Active Member
When you have a house filled with rifles, pistols and/or shotguns as well as a bunch of kids, there a chance something might go wrong at one point.Originally Posted by DigitalChaos
Out of the millions of people who have guns, there are more than a handful who are not responsible gun owners.
Just way too many idiots with guns.
Throbbing Member
Note... I live in Canada where we have less households with guns than 'merica and much stricter gun laws. And this still happens.
1. My mother and father were visiting one of my uncles. In the basement was a .22 rifle just sitting in the corner with the nozzle facing upward. I was maybe 12 and like most boys that age thought guns were awesome. I knew it was stupid but I had a pure Denis the Menace moment... without moving the rifle I touched the trigger... just to feel it.... I couldn't resist and I pulled the trigger. Gun wasn't loaded, thank god.
2. When I was 8 or 10 my friend found his dads revolver, it was huge. Nothing happened but it's still a situation where two 8 year olds were playing with a hand gun.
3. When I was 15 my friend wanted to scare another friend so he ran up the basement stairs holding his dads rifle, pointing it at the other friend. It's still funny because it scared the shit out of him... he happened to be holding a spoon and he threw it at the nozzle, he later said he wanted to jam the nozzle. Nothing bad happened but still a situation where young teens are playing with a rifle pointing it at one another.
I have a few more stories....
Alt-Left Leaning Cunt
Of course mental health played a huge part in this. Did you read the article? The mother had been warned about keeping weapons in the home before it happened. And she failed to keep is mental health appointments.
There are no photos because if they identify the adults in the situation, then the children would be able to be identified.
Active Member
Of course it still happens. A world without accidents doesn't exists.
But our numbers are not even in the same ballpark though.
Active Member
So why don't you want to apply that logic to the ownership of every object that is potentially lethal?
Pools? How about cars?
It's such a stupidly myopic thing to apply this to guns. Yet, when you try to apply it to something else, you look really stupid. Hint: you look the same no matter the object.
Active Member
Because its primary usage differs from guns.
A car's primary usage is to get yourself from point A to B.
Anyways, my comment was directed towards that sentence.
"I live in Canada where we have less households with guns than 'merica and much stricter gun laws. And this still happens."
My point was, yes it still happens but to a much lower frequency. Is it all because of our stricter laws? Definitely not the only factor but it does help.
Also, the gun culture is quite different if non-existent. Here, guns are for the police, criminals, hunters and a handful of people who have one at home to protect themselves.
People don't have guns just for show, for pride or because they want to protect themselves against the mean government.
There are 1.6M firearms license holders in Canada. That's roughly 4.5% of the population. That's not a lot.
We just don't see having a gun as a necessity. This is quite different south of the border.
We've had this debate in the past and I don't want to get into it again.
The numbers obviously tell a different story depending of where you live.
I'm curious to know why do you think we have very little gun violence in Canada?
Active Member
For the same reason we have more American deaths in the USA: your dishonest scoping of the data is ridiculous.
Do other countries have, per capita, less accidents? How about less lethal accidents? How about less violent crime? How about less homicides?
We've had this argument before too, but you seem to have forgotten.
Active Member
Of course we have less per capita. It's not even close.
US homicides with firearms in 2011 = 8,583
Population: 310.5M
0.0276 per 1,000
CDN homicides with firearms in 2011 = 158
Population: 33,476,688
0.0047 per 1,000
How else do you want me to do the math?
Active Member
"with firearms"
Was my last post really not clear enough for you? Have you really convinced yourself of the whole gun control thing so much that basic statistical analysis isn't possible?
... or is it worse than that... Is it because you genuinely think that a gun homicide is worse than any other homicide?
edit: here is a sane approach to the data: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ate#By_country (the lack of a standardized year kind of screws it up though)
US has 3x the homicide rate of Canada (vs your 6x firearm homicide stat). When you look at the rest of the countries, it becomes very hard to try and link firearms to the picture.... but let's go back to Canada and the US:
When you break things down by territory/state, I see something very interesting. You have some territories that have some pretty high homicide rates while others don't. Whats up with that? Just from spot checking, I can see that some of the US states with highest rate of gun ownership have homicide rates much lower than many of the Canadian territories (and definitely less than the bulk of US states who are big into gun control).
Last edited by DigitalChaos; 07-10-2014 at 01:21 PM.
