[Rob Instigator]

people die all the time. it's what we do.
we are born then we live and then we die.

if a dad killed his child while cleaning a gun then that is his fucking fault, not the gun's fault. only a brain dead moron cleans a loaded gun.

[Rob Instigator]

"common sense" is the delusions people live by when thye choose not to actually analyze the situations.


"Common sense is the collections of prejudices acquired by age 18" - Albert Einstein

"common sense" is the phrase used y people who wishe to have you believe what they beleive. it is "common" to them and those that think like them.


gun ownership is "common sense" in the inner city

gun control/restriction is "common sense" to those who have no need for guns.

"common sense" tells us the world is flat you know...

"common sense" was why everyone just assumed that white europeans are the highest evolved humans, and why africans were the closest to the base animals and therefore lesser creatures in the eyes of "god"

fuck common sense.

[knox]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

people die all the time. it's what we do.
we are born then we live and then we die.

if a dad killed his child while cleaning a gun then that is his fucking fault, not the gun's fault. only a brain dead moron cleans a loaded gun.

so why give a shit, that's what you're saying. do you really understand what you're saying? because i'm honestly shocked with what your post seems to imply.

I kind of think you wouldn't have the same attitude if any of this affected you or any of your loved ones, but is that how things ended up being? is it so individualistic that you can't be bothered trying to pretend you care about other people's lives?

people die all the time - wtf is that supposed to mean?

should brain dead morons have guns? as a RIGHT? i think that's kind of like the point some people are trying to make.

[Glice]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

people die all the time. it's what we do.
we are born then we live and then we die.

if a dad killed his child while cleaning a gun then that is his fucking fault, not the gun's fault. only a brain dead moron cleans a loaded gun.

Only a brain-dead constitution not just allows but actively encourages a state's brain-dead citizens to possess something with which they might accidentally kill their son. It's still not the same as cars. Or knives. Or tobacco. Or jaunty dancing.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Glice

Only a brain-dead constitution not just allows but actively encourages a state's brain-dead citizens to possess something with which they might accidentally kill their son. It's still not the same as cars. Or knives. Or tobacco. Or jaunty dancing.

the constitution doesn't actively encourage-- it says "the right of the people to bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED".

but there's the whole militia clause. read it. the interpretation is not in the constitution itself, it's in the supreme court and how 9 judges read that thing.

no states that i know have a militia. there's the national guard, but that's a military thing done by civilians who serve once a month, then get conscripted into going to the middle east (sucks.)

switzerland on the other hand has a well-regulated militia. i mean the whole country is an army, not just with their little red knives but they all have automatic weapons at home.

so it's not the guns.

it's the social inequities, the gangs (half of the murders in LA are gang related-- dealers battling for turf), poverty, saturday night specials (cheap guns for quickie crimes), robberies and muggings and carjackings and drugs, mostly. then again saturday night specials are used for self-defense by poor people in high-crime neighborhoods...

maybe guns in a country with such income disparities is a bad mix but it's not one that was created on purpose and it's certainly difficult to disassemble in this political climate. because the greater the unrest, the more people want their guns.

here it's knives that get a bad reputation by the way. "a thug's weapon". guns are gentlemanly & honorable. back home in my 3rd world ghetto guns are considered a weapon of cowards-- you wanna kill someone you get close to them & do the deed. but here, no-- it's a different ethos.

all countries have their own problems. why don't we start criticizing england's horrible class structure and how people keep you in place by your accent. the government should ban social classes. ha ha ha!

ok, though i'd like to see guns more regulated & traceable to owners, it's inconceivable that the american government will ban guns in the foreseeable future. it shows a lack of imagination for foreigners to make such comments, i.e., assuming that all societies and governments are the same. kinda like the argument against banning burqas in france-- americans don't get it that the french do it in the name of equality. etc. etc.

anyway, some of the best guns are european-- berettas, glocks, kalashnikov rifles...

i guess the best one could hope for is that the country one lives in is a good fit for one's values. the idea of a world government and the homogenization of social life may be appealing, but only on the surface.

anyway, i've argued long enough and i'm tired. agree to disagree, etc.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

maybe guns in a country with such income disparities is a bad mix but it's not one that was created on purpose

thats not entirely accurate, a lot of the economic and political disparities are especially intentional, it benefits the businesses, the police state and the military industrial complex.

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

gun control/restriction is "common sense" to those who have no need for guns.

no my brother you got it all twisted.. those of us intimately acquanted with both guns and especially the threat of gun violence all are intuitively and deeply aware that there is no need for a gun. It is not those people who are safe and unexperienced with gun violence who believe in gun control, in fact most people who have never dealt with the trauma of gun violence first hand are the first to have no problems with gun ownership, it is those of us who have been shot at, who have friends and family with bullet holes, and who have had to bury our folks in the cemeteries, we are the ones who are truly against guns and it is indeed common sense to us that they are useless tools of devastation and human destruction

tear drops and closed caskets..

