There wasn't a significant number of dumbfucks dying in their bathtubs while using their hairdryer either yet, it's mandated by law to have the WARNING TAG on the power chord.

Personally, I think the tag should be removed for the sake of natural selection. You do the math and see where I stand on the gun issue.

But think of all that wasted electricity.

It only seems "paradoxical" if you buy into the quasi-magical notion that guns emit an anti-crime radiation (as many here seem to). Practical thinking leads us directly to the obvious conclusion that guns are worth a lot of money on the gray market, of course they will be routinely stolen. It's not like they jump out of the display cases and shoot the criminals automatically.

People keep treating these things as some kind of goddamn Living Embodiment Of My Constitutional Rights!!! instead of an object.

But they don't! The bullets do. Plus, if it's that much of a concern, you can always buy a sound-and-flash suppressor. Make sure your firearm is capable of sporting such a device!

Again, the issue is one regarding the individual liberties of US citizens. Issues of state soverignty in relation to nuclear programs are probably better suited for another thread.

To clarify, by safe practice, I mean practicing in the same way that you'd practice safe driving habits, practice safe sex, or in this case gun safety.

i'll go ahead and say lunatics will probably have a much harder time

you know

because guns are registered, usually

and taking mental tests is harder than flashing a driver's license

there's probably a lot more paperwork involved than when buying a 12 pack, so yeah, generally harder

Do you think it's paradoxical that a gun ban doesn't eliminate all violent crime?

These analogies do not hold up so well, Meth. Their core functions are incompatible.

You see, the function of a car, the reason people purport to need one, is travel. It is indeed possible to use a car in this fashion safely. There are other ways to use a car, but this is the core use. If a car was built that did everything that a normal car does except accelerate your travels, no one would buy it.

The function of a gun is to put new windows in a structurally-sound person. It is not possible to use a gun in this fashion safely; by definition if the gun is used in this fashion someone has been hurt. There are other ways to use a gun, but this is the core use. If a gun was released that did everything a normal gun does except shoot bullets into people, no one would buy it.*

When people talk about "safe driving" what they generally mean is usage of the item's core function (accelerated travel) with the hope of absolutely minimizing injury or harm to the driver or other drivers.

When people talk about "safe gun ownership" what they generally mean is preventing the item's core function from engaging, by keeping the weapon unloaded, locked up, et cetera. A safe gun owner wants to prevent people from getting shot, or to make the gun useless.

You can't just treat a gun as a piece of property like any other for this reason. Either you're just looking at it (it's useless) or somebody's badly hurt (it's useful). Maybe there are other items like this but none are coming to mind. You can fuck somebody up pretty badly with a cricket bat but that's not why cricket bats exist.




*with some exceptions vis-a-vis hunting, but do you think the gun lobby would accept a ban on everything but hunting rifles? Also, when I say "no one" this obviously excludes collectors, which are in a class of lunacy all their own.



If you think "paperwork" keeps a determined asshole from doing whatever the hell he's decided to do I expect you don't watch the news too often. Here, let me lay it out for you. You have a gun. I am a criminal who does not object to killing someone to get what I want. Now I have a gun!

At any rate gun bans obviously don't eliminate violent crimes. Mostly people just resort to stabbing each other. But the class of crimes you can accomplish with knives is significantly smaller. I can't see anyone holding up a bank with a machete exactly.

wait man let me stop you here! this is the part where I shoot you for breaking into my house :cool: ok go No, it won't go that way all the time, but paperwork and bureaucracy is sort of necessary to make sure guns make it into capable hands. In the situation you gave, at least the good guy has a chance to protect himself.

If you think "gun bans" keep a determined asshole from getting a gun, then you're the one who needs to watch the news! No, but how about them breaking into someone's house?

I guess you could hold up a bank with homemade bombs.

Guns aren't useless if they don't hurt anybody, your own example of the bank robbery is indicative of the deterrent factor. Some people get shot during bank robberies but most of the time they don't and I'd hardly think the robber considers his gun useless because nobody was perforated. Hell, you don't even need a real gun for deterrent, which is a significant cause of gun crime in Britain. You could even use an airsoft gun in a robbery (doesn't shoot bullets).

The same principle applies to all other uses, legal or otherwise. If I can deter somebody from committing an assault or robbery without firing a single shot that's the best possible outcome.

The function of a gun is to fire a projectile. The target is reliant upon the user and their motivation. Why all the demonizing? As you said earlier, it's just an object. Gun safety is practiced not to prevent the core function from engaging, but to help insure control when the function is engaged and prevent accidents.