Active Member
Since this discussions is about guns of course I'm selecting data that involves firearms
I don't care if someone killed a dude with a chainsaw. It's irrelevant to this discussion.
I'm not trying to find out which country is the most violent in general or the most dangerous. I'm trying to find out which is using more guns and why.
Why do you think Canadians have a such a different view of firearms than Americans?
Why are they irrelevant to us and why are you obsessed with them?
Active Member
See my last edit.
Also, that bullshit excuse is Fox News worthy dishonesty and spin.
if this thread is about guns why are you talking about deaths?!?(because you pick whatever scope you are comfortable with)
Last edited by DigitalChaos; 07-10-2014 at 01:25 PM.
Quiet Member
Comparing gun violence in a country that has 3.4 (Canada) people per square km to one that has 32 (US) people per square km is insane.
You get a lot of people close to each other...mix in extreme poverty, horrible education, and how the US ignores our crazy people problem...and a lot of people die.
Active Member
Canada and the US should theoretically be the most alike countries in the world.
Bite me
Wait, that's INDIA, not the U.S. The size of this country is HUGE, yet LOTS of it is relatively empty. While the media reports would also make me believe, for about 10 seconds, that we sure seem to have a lot of 'crazy people,' here, my logic suddenly takes over and I realize that we don't have a monopoly on that, either. The number one killer in this country isn't violence; it's heart disease (see also obesity). The one thing that makes us pretty different than Canada is "gun culture" and our history of violence, in general. We don't have a monopoly on THAT, either. There are far more violent countries. We just happen to get a lot more attention, because we have a lot more media outlets that make lots of advertising revenue by selling hyperbole of our being "the most powerful country in the world."
I think "obsessed" is a strong term. According to statistics, Canadians actually have WAY MORE guns than the United States (mostly hunting rifles). They just don't kill each other with them. Why this is, I don't think anybody knows. That's the magic question. But, it's the same question you have to apply to every other culture and country that uses guns. I think the U.S.'s gun deaths are significantly increased because of gang-related deaths, and that is due to the drugs trade which is very much like a 'war.' Compare it to, say, Iraq. Do they use guns in Iraq? Of course they do. They're not fighting each other with rocks. They're using guns. The gang members selling drugs in Chicago think of themselves as "soldiers" protecting their "turf" or "land" and they're going to use guns to do it. Anybody they kill who happens to be "in the way" is just "collateral damage" -- the same language that the military uses when innocent people are killed in wars. The numbers you see in gun death statistics are greatly affected by drug gangs. Compare that to the number of homicides in Mexico, Colombia, etc. See also this.
As a comparison:
In 2012, 33,561 people died in traffic crashes in 2012 in the United States (latest figures available), including an estimated 10,322 people who died in drunk driving crashes, accounting for 31% of all traffic deaths that year.
Last edited by allegro; 07-12-2014 at 01:58 PM.
Quiet Member
The prohibition of drugs doesn't work. Wont work with guns either. I agree with your post for the most part.
Last edited by Satyr; 07-12-2014 at 05:24 PM.
Active Member
The war on drugs:
- pipes a lot of tax money into state and federal governments
- increases the power of state and federal governments
- local police love all the extra funding and equipment they get due to drug enforcement
- defense contractors profit with all the demand for the toys that drug enforcement requires
- government powers are much easier to expand when you use drug enforcement as the excuse. (arbitrary police stops, detentions, more surveillance, money tracking, etc)
- for profit prison system loves the continually increasing demand
- legal system has a lot of demand for their services
- the rapidly growing pool of felons means a growing class of non voting citizens
- more felons mean more poverty because of how hard it is to get a job, im sure some enjoy the suppressed wages that result
- These neighborhoods result in a crime environment that makes it very desirable to have a gun for defense, even if you are prohibited
I know I am missing quite a few. The War on Drugs has been a great success for those who are involved in enforcement and punishment. Ending it would be desirable for everyone but the enforcers. Crime of all types (especially violent crime) would dramatically drop if we killed it.
Bite me
Prohibition never works, as we have seen with alcohol prohibition (18th Amendment to the Constitution and its repeal) in this country. It only leads to more crime and violence (Al Capone).
Last edited by allegro; 07-12-2014 at 06:53 PM.
Active Member
So, I've been on a Skold kick lately. I decided to look his stuff up to see if he was working on any new material.
