Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Exterminatus Now. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
Ronnie Barrett is my hero.; lol california.
Topic Started: Jan 27 2006, 05:46 AM (705 Views)
Major Maxillary
Member Avatar
Anarcho-Fascist
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
As some might know, a while back The state of California passes a law banning .50 rifles and ammo, during the hearing, Bonnie barrett, President of Barrett Arms and inventor of the venerable M82A1 "Light Fifty" was outright ignored, and became pissed off when he saw an LA Police Officer holding up an M82 owned by the LA Police department, claiming that it could be bought by any tom, dick and harry withing a moments notice.
http://nramemberscouncils.com/caspecial/la50banbarrett.shtml

so what did he do?

Boycott California.
Is holding their equipment that they sent back to him for servicing for ransom.
Wrote a metric fuckton of angry letters to everyone concerned.


but now he's gone one step furter; He's invented a new cartridge which makes all .50 rifles California Legal again. Basically it's a .49 bulet on a necked down .50 BMG case. can't find anything on it right now, save for a little thread on /k/chan that's no longer around.

this tickles me to no end.


You see, this law only bans weapons chambered for .50, so anything smaller is perfectly fine.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Lothar Hex
Member Avatar
Illogical
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Seems like a complete fucking arrogant prick to me. How the FUCK is this a good thing?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Felix
Member Avatar
Propagandist
[ *  *  * ]
No offence, but if people want to play with rifles, can't they just join the army, instead of putting other people's lives at risk?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Hercule Pyro
Member Avatar
You've done some terrible things, Mister Harry
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Major Maxillary,Jan 27 2006
05:46 AM
Is holding their equipment that they sent back to him for servicing for ransom.

So he's illegally holding onto their gear to make a point?

Key word being "illegally".
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Major Maxillary
Member Avatar
Anarcho-Fascist
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Lothar Hex,Jan 27 2006
11:38 AM
Seems like a complete fucking arrogant prick to me. How the FUCK is this a good thing?

Because the law in question is rediculous. It outlaws something just because "People don't need it." Yeah, I don't really need a rifle that can shoot out to over a mile and turn coyotes into red vapor, but who the hell are these people to say I can't have it? I also have a shitload of games I don't need on a computer I don't need which also has more porn on it that i could ever masterbate to. does that mean I shouldn't have any of it? People go and buy huge assed cars that can scale mountains and only use it to commute to work. who are we to say they shouldn't be allowed the biggest house, the fastest car, and the nicest things just because they don't need it?

Then there's the whole "terrorists could use this weapon to damage [railcars/planes], or criminals could use it against us!" which is pretty much bullshit.

The gun itself costs about the same as a car, and the ammo is at the cheapest $5 a round. noone has ever been able to shoot a plane down with it, nor could anyone damage a railcar which is designed to survive a head on collision with another train.

Also, in the history of this gun it has only ever been used against US agents on our home soil once. In Waco, Tx, against an aluminum hulled Bradley, the Bradley survived.

And trust me, The people who advocated this bill are even bigger pricks.


@felix: .50 rifles are used for competition shooting and big game hunting, neither of which you can do while in the Army. well, you can, but you need to be off duity, and they don't let you take the guns home.


@East: He's refusing buisiness on the grounds that they passed a rediculous, unconstitutional law using a rifle that He sold them for police use as the centerpeice. The M82 was already illegal in California due to it's detachable ten-round magazine and pistol grip, which classifies it as an "Assault weapon." And since I haven't heard of anyone trying to use their governmental authority to force him to give the rifle back, I think it's safe to assume it's not illegal.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Legion
Member Avatar
Mongrel Student
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Yes, but porn and games aren't designed to kill things, are they? Well, porn's debatable... :P

The only use a gun has is to shoot things. The main use for a gun is to kill things. All right in the Army. (Well, 'all right' in the loosest sense of the phrase), but I can see no reason for your average Joe to be alllowed to wander around with their own personal armoury.

