Dec 21 - NRA: "The Only Thing That Stops A Bad Guy With A Gun Is A Good Guy With A Gun"

most viewed right now
 182
Image(s) inside Dec 16 - Virginia woman killed by her pit bulls in ‘grisly mauling’
56 comments
@news
most viewed right now
 134
Image(s) inside Uncle Murda Comments On Chinx's Killer Who Is Linked To Him!
72 comments
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 129
NBA Isiah Thomas Says His Family was Worse than Lavar Ball "He Used to Rob Eve..
31 comments
@sports
most viewed right now
 65
NBA Jahlil making the move to small forward
75 comments
@sports

section   (0 bx goons and 1 bystanders) Share this on Twitter   Share this on Facebook
 

Props Slaps
 5 years ago '04        #101
biscuit 66 heat pts66
space
avatar space
space
$19,287 | Props total: 3889 3889
 aclockworkred71 said:
This has nothing to do with movies and television, that isn't even relevant.
If you watched the video or read the pdf that dude posted of the transcript on the first page you'd see how it is relevant. It's talking about desenitization of the masses to gun violence. Go back and check it out before you say my arguement is not relevant.
 5 years ago '04        #102
biscuit 66 heat pts66
space
avatar space
space
$19,287 | Props total: 3889 3889
 psylence2k said:
to be honest, nobody knows until we try it so I'm not gonna pretend.

other developed countries have tried it, the most comparable country to us culturally is the U.K.

They have all the factors a.ssociated with crime and gun violence that we do. Poverty, Urban deprivation, drugs, etc. They also enjoy alot of things we do as well ( violent movies, violent video games, violent music ).

After the Dunblane massacre of 1996 happened which 16 elementary school children were shot to death very similar to what happened at Sandy Hook. They tried out their hand gun ban nationwide, and it drastically dropped the gun homicide rate, and they haven't had a massacre since.

They have a population 1/5th of ours and they had 39 gun deaths last year, so if we were proportionate to them our rate should be somewhere around 195, but it's not , it's over 10,000. So who's gun control laws seem to really work better ??

People say guns helped the armed defend themselves, but who's always armed ?? The police right ??? In the past 10 years, we've had almost 1200 armed police k!lled from guns, that's an average of 120 a year , an average of 10 a month, an average of 2-3 a week. Do you know how many police deaths the U.K. has had in that same 10 year period recorded ?? TEN, that's on average just 1 a year, and guess what ?? their police dont even regularly carry guns. Their patrol cops are unarmed. So how do more of our ARMED police get k!lled in one month than their UNARMED police do in 10 years ??

Columbine had armed security, Virginia Tech had an entire police force on campus.

So isn't it clear that other countries are going the "less gun" route and succeeding while we're going the "more guns" and not ??
The UK is a great comparison to use.

Let me say this to close then...

If guns are to be banned, ban guns completely - INCLUDING POLICE. For me, that would be acceptable and could work with the example you've given. The public would have less of a police state to fear and possibly (but not probably) less opportunity of an event like this happening on this scale. ONLY in this completely banned scenario -police AND public - could it be acceptable in my opinion.

Remember, guns for the public were to protect the people from possible tyrants (meaning foreign or domestic) from taking over the United States. Can you say you trust the government completely enough to allow them to be the only ones who have access to unlimited guns and have the public with no right to defend themselves based on this and other incidents? If your answer is yes, than your faith in the motives of the government is strong. I would say a lot of people don't have faith to that degree and this f!ght may never have a resolution.
 5 years ago '07        #103
Ham Rove 3511 heat pts3511
space
avatar space
space
$55,232 | Props total: 20021 20021
 biscuit said:
If you watched the video or read the pdf that dude posted of the transcript on the first page you'd see how it is relevant. It's talking about desenitization of the masses to gun violence. Go back and check it out before you say my arguement is not relevant.
its not relevant, hes trying to misdirect attention. If he really cared about desensitization, he'd be offering solutions other than "give everyone guns" the guy is a puppet for the gun manufactures which is pretty obvious.
 5 years ago '04        #104
biscuit 66 heat pts66
space
avatar space
space
$19,287 | Props total: 3889 3889
 NoTitleSince73 said:
its not relevant, hes trying to misdirect attention. If he really cared about desensitization, he'd be offering solutions other than "give everyone guns" the guy is a puppet for the gun manufactures which is pretty obvious.
So you don't think gun violence in movies, media, and video games to the youth is a problem? Do you have kids fam? I do. Do you let your childern partake in all of that but at the same time say ban guns? That's hypocritical. I clearly see his point and see how all of those things contribute to the problem. I am not saying they are the cause of that particular incident, but they are part of a greater problem that exists where the culture glorifies gun violence in some forms but looks down on it in others.

