Pro-gun vs No-gun America

[SemiAuto]

Well, I am dissapointed. I only got one out of three right. I had "practicing for killing" and sure enough he trotted that one right on out, didn't he?

Semi, Spudflower will never ever ever ever ever admit to a lack of objectivity and/or distorted views of the subject, no matter how many times you beat him over the head with it.

I got time to kill.

oops....

[soulflower]

Because I didn't find it offensive.

Well people in Oregon found it offensive. And if the idiots were looking to make a statement and get attention, they succeeded. 911 calls were made and atleast one school was locked down.

Here's a gun owner with common sense:

He said he supports the Second Amendment, grew up in Alaska using guns to hunt and take target practice. He also owns a firearm, but said he was upset by the duo’s actions.

“Someone could have spotted them, felt threatened and the situation easily could have escalated because someone felt they had to make a statement that’s already in the Constitution,” Janiak said. “When you purchase and own a gun, you owe it to the community to be responsible with it.”

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/i...l#incart_river

Or gay guys kissing.

Gays kissing has never gotten innocent people killed

Really? Government is always benevolent? That is irrational.

If your government decides to be tyrannical then the Bill of Rights is null and void...

[soulflower]

Well, I am dissapointed. I only got one out of three right. I had "practicing for killing" and sure enough he trotted that one right on out, didn't he?

Semi, Spudflower will never ever ever ever ever admit to a lack of objectivity and/or distorted views of the subject, no matter how many times you beat him over the head with it.

I've admitted dozens of times that I'm biased.

I'm under no obligation to be unbiased on this forum...

[soulflower]

The question was about uses outside of violence.

Hunting can be considered violence against accepted animals but if you generally want to chalk it up as violence then your typical meat packing plant is far worse.

Target shooting is hardly violent.

The whole point is that it is the action of the person that matters. Am I a violent person simply for owning guns?

Hunting is a form of violence. It may be controlled violence but it's still violent.

I agree on the act of target shooting itself but what's the point if it's not to improve the accuracy of firing a weapon that is made for violence?

And no, I don't think owning a gun makes one violent but guns themselves are tools of war and made for violence.

[flyboy56]

Hunting is a form of violence. It may be controlled violence but it's still violent.

I agree on the act of target shooting itself but what's the point if it's not to improve the accuracy of firing a weapon that is made for violence?

And no, I don't think owning a gun makes one violent but guns themselves are tools of war and made for violence.

And a simple disagreement with someone is also a form of violence.

[SemiAuto]

Well people in Oregon found it offensive. And if the idiots were looking to make a statement and get attention, they succeeded. 911 calls were made and atleast one school was locked down.

Here's a gun owner with common sense:

He said he supports the Second Amendment, grew up in Alaska using guns to hunt and take target practice. He also owns a firearm, but said he was upset by the duo’s actions.

“Someone could have spotted them, felt threatened and the situation easily could have escalated because someone felt they had to make a statement that’s already in the Constitution,” Janiak said. “When you purchase and own a gun, you owe it to the community to be responsible with it.”

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/i...l#incart_river

It is not a problem for me.

Gays kissing has never gotten innocent people killed

I doubt that. Anti-gay violence still exists.

If your government decides to be tyrannical then the Bill of Rights is null and void...

Isn't part of the reasoning behind the 2nd amendment is to deter government from doing such things?

[Smokey 1]

I agree on the act of target shooting itself but what's the point if it's not to improve the accuracy of firing a weapon that is made for violence?

No, its just fun and can be competitive. I fired thousands of rounds in competition and never hurt one person or animal.

[SemiAuto]

Hunting is a form of violence. It may be controlled violence but it's still violent.

I agree on the act of target shooting itself but what's the point if it's not to improve the accuracy of firing a weapon that is made for violence?

Competition. Hockey is more violent. The NFL is way more violent.

And no, I don't think owning a gun makes one violent but guns themselves are tools of war and made for violence.

So are all manner of other things. Violence is an action. Somebody has to engage in it. A gun, in itself, is not violent. Much like a hammer it is just a hunk of metal.
It is what people do with it that matters.

[ms maggie]

I am a gun owner. How is my 'gun culture' running roughshod over him?

How am I invading his part of the country and exactly what part is he claiming ownership rights over? Is the coffee shop he mentions his? The highway he mentions is a probably a public common. If so, if I were to go to a range on this highway would I be running roughshod over him?

His closing is a contradiction. He doesn't want to learn but claims to be ready to talk.

The problem with so called common sense gun control is nonsense like this.

I don't like nor own guns. You have a right to own them. There are places where I wouldn't be comfortable with people having guns: airplanes, bars, stadiums, amusement parks, though I don't think that's necessary being "run roughshod over". Guess it's largely what you're used to. Lots of hunters in PA and in other places I've lived so it's no big deal to see a gun rack on a car or truck. We live in the city now so that's not a common issue even.

[soulflower]

And a simple disagreement with someone is also a form of violence.

No it's not

[soulflower]

Isn't part of the reasoning behind the 2nd amendment is to deter government from doing such things?

That's an opinion.

Afterall, the lack of a Right to own guns in many Western countries hasn't led to tyranny throughout the Western world.

[SemiAuto]

Would this be a bad time to go on about taxation being a form of violence?

[soulflower]

Competition. Hockey is more violent. The NFL is way more violent.

Some people would argue that killing animals is more violent than Hockey or Football.

I don't object to hunting but I wouldn't compare it to sports that don't involve killing.

So are all manner of other things. Violence is an action. Somebody has to engage in it. A gun, in itself, is not violent. Much like a hammer it is just a hunk of metal.
It is what people do with it that matters.

A hammer is made for fixing and building things. A gun is made for killing humans and animals. You really enjoy the false equivalency stuff...

[SemiAuto]

That's an opinion.

Then what is the 'necessary for the security of free state' part about?

Afterall, the lack of a Right to own guns in many Western countries hasn't led to tyranny throughout the Western world.

It is not a guarantee. The US has had its fair share of tyrannical moments.

[Smokey 1]

A gun is made for killing humans and animals. ...

Not necessarily, many guns are specifically made for target shooting.

[soulflower]

Not necessarily, many guns are specifically made for target shooting.

And if those types of guns use live ammo they can inflict harm on humans

[Baltimatt]

Funny I made mention of this concept earlier.

I'm reasonable. I won't stick my nose into your sex life, and you stay out of my gun rights. You have rights and so do I. I am totally repsectful of your rights. Marry anyone you want, as often as you want. I choose my battles wisely, and I pass on this one.

[Smokey 1]

And if those types of guns use live ammo they can inflict harm on humans

They can but that is not what they are designed for as you posit.

[SemiAuto]

Some people would argue that killing animals is more violent than Hockey or Football.

I don't object to hunting but I wouldn't compare it to sports that don't involve killing.

It doesn't change the fact that competitive target shooting is not violent.
If me an Ray Lewis went target shooting we'd both probably be fine. If we decided to play football I'd probably end up in the hospital.

A hammer is made for fixing and building things. A gun is made for killing humans and animals. You really enjoy the false equivalency stuff...

Yet blunt objects are used more often in homicides than rifles. It doesn't matter what you built it for. It is a matter of what people do with them. There is no false equivalency. You're assigning motives to inanimate objects. The motivation comes from the person and not the object.

[SemiAuto]

And if those types of guns use live ammo they can inflict harm on humans

And a hammer can be used to beat someone to death.