[Changleen]

Does anybody actually read what I post, or do they read a couple of sentences than post a response?

 

[ridecruz88]

:nuts: You really are stupid. You support pre-emptive action against 'Arabs' but don't support gun control, then you criticise me for wanting to 'impose regulations on self-defense things'. Hello? McFly?

Let alone the fact that one is a reform of your own country's laws and the other is interfering with the sovereign rights of other nations...

I think you're right in a certain respect. I think we shouldn't try and stop gun control for the reasons I've stated a million times in this post, and as far as nukes go, there aint **** we can do about it, so its pointless to try and make laws, we have to make action.

 

[jaydee]

The only way a gun can protect you is if you shoot someone before he shoots you. If he's already got a gun aimed at you, you're too late. If he doesn't, how do you know he's going to shoot you? So I guess you shoot him first just in case he might have a gun and might shoot you, right? Makes perfect sense to me.

There are so many guns around now in the US, it's a good bet anyone you get in an argument with has one on him, not just criminals. So the type of person that would normally get bent out of shape and hit someone or yell at him in a rage now pulls out his gun and shoots him instead. Most gun incidents aren't related to robberies, they are cases of domestic violence or public stupidity. Why would you want to live in a place where you feel you have to carry a concealed weapon to be safe? The Wild West era is over. Guns may not kill people by themselves, but people can't kill people with guns unless they have one.

This is not a USA-bashing post. There are a lot of testosterone-gooned morons strutting around in Canada these days with more firepower than brains too.

 

[nicklin]

Changleen:

"When I lived in San Francisco, whilst riding the BART one day, a black truck with very dark black windows pulled up next the BART at an intersection and started pointing a red laser dot at people on the BART. A lot of people freaked out. Fortunatly for me I was in the articlated section. No idea if the dude had a gun or not."



So we should ban laser pointer too?



Now let's talk about right wing neo-nazi activities in Australia, Europe, and Russia, where people got beaten becuase they were Arabs, Blacks, and Asians.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=neo-nazi+crime+europe&btnG=Google+Search


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=neo-nazi+crime+europe&btnG=Google+Search

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=neo-nazi+minority+australia&btnG=Search

how about them eh, changleen? let's abolish chains, knives, and boots right?

 

[ridecruz88]

The only way a gun can protect you is if you shoot someone before he shoots you. If he's already got a gun aimed at you, you're too late. If he doesn't, how do you know he's going to shoot you? So I guess you shoot him first just in case he might have a gun and might shoot you, right? Makes perfect sense to me.

There are so many guns around now in the US, it's a good bet anyone you get in an argument with has one on him, not just criminals. So the type of person that would normally get bent out of shape and hit someone or yell at him in a rage now pulls out his gun and shoots him instead. Most gun incidents aren't related to robberies, they are cases of domestic violence or public stupidity. Why would you want to live in a place where you feel you have to carry a concealed weapon to be safe? The Wild West era is over. Guns may not kill people by themselves, but people can't kill people with guns unless they have one.

This is not a USA-bashing post. There are a lot of testosterone-gooned morons strutting around in Canada these days with more firepower than brains too.

to put it into perspective:

weed was made illegal...but does that stop the people who want it from getting it? Even tho it is something that you can just grow and guns aren't, there are countries such as canada and mexico around us that would be more than willing to sell high priced guns to people with a high demand. The result, the people who want the guns get the guns, and that could be someone with the intent of hunting all the way to the intent of killing 100 people on a streetcorner. Its too late now to stop guns, theres probably millions out there, and only about half of them will probably be confiscated if a law is passed.

 

[JRogers]

There are so many guns around now in the US, it's a good bet anyone you get in an argument with has one on him, not just criminals.

I am going to have to give a decided "no" on this one. May be part hyperbole but, still, it sounds a bit too self-assured for that.

