Runboard.com
Слава Україні!

runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)

Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 ... 20  21  22 

 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 5360
Karma: 24 (+39/-15)
Re: "If guns kill people...."


quote:

Yobbo wrote:

Bullshit.



LOL You said it a lot easier than I did.
12/16/2018, 12:39 am Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Re: "If guns kill people...."


quote:

Philer wrote:

quote:

YES, and the POINT is that regulations clearly have absolutely NOTHING at all to do with it, and it is insane, insulting, and stupid to keep trying to lie and imply that it does. You could give a firearm to absolutely every single person in Australia, and you likely would not see a single difference in murder rates.-Rigby



Even if that were true it wouldn't mean that reducing the number of guns in the wrong hands in this country wouldn't reduce the homicide rate. This is a country with way too many Prima Donnas who don't care that much about other people, only themselves. It is also a country that promotes violence in a lot of ways, including by promoting the popular belief that some people snap and lose control of themselves when they get mad. Putting guns into the hands of people who believe that crap is asking for trouble.

quote:

To claim firearm access is what determines murder rates is not must incredibly irrational, but as insulting as one could possibly get. That implies we are all murderers, but just have to all be forcibly stopped from our criminal impulses to kill.



People shoot and kill people for all sorts of reasons including the belief that a threat exists when it doesn't really exist. The police often commit that kind of homicide. Your average citizen does too.

Then you have criminals being empowered and developing courage after getting their hands on a gun. Guess what? That leads to people being killed also, people who wouldn't have been killed if the criminal hadn't got hold of a gun.

Then there are the Prima Donnas who are empowered by guns and perhaps only develop the necessary will to kill after getting a gun.

And of course there are those killers who falsely believe they have snapped after getting angry who shoot people."I couldn't help it! He drove me to do it!"

Guns easily facilitate homicide. It's not difficult to see why fewer homicides would happen without guns.




Except that ignores entirely what causes murders in this country. Whether or not it is done with guns, the main cause it the repressive government, that incarcerates millions over things like drugs, gambling, prostitution, etc. That causes all these black market economies to be unable to use banks or any of the normal means of security. And that leads to gang turf wars. When the St. Valentines Day massacre happened in 1929, no one thought the solution was to make machineguns illegal. Clearly that was not the cause nor remotely possible to be a cure.

Yes "reducing the number of guns in the wrong hands in this country wouldn't reduce the homicide rate" at all, because it is not having guns that causes homicides at all. Putting a gun in someone's hands does not at ALL make them remotely feel homicidal.
Prima Donnas are not cause of murders in the US.
They are caused by poverty and economics.
Putting guns on the hands of those who think people snap and have uncontrollable rages is no danger at all because those people are the ones most assured to not let themselves get into a situation that could be that stressful.

And again you imply that gun control prevents criminals from getting guns, against all the evidence. Gun control means adding a small penalty for obtaining a gun illegally. But that can NEVER possibly inhibit criminals at all because they already INTEND to deliberately risk far greater penalties with the firearms. In it totally impossible, illogical, and insane for anyone to ever believe there is any possible remote chance at all for gun control to have any positive value at all.
Instead, all it does it reward the fascist dictatorship for taking away any vestige of democracy or equality under the law.

Since the ONLY people you disarm with gun control are the honest people who use them to prevent millions of crimes every single year, then obviously all gun control does is greatly increase crime. The vast majority do not at all commit serious crimes, but instead try to stop them. Gun control completely prevents that, and is clearly intended only to increase crime, intimidate people even more, and to use that to further the power of the evil dictatorship. There can be no other possible reason.
12/16/2018, 3:30 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Re: "If guns kill people...."


Face facts, gun control is totally and completely insane, and can only increase crime and a fascist government take over.

Image

12/16/2018, 4:42 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
crogin Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Registered: 01-2009
Posts: 1840
Karma: 6 (+7/-1)
Re: "If guns kill people...."


Image


---
Don't try to tell me the only way left is up.
There's always more down!

12/16/2018, 5:17 pm Link to this post PM crogin
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Re: "If guns kill people...."


quote:

crogin wrote:

Image



That is insane.
Tell me a single country that did not slide into dictatorship through gun control?
Gun control is absolutely and totally against not just one, but every single principle of a democratic republic.
Gun control is where you say you do not trust the general public, and instead insist that you give all power only to the central government, as if they were the only ones who could be trusted with it.

What ever happened to of, by, and for the "people"?
Gun control is absolutely impossible in a democratic republic because in a democratic republic the only source of authority is supposed to be the people themselves.
And the people themselves could never have the authority to disarm themselves.
That is an obvious logical and legal contradiction.

