GUNS DON'T KILL

Guns are tool which make it easier to kill, Are you a robot or are you a human being with emotion. When your emotion is compromise all it take is a pull of a trigger and there is no going back. Why do you think you have family where the father kill his wife/SO and then his kids emotion, Robot or Human Being?

What about a knife, a bat, an ax, a tire iron, a 2x4, a vehicle moving at 30mph (or more), a frying pan, a rope, a plastic bag, a hammer, a screwdriver...?? I could go on for days. If a human being has a desire to kill, it will find a way. Evil, or stupidity, or irresponsible behavior cannot be legislated away. Additionally, you cannot legislate against any and every scenario that may ever conceivably arise. All that does is take away our freedoms incrementally. Originally Posted by EXTXOILMAN

"Reports and video indicate that Derrion Albert was caught in a brawl between two factions of students at Christian Fenger Academy High school, on Chicago's South Side, from two neighborhoods, Altgeld Gardens and The Ville. His death occurred after he was brutally beaten by several boys with pieces of a railroad tie. Police initially arrested four individuals, Silvonus Shannon, Eric Carson, Eugene Riley, and Eugene Bailey, who were charged with first-degree murder." [wiki]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Derrion_Albert

And the flip side is that according to your logic, we might as well make it legal to own an atom bomb. Originally Posted by Doove

Doofus, your father must have been a nuclear physicist, because it’s obvious his gonads were irreparably irradiated and that you are the product of genetically damaged sperm cells. Your “atom bomb” retort is nothing but specious hyperbole spawned by a vacuous, Kool Aid impaired mind, Doofus.

Why don't you just ban murder? That ought to solve the problem if all we need to do is ban something. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

+1

Doofus, your father must have been a nuclear physicist, because it’s obvious his gonads were irreparably irradiated and that you are the product of genetically damaged sperm cells. Your “atom bomb” retort is nothing but specious hyperbole spawned by a vacuous, Kool Aid impaired mind, Doofus. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

That was pretty dumb.

Not sure how else to describe it.

That was pretty dumb.

Not sure how else to describe it. Originally Posted by Doove

On the "dumb" scale, it rates far below your dumber assertion that everyone wants to legalize the private possession of "atom bombs", Doofus.

On the "dumb" scale, it rates far below your dumber assertion that everyone wants to legalize the private possession of "atom bombs", Doofus. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

I didn't suggest anyone wanted to. I suggested that, based on the logic being used, we might as well.

After all, if we can kill everyone in the world 100 times with just stones...

Americans have an unalienable right to defend themselves and own arms.

Whenever something stupid like this happens the conservatives automatically rally and cry out to outlaw ALL firearms (and weapons for that matter)

This is ridiculous. The problem isn't the presence of Guns. The problem is the presence of F'n STUPID, Sick, Evil people roaming the world (undetected). You never hear of normal people shooting up others. It's always some Psych case...

Yes, perhaps we need better gun control. But divesting solid, moral Americans of arms leaving them defenseless against evil people (who will obtain them through black market channels) is just plane dumb.

If while I'm sleeping, being a good citizen, some evil F'k breaks into my home with his gun. I'm not getting shot because I don't have one to counter...

Perhaps the real area that needs more control is F'n crazy people. Maybe the government needs to more closely monitor the purchases and activities of people with known Psychological mental illnesses (and stop them from purchasing guns)

In closing, Evil, sick people are F'n Evil people. If you take away the guns, you will not eliminate serial killers. They will simply find a myriad of other ways to kill people.... The problem lies not in the weapon, but rather in the person.

I didn't suggest anyone wanted to. I suggested that, based on the logic being used, we might as well.

After all, if we can kill everyone in the world 100 times with just stones... Originally Posted by Doove

Your logic was specious, Doofus.

How much is a life worth?

It's amazing to me that for some people that are "supposedly" so smart, so "moral", ans so "normal" will quickly kill someone for breaking into their home.


What did they take and how much was it worth?


I hope the answer to the second question matches the answer to the 1st.


This is exactly why we need gun control, people will kill for anything (they broke in my house and were stealing my $600 TV, he was trespassing on my property, he looked suspicious walking in my neigborhood, he had sex with my wife) ....should I continue........


The only time someone should kill someone else is if they are trying to kill you or someone else.


Insurance is for if your property is stolen or damaged.

Americans have an unalienable right to defend themselves and own arms.

Whenever something stupid like this happens the conservatives automatically rally and cry out to outlaw ALL firearms (and weapons for that matter)

This is ridiculous. The problem isn't the presence of Guns. The problem is the presence of F'n STUPID, Sick, Evil people roaming the world (undetected). You never hear of normal people shooting up others. It's always some Psych case...

Yes, perhaps we need better gun control. But divesting solid, moral Americans of arms leaving them defenseless against evil people (who will obtain them through black market channels) is just plane dumb.

If while I'm sleeping, being a good citizen, some evil F'k breaks into my home with his gun. I'm not getting shot because I don't have one to counter...

