Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / Colorado Aurora Tragedy.

Author
Message
Benjamin
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 27th Jul 2012 02:37 Edited at: 27th Jul 2012 02:37
Link
Quote: "How is the enforcement of no guns in a theatre going to stop criminals such as this one?"


Metal detectors etc. I meant in a 'perfect' case where people like this couldn't get through.



Support a charitable indie game project!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 27th Jul 2012 02:41
Link
weird.. in sweden -> guns "banned" -> low amount of armed crimes/shootings -> I dont have a gun/insert other kind of weapon here -> I feel very safe.



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
Wolf
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Nov 2007
Location: Luxemburg
Posted: 27th Jul 2012 03:37 Edited at: 27th Jul 2012 03:49
Link
@EAI

Quote: "For what it's worth, any thing used to assault another individual is an an assault weapon. The term "assault weapon" is a misnomer used to evoke an emotional response. There is really no such firearm classified as an "assault weapon". There are, however, "assault rifles" which are defined as being select-fire rifles capable of burst or fully automatic firing. Such weapons are classified as "machineguns" in the USA and are very tightly regulated by the federal government under the 1934 National Firearms Act (NFA). I know that was a bit of TL : DR but I think it's important that people know what they're advocating for/against and too often language is used to manipulate an emotional response."


Very true! The english language is plagued with euphemisms.

I just join in on the gun discussion here:

First of all..whoever came up with the "car" argument... seriously? A gun is designed to kill people (I know, its also a sport, hobby and hunting tool... but no matter how pro-gun you are: You have to face the fact that assault rifles have been designed for military use. )

You CAN kill people with a car but a fully automatic weapon takes it to a whole new level. There really is no comparison.

Quote: " An AR-15 is nothing like an M-16 "


Isn't that practically the same gun?


Quote: "Because The 2nd Amendment does not allow the public to be armed only for sporting. It was conceived as a hedge against tyranny and so that the public could resist a standing army. Yes, American revolutionaries did not have the sort of firepower found today but they did have better, more effective small arms than professional armies of that era."


True! The idea was that the public could overthrow a government that didn't act in their beliefs and defend itself against any kind of oppression. Even though the american gunlaws feel alien for most europeans... you kind of have to agree if you look at it from this point of view.

Quote: "Personally I think society benefits much more from trying to understand and correct the factors which causes individuals to become so hopeless about their futures that they turn to these sorts of horrible acts.

Assigning responsibility for actions to an individual seems hard enough for some to grasp so I suppose it's a pipe dream to contemplate societal responsibility as well. It's much easier though to try and blame tools.
"


Blame the "with what" instead of the "why"...reminds of the "killer games" videogame lunacy in germany a few years ago that blamed... and I'm not kidding... counterstrike for shootouts.

Pointing fingers is...of course... a lot easier than questioning social infrastructures and education systems.

Quote: "I think you have an exaggerated view of the capabililties of a gun. Life isn't like an FPS game. Lateral moving targets are very hard to hit and more often than not, a gunshot wound is not fatal if treated. There were 50 people shot in that theater who did not die.
"


My grandfather shot himself twice right in the face a few weeks ago and survived. My uncle (ex mercenary) has been shot three times (once in the chest close to the heart) and my great grandfather has been marked at the throat by a bullet during an hunting accident.

While it is true that hitting moving targets isn't as easy as it looks in games and movies non-lethal gunshot wounds often criple you and you have to concider the psychological trauma of the victim.

Quote: "No thanks. I'd rather be free and with risk than safely caged."


A delight to read. Too many people tend to treat a lot of freedom for the illusion of a little safety (see: airport security). I would much rather have a world where I might get shot, stabbed, run over, beaten to death or robbed but where I also might fall in love, have some delightful adventurous experience and feel the raw force of life than to life in some sterile, soft and safety obsessed society. If you want to have highs in your life...you gotta have some lows too. take a chance...you're not going to live forever anyway! I also wish somebody would just start "fly at your own risk airlines" and censor the "concerned mommies" on television.

But I start to ramble.

Quote: "Americans see a gun as a way of defense, because it was introduced to you as a method of stopping bears from eating your wives or something. "


No, it wasn't.

Quote: " Unfortunately; the criminals don't adhere to the rules we have set forth."