The self-defence thing is bunk. If someone comes at you with a gun, then chances are they don't want to use it. Your average thief isn't some crazed psychopath. The gun's merely a tool to instill fear into people to make them more malleable. If the guy comes at you, and you pull a gun, then chances are he's going to blow your face off. Because however much the guy may not want to use it, if he thinks you're going to shoot him, he's going to shoot you to save himself, isn't he?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
PoisonedAl
Member Avatar
Better then you.
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Lothar Hex,Jan 27 2006
11:38 AM
Seems like a complete fucking arrogant prick to me. How the FUCK is this a good thing?

You forget Americans have extremely small penises and have a desperate need to make up for it. If they don't get to play with big guns, they are reminded that their idea of a sex aid is a pair of tweezers.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rawkko
Member Avatar
Closet furry
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
I admit the bullet re-designing is a good idea to keep the gun legal but WHAT THE HELL FOR? Its a fucking gun for christ sake, if you want killing power get a fucking blade they've worked flawlessly for the past 2000 years.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Major Maxillary
Member Avatar
Anarcho-Fascist
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Legion
 
Yes, but porn and games aren't designed to kill things, are they? Well, porn's debatable... :P


The anti .50 ban isn't about killing, it's about nessesity. they say that since you don't need something, you shouldn't have it.


Legion
 
I can see no reason for your average Joe to be alllowed to wander around with their own personal armoury.[/qhote]

???
Posted Image

You're perspective of the issue is really screwed up. I have an M1 carbine, you know where it is most the time? In my closet. The only time I take it out of the house is to go to the range. infact, carrying any weapon ouut in the open here will pretty much get you arrestes by the SWAT team.

and you can't walk around with a .50 rifle, either. they're on average five feet long, and quite a few are about 35 pounds.


Legion
 
The self-defence thing is bunk. If someone comes at you with a gun, then chances are they don't want to use it.


So because someone isn't willing to shoot you dead you shouldn't have a way of geting them to back off? how do you know that the person shoving that glock in your face isn't willing to pull the trigger?


Legion
 
Your average thief isn't some crazed psychopath. The gun's merely a tool to instill fear into people to make them more malleable. If the guy comes at you, and you pull a gun, then chances are he's going to blow your face off. Because however much the guy may not want to use it, if he thinks you're going to shoot him, he's going to shoot you to save himself, isn't he?


That's your excuse for forcing people to be at the mercy of armed thugs?

Way back in the day, when Klan raiders started harrassing free blacks, you know what they used? guns. you know what the free black used to drive the raiders off? guns.

During this one chicago riot not too long ago, rioters dragged folk out of their cars and homes, beating them half to death. I can guarentee you that Mor than a few broke down someone's front door only to find that they were staring down the barrel of a shotgun, or looked in the window of a sedan to see the person holding a 9mm.

The simple fact is, Americans are violent. always have been, always will be. We're the ones that kill, not our tools. It may be horrible to take a life, but it's even worse to allow someone to take a life by removing what is too often the victim's only effective defensive tool.


Quote:
 
I admit the bullet re-designing is a good idea to keep the gun legal but WHAT THE HELL FOR? Its a fucking gun for christ sake, if you want killing power get a fucking blade they've worked flawlessly for the past 2000 years



Yep, blades worked great for over 2000 years.
Posted Image
then we perfected guns.
Posted Image

This isn't about simply keeping big assed guns legal, it's about proving a point. prohibition doesn't work. At least not in America.

I know you guys don't understand why it's so damn important for john Q American to keep an AR50 in his Garage, but try to bear with me.

Our nation's founders wrote the second amendment into the constitution for two fundamental reasons;
1. So that Americans would never again have to suffer foreign tyranny.
2. So the Government would always know where it's power really lay.


Alot of people say that "It's not an individual right" but according to the supreme cout it is. and it's their job to interperet the constitution. so their say in the matter is more or less final.

