October 04, 2022, 08:23:20 PM
Forum Rules: Read This Before Posting


Topic: Gun Control  (Read 9293 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DrCMS

  • Chemist
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1287
  • Mole Snacks: +209/-81
  • Gender: Male
Re: Gun Control
« Reply #15 on: January 02, 2013, 06:03:09 AM »
If that article and the comments are a true reflection of your and America's views then I feel very sorry for you all and hope that one day you grow up. The 2nd amendment is a an anachronism that is now poisoning America and the thoughts that so many of the comments had that they needed a gun to defend themselves from their own government is just crazy.  Why are Americans so scared of everything?  I do not agree with what everything the UK Government is doing but I have never felt that I need a gun to make it better.

Offline 408

  • Chemist
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 796
  • Mole Snacks: +103/-30
Re: Gun Control
« Reply #16 on: January 02, 2013, 09:26:19 PM »
DrCMS:What is the leading non-natural cause of death in the 20th century?


Offline DrCMS

  • Chemist
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1287
  • Mole Snacks: +209/-81
  • Gender: Male
Re: Gun Control
« Reply #17 on: January 03, 2013, 06:25:13 AM »
@408 the answer to your odd question is Democide - but how many of those were in western democracies?  The answer to that is very very few, so stop taking bizarre examples that do not apply to America to try to prove your odd claim that Americans need assault weapons to protect themselves from their own democratically elected government.

Anyway it is infantile to think that if your government turned on you that a few guys with guns would make any difference at all.
If you could mobilise a large part of the country and get significant amounts of the police and army on your side then you might stand a chance in a fight but if you had that much support in a democratic country you would not need to fight.  If you had less support you would need to fight and like Ruby Ridge and Waco you'd lose.  So it is a stupid self defeating argument made by the kind of half wits who like to play with guns and screw everyone else.

Offline curiouscat

  • Chemist
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3005
  • Mole Snacks: +121/-35
Re: Gun Control
« Reply #18 on: January 03, 2013, 07:03:26 AM »
@DrCMS

I don't think 408's argument is as silly as that.

@408 the answer to your odd question is Democide - but how many of those were in western democracies?  The answer to that is very very few, so stop taking bizarre examples that do not apply to America to try to prove your odd claim that Americans need assault weapons to protect themselves from their own democratically elected government.

It's a bit of wishful thinking to think that a Western democracy could never take a turn for worse. People live much shorter lives than the life-span of a nation. Also, you can't really arm when you see things go bad. That's obviously too late.

Quote
Anyway it is infantile to think that if your government turned on you that a few guys with guns would make any difference at all.

A Few guys?  Forty-seven percent of American adults currently report that they have a gun in their home or elsewhere on their property. The numbers do vary quite a bit depending on what survey you use but it surely is more than "a few". 

Whether they can win an all out war against a determined army is a different story; but rebellions have historically always been a difficult matter.

Quote
If you could mobilise a large part of the country and get significant amounts of the police and army on your side then you might stand a chance in a fight but if you had that much support in a democratic country you would not need to fight. 


The problem is, history shows countries don't remain democratic in these messy situations.  Fights are fairly common. Even when a majority does not want a despotic ruler / government; he'll rarely graciously step down.


Quote
So it is a stupid self defeating argument made by the kind of half wits who like to play with guns and screw everyone else.

In spite of all I wrote I'm still pro-Gun-Control. Difference is, I don't think that all arguments of the other side are "stupid" ; just that it is ultimately a cost-benefit analysis. I do recognize the strong and compelling arguments against guns too (unlike the author of the Forbes piece that 408 linked to) and then make my choice.

It is indeed a more nuanced issue.  Ironically, Switzerland (which has never fought a war in 150 years) and most would think as a very safe nation has close to 4 million guns out there in a nation of only 8 million people.

Offline DrCMS

  • Chemist
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1287
  • Mole Snacks: +209/-81
  • Gender: Male
Re: Gun Control
« Reply #19 on: January 03, 2013, 07:48:35 AM »
It's a bit of wishful thinking to think that a Western democracy could never take a turn for worse. People live much shorter lives than the life-span of a nation. Also, you can't really arm when you see things go bad. That's obviously too late.

I'm not saying it could never ever happen but I think it is very very unlikely to be a problem I will ever have to deal with here in the UK or you will have to deal with in the USA. 

So the pro-gun argument goes that protect themselves against an event that is unlikely to effect anyone alive today you have to put up with multiple mass shooting per year that kill lots of people?  Having that "cure" so readily available is a lot lot worse than the disease.



Quote
Anyway it is infantile to think that if your government turned on you that a few guys with guns would make any difference at all.

A Few guys?  Forty-seven percent of American adults currently report that they have a gun in their home or elsewhere on their property. The numbers do vary quite a bit depending on what survey you use but it surely is more than "a few". 

Whether they can win an all out war against a determined army is a different story; but rebellions have historically always been a difficult matter.

I'm well aware of how many Americans think they need a gun to be a man but unless this uprising involves a very large amount of them it will not win against the US military and police forces.  If the uprising is that big that is could win or the army/police join it then something very wrong has happened to the country and a fire fight will not fix it.

The most likely uprising will be a few nutters on their own you do not agree with the rest of the country and they will always loose how ever they are armed because they do not have the numbers. So the 2nd Amendment militias argument is stupid infantile posturing by half wits.  It could never work in the modern world so why not just repel it and move on with a constitution that works in the modern world.

iLLuminatus104

  • Guest
Re: Gun Control
« Reply #20 on: January 26, 2013, 02:43:37 AM »
guns don't kill people...people kill people

i think it's short sighted to consider banning/placing more restrictions on gun sales. there are already many gun laws, we don't need more. we need to fix the people that make up the society. better education will yield more intelligent people, so my suggestion is to improve school systems and society will correct itself

more gun laws are just putting a bandaid on a stab wound. it won't fix anything and will create a greater schism between the government and citizens

Offline Borek

  • Mr. pH
  • Administrator
  • Deity Member
  • *
  • Posts: 27182
  • Mole Snacks: +1765/-406
  • Gender: Male
  • I am known to be occasionally wrong.
    • Chembuddy
Re: Gun Control
« Reply #21 on: January 27, 2013, 03:55:45 AM »
Unfortunately thread started to attract conspiracy theories freaks. I am locking it.
ChemBuddy chemical calculators - stoichiometry, pH, concentration, buffer preparation, titrations.info, pH-meter.info

Sponsored Links