you guys far to much :D

• Shiex i must appologies to you and all other intelligent respectable Americans who i insult with my angry emotional brush strokes of generalisation. I keep doing it but not for one moment do i really think of you as being all the same. I know some of you guys are the most intelligent respectable and caring people, and i mean you no ill. It is Bush and his cronies, and those who support many of his beliefs that I struggle with - and even then not all i must stress. Not all.


Its hard to understand quite what its like to be in such fear for your/your familys safety for you to feel the need to have a gun. It simply isn't the case here. We don't have guns full stop. We have small teams of Armed rapid responce police units, and occasionally we have crimes which involve fire arms. But they are rare - main news headline events that don't happen. The public dosn't have guns, most of the criminal fraternity don't have guns. The public dosn't need them because nobody can have them so for criminals to be able to acquire them is hard. So forgive me but it is very hard to understand.
Hard to understand also is this idea that everyone must have the 'right' to own a weapon to kill others. Yes Cars kill people, cigarettes, alcohol, cancer etc etc... but Guns are soley for the purpose to kill. You don't have Native Indians threatening your colonies anymore, or British soldiers... I don't know quite how i can put this.. maybe thats enough.
I guess i can't accept this "its my god given right" argument.

* Giving up your 'right' to own an UZI is different from giving up your right to a fair trial, or to know that your government isn't secretly tapping your phones etc.

And please don't get me wrong. Guns have a purpose and i understand that there are times and people who need them. - be it professional hunters farmers customs and excise, Drugs enforcement or whatever. But do i think that Joe next door should be allowed to keep a AK74 in his cabinet? No. nobody should.

Which is going to result in more deaths? Not allowing anyone to have guns or allowing everyone? its pretty obvious. Im not saying its easy, just pretty clear.

Regarding Alchohol i totally agree with many parts of what you've said. Having worked as a Bouncer/DoorMan i've been right in the thick of seeing what to much Alchohol can do to people. But its never just alchohol. Its the same with Guns you might say, and i'd agree. But my argument is that it comes down to society and peoples behaviour and attitude towards others thats at the core of it. Much harder to change, but removing things like guns makes it easier. Alcohol in moderation fine, alcohol in not much moderation not quite so fine.. agressive group of young men and alcohol = BFG laying some smack down on the door.
And if you add a gun/s to the mix? well its an easy answer it = BFG in hospital/morgue.

Im rambling on sorry. i should be sleeping.



Yeah i know mate, and i think you know i know that. I just forget that people might not know i know that and thus i skip a bit and generalise ;) Sorry...

oh too many knows in there i know.

As for this one:


I can't comment on the Hippy behaviour there i have nothing to go on. I worry about your 'hippy' population however if they are blocking wind farms. Nuclear energy i can understand the worry about - we're having that very argument over here at the moment. As for drilling in Alaska and destroying the wildlife reserves....

Comes down to a change in Society - if people are prepared not to believe its their god given right to drive a 4 ton 6litre sports utility 'wagon' , or to live in the middle of the desert with a 400 foot cooled swimming pool then the energy consumption wouldn't be so high...

It comes down to societys attitudes again, and by no means am i arguing that America is the only one with a lot of monsters under the bed, monsters that need to be pulled out and addressed... quite litterally before the lights turn out!!

On that note i need my beauty sleep!  ::bussi::

     As much as I don't want to sound like GS, I agree with the right to bear arms.

     I think there may be a fundamental difficulty for people from other countries in understanding an American's relationship to his government. The Founding Fathers had just finished a war that was a very risky gamble, a gamble undertaken to gain freedom from the whims of a tyrant who gave the colonists no say in their own governance. Through courage, luck, and balls the size of coconuts (not to mention the Virginia militia, the first snipers in American history), the colonists won the war and spent a long, hot summer hammering out a nation. The fundamental principle running through the Constitution is one of mistrust for government and governors. By way of example, the American bicameral legislature and three independent-but-intertwined branches of government (executive, legislative, judicial) were specifically concieved to be as inefficient as possible while still being functional, because the Founding Fathers reasoned that a government which expended all its energies on infighting would have little energy left for screwing its subjects. The mistrust of power and those who hold it is deep-seated in the American psyche.

     The right to bear arms was another move by the Founding Fathers to limit the maximum power of the government. If the country's rulers ever got uppity, they'd have to deal with an armed populace before they got their way. Of course, advancing military technology has very much changed the equation. Even so, a well-armed modern populace could put up a decent, if doomed, fight.

