peregrinerose 0 #26 September 23, 2004 QuoteI think people should be able to buy guns, air bags and AAD's to their heart's content. If anyone buys a gun to protect themselves against a potential domestic violence situation, my advice would be to get the hell out of that house before you need the gun! It makes as much sense as planning to drive drunk and so getting a car with airbags. From the article, which said they USED to live together, sounded like she was out of it but he kept harassing her. In that situation, I'd definitely have a weapon on me at all times. I don't know it would have saved her, without being in the situation, no one could know. But wouldn't it be better if she had a fighting chance instead of having to beg strangers for help and not getting it in time? To some of the other posts about self defense. I have no fear of someone breaking into my house or accosting me. I occasionally carry when hiking, not for people, but for the rabies problem that does occur. I had a rabid possum in my driveway last year, it is an issue that we have to be concerned about in more rural areas. Jen Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #27 September 23, 2004 Quote I'm 3 times older than you and I've worked on the south side of Chicago for longer than you've been alive, and this has not happened to me - ever. Quote For those that don't know - his job is pretty much in the middle of the projects, and is one of the highest crime areas of the city. I had a friend from HS that was shot to death in his car about two blocks from John's school._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,119 #28 September 23, 2004 >In that situation, I'd definitely have a weapon on me at all times. No problem with that at all. But if having that weapon gives you the confidence to get in the car with someone who was harassing you - it has done you more harm than good. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelel01 1 #29 September 23, 2004 Quote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If the gun wasn't within arm's reach, then NO, having one would not have saved her life. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LOL ... that's twice this week where I proclaim that ... Kelly wins ... How many gun owners have their gun on them 24/7 ready to defend themselves in the very instant that it may be needed? PS: Please keep me out of the inevitable gun versus gun control flaming that I know some people would love to throw at me. I just wanted to respond to Kelly's ever so rational response. Thank you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites peregrinerose 0 #30 September 23, 2004 QuoteNo problem with that at all. But if having that weapon gives you the confidence to get in the car with someone who was harassing you - it has done you more harm than good. Very true. I'm fine with carrying, but don't check my brain at the door on the rare times that I do. That would be like poking the rabid raccoon with a stick just because there's a .357 shoved in the small of my back. Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Kennedy 0 #31 September 23, 2004 QuoteHow is it to always be scared of the people? Do you understand the difference between being scared and being prepared? It is obvious that there ARE some3 people out there that we all should be concerned about. Take the vengeful ex-boyfriend in Jeffrey's example. Also, who is more "scared?" The person who is prepared for possibilities, or the person who is so afraid of society that they think no one else deserves to decide for themselves? Like TomA said, I'm not afraid, but it seems that anti-gun people are afraid of everyone. QuoteDon´t you get tired of thinking that maybe you will be the next one murdered? Don't you get tired of thinking that everyone out there is a wonderful person that means you no harm? After a home burglary in a nice neighborhood and an unprovoked assault and battery in a college town, I hope for the best from people, but I prepare for the worst. Bad people do exist. If you deny me means to defend myself, what would you have me do when I meet one of them?witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #32 September 23, 2004 QuoteLOL ... that's twice this week where I proclaim that ... Kelly wins ... How many gun owners have their gun on them 24/7 ready to defend themselves in the very instant that it may be needed? I work in Kosovo, so obviously it only applies when I'm home on vacation: I am not licenced to carry concealed (yet). However, when I am home, on my own land, my pistol is on my belt. When I go to bed at night, it's on the nightstand. Once I'm licensed, it will be on my belt everywhere it is not illegal for me to carry it. It's a whole HELL of a lot better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it - just like air bags, seat belts, fire extinguishers and reserves.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelel01 1 #33 September 23, 2004 You, my friend, are in the minority. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #34 September 23, 2004 QuoteYou, my friend, are in the minority. Does that make his behavior wrong? Skydivers are a minority. Maybe they should be just like the majority of the general public, and quit jumping out of airplanes. How boring life would be if all people behaved exactly the same and did all the same things. What ever happened to respect for the lifestyles of others, as long as they aren't bothering anyone? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelel01 1 #35 September 23, 2004 For fuck's sake, John. Did you even read my post before? I in no way implied that he was wrong. I was saying that if this couple had had a gun, that doesn't mean it would have been accessible to save the woman's life. So, he said that he always has his on him, and I said that it was a rarity for someone to have it all the time. NOWHERE IN THERE did I indicate that he was wrong for it. In fact, I think he's right-- as opposed to people who have one gun in one room of their house that they may or may not be able to get to if they needed it. Read first, then post. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #36 September 23, 2004 Agreed - just like the other examples noted (seat belts, etc.), it doesn't do you any good to have it if it's not where you can use it. My example: I don't live in a bad part of San Antonio (anymore, anyway!). In the last few years, the gangs have started being more active in the local area. Taggings and scouting parties aren't all that uncommon anymore. Add to that the fact that I own horses, and live in an area where there are packs of wild dogs that prey on livestock, and it only makes sense to have it handy, just in case, and PRAY TO GOD I never have to use it.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #37 September 23, 2004 QuotePrecious energy spent on touting your right to bear arms could be better spent fixing the problems in this society that would give people a reason to need to protect themselves. Why not strive to improve jobs, education, health care and mental health care...the things that would minimize the seeds for violent crime. Seems to me that we in the world have spent eons trying to do that. Let's examine your beliefs in the context of this story. I guess had Mr. Seay had a job, he would have been working at the time, and thus would not have been available to murder that lady. You make a good point. Then again, maybe he had a job, or maybe he did not but did not want a job. Education? Had he been educated he would have known that killing someone is against the law. He also would have known to respect restraining orders, since he could be arrested for violation of one when he goes to kill her. Education could have gotten him into college, where no crime exists among those fine young Americans. Ask anyone whether crimes of violence or property crimes are ever committed by students. Ghetto youths riot, never a student body. Health care. Yep, there's a good one. I suppose that had Mr. Seay had good health insurance and a good quality primary medical doctor, this wouldn't have happened. His defense attorny should raise that as a colorable defense - "Mr. Seay's access to health care was denied. This is exactly the type of thing that would so inflame the ordinary person's normal senses so that he could not formulate intent to kill." That'll work. Maybe it was SHE who didn't have health care, so he finished her off rather than stick her with medical bills because she was not insured. Congrats. I think you've shown how jobs, health care and education would prevent murderous sociopaths from being murderous sociopaths. True, society should set up a system that identifies and detains suspected sociopaths before they can act in ways inconsistent with society's needs. Sorry, dude, not my thing. I'd rather protect myself from the potential criminal than have society protect itself from "potential criminals" by treating "potential criminals." My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,119 #38 September 23, 2004 >Precious energy spent on touting your right to bear arms could be better > spent fixing the problems in this society that would give people a reason > to need to protect themselves. As we have the second amendment here that says we have that right, your choice is to spend energy and time getting it changed, or leave it alone and spend that extra energy making people safer in other ways (increased police presence etc.) >Someone locking themselves up in their house with their cache of > firepower makes them a nut job, part of the problem, they probably > could've benefited from that lobbying for more mental health care. Well, no, they're no more of a problem than someone who locks themselves up with their model rockets or their street rods. If you want to come and _make_ them into a problem, that's one thing - but then it's you causing the problem, not them. >Eliminate the things that cause crime, then you can live life not in fear of crime. You can definitely eliminate some of those things, but then again, some people are just nuts and/or evil. And unless you plan to genetically engineer a superior race of people, they will always be with us. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Douva 0 #39 September 23, 2004 QuoteQuoteHow is it to always be scared of the people? Do you understand the difference between being scared and being prepared? I really hate the "I refuse to live in fear" attitude as an excuse for refusing to be prepared. Wearing a seat belt is not living in fear. Teaching your children not to talk to strangers is not living in fear. Owning a fire extinguisher is not living in fear. Owning a gun is not living in fear. Keeping bottled water and canned food in your closet is not living in fear. The "I refuse to live in fear" argument is usually indicative of people who refuse to live in reality. They refuse to accept the fragile, random nature of life, instead claiming that to prepare for any uncertainty would be giving into fear. The truth is, people