US Supreme Court upholds individual right to gun ownership

[Asher]

Not even responding to that crap, Ves. Sorry.

Maybe when I'm drunk sometime I will reply to it, because only then will it seem like a good idea to argue with two delusional people simultaneously.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Projecting much?

Yes, Ben, I am projecting. I am clearly height-challenged and hearing-impaired and I love hunting because of it.

Do you even know what projecting means?

[Vesayen]

You are not responding to it because I make some very strong points. You are a pathetic troll. I invite the other posters in the thread to stop responding to him.

[Ben Kenobi]

I absolutely do not agree. While it is a "personal opinion" whether they need guns, the fact are guns are a threat to public safety so your opinion doesn't mean **** to me.

Why are they a threat to public safety?

It's my personal opinion that you should be sterilized and deported to Australia, but that doesn't mean that should be legal for me to do.

Exactly. Welcome to the free world Asher. By the same logic you can't confiscate other peoples guns.

killing is a threat to public safety and liberty. Guns are designed to kill.

How is me shooting down a plump Canada goose a threat to public safety and liberty?

Do me a favour and hang out in downtown LA or Oakland for a week or so and then see if you can evaluate how the gun culture may impact public safety and liberty.

Or Washington DC?

I've actually been in downtown LA. It's not great but nicer then East Vancouver, where I used to live.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Vesayen
You are not responding to it because I make some very strong points.

To be honest I didn't even read it. I don't have time right not to argue with two people like this. You'll wait your turn.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Vesayen
The likeliness of any American being killed by a gun is a far, far, far smaller threat to freedom then removing them for personal protection and the combined threat of being defenseless to a tyrant.

That's ridiculous. Guns don't protect us from tyrants at all. In fact the very idea of being scared of tyrants is absurd. The powers that be can pretty much do whatever they want anyway. They don't need to be tyrants.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Why are they a threat to public safety?

Why are weapons designed to kill a threat to public safety? Really, Ben, this is the question you are asking?

Exactly. Welcome to the free world Asher. By the same logic you can't confiscate other peoples guns.

That's not the same logic. By that logic you're free to do anything you want, including viewing Christian child porn with catholic priests. I'm all for personal freedoms and liberty, but they must be balanced with public safety. The US has astronomical murder rates that is closely tied with gun culture, which is the #1 murder tool. We need to balance our freedoms with the public safety and liberty.

And frankly, when you've got some of the highest murder rates in the world, the liberty of those dead people from gun violence is pretty limited.

How is me shooting down a plump Canada goose a threat to public safety and liberty?

Are you saying guns are only used to shoot down Canada geese? Really, Ben.

[tinyp3nis]

Originally posted by Mr Snuggles
Not even responding to that crap, Ves. Sorry.

Maybe when I'm drunk sometime I will reply to it, because only then will it seem like a good idea to argue with two delusional people simultaneously.

You keep banging your head to a concrete wall because you might be a maschocist honestly.

[Lorizael]

Hell, I'll give it a whirl.

Originally posted by Vesayen
The likeliness of any American being killed by a gun is a far, far, far smaller threat to freedom then removing them for personal protection and the combined threat of being defenseless to a tyrant.

Guns are simply not a protection against tyrants. Again, how do rifles stop cruise missiles?

Those who commit crimes with guns will do so whether they are legal or not. Surley you are not worried about the legal use of guns, i.e., not murdering people, correct? You are only worried about murder. Passing laws to steal MY liberty and my protection from a tyrant, when criminals will still be criminals is pointless.

I'm worried about guns being used by people other than criminals. Like children, for example.

Obviously to stop a tyrant from coming to power. Any tyrant who would come to power in America would need popular support initially. Small arms can fight a military force who wont use mass bombing, which is the case to any would be tyrant in America.

This is seriously ridiculous. Without an airforce, navy, training, or leadership, no armed citizenry could hope to combat the United States military led by a tyrant. And remember, we're talking about a tyrant here, not some ***** like Bush. Tyrants use every weapon at their disposal to remain in power.

Virtually EVERYONE I know drives a car. Many, many, many, many more people die every year from car accidents then gunfire. I suppose you want to ban cars? They are only a threat if they intend to harm me. The stranger down the street with a shotgun does not want to hurt me, why would he? Further, criminals will have guns no matter what, you secure your own liberty by having a gun to protect yourself from them.