Nor could there ever be any science indicating gun control could ever possibly do any good, because obviously the only people who will adhere to gun control laws, are the honest people we do not at all want to disarm. Criminals not only won't adhere to gun control legislation, but greatly profit from it because it increases the price they can charge for their illegal firearms.
12/16/2018, 6:49 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
crogin Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Registered: 01-2009
Posts: 1840
Karma: 6 (+7/-1)
Re: "If guns kill people...."


Image


---
Don't try to tell me the only way left is up.
There's always more down!

12/16/2018, 6:55 pm Link to this post PM crogin
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 5360
Karma: 24 (+39/-15)
Re: "If guns kill people...."


quote:

Except that ignores entirely what causes murders in this country. Whether or not it is done with guns, the main cause it the repressive government, that incarcerates millions over things like drugs, gambling, prostitution, etc. That causes all these black market economies to be unable to use banks or any of the normal means of security. And that leads to gang turf wars. When the St. Valentines Day massacre happened in 1929, no one thought the solution was to make machineguns illegal. Clearly that was not the cause nor remotely possible to be a cure.-Rigby



I'm not claiming that out government doesn't contribute to the problem. The "war on drugs" is irrational and promotes homicide by both the police and drug dealers trying to protect themselves from other dealers and armed robbers trying to get their dope or money as well as the police.

BTW, the St. Valentine's Day Massacre may not have led to making machine guns illegal but the murder of two FBI agents by Baby Face Nelson did a few years later.

Why did Wyatt Earp ban the carrying of guns in Dodge City, Kansas when he was Marshall there? For one simple reason. To keep some gunman from shooting him in the back. The notion that every one of them would have given him a fair chance to draw his gun was silly. Also even in a gunfight there was a good chance he could have been shot and killed.

quote:

Yes "reducing the number of guns in the wrong hands in this country wouldn't reduce the homicide rate" at all, because it is not having guns that causes homicides at all. Putting a gun in someone's hands does not at ALL make them remotely feel homicidal.



That depends on the individual who gets the gun. Some people who get guns want to use them to shoot people. They don't have any great regard for them and the gun is something they want to use against them.

quote:

Prima Donnas are not cause of murders in the US.
They are caused by poverty and economics.



At most, poverty and economics can partially explain things like drug dealing and theft, not homicide. Homicide is a derivative of a lack of respect for other people, not a strong desire to obtain money or food.

Prima Donna is just my term for someone who puts himself first who also doesn't care about or respect other people and would like to harm them for some insult or alleged lack of respect shown to them. Providing guns to such self-absorbed creeps just increases the chance of innocent people being killed.

quote:

Putting guns on the hands of those who think people snap and have uncontrollable rages is no danger at all because those people are the ones most assured to not let themselves get into a situation that could be that stressful.



That's not realistic at all. People aren't going to cut themselves off completely from other people who might on occasion make them mad. How many abusive husbands leave their wives because they want to protect their wives from their own rage-filled abuse?

quote:

And again you imply that gun control prevents criminals from getting guns, against all the evidence.



It just depends on the methods and effort put into it by the government. Our government doesn't practice effective gun control but doesn't seem to want to do so.

quote:

Since the ONLY people you disarm with gun control are the honest people who use them to prevent millions of crimes every single year, then obviously all gun control does is greatly increase crime. The vast majority do not at all commit serious crimes, but instead try to stop them. Gun control completely prevents that, and is clearly intended only to increase crime, intimidate people even more, and to use that to further the power of the evil dictatorship. There can be no other possible reason.



I obviously disagree. Efforts at gun control can be employed to try to save lives. Our government choosing to devote little effort to effective gun control isn't because it is a benevolent government but only a male-dominated one that prefers guns to saving lives.
12/16/2018, 7:01 pm Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Re: "If guns kill people...."


quote:

Philer wrote:

quote:

Except that ignores entirely what causes murders in this country. Whether or not it is done with guns, the main cause it the repressive government, that incarcerates millions over things like drugs, gambling, prostitution, etc. That causes all these black market economies to be unable to use banks or any of the normal means of security. And that leads to gang turf wars. When the St. Valentines Day massacre happened in 1929, no one thought the solution was to make machineguns illegal. Clearly that was not the cause nor remotely possible to be a cure.-Rigby



I'm not claiming that out government doesn't contribute to the problem. The "war on drugs" is irrational and promotes homicide by both the police and drug dealers trying to protect themselves from other dealers and armed robbers trying to get their dope or money as well as the police.

BTW, the St. Valentine's Day Massacre may not have led to making machine guns illegal but the murder of two FBI agents by Baby Face Nelson did a few years later.

Why did Wyatt Earp ban the carrying of guns in Dodge City, Kansas when he was Marshall there? For one simple reason. To keep some gunman from shooting him in the back. The notion that every one of them would have given him a fair chance to draw his gun was silly. Also even in a gunfight there was a good chance he could have been shot and killed.

quote:

Yes "reducing the number of guns in the wrong hands in this country wouldn't reduce the homicide rate" at all, because it is not having guns that causes homicides at all. Putting a gun in someone's hands does not at ALL make them remotely feel homicidal.