What California is doing is frivoulous and unconstitutional. and therefore people like Ronnie Barrett are fighting them because that's what We do. we fight against those who would strip us of our liberty. this isn't about a gun, it's about our principles, and our right to buy unessisary luxuries to occupy our time.


And that's what brings me to wanting to tell you all about it. because it's funny as hell when you turn off your "ZOMG GUNZ R TEH EBIL!1" reflex.

California bans .50 caliber bullets.
Ronnie barrett starts making .49 bullets to piss them off.
all America waits for .49 bullet ban.
Rinse, repeat.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Lothar Hex
Member Avatar
Illogical
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Major Maxillary,Jan 27 2006
05:23 PM
1. So that Americans would never again have to suffer foreign tyranny.
2. So the Government would always know where it's power really lay.

1) You have something called the Military which stops that, and frankly if THAT gets it's arse handed to it, I somehow doubt a few average cuitizens with guns is gonna worry an army that just spanked yours.

2) You mean with the Fundamentalist Christians? Cos it sure ain't the average people.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Major Maxillary
Member Avatar
Anarcho-Fascist
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
you'd be surprised what a handful of armed citizens can do when properly motivated. also, at the time there was no standing army, just the militia.

No, mister pessemist. the power lies with the people as a whole. If the people don't like what the government does, they don't put up with it. they rettition the government and say "Hey, we don't like that!" if enough people agree then whatever they're pissed off about it changes.


Remember, I'm talking about way back when we had just thrown off British rule. those were the two primary reasons for the second ammendment. since then there have been more that people applied to it, but the first reasons were those stated.


Nowadays, as Justice Alex Kozinski said, “The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed—where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.”
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Lothar Hex
Member Avatar
Illogical
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Major Maxillary,Jan 27 2006
05:44 PM
you'd be surprised what a handful of armed citizens can do when properly motivated. also, at the time there was no standing army, just the militia.

No, mister pessemist. the power lies with the people as a whole. If the people don't like what the government does, they don't put up with it. they rettition the government and say "Hey, we don't like that!" if enough people agree then whatever they're pissed off about it changes.

Hmm, armed citizens versus tanks, helicopters, jet fighters, properly trained soldiers...etc. Yes, how foolish of me to think that Bob from New York can't take these guys on.

If the people don't like what the government does, explain why troops are still in Iraq are still there despite a majority of Americans thinking they should be at home. Explain why George Bush is still in power DESPITE doing worse things than fuckign Nixon?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rawkko
Member Avatar
Closet furry
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Major Maxillary,Jan 27 2006
05:23 PM
Yep, blades worked great for over 2000 years.
Posted Image
then we perfected guns.
Posted Image

Kill joy :<_<: I would have thrown the knives being in their position, Touche Maxillary :P
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Lothar Hex
Member Avatar
Illogical
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Rawkko,Jan 27 2006
06:05 PM
Major Maxillary,Jan 27 2006
05:23 PM
Yep, blades worked great for over 2000 years.
Posted Image
then we perfected guns.
Posted Image

Kill joy :<_<: I would have thrown the knives being in their position, Touche Maxillary :P

"Never bring a knife to a gun fight".

Rawkko, your arguements crap, stop talking.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Felix
Member Avatar
Propagandist
[ *  *  * ]
Since this is a forum for a British webcomic, it's quite likely that not many people with agree with you on gun control, Major Maxillary.

But still, liberalism can't be used as an excuse. Liberty does not mean allowing people to do whatever the fuck they want, it's about protecting individuals liberties from attack from others. The .50 rifle may well be a hunting weapon, but that won't stop it being used to kill someone else. If Americans need guns to protect themselves, then frankly you need a much more improved police force.