Thats true...criminal organisations will get firearms no matter how strict you gun laws are. There was an incident in luxembourg where a money transport has been robbed...and one of the criminals had a rocket launcher. I don't know where to get a rocket launcher, or how it got here... but he had it. My point is that if citizens (us) are armed aswell...gang violence and robbery's could be easily stopped right away but arming everyone? A few psychological tests should be there. I know a lot of people that I'm happy that they don't have guns.

I saw a lot of newsreports and documentations on the german television that highlights american gunlaws as complete insanity I got the same undertone from the newsreport of this incident. Some of it was downright racist.

Personally, I think shooting is a lot of (expensive ) fun. The only reason why I don't have a license is because of the horrendous weaponprices in luxemburg. However, even though I would never use a gun to kill someone, I can see from an objective point of view that it is a horribly lethal weapon and that someone less dysfunctional might better not have access to it

Our eruopean gunlaws aren't bulletproof either. You could have a lobotomy and still find assault rifles in belgium.

Guns wouldn't exist in a perfect world...but thats not going to happen.

You don't need to be so afraid of your fellow human beings. The news are filled with violence and crime for a reason (sensationalism). A news headline with "Husband returns home from work safe again" "Lonely man finally found love in the subway today" or " family had a warm and cuddly christmas eve" doesn't sell that well. (I would buy that newspaper though ) None of this implies on you daily life.

I drive to work on the highway every day and I'm in traffic with hundreds of other people driving motorised vehicules with dangerous speed around me and somehow we all manage to be reasonable and conciouss enough not to cause a huge vehicular murder mayhem. If everyone would suddenly be armed... some people would start shooting other people (they might have otherwise have stabbed) but most...the vast majority wouldn't. Some people do also drive themselves in a crowd...but you don't and I don't.

(I know that I just contradicted my opening line...deal with it)

Its 2012... technology, science and knowledge improves at a stunning rate and I get the feeling that a lot of people can't handle our century. Maybe a lot more will lose their mind but thats just a minor side effect of progress.

I'm also really tired of movies basing on comic books.



-Wolf



-Wolf

"This thread has been locked for the following reason: Too much EPIC" - Thraxas
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Dark Java Dude 64
Community Leader
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Sep 2010
Location: Neither here nor there nor anywhere
Posted: 27th Jul 2012 03:44
Link
@Quik you live in good ol Sweden? How awesome that you live near Notch.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 27th Jul 2012 04:26 Edited at: 27th Jul 2012 04:30
Link
Quote: "@Quik you live in good ol Sweden? How awesome that you live near Notch."


More proud to be close to the magicka devs and Paradox but.. yeah x)
Quote: "True! The idea was that the public could overthrow a government that didn't act in their beliefs and defend itself against any kind of oppression. Even though the american gunlaws feel alien for most europeans... you kind of have to agree if you look at it from this point of view."

That, i certanly do. However, i do not agree with...
Well, I play this game called "Victoria" (by Paradox)
As soon as the public is mishappy with you, they do pick up arms and shoot at you. Which, to me is quite.. NO. If the goverment is not paying you enough in medical bills, or taxing too high YOU DO NOT START SHOOTING PEOPLE...

And enough that I don't like the concept of shooting down the goverment, I do feel that...
If you go, to a riot - and lets say, its for a good cause. And you bring guns, and ONLY, ONLY use them if the police start shooting AT YOU first, then YES. I can see that as being legit.
provided it's for a good cause and only used in self defence...
ugh, my view on guns and shizz is quite.. complicated and often turns about on itself...


I'm ONLY for guns, when it comes to 100% total self defence. I'm a pacifist - I do not believe in the military (no offence intended to any ex military guys(soldiers(mindslap on me)) EDIT: and current soldiers /end EDIT - let's not ramp up a discussion about that here), and naturally i'm against any form of weapon carrying, because unless you are in a situation in where you probably will die, do I in my mind "allow" the usage of lethal weapons, may seem unfair but that's how I see it. Life is holy and should not be wasted.
Edit again: By holy I do not mean... from a religious perspective, I use it as a "synonym" to "infinite worth"

and even if you do kill someone in self defence, in protection of you, or maybe a family memeber, while you should take pride in that you defended yourself or your son/daughter/wife, you should still, feel remorse and feel bad about the fact that you KILLED, and TOOK THE LIFE of another human being.

