| Author
|
Thread |
  |
|
hassan-i-sabbah
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 27424
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ywfn
quote:
Originally posted by hassan-i-sabbah
its highly debatable whether owning guns makes you safer. see: one week ago, connecticut
I used to believe that too, until I read Glenn Greenwald's surprising op ed in support of personal ownership of firearms. He does a really good job of explaining why personal responsibility actually makes sense in this case:
http://www.salon.com/2011/08/06/2nd_amenment_still_relevant/
wow that was a good one, nice job
_________________
quote:
Originally posted by turtleman
A normal person wouldn't say that in real life because it's ridiculous and insulting. Yet here you are spouting the most hateful garbage that your demons can muster out of your darkened soul. All because of the internet.
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 7:37 am |
|
|
hassan-i-sabbah
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 27424
|
greenwald gets money from cato institute and is something of a quasi-libertarian so i believed it...
_________________
quote:
Originally posted by turtleman
A normal person wouldn't say that in real life because it's ridiculous and insulting. Yet here you are spouting the most hateful garbage that your demons can muster out of your darkened soul. All because of the internet.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 7:37 am |
|
|
hassan-i-sabbah
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 27424
|
quote:
Originally posted by -667-
lmfao mackman also has some strange fetish where he is a freedom fighter against a tyrannical government, yet he is the first one to endorse his government massacring people with his tax money, people that have occasionally elected their leaders
yeah i used to nominally think that was a good point but if you think about it for more than a second it completely falls apart. if an armed populace actually presented a legitimate threat of insurrection why would the US government (or any government) tolerate it for one second? its not a coincidence that passionate gun owners and second amendment enthusiasts like mackman are generally jingoistic tools who don't care about any rights beyond the second amendement and would never revolt against the US government in any fashion except maybe if they took guns (and probably not even then). they're basically sleeper right wing militia members. if there was ever a chance for genuine revolutionary change in america it would come from a group that would have to get all its weapons illegally anyway (look at how gun laws changed in so many american cities in response to the black panthers)
the right to bear arms exists because US gun culture ensures most legal gun enthusiasts adopt reactionary views. if things ever hit the fan in america suburban white supremacists gun owners like mackman would never rebel against the government, all those neighborhood gun clubs would act as de facto death squads against whoever the troublemakers happened to be (the poor, minorities, etc) to ensure the protection of their economic and social privileges
_________________
quote:
Originally posted by turtleman
A normal person wouldn't say that in real life because it's ridiculous and insulting. Yet here you are spouting the most hateful garbage that your demons can muster out of your darkened soul. All because of the internet.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 7:44 am |
|
|
ORKinman2
Joined: 18 Feb 2010
Posts: 175
|
Altering gun laws or banning them altogether is treating a symptom of a problem and not the problem itself. I don't own a gun, and I have no desire to ever own a gun, but I also know that banning guns would not equate to anything positive. As with any high-profile incident in the media, situations such as what took place in Newtown, Connecticut are not an accurate reflection of statistics as a whole in society. Unfortunately, douchebag liberals see the news and say "OMFG WHY DON'T WE BAN GUNS, GUNS ARE THE DOWNFALL OF SOCIETY", and equally as bad you have conservative rednecks that say "THE ANSWER IS MORE GUNS...'MERICA!"
Just leave the law as is...The human psyche cannot be predicted and guns are not the cause of a psychopathic maniac mass murdering people.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:11 am |
|
|
ORKinman2
Joined: 18 Feb 2010
Posts: 175
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ywfn
quote:
Originally posted by hassan-i-sabbah
its highly debatable whether owning guns makes you safer. see: one week ago, connecticut
I used to believe that too, until I read Glenn Greenwald's surprising op ed in support of personal ownership of firearms. He does a really good job of explaining why personal responsibility actually makes sense in this case:
http://www.salon.com/2011/08/06/2nd_amenment_still_relevant/
This excerpt has changed my life. Thank you for posting this, everyone should be made to read this fine piece of journalism.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:15 am |
|
|
hassan-i-sabbah
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 27424
|
quote:
Originally posted by ORKinman2
Just leave the law as is...The human psyche cannot be predicted
you're right, that's why we should prevent them from getting highly deadly weapons in the first place
quote:
Originally posted by ORKinman2
and guns are not the cause of a psychopathic maniac mass murdering people.