Some people keep pistols not only for personal protection, but also for competitive shooting and recreation, and as you mentioned, collecting. Clue me in on why this seems crazy.

Yes, because I went up to your bedroom, woke you up, announced my intentions, handed you the gun I already took out of your cabinet, stood against the wall, and held up a dartboard in front of my chest. Best of luck with that scenario.

It's entirely possible you're awake 24/7 and never leave the house but this is not probably the most common example.

"Competitive shooting". Explain to me why you need anything more than a paint gun for this. Or, hell, a crossbow. Darts. A rubberband and paperclip. Spitwads. In the world of "gosh let's see which of us can point at something" there are many options that hardly ever blow off somebody's thumb.

As for collecting I don't see why "GUYS LOOK: I HAVE A LOT OF SOMETHING" isn't a little silly. When I was about 7, maybe 8, I collected baseball cards. And then I said to myself: "Self, these things are fucking worthless".

It'd probably be best if everybody stopped fantasizing about what could go right or wrong. Paranoia isn't going to get us anywhere, and paranoid fantasies should not be the basis of policy.

The fact is that guns have deterred crime. Guns have also made people the target of crime. Guns can save lives and also be completely useless. The core of this debate concerns cultural values, and the political reality is that despite the majority of Americans who do not mind gun control, the few that care about it are the only ones who consider it a voting issue.

So I guess Americans just love guns FUCK YEAH

YouTube Video

FUCK YEAH

YouTube Video

FUCK YEAH

YouTube Video

FUCK YEAH

more like

YouTube Video

owned :cool:

Ok, within competitive shooting participants use both rifles and pistols in a variety of calibers. Paint guns aren't anywhere near as accurate as real guns over long distances. And yes, they have competitive crossbow shooting and darts. But as you can imagine, it isn't quite the same. Your statement is about as silly as telling a formula 1 driver that he should stick to go-karts, tricycle races, or pony rides. You really should try going to a gun range if you have access. Not to march around all macho, but to give it a go for the sport and get some firsthand education on the subject instead of immediately writing it off because it involves scary weapons. You'll find that it's not quite as simple, or barbaric as you might think.

And just cause you decided that your baseball collection sucked, doesn't mean that other people don't enjoy collecting things (guns included).

I'm not saying they don't enjoy it. People enjoy a lot of terrible things. NASCAR. Hot Pockets. Everybody Loves Raymond.

I'm not writing anything off because it's "scary" but because it's conceptually boring. People taking turns pointing at things. It's not an objection to guns precisely, I have the same attitude toward, say, a free-throw contest. "Sports" where nobody's actually interacting.

Maybe, but I don't really think any Brit is going to look kindly on a person who helped perpetrate the "events of 1776".

Plus, I'm a big fan of Xenogears. Freud rocked his shit off in that game. Uhh spoiler alert?

It is interesting to see that the Vehicle Theft rate was significantly high in 1995 and 1996. It appears to me that this was because everyone wanted to go to Atlanta for the Olympic Games.

YouTube Video

FUCK YEAH

Look all I'm saying is that it's their fault they didn't arm themselves

Columbine was caused by videogames everyone knows that by now

John Romero made Columbine his bitch :(

This is the calibre of criminal who burgles for your Panasonic, Meth:

YouTube Video

From the case sample we can already see formidable offensive capacity, depth perception capabilities and hand-eye (crucial)

A perfect opportunity for the use of "Smooth Criminal" completely squandered

Ain't that the truth.

Are you OK؟

I heard that Columbine was linked to bowling. Well, at least more so than video games or music.

I support the right to own firearms, but have zero desire to do so myself. Outlawing firearms, as many people already stated, just means that you'll have to get it illegally. Perhaps a little more difficult, but does anybody really get stressed about marijuana being illegal?

After seeing Michael Moore's film, the United States is certainly a special case when it comes to gun violence. "Bowling for Colombine" didn't provide any conclusive findings, but it did point out distinctive societal differences that might be at the heart of the problem in this country.

The other thing I just learned, most gun deaths in the U.S. are from suicides. What's up with that?

I must say that I find it difficult to defend gun ownership on the grounds of crime prevention. The odds of a gun being used this way are slim and the consequences of misuse are extreme even if unlikely. But what if I was living in the heart of the L.A. riots. What if I was a store owner being threated with knife or um...a palm frond? What if I saw a rabid dog in my neighborhood? I think these are pretty reasonable situations. Not enough so that I feel compelled to own a firearm, but enough so that I can understand why someone else would.