living today are safer than they have ever been; however, life still contains many variables beyond our control, and there is nothing wrong with taking steps to prepare for these contingencies. Contrary to what many proponents of gun control seem to believe, gun owners do not live in constant fear for their lives. Most of them feel fairly safe in their day-to-day lives. Rather, I would offer that it is the gun control advocates who are really living in fear. They are so afraid of what they don't understand that they wish to ban a tool that has been around for half a millennium, despite facts that, at best, offer flimsy support for their cause and, at worst, completely contradict their claims.I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites christelsabine 1 #40 September 23, 2004 Quote You know, with great power comes great responsability, and there is many people out there who i don´t think are responsible enough to own a firearm. That statement is absolutely true. I sign that. QuoteA DZ.commer threated me once to shoot me, go figure!!!! Would like to hear that story. Simply: All of us used to live a life w/o a permant thinking of being in danger. In my hometown (and that's a town with 1 million, for US circumstances probably a village) I go out, no need to arm myself! That's too imbecile to imagine! But, Senor, if "you" just grow up with that? With weapons around you? For you it must be fully normal, right? Fully normal to consider that just the next person behind next corner could be your killer What an imagination! Pure horror. dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Douva 0 #41 September 23, 2004 QuoteYou know, with great power comes great responsability, and there is many people out there who i don´t think are responsible enough to own a firearm. And a lot of 16 year olds aren't responsible enough to own cars, but we don't raise the driving age to 18 or 21 or 25 because of a few bad apples.I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,119 #42 September 23, 2004 >And a lot of 16 year olds aren't responsible enough to own cars, but we >don't raise the driving age to 18 or 21 or 25 because of a few bad apples. Bad comparison. We require licensing and registration of people who want to drive, to keep the worst of the bad apples off the street. Gun supporters tend to scream bloody murder if anyone suggests that for guns. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelel01 1 #43 September 23, 2004 Also not correct . . . in GA, the driving age is going up slowly, and the laws are getting much more strict. Because cars kill people. Note: just arguing the point. The jury's still out on how I feel about guns and gun control. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #44 September 23, 2004 QuoteWe require licensing and registration of people who want to drive, to keep the worst of the bad apples off the street. How effective is that? People without licenses never drive? There aren't any unregistered vehicles on the road? It is illegal for bad apples to have guns. Registration and licensing wouldn't change that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,119 #45 September 23, 2004 >How effective is that? People without licenses never drive? There aren't any >unregistered vehicles on the road? I wasn't saying it was a good idea. I was saying that comparing guns to cars is a bad comparison, because cars involve licenses/registrations and guns (usually) don't. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Douva 0 #46 September 23, 2004 Quote>And a lot of 16 year olds aren't responsible enough to own cars, but we >don't raise the driving age to 18 or 21 or 25 because of a few bad apples. Bad comparison. We require licensing and registration of people who want to drive, to keep the worst of the bad apples off the street. Gun supporters tend to scream bloody murder if anyone suggests that for guns. Registration and licensing are only required to operate a vehicle on PUBLIC streets. Twelve year olds legally operate unregistered pickup trucks on farms all over the country. Likewise, most states require licensing to cary a gun in public. The anti-gun notion that we regulate guns less than cars really doesn't hold water. I've never seen a federal background check to buy a car, and I've never seen anyone wait over three months for two federal fingerprint checks and an extensive federal background check to be processed for their driver license. I can see your point about the flaw in my comparison, though.I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Botellines 0 #47 September 23, 2004 QuoteLet me guess, you out-reasoned him and he felt threatened by your logical (and probably correct) argument? Yep! QuoteI hope someone removed the stick from his ass for you :> Yeah, a moderator told him it was not nice to threaten to shoot another poster and deleted his post. He just helped me prove my point that not everybody is suited to own a gun. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Botellines 0 #48 September 23, 2004 QuoteWould like to hear that story. Do you remember that post about a gorgeous 23 years old teacher that slept with a 15 year old student? well, i didn´t see the 15 years old guy as a victim, it was wrong, but the guy knew perfectly what he was doing. And then this guy who thinks i am a pedophile because i didn´t agree with him that the guy was a victim, threatened to shoot me if i ever get close to his nephews who happen to live in the same city I live. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=1136153;page=1;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;mh=25; Here you have the link, it is long, but it is worth. You can see how some people in a heated discussion can loose control. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tunaplanet 0 #49 September 23, 2004 QuoteCould a homeowner's gun have saved this woman's life? When we become psychic we'll know. Otherwise it's pure speculation. Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites christelsabine 1 #50 September 23, 2004 Do not take it too serious, guy. You are not a fool. You surely know where to draw a line and when words just "sound" ridiculous. And yes, I know when disputes are starting to become hot. It's always mutual. Look forward to present thread! Night. dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Page 2 of 7 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
billvon 3,119 #28 September 23, 2004 >In that situation, I'd definitely have a weapon on me at all times. No problem with that at all. But if having that weapon gives you the confidence to get in the car with someone who was harassing you - it has done you more harm than good. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelel01 1 #29 September 23, 2004 Quote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If the gun wasn't within arm's reach, then NO, having one would not have saved her life. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LOL ... that's twice this week where I proclaim that ... Kelly wins ... How many gun owners have their gun on them 24/7 ready to defend themselves in the very instant that it may be needed? PS: Please keep me out of the inevitable gun versus gun control flaming that I know some people would love to throw at me. I just wanted to respond to Kelly's ever so rational response. Thank you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peregrinerose 0 #30 September 23, 2004 QuoteNo problem with that at all. But if having that weapon gives you the confidence to get in the car with someone who was harassing you - it has done you more harm than good. Very true. I'm fine with carrying, but don't check my brain at the door on the rare times that I do. That would be like poking the rabid raccoon with a stick just because there's a .357 shoved in the small of my back. Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #31 September 23, 2004 QuoteHow is it to always be scared of the people? Do you understand the difference between being scared and being prepared? It is obvious that there ARE some3 people out there that we all should be concerned about. Take the vengeful ex-boyfriend in Jeffrey's example. Also, who is more "scared?" The person who is prepared for possibilities, or the person who is so afraid of society that they think no one else deserves to decide for themselves? Like TomA said, I'm not afraid, but it seems that anti-gun people are afraid of everyone. QuoteDon´t you get tired of thinking that maybe you will be the next one murdered? Don't you get tired of thinking that everyone out there is a wonderful person that means you no harm? After a home burglary in a nice neighborhood and an unprovoked assault and battery in a college town, I hope for the best from people, but I prepare for the worst. Bad people do exist. If you deny me means to defend myself, what would you have me do when I meet one of them?witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #32 September 23, 2004 QuoteLOL ... that's twice this week where I proclaim that ... Kelly wins ... How many gun owners have their gun on them 24/7 ready to defend themselves in the very instant that it may be needed? I work in Kosovo, so obviously it only applies when I'm home on vacation: I am not licenced to carry concealed (yet). However, when I am home, on my own land, my pistol is on my belt. When I go to bed at night, it's on the nightstand. Once I'm licensed, it will be on my belt everywhere it is not illegal for me to carry it. It's a whole HELL of a lot better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it - just like air bags, seat belts, fire extinguishers and reserves.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelel01 1 #33 September 23, 2004 You, my friend, are in the minority. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #34 September 23, 2004 QuoteYou, my friend, are in the minority. Does that make his behavior wrong? Skydivers are a minority. Maybe they should be just like the majority of the general public, and quit jumping out of airplanes. How boring life would be if all people behaved exactly the same and did all the same things. What ever happened to respect for the lifestyles of others, as long as they aren't bothering anyone? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelel01 1 #35 September 23, 2004 For fuck's sake, John. Did you even read my post before? I in no way implied that he was wrong. I was saying that if this couple had had a gun, that doesn't mean it would have been accessible to save the woman's life. So, he said that he always has his on him, and I said that it was a rarity for someone to have it all the time. NOWHERE IN THERE did I indicate that he was wrong for it. In fact, I think he's right-- as opposed to people who have one gun in one room of their house that they may or may not be able to get to if they needed it. Read first, then post. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #36 September 23, 2004 Agreed - just like the other examples noted (seat belts, etc.), it doesn't do you any good to have it if it's not where you can use it. My example: I don't live in a bad part of San Antonio (anymore, anyway!). In the last few years, the gangs have started being more active in the local area. Taggings and scouting parties aren't all that uncommon anymore. Add to that the fact that I own horses, and live in an area where there are packs of wild dogs that prey on livestock, and it only makes sense to have it handy, just in case, and PRAY TO GOD I never have to use it.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #37 September 23, 2004 QuotePrecious energy spent on touting your right to bear arms could be better spent fixing the problems in this society that would give people a reason to need to protect themselves. Why not strive to improve jobs, education, health care and mental health care...the things that would minimize the seeds for violent crime. Seems to me that we in the world have spent eons trying to do that. Let's examine your beliefs in the context of this story. I guess had Mr. Seay had a job, he would have been working at the time, and thus would not have been available to murder that lady. You make a good point. Then again, maybe he had a job, or maybe he did not but did not want a job. Education? Had he been educated he would have known that killing someone is against the law. He also would have known to respect restraining orders, since he could be arrested for violation of one when he goes to kill her. Education could have gotten him into college, where no crime exists among those fine young Americans. Ask anyone whether crimes of violence or property crimes are ever committed by students. Ghetto youths riot, never a student body. Health care. Yep, there's a good one. I suppose that had Mr. Seay had good health insurance and a good quality primary medical doctor, this wouldn't have happened. His defense attorny should raise that as a colorable defense - "Mr. Seay's access to health care was denied. This is exactly the type of thing that would so inflame the ordinary person's normal senses so that he could not formulate intent to kill." That'll work. Maybe it was SHE who didn't have health care, so he finished her off rather than stick her with medical bills because she was not insured. Congrats. I think you've shown how jobs, health care and education would prevent murderous sociopaths from being murderous sociopaths. True, society should set up a system that identifies and detains suspected sociopaths before they can act in ways inconsistent with society's needs. Sorry, dude, not my thing. I'd rather protect myself from the potential criminal than have society protect itself from "potential criminals" by treating "potential criminals." My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #38 September 23, 2004 >Precious energy spent on touting your right to bear arms could be better > spent fixing the problems in this society that would give people a reason > to need to protect themselves. As we have the second amendment here that says we have that right, your choice is to spend energy and time getting it changed, or leave it alone and spend that extra energy making people safer in other ways (increased police presence etc.) >Someone locking themselves up in their house with their cache of > firepower makes them a nut job, part of the problem, they probably > could've benefited from that lobbying for more mental health care. Well, no, they're no more of a problem than someone who locks themselves up with their model rockets or their street rods. If you want to come and _make_ them into a problem, that's one thing - but then it's you causing the problem, not them. >Eliminate the things that cause crime, then you can live life not in fear of crime. You can definitely eliminate some of those things, but then again, some people are just nuts and/or evil. And unless you plan to genetically engineer a superior race of people, they will always be with us. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Douva 0 #39 September 23, 2004 QuoteQuoteHow is it to always be scared of the people? Do you understand the difference between being scared and being prepared? I really hate the "I refuse to live in fear" attitude as an excuse for refusing to be prepared. Wearing a seat belt is not living in fear. Teaching your children not to talk to strangers is not living in fear. Owning a fire extinguisher is not living in fear. Owning a gun is not living in fear. Keeping bottled water and canned food in your closet is not living in fear. The "I refuse to live in fear" argument is usually indicative of people who refuse to live in reality. They refuse to accept the fragile, random nature of life, instead claiming that to prepare for any uncertainty would be giving into fear. The truth is, people living today are safer than they have ever been; however, life still contains many variables beyond our control, and there is nothing wrong with taking steps to prepare for these contingencies. Contrary to what many proponents of gun control seem to believe, gun owners do not live in constant fear for their lives. Most of them feel fairly safe in their day-to-day lives. Rather, I would offer that it is the gun control advocates who are really living in fear. They are so afraid of what they don't understand that they wish to ban a tool that has been around for half a millennium, despite facts that, at best, offer flimsy support for their cause and, at worst, completely contradict their claims.I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #40 