posted
From a delightful little movie starring the ever-so wonderful Kevin Costner, I am reminded of a little saying.
If you build it, they will come.
Of course, 'it' is a ballfield, and 'they' are dead pro baseball players, but I still think it fits this situation perfectly.
------------------ "Hockey is a sport for white men. Basketball is a sport for black men. Golf is a sport for white men dressed like black pimps." - Tiger Woods
"If you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have them."
And if you outlaw murder, only outlaws will murder people. Doesn't this fall under some category of circular logic? :-)
Oh, and two things, Omega. First, neither "millenium" nor "millenia" is a word (unless you count the Millenium Falcon). The words are "millennium" and "millennia". And if someone wants to usher in the new millennia, I'm sure they can, though they're not going to be around to see more than one of those...
And the other thing is that I believe that color-change joke was a reference to the use of the words "was white", as in past tense.
------------------ "You're basically killing each other to see who's got the better imaginary friend." -Yasir Arafat on religious wars
"And if you outlaw murder, only outlaws will murder people. Doesn't this fall under some category of circular logic?"
That's not circular logic. It's a logical conclusion. Obviously, if you outlaw murder (we'll ignore the fact that murder is illegal by definition), then only outlaws will murder people, since, by murdering someone, they will become outlaws.
Are you saying that it does not follow that if you criminalize gun ownership, then only criminals will own guns? If so, you're a twit.
And you're certainly not going to argue that the best circumstances are those under which ONLY the criminals have guns. We've seen what that does in Brittain.
re: Millennium
Again, spelling isn't my best category.
*"Two 'L's, Two 'N's...*
"I believe that color-change joke was a reference to the use of the words "was white", as in past tense."
IIRC, they're dead, so that would be the appropriate tense to use...
------------------ Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh? Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns. Pilot: Americans it is. - "due South"
"Obviously, if you outlaw murder (we'll ignore the fact that murder is illegal by definition), then only outlaws will murder people, since, by murdering someone, they will become outlaws."
Look at this guy... Even when he goes and explains the point I was making, he still doesn't get it...
I'll type this slowly, so you can understand it, Omega. If something is illegal, only criminals will do it, because doing it makes them criminals. Therefore it's utterly pointless to make such an arguement, since it basically just repeats itself. What meaning does it have to say only criminals do illegal things? The only real response to such an arguement is "No shit, Sherlock.", or some variation thereof.
------------------ "You're basically killing each other to see who's got the better imaginary friend." -Yasir Arafat on religious wars
And to your right you will see a man who does not recognize that there are multiple definitions of the word "criminal".
*/TourGuideSpeak*
"Criminal" can also be defined as someone who doesn't have any respect for the law, and thus doesn't care when they break it. THIS kind of criminal isn't going to turn over his guns if they're outlawed. Thus, to be even MORE simplistic about it: "If ownership of a firearm is made illegal, then only those who have no respect for laws will own firearms." This is a logical conclusion. Do you really want only people who have no respect for the law to be the only ones with guns? You know, like in England?
------------------ Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh? Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns. Pilot: Americans it is. - "due South"
posted
A criminal activity can be anything that violates the laws we, as a people, have decided to have. A criminal is a person that comes to a rolling 'stop' and a person that murders. The definition is the same, one that breaks laws. The level of the crime is the variable.
I am a criminal, although my crimes are traffic violations, and not murder. I am still guilty of usually doing 5 mph over the speed limit, and the rolling 'stops'.
------------------ Stupid bastards and religious freaks, so safe in their castle keeps...
posted
in the thread that started this, "This is not ordinary laziness...", I was wondering what kinds of weapons you think shouldn't or should be controled? You have: 1. Pistols/Revolvers 2. Shotguns 3. Rifles 4. Automatic Weapons - Any type of weapon with a cyclic rate of fire, 1 trigger pull equals 3 or more rounds being fired.
------------------ Stupid bastards and religious freaks, so safe in their castle keeps...
posted
I'm all for automatic weapons. Provided they are Russian. I hear the AK-74 can take out a 7-11 in a jiffy. Those guys pose a threat to me. They're open 24/7. Obviously they're part of the conspiracy to nullify the constitution.
BRING ON THE FRENCH WHORES!!
------------------ "Hockey is a sport for white men. Basketball is a sport for black men. Golf is a sport for white men dressed like black pimps." - Tiger Woods
posted
I see automatic weapons like I see privately owned nukes. They are NOT a legitimate means of self-defence, and in fact have the ability to render self-defence impossible. This violates the spirit of the second ammendment.
------------------ Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh? Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns. Pilot: Americans it is. - "due South"
B) Provide an even bigger detterent for criminals?
------------------ "Hockey is a sport for white men. Basketball is a sport for black men. Golf is a sport for white men dressed like black pimps." - Tiger Woods
posted
I guess it all depends on who you plan on defending yourself against. What is the context here? The 2nd Amendment doesn't state that, just the right to bear arms. No limits.
Branch Dividians ring any bells, they were over zealous in the right to self defense from the U.S. Government.
What was the intention of the 2nd Amendment? The right to self defense. But from whom??? Your next door neighbor or the Government?
Remember, the 2nd Amendment was written just after a government was overthrown.
The answer is????
------------------ Stupid bastards and religious freaks, so safe in their castle keeps...
"This violates the spirit of the second ammendment."
You're joking, right? If not, you obviously don't know jack-shit about the second amendment, assuming you've ever actually read it, so I think it's safe to say your arguement is void...
------------------ "You're basically killing each other to see who's got the better imaginary friend." -Yasir Arafat on religious wars
posted
If you use an automatic weapon in self defense, you're liable to blow fifty innocent bystanders to bits. Sorry, I see no reason why people need an AK-47 or a CAR-15 to defend their homes.
------------------ Friends Don't Let Friends Vote Republican *** Gore/Lieberman 2000 - a step forward into the new millennium
posted
Since private ownership of automatic weapons is already illegal, the question is moot. If you hear about automatic weapons being used on the street today it is because either:
1. The person reporting the incident is an idiot, doesn't know the difference between automatic, semi-auto, and other types of weapons, or doesn't care and is using scare tactics to sell the story (see: Most media types)
2. It actually IS an automatic weapon, the existence of which must be laid at the feet of inadequate law enforcement, and criminals.
When reading the Second Amendment, it is necessary to use what you learned in elementary English grammar to realize that the bit about the 'well-regulated militia' is a subordinate clause, and that the real object of the paragraph is 'The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The Militia bit is only a REASON, for the object to be what it is, and not necessarily the SOLE reason.
------------------ "Ed Gruberman, you fail to grasp Ty Kwan Leap. Approach me, that you might see." -- The Master
Printer-friendly view of this topic
