NickF1011 Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 is that what guns were designed for initially??????????? Fact...they are designed to kill from the get go, use the word "protect" if you deem that a better choice of words, whilst a knife can be used for that purpose, or a "chainsaw" ( movie-goer? ) an axe...hell, a car....they "evolved".....and are in an entirely different class....guns BECAME recreational, they didn't start that way, and that really isn't their intended purpose....interesting debate none the less..... The Slinky was originally designed to be a spring. The wonderful thing about being human is that we can find uses for things that they were not originally intended to do. If you want to go back far enough, the original "knives" (or pointy sticks) were used as weapons for killing animals for food. :shrug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trimdingman Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 then how the hell did HE get a gun....screening too lax perhaps?..its a no win...do find it interesting that people don't seem to want getting a firearm to be more difficult....hell...no more exams...EVERYONE pass's with a College degree and the same grade.... It is impossible to stop someone from getting a gun. The day before a big rumble, back years ago, cars would be missing their radio antennae. They used to be hollow, and just the right size for a .22 calibre gun barrel. Add a wooden handle, a home-made firing mechanism with an elastic band, and you have a single shot zip gun. The only person who will jump through all of the hoops to obtain a firearm is the person who intends to use it responsibly. The person who wants it for crime will get it illegally. The person who gets it for him will make a profit. The cop who tries to catch the guy who is selling the guns illegally will also benefit either from being employed or from being bought off by the criminal. It goes on and on through court judges, lawyers, prison guards, government beaurocrats, more taxes, more unemployment, more crime. There is a song about a guy who swallowed a fly. Then he swallowed a spider to catch the fly, and so on until he swallowed a horse and died of course. It is a good analogy of what happens when you take things out of perspective. The cure is worse than the disease. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 I understand THAT completely.....but a LOT of crimes ARE commited by people that obtained them legally....for instance this gentleman.... You can run down lots of people with a car...and people have done it. They were sane when they received their license (or bought the vehicle). Should we ban or require psychological screening for people when they buy cars, too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napfirst Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 The Slinky was originally designed to be a spring. The wonderful thing about being human is that we can find uses for things that they were not originally intended to do. If you want to go back far enough, the original "knives" (or pointy sticks) were used as weapons for killing animals for food. :shrug: Careful there Nick, you'll confuse Dean with your logic.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 Careful there Nick, you'll confuse Dean with your logic.... Now now. We can argue without belittling each other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napfirst Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 You can run down lots of people with a car...and people have done it. They were sane when they received their license (or bought the vehicle). Should we ban or require psychological screening for people when they buy cars, too? Watchout now.....they'll jump on that idea...anything to increase the government's intrusion into our lives! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 This conversation got interesting. I guess it got revived due to the recent shooting? I agree that the system is broken, and something should be done. More stringent tests (particularly strong psychological screening-and trust me, we don't have anything near that now) would be helpful. I would vote for an entire full FBI-style ATF background investigation with FS polygraph, but the cost would be ridiculous. And if the government wants your guns, they will take them. You can stock up on ammo, but they will pry it from your cold, dead, fingers after they level your house with an AT4 or Javelin. If they REALLY wanted them, they will get them. Today. Never thought that argument held much water, with the way modern military weapons work. And hey, I love my guns. But not everyone who WANTS to own a gun SHOULD OWN a gun. Careful Spainiard...you'll confuse Nappie with your logic.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 Now now. We can argue without belittling each other. I expected nothing less from him anyway Nick....and he STILL hasn't offered a single alternative to fix an obviously broken system.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 Careful Spainiard...you'll confuse Nappie with your logic.......... Oh come on. :puts on moderator cap: Cut it out!! :takes off moderator cap: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 I expected nothing less from him anyway Nick....and he STILL hasn't offered a single alternative to fix an obviously broken system.... The only fix the current system of gun control needs is to actually enforce the laws that are already on the books. More regulation isn't going to help anything if those regulations are largely ignored anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 The Slinky was originally designed to be a spring. The wonderful thing about being human is that we can find uses for things that they were not originally intended to do. If you want to go back far enough, the original "knives" (or pointy sticks) were used as weapons for killing animals for food. :shrug: yep, on the way to work I drove past a recreational spear throwing range.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 yep, on the way to work I drove past a recreational spear throwing range.... The rifle is just a modern version of the spear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 The only fix the current system of gun control needs is to actually enforce the laws that are already on the books. More regulation isn't going to help anything if those regulations are largely ignored anyway. point is the laws are too loosey goosey...they need to be re-vamped with tighter more stringent regulations, and re-evaluate owners every 5 or so years...not only would that weed a few out , it would also become such a tedious process as to hinder those that really have ZERO need to begin with.....what is the REAL need to have a gun anyways?.....theres a can of worms I just opened...simply put...recreation ( really necessary???? ) or the fact that guy down the road has one and I need to defend myself ( speculation????...well at least sometimes )....now if he DIDN"T have one would the need still be there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 The rifle is just a modern version of the spear. ?????? yep...that spear was an interesting choice when Kennedy was assasinated...