 

[jaydee]

to put it into perspective:

weed was made illegal...but does that stop the people who want it from getting it? Even tho it is something that you can just grow and guns aren't, there are countries such as canada and mexico around us that would be more than willing to sell high priced guns to people with a high demand. The result, the people who want the guns get the guns, and that could be someone with the intent of hunting all the way to the intent of killing 100 people on a streetcorner. Its too late now to stop guns, theres probably millions out there, and only about half of them will probably be confiscated if a law is passed.

I agree that a criminal who really wants a gun will usually find a way to get one, usually from someone who stole it from a non-criminal in the first place. So the less of them that are sitting in someone's gun cabinet, the less will be stolen and circulated. Especially handguns. Anyway, the point is not so much to get rid of all the guns, but to know where they are. Tight gun laws will mean fewer guns floating around, which is a good thing. If it cuts the supply in half, as you suggest, that's a great thing.

I also agree that it's too late to stop guns from being commonplace in a hurry, but it's never too late to get started on some kind of plan. Eventually guns will be harder to find, and shooting incidents will decrease.

Hunting rifles, no problem, but get them registered so you are legally responsible for them, and have the important parts removed and stored separately when they're in the case. Handguns and combat weapons, there is absolutely no legal need for them; they should be banned outright. If you really like to keep these guns as a collector, they should be gutted or barrel-welded so they can never be restored to firing order. Again, a huge proportion of shooting incidents take place just because the guns are so close at hand. If you're not a hunter, you don't need one.

I never really saw myself as pro or anti NRA, and I still don't in most matters, but there is a huge problem here and we have to make some plans to fix it.

 

[JRogers]

to put it into perspective:

weed was made illegal...but does that stop the people who want it from getting it? Even tho it is something that you can just grow and guns aren't, there are countries such as canada and mexico around us that would be more than willing to sell high priced guns to people with a high demand. The result, the people who want the guns get the guns, and that could be someone with the intent of hunting all the way to the intent of killing 100 people on a streetcorner. Its too late now to stop guns, theres probably millions out there, and only about half of them will probably be confiscated if a law is passed.

The analogy does not work. Should we make heroin legal because people can still get it? Suppose 50 percent of the US used herion, would it still be pertinent to ban it? I would think so. Just because only half might be confiscted, does that mean that getting half is a bad idea? You do what you can, you know. I am not saying that banning firearms would be a good idea (never going to happen, so what's the point of arguing it?) but simply that your parallel does not fit.

 

[JRogers]

I agree that a criminal who really wants a gun will usually find a way to get one, usually from someone who stole it from a non-criminal in the first place. So the less of them that are sitting in someone's gun cabinet, the less will be stolen and circulated. Especially handguns. Anyway, the point is not so much to get rid of all the guns, but to know where they are. Tight gun laws will mean fewer guns floating around, which is a good thing. If it cuts the supply in half, as you suggest, that's a great thing.

I also agree that it's too late to stop guns from being commonplace in a hurry, but it's never too late to get started on some kind of plan. Eventually guns will be harder to find, and shooting incidents will decrease.

Hunting rifles, no problem, but get them registered so you are legally responsible for them, and have the important parts removed and stored separately when they're in the case. Handguns and combat weapons, there is absolutely no legal need for them; they should be banned outright. If you really like to keep these guns as a collector, they should be gutted or barrel-welded so they can never be restored to firing order. Again, a huge proportion of shooting incidents take place just because the guns are so close at hand. If you're not a hunter, you don't need one.

I never really saw myself as pro or anti NRA, and I still don't in most matters, but there is a huge problem here and we have to make some plans to fix it.

I don't know if the sentiment is the same in Canada as it is in the US but here, there is never a trend to examine things from a "need" standpoint. To control environmental regulations, should we evaluate wether you "need" a car or an SUV? Sounds ridiculous because it would never work at present. Americans are not about needs, they are about rights. If it is your right, need is not part of the equation, with only few exceptions.

 

[Silver]

The analogy does not work. Should we make heroin legal because people can still get it? Suppose 50 percent of the US used herion, would it still be pertinent to ban it? I would think so. Just because only half might be confiscted, does that mean that getting half is a bad idea? You do what you can, you know. I am not saying that banning firearms would be a good idea (never going to happen, so what's the point of arguing it?) but simply that your parallel does not fit.

