Guns are evil because...
 

They allow good folks to defend themselves from thugs that only want everything good folks have...

http://thecabin.net/news/local/2012-...s#.T6FTnatSSsa

Courtesy of KATV

CONWAY – A teenager is being called a hero by the family he protected from armed intruders early Monday morning.

Brady, 14, is a trained trap shooter who used his own shotgun to intimidate two black males who he says broke into his family's house just after midnight Monday morning.

"They both had silver revolvers pointed at me, and we just kind of pointed at each other for like three seconds and then I yelled, ‘Hey!'" said Brady, "And they and they took off running."

Nothing has been reported stolen from their house.

The full names of Brady's family are being concealed for safety purposes.

Less than 24 hours after the incident, Brady says he is slightly shaken up although he kept his cool during the tense few moments.

"It's pretty scary to be like looking death in the face and you realize how vulnerable you are all the time," he said.

His proud mother says while he is definitely young he's already shown more courage than most grown men.

"You always tell your kids don't touch guns, you know, they could hurt someone," said Angela," but if you actually teach your kids good gun safety to begin with, and they grow up around guns or grow up knowing how to use them they could save your life."

Brady has been training with guns since he was 5 and has been practicing with his own shotgun for two months.

"I'm proud of him," said Angela. "He's my hero."

She's already taking steps to make sure other unwelcome guests don't make it into the house. The locks have been changed and the security system has been upgraded.

"You name it we are doing it," she said. "So if they ever come back they're going to wish they hadn't of because we will catch them in the act."

Thanks to the quick thinking of her son, he did away with the first batch of what could be many criminals to come.

"He wants to be agent one of these days," Angela said, "so I guess he's starting young."

Guns are evil because they allow bad folks to commit horrible atrocity. They serve as an easy and convenient vehicle for the wholesale slaughter of communities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout

Guns are evil because people those have them could be insane, emotionally unstable or just soaked or doped. All these "cool" guys types are always hard to reveal...

Yeah. Like these guys. I mean, c'mon. They just look crazy.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e3...IMG_0115-1.jpg

Ooooh, that one on the far right looks fucking INSANE.

It's always the little ones you have to be wary of.

I prefer to think of short people not as short but as CONCENTRATED FURY.

Fixed it. LOL.

Fixed the second one!

I died. Then the sex edits resulted in continuous giggles. Just knew from the title that this would be a terrible, and wonderful thread.

Insert obvious comment about people, not guns, killing people.

But guns help, don't they?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woo_Bum-kon

They certainly do help.

So, normally I see the point of gun control, but, devil's advocate, here, if any of the families in the homes he broke into had a gun and somebody who knew how to use it, the rampage could have ended hours earlier, thus saving dozens of lives.

Hell, it could have been averted at the very start by late 80's Ice Cube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiX7GTelTPM

Yes. Because more guns is obviously the great equalizer. Why didn't I think of that.

Nothing can stop people from murdering. I hate it, but it seems to be our nature

The fact that guns exist is the problem. People are going to get a hold of them no matter what, for instance the guy in your story was a police officer. No way the government is going to give up *their* guns.

So the fact still remains that people will still have access to guns, just not through legal means. The kind of people who know where the black market weapons are are not generally good people.

So it seems that, because we are never going to get rid of people having guns, why not allow people to choose if they want a gun or not to protect themselves and others from violence.

Still though, like I said I normally see tighter gun laws as a good thing. There is no reason you need fully automatic weapons, flak jackets, etc. I don't even see why you would ever need more that one or two guns.

Personally I feel the way to resolve the whole thing is to allow people their right to guns, but limit the ammount they have. Say something like 1-2 guns per household, and only allow hunting rifles and shotguns, no pistols or military type weaponry.

People are just going to get them illegally, huh. You don't say.

Do you have an argument against that? Or are you done?

I do, actually. But your "arguement" is a regurgitation of the same crap that you can find in any debate about gun laws. I feel that is indicative that you don't know what you're talking about. It's not my job to educate you, so how about you do a little research and think about it, then maybe you can get back to me. Kthx

So let me get this straight, I'm the one who needs to do research, and you're the one who can't argue a "regurgitation of the same crap that you can find in any debate about gun laws"? The reason it's 'regurgitated' is because it's common fucking sense.

More guns will make less gun related crime is common sense? You're fucking stupid, B.

Which would you prefer, an arguement based in statistics or one in logic?

