Who Shouldnt Have Guns?

So, my hunting practices in an effort to feed my family should be outlawed because I am a civilian? I have never killed a human.

What dishonest nonsense!

Humans have perfected agriculture more than 5 thousand years ago and you have the cheek to suggest your gun is meant to feed your family?

Also, the notion that guns are for souly for killing is wrong IMO. A gun is good for only one thing, pulling the trigger generally releases some sort of spring which pushes a firing pin forward with enough force to strike the primer of the round in the chamber therefore pushing a projectile(s) down a barrel. Anything outside of that is the responsibility of the human. A loaded gun left in the corner of a room for 100 years will not go off until someone or something manipulates the trigger to start the previously described mechanical chain of events.

Nonsense.

A hammer is made to drive nails. That is its purpose. It can be used to bash your ignorant skull in, but that is not the purpose for which it was made.

Same can be said about a lot of everyday things -- a baseball bat, a meat cleaver, a chain saw, etc. etc.

A gun, on the other hand, was never meant for anything except to be fired at someone else. It wasn't made so that it sits in a corner for 100 years. It wasn't made to protect yourself from an assailant. And it certainly wasn't made so that you can feed your family.

Multiply the destructive effect of a gun a thousand times over, and you have a nuke. Now, try peddling the nonsense that the us nuke stockpile was made to protect you and a million others like you and you would have a fair appreciation of what I'm talking about.
 
Werbung:
I own several guns and quite a few have no practical purposes in its design that have nothing to do with killing or wounding. More like punching holes in paper or breaking clay pidgeons.

Paper that just happen to have the form of a human being drawn on it, hmmm? And they have cross-hairs drawn on where the vital points of a human being should be in order to kill, eh?

I know exactly what you mean.
 
Actually, I certainly know why your post is moronic. There are many reasons to own a gun...like, say, protection. My wife works late (finishes up at 2am today), carrying cash and credit card info. Yep, she carries a pistol (Makarov 9mm SA). Her best friend works late, often finishing up between midnight and 4am. Yep, she carries a pistol (.38 Chiefs Special). My uncle used to be a courier, sometimes carrying large amounts of cash. Yep, he carries a pistol (Walther .380, then a .44 Magnum, now a big .454 Casull). He's also an avid shooter, of pistols and big rifles, and loads his own ammo.

If the weather cooperates, we're going shooting this weekend. He thinks he finally has the loads perfect for his new Springfield Sledgahammer (S&W .500)--I just want to shoot his Holland & Holland elephant rifle, and see him shoot blocks out of the air with revolvers. :) My grandmother might join us with her late husbands old .45 pistol, and I know she'll want to shoot my uncle's bolt-action rifles.

And what exactly in the design of a gun that is meant to protect its bearer, eh? A kevlar body vest, I can understand. But a hand gun?

It is meant for only one thing -- to kill your would-be assailant before he kills you. And if you were to admit this fact in a court of law, your entire self-defense nonsense falls apart.
 
Congratulations! This is the dumbest thing I've read in weeks!

Are you trolling for kicks or are you actually brainwashed enough to believe this idiocy?

Let me explain to you the mechanics of debate in a way that even a 5 yr old can understand.

You are meant to choose a position and say why you chose such a position -- preferably, using facts and logic.

Laughing like a hyena isn't debate. And since you have laughed in this forum for more times than you actually contributing anything intellectual in the discussion -- I think you are better off using your gun on your silly head.
 
My point is simple: he is essentially accusing myself and most of my family of premeditated murder.

I am accusing you of no such thing.

Pre-meditation requires rational thought. There is nothing in what you say that suggests rational thought.
 
And what exactly in the design of a gun that is meant to protect its bearer, eh? A kevlar body vest, I can understand. But a hand gun?

I'm not sure I can dumb this down to your level, but I'll try. A would-be rapist will quite probably rethink his plan if he finds himself staring down the barrel of a cocked pistol. If he doesn't...aim for center mass, keep shooting until the threat is neutralized.