That analogy doesn't work because someone with a heroin needle is a threat mostly to themselves. It affects others, but in the same way that alcohol or tobacco does.

Someone with a gun, on the other hand...you only get to use a gun on yourself once if you do it properly.

 

[SlackBoy]

But c'mon if you banned handguns, there would be all those extra people living putting a strain on the resources in america

they have bad people and gangs and stuff in other countries. You sure are right to demand your right to have them in yours as well

 

[TheInedibleHulk]

and is kerry against the u.s. being independent(giving our descisions over to the U.N., which doesn't ever do anything)?

Sorry to kill the gun debate, but I couldnt believe no one commented on this. Kerry is against the US being independant huh? SO you think becasue Kerry desires to practice diplomacy and discussion with the international community, that he is against "the u.s. being independent"? What the hell are you smoking? What Kerry wants to do is reverse this administrations horrible policy of ignoring the rest of the world and doing whatever the fvck they want. In this campian the Bush people have tried to spin Kerry's comments on this issue into making Kerry look like some kind of pussy, when actaully he is just espousing solid, widely held views about foreign policy. The world is moving towards a global economy and political structure, and that scares people like Bush becasue they might have to relinquish some of their personal power, and maybe not get to do exactly what they want to do all the time. Making concessions is part of living in a globalized society, and cutting ourselves off is only going to hurt us economically and politically in the long run.

So the UN doesnt do anything eh? Well your right that the UN is about as effective as say, the US legislative branch, but we certainly didnt take any steps in the right direction by setting up the precedent that what they say has no effect on what we do. If you thought the UN was useless before, congrats man it just got worse. The UN was set up to prevent things like the world wars from happening again. In fact the precursor to the UN was the brainchild of Woodrow Wilson, which unfortunately fell apart after he had a stroke and the US govt then refused to join because it didnt want to concess any power to an international organization. The other european nations involved then made Germany pay exorbitant reparations for the first world war, creating a severe depression in Gemany (worse than everywhere else), and along with that the conditions necesarry for Hitler to gain power. Wilson was against these high reparations for exactly this kind of reason, and if the US was able to be involved in the treaty and Wilson's views were expressed, there may have never been a WWII. So basically, cooperation and diplomacy are a good thing, history has proven it, GW disagrees. I wonder which is more consistently correct?

 

[nicklin]

Cruzrider88:

If there is one thing I learned in my life growing up in Santa Cruz, it's that people who hate guns are afraid of it, and they will always come up a reason to ban firearms.

it is very rare now that I have this kind of debates, because deep down I know, one day, it may never come, but we will be called to save these panzy liberals with our guns. And we will be ready, becuase that;s what being American is all about: we have to freedom to choose, and we will fight for our countrymen, our neighbors, our children and loved ones, even if they do not appreciate us. it does not matter. As long as we are ready

 

[Changleen]

Changleen:

"When I lived in San Francisco, whilst riding the BART one day, a black truck with very dark black windows pulled up next the BART at an intersection and started pointing a red laser dot at people on the BART. A lot of people freaked out. Fortunatly for me I was in the articlated section. No idea if the dude had a gun or not."



So we should ban laser pointer too?



Now let's talk about right wing neo-nazi activities in Australia, Europe, and Russia, where people got beaten becuase they were Arabs, Blacks, and Asians.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=neo-nazi+crime+europe&btnG=Google+Search


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=neo-nazi+crime+europe&btnG=Google+Search

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=neo-nazi+minority+australia&btnG=Search

how about them eh, changleen? let's abolish chains, knives, and boots right?

You really are retarded. By your 'logic', we'd ban Republicans before boots and chains.

 

[JRogers]

That analogy doesn't work because someone with a heroin needle is a threat mostly to themselves. It affects others, but in the same way that alcohol or tobacco does.