[Glice]

I don't care what the constitution says, to be honest, but I've heard plenty of Americans yark on about it to the point where what it actually says and what it effectively means seem legions apart.

The thing with abolishing the class structure is that there's no actual part of British law that says anything about it. It's engrained in our collective psyche, it's not a physical object like a gun.

It is the guns, but it's the guns in the culture. Like you say, the Swiss don't have a problem, because they're treated like adults. You heavily restrict the guns and America still has massive social disparity problems, but they don't manifest those problems in frequent homicides.

I know there's a big point to be made about non-Americans commenting on a culture they don't understand, but on the other hand, it genuinely baffles the rest of the world. The English have cricket, but that doesn't kill people.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

thats not entirely accurate, a lot of the economic and political disparities are especially intentional, it benefits the businesses, the police state and the military industrial complex.

what im saying is that the constitution doesn't say that the people shall live in ghettos where pistols shall abound. i'm answering to "retarded constitution". context, man. ok i gotta get off the computer--enjoy the evening.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by Glice

I don't care what the constitution says, to be honest, but I've heard plenty of Americans yark on about it to the point where what it actually says and what it effectively means seem legions apart.

exactly, for all intents and purposes, the constitution used to acknowledge Africans as 3/5 a human being (and that was only men, african women weren't human at all, but strictly property)
I have never honored the constitution for shit, I'd sooner wipe my ass with it then respect as it has been and still remains a facade of idealism and a bunch of lies written by a bunch of crooks who only intended to dupe us into allowing the to reign over us in the veiled guise of a supposed democracy..

It is the guns, but it's the guns in the culture. Like you say, the Swiss don't have a problem, because they're treated like adults. You heavily restrict the guns and America still has massive social disparity problems, but they don't manifest those problems in frequent homicides.

exactly. the laws and legislation are not the problem, it is the social climate and societal norms and behaviors that support and even demand such legislation. With arizona sb1070, it was not the law itself that is the problem, it is the climate of fervent racism and xenophobia with supports such a proposition in the first place, and even though the feds shut it down, the racism remains virulent and is in fact even more dangerous than before because it has been instigated towards more action..

in america you must change the climate where americans feel they need to have guns for safety and security, when in reality those guns are the very thing which threatens the safety of the people. as long as the people want and believe they have to have guns, then they will continue to have the opportunities to shoot each other over misunderstandings and over-reactions..

[knox]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

thats not entirely accurate, a lot of the economic and political disparities are especially intentional, it benefits the businesses, the police state and the military industrial complex.


no my brother you got it all twisted.. those of us intimately acquanted with both guns and especially the threat of gun violence all are intuitively and deeply aware that there is no need for a gun. It is not those people who are safe and unexperienced with gun violence who believe in gun control, in fact most people who have never dealt with the trauma of gun violence first hand are the first to have no problems with gun ownership, it is those of us who have been shot at, who have friends and family with bullet holes, and who have had to bury our folks in the cemeteries, we are the ones who are truly against guns and it is indeed common sense to us that they are useless tools of devastation and human destruction

tear drops and closed caskets..

Once again, you're right. We the ones who have had to see that kind of like on a daily basis are the ones saying it's enough of this. We - the ones more vulnerable to have a gun pointed at us (and I DID more than once) are the ones saying it would be WORSE if I had one.

i guess most of us who live in a constant terror of what guns can REALLY do just wish there could be less and less of that.

So I guess what I'm saying is that it's easy to talk about how "EVERYONE DIES THATS WHAT THEY DO" when you're not REALLY worried you're the next.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by knox

Once again, you're right. We the ones who have had to see that kind of like on a daily basis are the ones saying it's enough of this. We - the ones more vulnerable to have a gun pointed at us (and I DID more than once) are the ones saying it would be WORSE if I had one.

i guess most of us who live in a constant terror of what guns can REALLY do just wish there could be less and less of that.

amen.

the problem is that people have to have been confronted with gun violence to understand it, and that is a tragedy in an of itself, because I don't want anyone to have to deal with it PERIOD, let alone just to prove a point. I'll keep my skeletons in the closet on this one, but from my own direct experience, guns in all their aspects fucking suck.

[knox]

suchfriends,

i love you.







(but you're still white, sorry).