You're totally missing the point here. Cars should not be banned because they are not intended to kill people. Cars can be a threat to you even when not intending to harm you; just look at almost every car accident ever.

I feel safer knowing many patriots in America armed to the teeth. If **** ever hits the fan, we will have to rely on them. Liberty is not a state of mind. Liberty is freedom from coercive force. We agree some forms of coercive force are neccesary, this is why we have laws. We have an army to stop other countries from using coervice force on us. Guns can be used to stop the goverment from exerting coercive force, if it ever betrays the constitution.

****, too delusional to respond to.

[rah]

Based on what I saw in the paper yesterday, about 1 person a day is killed in the Chicago area. Most of them are gun related. I can't find statistics on how many lives are saved per day due to successful self defense due to having a gun, but I would guess it's less than that.

SO while I believe in the right to own a gun, there are still obviously public safty issues involved that should be considered.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Vesayen
I feel safer knowing many patriots in America armed to the teeth.

Dude, come to the Memorial in OKC. Look at all the representations of dead people from patriotic gun freaks.

[Vesayen]

Originally posted by Lorizael
Guns are simply not a protection against tyrants. Again, how do rifles stop cruise missiles?

A rising tyrant will not be willing to use massive ordinance against a civilian population, lest they lose public support, which they will need. A would be tyrant in America would have to rise to power in light of some "disaster" claiming to suspend all civil liberties, rights etc. They would need time to establish themselves, during this time they will need a military and civilian population that supports them. The armed forces would never be willing to bomb American civilians.

Originally posted by Lorizael
I'm worried about guns being used by people other than criminals. Like children, for example.

Your worry about firearms is children will get them? Parents should not leave them where they will be found. In 90% of households in America, the familly car keys are within simple reach of children.

Originally posted by Lorizael
This is seriously ridiculous. Without an airforce, navy, training, or leadership, no armed citizenry could hope to combat the United States military led by a tyrant. And remember, we're talking about a tyrant here, not some ***** like Bush. Tyrants use every weapon at their disposal to remain in power.

Is that why all resistance in Iraq was wiped out rapidly, eh? We've learned between Iraq and Vietnam that a determined resistance which resides in a civilian population can put up a serious fight or at least, be a serious hinderance. We need our guns to stop a tyrant as he TRIES to rise. It would be impossible to dethrone a tyrant who is well entrenched. It is much easier to stop their rise, a would be tyrant would require popular support initially, bombing civilians would instantly destroy this. The armed forces will not follow a leader who orders the bombing of Americans. An armed populace who resists a tyrant shows the military that their authority is illegitimate and ENCOURAGES the military to defect from a would be tyrant.

Originally posted by Lorizael
You're totally missing the point here. Cars should not be banned because they are not intended to kill people. Cars can be a threat to you even when not intending to harm you; just look at almost every car accident ever.

You are in fact missing my point. We need things which can kill people. You are assuming I am against things designed to kill people. I am not. Without things designed to kill people, how will we kill them, when neccesary?

Originally posted by Lorizael
****, too delusional to respond to.

There is nothing delusional about the concept of liberty. Liberty is freedom from coercive force, it is as simple as that.

Originally posted by Kidicious
Dude, come to the Memorial in OKC. Look at all the representations of dead people from patriotic gun freaks.

Mcveigh was insane. Nothing can be done to stop insane people. Also, he used a homeade bomb to blow up the building, he did not shoot it to pieces. What would you have done to stop him, ban fertilizer?

[Asher]

Mcveigh was insane.

On the Insane chart (1-10, 10 being most insane and 1 being least), McVeigh is about an 8, and you and Ben are about 7.9999.

[Asher]

You are in fact missing my point. We need things which can kill people. You are assuming I am against things designed to kill people. I am not. Without things designed to kill people, how will we kill them, when neccesary?

The problem with this is if I had a gun right now, I'm not sure I wouldn't shoot you for being crazy.

I think if you focused less on killing and more on fixing your ****ed up country, you may actually contribute something to this world. Right now you're just a loon.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Vesayen
Mcveigh was insane. Nothing can be done to stop insane people. Also, he used a homeade bomb to blow up the building, he did not shoot it to pieces. What would you have done to stop him, ban fertilizer?

What would I do to stop him? Educate people on what makes a person like that insane. But what does that have to do with you feeling good about people like him being "armed to the teeth."