Let's cut through the BS. Do GUNS kill people, OR...

[UltraBudgie]

See??  I told ya' it was possible! 

Thanks though, to you and all the others.

 Thank you FCD.  Great thread.  We depend on you to bring the good stuff. 


Edit to add: l probably don't need to say this, but I appreciate you tolerating what may be seen as my "manic-mode" debate persona.  I assure you it was not meant dishonestly or as any type of malicious ploy.

[chr0naut]

So let's cut through all the bullshit.  Do GUNS kill people, OR do the (twisted) PEOPLE who use guns kill people unlawfully?

I'm so sick of this debate.  It's not even a "debate" really, it's more of a liberal echo chamber on the subject.

Look, I've been a firearms instructor for over 30 years, and I can prove to any interested person that a firearm canNOT kill another human being on its own.  I can prove it!  Throw it on the floor, bounce it off a wall, drop it out of a vehicle...it will NOT fire on its own.  It will NOT FIRE!  The only way to make a modern firearm fire is by pulling the trigger, and a person has to do this...intentionally, consciously.  No exceptions.

Oh sure, you can come up with some cocked up thing about something catching the trigger, but please do point me to a single, even just ONE single, fatality or serious injury where this ever happened!  It didn't.  Repeat...IT...DID...NOT...HAPPEN!  Yes, drunk people and people on drugs kill people with firearms, BUT so do these same people with cars, trucks, hammers, knives, bats and even with their hands.  Okay, should we outlaw all those things too (like the UK seemingly tries to do)???  It doesn't work, folks.  The person you have to stop, is the person with "intent".  A firearm has no, ZERO, "intent".  A firearm is just a tool, like a hammer, or a knife, or a car.  Firearms don't think for themselves.

So, c'mon anti-2A people...let's get into it.  You have nothing to defend your "public safety" position other than your notion than...when all guns are illegal, then you can rule over you "slaves" like you've wanted to since Lincoln made slavery illegal.  It's about "control" for you.

So, let's get it on!  Bring it!  Explain your position.

Oh, and NO, Australia is not a good example, despite everyone looking to it for their last grasp.  I love Australia, and one of the things I love about it is Australian independence.  The gun ban in Australia had little bearing on gun ownership except in the big cities.  In the rural areas, far away from cities, Australians just laughed.  Out of sight, out of mind.  Done.  Break into a rural home in central Australia and find out...'Fuck around, and find out'...as the saying goes.  Good!  Don't ya' think?

This whole "gun" thing isn't about firearms, it's about controlling YOU.  It's about controlling every single thing you do...where you go, what you have, why you have it, and what you're allowed to do. 

How can some of you people not see this?  It's about "Control". 

I don't care if a person doesn't wish to own a firearm.  There's a lot of reasons why this might be a credible reason.  That's okay.

BUT...for those people who are qualified, competent and willing...there should be no reason, under the umbrella of the founding fathers of this once great nation, which should prevent law abiding citizens from owning as many firearms as they wish, including fully automatic weapons (only thing I take issue with Reagan for...fuck the Firearms Act of '86).

I rest.

P.S.  Now, I know this is not a topic welcome here on DI.  Hey, I get it.  Okay, but I posted it...and I really don't give a flying...(connection lost)

Take care all!!

Guns, poisons, bombs, radiation, diseases, old age, etc do not consciously kill people. But if you give them to people, people do die.

It is the combination that kills.

So, if you want to reduce deaths, you remove a necessary component contributory to deaths from the chain.

[StaringFrog]

Yes - remove the necessary component by getting rid of the people that are perfectly fine harming others. The great majority of them are criminals that somehow avoid being prosecuted for years due to plea deals by bad prosecutors. Consider them the low hanging fruit, eliminate them first and reevaluate.

[Chiefsmom]

Yes - remove the necessary component by getting rid of the people that are perfectly fine harming others. The great majority of them are criminals that somehow avoid being prosecuted for years due to plea deals by bad prosecutors. Consider them the low hanging fruit, eliminate them first and reevaluate.

Agreed.
Nobody seems to care about consequences any more, because so many get a slap on the wrist!  It is ridiculous!

I have had guns all my life.  Never hurt anyone.  Cried like the girl I am when I shot a bird when young.

Now, once threatened someone with a nail gun to the foot.  LOL  But he was annoying me.  Didn't do it though.  Cause I love him.

[TzarChasm]

Guns, poisons, bombs, radiation, diseases, old age, etc do not consciously kill people. But if you give them to people, people do die.

It is the combination that kills.

So, if you want to reduce deaths, you remove a necessary component contributory to deaths from the chain.

You know what stops a bad person with a gun? A responsible, proactive citizen who also has a gun.

You know what doesn't stop a bad person with a gun? Taking away the guns from all the responsible proactive citizens.