*kills someone with a gun* "A gun did not cause that person to die."
_________________
quote:
Originally posted by turtleman
A normal person wouldn't say that in real life because it's ridiculous and insulting. Yet here you are spouting the most hateful garbage that your demons can muster out of your darkened soul. All because of the internet.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:24 am |
|
|
ORKinman2
Joined: 18 Feb 2010
Posts: 175
|
quote:
Originally posted by hassan-i-sabbah
quote:
Originally posted by ORKinman2
Just leave the law as is...The human psyche cannot be predicted
you're right, that's why we should prevent them from getting highly deadly weapons in the first place
quote:
Originally posted by ORKinman2
and guns are not the cause of a psychopathic maniac mass murdering people.
*kills someone with a gun* "A gun did not cause that person to die."
I disagree...History has shown that illegalizing anything only results in higher crime and the creation of underground markets. Do you realistically believe that banning guns would mean that no one would have guns in the United States? Our country has learned nothing from prohibition; see: Drugs in America.
The real problem is mental illness and there are a thousand different possibilities for assisting in prevention of these tragedies. Not to get off topic or go on a tangent, but our prison system is overflowing with non-violent offenders that need counseling, not incarceration. We need to get rid of the ridiculous drug laws and implement a better rehabilitative program in the United States to treat non-violent offenders. Likewise, the money we save on decreased inmates could be used to help our mentally-ill and hopefully prevent situations such as Newtown from taking place. I can assure you that guns are not the real issue.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:34 am |
|
|
hassan-i-sabbah
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 27424
|
quote:
Originally posted by ORKinman2
I disagree...History has shown that illegalizing anything only results in higher crime and the creation of underground markets.
so making murder legal would decrease crime? "history" doesn't show this at all. there are many countries with stricter gun laws, they have less guns. it is easier to buy marijuana in colorado, where it is legal, than in kansas, where it is illegal. you can't make generalizations like this without looking at specific cases
quote:
Originally posted by ORKinman2
Do you realistically believe that banning guns would mean that no one would have guns in the United States?
that's a strawman. of course i dont think that. the point is to make it so its harder for people to get very deadly weapons. american gun nuts are even opposed to that, because americans are so pampered they start crying about freedom if they cant get a giant assault rifle at wal-mart
quote:
Originally posted by ORKinman2
The real problem is mental illness and there are a thousand different possibilities for assisting in prevention of these tragedies.
why is the real problem mental illness when in the same a week a crazy guy in china stabbed a bunch of kids but they all lived, while the CT kids are dead? obviously society can do more for the mentally ill but that doesnt mean you let practically anyone buy these weapons
quote:
Originally posted by ORKinman2
Not to get off topic or go on a tangent, but our prison system is overflowing with non-violent offenders that need counseling, not incarceration. We need to get rid of the ridiculous drug laws and implement a better rehabilitative program in the United States to treat non-violent offenders. Likewise, the money we save on decreased inmates could be used to help our mentally-ill and hopefully prevent situations such as Newtown from taking place. I can assure you that guns are not the real issue.
yes i agree the prison-industrial complex should be dismantled. that doesn't mean its not a bad idea to let crazy survivalists like this kids mothers and loner psychos like the colorado guy have guns
_________________
quote:
Originally posted by turtleman
A normal person wouldn't say that in real life because it's ridiculous and insulting. Yet here you are spouting the most hateful garbage that your demons can muster out of your darkened soul. All because of the internet.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:38 am |
|
|
Mackman
Joined: 19 Apr 2001
Posts: 3639
|
quote:
Originally posted by hassan-i-sabbah
words
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let's not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country." --Adolf Hitler, dinner talk on April 11, 1942, quoted in Hitler's Table Talk 1941-44: His Private Conversations, Second Edition (1973), Pg. 425-426. Translated by Norman Cameron and R. H. Stevens. Introduced and with a new preface by H. R. Trevor-Roper. The original German papers were known as Bormann-Vermerke.