Think about what he - was about to take from you. All that, you took from him. Justified or not - it's still a horrible thing in my head.



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
CoffeeGrunt
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2007
Location: England
Posted: 27th Jul 2012 04:35
Link
One quick question...

Why not have a taser?
Back to top
Profile PM Email
KeithC
Senior Moderator
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2005
Location: Michigan
Posted: 27th Jul 2012 04:50
Link
Quote: "Metal detectors etc. I meant in a 'perfect' case where people like this couldn't get through."


No such "perfect" situation exists. There will always be a back door, a disgruntled employee that has access, or some other way to gain entry.

As to the question of a Taser; they are effective, as I use one at work, and have been shot by one (longest 5 seconds of my life). However; there is a maximum distance one can be shot (the ones we carry at work are only effective up to 25ft.), and they aren't perfect. Hard to reload quickly as well; with zero after effects (again, I know from first-hand experience). Having said that; for those that are "gun shy", it is a viable option for personal protection.

-Keith

Back to top
Profile PM Email
Errant AI
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Aug 2006
Location:
Posted: 27th Jul 2012 06:01
Link
Quote: "whoever came up with the "car" argument... seriously? A gun is designed to kill people"


That might have been me. My point was simply to illustrate that there are any number of ways a person could kill and injure a great number of people in a short time if they had no access to a firearm. A bomb could have been equally as effective as well and apparently he had knowledge of the construction of such things. I suppose if one was a really patient passive-agressive sociopath they could just open up a fast food chain but I'm being snarky now.

Quote: "Isn't that practically the same gun?"


Cosmetically, yes. And this is what gets people worked up about it.

While AR-15s are capable of using most of the same parts as an M16, the key differences lie in the lower receiver. This is the part that is considered to be a firearm. An AR-15 is milled differently on the inside so that it can not accept the automatic sear components from M-16s or M-4s.

M-16 lower receivers and Drop-In-Auto-Sears (DIAS) are classed as machineguns and are finite in quantity (none new have been put into the civilian market since 1989), expensive ($10,000 - $16,000), and tightly controlled via the NFA system (each transfer requires a $200 tax stamp fee, fingerprints, photos, FBI background check, Local law enforcement approval, registration and about a six month wait).

AR-15's on the other hand are treated the same as any other consumer rifle such as a Ruger 10/22 or Mini-14. The process for buying one varies state to state. Here in Oregon, you just show your ID or Driver's license, wait a few minutes for a State Police background check then pay the kind folks, they log the purchase in a spiral notebook of sorts and off you go. Other states require checking a national database, waiting periods before you can pick up your new purchase or any other number of provisions and hurdles.

Couldn't a user modify their AR-15 to be full-auto? Yes, it's possible with know-how and machining equipment. It would be a serious felony crime to do so. Obviously, criminals wouldn't care but it's no reason to single out the AR-15 because any number of semi-automatic weapons can be converted to crudely opperate as full-auto with metal files or shoe laces.

In the right hands, even old, manually operated guns can put out a lot of lead.

Quote: "While it is true that hitting moving targets isn't as easy as it looks in games and movies non-lethal gunshot wounds often criple you and you have to concider the psychological trauma of the victim."


The thing people need to get past is the mental association of the potential to do harm and actually doing harm. A dog can tear your face off and unlike a gun, a dog actually has a mind of its own. There's an infinate number of things in this life that can maim or traumatize a person. Some of those things can be negated with a gun. That said, firearms should be treated with the same respect given to any potentially dangerous thing so that avoidable accidents don't happen.

Quote: " I would much rather have a world where I might get shot, stabbed, run over, beaten to death or robbed but where I also might fall in love, have some delightful adventurous experience and feel the raw force of life than to life in some sterile, soft and safety obsessed society. If you want to have highs in your life...you gotta have some lows too. take a chance...you're not going to live forever anyway! I also wish somebody would just start "fly at your own risk airlines" and censor the "concerned mommies" on television."


I could not agree more! Well, other than the censoring... I feel everyone has a right to their voice but a little balance sure would be a nice change.

Quote: "If you go, to a riot - and lets say, its for a good cause. And you bring guns, and ONLY, ONLY use them if the police start shooting AT YOU first, then YES. I can see that as being legit."