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Glice

The thing with abolishing the class structure is that there's no actual part of British law that says anything about it. It's engrained in our collective psyche, it's not a physical object like a gun

brutherford--

just popped back to say this is EXACTLY what you're missing. the gun is engrained in the collective american psyche-- it cannot be legislated out!

right now, in virginia, it is legal to pack a gun in the open. so people are walking around like it's the wild west. it makes people uncomfortable (it would make me uncomfortable as fuck if i'm on a bus and some random dude comes in with a 9mm pistol on a holster), but that's the fucking state law AND the ethos of a large part of the public.

it took me a long time to understand this, especially living in a big city in the east, until i moved out west & saw people handle guns on a regular basis. my wife's parent's house is a small fucking arsenal. there's a magnum revolver, a 12 or 14 gauge shotgun, various rifles, a musket... when my wife left for college her dad gave her a little one-shot 22 to carry with her.

anyway, remember this: engrained in the psyche. it's like the english and their tea. i know it sounds nuts and incomprehensible but it's unthinkable to ban guns in america, and regulation is becoming difficult.

i do strongly favor tighter regulation and registration. there are background checks required for gun purchases but the problem is that there is a "gun show loophole"-- you can basically walk into a fair-like market & walk out ready for civil war. but the open carry law of virginia (there are other states) is a different story-- and the movement is actually gaining ground all over the place. you can have a legal registered gun out in the open.

have some fun looking at the yahoos: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_ca..._United_States

yes i agree with you it's "crazy" but remember: engrained in the psyche

only then you can begin to comprehend what this is about

ps here a little video
http://channel.nationalgeographic.co...ideos/06195_00

[GeneticKiss]

Like I said before, the second someone starts talking about gun ownership as privilege (as it should be) instead of a right, in some people's mind's you're fucking with Mom, the flag, and apple pie. If a politician did this, they'd either be blacklisted by their political party or assassinated by some gun nut.

I sympathize with suchfriend's plight, but at the same time if someone was shooting at me or my friends/family, I'd want the chance to shoot back. Guns aren't the problem; violence is. Eliminate the causes of violence and this thread wouldn't have a reason to exist.

And I agree with Rob that the dumbass who ended up killing his kid because his gun went off while he was cleaning it was a moron. Remember what I was talking about earlier regarding "responsible" gun ownership? Cleaning a loaded gun while your kid is in the room certainly isn't responsible.

[Glice]

I think it's a very weak form of politics that can't propose to alter a culture. Looking to GB, there's a load of things that were engrained in our psyche that have been eroded. We don't actually drink the tea of the stereotype, that's an imperialist-era hangover. Pub culture until about ten years ago was smoking, fighting, pub games and largely woman-less; thanks to a series of Labour legislation changes around health and booze taxation, a pub's more likely to be a bistro type affair with free wi-fi and young mothers drinking shit 'Italian' coffee in the afternoons than it is somewhere for men to go and complain about their Missus.

Similarly, British football culture is very different now. Thanks to a more sophisticated policing of crowds, seated stadia and more punitive measures for football violence, the idea of going to a game for a fight with the other team is severely diminished. There are still remnants, but it's by no means what it was in the 60s and 70s; further, football crowds are no longer primarily populated by working class men.

I would entirely agree that altering gun culture in America isn't going to happen soon; I wouldn't agree that it's impossible. If we take my example of pubs, it is possible to remove fetishised objects like cigarettes from an 'engrained' culture; they'll still stick around in some form, but smoking levels and related health problems have been severely reduced thanks to the (EU-imposed) smoking ban.

I don't think it even requires any notion of changes being 'radical' - health care reform is finally moving in the States - it's not an ideal system, but it is a definite step in the right direction. It's taken a strong leader with a lot of popular support to force through those changes, and they're not as huge as I think the left would've liked, but things can change. So far as I can make out, in spite of a fairly large public and political resistance to health care reform, they have taken place and no-one has rioted.

[Glice]

I think it's a very weak form of politics that can't propose to alter a culture. Looking to GB, there's a load of things that were engrained in our psyche that have been eroded. We don't actually drink the tea of the stereotype, that's an imperialist-era hangover. Pub culture until about ten years ago was smoking, fighting, pub games and largely woman-less; thanks to a series of Labour legislation changes around health and booze taxation, a pub's more likely to be a bistro type affair with free wi-fi and young mothers drinking shit 'Italian' coffee in the afternoons than it is somewhere for men to go and complain about their Missus.

Similarly, British football culture is very different now. Thanks to a more sophisticated policing of crowds, seated stadia and more punitive measures for football violence, the idea of going to a game for a fight with the other team is severely diminished. There are still remnants, but it's by no means what it was in the 60s and 70s; further, football crowds are no longer primarily populated by working class men.

I would entirely agree that altering gun culture in America isn't going to happen soon; I wouldn't agree that it's impossible. If we take my example of pubs, it is possible to remove fetishised objects like cigarettes from an 'engrained' culture; they'll still stick around in some form, but smoking levels and related health problems have been severely reduced thanks to the (EU-imposed) smoking ban.

