Author Topic: 2008  (Read 37758 times)

MDude

  • Meticulous Maniac
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 638
  • Enjoy machine world.
    • My Soundcloud Account
Re: 2008
« Reply #30 on: January 24, 2007, 09:23:41 pm »
Something just tells me a machine gun isn't very usefull for defense, what with being more of a crowd killing weapon than anything else. It would probably be better to have an ordinary sidearm and some body armour.

As for creepy people with overly prominent guns (HAHA INNUENDO), I think that should be left for the states or smaller jurisdictions, simply because standards of how much "safe feelingness" needs to be enforced is more of a personal issue than an ethical one.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2007, 09:25:33 pm by MDude »

FyberOptic

  • King of Earth
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2522
  • Oh god what is that?
    • Fybertech.com
Re: 2008
« Reply #31 on: January 24, 2007, 09:35:13 pm »
Quote
Tell me that when gang's have Gatling guns. As long as a person is responsible with whatever fire arm he, she owns it shouldn't matter the size or firing speed.

Gangs already have plenty of illegal weapons.  That doesn't mean countless americans should be allowed to have them too.  I don't think you'd be very cool with knowing your neighbor legally owned a working gatling gun, especially if they were possibly a crackpot.

ecto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 606
  • Ghosty,ghosty!
Re: 2008
« Reply #32 on: January 24, 2007, 10:20:19 pm »
Gatling gun no. I'm trying to make a point here. your assuming that every person who has an automatic, or semi automatic fire arm is irresponsible with it. That's just not true. I'd like to mention the Vidder amendment here. How safe do you think the citizens of New Orleans felt when their guns were being taken away from them? The law abiding citizens were left defenseless during Hurricane Katrina while gangs, looters, and criminals ran wild through the streets.
I'd rather go hunting with Dick Cheney, then go for a car ride with Ted Kennedy.Neuf sed.

FyberOptic

  • King of Earth
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2522
  • Oh god what is that?
    • Fybertech.com
Re: 2008
« Reply #33 on: January 24, 2007, 11:37:31 pm »
There's a difference though between having a handgun and a freaking machine gun.  I'm referring to the latter.  There is nobody on the planet that needs that for self-defense or normal hunting, yet they're legally sold.

ecto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 606
  • Ghosty,ghosty!
Re: 2008
« Reply #34 on: January 24, 2007, 11:56:07 pm »
No self respecting hunter would take a machine gun with them to hunt. As for defense I agree it's a bit much. Like you said they are legally sold, which doesn't make them illegal. Until they are made illegal it is up to the person who purchases them to decide whether or not they need it. The same goes with ciggarettes. As much as I despise them i'm not going to tell a person whether or not they need them, or can't buy them.
I'd rather go hunting with Dick Cheney, then go for a car ride with Ted Kennedy.Neuf sed.

Buzzard

  • Flying biker bandit
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 856
  • So I heard you like Mudkips
Re: 2008
« Reply #35 on: January 25, 2007, 12:17:35 am »
My arms are illegal in 12 different states.
Ten years to the minute, no longer in it.

HitomiBoy

  • People. Mmm Mmm Good.
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 155
  • -Phago-
    • Melpomene
Re: 2008
« Reply #36 on: January 25, 2007, 12:40:26 am »
As ecto is saying over and over again, though a gattling gun isn't exactly necessary, it IS legal, and it is part of our rights, as such, it must be protected and respected until it is deemed illigal by a legislative body.

Also if my neighbor had a gattling cannon in his garage, I would so totally visit every day.

Lastly, the idea that weapons bought legally are used to kill someone illegally is, in general, proposterous. True, some people do kill others with their legal firearms, however, gang violence and other sources of deaths, are majorly cause by black market weapons bought illegally, and restricting gun ownership would result in high crime rates, as is evident in great brittain.

Prox

  • lolwut
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 913
    • Right here
Re: 2008
« Reply #37 on: January 25, 2007, 12:47:55 am »
There is nobody on the planet that needs that for self-defense

I think it's funny that there are Americans who want to have heavy assault weapons to defend themselves against threats posed by unlikely futurities with easier solutions, but victims of genocide in Africa don't even have access to them even though they need them more.

