more guns because there is more crime, more crime because there are more guns?

[Akka]

Originally posted by faded glory
Akka I hunt. Do you think I shoot animals because of low self esteem!? No way... I enjoy the sport and the hunt. Its an awesome expierence to do what others did before grocery stores existed.

Yes.
Enjoying the stalk and the killing with zero risk for yourself shows a special kind of spirit that is very obvious in most of your posts

[- Groucho -]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil
Mmh... Are you aware that what make American look like crazy gun-lover is not the fact that there is hunting guns in their home, but the fact they can get handguns and rifles ?
I mean, you don't use an AK-47 to hunt ? Do you ?

I had two point in my post. I note you dodged the tough one.

[faded glory]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil


Yes.
Enjoying the stalk and the killing with zero risk for yourself shows a special kind of spirit that is very obvious in most of your posts

Should I?

Perhaps I give the deer a gun, to even it up a little?

Think about what your saying.

[Akka]

Originally posted by Echinda


I had two point in my post. I note you dodged the tough one.

I'm not responsible for the actions of my ancesters.
We had 3000 years to destroy our wildlife. Note that with only 200 years of existence, you're still able to reach a pollution level that is far higher than us. You learn fast

Oh, and I had only one point in my post. You managed to dodge in entirely

[Akka]

Originally posted by faded glory
Should I?
Perhaps I give the deer a gun, to even it up a little?
Think about what your saying.

?
Are you sure I'm the one that should think about what I'm saying ?

You are aware that your sentence means nothing ?
I mean, you ask "should I ?". Should you what ? I was just saying, half-joking half-serious, that it needs a special kind of spirit to hunt and that this spirit showed in your posts.

Well, you could try to hunt with a knife to even the odds.
A man with a knige against, let's say, a boar. Could be interesting.

[faded glory]

My point is why put myself in harms way? There are enough dangers as it is. Ticks, Poiusin Ivy, always the possibility another hunter will mistake you for a dear.

[Akka]

Originally posted by faded glory
My point is why put myself in harms way? There are enough dangers as it is. Ticks, Poiusin Ivy, always the possibility another hunter will mistake you for a dear.

Of course there is no reason to put yourself in harms way.
There is no reason to kill animals as a hobby, though. The fact that you don't want to put yourself in harms way shows that you just want to kill without a fight and without risk, and it's the reason why hunters are not anyhow great in my personnal opinion.

[faded glory]

What? You kill animals everytime you go to mcdonalds.You think Cow's and Chicken grow on tree's man??? Animals dont have feelings. And if they do, who cares your at the top, there at the bottom. Dont think that cow wouldnt eat you if it didnt have a chance! I cant believe Im hearing this. You must be a PETA nut.

[- Groucho -]

So much for subtlty. I was referring to the distressing habit of European nations to spawn dictators in the 20th century (Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Russia, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria etc.) and how a similar regime never arose in the US.

As for your point - no, I don't have an AK-47, I have two 30-06s and a 12 gauge. All hunting weapons, though I personally only use them for target shooting. As I was trying to point out, not all guns are built for killing people. Sure, some are. But not all.

[faded glory]

I have a 30-06, .357, an Israeli spin off Ak-47 and .22. I dont use Ak-47, I use .22 at turkey shoots...and the 30.06 is for hunt.

[Ned]

Where does the animus against private ownership of guns come from? The reason for private ownership of guns is simple: to provide for self defense against criminals and against tyrannies and invasions.

Near the end, the Roman Empire banned private ownership of weapons. Banditry increased enormously. The lack of weapons certainly did not help when the Germans invaded.

Guns do not cause crime, they help prevent it to the extent the criminal knows or suspects the potential victim is armed.

I can imagine the police would be in favor of disarming the populace to make their jobs safer. However, the police cannot be everywhere at all times to protect you when you need it the most.

What I think we need are severe penalties for committing a crime with a gun. The penalty should equivalent to the penalty given if the gun were actually used to kill someone.

Ned

[Akka]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by faded glory
What? You kill animals everytime you go to mcdonalds.You think Cow's and Chicken grow on tree's man??? [QUOTE]

I don't have any problem to kill for food or defence. That's a natural process and it's not bad nor good. Killing for pleasure, on the other hand, shows a kind of spirit I don't like.

Animals dont have feelings.

Duh. Of course they have. Do you think your nervous system is anything different than theirs ? It's just more developped.
Though this last sentence is still to be proved...

And if they do, who cares your at the top, there at the bottom.

Oh ok. Might makes right. Ones at the top have all the rights over ones at the bottom. Sure.

Dont think that cow wouldnt eat you if it didnt have a chance! I cant believe Im hearing this. You must be a PETA nut.

I'm not a nut in any sense. Now well, let's be serious : I'm not for equality between humans and the others animals. Not because I think we've any Holy Right against other animals, though. Just because it's a species feeling ; I would protect my own species against others. Other animals do the same, again it's a natural process of self-preservation.
Though, I still loathe the pleasure to kill. It's more about the set of mind than the act itself.

And to come back to guns : I don't consider that it's a sane society the one that has to rely on guns to ensure that its citizens are protected. Praising gun spreading and individual defence lead to a culture of violence that will increase crime.
I want to use my right to not having to carry a gun to be safe.

[- Groucho -]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil
And to come back to guns : I don't consider that it's a sane society the one that has to rely on guns to ensure that its citizens are protected. Praising gun spreading and individual defence lead to a culture of violence that will increase crime.
I want to use my right to not having to carry a gun to be safe.

But you're not safe without a gun - you're European, it's only a matter of time before another dictator tries to sweep to power in your country *cough* Le Pen *cough*.

[Akka]

Originally posted by Echinda


But you're not safe without a gun - you're European, it's only a matter of time before another dictator tries to sweep to power in your country *cough* Le Pen *cough*.

Yes, *cough* 18 % vs 82 % *cough*.

[Saint Marcus]

Near the end, the Roman Empire banned private ownership of weapons. Banditry increased enormously. The lack of weapons certainly did not help when the Germans invaded.

If the roman empire didn't ban private ownership of weapons, the empire would have fallen from the inside. the reason they did this was to avoid a civilian uprise.

But you're not safe without a gun - you're European, it's only a matter of time before another dictator tries to sweep to power in your country *cough* Le Pen *cough*

we in Holland took care of our little problem, thanks to guns.

[/sarcasm]