Guns don't kil, people do. But the gun really makes it alot easier.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Rawkko
Member Avatar
Closet furry
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Sorry bout' that, I got abit off topic with that. What I meant with the whole knife thing is that there are tons of weapons out there that can be used instead (though not as powerful). The way you put it, it doesn't sound like it'd be that deadly if used against a vehicle but it could definately rip someone apart. I agree with its use as a hunting gun and there's are no way of controlling which people could get this gun or not so its kinda worthless arguing about it being legal or not, either way I've already made an ass outta myself so I'm done with this subject. And this thing is roughly five feet long, who would go to all the trouble of lugging it around to go hunting anyway when there are slightly less powerful rifles that arent as bothersome.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Major Maxillary
Member Avatar
Anarcho-Fascist
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Felix,Jan 27 2006
06:12 PM
Since this is a forum for a British webcomic, it's quite likely that not many people with agree with you on gun control, Major Maxillary.

But still, liberalism can't be used as an excuse. Liberty does not mean allowing people to do whatever the fuck they want, it's about protecting individuals liberties from attack from others. The .50 rifle may well be a hunting weapon, but that won't stop it being used to kill someone else. If Americans need guns to protect themselves, then frankly you need a much more improved police force.

Guns don't kil, people do. But the gun really makes it alot easier.

That's all true, except the job of the police is to maintain order, and to enforce the law. no federal agency has my, yours, or anyone else's personal safety as their soul purpose, or even a teritiary objective.

five to thirty minutes is the time most people have to wait for police to show up. anything can happen in that time.


And i belive you're the third person in a year to call me a liberal.


the big thing about why anti gun laws are bullshit, is because only people who respect the law obey it. you think a criminal would care if he was breaking the law by using a gun?

Liberty isn't doing whatever the fuck you want, but it is doing whatever the fuck you want within reason. Nobody is hurt when you blast the crap out of an old waching machine a mile away on your property out int the middle of nowhere, nobody is hurt when you shot a deer, except the deer, and nobody is hurt when you punch holes through paper.

Also, name one instance in the last twenty years where a .50 rifle was used by one civillian to kill another outsid of war. Have you ever seen a fifty caliber rifle up close? it's friggin huge, kicks like a pissed off donkey, and is only useful when you're sitting a mile away. it's easier to just use a pistol if you want to kill someone. and then you have the argument where a person can use a .50 to assasinate someone, wich can be done with any rifle, becasue there are a couple civillian hunting rounds that are far more powerful than the .50 BMG, and completely unregulated.

You can focus on the negative stuff all you want, but that doesn't mean the positive should be ignored.


But really this isn't about the guns alone. this thread is supposed to be about the retarded attempts at prohibition, and laughing as people find ways around it.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Lothar Hex
Member Avatar
Illogical
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
You can focus on the negative stuff all you want, but that doesn't mean the positive should be ignored.


Yeah, I'd love to hear the "positive" things about letting every one in the country have a gun. Most of the time it's just protection from other people who have them. If there were less guns readily available in the country, gun crime would go down. Even the "illegal" guns most criminals use were made and bought perfectly legally at one point.

Britain once let a few too many people have guns, and a few stupid things happened. Then we took them away again, and the stupid things stopped happening. American citizens don't need guns at all, they just like having them.

Your comment about criminals has relevance to Britain as well, they don't "obey" the laws regarding those either. But most of them don't bother with or them either because the average citizens don't have them. The Kray twins, Britain's most notorious gangsters, were invovled in armed robberies yes, but most of the time they just went round and beat the absolute shit out of people.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Major Maxillary
Member Avatar
Anarcho-Fascist
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Lothar Hex,Jan 27 2006
06:00 PM
If the people don't like what the government does, explain why troops are still in Iraq are still there despite a majority of Americans thinking they should be at home. Explain why George Bush is still in power DESPITE doing worse things than fuckign Nixon?

There are plenty of examples where the superior technology and arsenal of a modern army turns out to be not very superior at all when going up against a motivated guerilla movement.


The majority does like what is going on.

the troops are still overseas because we stil have a job to do.

You're confusing the vocal minority with the silent majority. squeaky wheel gets the grease and all that.

Bush is still in OFFICE because he was reelected for a second term.