Looks like Skold not only loves his guns, but enjoys making them too!
Last edited by DigitalChaos; 07-12-2014 at 09:11 PM.
Active Member
And here is Brody Dalle and Josh Homme shooting
Active Member
silly 1 video per post restriction...
tempus est umbra in mente
uh, good for Skold and Josh Homme. What is the point here exactly?
Active Member
"Gun Talk - News, Laws, etc"
It's not restricted to just gun control ranting.
Active Member
In Skold's video, he looks to be shooting a pistol variety of the AK47. The pistol variants of guns that are traditionally rifles is always interesting. It's done almost exclusively to get around SBR laws (short barreled rifle). SBR's are illegal in some states. At the federal level it requires a tax stamp, just like machine guns, suppressors, explosives, etc. BUT, you take the stock off of your rifle and it becomes a pistol... and then you can have your incredibly short barrel.
Gun laws are awesome.
There are actually quite a few "arm braces" that have been ruled "not a stock" by the ATF.
Example:
Top is a full size AR-15. Bottom is an ATF approved AR-15 pistol with arm brace. If it had a stock, that would suddenly become a super illegal SBR.
tempus est umbra in mente
oh. awesome.
This thread sucks
Active Member
It's ok @Jinsai , you can tap out. You stopped being able to deliver at an intellectual level pages ago. You seem more cut out for an anti-gun tumblr page.
Spoiler: I'd totally read it, right along side http://www.reddit.com/r/GunsAreCool/
Active Member
Also, one of those images you posted is a fucking plastic gun. derp... I suppose you'd freak out knowing that I let my kid play with a nerf gun.
tempus est umbra in mente
No, just "rah rah guns are awesome, I'm gunna take a picture with my infant holding a gun" American gun culture is the lamest shit ever. And yes, one of the guns is plastic. The others aren't.
What's the problem though? It's a plastic GUN. The thread is called "gun talk - news laws etc," not just REAL guns. Derp.
Active Member
I also dislike most gun culture. But, you'd do well to read Your Problem with Guns or Gays Is Not Political
tempus est umbra in mente
Did this guy even read what he wrote?
"And the gap between the life that Mia Joy has and that which she would otherwise have had makes the general question, “should gay couples should be able to adopt,” sound something between silly and faintly insulting when applied to this particular, inspiring case."
yes, that does sound silly
"What most anti-gun people are really feeling (rather than thinking) is that there has to be something strange about you if you like guns. I mean, why would you get turned on by something whose primary purpose is to kill people? If you do, you can’t be like me. You are sufficiently different that I am suspicious or your worldview or your motives or both. You are culturally “other”.
uh... are you saying that you're suspicious of people who get turned on by weapons, or are you suspicious of the people who can't understand why someone would be turned on by guns?
"Despite what we like to think, we most, if not all, of our political views this way."
What?
" I would have to imagine saying to Phil and Mike, “You should not be allowed to what you have done for Mia Joy, and I would use the force of law to stop you.”"
This is getting ridiculous...
"And if I were going to take a stand against my open-carrying friend, Rob, I’d have to imagine saying to him, “You should not be allowed to own that to protect your family – or to protect your country against a tyrannical state, should it ever come to that, and I would use the force of law to stop you”."
Ok, not grammatically perfect, but at least it's not incomprehensible bullshit. His "point," however, is fucking hysterical. Let's expand this ludicrous comparison to my fictional buddy Lex Luther, who wants to build a machine capable of wiping out a small country. I'd have to say to him "you should not be allowed to own that to protect your country against a tyrannical state, or to scare people away from breaking into your secret laboratory, and I would use the force of law to stop you."
This is some stupid bullshit.
Active Member
What you just did is the equivalent of "well then people will be marrying animals and having sex with infants if we let gay people marry."
When you are so wrapped into a viewpoint, you are going to see it as an unequal comparison. I could show this to a gun loving gay hating southerner and they would say the same shit that you did. They would just flip the justification.
As someone who thinks everyone should be able to make their own choices as long as they don't impact the freedom of others, I see HUGE similarities between a lot of the left-wing and right-wing views that involved restriction, prohibition, censorship, etc. It doesn't matter if we are talking about guns, marriage, sexuality, drugs, religion, or whatever it may be. One side always justifies their anti-freedom fascism as being better for society.
Likes: 
Faceplams: 
Reply With Quote