Last year when the Occupy demonstrations were first sweeping the nation, the demonstrations were largely peaceful other than refusing to disperse. One night, in a cordinated effort, numrous of the big city demonstrations were raided and broken up by riot police using gas, beanbag shotguns, etc. There were only a couple of the large demonstrations which were not raided. One of those was in Phoenix where the Occupy protesters were joined by open-carry advocates carrying AR-15s and other weapons. These people were expressing their 2nd Amendment rights so that others (who they did not necessecarily agree with ) could be be safe to express their 1st Amendment rights (free speech).

Ideally, that's how it works. It isn't about making a coup attempt or "voting from the rooftops". It's about offering a counterbalance to the state's monopoly of force so that a dialogue can take place and that the rights and dignity of the people be respected.
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Wolf
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Nov 2007
Location: Luxemburg
Posted: 28th Jul 2012 21:06 Edited at: 28th Jul 2012 22:11
Link
Quote: "no reason to single out the AR-15 "


Do people do that? The newsreport I've seen has showed a gunstore where they had an FN2000 an various H&K Rifles... weapons just as black and deadly as an AR15

Quote: " Here in Oregon, you just show your ID or Driver's license, wait a few minutes for a State Police background check then pay the kind folks, they log the purchase in a spiral notebook of sorts and off you go."


Wow! Over here you get dragged through a horrible clusterhump of bureaucracy.

Quote: "The thing people need to get past is the mental association of the potential to do harm and actually doing harm"


Thats not what I meant, what I ment was the trauma of people that already have been shot in the incident My point was that even though they might not have died from the attack, a lot of these people might and probably will be scarred for life. ...not the fact that some people can't cope with the idea that someone owning a gun might just use it against you.


Quote: "Well, other than the censoring... I feel everyone has a right to their voice but a little balance sure would be a nice change."


Of course! The latter was ment as a joke

Quote: "and have been shot by one (longest 5 seconds of my life)."


yeah...every second date I go to is also just zappp

Quote: "Couldn't a user modify their AR-15 to be full-auto? Yes, it's possible with know-how and machining equipment. "


Wouldn't a full-auto weapon in the hands of a non-trained psychopath be less effective than a semi automatic one? Just in theory?



-Wolf

"This thread has been locked for the following reason: Too much EPIC" - Thraxas
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
ionstream
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2004
Location: Overweb
Posted: 28th Jul 2012 21:54
Link
Oh this is still going on.

If you think that the rocket launcher hyperbole is invalid because rocket launchers are already illegal, then you are failing to understand my point. There is an arbitrary line for the kinds of weapons that a person should and should not have, which no one disagrees with. In general, that line occurs when a weapon is too destructive to be considered purely for defense or hunting. So ignoring that fact when arguing that guns is being dishonest.

Perhaps the people that go through such a deadly shooting don't think to themselves "if only I had a gun so I could fight back!" but rather "if only this guy wasn't able to get the guns he has, then this might not have happened." Nobody thinks that banning these kinds of weapons/make the guns harder to get would end violence. The goal is to minimize it to the best of our ability.

Quote: "Wouldn't a full-auto weapon in the hands of a non-trained psychopath be less effective than a semi automatic one? Just in theory?"


No, not at all.

Back to top
Profile PM Website
CoffeeGrunt
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2007
Location: England
Posted: 28th Jul 2012 22:06
Link
...And yet I don't think that'll happen. No-one wants to give up guns, because no-one wants to be the weaker man when everyone else has one.

It's like trading cards on a playground, only life or death. Still the same mentality applies; if I don't have this, I will be inferior.

I suppose people trained with guns from a young age learn to respect them, and that is good. I can imagine that our members and a lot of other people like Keith, Errant and such have been around guns for a long time, and therefore know the ins and outs, and treat them as deserved.

Yet I don't doubt that there are a lot of Americans out there who treat guns as a kid does. I think the problem may not be gun ownership, so much as sitting down and making sure people know it's a lethal, last-resort weapon. Maybe people wouldn't fear guns as much if they understood them more? Not just in America as well.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Nateholio
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Dec 2005
Location: I\'ve Been Everywhere
Posted: 28th Jul 2012 22:15 Edited at: 28th Jul 2012 22:19
Link
Quote: "Americans see a gun as a way of defense, because it was introduced to you as a method of stopping bears from eating your wives or something."


