Wolfire Games Forums

PrincessCelestia wrote:Love me some good ole propaganda and fear mongering though. Always gets the job done.

And i'm gonna stop you there. Stop loving that AND (made it small for epr89 because he doesn't like this but) illuminati

I do not understand USA's gun problem, besides the fact that people die constantly.
I hope you all agree that dying violently and regrettably is bad.



Don't mind me, I'm trying to think of happy thoughts.

I saw a blind cat this morning. It kept walking circles in my garden. I think it was lost.
Pretty damn cute fuzzy beastie.
It found its way home eventually.

>die constantly
I'm gonna stop you there.
We have a murder rate of 4 in every 100,000 people and it's not because of guns. Honduras has 98 in 100,000 murders and a ridiculously low gun ownership rate. There's no correlation between high murder rates and gun ownership rates.

EDIT: Not to mention cities like Detroit, which would beat Venezuela for second in the world of murder if it were its own nation. Has a 100% gun ban. Baltimore, Chicago, New York, San Francisco. All heavily restricted gun ownership, high murder. Our murder rate would be a lot lower without them. Correlation isn't causation, but I know I'd rather have a piece on me.

I'm pretty sure I heard someone mention you can 'smuggle' guns into those places way too easily though, meaning their gun bans/restrictions mostly just mean that a lot of the denizens are in fact unarmed and easy targets.
This would lead me to believe that the gun restrictions, in combination with the lack of them in neighbouring states, actually do directly lead to... encounters, whether there are guns involved or not.

Or is that baseless and wild speculation without any basis in reality? I'm just extrapolating from hearsay, here, I don't know what I'm talking about.

That's the experience overall. No law-abiding citizen would violate a gun ban, for fear that the government will kidnap or kill them for it. But criminals still have their guns, and aren't going to just hand theirs over.

While correlation does not equal causation, there is some evidence.
Like how every single mass murder in the last couple decades has occurred in a gun free zone, not to get into the psych drugs every perpetrator happened to be on at the demand of school authorities.

Create a whole fuck ton of soft targets with lots of criminals and all of a sudden people are dying. It's almost like armed victims live longer or some shit.

PrincessCelestia wrote:That's the experience overall. No law-abiding citizen would violate a gun ban, for fear that the government will kidnap or kill them for it.

What? Is this a joke, or something people are seriously worried in the USA?

Like how every single mass murder in the last couple decades has occurred in a gun free zone, not to get into the psych drugs every perpetrator happened to be on at the demand of school authorities.

Does a "gun free zone" means a school or near a school? If so, your facts are wrong. Even I, half the world away, have seen the news about shootings in military bases. Apologies for black humour, but a military base is about as far from a gun-free zone as a gnu from its herd.

I'm not sure if the psych drug rates are any worse than the gun ownership rates:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... estigation
"In the 62 mass shootings we analyzed, 54 of the killers had handguns—including in all 15 of the mass shootings since the surge of pro-gun laws began in 2009."

"nearly 80 percent of the killers in our investigation obtained their weapons legally."

I have no interest in the matter, but it seems I'm too pedantic to leave facts unverified. I don't know enough about US culture and policies to have an opinion on this, or to try and change another's opinion on this.

Actually
Military bases tend to be gun free zones here. The only time you have a rifle in hand is when you check one out of the armory and the only time you have ammunition in that weapon is when you go to the rifle range, after which you are not permitted to keep ammunition on you. The only people, other than the MPs at the front gates, who strolled around with loaded handguns were the armorers.

It's also difficult to own a personal gun as an enlisted service member and they're often heavily regulated. It's as close to a gun free zone as you can get without it actually being called one.

EDIT: On top of that, I've never seen a gun shop on base. I doubt they're permitted. You have to go off base and you're in for one long fucking day if you try to bring a gun through the gate and it's visible for the MPs. You have to get the purchase approved by your chain of command. Never attempted myself, but that's what I know from all the guys that did go and buy them. They're also registered with the armory, although I think they're allowed to be kept in the home, probably unloaded and locked up.

And no, it's not a joke. People get arrested and thrown in prisons all the time here for "illegal" possession of a weapon. And if you tell the police "I've done nothing wrong and I'm not going with you", you'll be beaten or killed. Welcome to the "land of the free". In fact, Chicago just had a good ole fashioned holiday weekend. Over the 4th of July weekend, some 80 people got shot or something. It's a city-wide gun free zone, it's nearly impossible to get a concealed carry permit there. The city officials were not interested in getting guns out of the criminals' hands, nor were the interested in protecting their citizens better.

No. The first thought on their mind and to fall out of their mouths was "We need to restrict the average citizen's gun rights more"

Wow. So a gun free zone is an area where you can't have your own loaded weapon with you? Here that's called "not a shooting range". The thought of calling an area a gun-free area because the guns are stored properly & buying a gun is regulated seems super weird.

Also, calling arrest a kidnapping is an outright falsehood. Those words are not synonymous. Quote marks around " illegal " don't help your argument.

65 in Chicago this year. 80 was last year. You exaggerate everything. It IS bad, but since you're careless in many things, I have trouble trusting any of it.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/loca ... story.html

1: Endo just rekt your shit.

2: Plugging Revin Goff here. Fucking stop me.



Enjoy you glorious cunts.

If you take the saw blade and cord out of a saw, it is no longer a functioning tool. The use of a firearm for self-defense is impossible if it's unloaded and in a safe. It's not 'proper storage' if you are banned from keeping it with you, ready for use.

Also, yes. Arrest is kidnapping. 'Law' is just ink on paper that politicians use to violently mold society to fit their idea of perfect reality. Most laws the state writes and enforces are not for the peoples' benefit, but only exist for the purpose of extortion and racketeering.

EDIT: 65 is still outrageous, and would only support my position. Chicago passed a concealed carry bill this last year, permitting citizens to carry a loaded handgun for self-defense if they get the state's permission to do so. While I loathe permits and licenses, it would only support the fact that Chicago's crime rate is at a 50-some year low now that permit applications have soared there.

I will not debate American politics or situation further, but I'm happy to live in a country where carrying a loaded gun for self defense is a ridiculous thought. I'm happy to say I haven't had to seriously consider if I'd kill someone of my own volition.

The thought can be whatever you want it to be. I'll take my rights and civil liberties unregulated by the state, thanks much.

If everyone could agree we should all just stab each other guns wouldn't be a problem.

Fuck everyone has a kitchen knife.

Phoenixwarrior141 wrote:If everyone could agree we should all just stab each other guns wouldn't be a problem.

Fuck everyone has a kitchen knife.

Stabbing with a gun would be a problem though. So hard! No bayonets, obviously.