I thought that if guns were illegal.....

[jkm2500 0]

murders would stop. But apparently murder still does happen, by other means. Maybe Germany should outlaw swords too.

http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20050403-123713-7848r.htm

Quote

Sword attack at German church kills a man



Stuttgart, Germany, Apr. 3 (UPI) -- Police in Germany said a man entered a Protestant church Sunday wielding a sword and killed one man and injured others.
Investigators described the scene at the church in Stuttgart, Germany, as "grisly," and said they had not determined a motive for the attack, the BBC reported.

"Severed limbs were lying all round the church," a police spokeswoman said.

One man was taken into custody.

The primary purpose of the Armed Forces is to prepare for and to prevail in combat should the need arise.

[Rebecca 0]

No, murders by shooting might stop... but murder will still happen.

you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk?

[jkm2500 0]

Quote

No, murders by shooting might stop... but murder will still happen.

That was my point. I think that no matter what we do as a society, there will always be people that have no place.

The primary purpose of the Armed Forces is to prepare for and to prevail in combat should the need arise.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

The question is what the tally would be if this guy had a full automatic with a couple of clips?

[Ron 10]

Quote

The question is what the tally would be if this guy had a full automatic with a couple of clips?

#1 they would be Magazines, not clips...This shows you watch WAY to much TV and get your ideas about guns from Movies.

#2. How much you wanna bet that if you wanted to get a full auto weapon you could? Even in lovely Canada?

Say what you want, people will kill people.

Also, outlawing guns only makes it so outlaws have the guns. See criminals don't care about a law...See they are criminals see? No respect for the law. Only the law abiding citizens obey the laws..Bad guys will not.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

#1 they would be Magazines, not clips...This shows you watch WAY to much TV and get your ideas about guns from Movies.

#2. How much you wanna bet that if you wanted to get a full auto weapon you could? Even in lovely Canada?

#1 partially true

#2 very true as well.

Did any of those two points have anything to do with my question or suggestion, NO but then that was to be expected.

Suggestion stands, a gun would have, in all likelihood, caused more deaths in the given scenario.

Just ask your SF buddies, maybe they'll agree with that one, and report back.......

[justinb138 0]

Quote

The question is what the tally would be if this guy had a full automatic with a couple of clips?

What would it be if he had a 5gal gas tank and some matches?

It could very easily be the same or more than if he had a full-auto weapon.

[USNLawdog 0]

What if he had 300lbs of C4, 5 miles of detcord and a gatling gun like the terminator? Guns aren't the problem, stupid people with guns is the problem. Either way he did it, this guy deserves to be bubba's boyfriend for a long long time.

"I've taken the liberty of drafting your confession, you will be given a fair trial and then taken out back and shot."

[Ron 10]

Quote

Did any of those two points have anything to do with my question or suggestion

Yes, you keep claiming that guns are bad and evil, but its clear that outlawing them does not work.

Quote

Suggestion stands, a gun would have, in all likelihood, caused more deaths in the given scenario

The WTC guys didn't have a single gun on them.

Wow your theories just fall apart don't they?

Quote

Just ask your SF buddies, maybe they'll agree with that one, and report back.......

As soon as that one guy that you put so much faith in gives you your opinion let me know.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Uhmm, what does the WTC have to do with the scenario in Germany. Or the fact that a full automatic weapon would have, in all likelihood, caused more casualties?

To the other people, yes dropping a nuclear bomb on the church would have caused more casualties as well. However, that still doesn't take anything from the original statement.

Quote

As soon as that one guy that you put so much faith in gives you your opinion let me know.

He agrees with me that a full automatic weapon would have caused more casualties. He just calls it common sense.

[Ron 10]

Quote

Uhmm, what does the WTC have to do with the scenario in Germany

Both are proof that you don't need a gun to kill unlike what you say. Then you claim the "scope" of death with a gun is bigger...But the terrorists did not use a single gun and killed 3,000 people. So your scope argument falls flat on its face.

Quote

To the other people, yes dropping a nuclear bomb on the church would have caused more casualties as well. However, that still doesn't take anything from the original statement.

True. However you claim that the scope with a gun is bigger...Well both a nuke and a hijacked Airliner will kill more than a gun.

Quote

He agrees with me that a full automatic weapon would have caused more casualties. He just calls it common sense.

It seems common sense is not so common up there...It might be due to the cold.