Uh, no. It was "introduced" as a way to defend oneself, family, and property from those who may wish them harm...INCLUDING the government. Most Americans who have half a brain don't trust local/State/federal gov't much if at all.

Let me ask you this: how many times have you had to pull a gun on someone, or wish you could have if you can't own a firearm where you live? I don't mean being irresponsible and stupid, going around gunslinging. I mean that you needed to defend yourself or property from harm.

I've had to do it on several occasions (home defense and while in the car to name two occasions). I'd rather have a firearm than not, even if the other guy doesn't. It's amazing the change in someone's attitude when looking down the barrel of a firearm pointed at them.

In the end, if y'all in the UK were fine with just giving up a right your forefathers cherished then by all means do so. But also keep your nose out of what we in the US want to do in our own States - I know, that sounds odd coming from someone who lives in the country that seems to invade other countries and generally warmonger around the planet, but I hate that too.

In Development: K96 - Combat Simulation
Keep your Hope and Change, I choose individual Liberty!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 28th Jul 2012 22:25
Link
Quote: "Let me ask you this: how many times have you had to pull a gun on someone, or wish you could have if you can't own a firearm where you live? I don't mean being irresponsible and stupid, going around gunslinging. I mean that you needed to defend yourself or property from harm.
"


None.

Quote: "In the end, if y'all in the UK were fine with just giving up a right your forefathers cherished then by all means do so. But also keep your nose out of what we in the US want to do in our own States - I know, that sounds odd coming from someone who lives in the country that seems to invade other countries and generally warmonger around the planet, but I hate that too."


I would say, until that country stops butting it's nose in everyones buisness, then I see no reason to why I should. No offense to you intended, needless to say. But, US really needs to stop thinking of itself as the allmighty.



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
Nateholio
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Dec 2005
Location: I\'ve Been Everywhere
Posted: 28th Jul 2012 22:30
Link
Quote: "I would say, until that country stops butting it's nose in everyones buisness, then I see no reason to why I should. No offense to you intended, needless to say. But, US really needs to stop thinking of itself as the allmighty."


You're right, the US does need to stop going around sticking it's nose in the business of others. But neither party wants this to happen and the masses of sheeple keep voting for warmongers from both parties. Whether its Romney or Obama in 2012, the warmongering won't stop.

But this doesn't have anything to do with my PERSONAL rights to keep and bear arms.

In Development: K96 - Combat Simulation
Keep your Hope and Change, I choose individual Liberty!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 28th Jul 2012 22:32
Link
Quote: "But this doesn't have anything to do with my PERSONAL rights to keep and bear arms."


Which is related to your country laws as far as i'm concerned...



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
Nateholio
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Dec 2005
Location: I\'ve Been Everywhere
Posted: 28th Jul 2012 22:38 Edited at: 28th Jul 2012 22:39
Link
Quote: "Which is related to your country laws as far as i'm concerned..."


I don't know if you're from the UK (or NZ/Canada/Australia) or not, but rights have nothing to do with what laws say. That's something us lowly colonists learned from the Brits, back when the Brits held their rights "sacred" and British Citizenship was the envy of many around the world.

In Development: K96 - Combat Simulation
Keep your Hope and Change, I choose individual Liberty!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
CoffeeGrunt
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2007
Location: England
Posted: 28th Jul 2012 22:42
Link
Quote: "Let me ask you this: how many times have you had to pull a gun on someone, or wish you could have if you can't own a firearm where you live? I don't mean being irresponsible and stupid, going around gunslinging. I mean that you needed to defend yourself or property from harm."


Never. Every encounter I've been in, up to one where I had a rusty nail at my throat held by a guy who very much disliked me in high school, I managed to talk my way out of.

Quote: "Uh, no. It was "introduced" as a way to defend oneself, family, and property from those who may wish them harm...INCLUDING the government. Most Americans who have half a brain don't trust local/State/federal gov't much if at all."


Yet you vote for these people, then point a gun at them? In my defense, I generally don't wanna shoot David Cameron or the Queen. Some might, but most don't. However, you're making this political.

Quote: "In the end, if y'all in the UK were fine with just giving up a right your forefathers cherished then by all means do so."