Lothar Hex,Jan 27 2006
06:46 PM
If there were less guns readily available in the country, gun crime would go down.


And if wishes were horses Beggars would ride. In a perfect world There wouldn't be any guns, and nobody would have them. however. There's got to be at least fifteen guns in this country for every man, woman, child, and dog. Our firearms manufacturers make the majority of their profits from civillians, the various firearm activities from skeet shooting to Sqirrel Hunting to gunfighting is deeply ingrained in our culture, we're so industrialized that just about anyone can have a fully stocked metalshop in their backyard, and the materials to produce guns and ammo are cheap and readily available.

There is alot of simmilarity between guns and alcohol. Back in the twenties, people saw all the horrible things that folks were doing after getting tanked, so they went campaigning with axes, bibles, and crazy propaganda to get the government to ban booze. that didn't work out so well. You see, while alcohol itself was outlawed, the materials needed to make it weren't. so all prohibition meant was that you couldn't buy it from the store. you could still set up a distillery in your basement reall easy, buy a bag of corn or rice or barley, run it through, and you'd get something that would only maybe kill you. hell, alot of people still distill their own whiskey, brew their own beer, or ferment their own wine. Nowadays It's only illegal if you try to sell any of it without a license.

That's how it's always been here in America; The easier something is to make, the harder it is to keep it away from us. and if something's banned we will want it more.

Lothar Hex,Jan 27 2006
06:46 PM
American citizens don't need guns at all, they just like having them.


Exactly.


Lothar Hex,Jan 27 2006
06:46 PM
Even the "illegal" guns most criminals use were made and bought perfectly legally at one point.


Most are stolen, others are imported/smuggled from places like China or just plain smuggled into the country, some are sld from old ass stockpiles, and the rest(almost none) are home made.


Lothar Hex,Jan 27 2006
06:46 PM
But most of them don't bother with or them either because the average citizens don't have them.


Of course, why use something when you don't need it and will only make you stand out?

Lothar Hex,Jan 27 2006
06:46 PM
The Kray twins, Britain's most notorious gangsters, were invovled in armed robberies yes...


Who?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Evil Cleric
Member Avatar
Awakened, but asleep
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
PoisonedAl,Jan 27 2006
03:34 PM
Lothar Hex,Jan 27 2006
11:38 AM
Seems like a complete fucking arrogant prick to me. How the FUCK is this a good thing?

You forget Americans have extremely small penises and have a desperate need to make up for it. If they don't get to play with big guns, they are reminded that their idea of a sex aid is a pair of tweezers.

Wow, what a mature way to make an argument. Dude, if you have to say something that you think needs to be said, say it without acting like a complete ass. If you want to join in the argument at least have some solid reason's why you do or do not agree. Everyone else here has managed to make good arguments, except you. So if you just have to say something on the argument do so without insulting me and my fellow countrymen. :angry:
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
demishock
Member Avatar
Natural Selection
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Barrett's seems like a perfectly decent argument to me. He makes 'em, he ought to be able keep them on hold from anyone who's using them improperly. If he was giving them out to civilians out of spite, then I'd say he was being an ass, but since he's just withholding it, not so much. I think he's entitled to try and protect the reputation of his own product, even if it is a gun.

As for the banning itself... sounds pretty pointless. As he mentioned in that letter, their taxes are being spent on the legislation for the ban, which personally, I think is a waste of money just to ban one specific kind of gun that's never been used in a crime before. In fact, by banning it, they're just drawing unnecessary attention to the fact that it was even out there on the market to start with.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Lothar Hex
Member Avatar
Illogical
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Evil Cleric,Jan 27 2006
08:44 PM
PoisonedAl,Jan 27 2006
03:34 PM
Lothar Hex,Jan 27 2006
11:38 AM
Seems like a complete fucking arrogant prick to me. How the FUCK is this a good thing?

You forget Americans have extremely small penises and have a desperate need to make up for it. If they don't get to play with big guns, they are reminded that their idea of a sex aid is a pair of tweezers.