See people kill people. Guns or a sword (or a nuke, or an airliner) are tools. This story shows that even if you outlaw guns people will still kill people. Look at DC they have RESTRICT gun laws and yet people still die (Largest murder rate in the US) and they USE GUNS...But Gasp!!!! Guns are illegal there! How did that happen?!?!?!

Simple a criminal will not follow a "law" you pass...Hence why they are "criminals".

You fail to grasp the very simple concept that a criminal will not follow a law they don't like.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[christelsabine 1]

Ron,

this was relationship tragedy. The guy - a Tamile (sp?) - killed a woman and wounded several other people seriously. In the case he had any AK-.... in hands that moment, you can be sure he would have killed dozens. People in the church defended themselves with chair legs, wooden banks and similar. How to do against bullets?

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[Ron 10]

Quote

this was relationship tragedy

OK...so a gun would not have changed this.

Quote

killed a woman and wounded several other people seriously. In the case he had any AK-.... in hands that moment, you can be sure he would have killed dozens.

You use a crystal ball to find this out? Maybe he only attacked those who tried to fight him? Do you have evidence that he would have gone wild or are you guessing?

Quote

People in the church defended themselves with chair legs, wooden banks and similar. How to do against bullets?

Imagine how this owuld have played out if those who defended themselves with chair legs had a pistol?

He would have shown up with a sword and been dead in seconds.

So an armed populace could have SAVED lives huh?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

See people kill people. Guns or a sword (or a nuke, or an airliner) are tools.

I agree, some tools are just more effective and efficient than other tools. See with an electric screwdriver you can screw more screw per hour than with the old hand screwdriver. Doesn't take away from the fact you could still use the old fashioned screw driver to get the job done. Fact remains that the electric screw driver is more efficient.

Same comparison goes for swords and guns. See, now that is the kind of common sense us stupid people up here in Canada understand.

[Ron 10]

Quote

I agree, some tools are just more effective and efficient than other tools. See with an electric screwdriver you can screw more screw per hour than with the old hand screwdriver. Doesn't take away from the fact you could still use the old fashioned screw driver to get the job done. Fact remains that the electric screw driver is more efficient.

Again, OK city bombing, WTC #1 and #2, USS Cole...ect no guns, lots of death. #1 cause of Death in the US is BLUNT FORCE TRAUMA, not gunshot.

So the tool of choice for the most killing is a heavy object. The tool of choice for mass killings seems to be a bomb.

Sorry the facts don't jive with your agenda.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[christelsabine 1]

You use a crystal ball to find this out? Maybe he only attacked those who tried to fight him? Do you have evidence that he would have gone wild or are you guessing?

Quote

It does not need a crystal ball on that. Common sense, or how is it called? He"was going wild", to use your words. For that, he used a sword. Does it need any evidence that he would "not" have done with with an AK-... in hands? What a silly question, Ron.

Quote

People in the church defended themselves with chair legs, wooden banks and similar. How to do against bullets?

Imagine how this owuld have played out if those who defended themselves with chair legs had a pistol?

He would have shown up with a sword and been dead in seconds.

That would have meant a blood bath, Ron. I just try to imagine all those mothers, fully armed to protect their children in case "a sword killer" is attacking them in a church.

Mainly mothers, kids..... And hundreds of hand guns. Again, a silly idea. Anyhow, over here. Perhaps not in the US? Is it normal in the US to visit the church with the kid sitting on left hip and the hand gun on right hip? Hahahhah, Ron you are kidding me - right?

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Again, OK city bombing, WTC #1 and #2, USS Cole...ect no guns, lots of death. #1 cause of Death in the US is BLUNT FORCE TRAUMA, not gunshot.

I was talking about a church in Germany.

Focus Ron, focus......

Yes Ron, there are even more efficient and effective tools, but that still doesn't negate the original statement.

Just like a full automatic nail gun would be more effective and efficient than the electrical and manual screw driver. But that doesn't change the relationship between the manual and electric screwdriver with regards to efficiency and effectiveness.

Again, common sense to us stupid people up here in Canada.

[Ron 10]

Quote

That would have meant a blood bath, Ron. I just try to imagine all those mothers, fully armed to protect their children in case "a sword killer" is attacking them in a church.

You have proof it would be a blood bath? Or are you guessing?

Quote

Is it normal in the US to visit the church with the kid sitting on left hip and the hand gun on right hip? Hahahhah, Ron you are kidding me - right?

Is it normal in Germany for a guy to kill people in chuch with a sword? Its not here in the States.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 10]

Quote

I was talking about a church in Germany.

