personally to add my thoughts, look at cyprus. taking 20, 30 percent of everyone income? the government screwed up, they should pay for it, not the people. that is why you have guns . if you have no guns, your helpless against the governemnt. if they want to take your stuff you cannot stand up without guns. and cyprus is not some third world country, it has one of the larger economy in Europe. if it can happen there, it can happen anywhere
btw surprised how many people have debated this
Edited by ODST on 04/02/2013 11:21:34
�RG� (Renegade Gamers) Senior Admin [C�R] Veteren
The man behind it says:
"I recognise the tool might be used to harm other people - that's what the tool is - it's a gun. But I don't think that's a reason to not do it - or a reason not to put it out there."
something they didnt mention was what size of bullet it used?
so ninja, its possible to make it at home. if no one was allowed to have guns, and this guy built it and went on a spree, damn, he would kill alot of people.
"When Breivik arrived on the island, he presented himself as a police officer who had come over for a routine check following the bombing in Oslo. He was met by Monica Bøsei, the camp leader and island hostess. Bøsei probably became suspicious and contacted Trond Berntsen, the security officer on the island, before Breivik killed them both.[78] He then signalled and asked people to gather around him[79] before pulling weapons and ammunition from a bag and indiscriminately firing his weapons,[80][81][82] killing and wounding numerous people. He first shot people on the island and later started shooting at people who were trying to escape by swimming across the lake.[83] Survivors on the island described a scene of terror.[80] In one example, 21-year-old survivor Dana Barzingi described how several victims wounded by Breivik pretended to be dead to survive; but he later came back and shot them again.[80] He did relent in his executions on some occasions: first, when an 11-year-old boy who had just lost his father (Trond Berntsen) during the shooting, stood up against him and said he was too young to die; and later, when a 22-year-old male begged for his life.[84]
Some witnesses on the island were reported to have hidden in the undergrowth, and in lavatories, communicating by text message to avoid giving their positions away to the gunman.[85] The mass shooting reportedly lasted for around an hour and a half, ending when a police special task force arrived and the gunman surrendered, despite having ammunition left, at 18:35."
that i will use as an example, an hour and a half. what if the gun control laws were less strict in norway? what if they allowed people to carry handguns? they would have stopped this guy much sooner.
"The owner must always have a good reason to bring the weapon to a public place. Such reasons include transportation to a range or hunting area, transportation for repairs, or for maintenance and hobby activities.
During transportation, the weapon must be empty and concealed, but not worn on the body, and under the constant supervision of the owner. This applies equally to replicas, air guns and decommissioned firearms."
Concealed carry is illegal.
If someone gets a gun, in a non gun environment, there will be a bad massacre, its common sense, no matter how hard you try to take away guns, there will always be a way for people who want em to get em, and if they massacre people, then none of those law abiding citizens will have a gun.
Some of you may say, well, if you have guns, then they might go on a rampage or abuse that power, and guns are bad, they cold kill many, etc. . True, very true. But what about cars? 25 ton killing machine? You could kill alot of people by running people over with em. Driving it into a school or play ground Or, causing an accident on the highway. Do we try to restrict driver rights? Do we try to limit how big a car you can drive? Not really. But if cars can cause as much damage as a gun, why do we allow people to drive them? A big majority of people happen to be responsible people. There are a few nuts, but most are responsible. If you give everyone a gun, then hell, imagine him walking into a store and pulling out a gun to start shooting people, everyone else pulls out there gun and shoot him dead before he can. if everyone had a gun, then anyone who tries to massacre, will have a 20 30 40 to 1 fight. not very good odds eh? Guns also help as a side effect if the government no longer work for the people. Our founding fathers obviously saw a reason to give the right to bear arms and no, it wasn't cause it was a frontier.
They knew that someday the government might no longer work for the people or do whats in there interest, and so made it a given right that you can use guns for protection, of your house, or of your rights. I dont know why they want to limit our gun rights. As I've explained, it would be better if you left em how it was, maybe more incidents, but less killing in the long run. I know some might say, "The government would never do that" and "You must be crazy to think that the government would or could do that"
Well, there is one I can think of. Cyprus.
Do you think that that is right to take from the citizens what the governments mistake was? the people didn't sanction that. I'd be quite pissed if someone took MY money away for there mistakes. If Cyprus had guns, we'd know they would be used.
And it isn't some small country, its a heavily developed country.
Back to my main point, guns would be better for everyone to have, then no one to have, cause some will get through.
Dude how old are you again?? LOL. You know too much =P
I love how you made the comparison of owning a car and owning a gun. It's basically the same thing, both hold a lot of responsibility. I would of never thought of that. Great respect to you sir!
Edited by ZA BrickSquad on 05/07/2013 07:26:14
Size of bullet:
That sounds irrelevant. Getting shot by a bullet is still going to kill you, it doesn't matter how many inches it measures.
if no one was allowed to have guns, and this guy built it and went on a spree, damn, he would kill alot of people.
We seem to have looked at this in completely different ways.
The issue isn't that 'this guy' can build a gun. He's clearly a gun addict and loves playing with dangerous weapons for fun anyway.
No, the real issue is that he wants everyone to be able to get their hands on a weapon. Anyone. Surely you can see that unleashing lethal weapons on the uninformed public is bound to end in tragedy?
Car analogy:
Let's compare cars and guns, so there's no confusion as to which is which ...
Cars are made as a mode of transport. They've been designed to get you from A to B quickly and comfortably.
