Latest topics
News Feed
Right to Bear Arms
+4
eaustinn36
Masta Shef
andrew
Limey Polo
8 posters
Page 1 of 2
Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Re: Right to Bear Arms
I need to disagree with a controversial perspective on firearm laws! :p With firearms available, I think these rioters would have firearms and the homicide rates (now and before) would be considerably higher.Master Shef wrote:Yea, Limey the Rodney King Riots are definately comparable to the ones happening right now in England. Too bad the Brits don't have any way to defend themselves like the store owners (Korean ones) in the Rodney King Riots.
Limey Polo- Zombies dun like meh.
- Posts : 141
Re: Right to Bear Arms
LimeyPolo wrote:I need to disagree with a controversial perspective on firearm laws! :p With firearms available, I think these rioters would have firearms and the homicide rates (now and before) would be considerably higher.Master Shef wrote:Yea, Limey the Rodney King Riots are definately comparable to the ones happening right now in England. Too bad the Brits don't have any way to defend themselves like the store owners (Korean ones) in the Rodney King Riots.
You're basically saying that everyone with a gun is homicidal, which is not true. Homicide would go down if people had the means to defend themselves.
andrew- I Are Postwhore.
- Posts : 699
Re: Right to Bear Arms
LimeyPolo wrote:I need to disagree with a controversial perspective on firearm laws! :p With firearms available, I think these rioters would have firearms and the homicide rates (now and before) would be considerably higher.Master Shef wrote:Yea, Limey the Rodney King Riots are definately comparable to the ones happening right now in England. Too bad the Brits don't have any way to defend themselves like the store owners (Korean ones) in the Rodney King Riots.
Well Im going to use a SMK quote here, "Implying" that LEGAL gun owners would be responsible enough to legally obtain firearms and than riot and burn down businesses with Molotov Cocktails.
Masta Shef- I type in my sleep
- Posts : 864
Re: Right to Bear Arms
I'm not. :p I'm just saying that rioters would have easier access to firearms and they'd have the direct means to commit efficient homicide. Anyway, let's continue this discussion in another thread if you so wish.andrew wrote:LimeyPolo wrote:I need to disagree with a controversial perspective on firearm laws! :p With firearms available, I think these rioters would have firearms and the homicide rates (now and before) would be considerably higher.Master Shef wrote:Yea, Limey the Rodney King Riots are definately comparable to the ones happening right now in England. Too bad the Brits don't have any way to defend themselves like the store owners (Korean ones) in the Rodney King Riots.
You're basically saying that everyone with a gun is homicidal, which is not true. Homicide would go down if people had the means to defend themselves.
On topic, I do think these riots are irrational, encompassing no agenda but senseless anguish or fun.
Limey Polo- Zombies dun like meh.
- Posts : 141
Re: Right to Bear Arms
Firearms would already be easily available to the rioters, why not make them more easily and legally accessible to the people that will be targeted?
andrew- I Are Postwhore.
- Posts : 699
Right to Bear Arms
(No, not literally the legal entitlement to biologically mutuate human arms into BEAR ARMS for defense)
Your thoughts on this topic, hmm? Is it a deterrent? Does it escalate conflicts? Intensify criminalities?
Your thoughts on this topic, hmm? Is it a deterrent? Does it escalate conflicts? Intensify criminalities?
Limey Polo- Zombies dun like meh.
- Posts : 141
Re: Right to Bear Arms
@Limwy You cant end the discussion with your opinion and expect me not to respond...butanyway I believe you are incorrect as this would have been the case in the Rodney King Riots. As well of course they are just rioting to reak havoc. At this point people are just doing it because they can get away with it. No sense of community or respect for the law.
Masta Shef- I type in my sleep
- Posts : 864
Re: Right to Bear Arms
On the incident by a sociology Professor:Master Shef wrote:@Limwy You cant end the discussion with your opinion and expect me not to respond...butanyway I believe you are incorrect as this would have been the case in the Rodney King Riots. As well of course they are just rioting to reak havoc. At this point people are just doing it because they can get away with it. No sense of community or respect for the law.
"Gunfire killed 35, including eight people shot by law enforcement and two by National Guardsmen. Six died in arson fires. Attackers used sticks or boards to kill two others. Stabbings killed two. Six died in car accidents; two in hit-and-runs. One was strangled.
The violence crossed racial and ethnic lines. The dead included 25 African-Americans, 16 Latinos, eight whites, two Asians, one Algerian, and one Indian or Middle Easterner. Men outnumbered women, 48 to 5.
One of the more troubling statistics: 22 of the cases remain open, unsolved homicides. "
Limey Polo- Zombies dun like meh.
- Posts : 141
Re: Right to Bear Arms
Yea, good point Limey, I guess that is a good example of gun control at work. Oh wait you said 35 dead from firearms in a place that guns are outlawed? That can't be!
