[hevusa]

Originally Posted by FreshChops

This lead to his capture as well probably saved other lives aside from themselves.

Wow... now you are saying guns save lives. Fucking shallow and hideous if you ask me. The nuke at Hiroshima supposedly saved lives too. Now you are using reasoning like the US military. Congrats!

[Rob Instigator]

and even after all that abuse he just wanted to join a band and play folk music and he had FANS. many musicians in SoCal actually enjoyed Charlie Manson;s tunes, and many of them actually dicked him around promising record deals and even stealing his songs.

It just makes me sick that people think the "family" members who did the killin were under some sort of hypnotic mesmer that the evil charles manson was able to conjure u[p, as if he was alisteir crowley or something....Those fucks knew exactly what they were doing.

Yet the murderous bitches and assholes get more sympathy from the media and from regular idiots than ol charlie.

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by hevusa

Wow... now you are saying guns save lives. Fucking shallow and hideous if you ask me. The nuke at Hiroshima supposedly saved lives too. Now you are using reasoning like the US military. Congrats!

why do you think COPS carry guns? to SAVE LIVES/PROPERTY. that is the same RIGHT that every human being has as well, whether or not their country grants them that right.

[ploesj]

Originally Posted by FreshChops

My whole neighborhood owns guns. We're all different people, different walks of life, but all have guns. The key is, we're all law abiding people with wholesome morals.... thus is our privilage. I love the fact knowing we're all armed. It's our own form of "neighborhood watch". After Hurricane Katrina, we were all cut off from communication and there was a lot of crime, robbing and looting. Not in my neighborhood and not in any others where residents were armed.

i'm sure you and the people around you aren't the type of gun-wielding maniac, but don't you think there should be some sort of regulation on who gets to own a weapon and who doesn't? in my opinion, someone with a violent past or a history of depression and suicide attempts shouldn't be able to just get a weapon.

[Rob Instigator]

there is HEAVY regulation as to who owns a gun in th USA.

If you have ever been in a mental institution you cannot legally purchase a gun.

If you have ever been convicted of a felony you are nto allowed to legally purchase a gun

If you have been certified mentally deficient/retarted you are not allowed to purchase a gun.

You have to be an adult.

You ahve to have a registered driver's license and in many cases wait through a days-long waiting period while they check your background. It depends on the state.

of course, as we all know, anyone who wishes to buy ANYTHING illegally has the means to do so, for there exists a black market for anything and everything in any and every country in the world.

In japan it just costs a LOT more to get a gun illegally , so only the rich can afford personal firearms, and since the rich do no get stopped by cops routinely, no one will ever see they are breaking the law. The same is true in the UK.

[hevusa]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

why do you think COPS carry guns? to SAVE LIVES/PROPERTY. that is the same RIGHT that every human being has as well, whether or not their country grants them that right.

I'm cool with an organized force like the police having weapons, that makes sense. But I barely trust citizens to operate their cars properly... forget giving them weapons. It is an idiotic and archaic idea that directly leads to the U.S. being the world leader in gun violence *waves american flag*. Fucking RETARDED.

[FreshChops]

Originally Posted by hevusa

Wow... now you are saying guns save lives. Fucking shallow and hideous if you ask me. The nuke at Hiroshima supposedly saved lives too. Now you are using reasoning like the US military. Congrats!

If you can't see how the old couple having a gun saved their lives while encountering a knife wielding escaped murder which led to his capture, as well as prevented any other encounters to be had if he wasn't captured.... than I can't help you?

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by ploesj

i'm sure you and the people around you aren't the type of gun-wielding maniac, but don't you think there should be some sort of regulation on who gets to own a weapon and who doesn't? in my opinion, someone with a violent past or a history of depression and suicide attempts shouldn't be able to just get a weapon.

i agree with that, that guns should be licensed the way you get one to drive a car (this would require study and passing an exam on gun safety).

the only problem with that is that this is enshrined in the american constitution as a right, so you can't put a license on a right. you only need permits for conceal carry (e.g., packing a gun under your jacket wherever you go). this varies again by state to state. in virginia i think now you can carry guns in the open.

while driving is a privilege and not a right, owning a gun is a right and not a privilege, by the law of this land. the only people who are barred from owning guns are convicted felons.

peculiar, huh? but it is what it is... changing that culture in a country of over 310,000,000 people would be extremely hard. remember than unlike your own country, this beast is made of 50 mini-countries (many bigger than whole european countries) plus a number of territories, over a huge chunk of land that would take you some 4 or 5 days to drive across.

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by hevusa

I'm cool with an organized force like the police having weapons, that makes sense. But I barely trust citizens to operate their cars properly... forget giving them weapons. It is an idiotic and archaic idea that directly leads to the U.S. being the world leader in gun violence *waves american flag*. Fucking RETARDED.

I wold sooner place my trust in my armed neighbor than a fucking COP

but to each their own.

and as far as the USA being the leader in gun violence, that is BULLSHIT.
straight u[p BULLSHIT.

go count the "gun violence" deaths in Burma, in Sierra leone, In fucking MEXICO, in Nicaragua, in the Sudan, etc. Those countries do not deserve mention though by the media because they are full of BRWON people and they do not matter to the status quo media. gun deaths are not reported, crime is severely underreported in those nations. in the USA, if anything, we are masters of filling out fucking reports.

In fact that is all cops do!!! they fill out reports! Most never ever fire their weapon in their entire career, not even ONCE. They just show up AFTER the crime, fill out a report, and go on about their business, which is collecting taxes from the people by means of traffic and speeding and parking tickets.

