Remember 2 things criminals like unarmed victims and once a country bans its citizens from having guns there not citizens any more there subjects.ALEXIS_DH said:
anybody care that the Assault Weapons ban is set to expire?
- Thread starter dante
- Start date
??LordOpie said:
About as useful as 50% of this thread (this post included).
TheMontashu said:
well, now this raises a contradiction. you say criminals like unarmed victims better. thus you impply that if more citizens will be unarmed that would make more people likely to be victims,
thus crime rates would rise. why? because unarmed citizens would be in disadvantage, thus arousing criminals to commit more crimes.
But, a few posts ago, you said people would kill whether they have a ak47 or a knife, and that more powerful weapos wont increase crime rates. so in a way, that people will commit crimes regardless of gunpower.
now, those 2 ideas are mutually exclusive, as in the first you impply an increase in crimes based on a disadvatange on weapon-power on the citizens.
BUT in the 2nd you said that a relative advantage on gun-power on the criminal side WONT raise rates. (assuming that most of the real world users of this bigger guns will be criminals on the streets, rather than the average american buying a bigger gun to carry on the street), which seems likely to me.
and ultimately. if guns were more widespread than now, and criminals know everyone has guns (like in colombia or venezuela), dude, that would make a much more violent society.
as criminals wont take the risk in commiting a crime exposing themselves to the possible armed victim. they would just shoot to kill first, then steal.
rather than the very polite way you are thinking, that a criminal would give you enough warning for you to have time to pull out your gun and start a gunfight. in which anyway you will probably loose as the attacker has the surprise edge over the defender.
if everyone was armed and criminials knew this, well dude, before you could realize you are being stolen, you would be dead. like in heavily armed countries like venezuela or central africa.
they dont go around pointing people with guns and asking them for their stuff!!, they know a lot of people have guns, so they dont take the risk of a gunfight, and just shoot to kill a priori, then they steal the stuff. i dont see how this scenario is better than the first one.
am not saying that guns should be outlawed from the US (would be nice but that gun-culture in the US is faaaaaaaar too established for such a meassure to be effective). but giving away as little as posible firepower is the best thing to do IMO.
if with the littlle firepower you got now, you see how bad it is. more firepower on both sides wont make it any safer for the public, it will just make it bloodier whenever a fight breaks.
I didnt read your whole post.... too long.ALEXIS_DH said:
But dude, youre logic doesnt follow... like, at all.
this aint the old west where all citizens will carry their guns outside. This means that criminals will NOT know whos packing. Theoretically, crime would go down cuz bad guys would be afraid of getting shot by citizens.
LordOpie said:
alright, short posts are the way to go then.
while some people try to convert the US into the Old west, you are right, criminal wont know who is packing. but crime wont lower that much, if any on that sole basis, becasuse criminals will
1) still outpower most people, since they know people are better armed, they also will get better guns
2) wont be afraid of getting shot, BECAUSE they will shoot first. like in places where criminals know most people carry guns. (think US ghettos, venezuela, colombia, rhuanda). they dont stop crimes because they know people is packing.
they just switch to more agressive tactics, like instead of pointing a gun and asking, they just shoot you and once, then they steal.
so we are back to my original point of, more guns to everyone does not stop crime or fights. it just makes bloodier fights.
The fact is innocent people with training can out shoot a criminal so weather there gun is bigger or not doesnt matter.
I would also never trust a cop to save my life because they cant shoot worth a damn either.
I would also never trust a cop to save my life because they cant shoot worth a damn either.
TheMontashu said:
lol, i think NRA guys overestimating their own abilities is epidemic.
anyway, a few easy points.
1) if gun size doesnt matter, why in the world you want bigger saying youll be better protected? or in equal conditions with the oponent??
2) how can you guarantee these trained "innocent people" will always be innocent people?? after all, criminal are not born criminals, and all of them were "innocent people" at some point.
You cant so we have to protect ourselves.ALEXIS_DH said:
TheMontashu said:
and there you on the train of circular reasoning again.
your vicious cycle will get worse, like first were pistols, now everyone has them, so people want more powerful guns to outgun the others. the problem is that EVERYONE thinks this, not just you.
so everyone would get the bigger guns. after that what?? everyone will want RPG to outgun the others, and there you go..... more people on your train.
the best way to avoid this vicious circle, would have been to not enter it in the first place.
but since the US is inside already, the next best thing would be just to NOT give big guns to anyone, and cut it where it is now. which is pretty bad already
Youre a damn fool and refuse to look at my logic. That doesnt mean your stupid in any way your jest closed minded and refuse to look at other points of view.