Himmler, head of the Nazi terror police, would become an architect of the Holocaust, which consumed six million Jews. It was self evident that the Jews must be disarmed before the extermination could begin.
Finding out which Jews had firearms was not too difficult. The liberal Weimar Republic passed a Firearm Law in 1928 requiring extensive police records on gun owners. Hitler signed a further gun control law in early 1938.
Your argument does not hold water. Look at flordia, where it has the highest percentage of concealed carry permits issued, yet I am not seeing wild west shootouts like you and other gun-grabbers persist would happen. I am calling you a pussy because based on your arguments and rationalizations its clear you have never handled a firearm before. Your knowledge comes from CNN. There literally is no difference between a 30 round magazine and 3 ten rounders. Detachable magazine firearms can be reloaded in literally 2 seconds.
If you really want to make the argument that those seconds would save lives, than you can make the argument that an armed guard could of prevented it from happening at all, which you ignore.
Also no one will lose their gun, and on the contrary people are stockpiling and hording now more than ever since. You would only succeed in disarming honest citizens, not criminals. I like how you skipped over my link about the mall shooter. As soon as he encountered any resistance, he shot himself. He most likely saved many lives. How about you at least acknowledge that mass murders typically target areas which they know no one has guns? I never hear about them targeting a police station because that would be retarded.
Since you know what an assault weapon is, how about you define it for me?
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:06 am |
|
|
hassan-i-sabbah
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 27424
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mackman
quote:
Originally posted by hassan-i-sabbah
words
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let's not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country." --Adolf Hitler, dinner talk on April 11, 1942, quoted in Hitler's Table Talk 1941-44: His Private Conversations, Second Edition (1973), Pg. 425-426. Translated by Norman Cameron and R. H. Stevens. Introduced and with a new preface by H. R. Trevor-Roper. The original German papers were known as Bormann-Vermerke.
Himmler, head of the Nazi terror police, would become an architect of the Holocaust, which consumed six million Jews. It was self evident that the Jews must be disarmed before the extermination could begin.
Finding out which Jews had firearms was not too difficult. The liberal Weimar Republic passed a Firearm Law in 1928 requiring extensive police records on gun owners. Hitler signed a further gun control law in early 1938.
ya that's because jews were about to be exterminated and imprisoned oppressed etc. in america the oppressed classes are already plenty oppressed, largely by the types of people who love owning guns. so there's no need to take guns in america, they serve no revolutionary purpose. they only serve to protect the american white supremacist power structure (which is why you are a gun advocate)
quote:
Originally posted by Mackman
Your argument does not hold water. Look at flordia, where it has the highest percentage of concealed carry permits issued, yet I am not seeing wild west shootouts like you and other gun-grabbers persist would happen.
lmao
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin
http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/cases/case_81
http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/cases/case_99
http://www.wctv.tv/home/headlines/92183289.html
http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/ViewNews.aspx?id=43060
http://www.politicususa.com/man-killed-florida-teen-loud-music-alters-story-fit-stand-ground.html
how can you keep constantly being so wrong, its amazing. these are all just things i knew about off the top of my head except two i found while googling for articles about the incidents i knew about, how many do you think there are that i'm not aware of? its not like i obsessively follow this stuff
quote:
Originally posted by Mackman
I am calling you a pussy because based on your arguments and rationalizations its clear you have never handled a firearm before. Your knowledge comes from CNN. There literally is no difference between a 30 round magazine and 3 ten rounders. Detachable magazine firearms can be reloaded in literally 2 seconds.
except you're completely wrong about that and your calling people "pussies" because they dont want kids to die makes it clear that you have a 4 inch dick, at best
quote:
Originally posted by Mackman
Also no one will lose their gun, and on the contrary people are stockpiling and hording now more than ever since. You would only succeed in disarming honest citizens, not criminals. I like how you skipped over my link about the mall shooter. As soon as he encountered any resistance, he shot himself. He most likely saved many lives. How about you at least acknowledge that mass murders typically target areas which they know no one has guns? I never hear about them targeting a police station because that would be retarded.