If you want to ban guns, let's be socially conscious about it and not glorify their use in the mass media either.


Last edited by biscuit; 12-22-2012 at 11:27 PM..
 5 years ago '07        #105
Ham Rove 3511 heat pts3511
space
avatar space
space
$55,232 | Props total: 20021 20021
 biscuit said:
So you don't think gun violence in movies, media, and video games to the youth is a problem? Do you have kids fam? I do. I clearly see his point and see how all of those things contribute to the problem. I am not saying they are the cause of that particular incident, but they are part of a greater problem that exists where the culture glorifies gun violence in some forms but looks down on it in others.

If you want to ban guns, let's be socially conscious about it and not glorify their use in the mass media either.
Did I say that stuff doesn't play part? Of course there is a real discussion to be had about that issue, but he obviously doesn't care about that, because if he did his advice wouldn't be to arm everyone, it would be for education etc. China and all these other countries have violent video games and movies. Hes acting as if that is the only problem. The NRA is part of the problem, they know that, everyone knows that. So they try to misdirect attention "oh don't look @ us pushing for more and more guns to be everywhere, and f!ghting gun laws to ensure more guns are sold, even if they are to people who shouldn't have access to them, blame Natural Born k!llers (a movie from the 90s) and Mortal Kombat"

And you see this is another problem with Groups like the NRA, no politicians are calling to ban guns, its counterproductive, and flat out impossible. But these NRA guys shove their propaganda so fiercely, to some of their members, any sort of reasonable gun laws equate to prohibition and the banning of all guns. Fear mongering is more of a problem here than violent video games. It's also quite funny he brings up the media and violence in video games and movies. Like the NRA isn't part of this media culture that perpetuates this stuff. Their entire existence is to serve the gun manufacturers, they are at heart, a lobbying interest.


Last edited by Ham Rove; 12-22-2012 at 11:41 PM..
 5 years ago '04        #106
biscuit 66 heat pts66
space
avatar space
space
$19,287 | Props total: 3889 3889
Not to get away from anyone attacking my arguments because I'm more than willing to continue, but I have a question that I'm not sure was asked yet in this thread...

What the fu*k was an elementary school teacher doing with all these fu*king guns and a bullet proof vest in the first place
 5 years ago '07        #107
Ham Rove 3511 heat pts3511
space
avatar space
space
$55,232 | Props total: 20021 20021
 biscuit said:
Not to get away from anyone attacking my arguments because I'm more than willing to continue, but I have a question that I'm not sure was asked yet in this thread...

What the fu*k was an elementary school teacher doing with all these fu*king guns and a bullet proof vest in the first place
I cant think of any practical use, but I can give you the answer you will likely get. "2ND AMENDMENT!!!" If given the chance, I bet she wishes she wasn't a gun enthusiast in hindsight.


Last edited by Ham Rove; 12-22-2012 at 11:41 PM..
 5 years ago '11        #108
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225 OP
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 aclockworkred71 said:
Maybe for you, not for someone who really wants it, hence why the market exists, this whole idea of giving up over legality is not very realistic, if destroying lives and k!lling yourself isn't a deterrent this certainly isn't.
So making things harder is not a deterrent?


"If a person really wants it" defense is hogwash. A person can really want something, but if they don't have the means to obtain it, they're not going to get it.

Having to search for an illegal dealer cost more money and more time. And sometimes, people don't have the extra money nor the time for it. Not to mention, having to buy these illegally gives a higher probability for the authorities to find out and intervene.

According to your logic, we shouldn't patrol our borders because the people who really want to get in will do it anyway. We should just make it easy for everybody since making it harder won't stop 100%

The whole we can't stop someone if they really want to do it line is just getting old. You know how many people really want to k!ll the President? We have enough security procedures in place to prevent this from happening though. Proactive measures can prevent a lot of things. When it comes to guns, we are being reactive in our actions and not proactive.


Last edited by Kadillac87; 12-22-2012 at 11:51 PM..
 5 years ago '04        #109
psylence2k 58 heat pts58
space
space
space
$12,812 | Props total: 1839 1839
 biscuit said:
The UK is a great comparison to use.

Let me say this to close then...

If guns are to be banned, ban guns completely - INCLUDING POLICE. For me, that would be acceptable and could work with the example you've given. The public would have less of a police state to fear and possibly (but not probably) less opportunity of an event like this happening on this scale. ONLY in this completely banned scenario -police AND public - could it be acceptable in my opinion.