Masta Shef- I type in my sleep
- Posts : 864
Re: Right to Bear Arms
The restrictions on firearms are still not stringent, in my opinion, and they fall into the black market rapidly.Master Shef wrote:Yea, good point Limey, I guess that is a good example of gun control at work. Oh wait you said 35 dead from firearms in a place that guns are outlawed? That can't be!
Limey Polo- Zombies dun like meh.
- Posts : 141
Re: Right to Bear Arms
LimeyPolo wrote:The restrictions on firearms are still not stringent, in my opinion, and they fall into the black market rapidly.Master Shef wrote:Yea, good point Limey, I guess that is a good example of gun control at work. Oh wait you said 35 dead from firearms in a place that guns are outlawed? That can't be!
Yea? Well im not here to argue with your opinions on guns although facts are facts and you sir have not givin me any reason to agree with you.
Masta Shef- I type in my sleep
- Posts : 864
Re: Right to Bear Arms
How are those deaths positive at all? The fact is that firearms were legal in LA during the1992's and they were not 'outlawed' as you said.Masta Shef wrote:LimeyPolo wrote:The restrictions on firearms are still not stringent, in my opinion, and they fall into the black market rapidly.Master Shef wrote:Yea, good point Limey, I guess that is a good example of gun control at work. Oh wait you said 35 dead from firearms in a place that guns are outlawed? That can't be!
Yea? Well im not here to argue with your opinions on guns although facts are facts and you sir have not givin me any reason to agree with you.
Limey Polo- Zombies dun like meh.
- Posts : 141
Re: Right to Bear Arms
Thought your post was refering to gun related deaths in England...
Masta Shef- I type in my sleep
- Posts : 864
Re: Right to Bear Arms
No, the LA riot; sorry for not referencing or elaborating. Regarding England's homicide rates with 'illegal' firearms:Masta Shef wrote:Thought your post was refering to gun related deaths in England...
"The number of homicides per year committed with firearms has remained between a range of 49 and 97 in the 8 years to 2006. There were 2 fatal shootings of police officers in England and Wales in this period and 107 non-fatal shootings - an average of 9.7 per year over the same period.
In 2005/6 the police in England and Wales reported 50 gun homicides, a rate of 0.1 illegal gun deaths per 100,000 of population"
Limey Polo- Zombies dun like meh.
- Posts : 141
Re: Right to Bear Arms
LimeyPolo wrote:The restrictions on firearms are still not stringent, in my opinion, and they fall into the black market rapidly.Master Shef wrote:Yea, good point Limey, I guess that is a good example of gun control at work. Oh wait you said 35 dead from firearms in a place that guns are outlawed? That can't be!
Not stringent? Even places that do legally sell weapons do background checks with the FBI.... If you have a spot on your record they will find it,and you won't legally obtain a firearm.
andrew- I Are Postwhore.
- Posts : 699
Gun Control Debate
Isn't this normally for a concealed permit, hm? Anyway:andrew wrote:LimeyPolo wrote:The restrictions on firearms are still not stringent, in my opinion, and they fall into the black market rapidly.Master Shef wrote:Yea, good point Limey, I guess that is a good example of gun control at work. Oh wait you said 35 dead from firearms in a place that guns are outlawed? That can't be!
Not stringent? Even places that do legally sell weapons do background checks with the FBI.... If you have a spot on your record they will find it,and you won't legally obtain a firearm.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_(by_state)#California
Limey Polo- Zombies dun like meh.
- Posts : 141
Gun Control Debate
Well on the flip side of your argument about the homicides, guns were used to defend against rioters as well. If it wasn't guns being used it'd be something else.
Masta Shef- I type in my sleep
- Posts : 864
Re: Right to Bear Arms
LimeyPolo wrote:Isn't this normally for a concealed permit, hm? Anyway:andrew wrote:LimeyPolo wrote:The restrictions on firearms are still not stringent, in my opinion, and they fall into the black market rapidly.Master Shef wrote:Yea, good point Limey, I guess that is a good example of gun control at work. Oh wait you said 35 dead from firearms in a place that guns are outlawed? That can't be!
Not stringent? Even places that do legally sell weapons do background checks with the FBI.... If you have a spot on your record they will find it,and you won't legally obtain a firearm.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_(by_state)#California
For every purchase of a firearm, long gun or hand gun, there is a background check. The checks are usually longer for hand guns for obvious reasons. What I meant by every purchase is for concealed carry, open carry, or just leaving the gun at home.
Last edited by andrew on 11th August 2011, 3:13 am; edited 1 time in total
andrew- I Are Postwhore.
- Posts : 699
Re: Right to Bear Arms
Are you saying that firearms were necessary to defend their stores? They may have prevented a few stores being burnt (organized communities of Koreans notably), but the consequences of these firearms being available is the DOUBT:Masta Shef wrote:Well on the flip side of your argument about the homicides, guns were used to defend against rioters as well. If it wasn't guns being used it'd be something else.
1 - Expense of lifes (firearms are weapons of murder, defensively or offensively).
2 - Costs of escalation.
3 - Access to people of the wrong intentions.
Limey Polo- Zombies dun like meh.