No, you were not. You were talking about guns in the US which is not involed with the story of a guy using a sword in Germany at all.

You brought it up and tried to drag the US laws into it.

You are just pissed cause your argument fell flat...Again.

Quote

Yes Ron, there are even more efficient and effective tools, but that still doesn't negate the original statement.

Well your statement was that guns are dangerous...more so than a sword and therefore should be illegal. OK, but there are MANY more dnagerous things than a gun...At least that what the FACTS say.

But its not nearly as much fun to make a tire iron out to be evil...

Quote

But that doesn't change the relationship between the manual and electric screwdriver with regards to efficiency and effectiveness.

And I showed you how a Bomb and blunt force trauma kill more people than guns...But they are not as cool to make out as "EVIL"...so you stick to trying to make guns look bad..

Your arguments are weak, and I am bored of you.

If you have a GOOD argument please bring it, but so far you have not brought anything up worth talking about anymore....Kinda the standard for you.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Nightingale 0]

If guns were illegal, then only criminals would have them. It would be a very scary place to be if the law abiding citizens are unarmed and the criminals have guns.

[Paulipod 0]

Quote

Guns are illegal there! How did that happen?!?!?!

That happens because it's so easy to get hold of a gun, and there are so many in circulation that its way too late for a ban in the US...

However - if public guns were never permitted in the first place.... there wouldnt be quite the problem there is now. Banning guns is a great idea, so long as it was done when your constitution was written.... rather than after the horse has bolted.

Not that this helps any now

Bodyflight Bedford
www.bodyflight.co.uk

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

The question is what the tally would be if this guy had a full automatic with a couple of clips?

Well, a couple of magazines might translate to 2 x 30 bullets, and if the crazed guy is firing in full auto he's not going to hit too many people, and many would survive.

Whereas a sword doesn't need to be reloaded, and opens up arteries in a manner that isn't easily repaired.

so it's a toss up, depending greatly on how well he can contain the crowd within the church. One way out, he could slice em all. Lots of open windows, would do better with the rifle on single fire. (your fear of automatics is driven by movies)

[Ron 10]

Quote

That happens because it's so easy to get hold of a gun, and there are so many in circulation that its way too late for a ban in the US...

Its to late for a ban almost anywhere. I can get a black market weapon pretty easy form any country.

Guys in England sneak parachute equipment into England all the time. Drugs get in and out of countries all the time.

No "Ban" works. Look like I said at drugs...Can't make it in X country? Get it smuggled in.

England has guns all over...But the catch is only the crooks have them.

Quote

However - if public guns were never permitted in the first place.... there wouldnt be quite the problem there is now

And the US would still be under control of England. Many revolutions would not have happend and a good number of those did good. The French resistance would not have been able to fight the Germans....I could go on.

Quote

Banning guns is a great idea, so long as it was done when your constitution was written.... rather than after the horse has bolted.

Like I said if they exist anywhere, they will be everywhere...Look at drugs...Pot is illegal, but I saw some just Sunday.

Yeah that worked well.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

No, you were not. You were talking about guns in the US which is not involed with the story of a guy using a sword in Germany at all.

Uhmm, yes I was. Never talked about guns in the US on this thread. A pro-gunner used the incident in germany to indicate that murders still happen without a gun. which is very true. I mentioned that the death toll probably would have been higher though if this guy had a gun. Which is probably also true. Nothing about the US, but then it is sometimes hard to understand for people in the US that it really isn't all about them....

Quote

Well your statement was that guns are dangerous...more so than a sword and therefore should be illegal. OK, but there are MANY more dnagerous things than a gun...At least that what the FACTS say.

No, I never said in this thread that guns should be illegal, just that this guy would probably have done more damage with one. And I know there are things more dangerous than a gun, but that just doesn't have any bearing.

Quote

Your arguments are weak, and I am bored of you.

Yet you keep responding, you always do.......

Quote

If you have a GOOD argument please bring it, but so far you have not brought anything up worth talking about anymore....Kinda the standard for you.

Yet you keep responding. You have done nothing to dispell the argument that guns would be more efficient at killing people than swords. all you have said is that bombs would be more efficient. But pointing to something more efficient doesn't take away from the first statement.

[billvon 3,119]

>If you have a GOOD argument please bring it, but so far you have not
> brought anything up worth talking about anymore....Kinda the standard
> for you.

Let's focus on the discussion and not go attacking the people participating in it.