Remember, guns for the public were to protect the people from possible tyrants (meaning foreign or domestic) from taking over the United States. Can you say you trust the government completely enough to allow them to be the only ones who have access to unlimited guns and have the public with no right to defend themselves based on this and other incidents? If your answer is yes, than your faith in the motives of the government is strong. I would say a lot of people don't have faith to that degree and this f!ght may never have a resolution.

My thing is this, I've said it before, there's quite a handful of other industrialized countries who've tried it and have had success. If there were currently no examples of gun control working in the world, I'd be just as skeptical and pessimistic about it as anyone else. I probably wouldn't believe it all.

but the thing is , I see the statistics, I see it working for other countries , so why not try it ?? Isn't that the sensible thing to do ?? If you have someone who is being rational and objective, and they look at the statistics and other countries and their success with gun control (real and efficient gun control) don't you think that rational person would say " Hey you know what ? This seems to be working here , here, and here, and there too, why not try it ?? "

My confusion is with people being automatically and belligerently opposed to trying it at all. It makes me truly believe that most gun advocates dont care whether gun control would work or not because they love the feeling of having a gun available to them. Even if we did enact real gun control and it worked and dramatically dropped murder rates, I feel that most of these advocates would be itching like crack addicts like " we need to bring back guns, I dont feel safe" even with the murder rate dramatically lower. I feel most people are conditioned and even addicted to the feeling of owning a firearm.

My thing is why not try it for at least 5 years ??? If it works and we progress, then let's try it for another 5, if it has no effect at all then we can always go back to "more guns" , but the problem is that people dont want to acknowledge the statistics and even try. So there's clearly a bias instead of rational thinking.

We can stand around and say we need a multifaceted approach that includes everything from mental health to video games, but you know what's funny ??

The Ukraine has the second highest mentally ill population in the world after the U.S.

and the U.K. has a comparable video game user rate to the U.S.

but both rank near the very bottom of the list for gun homicides and both have far more restrictive gun control which is what it seems to always boil down to. People can blame mental health and media but if you really look at the statistics , the biggest common denominator always seems to be gun control.




 biscuit said:
Not to get away from anyone attacking my arguments because I'm more than willing to continue, but I have a question that I'm not sure was asked yet in this thread...

What the fu*k was an elementary school teacher doing with all these fu*king guns and a bullet proof vest in the first place
What elementary school teacher are you talking about ?? You're not talking about the k!ller's mom are you ?? She wasn't a teacher there, that was one of the many many things that were misreported when the story first broke.


Last edited by psylence2k; 12-23-2012 at 01:00 AM..
 5 years ago '04        #110
biscuit 66 heat pts66
space
avatar space
space
$19,287 | Props total: 3889 3889
 psylence2k said:
My thing is this, I've said it before, there's quite a handful of other industrialized countries who've tried it and have had success. If there were currently no examples of gun control working in the world, I'd be just as skeptical and pessimistic about it as anyone else. I probably wouldn't believe it all.

but the thing is , I see the statistics, I see it working for other countries , so why not try it ?? Isn't that the sensible thing to do ?? If you have someone who is being rational and objective, and they look at the statistics and other countries and their success with gun control (real and efficient gun control) don't you think that rational person would say " Hey you know what ? This seems to be working here , here, and here, and there too, why not try it ?? "

My confusion is with people being automatically and belligerently opposed to trying it at all. It makes me truly believe that most gun advocates dont care whether gun control would work or not because they love the feeling of having a gun available to them. Even if we did enact real gun control and it worked and dramatically dropped murder rates, I feel that most of these advocates would be itching like crack addicts like " we need to bring back guns, I dont feel safe" even with the murder rate dramatically lower. I feel most people are conditioned and even addicted to the feeling of owning a firearm.

My thing is why not try it for at least 5 years ??? If it works and we progress, then let's try it for another 5, if it has no effect at all then we can always go back to "more guns" , but the problem is that people dont want to acknowledge the statistics and even try. So there's clearly a bias instead of rational thinking.

We can stand around and say we need a multifaceted approach that includes everything from mental health to video games, but you know what's funny ??

The Ukraine has the second highest mentally ill population in the world after the U.S.

and the U.K. has a comparable video game user rate to the U.S.

but both rank near the very bottom of the list for gun homicides and both have far more restrictive gun control which is what it seems to always boil down to. People can blame mental health and media but if you really look at the statistics , the biggest common denominator always seems to be gun control.






