VA Tech Shooting

[Sorrow]

hey it's the truth, honestly, do you think WW III is something to be fought with handguns? I'm just amazed by some of the things you bring up as "arguments" and shit, honest.

[Persol]

I'm just amazed by some of the things you bring up as "arguments" and shit, honest.

None of which you've managed to discuss, let alone disprove. I'm amazed by your complete lack of critical thinking "and shit". You start out just saying 'you are wrong' then 'america sucks' then 'americans deserve to die' then 'my country is better' then 'you are wrong'... but fail to at any point back up your point of view. Why'd you even bother browsing a serious discussion subforum?

Yeah, would not be much oil left if Iraq was bombed completely ...

Grow up. Regardless of the reason for attacking Iraq, nuking it would serve no benefit.

[Rustvaar]

I think it's time everyone grew up and took a look at what they're arguing about.

I'm sure the discussion started about the shooting earlier this month, then rolled onto gun-control, the Americas, WW2 and now apparently you're just bitching at one another for differing opinions and "Who can find the most source!"

Negative Internets to you all, gentlemen.

[Sorrow]

nuking it would serve no benefit.

Hurrrr but in regards to WW III, if there would be another world war, it'd probably involve something nuclear and or otherwise lethal that we can't protect ourselves from with handguns.
you can quote me any number you'd like but it's just unsafe to have lying around in your closet, even if it's just for warding off criminals, think about this, maybe the reason you keep guns is because criminals have guns, and how did they get those, bought em... maybe a bit more illegal but... well if somebody wants to kill you he'll probably do it one way or another.
burglars can be kept out with locks on your doors and windows.

pffffff. see no need for weapons, they don't do any good.

[Persol]

I'm sure the discussion started about the shooting earlier this month, then rolled onto gun-control, the Americas, WW2 and now apparently you're just bitching at one another for differing opinions and "Who can find the most source!"

The shooting caused people to say america should ban guns, so it went into gun control. America's founding documents state defense of self and nation (not government, but nation) as the reason for the right to bear arms. The only way to demonstrate that the right to bear arms is not a silly idea is to point out the positives and negatives of this ownership. For protection of nation, WWII is a good historical reference. The Netherlands was brought up specifically because one of it's residents stated that they'd never need guns... neglecting the number of their citizens killed and that they had to be rescued by people who did have guns.

The only way you can combat the idea that 'guns are bad' is through statistics. Comments like the above "it's just unsafe to have" completely disregard how unsafe it is compared to the good it can do when needed for defense. Athlete and I have been the only ones using sources, because having a discussion based on "I think guns are bad/good" is completely pointless. Sorrow has simply been resorting to sterotypes like "you have to be careful what you say so you don't get shot"... which, besides being completely incorrect, shows little understanding of how relatively few people die in gun homicides.

well if somebody wants to kill you he'll probably do it one way or another.

Please stop making my case for me about criminals simply using other weapons.

[Blink]

End