Thoughts on gun control?

[Coaxialgamer]

Oh god  what have you done

[comicsansms]

12 minutes ago, Coaxialgamer said:

Oh god  what have you done

It's called patriotic american's that believe everyone should have the power to travel around town with an AK47 so if something bad happens, they can kill it. (and because their constitution said they can, so they cannot change it, "forgetting" that their constitution says "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." but conveniently they only remembering the last part which says they can have guns, and they also are "forgetting" that that wasn't originally in their Constitution)

 

It is a really backwards way of thinking "Party X has guns, and they are bad, so if C party has guns, they can protect ourselves from them."  But they are forgetting that if guns were regulated, Party X wouldn't have guns to begin with. They also like comparing themselves with Switzerland, a country that has the highest gun ownership, but they are forgetting that people in Switzerland have to be enrolled in the army, so they have to know how to use a gun so they don't  just accidentally kill someone, another thing they are forgetting, there is still much more gun related deaths in Switzerland than Switzerland's neighbouring countries.

 

They just like avoiding the facts.

[HughMungusCynicalAnarch]

13 minutes ago, Comic_Sans_MS said:

It's called patriotic american's that believe everyone should have the power to travel around town with an AK47 so if something bad happens, they can kill it. (and because their constitution said they can, so they cannot change it, "forgetting" that their constitution says "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." but conveniently they only remembering the last part which says they can have guns, and they also are "forgetting" that that wasn't originally in their Constitution)

 

It is a really backwards way of thinking "Party X has guns, and they are bad, so if C party has guns, they can protect ourselves from them."  But they are forgetting that if guns were regulated, Party X wouldn't have guns to begin with. They also like comparing themselves with Switzerland, a country that has the highest gun ownership, but they are forgetting that people in Switzerland have to be enrolled in the army, so they have to know how to use a gun so they don't  just accidentally kill someone, another thing they are forgetting, there is still much more gun related deaths in Switzerland than Switzerland's neighbouring countries.

 

They just like avoiding the facts.

LOL this dumbass argument again.

 One there's a comma, two the federalist papers and writings of the founding fathers reaffirm the right for individuals to own firearms And ordinance, three well regulated meant in good order, four it means you need guns in order to be in the militia not that you need to be in the militia to be able to own guns and five militia means all able bodied men 18 to 45(that's actually the law) so either way your point is beyond retarded.

[comicsansms]

3 minutes ago, HughMungusCynicalAnarch said:

LOL, are you ignorant or slow? One there's a comma, two the federalist papers and writings of the founding fathers reaffirm the right for individuals to own firearms And ordinance, three well regulated meant in good order, four it means you need guns in order to be in the militia not that you need to be in the militia to be able to own guns and five militia means all able bodied men 18 to 45(that's actually the law) so either way your point is beyond retarded.

This is what I am talking about. You haven't given a point for guns, your defense is I am wrong and the edited sheet of paper said something kind what you want it to say, but not really and it was after an edit (and you cannot reedit an editted of paper). 

 

I am in a country that has fuck all fire arms related deaths and has strict laws so idiots cannot get guns to kill another 35 people for no particular reason. Gun control works if you start it, it has to be a nation wide ruling and it has to be enforced, but it will work.

 

Also where was I wrong about your 2nd ammendment? You are not under army control and your country isn't in a security crisis that would break your state. 

 

[HughMungusCynicalAnarch]

2 minutes ago, Comic_Sans_MS said:

This is what I am talking about. You haven't given a point for guns, your defense is I am wrong and the edited sheet of paper said something kind what you want it to say, but not really and it was after an edit (and you cannot reedit an editted of paper). 

 

I am in a country that has fuck all fire arms related deaths and has strict laws so idiots cannot get guns to kill another 35 people for no particular reason. Gun control works if you start it, it has to be a nation wide ruling and it has to be enforced, but it will work.

 

Also where was I wrong about your 2nd ammendment? You are not under army control and your country isn't in a security crisis that would break your state. 

 

It doesn't say what I want it to say it says what I says. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison and George Washington said what they said, individuals have the right to own firearms and ordinance. This is a fact. The definition of a militia I gave is a a fact. All My main points for guns were in my previous post. 

[comicsansms]

7 minutes ago, HughMungusCynicalAnarch said:

It doesn't say what I want it to say it says what I says. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison and George Washington said what they said, individuals have the right to own firearms and ordinance. This is a fact. The definition of a militia I gave is a a fact. All My main points for guns were in my previous post. 

So once again, you are saying you cannot reedit an edited sheet of paper.

 

Put it this way, if people only followed rules from 400 years ago, the world be a really fucked up place, people would be dumped on islands because they were accused of stealing "a ride on a horse" (not proven, just accused). Rules need revising and removed, depending on the situation.

 

Look at statistics, don't follow the gun cult. It is a cultural problem which isn't helping anyone, just causing unneeded deaths.

 

Don't say X US State has more gun related deaths than another and they have strictor gun laws, you can buy a gun from another US state and get into your car to drive it into another, you cannot just drive from one country to another with a gun. 

[HughMungusCynicalAnarch]

15 minutes ago, Comic_Sans_MS said:

So once again, you are saying you cannot reedit an edited sheet of paper.

 

Put it this way, if people only followed rules from 400 years ago, the world be a really fucked up place, people would be dumped on islands because they were accused of stealing "a ride on a horse" (not proven, just accused). Rules need revising and removed, depending on the situation.

 

Look at statistics, don't follow the gun cult. It is a cultural problem which isn't helping anyone, just causing unneeded deaths.

 

Don't say X US State has more gun related deaths than another and they have strictor gun laws, you can buy a gun from another US state and get into your car to drive it into another, you cannot just drive from one country to another with a gun. 

The second amendment hasn't been edited.

 

You didn't even read the post I asked you to read. Im not arguing until you actually read my points.

i never even mentioned states vs other states.