lol if the mall shooter didn't have any guns
that guy wouldn't have had to prevent him from killing more people in the first place you idiot.
reminder these spree shooters almost always legally own their guns or have stolen them from a legal owner
quote:
Originally posted by Mackman
Since you know what an assault weapon is, how about you define it for me?
you don't need to know the technical definition of "assault weapon" to know that a rifle with a 30 round clip serves no legitimate civilian use, you dont have to be some kind of gun fetishist idiot like you to say this is a bad thing for public safety. seriously, name one legitimate use?
_________________
quote:
Originally posted by turtleman
A normal person wouldn't say that in real life because it's ridiculous and insulting. Yet here you are spouting the most hateful garbage that your demons can muster out of your darkened soul. All because of the internet.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:15 am |
|
|
Mackman
Joined: 19 Apr 2001
Posts: 3639
|
Rifles actually do serve a legitimate civilian use:
-provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States;
raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
-provide and maintain a navy;
-make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
-provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.
The media and the leftest love to classify all rifles as "assault" because they look like the "bad ones in the movies" despite the fact that a rifle is no more dangerous than a pistol, which both have to be fired by each trigger pull. Civilians do not own, nor can they automatic weapons, burst fire weapons, or any other military hardware (tanks, etc).
For comparison sake: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8
Murders by rifle account for merely 2.55% of all murders in 2011. Yes banning them will solve everything overnight. Also people who point out that they are avid hunters but still for very strict gun control, more people were killed by shotguns then rifles. Also your chances of dying if being shot by a shotgun are MUCH higher than a small caliber bullet from a rifle (which most are). Handguns, esp 45's have a much larger caliber bullet.
Get informed please.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:31 am |
|
|
hassan-i-sabbah
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 27424
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mackman
Rifles actually do serve a legitimate civilian use:
assault rifles with 30 round magazines. what legitimate civilian use?
quote:
Originally posted by Mackman
-provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States;
raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
-provide and maintain a navy;
-make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
-provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.
this was written over 200 years ago and theres a military now that makes this obsolete. you dont have to keep people armed to raise an army anymore lol
quote:
Originally posted by Mackman
The media and the leftest love to classify all rifles as "assault" because they look like the "bad ones in the movies" despite the fact that a rifle is no more dangerous than a pistol, which both have to be fired by each trigger pull. Civilians do not own, nor can they automatic weapons, burst fire weapons, or any other military hardware (tanks, etc).
semiautomatic weapons with extended magazines are more deadly and can be used to kill more people faster than firearms used for legitimate purposes like hunting. you changed the topic to "rifles" when i was being very specific about what kinds of guns i was talking about
_________________
quote:
Originally posted by turtleman
A normal person wouldn't say that in real life because it's ridiculous and insulting. Yet here you are spouting the most hateful garbage that your demons can muster out of your darkened soul. All because of the internet.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:38 am |
|
|
|
|
Mackman
Joined: 19 Apr 2001
Posts: 3639
|
Travon case is still ongoing. My point is you are using a smattering of cases over the fact that MILLIONS are carrying weapons. Every country with NO GUNS at all have smattering cases such as these, they prove nothing.
Way to completely overlook the FBI stats I quoted btw.
Your fantasy of everyone going to walmart and using them to kill mass people is completely incorrect.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:43 am |
|
|
|
|
hassan-i-sabbah
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 27424
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mackman
Travon case is still ongoing. My point is you are using a smattering of cases over the fact that MILLIONS are carrying weapons. Every country with NO GUNS at all have smattering cases such as these, they prove nothing.
you said florida doesn't have a lot of "wild west" style shootings and i just posted like 8 at you off the top of my head/2 minutes of googling. you were wrong as hell lol
quote:
Originally posted by Mackman
Your fantasy of everyone going to walmart and using them to kill mass people is completely incorrect.
