Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Topic closed!!!
Subject: »NEWS AROUND THE WORLD
Does that make Obama any less disgusting? (And you know I'm not pro-republican.)
cmon man, obama´s got swag
2. Guns don't kill. People kill. Guns are only a way to do so.
so there are two ways to handle it:
a. limit the access to guns, so stupid people won't kill
b. eliminate the stupid people
In the same way you can say that Hitler wasn't responsible for killing Jews. Hitler didn't kill them, the soldiers did.
so there are two ways to handle it:
a. limit the access to guns, so stupid people won't kill
b. eliminate the stupid people
In the same way you can say that Hitler wasn't responsible for killing Jews. Hitler didn't kill them, the soldiers did.
2. Guns don't kill. People kill. Guns are only a way to do so.
Obvious, so what? if a kid has a gun, he can kill ( obvious too), so kids having acces to guns is just brainless
usually, the middle term is the right thing in any matter:
1) having free access to guns, even kids or old people but rapper
2) dont having any acess
3) yes access but if you havent break an strong law ( stealing, killing, raping) and older than X
and no acess to stuff like bombs or ak 47 and...the commons sense
The point is you shouldn't exploit kids and emotions to push your personal political agenda.
if you know any politic who has real power and dont exploit kids to push etc , please tell me who.
like i said, about tobacco the "kids argument" was very powerfull. it seems to me less ethic to use "kids argument" in pe the tobacco stuff than in pe: to get real the number 3) i wrote up there
Obvious, so what? if a kid has a gun, he can kill ( obvious too), so kids having acces to guns is just brainless
usually, the middle term is the right thing in any matter:
1) having free access to guns, even kids or old people but rapper
2) dont having any acess
3) yes access but if you havent break an strong law ( stealing, killing, raping) and older than X
and no acess to stuff like bombs or ak 47 and...the commons sense
The point is you shouldn't exploit kids and emotions to push your personal political agenda.
if you know any politic who has real power and dont exploit kids to push etc , please tell me who.
like i said, about tobacco the "kids argument" was very powerfull. it seems to me less ethic to use "kids argument" in pe the tobacco stuff than in pe: to get real the number 3) i wrote up there
a. limit the access to guns, so stupid people won't kill
that is the point, absolutly
that is the point, absolutly
People who kill are usually either criminals or psychos, and they aren't supposed to buy weapons legally. But most of them would buy weapons anyway from illegal channels. If guns are forbidden, it's normal people, who can't buy weapons.
Hitler didn't kill them, the soldiers did.
Guns don't give you commands. If they do, then you shouldn't be able to get a license, so you shouldn't have a gun legally.
(edited)
Hitler didn't kill them, the soldiers did.
Guns don't give you commands. If they do, then you shouldn't be able to get a license, so you shouldn't have a gun legally.
(edited)
People who kill are usually either criminals or psychos, and they aren't supposed to buy weapons legally. But most of them would buy weapons anyway from illegal channels.
well, in some "gun partys" in USA, its easy to buy, appatrently legally guns, with soft controll, even in a regular shop the control is so soft, so in this "partys" is softer.(party as feria in spanish, guess im using a wrong word in english) wanting to regulate this is common sense, imo
(edited)
well, in some "gun partys" in USA, its easy to buy, appatrently legally guns, with soft controll, even in a regular shop the control is so soft, so in this "partys" is softer.(party as feria in spanish, guess im using a wrong word in english) wanting to regulate this is common sense, imo
(edited)
Wait...there is realy some politician who wants children to have guns? O_o
I agree that monitoring these shops / gunfares should be stricter, people should be permitted to buy guns only with license, and getting a license shouldn't be very easy.
However I don't see the point in restricting different types of guns (for example semi-automatic weapons) from people, who pass every criteria.
However I don't see the point in restricting different types of guns (for example semi-automatic weapons) from people, who pass every criteria.
Maybe, I don't know all politicians in the States. But 'the progressive side' claims there are plenty of those, and that is a simple lie. It's not like the Republican Party is pro gun ownership by kids.
so there are two ways to handle it:
a. limit the access to guns, so stupid people won't kill
b. eliminate the stupid people
c.
You forgot one option the government can do.
In the same way you can say that Hitler wasn't responsible for killing Jews. Hitler didn't kill them, the soldiers did.
So Hitler isn't responsible for killing Jews like a gun can't kill. Tell me, does a gun gives orders to exterminate a certain race? Does it give orders to kill?
If you do want to make a comparison with Hitler, this is the better one (still not ideal, but better): the German soldiers are the gun and Hitler is handling the gun.
a. limit the access to guns, so stupid people won't kill
b. eliminate the stupid people
c.
You forgot one option the government can do.
In the same way you can say that Hitler wasn't responsible for killing Jews. Hitler didn't kill them, the soldiers did.
So Hitler isn't responsible for killing Jews like a gun can't kill. Tell me, does a gun gives orders to exterminate a certain race? Does it give orders to kill?
If you do want to make a comparison with Hitler, this is the better one (still not ideal, but better): the German soldiers are the gun and Hitler is handling the gun.
if a kid has a gun, he can kill ( obvious too), so kids having acces to guns is just brainless
I'm not denying that.
the middle term is the right thing in any matter
Government imposing laws is almost never the right thing, not according to me that is.
if you know any politic who has real power and dont exploit kids to push etc , please tell me who
How does this affect the degree of moral unacceptability of Obama's gun show?