Guns are made as weapons. They're designed to kill people quickly and effectively. You can't drive a gun.
I don't think I can be much more explicit in detailing the difference.
Guns aren't made for protection. Guns are made to kill people. Guns do kill people. They were designed for war. They should stay in wars.
ninja wrote: Size of bullet:
That sounds irrelevant. Getting shot by a bullet is still going to kill you, it doesn't matter how many inches it measures.
ninja, alas that is not true. that is a picture of a 1 inch bullet. thats for anti ammer one of the biggest rounds there is. dont get much bigger then that. most are half inch or less. the smallest round that can kill is very small, ive shot it before. you have to hit a man in his head to kill him, anywhere else it wont penetrate or go far in. by taking your sentence at face value, if i shot myself in the foot with a gun, its going to kill me. and inches? no no no. Milli meters. inches is used for the big stuff. most of it is in Milli meters. if the bullet is smaller its not going to as much damage or make a big hole in you lol.
The issue isn't that 'this guy' can build a gun. He's clearly a gun addict and loves playing with dangerous weapons for fun anyway.
No, the real issue is that he wants everyone to be able to get their hands on a weapon. Anyone. Surely you can see that unleashing lethal weapons on the uninformed public is bound to end in tragedy?
i agree that the public needs to be educated about how to use them proper use responsibility so forth. but people should be entitled to guns, as long as they know how to use em.
Car analogy:
Let's compare cars and guns, so there's no confusion as to which is which ...
Cars are made as a mode of transport. They've been designed to get you from A to B quickly and comfortably.
Guns are made as weapons. They're designed to kill people quickly and effectively. You can't drive a gun.
[/i]
true, cars are a mode of transportation. i said they can do alot of damage in the wrong hands, running people over, causing highway pileups? it can cause hundreds of deaths. thats not a cars intended use, but they still can do bad damage. even though guns are made to kill, the damage a car and a gun can do, are roughly the same. another thing is responsibility. look at a car. a 25 ton killing machine to quote my driver ed teacher. how can we let 16 year old children drive them? isnt that irresponsible to let children to drive them? wouldn't it be better if you were 21 till you could drive? but we do let them drive. we trust them to drive this car that can kill many people. there responsible enough. are guns so different? hell guns may kill people but vs a 25 ton killing machine? i think cars would be the more dangerous of the two. im not saying the one that does more obviously car acidents are going down, but for good reason, we educate like fuck. you go to alot of classes and such. with guns, they DONT! insted of spending money on gun control, how about they educate these people on how to use em the same ammount as driving. i think that would solve alot of problems. the level of responsibility is the same for a car and a gun ninja. that is the point of my argument.
Edited by ODST on 05/07/2013 14:25:02
�RG� (Renegade Gamers) Senior Admin [C�R] Veteren
You start off with "that is a picture of a 1 inch bullet" then tell me not to use inches ... 0.0 ... Let's leave the size of the bullet, it's trivial.
i agree that the public needs to be educated about how to use them proper use responsibility so forth. but people should be entitled to guns, as long as they know how to use em.
You can't force people to use guns responsibly. I mean, what on earth is 'using a gun responsibly'? Not going around shooting at people? The only reason for a gun is to kill people - killing is irresponsible, so 'responsible gun use' is an oxymoron.
Yes, you can encourage people to drive a car on the road, rather than on the pavement - but why bother having guns if you're just going to tell people not to use them? It's like leaving a child in a room with a marshmallow (although the correct analogy here would be more like a poisoned sweet!) and telling him/her not to eat it - the inevitable arises. If you don't want the child to eat the sweet, you shouldn't put it in front of them. Likewise, if you don't want people to go on gun rampages, don't give them guns!
I'd just like to highlight your words, "car acidents". You might accidentally kill someone in a road accident. It's collateral damage. If you go out with a gun, you're trying to kill people.
"It's like leaving a child in a room with a marshmallow (although the correct analogy here would be more like a poisoned sweet!) and telling him/her not to eat it - the inevitable arises. If you don't want the child to eat the sweet, you shouldn't put it in front of them. Likewise, if you don't want people to go on gun rampages, don't give them guns!"
I'm not going to get into this, because I've accepted that eventually guns will be taken from us.
Just reading this sounds like you're saying if you hand someone a gun, they have absolutely no chance of not going on a killing spree. You cannot compare them to a child, as the child may not understand why they are not allowed to eat it. They won't be able to comprehend that order and they will eat it anyway. A gun owner, however, decides whether or not to go kill people. Except the ones that do go on killing sprees are mentally disturbed, many of them had problems with their frontal lobes, which controls human behavior and reasoning.. So they had no choice, as that was made for them biologically. We need to learn how to treat these handicapped people, instead of saying the main cause of these horrific events are these pieces of metal.
true if they dont want to elarn you dont give em a gun. oh yes and i just realized something ninja that you should have relized too. guns original main use in america back in the day, was protection. no to to kill people. hunting, protecting yourself from bears etc. they have now been hijacked to kill people but they were not made for that purpose in america to have. they were given for protection. from crazys or others. protection. id rather have a gun by my bed, when a man comes in to steal or perhaps murder me, then rather a knife....
�RG� (Renegade Gamers) Senior Admin [C�R] Veteren
. if you have no guns, your helpless against the governemnt. if they want to take your stuff you cannot stand up without guns. and cyprus is not some third world country, it has one of the larger economy in Europe. if it can happen there, it can happen anywhere