except i never said "everyone" does or would do this. you are completely fucking retarded and you flunked community college by writing about the gay agenda
_________________
quote:
Originally posted by turtleman
A normal person wouldn't say that in real life because it's ridiculous and insulting. Yet here you are spouting the most hateful garbage that your demons can muster out of your darkened soul. All because of the internet.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 10:29 am |
|
|
Ywfn
Joined: 30 May 2001
Posts: 3833
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mackman
Correct. Perhaps having someone armed on campus wouldn't of made it an ideal target. Don't you understand.. people who commit mass murder do it largely because they know they wont encounter resistance? Schools do not have guns..
quote:
Originally posted by hassan-i-sabbah
great so the solution is to put armed guards in schools with children, that will make them safer. security guards and police officers never make mistakes or exercise poor judgement i guess. i guess the solution is always just more guns. maybe if there's a mass shooting at a school with a security guard next time you can start arguing to arm the teachers
I think this here summarizes my biggest problem (and where I feel strongest) about the reoccurring debate that happens every time some crazy loser unloads in a school.
Over the years I have gone back and forth on my opinion of whether or not personal gun ownership is a right worth protecting, but the idea that we can make schools safer by having armed guards or allowing concealed carry is so self-evidently stupid, I just can't wrap my head around how any sane person can actually believe that (Not saying Mackman is sane, but I know lots of people I consider very intelligent friends that believe it too).
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:26 am |
|
|
hassan-i-sabbah
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 27424
|
yeah gun people in the US think "more guns" is the solution to everything, literally. like even when they realize its stupid they can't help it. like mackman says "i'm not saying just giving more guns is the solution!" and then goes on to talk about how the only solution is armed guards in school
_________________
quote:
Originally posted by turtleman
A normal person wouldn't say that in real life because it's ridiculous and insulting. Yet here you are spouting the most hateful garbage that your demons can muster out of your darkened soul. All because of the internet.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:42 am |
|
|
Ywfn
Joined: 30 May 2001
Posts: 3833
|
Haha, yea, you're like 10000x more likely to get accidentally shot by your own gun (or someone else's gun that's for "self defense"), than be the victim of a mass-shooting, yet every time these things happen, guns are sold out everywhere.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:55 am |
|
|
hassan-i-sabbah
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 27424
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ywfn
Haha, yea, you're like 10000x more likely to get accidentally shot by your own gun
cant wait for mackman to say this is bullshit while forgetting this is exactly what happened a week ago
_________________
quote:
Originally posted by turtleman
A normal person wouldn't say that in real life because it's ridiculous and insulting. Yet here you are spouting the most hateful garbage that your demons can muster out of your darkened soul. All because of the internet.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 12:00 pm |
|
|
Ywfn
Joined: 30 May 2001
Posts: 3833
|
Actually I would qualify that as a "mass shooting". I'm talking about general household accidents where a child gets ahold of a gun, where people accidentally shoot a family member/neighbor thinking they're a burglar, actually getting killed by a burglar because you pulled a gun, etc. You're far, far more at risk dying that way than at a public school.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 12:08 pm |
|
|
Ywfn
Joined: 30 May 2001
Posts: 3833
|
I remember reading from a statistician that you're more likely to die by lightning strike than from a mass school shooting. I think about the only thing less likely to kill you in the US was a terrorist attack, lol.
Edit: Specified mass school shooting. Obviously there's lots of mass shootings, mostly in places where White people don't go, but not very many
school
shootings.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 12:11 pm |
|
|
hassan-i-sabbah
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 27424
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ywfn
Actually I would qualify that as a "mass shooting". I'm talking about general household accidents where a child gets ahold of a gun, where people accidentally shoot a family member/neighbor thinking they're a burglar, actually getting killed by a burglar because you pulled a gun, etc. You're far, far more at risk dying that way than at a public school.
yeah that's true too, but the mass shooting is also the case of a legal responsible gun owner being shot by her own gun. its funny though cuz two weeks ago people like mackman would point to her as a model citizen but now that this has happened she's at fault for not being psychic and its in no way a problem with gun culture or ownership in america in general
_________________
quote:
Originally posted by turtleman
A normal person wouldn't say that in real life because it's ridiculous and insulting. Yet here you are spouting the most hateful garbage that your demons can muster out of your darkened soul. All because of the internet.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 12:14 pm |
|
|
7VlesSiah
Joined: 16 Feb 2001
Posts: 2456
|
Mackman, do you feel safer at a poker table where everyone has a gun or where no one is allowed a gun? I can tell you which table you are most likely to get shot at....