Someone with a gun, on the other hand...you only get to use a gun on yourself once if you do it properly.

True, but that does not change the functional part of my analogy: just because a law does not stop an action does not mean that the law should not exist. Who is affected was not what I was considering.

 

[Silver]

it is very rare now that I have this kind of debates, because deep down I know, one day, it may never come, but we will be called to save these panzy liberals with our guns.

From who, exactly?

 

[valve bouncer]

From who, exactly?

Rabid Canadians?

 

[ohio]

From who, exactly?

Hello, Patriot Act. (Oh, the irony... or is it contradiction... maybe hypocrisy is the word I'm looking for)

 

[Silver]

Hello, Patriot Act. (Oh, the irony... or is it contradiction... maybe hypocrisy is the word I'm looking for)

That's what I hear come up occasionally too. Luckily, David Koresh should serve as a good example of how useful guns are against the government these days...

 

[nicklin]

You really are retarded. By your 'logic', we'd ban Republicans before boots and chains.

there you have it folks, we are graced with the presence of Psychiatrist Dr. CHangleen, and he will be taking phone calls from 8 PM to 9Pm, (long distance charges may apply).

Just don't ask him any questions other than what's wrong with America, because he will be much more likely label you retarded than actually answer the questions. He is not afraid to use the word retared even after it gets old. SO watch out!!!!!

 

[ohio]

Luckily, David Koresh should serve as a good example of how useful guns are against the government these days...

Dude, if owning lots of guns means I get to be leader of a cult, bang lots of (underage?) chicks, and die a martyr... I'm so in. Are you TRYING to convince me I need guns? Cause I didn't think I did until about a half hour ago.



Anyone know a good place to stockpile arms that hasn't already been used?

 

[Silver]

Dude, if owning lots of guns means I get to be leader of a cult, bang lots of (underage?) chicks, and die a martyr... I'm so in. Are you TRYING to convince me I need guns? Cause I didn't think I did until about a half hour ago.



Anyone know a good place to stockpile arms that hasn't already been used?

You forget the, "Die a fiery death" part. Or, the get your family shot part, like Randy Weaver (was that his name?)

 

[qualude]

Cruzrider88:

If there is one thing I learned in my life growing up in Santa Cruz, it's that people who hate guns are afraid of it, and they will always come up a reason to ban firearms.

it is very rare now that I have this kind of debates, because deep down I know, one day, it may never come, but we will be called to save these panzy liberals with our guns. And we will be ready, becuase that;s what being American is all about: we have to freedom to choose, and we will fight for our countrymen, our neighbors, our children and loved ones, even if they do not appreciate us. it does not matter. As long as we are ready

Agreed. I grew up with guns, and was educated properly about guns by my parents, not my peers. I now like in NYC, where it is against the law (basically) for a private citizen to own a firearm. Not that I would need one here, but the majority of accidental firearm deaths are in urban areas, not rural ones. The facts show that if you are educated about guns at an early age by your parent/guardian, you have a much healthier respect for what guns can and cannot do. If you are educated by your friends, someone is going to lose a life.
I still own a 6 guns, and I try like hell to educate my friends that grew up in NYC that guns are not just for "bad" people, but are used as a tool in rural areas.
And, Kerry never said he would "turn over" the decisions to the UN. He said that on international issues, regarding countries in the UN, he would include them in discussions and listen to what they say. Unlike Bush, who has to "cowboy" his way through everything.

 

[Changleen]

there you have it folks, we are graced with the presence of Psychiatrist Dr. CHangleen, and he will be taking phone calls from 8 PM to 9Pm, (long distance charges may apply).

Just don't ask him any questions other than what's wrong with America, because he will be much more likely label you retarded than actually answer the questions. He is not afraid to use the word retared even after it gets old. SO watch out!!!!!

You're great! 'retared'... Maybe you should stop posting until you get a bit older.

 

[valve bouncer]

You're great! 'retared'... Maybe you should stop posting until you get a bit older.

Hey, at least he didn't say "your" an idiot.