Buzzard

  • Flying biker bandit
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 856
  • So I heard you like Mudkips
Re: 2008
« Reply #38 on: January 25, 2007, 02:38:36 am »
I don't think anyone in the world our country would ever need a machine gun to defend themselves. This isn't Fallout, dammit. We aren't trying to defend ourselves from an insane US government or deathclaws or something. Besides, who needs weapons when youve got THESE. /me flexes

Edit: just noticed what I typed. DIDN'T MEAN TO TYPE THAT.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2007, 02:42:16 am by Buzzard »
Ten years to the minute, no longer in it.

ecto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 606
  • Ghosty,ghosty!
Re: 2008
« Reply #39 on: January 25, 2007, 02:51:56 am »
Quote
I don't think anyone in the world would ever need a machine gun to defend themselves.

Take a look at Iraq, then rethink that. How many ak47's do you see in a crowd of people on the news every day? That can be either a full, or semi automatic weapon. In their case it would be a full automatic, which has the potential to be just as fast as a machine gun. 

As I typed that I didn't see that Buzzard crossed out world.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2007, 02:55:12 am by ecto »
I'd rather go hunting with Dick Cheney, then go for a car ride with Ted Kennedy.Neuf sed.

Mage

  • Veteran Lurker
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 80
Re: 2008
« Reply #40 on: January 25, 2007, 01:05:17 pm »
    Making guns illegal to buy would probably not make them harder to obtain. Plus there are a few trust issues if only the military is allowed guns. Ultimately, the only way to control such tools is at the lowest level. That is to say, the individuals who want and collect guns. If you have to have a gun around the house, KEEP IT LOCKED UP. Consult a security expert, keep them out of the hands of children and/or thieves, and don't keep a gun around if you don't know how to use one very well. Knowledge of firearms can give one respect for the damage they can do(at least it has for me).

Handguns, machine guns, et cetera... yeah, they're not designed to do anything but kill people. But if you want to collect them, I'm not one to stop you. I just want to make sure you don't want to use them first.
<INSERT PATHETIC ATTEMPT AT A WITTICISM HERE>

ecto

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 606
  • Ghosty,ghosty!
Re: 2008
« Reply #41 on: January 25, 2007, 01:53:32 pm »
Quote
I just want to make sure you don't want to use them first.

Ha! You think i'm some gun toting Rambo. I don't even own a fire arm.I come from a military family Buzzard, and yes I know the whole nine yards about gun saftey. There are proper places such as shooting ranges, pits, and competitions where you can fire a gun lawfully. As for keeping a gun around kids those are the type of people that don't need them in the first place. Your a fucking moron for not locking it in a safe. (That wasn't directed to you so don't take it the wrong way.)As for you saying they are designed just to kill people that's not true. Also i'd like to add Guns are not evil, they are cold, careless machines incapable of feeling.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2007, 01:55:41 pm by ecto »
I'd rather go hunting with Dick Cheney, then go for a car ride with Ted Kennedy.Neuf sed.

FyberOptic

  • King of Earth
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2522
  • Oh god what is that?
    • Fybertech.com
Re: 2008
« Reply #42 on: January 25, 2007, 05:23:55 pm »
Mage != Buzzard

But yeah, the problem is that people are irresponsible with them in terms of keeping them put away and locked up.  Worse yet, irresponsible parents let kids mess with guns at a young age, letting them get comfortable with the feel and how they work, which is really not a good thing.  It lets freaks like the Columbine guys have enough confidence in using them to steal them out of their own house and then go blow up a bunch of people.  Had those guns not been available, or at least had they never had the opportunity to learn how to use them, there's a very high chance Columbine would have never happened.

And then of course, irresponsible gun owners are a big part of why our video games come under constant attack, by people trying to redirect the blame away from the source when bad things like this happen.

I said irresponsible about 100 times..!

Mage

  • Veteran Lurker
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 80
Re: 2008
« Reply #43 on: January 26, 2007, 12:49:26 pm »
Mage does not equal Buzzard. I'm not saying everyone who has a gun is a maniac. I'm saying they should keep them out of the maniacs' hands. That's why we have waiting periods on purchasing firearms, in theory.
<INSERT PATHETIC ATTEMPT AT A WITTICISM HERE>

FyberOptic

  • King of Earth
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2522
  • Oh god what is that?
    • Fybertech.com
Re: 2008
« Reply #44 on: January 26, 2007, 05:52:34 pm »
!= means "does not equal" in case you didn't realize what I said.