By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Victory for the Constitution... in Illinois?!

spaceguy on 11 December 2012
Salnax said:
spaceguy said:
Shooting just happened in florida mall.


Well, if everybody in Florida had an AK-47, nobody would ever die from gunfire.



If everyone in the mall had ak 47, How many people would have been shot by everyone pulling out there guns, 100s?  So We should just  have a shoot out everytime? Your post is just not well thought out and is clearly someone who doesn't understand what happens when everyone panicks.



Around the Network
badgenome on 11 December 2012
Soleron said:

Self-defence is consistent with "only be used to injure people". Every other use can be applied for. It's not restricting anyone's right to possess a gun except for the purpose of wanting to kill people with it.

Nerve gas can presumably be used in self-defence as well.

I was stunned for a second that you really don't see a difference between nerve gas and a handgun, but I forgot that self-defense wasn't considered legitimate in modern Britain beyond perhaps bleeding on your assailant (though not to excess). Cultural difference, I suppose.



Salnax on 11 December 2012
spaceguy said:
Salnax said:
spaceguy said:
Shooting just happened in florida mall.


Well, if everybody in Florida had an AK-47, nobody would ever die from gunfire.



If everyone in the mall had ak 47, How many people would have been shot by everyone pulling out there guns, 100s?  So We should just  have a shoot out everytime? Your post is just not well thought out and is clearly someone who doesn't understand what happens when everyone panicks.


I was pulling a Rol. I think everybody carrying around an AK-47 would be a bad thing.



Love and tolerate.

Mr Khan on 11 December 2012
badgenome said:
Soleron said:

Self-defence is consistent with "only be used to injure people". Every other use can be applied for. It's not restricting anyone's right to possess a gun except for the purpose of wanting to kill people with it.

Nerve gas can presumably be used in self-defence as well.

I was stunned for a second that you really don't see a difference between nerve gas and a handgun, but I forgot that self-defense wasn't considered legitimate in modern Britain beyond perhaps bleeding on your assailant (though not to excess). Cultural difference, I suppose.

All in the name of freedom, of course. If law-abiding citizens had access to F-15's, nuclear submarines, ICBMs, tanks, and chemical and biological weapons, then government would think twice before making us pay for someone else's birth control.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

badgenome on 11 December 2012
Mr Khan said:

All in the name of freedom, of course. If law-abiding citizens had access to F-15's, nuclear submarines, ICBMs, tanks, and chemical and biological weapons, then government would think twice before making us pay for someone else's birth control.

You, on the other hand, are an American. You have no excuse to be this stupid about this issue.



Around the Network
Player1x3 on 11 December 2012
Mr Khan said:
Player1x3 said:
Mr Khan said:
badgenome said:
Soleron said:

 

The US currently bans possession of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, for the sole reason that they can only be used to kill and injure people. Why does this not apply to guns (assuming the hunting and recreational practices get permits)?

Really? I thought they were banned because they were weapons of mass destruction and not instruments of self defense.

Nuclear weapons could be the ultimate weapon of self-defence. "Don't loiter in front of my diner or i'll kill every last one of us."

It's only defending his private property, after all.


That's a rather pathetic argument. Gun is designed to fire a bullet which can harm or kill your target. Nuclear weapons are designed to kill hundreds of thousands of people, completely destroy cities and make areas uninhabitable for years...

It's not about using them. They're there to prevent crime.

Hey, it kept the Russians out for 50 years.


I know, i just wanted to make sure you know the difference between a gun and a nuclear bomb.



Soleron on 11 December 2012
badgenome said:
Soleron said:

Self-defence is consistent with "only be used to injure people". Every other use can be applied for. It's not restricting anyone's right to possess a gun except for the purpose of wanting to kill people with it.

Nerve gas can presumably be used in self-defence as well.

I was stunned for a second that you really don't see a difference between nerve gas and a handgun, but I forgot that self-defense wasn't considered legitimate in modern Britain beyond perhaps bleeding on your assailant (though not to excess). Cultural difference, I suppose.

If this was Mad Max I'd agree I guess. But the chances you'll even be in a self-defence situation are extremely low and I don't think the accidental deaths are worth it. And I don't view it as a freedom issue because the other uses you'd be able to apply for.

Also I don't understand why normal police in the US are allowed to have guns.



leatherhat on 11 December 2012
Soleron said:
badgenome said:
Soleron said:

Self-defence is consistent with "only be used to injure people". Every other use can be applied for. It's not restricting anyone's right to possess a gun except for the purpose of wanting to kill people with it.

Nerve gas can presumably be used in self-defence as well.

I was stunned for a second that you really don't see a difference between nerve gas and a handgun, but I forgot that self-defense wasn't considered legitimate in modern Britain beyond perhaps bleeding on your assailant (though not to excess). Cultural difference, I suppose.

If this was Mad Max I'd agree I guess. But the chances you'll even be in a self-defence situation are extremely low and I don't think the accidental deaths are worth it. And I don't view it as a freedom issue because the other uses you'd be able to apply for.

Also I don't understand why normal police in the US are allowed to have guns.


Just last year thousands of British were forced to watch their homes and businesses burn to the ground because they couldn't do anything against oppurtunistic, thieving rioters. 



ǝןdɯıs ʇı dǝǝʞ oʇ ǝʞıן ı ʍouʞ noʎ 

Ask me about being an elitist jerk

Time for hype

Max King of the Wild on 11 December 2012

LOL... it's about time. It was the only state left. Their foid card needs to go too.

Also LOL at the people that don't realize you DO need a permit to conceal and carry... funny thing is in Wisconsin there is open and carry and you don't need a permit for that.



Soleron on 11 December 2012
leatherhat said:
...


Just last year thousands of British were forced to watch their homes and businesses burn to the ground because they couldn't do anything against oppurtunistic, thieving rioters. 

Um. You think. That it's OK to shoot people who are looting?