- Posts : 141
Re: Right to Bear Arms
Defensive use of firearms is not murder... its self defense
andrew- I Are Postwhore.
- Posts : 699
Re: Right to Bear Arms
Someone threatens you and a fair reaction is shooting them in the face? Self-defence has boundaries, and people are prone to exaggerate their entitlement to defend with disportionate responses.andrew wrote:Defensive use of firearms is not murder... its self defense
Limey Polo- Zombies dun like meh.
- Posts : 141
Re: Right to Bear Arms
On Limey's side in this debate.
Would jump in but we already had an extensive one in the past, where it was basically me (and mboddz?) versus Shef and andrew again. Debate starts on page 16 of the topic, so feel free to quote any of those posts as my rebuttal.
http://www.undead-xbox.com/t5781p225-all-bout-america?highlight=all+bout+america
Would jump in but we already had an extensive one in the past, where it was basically me (and mboddz?) versus Shef and andrew again. Debate starts on page 16 of the topic, so feel free to quote any of those posts as my rebuttal.
http://www.undead-xbox.com/t5781p225-all-bout-america?highlight=all+bout+america
Re: Right to Bear Arms
Eaustin, let Limey debate, he wanted one. That debate was with you and mboddz, not him.
Limey, if someone threatens you, he OBVIOUSLY doesn't give a shit about your well being, and unless you are armed, or know how to defend yourself otherwise, you are not in the position of power. The person threatening is, and that is bad news for you.
You don't shoot them in the face, you warn them, and if necessary you shoot them hopefully somewhere that is not fatal. Your intention is to defend yourself, not kill someone.
Also keep in mind the person is not innocent. So defending yourself is completely justified.
They are the ones to blame for what happens, it is their own fault for doing what they did.
Limey, if someone threatens you, he OBVIOUSLY doesn't give a shit about your well being, and unless you are armed, or know how to defend yourself otherwise, you are not in the position of power. The person threatening is, and that is bad news for you.
You don't shoot them in the face, you warn them, and if necessary you shoot them hopefully somewhere that is not fatal. Your intention is to defend yourself, not kill someone.
Also keep in mind the person is not innocent. So defending yourself is completely justified.
They are the ones to blame for what happens, it is their own fault for doing what they did.
andrew- I Are Postwhore.
- Posts : 699
Re: Right to Bear Arms
andrew wrote:Eaustin, let Limey debate, he wanted one. That debate was with you and mboddz, not him.
Where did I say I wouldn't? I just said i'm not jumping in to press my points as I already did a few months ago. It's all you guys on this one.
Re: Right to Bear Arms
So, a threat to you can lead to a capital punishment, personally enforced? What about disputes in which both people are threatening each other?I think any involvement of firearms as 'defense' during these situations = highly unnecessary, provoking far worst results, if a bear is not attacking you or a thug intent on murder (quite rare).andrew wrote:Eaustin, let Limey debate, he wanted one. That debate was with you and mboddz, not him.
Limey, if someone threatens you, he OBVIOUSLY doesn't give a shit about your well being, and unless you are armed, or know how to defend yourself otherwise, you are not in the position of power. The person threatening is, and that is bad news for you.
You don't shoot them in the face, you warn them, and if necessary you shoot them hopefully somewhere that is not fatal. Your intention is to defend yourself, not kill someone.
Also keep in mind the person is not innocent. So defending yourself is completely justified.
Limey Polo- Zombies dun like meh.
- Posts : 141
Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Similar topics
» A CALL TO ARMS IN BATTLEFIELD 3!!
» Call to arms in the fight for REACH
» Naughty Bear
» Naughty Bear looks promising
» "Naughty Bear Gets Shat On"
» Call to arms in the fight for REACH
» Naughty Bear
» Naughty Bear looks promising
» "Naughty Bear Gets Shat On"
Page 1 of 2
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
23rd February 2014, 7:04 pm by eaustinn36
» Eaustinn's Xbox360 Minecraft Server - General Rules / Information
5th November 2013, 8:19 pm by eaustinn36
» Eaustinn's Guide to a better RP (GTA)
5th November 2013, 7:57 pm by eaustinn36
» Posting will be disabled April 15th 2013
2nd November 2013, 1:09 am by eaustinn36
» Brace for it...
14th April 2013, 6:06 pm by Made in Finland
» Day-z official topic
14th April 2013, 2:11 pm by eaustinn36
» Flask & the Quack Crew play browser games!
4th April 2013, 2:44 pm by Meatshield718
» E-HOLE LAUNCHING MIDNIGHT!
3rd April 2013, 8:53 am by KZ Powned
» The Walking Dead (General Thread)
3rd April 2013, 8:49 am by KZ Powned
» Derailed II: An off topic topic blah blah post your naked pictures here.
1st April 2013, 3:48 pm by Made in Finland
» Dead VideoGame Society (Current Game: e-hole.net)
31st March 2013, 11:33 pm by Super Mega King
» GTA 4 Zombies night?
31st March 2013, 10:01 am by snowwolf1996