 

[jaydee]

Cruzrider88:

If there is one thing I learned in my life growing up in Santa Cruz, it's that people who hate guns are afraid of it, and they will always come up a reason to ban firearms.

it is very rare now that I have this kind of debates, because deep down I know, one day, it may never come, but we will be called to save these panzy liberals with our guns. And we will be ready, becuase that;s what being American is all about: we have to freedom to choose, and we will fight for our countrymen, our neighbors, our children and loved ones, even if they do not appreciate us. it does not matter. As long as we are ready

Ladies and gentlemen, live from his hardened bunker somewhere under South Carolina, I give you NICKLIN the MAGNIFICENT, savior of the free world, scourge of aliens of all colors, and pansy-protector extraordinaire!

Dude, if you have to save the world from itself, get into the army, get a free rifle, and go get yourself dead. Which will be really easy if you are not afraid when someone points a gun at you. And now let me try to guess; a pansy is anyone who doesn't have a gun, and a Liberal is anyone who doesn't think like you. Am I getting this right?

It doesn't take any bravery to pull a trigger; a child can do it. Killing someone by moving a finger does not indicate manliness. I think you may be getting your gun confused with your dick.

 

[Changleen]

I think you may be getting your gun confused with your dick.

That's a common problem which is often overlooked...

 

[ridecruz88]

Anyone know a good place to stockpile arms that hasn't already been used?

haha o ya dude im from a southside and im here on ridemonkey to tell you where you can stockpile guns and ammo...pm me for more info

p.s.the government cant see this...

 

[ridecruz88]

You forget the, "Die a fiery death" part. Or, the get your family shot part, like Randy Weaver (was that his name?)

hmmmmm

heres a thought:

which is better when having your family shot like Randy Weaver:
A) not having a gun because they're outlawed
B) having a gun and shooting the guy whos trying to kill you

 

[ridecruz88]

Cruzrider88:

If there is one thing I learned in my life growing up in Santa Cruz, it's that people who hate guns are afraid of it, and they will always come up a reason to ban firearms.

it is very rare now that I have this kind of debates, because deep down I know, one day, it may never come, but we will be called to save these panzy liberals with our guns. And we will be ready, becuase that;s what being American is all about: we have to freedom to choose, and we will fight for our countrymen, our neighbors, our children and loved ones, even if they do not appreciate us. it does not matter. As long as we are ready

well said

 

[Skookum]

i can't frikkin believe this thread made it past the first page considering how it started........
guns haha. Pow yer dead!!!!

 

[Changleen]

hmmmmm

heres a thought:

which is better when having your family shot like Randy Weaver:
A) not having a gun because they're outlawed
B) having a gun and shooting the guy whos trying to kill you

Well, in both cases everyone ends up dead, so maybe they're the same. Actually in the second one the firearms industry has more money due to higher sales and therefore makes more guns, leading to the sceanareo likely being repeated. So, overall A) is better.

 

[Changleen]

well said

Are you serious?

 

[Skookum]

Well, in both cases everyone ends up dead, so maybe they're the same. Actually in the second one the firearms industry has more money due to higher sales and therefore makes more guns, leading to the sceanareo likely being repeated. So, overall A) is better.

chick chick
BLAPOWWW!

I just blasted you with a shotgun start squirmin then die you evil islander!!!!

 

[Changleen]

No way! Eat lead, scumbag! You missed!

DAKADAKADAKADAKADAKA

and two more to make sure you stay down!

DAKA-DAK

:eviltongu

 

[nicklin]

Ladies and gentlemen, live from his hardened bunker somewhere under South Carolina, I give you NICKLIN the MAGNIFICENT, savior of the free world, scourge of aliens of all colors, and pansy-protector extraordinaire!

Dude, if you have to save the world from itself, get into the army, get a free rifle, and go get yourself dead. Which will be really easy if you are not afraid when someone points a gun at you. And now let me try to guess; a pansy is anyone who doesn't have a gun, and a Liberal is anyone who doesn't think like you. Am I getting this right?