September 23, 2004 Quote You know, with great power comes great responsability, and there is many people out there who i don´t think are responsible enough to own a firearm. That statement is absolutely true. I sign that. QuoteA DZ.commer threated me once to shoot me, go figure!!!! Would like to hear that story. Simply: All of us used to live a life w/o a permant thinking of being in danger. In my hometown (and that's a town with 1 million, for US circumstances probably a village) I go out, no need to arm myself! That's too imbecile to imagine! But, Senor, if "you" just grow up with that? With weapons around you? For you it must be fully normal, right? Fully normal to consider that just the next person behind next corner could be your killer What an imagination! Pure horror. dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Douva 0 #41 September 23, 2004 QuoteYou know, with great power comes great responsability, and there is many people out there who i don´t think are responsible enough to own a firearm. And a lot of 16 year olds aren't responsible enough to own cars, but we don't raise the driving age to 18 or 21 or 25 because of a few bad apples.I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #42 September 23, 2004 >And a lot of 16 year olds aren't responsible enough to own cars, but we >don't raise the driving age to 18 or 21 or 25 because of a few bad apples. Bad comparison. We require licensing and registration of people who want to drive, to keep the worst of the bad apples off the street. Gun supporters tend to scream bloody murder if anyone suggests that for guns. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelel01 1 #43 September 23, 2004 Also not correct . . . in GA, the driving age is going up slowly, and the laws are getting much more strict. Because cars kill people. Note: just arguing the point. The jury's still out on how I feel about guns and gun control. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #44 September 23, 2004 QuoteWe require licensing and registration of people who want to drive, to keep the worst of the bad apples off the street. How effective is that? People without licenses never drive? There aren't any unregistered vehicles on the road? It is illegal for bad apples to have guns. Registration and licensing wouldn't change that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #45 September 23, 2004 >How effective is that? People without licenses never drive? There aren't any >unregistered vehicles on the road? I wasn't saying it was a good idea. I was saying that comparing guns to cars is a bad comparison, because cars involve licenses/registrations and guns (usually) don't. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Douva 0 #46 September 23, 2004 Quote>And a lot of 16 year olds aren't responsible enough to own cars, but we >don't raise the driving age to 18 or 21 or 25 because of a few bad apples. Bad comparison. We require licensing and registration of people who want to drive, to keep the worst of the bad apples off the street. Gun supporters tend to scream bloody murder if anyone suggests that for guns. Registration and licensing are only required to operate a vehicle on PUBLIC streets. Twelve year olds legally operate unregistered pickup trucks on farms all over the country. Likewise, most states require licensing to cary a gun in public. The anti-gun notion that we regulate guns less than cars really doesn't hold water. I've never seen a federal background check to buy a car, and I've never seen anyone wait over three months for two federal fingerprint checks and an extensive federal background check to be processed for their driver license. I can see your point about the flaw in my comparison, though.I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #47 September 23, 2004 QuoteLet me guess, you out-reasoned him and he felt threatened by your logical (and probably correct) argument? Yep! QuoteI hope someone removed the stick from his ass for you :> Yeah, a moderator told him it was not nice to threaten to shoot another poster and deleted his post. He just helped me prove my point that not everybody is suited to own a gun. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #48 September 23, 2004 QuoteWould like to hear that story. Do you remember that post about a gorgeous 23 years old teacher that slept with a 15 year old student? well, i didn´t see the 15 years old guy as a victim, it was wrong, but the guy knew perfectly what he was doing. And then this guy who thinks i am a pedophile because i didn´t agree with him that the guy was a victim, threatened to shoot me if i ever get close to his nephews who happen to live in the same city I live. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=1136153;page=1;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;mh=25; Here you have the link, it is long, but it is worth. You can see how some people in a heated discussion can loose control. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #49 September 23, 2004 QuoteCould a homeowner's gun have saved this woman's life? When we become psychic we'll know. Otherwise it's pure speculation. Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #50 September 23, 2004 Do not take it too serious, guy. You are not a fool. You surely know where to draw a line and when words just "sound" ridiculous. And yes, I know when disputes are starting to become hot. It's always mutual. Look forward to present thread! Night. dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