No but really. Our history is so long, bloody and filled with so many rising and falling powers here that we can't point to a single group of people who decided how everyone should live their lives. I'm glad for the freedom earned by historic chaos.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 28th Jul 2012 22:43
Link
From sweden, as previously stated in this thread

Not sure why the colonists should have any effect what so ever on how things're done in modern days...



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
xplosys
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Jan 2006
Playing: FPSC Multiplayer Games
Posted: 28th Jul 2012 22:46
Link
Nateholio, you're really not helping an already bad view of America/Americans, and this thread has reached it's deterioration point.

!retupmoc eht ni deppart m'I !pleH

Back to top
Profile PM
BlackFox
FPSC Master
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th May 2008
Location: Knight to Queens Bishop 3
Posted: 28th Jul 2012 22:55
Link
Quote: " this thread has reached it's deterioration point."


It had a few pages ago...


Twitter: @NFoxMedia
Back to top
Profile PM
Benjamin
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 28th Jul 2012 23:08 Edited at: 28th Jul 2012 23:09
Link
I've been in one situation where I would have liked a taser... but not a gun, since threatening him may not have been enough - because like I said before many people are stupid - and he may have tried to grab it off me (either causing me to shoot him, potentially fatally, or allowing him to do the same to me). Not really worth the risk IMO. My life is worth far more than my possessions.

Quote: "Uh, no. It was "introduced" as a way to defend oneself, family, and property from those who may wish them harm...INCLUDING the government."


I'd just like to point out that very few people (just the paranoid conspiracy folk) believe that their goverment will 'turn' on them and that they will have to defend themselves against them. It may have been a good point back in the day when the constitution was written, but I think we have reached a certain level of political stability and civility that this particular point isn't relevant anymore. I won't argue against self-defence against others though.



Support a charitable indie game project!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Green Gandalf
VIP Member
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jan 2005
Playing: Malevolence:Sword of Ahkranox, Skyrim, Civ6.
Posted: 28th Jul 2012 23:37
Link
Quote: "Nateholio, you're really not helping an already bad view of America/Americans"


I don't think anyone has a bad view of Americans - only of some Americans (as with any other nationality). And which Americans depends on your point of view of course - just as I'm sure KeithC doesn't dismiss all non-Americans as "wishy-washy".

Quote: "Quote: " this thread has reached it's deterioration point."

It had a few pages ago..."


Indeed it had - but then Wolf joined in with some very sensible comments and it came to life again.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
JLMoondog
Moderator
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Jan 2009
Location: Paradox
Posted: 29th Jul 2012 00:07
Link
Fun fact: The Constitution is actually supposed to be re-written every 19 years to accommodate for the change in political and social standings. In the last 200 years we've yet to change the font..

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
BlackFox
FPSC Master
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th May 2008
Location: Knight to Queens Bishop 3
Posted: 29th Jul 2012 00:28
Link
Quote: "The Constitution is actually supposed to be re-written every 19 years to accommodate for the change in political and social standings. In the last 200 years we've yet to change the font.."


That's because someone in office will get the idea to use the Wingdings font. Then watch real confusion set in.


Twitter: @NFoxMedia
Back to top
Profile PM
CoffeeGrunt
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2007
Location: England
Posted: 29th Jul 2012 00:34
Link
Oh please...please do.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Benjamin
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 29th Jul 2012 00:37
Link
Quote: "Fun fact: The Constitution is actually supposed to be re-written every 19 years to accommodate for the change in political and social standings. In the last 200 years we've yet to change the font.."


This is probably due to humans being very stubborn creatures that are reluctant to re-evaluate anything once they have their mind made up. At least, that's my theory.

Applies to a lot of things people believe...



Support a charitable indie game project!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 29th Jul 2012 02:30
Link
Quote: "This is probably due to humans being very stubborn creatures that are reluctant to re-evaluate anything once they have their mind made up. At least, that's my theory."


And there's no way in hell you're changing it?