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 point is the laws are too loosey goosey...they need to be re-vamped with tighter more stringent regulations, and re-evaluate owners every 5 or so years...not only would that weed a few out , it would also become such a tedious process as to hinder those that really have ZERO need to begin with.....what is the REAL need to have a gun anyways?.....theres a can of worms I just opened...simply put...recreation ( really necessary???? ) or the fact that guy down the road has one and I need to defend myself ( speculation????...well at least sometimes )....now if he DIDN"T have one would the need still be there? How can you claim the current regulations need to be tighter and more stringent? Do you even know what the current regulations are? Most gun control proponents don't. Do I own a gun? Not at present. Will I eventually? Quite possibly. Why? Because I've always enjoyed target shooting and, well, because I CAN. ?????? yep...that spear was an interesting choice when Kennedy was assasinated...... That doesn't even make sense! You do realize the rifle was invented long before the Kennedy assassination, right? I said MODERN. Kennedy was modern era as far as I'm concerned. However, plenty of people were killed by spears before the rifle was an available alternative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 How can you claim the current regulations need to be tighter and more stringent? Do you even know what the current regulations are? Most gun control proponents don't. Do I own a gun? Not at present. Will I eventually? Quite possibly. Why? Because I've always enjoyed target shooting and, well, because I CAN. That doesn't even make sense! You do realize the rifle was invented long before the Kennedy assassination, right? I said MODERN. Kennedy was modern era as far as I'm concerned. However, plenty of people were killed by spears before the rifle was an available alternative. Nut shell...point is you stated the rifle is a modern spear....they are NOT even comparable nick...if the laws are tightened then theres less chance of idiot such as this obtaining weapons...my point is OBVIOUSLY the system needs re-thinking to avoid situations such as this, or at the least HINDER such peoples ability to obtain....do I own a gun...nope, don't intend to either, no need, enjoy shooting them, was one of the top 5 "snipers' when in the Army...was fun...feel the need at home....why? So the gist i get is hey...lift all the regulations...go at it...yehah! everybody get a gun, you, me, pschos, ny jobs, teens, hell drop some off to the local gangs whilst we are at it...OR tighten the noose, make em harder to get, make owners accountable thru screening on a 5 yearly basis....and ask a simple question...why do you feel you need/ deserve a firearm? ....which is the lessor of each evil? I know my answer, BUT, will admit my bias may be due to the fact i don't feel the need to fill that void, AND witnessing scenarios such as the one which prompted me re-opening a "dead" thread... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 Oh come on. :puts on moderator cap: Cut it out!! :takes off moderator cap: in the ring Nick its called counter punching....I try not to instigate....but don't expect me to sit still when crap is thrown.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napfirst Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 I expected nothing less from him anyway Nick....and he STILL hasn't offered a single alternative to fix an obviously broken system.... I never said it was broken....you did...so why would I offer a solution.......you guys sure have thin skin...it that is considered personal....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 (edited) I never said it was broken....you did...so why would I offer a solution.......you guys sure have thin skin...it that is considered personal....... so in your eyes its ok that fruitloops and nutjobs find it easy to arm themselves, so I guess everything is just peachy in the land of napfirst....just keep govt regulations outa your hair...what good are regulations anyways...ESPECIALLY when it comes to arms....And no, not thin skinned, but when retorts are all fired from the same corner, they just get old real fast....so rather than constantly throwing barbs, bring something to the table for once and offer an opinion...even if you dis-agree it can be appreciated for a different perspective.... Edited March 12, 2009 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napfirst Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 so in your eyes its ok thatfind it easy to arm themselves, so I guess everything is just peachy in the land of napfirst....just keep govt regulations outa your hair...what good are regulations anyways...ESPECIALLY when it comes to arms....And no, not thin skinned, but when retorts are all fired from the same corner, they just get old real fast....so rather than constantly throwing barbs, bring something to the table for once and offer an opinion...even if you dis-agree it can be appreciated for a different perspective.... pray-tell what "barb" are you referring to?.......and again where did I say it was ok fruitloops and nutjobs ...you're drawing your own conclusions....and stop whinning, it makes you look weak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 pray-tell what "barb" are you referring to?.......and again where did I say it was ok fruitloops and nutjobs ...you're drawing your own conclusions....and stop whinning, it makes you look weak. Pa leese.....get over yourself....you obviously think the system is ok.....otherwise offer something up other than crap like #129.....if you can't..... go back to berating your workers..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napfirst Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 Pa leese.....get over yourself....you obviously think the system is ok.....otherwise offer something up other than crap like #129.....if you can't..... go back to berating your workers..... I'm not the one with the hurt feeling here....that would be you....so when I made my comment about using logic, that was berating?....did not know you New Zealanders got offended so easily...sorry in the future I'll be more PC with you...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 I'm not the one with the hurt feeling here....that would be you....so when I made my comment about using logic, that was berating?....did not know you New Zealanders got offended so easily...sorry in the future I'll be more PC with you...... relentless to say the least......... :boring: nice to see you stay on subject as per the norm...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napfirst Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 How long do you suppose this 88 year old man owned this gun......and how would the authorities know he had it in able to do the "5 year snaity check".......just not practical ROCK HILL, S.C. – Police say an 88-year-old client who wanted his down payment back on a deal shot a South Carolina real estate broker. Rock Hill Police Lt. Michael Belk says Richard Blow burst into a Coldwell Banker office in Rock Hill Wednesday and shot 68-year-old Jerry O'Neil in the abdomen and was taken to a hospital. Belk says Blow had been charged with assault with intent to kill and could face more charges. Belk says he wanted his money back. Coldwell corporate spokeswoman Kim Cox told several media outlets O'Neil was the broker in charge, which is the equivalent of a manager. Belk says about 10 other employees were in the office at the time, but only O'Neil was injured. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 How long do you suppose this 88 year old man owned this gun......and how would the authorities know he had it in able to do the "5 year snaity check".......just not practical good point.... but hey, they do it for drivers licences.....and if they are not fit, no driving....confiscate the gun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.