You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.
#21. Posted:
Yin
  • E3 2016
Status: Offline
Joined: Apr 30, 201211Year Member
Posts: 5,468
Reputation Power: 245
Status: Offline
Joined: Apr 30, 201211Year Member
Posts: 5,468
Reputation Power: 245
Makenna wrote HEY! MONSTER TRUCKS DESTROY THINGS! YOU CRASH A CAR INTO A GAS STATION AND BOOM!< THE WHOLE BLOCK IS ON FIRE! Vehicles can cause damage too but you never hear about it because it happens all the time. You always hear about mass shootings because they are so seldom. You might have two a year and 99% Of the people who commit them have a mental condition which prohibits them from thinking straight. I know cars are for transportation but take a train, A bus, A plane, A Boat. As silly as it really does sound, Cars kill more people then guns

Sure, monster trucks are made to destroy, but how many are actually street legal? They are for contained, entertainment purposes. Vehicles cause damage and death, but that isn't what their purpose is. That isn't what they are made to do. When vehicles are used right, people get to their destinations. When guns are used right, things and/or people get destroyed.

Actually, mass shootings are nearly a daily occurrence. We just don't hear about them all. Unless the death toll or injury number is significant enough or it happens in a certain place, news, aside from local, doesn't cover it. Is it really 99% of mass shooters being mentally ill? Or is that just a number you want it to be? We as a people like to say that they are mentally ill because we don't like the idea that any sane person would want to harm other people. Whether or not that is the case, one could easily argue that their obvious access to guns is an issue.

Are you saying people should take buses and trains instead of cars? While I do agree for the environmental aspect alone, it just isn't possible where I live. No buses, passenger trains, or even taxis are around here. The claim that cars cause more deaths isn't silly, but it is not the only thing to look at when comparing them to guns. Their purpose and what they bring to our society and economy are also things to look at. If we can find a way to make either safer, we should look at trying to do that. Even if we just looked at the claim that cars cause more deaths than guns, it doesn't make the deaths from guns any less tragic and unneeded. Just because something is safer than something else, it doesn't mean we shouldn't care about making it even safer.
#22. Posted:
002
  • Fairy Master
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 25, 20149Year Member
Posts: 4,817
Reputation Power: 7282
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 25, 20149Year Member
Posts: 4,817
Reputation Power: 7282
So if guns are soooo bad because their only purpose is to destroy things, what about knives? Their only purpose is to cut things, and ultimately destroy them, right? Now do you see where that argument isn't true? A gun can be used to have fun and go to the range with, or protect yourself from said mass shooters. Knives can be used to cut vegetables for a meal.

See how something with a good purpose can also have a bad purpose? Guns, knives, shovels, computers, hell even water has a bad purpose.
#23. Posted:
Yin
  • 2 Million
Status: Offline
Joined: Apr 30, 201211Year Member
Posts: 5,468
Reputation Power: 245
Status: Offline
Joined: Apr 30, 201211Year Member
Posts: 5,468
Reputation Power: 245
002 wrote So if guns are soooo bad because their only purpose is to destroy things, what about knives? Their only purpose is to cut things, and ultimately destroy them, right? Now do you see where that argument isn't true? A gun can be used to have fun and go to the range with, or protect yourself from said mass shooters. Knives can be used to cut vegetables for a meal.

See how something with a good purpose can also have a bad purpose? Guns, knives, shovels, computers, hell even water has a bad purpose.

While there is some truth to that, I'm not sure you can use a knife to harm 10-20-30 people across an entire room. Could you use a gun to stop a mass shooter? Possibly. And assuming of course this good guy with a gun doesn't get shot first or winds up shooting another good guy with a gun because he mistook him for the shooter. I just question why the answer to the problem has to be the problem to begin with. Anyway, I wasn't trying to make any of this about how I feel about guns. I just don't think the car/gun comparison was accurate.

(Knives and guns though. I think daggers and swords would be a better comparison for guns. They were made to hurt and kill people. Sure, we now use guns here at home for fun by shooting targets, but I don't see how BB/pellet/paintball guns can't be used for that instead. For protection, I question why tasers, stun guns, guns with rubber bullets, pepper spray, knives, and bean bag guns are seemingly dismissed as valid self defense weapons. And just to clarify. I'm not suggesting that we get rid of guns and go to these things for defense. I am just questioning why we don't as individuals consider a less lethal means of defense.)
#24. Posted:
Vancouver_Canucks
  • 2 Million
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 04, 201013Year Member
Posts: 6,598
Reputation Power: 276
Status: Offline
Joined: Oct 04, 201013Year Member
Posts: 6,598
Reputation Power: 276
The purpose of Firearms is to take lives. The purpose of vehicles is to get places quicker, transport goods.

The 'defence' argument about firearms is pointless, you defend yourself by using a firearm and you're more than likely to have taken a life.. Making it, still, an object with life taking objectives.




It should not be a statutory right to be able to possess a firearm, it's ridiculous. It should be a Military, Police, Security only right. The right gives every citizen the right to take life essentially as firearms have absolutely no other purpose.

It's cowardly.