Back to top
Profile PM Website
Errant AI
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Aug 2006
Location:
Posted: 29th Jul 2012 06:50
Link
Quote: "Do people do that? The newsreport I've seen has showed a gunstore where they had an FN2000 an various H&K Rifles... weapons just as black and deadly as an AR15"


It changes with the seasons. If you showed the same photo to the general public, there would probably be a supprising number of people who would identify an FS2000 as an AR-15. A decade ago, people would have thought it was an AK-47 and before then they would have called it an Uzi. Likewise, all pistols are Glocks. Journalist's guide to firearms identification (obviously not updated post-Aurora)

Quote: "Thats not what I meant, what I ment was the trauma of people that already have been shot in the incident"


I understood what you were saying and I think my argument is still valid. It's probably safe to say that anyone who's life has been touched by violence (of any kind) will not be 100% the same afterwards.

Quote: "Of course! The latter was ment as a joke"

I figured as much

Quote: "If you think that the rocket launcher hyperbole is invalid because rocket launchers are already illegal, then you are failing to understand my point. There is an arbitrary line for the kinds of weapons that a person should and should not have, which no one disagrees with. In general, that line occurs when a weapon is too destructive to be considered purely for defense or hunting. So ignoring that fact when arguing that guns is being dishonest."


It's invalid because the arbitrary line you are attempting to redefine has already been established. BTW, as far as the Federal government is concerned, rockets and other "Destructive Devices" are in fact legal but they are highly regulated and banned in some states. AR-15s fill niches in both hunting (varmint control) and self defense quite well. That you would elevate a semi-automatic rifle to the same category as clearly offensive weapons says more about your personal bias than the dishonesty of pro-gun advocates. It's also a little simplistic to believe that there is anything in this world that "no one disagrees with". But maybe I'm still missing your point :S
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Aaron Miller
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Feb 2006
Playing: osu!
Posted: 29th Jul 2012 07:45
Link
Quote: "People really need to stop quoting this as if its some sort of fact."

I was expressing an opinion reflecting my views by using a quote from someone more respected than I.

Cheers,
Aaron

Check out my website! - Blog
Twitter
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Nateholio
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Dec 2005
Location: I\'ve Been Everywhere
Posted: 29th Jul 2012 08:49 Edited at: 29th Jul 2012 09:01
Link
Quote: "Nateholio, you're really not helping an already bad view of America/Americans"

If refusing to be a victim in this modern society, which thinks that waiting for the state to come to your aid and ending up a victim is noble but defending yourself with lethal force if necessary is vile, makes me advance the bad view then oh well. I don't subscribe to the victim lionization/self-defender damnation school of pretzel logic.

Quote: "Yet you vote for these people, then point a gun at them?"


Firearms are the last safeguard against politicians doing unconstitutional things or things which violate your Individual Liberties. As for the voting, even when someone votes for a politician that says great things said politician always does everything but what they ran on.

Quote: "However, you're making this political."

This got political when the Statists started blaming firearms for the incident and saying that nobody but the state should have firearms.

Quote: "Not sure why the colonists should have any effect what so ever on how things're done in modern days..."

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it, or stand by as it's repeated and wonder why things get mucked up. The colonists write all of the founding documents of the US federal gov't. However, I mentioned "lowly colonists" as a friendly jest at my UK brethren.

In Development: K96 - Combat Simulation
Keep your Hope and Change, I choose individual Liberty!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
CoffeeGrunt
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2007
Location: England
Posted: 29th Jul 2012 15:12
Link
Quote: "Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it, or stand by as it's repeated and wonder why things get mucked up. The colonists write all of the founding documents of the US federal gov't. However, I mentioned "lowly colonists" as a friendly jest at my UK brethren."


In our defence, we were also fighting the French navies and Spanish troops too. Not only did we manage to hold onto the Caribbean, but we also defended Britain from an invasion at home...oh, and bankrupted the French economy in the process. I consider that a military victory, despite losing America.

History doesn't repeat though. Our countries are allies, and the world has grown up now. A strike against one country hits everyone. We can see this now, in the manner that the economy of a few countries faltering has dragged the planet into economic trouble. Big countries have no need to go to war with each other, no gain can be drawn from it.

I'm sorry to say that you sound like the average guy who still ascertains to this day that Russians will invade you soon. That alone makes it difficult to respect you as a level-headed opinion.

Quite honestly, invading any country would cost more than that gained. Russia doesn't invade places, it just sells oil and gas to them at extortionate prices now...
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Nateholio
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Dec 2005
Location: I\'ve Been Everywhere
Posted: 29th Jul 2012 22:02
Link
Quote: "In our defence"

No need to go on defense. I wasn't putting the UK down; if the US gov't didn't have to recognize sovereignty of The Crown and other minor things I would like to see the US be a part of the Commonwealth.