     At this point in history, the right to bear arms is more a psychological pacifier than a tool against government tyranny, but the intent of the Founding Fathers still holds merit--a weak government and strong populace limits the injustice the government can inflict.

Great way to put that Loth, and Id only make one further distinction, in that we dont feel that its a god given right, to us, its a constitutionally granted right..once aimed at an overpowering govt, but now directed at overpowering criminality..  (futher bolstered by the large population that lives in country areas where hunting for necessity is only obsolete by fifty to seventy years...and cultuaral habits are hard to break.) Becuase when we fought the British, fully half, if not more, of the guns used were privately held weapons...

Further, In most sparsely populated southern states hunting is still a huge past time. Yes you can bring up the ak 47/assault rifle stuff again, but hunters dont use them, and ak47 holders are few and far between comparitively..they just get most of the attention.

All of its ingrained and mushed together in a widely agreed upon american cultural phenomenon, and even the maverick city/crime usage is but PERHAPS representative of 3% of overall gunholders, therefore THOSE justifications never even cross the mind of the average gunholder (rendering that version of opposition negligable)..however, the sport/constitutional aspects still do.
You just dont hear about the law abiding ones, becuase they arent shooting anyone.

Two cracking posts, i can't argue with those. We'll agree to disagree but i can understand where you guys are coming from, and like i've said, and loth you now also said, it is hard to understand when you live in a gun free society.

I guess the only thing i would add is that if your constitution does allow private gun ownership etc, I wouldn't want anyone under 21, hell make it 25 being allowed anywehre near a gun. I don't think people should be able to drive till they're 21 considering how many young kids kill themselves and others, but guns...  I just think that more could be done to make sure that guns aren't shot in anger - or by accident!

So I gather that the crime rate in the US is going down then ?

For those armed when home invaders call? Yes. Drops that number to near 100% for those dumb enough to assault a household that is armed...break, enter, die. There are local newspaper articles monthly of burglars wounded or killed for picking the wrong home.
Home invasions are down in texas alone by 22% over 1995 numbers.
*Texas statistics begin in 2002 (when the concealed carry laws were enacted, meaning trained and certiffied citizens are allowed to carry concealed weapons)...and extend thru 2005.
For those armed when carjackers call? Yes. Down 16%

The carry law is not enacted in all 50 states..so i cannot speak for those states that do not have this law.

For those using ILLEGAL guns in the commision of crimes/commercial robbery induced by drugs and alcohol? No.
For gang related crimes, also again using ILLEGAL weapons (meaning stolen or obtained illegally) No.
Petty crimes such as property theft, no.

Jailed offenders asked about their habits referred extensively to the carry laws as their reasons from turning from home burglary and carjacking to vehicular burglary and straight auto theft.
Taking the chance of surpriseing an armed homeowner became too risky.

     BFG, in my opinion, it's all about the training. I am absolutely in favor of more training for people who wish to engage in a potentially dangerous activity, which activities include both driving and shooting. The sort of people who flip their SUVs over the highway divider into oncoming traffic and crush five vehicles before sliding to a stop are generally the same sort of people whose kids shoot themselves while playing with their gun--they're people trained merely as operators, not as skilled practitioners. Ever since I spent eighteen months pizza driving, and witnessed firsthand the difference between being a driver and being an operator, I've had a fantasy where every driver on the road must spend at least six consecutive months holding a driving job. Ah, it is to dream. Anyhow, I feel the same about gun ownership: a skilled, well-trained shooter, of any age, would be much less prone to do the stupid things that give legitimate gun owners a bad name.

     Regarding concealed-carry laws, again, I'm all in favor. Personal crimes like mugging become far less appealing to criminals or potential criminals because of the gamble involved. Namely, "who is safe to rob?"

     I have read several times the opinion that the culture of dueling was the root cause of the American South's cultural habit of extreme, formal politeness. That culture has waned over the decades from its peak, circa the Civil War, but was so deeply ingrained that to this day it is not uncommon in the South to address men as "sir". In short, if there is a real risk of injury or death from rudeness, politeness is a survival trait. If that link is a true one, it's one more point in favor of concealed-carry, in my opinion. You're much less likely to be a dick to someone who just might be capable of ventilating you, and America could do with a return to politeness.