It doesn't take any bravery to pull a trigger; a child can do it. Killing someone by moving a finger does not indicate manliness. I think you may be getting your gun confused with your dick.

your opinion is your opinion, but that's not what my grandfather, a paratrooper in the Army thought when he went to fight for the free world in WWII. What he did wish, however, was that there was a program like the CMP(Civil Marksmanship Program) earlier so the people in the army would know how to shoot BEFORE they went to war.

you don;t need to be in the military to appreciate firearms, just like you don;t have to race professionally to ride a bike.

what you said is very amusing, it's in fact hilarious. I'm glad our neighbor to the north can be such an asset in providing entertainment value.

Very mature comments indeed. Your ability to use words like "dick" rivals that of the ability of changleen using the word "retarded". But I suggest you record yourself saying that and listen to it yourself. It will only help.

nick

 

[nicklin]

Oh uh, I used Sc standing for Santa Cruz, which I stated that merely lines above, so i suppose you didn't read the whole and decided to squeeze your brain capacity to come up with a great comment like that against "people in bunkers near south carolina.

I go to school in University of California, Berkeley. Just for your information. i came here because I couldn't afford to go to Cornell University.

Nick

 

[jaydee]

Nick, I''m merely an ign'ant Canajun, eh. Sorry I missed your reference to Santa Cruz. Do they have hardened bunkers there too?

My dad said similar things about fighting for freedom when he fought in the RCAF in WWII, which probably reveals how old I am. I still admire him for what he did in going to that war. I'm not really bashing guns at all; the technology and beauty of the machinery fascinates me too. They have certainly had a place in the world, though it may have been better if they had never been invented. There would be less attraction to war if you still had to kill the other guy face to face, covered in his blood, by trying to saw him in half, while realizing that he's just another guy like you. There would also be a lot fewer casualties.

I have absolutely no problem with rifle or handgun practise on a range, or hunting, or owning guns for those purposes. It's the pervasive idea in American society (correct me if I'm wrong on this) that you have to have one close at hand at all times, just in case you have to shoot someone. Surely you can't argue with the fact that if a gun is stolen from someone's house and used to kill someone, that was an easily preventable death. You may not be a "gun nut" yourself, but we have plenty of those in Canada, and I'm not the first one to estimate that the size of the nut's gun is apparently in inverse proportion to the size of the nut's penis. Sorry if I offended you with the use of the word "dick", but I've been calling it that for 53 years, and it's a hard habit to break. I'll make every attempt to be biologically accurate in future. I hope you're OK with the use of the word "nut".

When I was your age, I was in university too, and I heard all the same rhetoric from both sides as now, except it was the Vietnam war. Some things never change.

Anyway, I'm glad to provide you with some entertainment; that's really my purpose in being here.

 

[Damn True]

Nick, I''m merely an ign'ant Canajun, eh. Sorry I missed your reference to Santa Cruz. Do they have hardened bunkers there too?

Yes, but they grow weed in them. Keeps it hidden from the helicopters.

 

[Changleen]

your opinion is your opinion, but that's not what my grandfather, a paratrooper in the Army thought when he went to fight for the free world in WWII. What he did wish, however, was that there was a program like the CMP(Civil Marksmanship Program) earlier so the people in the army would know how to shoot BEFORE they went to war.

you don;t need to be in the military to appreciate firearms, just like you don;t have to race professionally to ride a bike.

what you said is very amusing, it's in fact hilarious. I'm glad our neighbor to the north can be such an asset in providing entertainment value.

Very mature comments indeed. Your ability to use words like "dick" rivals that of the ability of changleen using the word "retarded". But I suggest you record yourself saying that and listen to it yourself. It will only help.

nick

You are such an... I'm sorry, you're an idiot. Can you really not see the obvious holes in the logic of your arguments? You sound like a stoner or a drunk 15 year old. I'm glad you managed to copy my spelling of 'retarded' this time or you would have looked really stupid. Please think about what you say before you say it.