To put things into perspective, between January 1st 2013 and June 13th 2016.. There were 1,000 Mass Shootings in the United States. 1,000 Mass Shootings in barely 1,260 days. Compare it to the UK where the right to own a firearm is extremely difficult to obtain and requires endless amounts of checks and security vetting, there has been just 2 Mass Shootings in the last 20 Years.

Just to counter the hunting argument, hunters in the UK tend to use high powered air rifles which can be obtained legally, again, with the right checks.




Hundreds of lives are taken each year in the US due to firearms, and also a lot by means of RTC's, Drunk Drivers, Hit & Runs etc.. BUT, safety of vehicles is a huge area of investment nowadays meaning collisions may still happen in high numbers but deaths are becoming less and less. Whereas with firearms, you cannot make something destined to kill, safe and you never will unless the Right/Freedom to own a firearm is revoked and a large majority of firearms are given up and destroyed, have the firing pin removed to make it unusable and be just a show piece.

What i have said will not come across well with the vast majority of American's and Firearm owners, but i'm not sorry. Firearms are a problem and you cannot fight the illicit usage of Firearms by providing citizens with more, it's a recipe for disaster. I'm all for having firearms as collectors items/show pieces as they are a talking point but to have them for any other purpose (Hunting exempt) is wrong.
#25. Posted:
392
  • TTG Undisputed
Status: Offline
Joined: Jul 13, 20149Year Member
Posts: 5,592
Reputation Power: 61
Status: Offline
Joined: Jul 13, 20149Year Member
Posts: 5,592
Reputation Power: 61
Continuous wrote
Yin wrote Not exactly the best argument. Cars are made for transportation. Guns are made to destroy and kill. We also regulate cars way better than guns, so there is also that. At least we try to lower deaths with cars with mandatory safety measures.

Guns are made for sporting and protection. Just because someone uses them to kill somebody, that does not mean that they are made solely to destroy things. And since your uneducated on this topic. We actually regulate guns very strictly. Guns are much more regulated than guns. If you truly what you have said, then please give me an example.
"Guns are much more regulated than guns"... You learn something new everyday lol
#26. Posted:
002
  • Christmas!
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 25, 20149Year Member
Posts: 4,817
Reputation Power: 7282
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 25, 20149Year Member
Posts: 4,817
Reputation Power: 7282
Yin wrote
002 wrote So if guns are soooo bad because their only purpose is to destroy things, what about knives? Their only purpose is to cut things, and ultimately destroy them, right? Now do you see where that argument isn't true? A gun can be used to have fun and go to the range with, or protect yourself from said mass shooters. Knives can be used to cut vegetables for a meal.

See how something with a good purpose can also have a bad purpose? Guns, knives, shovels, computers, hell even water has a bad purpose.

While there is some truth to that, I'm not sure you can use a knife to harm 10-20-30 people across an entire room. Could you use a gun to stop a mass shooter? Possibly. And assuming of course this good guy with a gun doesn't get shot first or winds up shooting another good guy with a gun because he mistook him for the shooter. I just question why the answer to the problem has to be the problem to begin with. Anyway, I wasn't trying to make any of this about how I feel about guns. I just don't think the car/gun comparison was accurate.

(Knives and guns though. I think daggers and swords would be a better comparison for guns. They were made to hurt and kill people. Sure, we now use guns here at home for fun by shooting targets, but I don't see how BB/pellet/paintball guns can't be used for that instead. For protection, I question why tasers, stun guns, guns with rubber bullets, pepper spray, knives, and bean bag guns are seemingly dismissed as valid self defense weapons. And just to clarify. I'm not suggesting that we get rid of guns and go to these things for defense. I am just questioning why we don't as individuals consider a less lethal means of defense.)


I don't think the point was to compare guns to vehicles, the point was looking at the death toll as much more people die in car accidents each year than people getting shot by guns, but we turn a blind eye to the vehicles. guns aren't a problem. At the point 10, 15, 20% of the population dies each year by being shot, then I would agree that humans can't handle guns. With that being said, less than a tenth of a percent of the population get shot and die each year.

I'll agree that tasers and pepper spray are a valid form of self defense to an extent. Pepper spray won't always deter someone. Get a strung out meth head and your pepper spray or taser won't do anything. To your standard person, it's a great idea. The issue is, tasers run on batteries that can die without you knowing (how many times have you pulled out a flashlight and seen it was dead?), and your pepper spray might loose compression (how many times have you pulled out an aerosol can and it had product but wouldn't spray?). BB guns, and paintball guns won't do anything. When we were kids we used to shoot each other with BB guns playing cowboys and indians lol. Yeah a pellet gun would do a little more damage, but they take forever to load. I just watched a video showing that only 14% of shots taken by police officers hit their target. Of that 14%, how effective were they? Sometimes you hit in places that don't effect people too much. When you get a c02 pellet gun, it'll shoot fast but won't hit with any sort of power.