You act like I'm calling for every citizen to be outfitted with machineguns and nuclear warheads. I'm not. I'm saying that people should have the right to own a gun if they want one. There are more purposes for guns than murdering people...you know this, right? Will you outlaw hunting?


I'd like an argument based on logic, please. Statistics can be...misleading.

Versus's lack of response clearly indicates (s)he is at the local gun store buying all the guns.

All the guns

You may notice that I haven't posted in any thread at all since this one. But you're right; clearly that means that I am too ashamed to admit that I am wrong and have fled from this argument.

You're right. If any of those people had guns as well, Woo could have been stopped sooner. This, however, is not indicative that because guns are available, people who otherwise wouldn't be inclined to arm themselves suddenly will. The United States has the most relaxed gun laws in the industrialized world and the highest gun ownership per capita, but still has some of the highest crime rates, particularly homicide, and guess what? One of the highest firearm related death rates. More guns does not ever equate to less gun crime.

Well, fucking obviously murder wasn't suddenly invented in tandem with gunpowder. That does not change that firearms make mass murder easier. The reason why gun laws are so invasive is because guns are so easy to use; Literally, they can serve as a vehicle to an end which would otherwise be extremely difficult to accomplish.

Again, firearms-related death is not suddenly going to stop everywhere, but it's fucking moronic to come to the conclusion that because gun ownership is illegal or severely restricted, that things will be the same as if it wasn't because some people will still be able to get them. You can look at any industrialized country with restrictive laws and will find that their gun-related crime per capita is significantly lower. Japan, for instance, has the strictest gun laws in the industrialized world and, consequently, has an average of less then 200 gun-related crimes a year, with a handgun-related homicide rate 200 times less then the United States.

Yes, I definitely equated gun ownership to nuclear warfare. I know what the fuck you're saying, and I'm telling you that your argument is based on assumptions from your imagination, not fucking reality. If you actually did research like I told you to, then maybe you would understand how the real world actually is. Your logic is fucking stupid, and regardless of what the fuck you feel, it doesn't change that strict gun laws reduce gun related crime rates. You will not find a single country has both relaxed gun control and low gun-related crime rates.

I want you to think about what "the United States is the largest exporter of firearms" means.

Think about it this way....

The Firearm is the ultimate symbol of the duality of man.

It can be used to cause harm and spread violence,It can also be used to prevent harm and allow for a peaceful existence (as well as provide for recreational marksmanship,and supply food for the stew pot)

It is what an individual person does with said firearm that determines the outcome.

Some on here (and in real life) would like nothing more than to get rid of firearms completely.

I as well as others would like the ability to own Full auto weapons without all the legal red tape (no different than someone else wanting to own a fast as hell sports car).

The two sides of this debate will continue to hammer away until the end of time,but I would at least like to leave the choice/right of ownership to the individual.

Sure there are dangers,there are dangers in just about everything in life,but to say that one person has no right to own what they please (as long as they do no real harm to others) is just short sighted and wrong in my book.

The notion that prohibiting anything will work is silly. Humans were killng each other for millenia prior to the invention of firearms. If someone gets it in their head to do harm to another, it will either happen or it will not.
Do firearms make it easier? Certainly. They are the great equaliser. So do vehicles, really. Is it tragic that they are used irresponsibly? Absolutely. If we could erase their invention, I would be for it. Let hunters use bows and learn a deep respect for their prey. But it's idealistic to presume prohibiting guns will work. Humans are clever enough to invent firearms - and clever enough to find a way around any attempt to regulate their actions.

Anyone that has grown up hunting for their food has a deep respect for what they take,No matter the type of arm used (Bow,Sling shot,Shotgun,rifle or handgun) I can't use a bow or a sling shot worth a damn,but respect others that can.

Hell most of the fun for me was being out and about instead of sitting at home.

Agreed. Prohibition has never, and will never work. Versus, you seem to have the (fucking retarded) idea that because we have lax gun laws, that that is the sole reason that gun crime is huge. Do you not think that movies glorifying shooting the ever loving shit out of anything that is in your way, gangster rap that basically equates guns with penises, the fact that our prison system tends to breed even more violent criminals, the huge population, the huge crystal meth problem, and yes, the fucking lax gun laws, all blend together to give us such a high gun crime rate?