[chr0naut]

You know what stops a bad person with a gun? A responsible, proactive citizen who also has a gun.

You know what doesn't stop a bad person with a gun? Taking away the guns from all the responsible proactive citizens.

People are complex. They aren't separable into 'good and bad', except in a 'children's comic book' grade world-view.

The Bible puts it this way: "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God". That means everyone is a 'bad person' at their core, and they have done evil things that make them so.

"Responsible proactive citizens" is a veneer over the ugly truth. "Responsible proactive citizens who also have a gun", even more so. They have a gun because they want to feel they are leveraging power over someone else, and they fully intend to shoot if someone reacts against that. That is how the threat works.

The most evil people have always hidden behind outward respectability. It's the standard modus for evil.

Some, if not all, of those 'responsible proactive citizens' have mental problems, money problems, social problems and anger issues.

You can only think that there are good people and bad people by lowering the bar on what you think is 'good'.

The US President is a felon, elected by a majority. What chance do normal citizens of the country have of being 'good guys', or of actually being able to discern right from wrong?

[argentus]

Guns kill people in the same way that pencils fail tests.

[Maxmars]

People are complex.

The Bible puts it this way: "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God". That means everyone is a 'bad person' at their core, and they have done evil things that make them so.

I feel compelled to disagree that "everyone is a 'bad person' and have done evil that makes them so.  With respect, of course, as this is my opinion.

"All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" seems a self-evident assertion about "considering oneself "worthy" of the glory of God.

I think people can only be judged by others as a 'pantomime' of justice...
it can never be about anything other than "how it appears," with the necessarily meaningful added narrative... which is not necessarily how it is.

How we conceive others feel is just as fertile a ground for disharmony... making no presumptions.

The problem isn't that some good looking people turn out to be disappointingly overestimated...
it's that we keep pretending you have to signal being good to be good. (Ironically missing the entire point of "being" good.)
So "pretend" signals, and signals about "nothing" become media's 'flavor.'

[TzarChasm]

People are complex. They aren't separable into 'good and bad', except in a 'children's comic book' grade world-view.

The Bible puts it this way: "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God". That means everyone is a 'bad person' at their core, and they have done evil things that make them so.

"Responsible proactive citizens" is a veneer over the ugly truth. "Responsible proactive citizens who also have a gun", even more so. They have a gun because they want to feel they are leveraging power over someone else, and they fully intend to shoot if someone reacts against that. That is how the threat works.

The most evil people have always hidden behind outward respectability. It's the standard modus for evil.

Some, if not all, of those 'responsible proactive citizens' have mental problems, money problems, social problems and anger issues.

You can only think that there are good people and bad people by lowering the bar on what you think is 'good'.

The US President is a felon, elected by a majority. What chance do normal citizens of the country have of being 'good guys', or of actually being able to discern right from wrong?

this guy, amirite?

People are inherently evil, guns are fascist, there are no heroes only self aggrandizing psychopaths, orange man bad. Comical.

And no, I'm not going to waste time arguing with you. i just want you to remember in a contest between a gun and god's favor, the gun wins 99.99% of the time. So I prefer to have it and not need it.

[chr0naut]

I feel compelled to disagree that "everyone is a 'bad person' and have done evil that makes them so.  With respect, of course, as this is my opinion.

"All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" seems a self-evident assertion about "considering oneself "worthy" of the glory of God.

I think people can only be judged by others as a 'pantomime' of justice...
it can never be about anything other than "how it appears," with the necessarily meaningful added narrative... which is not necessarily how it is.

How we conceive others feel is just as fertile a ground for disharmony... making no presumptions.

The problem isn't that some good looking people turn out to be disappointingly overestimated...
it's that we keep pretending you have to signal being good to be good. (Ironically missing the entire point of "being" good.)
So "pretend" signals, and signals about "nothing" become media's 'flavor.'

When the Bible says that something is like something else, it is clearly a use of metaphor, simile or type. But when it is a direct statement, it most clearly isn't an allusion to something else.

Sins are clearly defined in the Bible as the breaking of specific rules (such as the 10 commandments, but also inclusive of the 113 commandments and dictates of the Old Testament). This passage from the Roman epistle is saying that we have, all of us, broken one or more of those specific rules at some stage. It isn't vague allegory.

It is a theme that recurs throughout the Bible, said in numerous ways, and is quite clearly specific in meaning:

30 Powerful bible verses about man’s sinfulness (Full Commentary)

In pre-Christian secular discussions and plays, many ancient philosophers took the view that no-one was truly virtuous (an analogue of sinlessness), and that self-claims of virtue were often, paradoxically, the sign of a tyrant. This has been borne out time and time again over history and is also a frequent theme even in today's popular media.