Quote: "History doesn't repeat though."

Dangerous position to take.

Quote: "Our countries are allies...A strike against one country hits everyone."

If you're speaking exclusively of the US and UK, then yes of course. I always think of it like two guys who beat the crap outta each other then become best friends afterwords. If the UK, Canada, Australia, NZ were attacked by another country I'd be down at the local military recruiter signing up with the thought "let's bomb those bastards back to the stone age".

Quote: "I'm sorry to say that you sound like the average guy who still ascertains to this day that Russians will invade you soon."

No, with about 1.3 firearms per person here in the US (about 270 million firearms in 2007) plus law enforcement and military I'm not much worried about an invasion. What I am concerned about is the federal gov't handing over federal lands to China in exchange for canceling debts.

Quote: "Russia doesn't invade places, it just sells oil and gas to them at extortionate prices now... "

Indeed. They seem to be one of the few nations that has half a brain right now.

Now since I can't resist another jest..The other night an Aussie friend and I came to the conclusion that we both drive on the correct side of the road while you Brits are all backwards.

In Development: K96 - Combat Simulation
Keep your Hope and Change, I choose individual Liberty!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
CoffeeGrunt
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2007
Location: England
Posted: 29th Jul 2012 22:14
Link
Gratz, we believe the opposite, and have made a very successful campaign via Top Gear to prove it. Aussie and Yankee Top Gear are universally recognised as things that suck.

Quote: "If you're speaking exclusively of the US and UK, then yes of course. I always think of it like two guys who beat the crap outta each other then become best friends afterwords. If the UK, Canada, Australia, NZ were attacked by another country I'd be down at the local military recruiter signing up with the thought "let's bomb those bastards back to the stone age"."


Mmm, but everyone out there is smart enough to bleed other countries economically rather than spending on war. China and Russia won't attack, North Korea has a saddening economy that won't present much of a threat unless they start building nukes instead of tractor simulators, and the Middle Eastern countries don't really have the power but they are sitting on sticky black stuff we need.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Nateholio
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Dec 2005
Location: I\'ve Been Everywhere
Posted: 29th Jul 2012 22:26
Link
Quote: "Aussie and Yankee Top Gear are universally recognised as things that suck."

Haha! This is why I only watch the real Top Gear.

We used a very scientific method to come to the conclusion, in the same way that methods employed by Clarkson, Hammond, and May are very scientific.


In Development: K96 - Combat Simulation
Keep your Hope and Change, I choose individual Liberty!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 29th Jul 2012 23:32
Link
Quote: "If you're speaking exclusively of the US and UK, then yes of course. I always think of it like two guys who beat the crap outta each other then become best friends afterwords. If the UK, Canada, Australia, NZ were attacked by another country I'd be down at the local military recruiter signing up with the thought "let's bomb those bastards back to the stone age"."


ugh...
Quote: "No, with about 1.3 firearms per person here in the US (about 270 million firearms in 2007) plus law enforcement and military I'm not much worried about an invasion. What I am concerned about is the federal gov't handing over federal lands to China in exchange for canceling debts."


I'm more worried about the nukes than the firearms.



May I just ask why you're all debating who would attack the US/UK?
Why is that important?
Why is that important in this thread..?
Who gives a doodle?



Whose eyes are those eyes?
Back to top
Profile PM
Aaron Miller
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Feb 2006
Playing: osu!
Posted: 30th Jul 2012 01:51
Link
When I read this thread I have to double check the title. This seems to be incredibly off topic.

Cheers,
Aaron

Check out my website! - Blog
Twitter
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Dark Java Dude 64
Community Leader
14
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Sep 2010
Location: Neither here nor there nor anywhere
Posted: 30th Jul 2012 01:56
Link
Me is in agreeance.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Errant AI
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Aug 2006
Location:
Posted: 30th Jul 2012 02:47
Link
This is relevant. Saw this just now: Gun at 'Batman' causes stir
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
CoffeeGrunt
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2007
Location: England
Posted: 30th Jul 2012 03:06
Link
It's good to hear that people didn't freak out over it, and the situation was resolved calmly for everyone involved.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2025-05-21 18:07:33
Your offset time is: 2025-05-21 18:07:33