What elementary school teacher are you talking about ?? You're not talking about the k!ller's mom are you ?? She wasn't a teacher there, that was one of the many many things that were misreported when the story first broke.
Let's just be clear here since I stated my stance. If we have gun control in the US, do we ban guns from the public and the police or just the public? Which one are you suggesting works?

Also, are you saying that the k!llers mom was not an elementary school teacher?
 5 years ago '04        #111
psylence2k 58 heat pts58
space
space
space
$12,812 | Props total: 1839 1839
 biscuit said:
Let's just be clear here since I stated my stance. If we have gun control in the US, do we ban guns from the public and the police or just the public? Which one are you suggesting works?

Also, are you saying that the k!llers mom was not an elementary school teacher?


Both have had success, my gut instinct would think at least the police need guns but like I said, once again, the statistics show it can work with unarmed police so I wouldn't be opposed to trying it out.

Though realistically, even though it's the sensible thing to try, we're so stubborn and stuck in our ways to see a gun ban happening any time soon so I guess we'll have to implement real and efficient gun control in the meantime and progress from there.

and yeah, I dont think she was a school teacher, that's what they first reported but multiple news stations including CNN refuted it later, she had been unemployed for a while.
 5 years ago '05        #112
Jazzy Soul 27 heat pts27
space
avatar space
space
$14,162 | Props total: 10 10
 aclockworkred71 said:
Irresponsible people exist, I drank and drove home responsibly last night another man didn't, should I be interrogated and punished for another man's issue? I fail to grasp what you are saying with this line, making rare instances out to be common.
My point is that if you can't be responsible you shouldn't be a gun owner. You should not be trusted with a deadly weapon if you can't be responsible for it. And drinking and driving by default is irresponsible if you had gotten pulled over you would deserve that DUI cause you could have k!lled someone!
 5 years ago '11        #113
SomeOnesoN 202 heat pts202
space
avatar space
space
$17,249 | Props total: 1284 1284
 biscuit said:
The UK is a great comparison to use.

Let me say this to close then...

If guns are to be banned, ban guns completely - INCLUDING POLICE. For me, that would be acceptable and could work with the example you've given. The public would have less of a police state to fear and possibly (but not probably) less opportunity of an event like this happening on this scale. ONLY in this completely banned scenario -police AND public - could it be acceptable in my opinion.

Remember, guns for the public were to protect the people from possible tyrants (meaning foreign or domestic) from taking over the United States. Can you say you trust the government completely enough to allow them to be the only ones who have access to unlimited guns and have the public with no right to defend themselves based on this and other incidents? If your answer is yes, than your faith in the motives of the government is strong. I would say a lot of people don't have faith to that degree and this f!ght may never have a resolution.
 5 years ago '04        #114
TizOnly1 5 heat pts
space
space
space
$5,931 | Props total: 7569 7569
People who are afraid of government tyranny in 2012 are all idiots.

1. At no point will the US just enter into some martial law military state. Don't be fu*king dumb.
2. The ways in which the US government DOES oppress, aren't phased by guns. Shoot all you want, the prison-industrial complex, unfair drug laws, institutional inequality, etc won't stop.
3. If the US government were to, for some reason, start a physical battle with its own citizens (again, a completely ridiculous notion), your guns, and zero training, and completely uncoordinated a.ssistance from Bill from down the road will not stop sh*t. Get real.
Home      
  
 

 






most viewed right now
 34
Erykah badu shows that fur burger
80 comments
24 hours ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 26
Infinity War Countdown - 140 days left: Disney pulls dick out on the entertain..
71 comments
1 day ago
@movies
most viewed right now
 25
Image(s) inside Dec 15 - This Colorado city declined to allow pot sales. Now it's havi..
27 comments
1 day ago
@news
most viewed right now
 24
Image(s) inside Might let her meet the parents
78 comments
24 hours ago
@thotsdimesetc
most viewed right now
 19
Dec 15 - California Warns People to Limit Exposure to Cellphones
32 comments
1 day ago
@news
most viewed right now
 13
Image(s) inside Dec 15 - Amazon may have just dropped a clue about the home of its new..
82 comments
1 day ago
@news
most viewed right now
 13
Image(s) inside Chinx’s Killer attended his funeral!!!!!smh
141 comments
18 hours ago
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 9
Video inside Chick Rants About Only Liking Hood Guys! "I Love When I see A N*gga Glo..
195 comments
1 day ago
@wild'ish
back to top
register contact Follow BX @ Twitter Follow BX @ Facebook search BX privacy