_________________
I have hacks in my brain and I use them.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 12:42 pm |
|
|
hassan-i-sabbah
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 27424
|
quote:
Originally posted by 7VlesSiah
Mackman, do you feel safer at a poker table where everyone has a gun or where no one is allowed a gun? I can tell you which table you are most likely to get shot at....
obviously its safer if everyone has a gun because if someone showed up to rob the poker game like in a badass gangster movie everyone would stand up and blow that motherfucker away before he knew what hit him, fuck yeah
_________________
quote:
Originally posted by turtleman
A normal person wouldn't say that in real life because it's ridiculous and insulting. Yet here you are spouting the most hateful garbage that your demons can muster out of your darkened soul. All because of the internet.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 12:44 pm |
|
|
hassan-i-sabbah
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 27424
|
lol i still cant believe mackman claimed florida didnt have a lot of wild west type shootings
_________________
quote:
Originally posted by turtleman
A normal person wouldn't say that in real life because it's ridiculous and insulting. Yet here you are spouting the most hateful garbage that your demons can muster out of your darkened soul. All because of the internet.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:41 pm |
|
|
Winchester
Joined: 04 Oct 2011
Posts: 980
Location: Melbourne, Australia |
quote:
Originally posted by hassan-i-sabbah
quote:
Originally posted by 7VlesSiah
Mackman, do you feel safer at a poker table where everyone has a gun or where no one is allowed a gun? I can tell you which table you are most likely to get shot at....
obviously its safer if everyone has a gun because if someone showed up to rob the poker game like in a badass gangster movie everyone would stand up and blow that motherfucker away before he knew what hit him, fuck yeah
Haha
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:24 pm |
|
|
Mackman
Joined: 19 Apr 2001
Posts: 3639
|
quote:
Originally posted by hassan-i-sabbah
quote:
Originally posted by 7VlesSiah
Mackman, do you feel safer at a poker table where everyone has a gun or where no one is allowed a gun? I can tell you which table you are most likely to get shot at....
obviously its safer if everyone has a gun because if someone showed up to rob the poker game like in a badass gangster movie everyone would stand up and blow that motherfucker away before he knew what hit him, fuck yeah
typical uninformed opinion.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:17 pm |
|
|
Mackman
Joined: 19 Apr 2001
Posts: 3639
|
quote:
Originally posted by hassan-i-sabbah
lol i still cant believe mackman claimed florida didnt have a lot of wild west type shootings
you pick out a handful of cases in a state where millions of people carry. The numbers are not in your favor.
and the martin case is still ongoing we don't know how it went down.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:18 pm |
|
|
Mackman
Joined: 19 Apr 2001
Posts: 3639
|
quote:
Originally posted by hassan-i-sabbah
quote:
Originally posted by Mackman
Travon case is still ongoing. My point is you are using a smattering of cases over the fact that MILLIONS are carrying weapons. Every country with NO GUNS at all have smattering cases such as these, they prove nothing.
you said florida doesn't have a lot of "wild west" style shootings and i just posted like 8 at you off the top of my head/2 minutes of googling. you were wrong as hell lol
quote:
Originally posted by Mackman
Your fantasy of everyone going to walmart and using them to kill mass people is completely incorrect.
except i never said "everyone" does or would do this. you are completely fucking retarded and you flunked community college by writing about the gay agenda
you have been making blanket statements about all americans go to walmart just to buy the next big assault rifle, and make repeated references to that, you fucking idiot. And you were proven wrong.
|
|
Fri Dec 21, 2012 9:23 pm |
|
|
|
Warcraft Occult Forum Index
-> Links, reviews, previews, etc