Rubber bullets are a great alternative, the issue is finding them. In my shotgun that I have as a home defense weapon, the first shot is rubber bullets and the next is buck shot. The only reason I use rubber bullets with the first shot though is because I don't want to damage the house lol. My only issue with them is they are expensive and hard to find.
#27. Posted:
Grown
  • Game Reviewer
Status: Offline
Joined: Jul 10, 201112Year Member
Posts: 1,578
Reputation Power: 81
Status: Offline
Joined: Jul 10, 201112Year Member
Posts: 1,578
Reputation Power: 81
The fact that most of you that are against guns act like we can just walk into a store and buy one and walk out with it lol. This is not the case at all. I bet you anything if you lived in the US your whole life you would use a gun at some point and have no issues with them. Every time I see one of these types of post on this site it is always the samething. People from the US defending gun rights and then people im guessing mostly from the UK that are completely against guns. I own a few firearms myself and one of those is an AK. I also see people in public carrying firearms. You think restricting gun rights here will change anything? Black market is a pretty big issue here aswell. Some of you are acting like the US is this awful place and so many people die everyday here to guns. But I have yet to witness a gun related crime and I live by Detroit. The US really is not all that bad. I can walk outside every morning without getting shot at. I could carry my pistol but I Just decided not to carry it. I also bet if I was living in the UK my whole life and never lived in the US I would be against guns too.


I know this was kinda a longish rant but I am tired of seeing this same arguement once a month. Most of us are from different countries with different laws in place. But in the US it is our right to own firearms. Sorry for any misspelling this was all typed on a phone. Dont bother arguing with my post because I won't respond to it.
#28. Posted:
Yin
  • TTG Undisputed
Status: Offline
Joined: Apr 30, 201211Year Member
Posts: 5,468
Reputation Power: 245
Status: Offline
Joined: Apr 30, 201211Year Member
Posts: 5,468
Reputation Power: 245
Grown wrote The fact that most of you that are against guns act like we can just walk into a store and buy one and walk out with it lol. This is not the case at all. I bet you anything if you lived in the US your whole life you would use a gun at some point and have no issues with them. Every time I see one of these types of post on this site it is always the samething. People from the US defending gun rights and then people im guessing mostly from the UK that are completely against guns. I own a few firearms myself and one of those is an AK. I also see people in public carrying firearms. You think restricting gun rights here will change anything? Black market is a pretty big issue here aswell. Some of you are acting like the US is this awful place and so many people die everyday here to guns. But I have yet to witness a gun related crime and I live by Detroit. The US really is not all that bad. I can walk outside every morning without getting shot at. I could carry my pistol but I Just decided not to carry it. I also bet if I was living in the UK my whole life and never lived in the US I would be against guns too.

I mean, if you really want to bet anything... (yes, I know it was just a figure of speech.) I live in the US in the south. My brother has pistols and rifles. I fired a few of the rifles and fired my nephew's revolver. Very fun. I tend to look past that good feeling though when I see kindergartners, church-goers, and nightclub-goers slaughtered. I used to heavily defend guns on this site before all of that. I felt nothing could change my mind, even terribly saying that I would totally support them even if family members were killed by people with guns. Well, it didn't take that. I'm also reasonable enough though to know that changing the amendment would be nearly impossible and that black markets most certainly do exist. Getting rid of guns just isn't an option when we have almost as many as we have citizens. I just feel that something has to give at some point. Some type of change, even if it is small. I see nothing wrong with being against guns, but it all matters what we do about it.
#29. Posted:
Coushy
  • TTG Senior
Status: Offline
Joined: Mar 08, 201311Year Member
Posts: 1,103
Reputation Power: 45
Status: Offline
Joined: Mar 08, 201311Year Member
Posts: 1,103
Reputation Power: 45
Guns dont kill people, but people with guns kill people more often. The countries with the most lenient gun control also have the highest amount of homicides per crime. Not that im against guns, just something you should consider
#30. Posted:
002
  • Rated Awesome
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 25, 20149Year Member
Posts: 4,817
Reputation Power: 7282
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 25, 20149Year Member
Posts: 4,817
Reputation Power: 7282
Coushy wrote Guns dont kill people, but people with guns kill people more often. The countries with the most lenient gun control also have the highest amount of homicides per crime. Not that im against guns, just something you should consider


Where did you get the from? Multiple studies have shown that there is no correlation between gun ownership and crime. There are countries that have high gun ownership and low crime (Switzerland), high gun ownership and high crime (US), low gun ownership and high crime (Britain, Mexico) and low gun ownership and low crime (Japan). Also, for everyone thinking the US should up and take away guns from citizens, look at Mexico. Mexico has some of the toughest gun laws in the world, but the country has tons of illegal guns, and plagued by crime and murder in fact, far more than the government will acknowledge.

crime in Washington has risen dramatically since 1976, the year before its handgun ban took effect. Washington, D.C., now has outrageously higher crime rates than any of the states (D.C. 1992 violent crime rate: 2832.8 per 100,000 residents; U.S. rate: 757.5), with a homicide rate 8 times the national rate (1992 rate 75.4 per 100,000 for D.C., 9.3 nationally.) No wonder former D.C. Police Chief Maurice Turner said, "What has the gun control law done to keep criminals from getting guns? Absolutely nothing... [City residents] ought to have the opportunity to have a handgun."
Jump to:
You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.