Of course politicians do that. Because they know the majority of people let their emotions decide instead of rationality. Obama and the pro-gun control lobby is basically saying: "You don't want gun control so you want more children's deaths." See what Ben Shapiro said on the debate with Piers Morgan. It is the pro-gun control lobby that is dancing on the children's graves.
I'm not denying that.
the middle term is the right thing in any matter
Government imposing laws is almost never the right thing, not according to me that is.
if you know any politic who has real power and dont exploit kids to push etc , please tell me who
How does this affect the degree of moral unacceptability of Obama's gun show?
Of course politicians do that. Because they know the majority of people let their emotions decide instead of rationality. Obama and the pro-gun control lobby is basically saying: "You don't want gun control so you want more children's deaths." See what Ben Shapiro said on the debate with Piers Morgan. It is the pro-gun control lobby that is dancing on the children's graves.
People who kill are usually either criminals or psychos, and they aren't supposed to buy weapons legally.
Actually most people who kill someone with a gun, at least in the US, are not criminals or psychos. They are people that behave agressive and on impuls use their gun, as it is conveniently available.
Examples are domestic violence, road rage, bar fights, etc.....
Childeren in the US are more likely to get killed or be wounded by accidental fire arm discharges, then get killed by a spree gunner.. On average 500 childeren die every year
So, it does make sense to restrict weapons in places with a lot of kids, like schools...
Also people living in a household with a gun, are more likely to be victim of homocide, compared to people living in a household without a gun.
but most of them would buy weapons anyway from illegal channels.
The illegal channels in the US are mainly filled with guns that were originally bought legally.
Untill now you are allowed to sell your gun privately, at gunshows for example. No checks needed.....
Just as criminal groups will put vunerable individuals under pressure to buy guns legally, who then end up on the streets..
Did you know that estimated 70% of weapons used by drug cartels in Mexico are from the US? Most of them originally purchased legally?
Guns don't kill people, but they make it too easy for the people that do.......
But the real danger is in accidents and misusage, reason enough to put some restrictions in place.
(edited)
Actually most people who kill someone with a gun, at least in the US, are not criminals or psychos. They are people that behave agressive and on impuls use their gun, as it is conveniently available.
Examples are domestic violence, road rage, bar fights, etc.....
Childeren in the US are more likely to get killed or be wounded by accidental fire arm discharges, then get killed by a spree gunner.. On average 500 childeren die every year
So, it does make sense to restrict weapons in places with a lot of kids, like schools...
Also people living in a household with a gun, are more likely to be victim of homocide, compared to people living in a household without a gun.
but most of them would buy weapons anyway from illegal channels.
The illegal channels in the US are mainly filled with guns that were originally bought legally.
Untill now you are allowed to sell your gun privately, at gunshows for example. No checks needed.....
Just as criminal groups will put vunerable individuals under pressure to buy guns legally, who then end up on the streets..
Did you know that estimated 70% of weapons used by drug cartels in Mexico are from the US? Most of them originally purchased legally?
Guns don't kill people, but they make it too easy for the people that do.......
But the real danger is in accidents and misusage, reason enough to put some restrictions in place.
(edited)
These are very good arguments. But my point is that all this has two aspects:
1) The quality of guns - restricting automatic, semi-automatic guns.
2) The number of people, who can buy and sell guns. As far as I know this isn't controlled at all in many states.
I think that the only problem is the second one. Shops which sell guns should need a special permission and people who buy those should need a license, and it shouldn't be too easy to get. No such thing should exist, like you sell your gun in a gunshow without any checks.
If this would be the case, the amount of sold guns would drop, and most importantly the second hand sales would drop even more. The state should have a database, about who bought, how many and what kind of guns.
I think, these restrictions are all make sense.
But I still don't see why should be the quality of guns restricted. If there would be no assault guns available, people would buy handguns and hunting shotguns, and the accidents, crimes, etc would happen with those.
1) The quality of guns - restricting automatic, semi-automatic guns.
2) The number of people, who can buy and sell guns. As far as I know this isn't controlled at all in many states.
I think that the only problem is the second one. Shops which sell guns should need a special permission and people who buy those should need a license, and it shouldn't be too easy to get. No such thing should exist, like you sell your gun in a gunshow without any checks.
If this would be the case, the amount of sold guns would drop, and most importantly the second hand sales would drop even more. The state should have a database, about who bought, how many and what kind of guns.
I think, these restrictions are all make sense.
But I still don't see why should be the quality of guns restricted. If there would be no assault guns available, people would buy handguns and hunting shotguns, and the accidents, crimes, etc would happen with those.
there are some politicians who support and accept childrens being able to shoot the gun of their parents, these about the kids.
about the law, there are some politicians who think that having laws like "if i want to buy a gun, i have to wait some days until the shop gets the certain that i havent broke the law in past, pe:homicidies, robs..," are laws against the freedom
about the law, there are some politicians who think that having laws like "if i want to buy a gun, i have to wait some days until the shop gets the certain that i havent broke the law in past, pe:homicidies, robs..," are laws against the freedom