Do you not think that without all of those things being resolved together, that the gun crime rate isn't going to change? Even if we banned all guns for everyone forever, the gun crime rate would probably drop, but I guaran-goddamn-tee you the rate violent crime probably wouldn't, it would just be knives and improvised weapons instead. We are a violent fucking culture. Guns are a tool, not a mind bending door to violence, you dipshit.

I own two guns. I have shot exactly zero living things with either of them. I will probably go my entire life without having to use either of them on a living being, and I would die happy knowing that. However, if everybody already has fucking guns (which they do, and you're a fool to think anybody can take that away from them), then you bet your sweet ass I'm going to have one, too. It makes no sense to leave yourself vulnerable. I would use that gun on anybody threatening me in my home, have they a knife, a club, a large frozen trout, or a fucking gun.

I didn't mean to infer a lack of respect on the part of all firearm-using hunters. There are a number of greedy hunters, of course, and a number of respectful ones. I suspect using a bow would bring a deeper respect for prey, because of the increased challenge as well as the terran, organic feel of such a weapon.

I didn't take any offense of your post,just wanted to add my two pennies.

Also, it's more satisfying knowing that you 'caught' your own food.

It's the natural order when you think about it,it's getting back to basics,just yourself,the arm that you have chosen,and the wilderness.

But to get this back on the original topic.

Thugs (Badguys,whatever else you want to call them) will do what they can to take what they want/need from another by force.

The cops can't be everywhere all the time,so again in a way it's back to basics,just the home owner/would be victim,their weapon of choice,and the threat,sure the police will get there after everything is said and done,but the two that are in direct conflict have to decide for themselves the outcome.

A weapon used in direct threat of life vs A weapon to defend self,family,and property.

*facepalm*

Having actually shot people, rather then fantasized about it like a prepubescent boy, I really love when people tell me what they are going to do with their gun.

You're not going to troll me on this Versus...nice try though.

Particularly when they're trying to claim they're a big badass who's totally capable of taking down the Mexican cartels singlehandedly, but also claims they're too weak and pitiful to be a productive member of society and needs our tax money to live.

Like you've never been wasted out of your mind for four years.

This isn't difficult people.

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/me...son_crying.gif

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lq...ykhbo1_500.gif

I'm not going to get mad and start throwing insults so you're just wasting your time kids.

Rattlesnakes aren't evil, but I notice people aren't clamoring to have them around everywhere they go.

And rattle snakes are living things driven purely by instict,they have a will of their own,firearms are no different than a keyboard,in that they are non-living things that must first be acted upon by a living being.

Except keyboards aren't deadly in the hands of flaming idiots.

They can be if that's what a person chooses to use them for.


That's the point I'm trying to make.

I live how Versus kind of gave up. Not speaking for deadman, but I'll go ahead and again say that I have never show a living being, and I, really hope I never have to. I go want to have that ability though, if it some comes down to it.

Oh come on, you're really reaching with that one... it takes a whole lot more cunning and effort to kill some one with a keyboard than it takes to shoot them with a gun.

Stretching like that doesn't help your argument at all.

To be fair, I think the rattlesnake analogy holds quite well, considering we're talking about OTHER people being armed as well. Being queer as fuck in a rather conservative place it just bugs me a little that the people who'd be most inclined to do me harm for no good reason are the one's most likely to be armed.

One thing I've noticed is they way you've dismissed what Versus has to say. I'd imagine he'd be the guy to talk to about guns, what they do and how people tend to use them. What's up with that?

Versus was trying to troll me into a different agrument and I avoided it.

What about your prejudice toward them,I mean if you have been physically attacked because of your sexual orientation I can very well understand why you feel the way you do.

But if that's the case wouldn't you want to be able to protect yourself?

Not to mention if you shoot young black boys, the police have to be dragged kicking and screaming to arrest you, but if a trans woman of colour kills a white man to defend herself, she's a murderer and could get the death penalty. In the same state with the same hold your ground laws.

Stand your ground laws are not the problem in either case,it's the misuse of them (as in the Zimmerman/Martin case)

The other one I haven't heard about,mind posting a link to it?

So now you're speaking in circles. I already spoke about the immediate result of restrictive gun laws and can use the examples of every city, country, whatever, that has them to provide evidence, but apparently examples taken from the real world aren't enough. So yeah, I have given up. I can't fix stupid.

You're trying to make this into something it isn't. We're talking about guns and the violence specific to them, not violence in general. Your argument is that what can be accomplished with guns could also be accomplished without them. I'd like you to back this up with evidence as I have. Go ahead. I'll wait.