Wow, what a mature way to make an argument. Dude, if you have to say something that you think needs to be said, say it without acting like a complete ass. If you want to join in the argument at least have some solid reason's why you do or do not agree. Everyone else here has managed to make good arguments, except you. So if you just have to say something on the argument do so without insulting me and my fellow countrymen. :angry:

I happen to agree and respect Al, so shut it.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Fat Man
Member Avatar
Re-enacters answer to the armoured company
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
So its now Good when people twist laws to get thier own way

does that make me getting a shotgun lisence then sitting out my frontdoor with a 72 pounder cannon good i think not or for that matter a 72" deck gun formally mounted on a battle ship

Still if I wanted a gun for home defense I'd personally go for a no.8 bolt action .22 caliber brain mincer (bullete goes in head but it dont come out)

Just out of intreast anyone know the last time the american army won a war without any help.

Quote:
 
Remember, I'm talking about way back when we had just thrown off British rule
COMMON MISCONCEPTION

the american cival war was won by a french general who personally arse-rapped the english fleet who were bringing reinforcements for the south.

Oh and last time I cheacked it English Rule since we scotts were fighting with you damn yanks for big chunks of it.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
demishock
Member Avatar
Natural Selection
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Fat Man,Jan 27 2006
07:05 PM
Quote:
 
Remember, I'm talking about way back when we had just thrown off British rule
COMMON MISCONCEPTION

the american cival war was won by a french general who personally arse-rapped the english fleet who were bringing reinforcements for the south.

*blinks slowly* Okay, I think you're getting the wars a bit confused...

The war during which we "had just thrown off British rule" and "a french general ... personally arse-rapped the english fleet" was the (American) Revolutionary War, not the (American) Civil War.

But you're kind of leaving out the bit after the naval battle where the Americans and the French defeated Cornwallis at Yorktown and then the English government decided to stop the fighting.

So no, we didn't win by ourselves, but it wasn't JUST the Americans or the French who won it, and most certainly not just ONE person.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
HunteRS
Member Avatar
Power is all that is needed.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
Since this is a forum for a British webcomic, it's quite likely that not many people with agree with you on gun control, Major Maxillary


True-but I here in Scotland do. I have enjoy shooting since about 9 (or earlier if you count water pistols.) Now Dunblane was a tradgedy-but as far as I remember it was later proved the nuts weapons were bought illegally. So the government decided to make gun ownnership more sifficult. What's happened since then? British Gun crime IS rising (check the National crime stats if you don't believe me.)
Maybe a .50 cal bullet is a bit excessive to defend yourself but Americans will always believe they will have the right to bear weapons from Flick knives to Rocket launchers. Banning a certain type of bullet is really just a petty attempt to win votes from the anti-gun lobby. Good job-now what about finally banning Dum-dums?

Quote:
 
And i belive you're the third person in a year to call me a liberal.


Actually the nastiest insult up on Capitol Hill is to call someone a 'liberal'. Don't ask me why-maybe Americans are still genetically programmed to think Liberty=Commies!!


Quote:
 
There are plenty of examples where the superior technology and arsenal of a modern army turns out to be not very superior at all when going up against a motivated guerilla movement.


Hmmm..vietnam per chance?

It doesn't technically matter. Major, your point is that by removing the right to buy .50 cal bullets and guns the American is having is right to bear arms violated. Not really. America=capitalism where consumer choice is king. There are plenty of other and indeed messier ways to defend your home. Everyone else is basically saying guns=teh bad. Your right. They are nasty implements of death. But most people don't use them like that. Most enjoy them for practising thier skills or have an antique intrest in them. The arguement seems suspiciously Jack Thompsonish ie Games are whats making these kids kill-take them away. Replace Game with Gun and you get your argument. People who kill others often do so out of either A) passion or B)Being emotion fucked (like my good self.) Guns make it easier to kill people? So do arms, legs and people just being people in thier attitudes.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The CABAL Network · Next Topic »
Locked Topic