That depends on the individual who gets the gun. Some people who get guns want to use them to shoot people. They don't have any great regard for them and the gun is something they want to use against them.

quote:

Prima Donnas are not cause of murders in the US.
They are caused by poverty and economics.



At most, poverty and economics can partially explain things like drug dealing and theft, not homicide. Homicide is a derivative of a lack of respect for other people, not a strong desire to obtain money or food.

Prima Donna is just my term for someone who puts himself first who also doesn't care about or respect other people and would like to harm them for some insult or alleged lack of respect shown to them. Providing guns to such self-absorbed creeps just increases the chance of innocent people being killed.

quote:

Putting guns on the hands of those who think people snap and have uncontrollable rages is no danger at all because those people are the ones most assured to not let themselves get into a situation that could be that stressful.



That's not realistic at all. People aren't going to cut themselves off completely from other people who might on occasion make them mad. How many abusive husbands leave their wives because they want to protect their wives from their own rage-filled abuse?

quote:

And again you imply that gun control prevents criminals from getting guns, against all the evidence.



It just depends on the methods and effort put into it by the government. Our government doesn't practice effective gun control but doesn't seem to want to do so.

quote:

Since the ONLY people you disarm with gun control are the honest people who use them to prevent millions of crimes every single year, then obviously all gun control does is greatly increase crime. The vast majority do not at all commit serious crimes, but instead try to stop them. Gun control completely prevents that, and is clearly intended only to increase crime, intimidate people even more, and to use that to further the power of the evil dictatorship. There can be no other possible reason.



I obviously disagree. Efforts at gun control can be employed to try to save lives. Our government choosing to devote little effort to effective gun control isn't because it is a benevolent government but only a male-dominated one that prefers guns to saving lives.



The government does not just "contribute" to the problem, but is entirely the problem.
For example, the gangsters like "Baby Face" Nelson were created by the deliberate manipulations of the stock market to create the depression, the banks foreclosing, Prohibition, wars, etc., all the fault of or with the cooperation of the government.
In fact, there likely should not even be armed federal agents.

And it is impossible to read the history of Wyatt Earp and not realize he is the bad guy. While cattle towns had the right to disarm those intent on drinking, that is not what the Earps did. It appears the Earps were simply guilty of deliberate, premeditated murder. They really did not have the authority to do what they did, and they were acting against the wishes of the entire town. It had nothing to do with gun fight duels, which had long already been illegal and really did not happen. That is just made up stories mostly.

I do not at all get your preoccupation with Prima Donnas? They are NOT the problem because a Prima Donna is not going to take the risk of shooting someone themselves. The main cause for murder is economic. Even when it is domestic violence, that almost always is over economics.

And what is this "effective" gun control you keep referring to?
Since the government can't ever really stop anything, from drugs to prostitution, all government can do is actually encouraging it by causing it to be more profitable. To stop people intent on murder, from getting guns illegally, you would have to increase the penalty of getting the gun to be greater than that of murder itself. Which would be so insane as to make the government totally corrupt and needing to be removed at all cost.

Face facts. Gun control is not in any way even remotely desirable, legal, nor anything but a corrupt means of implementing a dictatorship. Police are not and can not have any additional authority, either to arrest people or to be armed. Gun control is just insane and a total inversion of the basics of a democratic republic, where all authority is supposed to come FROM the individuals of society, not the police.
12/16/2018, 9:07 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 5360
Karma: 24 (+39/-15)
Re: "If guns kill people...."


quote:

The government does not just "contribute" to the problem, but is entirely the problem.
For example, the gangsters like "Baby Face" Nelson were created by the deliberate manipulations of the stock market to create the depression, the banks foreclosing, Prohibition, wars, etc., all the fault of or with the cooperation of the government.
In fact, there likely should not even be armed federal agents.-Rigby



Baby Face Nelson liked to shoot people too much to have been simply a product of the depression or prohibition. Lots of other criminals were not as quick to shoot people including infamous ones like John Dillinger.

quote:

And it is impossible to read the history of Wyatt Earp and not realize he is the bad guy. While cattle towns had the right to disarm those intent on drinking, that is not what the Earps did. It appears the Earps were simply guilty of deliberate, premeditated murder. They really did not have the authority to do what they did, and they were acting against the wishes of the entire town. It had nothing to do with gun fight duels, which had long already been illegal and really did not happen. That is just made up stories mostly.



Even if their ethics were somewhat questionable they were smart enough to know what to do to survive. That included enforcing some very practical gun control in towns like Dodge City.

quote:

I do not at all get your preoccupation with Prima Donnas? They are NOT the problem because a Prima Donna is not going to take the risk of shooting someone themselves. The main cause for murder is economic. Even when it is domestic violence, that almost always is over economics.