Perhaps the real area that needs more control is F'n crazy people. Maybe the government needs to more closely monitor the purchases and activities of people with known Psychological mental illnesses (and stop them from purchasing guns)

In closing, Evil, sick people are F'n Evil people. If you take away the guns, you will not eliminate serial killers. They will simply find a myriad of other ways to kill people.... The problem lies not in the weapon, but rather in the person. Originally Posted by GentlemanCaller007

That's good stuff right there, 007. +1!!

How much is a life worth?

It's amazing to me that for some people that are "supposedly" so smart, so "moral", ans so "normal" will quickly kill someone for breaking into their home.


What did they take and how much was it worth?


Insurance is for if your property is stolen or damaged. Originally Posted by KRiggins

Well, first of all, if someone is breaking into my home while I am there to shoot them, I must assume that they knew I was there when they started breaking into my home, so I can assume that if I tried to stop them from taking my stuff they would hurt me and/or my SO in some significant way to keep me from keeping them from taking my stuff ...

... so since they will hurt me I am going to hurt them first ... which keeps them from taking my stuff in the first place, which is what I want to do.

Secondly, if someone is breaking into my home I do not ask them "what they want" or "how much of what I own do they want" ... even if they survived the first two rounds I probably wouldn't ask them such a dumb question ... See "first of all" above.

Finally, "insurance" is for me too .... well ... for my beneficiary ... so fffeeen what?

I would rather his beneficiaries collect rather than mine... unless they were with him. Then may be theirs will collect.

The weapon I use to defend my home is not used to kill ... it is used to discourage those who would enter my home without permission from doing so in the future or being able to do so in the future ... or being able to invade someone else's home in the future .....

... so my weapon has a "community service" function.

How much is a life worth?

It's amazing to me that for some people that are "supposedly" so smart, so "moral", ans so "normal" will quickly kill someone for breaking into their home.


What did they take and how much was it worth?


I hope the answer to the second question matches the answer to the 1st.


This is exactly why we need gun control, people will kill for anything (they broke in my house and were stealing my $600 TV, he was trespassing on my property, he looked suspicious walking in my neigborhood, he had sex with my wife) ....should I continue........


The only time someone should kill someone else is if they are trying to kill you or someone else.


Insurance is for if your property is stolen or damaged. Originally Posted by KRiggins

And just when do you determine what the intentions are of the person breaking into your house. Someone breaks in how do I know they only want to take my $600.00 TV. I would rather have a guy and find that all they wanted was the TV than to find out they wanted to harm me or my family and not have a way of defending myself. Just last week here in KC 4 men entered a home on the pretext of robbing it and killed all 3 of the homes occupants. So you tell me how much were their lives worth?

How much is a life worth? Originally Posted by KRiggins

Yours or mine?

Americans have an unalienable right to defend themselves and own arms.

Whenever something stupid like this happens the Liberals automatically rally and cry out to outlaw ALL firearms (and weapons for that matter)

This is ridiculous. The problem isn't the presence of Guns. The problem is the presence of F'n STUPID, Sick, Evil people roaming the world (undetected). You never hear of normal people shooting up others. It's always some Psych case...

Yes, perhaps we need better gun control. But divesting solid, moral Americans of arms leaving them defenseless against evil people (who will obtain them through black market channels) is just plane dumb.

If while I'm sleeping, being a good citizen, some evil F'k breaks into my home with his gun. I'm not getting shot because I don't have one to counter...

Perhaps the real area that needs more control is F'n crazy people. Maybe the government needs to more closely monitor the purchases and activities of people with known Psychological mental illnesses (and stop them from purchasing guns)

In closing, Evil, sick people are F'n Evil people. If you take away the guns, you will not eliminate serial killers. They will simply find a myriad of other ways to kill people.... The problem lies not in the weapon, but rather in the person. Originally Posted by GentlemanCaller007

Fixed it for you.

How much is a life worth?

It's amazing to me that for some people that are "supposedly" so smart, so "moral", ans so "normal" will quickly kill someone for breaking into their home.


What did they take and how much was it worth?


I hope the answer to the second question matches the answer to the 1st.


This is exactly why we need gun control, people will kill for anything (they broke in my house and were stealing my $600 TV, he was trespassing on my property, he looked suspicious walking in my neigborhood, he had sex with my wife) ....should I continue........


The only time someone should kill someone else is if they are trying to kill you or someone else.


Insurance is for if your property is stolen or damaged. Originally Posted by KRiggins

For the cocksucker breaking into my house his life is worth about a buck fifty. That's about 3 45 slugs to the chest.

The point of my response was to show that people with access to guns ultimately decide when and if someone or multiple people are killed.

I have a gun, and if you I think my life or my family's life is in danger I will use my weapon to defend myself as should anyone else.


Other than defending your life, as stated earlier, no one should kill another.


I have not heard of a possible solution to the problem at hand.


There are types of guns that are not used for protection and are not used to hunt. Do we all agree that those types of weapons should be highly regulated?