Car Forums  

Go Back   Car Forums > General Discussions > Off Topic
FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 05-18-2005, 08:48 PM   #181
car_crazy89
Part Time CFer
 
car_crazy89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,849
Quote:
Originally Posted by 99integra
Here we go with a flame war.
I may be wrong but i doubt there will be a flame war. I havent seen any recent posts done by vwhobo so i dont think he's really been here (if at all) and so he wont end up seeing that (atleast not for a while) and so it SHOULD be okay, dont quote me on that though.
__________________

"Noone dies a virgin, life screws us all"
car_crazy89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2005, 08:54 PM   #182
99integra
CF's Florida boy
 
99integra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Piqua, OH
Posts: 6,099
Don't worry i won't , (unless it comes to that)
__________________
Current whip: walking
99integra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-2005, 03:57 AM   #183
Godlaus
UnFedFat in Disguise
 
Godlaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5speedIntegra
So you think taht jsut because Bush wants to impress his daddy makes it ok for us to be in a country that nobody gives a flyin shit about . I guess that answers democrat or republican. I am a Christian. I am anit-abortion and i do agree with vwhobodouche on the gun thing. Come in my house uninvited and test ur luck.

Are you serious? You think he's trying to impress his daddy? Well, come to think of it, he advised against invading Iraq again. So, if he was trying to show off, why woul dhe do something his father wrote a book about not doing? The only people who don't care about this country are peope like you. People like everyone else is trying to make it better.

Quote:
Let's remove legal reasons why you, yourself, can't take an automatic weapon to school. If YOU, yourself, took one to school, would you automatically have to shoot everyone there simply because you had it? Or are you capable of using restraint and mature judgement in using that tool (or not using it)? Would the gun itself make you use it? Or would YOU be the one making the choice?

You know what? You're right. We should allow citizens to havce any kind of 'tool' they want. You want an Abrams tank? Sure, 120 grand. An automatic M4 with a gernade launcher? Sure, 4 grand. You want a nuclear warhead? Sure, I'll sell it to you.

Even normal citizens fail to use proper judgement at times. Hell, I'm willing to be you've done your share of illegal activities.

Quote:
Tools are tools and how you use them is what matters.

But, if you take the tool away, the bad part of them can not happen.
--------------------------
The main theme I see arising is; "If the will is so great, why fight it?". Which is possibly one of the most absurd things I've ever heard.
__________________
I am everything you want to be
Godlaus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2005, 09:51 PM   #184
ChrisV
The Big Meaney
 
ChrisV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 3,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneiR36
But you assume criminals are this well defined group of people. Whereas in any given instant, a full gun-bearing citizen could become one.

That could happen with anyone and a car or a rock, too. Not a valid response, as we allow non criminals to have cars and rocks until they prove they can't use them responsibly in commiting a criminal offense or killing someone intentionally.



Quote:
We don't have the luxury of a "minority report" type prediction. We don't know who's going to be interested in using the gun to kill someone in the future. Distinguishing between criminals and non-criminals as far as gun ownership is concerned might protect us in the immediate future, but how about in a few decades? I wonder if studies have been done, to see how much those two groups overlap as time goes on. That is, how non-criminals who own guns migrate over to the sector of criminals who were aided by guns.

Innocent until proven guilty is a basic tenet of freedom for a Citizen of majority age. Period. if you want to take away guns because someone MIGHT go off and be a criminal with one, then you might as well take away cars because someone MIGHT go off and ram someoe or drive drunk and kill someone else.

Once you start down that path, where do you quit? the OJ case didn't have a gun involved at all. Did the Laci Peterson case use a gun? What will we take away next, when all those knifings and muggings are still killing people?

And think about it this way:

There are already laws against killing people. Has that stopped it from happening? the guns that are being used illegally are already being aquired illegally for the most part, including guns that aren't even supposed to be in this country. ALL that anti gun laws do is remove guns from the hands of people who wouldn't use them illegally ANYHOW. Proven time and again.



Quote:
And why can't YOU bring a gun to work, ChrisV?

I work in a government office, and can't even bring a camera in. We work under Homeland Security rules.

Want to know the interesting thig? I've NEVER owned a gun. My mom did. My brother does. I've shot both rifles and handguns at shooting ranges before. I'm simply not interested in them. What I AM intersted in is knee jerk reactions designed to eradicate the rights of Citizens in the name of a false sense of safety.

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
__________________
I'm not mean. You're just a wuss.



www.midatlantic7s.com
ChrisV is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:16 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2002 - 2011 Car Forums. All rights reserved.