It's not an obsession, it's simply the nature of the beast. Prima Donnas are people who put themselves ahead of others who don't care much, if at all about other people, who also have easily bruised egos. They have very high opinions of themselves and really don't like it when someone else does not or treats them in a way they don't like. They are the people who become mass shooters and they also are most of the domestic abusers. They are a big factor in violent crimes in this country in general.

Violent crimes are seldom about economics, Rigby. They are almost always about someone not respecting other people enough not to harm them. Sometimes people are harmed by self-absorbed Prima Donnas just for their entertainment.

quote:

And what is this "effective" gun control you keep referring to? Since the government can't ever really stop anything, from drugs to prostitution, all government can do is actually encouraging it by causing it to be more profitable. To stop people intent on murder, from getting guns illegally, you would have to increase the penalty of getting the gun to be greater than that of murder itself. Which would be so insane as to make the government totally corrupt and needing to be removed at all cost.



All sorts of effective gun control measures would be possible if the government wanted to enforce them. From universal background checks to registration and licensing of guns.

12/16/2018, 10:31 pm Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6799
Karma: -5 (+26/-31)
Re: "If guns kill people...."


quote:

Philer wrote:

quote:

The government does not just "contribute" to the problem, but is entirely the problem.
For example, the gangsters like "Baby Face" Nelson were created by the deliberate manipulations of the stock market to create the depression, the banks foreclosing, Prohibition, wars, etc., all the fault of or with the cooperation of the government.
In fact, there likely should not even be armed federal agents.-Rigby



Baby Face Nelson liked to shoot people too much to have been simply a product of the depression or prohibition. Lots of other criminals were not as quick to shoot people including infamous ones like John Dillinger.

quote:

And it is impossible to read the history of Wyatt Earp and not realize he is the bad guy. While cattle towns had the right to disarm those intent on drinking, that is not what the Earps did. It appears the Earps were simply guilty of deliberate, premeditated murder. They really did not have the authority to do what they did, and they were acting against the wishes of the entire town. It had nothing to do with gun fight duels, which had long already been illegal and really did not happen. That is just made up stories mostly.



Even if their ethics were somewhat questionable they were smart enough to know what to do to survive. That included enforcing some very practical gun control in towns like Dodge City.

quote:

I do not at all get your preoccupation with Prima Donnas? They are NOT the problem because a Prima Donna is not going to take the risk of shooting someone themselves. The main cause for murder is economic. Even when it is domestic violence, that almost always is over economics.



It's not an obsession, it's simply the nature of the beast. Prima Donnas are people who put themselves ahead of others who don't care much, if at all about other people, who also have easily bruised egos. They have very high opinions of themselves and really don't like it when someone else does not or treats them in a way they don't like. They are the people who become mass shooters and they also are most of the domestic abusers. They are a big factor in violent crimes in this country in general.

Violent crimes are seldom about economics, Rigby. They are almost always about someone not respecting other people enough not to harm them. Sometimes people are harmed by self-absorbed Prima Donnas just for their entertainment.

quote:

And what is this "effective" gun control you keep referring to? Since the government can't ever really stop anything, from drugs to prostitution, all government can do is actually encouraging it by causing it to be more profitable. To stop people intent on murder, from getting guns illegally, you would have to increase the penalty of getting the gun to be greater than that of murder itself. Which would be so insane as to make the government totally corrupt and needing to be removed at all cost.



All sorts of effective gun control measures would be possible if the government wanted to enforce them. From universal background checks to registration and licensing of guns.




No one inherently likes to just shoot people to cause harm.
There are psychopaths, but likely they are all created by long term stressful living conditions.
And we know that is true.
If you go to a primitive, hunter/gatherer society, you don't find any significant criminals. You go to the most high tech, sophisticated, and stressful society, like ancient Rome or the USA now, and you find the most dangerous and deranged, like Caligula, Nero, etc,

Collecting guns from patrons of the bars in the cattle towns is NOT gun control.
No one confiscated or regulated guns in the possession of anyone but the ranchers coming to town to drink.
Nor were they prevented from taking their guns with them when they left, so they could still have concluded any deadly feud, if it came up. So there was no similarity to gun control. It was more like a dress code, where guns were not allowed in the saloons.

Prima Donnas do not commit crimes usually, because they don't want to take the risk. They are not the ones who become mass shooters, because they would never commit suicide willingly. Mass shooters likely do lack empathy, but that is likely due to long term suffering of some sort. They all seem to have that history, except for Paddock, which is why I suspect he was already killed before the shooting at the crowd started.
12/17/2018, 12:54 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 ... 20  21  22 





You are not logged in (login)