TheMontashu said:
no man, am not close minded, I just lack a superpowered vision to see thru such a small mind, let alone to find any trace of logic in it.
that is an interesting way to end a "debate" in which an open mind like yours did nothing to refute any argument, but just started to recite in a memoristic way without any development or everything you heard-read-saw somewhere else, without any 2nd thought on the underlying ideas and implications,
I have seen you side and you say if every one has a gun its going to end up a who has a bigger gun contest. Thats not true in Vermont they have right to carry (yes you can carry I gun in your pocket if you want and you dont need a permit) when do you hear of crime in Vermont. Your logic is flawed at its root and Im sorry but if someone has a rocket launcher its hard to hide and before you can get it out there on the ground with 230 grain 45 slugs in them. And if every on has a gun no one will pull a gun cause they know someone else with have a gun on them the second they pull there gun, thus deterring crime.
Along that same logic if nobody had a gun nobody could get shot and i could go about my day.TheMontashu said:
I try to ignore stupid statements but this one takes the cake. Do you really want to live in a place that everyone carries a gun? This fantsy world of yours sounds like a bad wild west movie. Stop watching westerns while doing acid and I'll welcome you back to the real world when your ready. Until then militia life is calling your name.
The fact is yes if no one had a gun that would be great but banning guns isnt going to stop criminals from getting guns. So if we all have guns we can scare the criminals from committing crime.Lexx D said:
What are the gun laws in Antarctica? 'Cos no one gets shot there...
Hahahahahahahaha
I have a feeling this kids going to get shot, i cant explain it, its just a gut feeling.
TM: hey jerk getta away from my car
Jerk: Step off Boitch
TM: That's it *pulls out 9mm*
JERK: Ah hell no *pulls out Desert Eagle*
BOOM BOOM BOOM ...click click click...
TM: hey jerk getta away from my car
Jerk: Step off Boitch
TM: That's it *pulls out 9mm*
JERK: Ah hell no *pulls out Desert Eagle*
BOOM BOOM BOOM ...click click click...
I have a feeling desert eagles are crap and I dont plan on getting shot. When I have a car gun I will be intelligent about what I do and say involving fire arms and ALWAYS have a round chambered in a 1911 with a 10 round mag in the mag well.
Dont worry using a gun to DEFEND yourself is a LAST resort.
I feel much safer in the knowledge that the montashu is more likely to shoot himself in the nads getting his gun out than damage anyone else. Darwin will look after us.
I'm swat qualified, so I think my balls are in good shape.
I shoot with the local swat trainer and I went with him to one of the qualification sessions and did it. Are u jest searching my posts to be a dick cause I know how to do that to.
I admire honesty.TheMontashu said:
TheMontashu said:
dude, playing counterstrike and doom doesnt count.
anyway, like a bodyguard told me once.
when in danger, Never pull out your gun, if you do, do it only if you are going to shoot, and if you shoot, shoot to kill.
because if you feel a threat, and pull out your gun hoping it will scare and stop an armed criminal, you are expecting too much from life, and overestimating your abilities.
He is not gonna take a risk of a gunfight, and just gonna shoot you down at once.
if you are attacked and caught with your pants down, and you think you stand a chance in pulling out your gun to defend yourself, you are full of BS as well.
as soon as you make evident you want to pull out a gun, the criminal will just shoot you before you have a chance of pulling it out. there wont be any time to show off your training, or your bruce lee moves.
why do you think police say if you are ambushed just surrender?????????, its not because they like thieves, its just if you are caught by the balls and a criminal is aiming at your face, well you already lost, no magical trick, no ak47, no swat training is gonna pull you out. just relax the sphincter and get ready for the stiffing.
so unless you carry your loaded gun in a hand at all times, alert to any sound, ready to anticipate every move, like a bodyguard, all that training and outgunning the other is BS, you aint no chuck norris, and this aint no movie.
thats odd, i thought i was in high school? 
I was subscribed to this posts a while back, so i get notiified every time you post something dumb.
Has anyone else seen the crazy moms trying to ban the Assult rifles walking around malls trying to get signitures?
I was subscribed to this posts a while back, so i get notiified every time you post something dumb.
Has anyone else seen the crazy moms trying to ban the Assult rifles walking around malls trying to get signitures?
Yes, they yelled at me for wearing an NRA shirt.
We (and I mean everyone) seems to forget that, guns don't KILL people.... PEOPLE kill people. They shouldn't ban them, just make it very diffiucult to purchase one. If you have priors or if your a convicted felon, nope sorry. 5, 15 or 30 day waiting period for background checks, sure.... I have nothing to hide.
What they should ban is old people driving cars.
What they should ban is old people driving cars.
Nappy said:
Bravo!!!!!