I don't think it even requires any notion of changes being 'radical' - health care reform is finally moving in the States - it's not an ideal system, but it is a definite step in the right direction. It's taken a strong leader with a lot of popular support to force through those changes, and they're not as huge as I think the left would've liked, but things can change. So far as I can make out, in spite of a fairly large public and political resistance to health care reform, they have taken place and no-one has rioted.

[knox]

Originally Posted by GeneticKiss

Eliminate the causes of violence and this thread wouldn't have a reason to exist.

And I agree with Rob that the dumbass who ended up killing his kid because his gun went off while he was cleaning it was a moron. Remember what I was talking about earlier regarding "responsible" gun ownership? Cleaning a loaded gun while your kid is in the room certainly isn't responsible.

But then you say EVERYONE has the RIGHT to have a gun, even total morons. Can you imagine what it sounds like to us? You're defending this guy's RIGHT to be a moron and purchase a gun and accidentaly kill his kid.

It's like you're focusing on the right of morons more than on the rights of people who are wounded and murdered.

You can't eliminate the causes of violence completely (perhaps eliminate the social causes of violence) but you just can't stop the human being from being violent. You guys seem to be ignoring the fact that the whole rest of the continent (especially poorer countries) is SUFFERING the consequences of your lack of regulation. Or the fact that the gun industry and its lobby is supporting a lot of shit.

I don't like that defeatist attitude: that's how it is. Well, homophobia is also ingrained in people's psyche but you have to allow gay couples to marry because that's the right thing to do. Things change.

If I'm living in a country where any jackass can buy and carry a gun, I am under threat, and it certainly wouldn't feel like living in a free democratic country. Suppose it doesn't matter because dead people can't vote.

We need to face this truth: the idea that someone will invade your house and shoot at your white family and you'll be able to save them and everyone will survive and the bad guys will be dead is too far-fetched and movie-like. Now the POORER communities that most of us don't even drive near by have a REAL number of people being killed, are under the control of criminal groups that impose their powers with the use of guns, have a lower life expectancy among young people. People are dying, lots of people are.

If I had to give up a 'right' to save some of them in the long term I certainly would.

[hevusa]

Originally Posted by knox

But then you say EVERYONE has the RIGHT to have a gun, even total morons.

That is because most gun owners are total paranoid morons. It takes one to know one.
Increased safety because everyone is carrying a gun ended with the wild west. But the republicans are too stupid to realize it.

[Dr. Eugene Felikson]

 

[GeneticKiss]

Originally Posted by knox

But then you say EVERYONE has the RIGHT to have a gun, even total morons. Can you imagine what it sounds like to us? You're defending this guy's RIGHT to be a moron and purchase a gun and accidentaly kill his kid.

It's like you're focusing on the right of morons more than on the rights of people who are wounded and murdered.

You can't eliminate the causes of violence completely (perhaps eliminate the social causes of violence) but you just can't stop the human being from being violent. You guys seem to be ignoring the fact that the whole rest of the continent (especially poorer countries) is SUFFERING the consequences of your lack of regulation. Or the fact that the gun industry and its lobby is supporting a lot of shit.

I don't like that defeatist attitude: that's how it is. Well, homophobia is also ingrained in people's psyche but you have to allow gay couples to marry because that's the right thing to do. Things change.

If I'm living in a country where any jackass can buy and carry a gun, I am under threat, and it certainly wouldn't feel like living in a free democratic country. Suppose it doesn't matter because dead people can't vote.

We need to face this truth: the idea that someone will invade your house and shoot at your white family and you'll be able to save them and everyone will survive and the bad guys will be dead is too far-fetched and movie-like. Now the POORER communities that most of us don't even drive near by have a REAL number of people being killed, are under the control of criminal groups that impose their powers with the use of guns, have a lower life expectancy among young people. People are dying, lots of people are.

If I had to give up a 'right' to save some of them in the long term I certainly would.

Please reread my post. I was saying douchebags like him are the LAST people on Earth who should be allowed to KNOW of guns' EXISTANCE, let alone be able to see, touch, or use them. My comment regarding thinking of gun ownership as a privilege instead of a right being seen as un-American is an observation based on fact, not some opinion of mine. If you're not an American, I'm sorry, but you don't really have a clear grasp of the role of guns in our culture. Now, there are a lot of things I don't like about our culture: contemporary country music; karaoke bars (yes, I know it comes from Japan but you have to admit Americans can bring it to new lows); pickup trucks, SUVs, and various other low-mileage vehicles (except muscle cars-those rule); and the idea of referring to a sport that involves minimal use of the feet as "football". But I enjoy a good gunfight in the movies, and even though I know in reality gun battles are anything but thrilling to anyone but the sick minded, I don't support the idea of banning firearms entirely. You can say it's naive, misguided, psychotic, or whatever, but I can tell you that I do know someone who successfully defended his home against an intruder a few years ago.