[tesla69]

Originally Posted by ann ashtray

They weren't on acid ALL the time. They weren't at all when they'ed wait outside the courthouse, living in the streets, while Charlie was on trial.
I don;t know many people that would do that.

Tex says they were using amphetamine a lot, which Charlie didn't like (he couldn't use it as control drug I think).

[knox]

I think you name five things there and call it HEAVY regulation. I don't know, I tend to think americans think it's not the goverment's obligation to enforce security, and it's not their right to demand it. But I said a million times (and i goes ignored) cases in which people manage to protect themselves with guns aren't the majority - most of the time people increase their chances of getting hurt. Those aren't lunacies from pacifists, those are statistics.

About Charles Manson, yeah rough childhood. Lots of people have it, but not all people are sociopaths. What about that whole thing about starting war against "the blacks"?

[Rob Instigator]

but knox, you do not seem to grasp what others here are saying, which is dead truth, that people defending themselves from crime is NOT NEWS, unless the crime occurs anyway,.

news media do not cover that, not even in the "human interest" section of the local TV news.

It is underreported and that is why you and many others have the false impression that the instances where ownership of a gun turns bad far outnumber th instances where gun ownership actually benefitted the gun owner.

[knox]

But hold on. Nobody said anything when I asked:

If you can't carry potentially dangerous stuff why can't you purchase bombs? Why can't you legally buy crack?

What's the difference?

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by knox

I think you name five things there and call it HEAVY regulation. I don't know, I tend to think americans think it's not the goverment's obligation to enforce security, and it's not their right to demand it. But I said a million times (and i goes ignored) cases in which people manage to protect themselves with guns aren't the majority - most of the time people increase their chances of getting hurt. Those aren't lunacies from pacifists, those are statistics.

About Charles Manson, yeah rough childhood. Lots of people have it, but not all people are sociopaths. What about that whole thing about starting war against "the blacks"?

charles manson never said he was gonna start war against the blacks. that is once again, misinformation perpetrated by the status quo powers that be.

charles manson , like a lot of regular people in the USA, white and black, thought a RACE WAR was going to occurr. he sought to escalate it, by some reports, or to actually trigger it into beginning. he wanted everyone to fight themselves and leave him and his people alone in the desert where they would "survive" until the race war was over.

[knox]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

but knox, you do not seem to grasp what others here are saying, which is dead truth, that people defending themselves from crime is NOT NEWS, unless the crime occurs anyway,.

news media do not cover that, not even in the "human interest" section of the local TV news.

It is underreported and that is why you and many others have the false impression that the instances where ownership of a gun turns bad far outnumber th instances where gun ownership actually benefitted the gun owner.

It's not an IMPRESSION, those are numbers, facts.
News do not tend to cover suicides either, which happen quite often.

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by knox

But hold on. Nobody said anything when I asked:

If you can't carry potentially dangerous stuff why can't you purchase bombs? Why can't you legally buy crack?

What's the difference?

you can buy alcohol.

you can buy gunpowder

you can buy thermite

you can buy potassium, or any other highly volatile minerals and chemicals.

you can buy untold knives and swords

the reason crack was treated so harshly in the late 80's and early 90's and the reason they had fucked up sentences for crack cocaine as opposed to poweder cocaine (which have been lessened recently) was not because crack kiled and hurt people. (it sur4e fucking did though) but because white people were not making the money off the crack. it was bklacks, and hispanics.

white people make the big money off the powder cocaine, and it is still widely available, not prosecuted like crack cocaine is, and quite often enjoyed by the power elite in all realms of society without fear they will be prosecuted or arrested for it.

[tesla69]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

It just makes me sick that people think the "family" members who did the killin were under some sort of hypnotic mesmer that the evil charles manson was able to conjure up, as if he was alisteir crowley or something....Those fucks knew exactly what they were doing.

Rob, I don't think you can discount the impact of group sex, group acid sessions, and intensive psychological manipulation of dianetics and old fashioned bullyism along with poor nutrition among people who have been trained from birth to admire and obey authority. I'm sure you know most men can be easily manipulated with poon and Charlie used to send his girls to go with certain people he needed something from. There is actually a good film about The Family that shows a really wonderful caring communal group that at some point turns ugly and began to eat itself (the murder of Shorty Shea for example).

I'd like to own a .50 caliber, for hunting squirells of course http://www.barrett.net/

[Rob Instigator]

I know all about that stuff. charlie deserved to go to jail for what he insitgated, but to remain in jail for life? I don't know. rapists get 20 year terms. child abusers get 10-20 year terms. time off for good behaviour, those sick fucks are on the street again in 12 years.

[knox]

Facts:

- White people make money with guns. In fact, nobody cares because in general it's the poorer that kill themselves and each other in the end.

- The number of fatal accidents related to people owning guns is way superior to the number of times someone actually manages to sucessfully protect themselves from any sort of crime.

- The motive of MOST crime is to do with money/goods. The fact that people find guns easily available turns that into a more dangerous event, with serious consequences.

- MOST people are killed by someone close to them, someone they know or for stupid reasons that are unrelated to strangers and crime.

- Most guns criminals have were once purchased legally. While people can still buy them freely, industries will continue making them which will end up leading to more guns with criminals and less control over them.

- The responsability of security should ideally belong to the state, citizens should be demanding that rather than feeling like they can do justice and protect themselves - they can't.

As for the Manson bullshit:

- He was a sociopath. As far as everyone knows, he was a racist, preached violence and planned those crimes. Sociopaths don't even need drugs - they are naturally able to be leaders, specially over vulnerable people.

[Keeping It Simple]

Originally Posted by radarmaker

Numeracy fail.

If the UK's population is the same as the US, the murder rate in the UK would be 8.5/100,000 people. It proves strict gun laws don't work.