It is meant for only one thing -- to kill your would-be assailant before he kills you. And if you were to admit this fact in a court of law, your entire self-defense nonsense falls apart.

No. It is meant to STOP the attacker, recognized as self-defence in every state. If he does not survive...then he doesn't.
 
Let me explain to you the mechanics of debate in a way that even a 5 yr old can understand.

You are meant to choose a position and say why you chose such a position -- preferably, using facts and logic.

Of course. But wait..."facts" and "logic" are two things completely alien to you (along with "intelligence" and "sanity"). You wouldn't know them if you tripped over them.

Laughing like a hyena isn't debate. And since you have laughed in this forum for more times than you actually contributing anything intellectual in the discussion -- I think you are better off using your gun on your silly head.

You sound like a 3-year-old. Good job!
 
And hey, just got an e-mail from my uncle: Good to go this weekend! He has 30 rounds for his elephant gun, 100 for his Sledge, about 500 .44 Magnums, and a case of 7.92mm Mauser ammo. He thinks he has a load worked out for the Makarov, too.
 
I'm not sure I can dumb this down to your level, but I'll try. A would-be rapist will quite probably rethink his plan if he finds himself staring down the barrel of a cocked pistol. If he doesn't...aim for center mass, keep shooting until the threat is neutralized.

Yep. That would do it, I suppose. Ready or not, here I come!

Unfortunately, I'm not sure all rapists are as dumb as you.

No. It is meant to STOP the attacker, recognized as self-defence in every state. If he does not survive...then he doesn't.

Great! Another cowboy redneck.

Heee-Haw!
 
Of course. But wait..."facts" and "logic" are two things completely alien to you (along with "intelligence" and "sanity"). You wouldn't know them if you tripped over them.



You sound like a 3-year-old. Good job!

Heeee-Haw!
 
So, you have nothing left except personal attacks from about the level of a three-year-old? Yep, about what I figured.

Please do not ever breed under any circumstances.
 
What dishonest nonsense!

Humans have perfected agriculture more than 5 thousand years ago and you have the cheek to suggest your gun is meant to feed your family?
The suggestion that I am being at all dishonest is quite ignorant on your part. There is no agriculture where I live. The nearest farm is a 375mile airplane trip away. I need a gun to feed my family, YES. I dont have the option of calling pizza hut.
A gun, on the other hand, was never meant for anything except to be fired at someone else. It wasn't made so that it sits in a corner for 100 years. It wasn't made to protect yourself from an assailant. And it certainly wasn't made so that you can feed your family.
Again your notion that guns are only designed to shoot humans is a completely ignorant argument and you obviously have little concept about how a gun works, the different types and thier purposes.
A hammer is made to drive nails. That is its purpose. It can be used to bash your ignorant skull in, but that is not the purpose for which it was made.

Same can be said about a lot of everyday things -- a baseball bat, a meat cleaver, a chain saw, etc. etc
Thank you for proving my point. Which I will remind you that I explained what the mechanical design of guns do. Much the same as a hammer is designed to pound nails, it is the responsibility of the user of its actual use. By your argument here we shouldnt have access to any of the items you mentioned because someone could use them beyond thier intended purpose. No more pencil or pens in society either, because although they are designed to write with, someone could jab it into another human.
Also, you need not mention anything about bashing my ignorant skull in with any object. It is quite unbecoming. Until you can say something like that to ones face it is pointless. I doubt you would have the guts to do so anyways, and if you did, it wouldnt show so much courage as it would a lack of brains.
 
Paper that just happen to have the form of a human being drawn on it, hmmm? And they have cross-hairs drawn on where the vital points of a human being should be in order to kill, eh?

I know exactly what you mean.
I dont shoot at human shaped targets, and your suggestion that I do is false and ignorant. For the far majority it is a simple bullseye with scoring rings. The ones who generally shoot at human shaped targets are the police and military forces. The only ones who by your suggestion should have guns.
Am I the only one who thinks that letting only the people who regularly practice on human targets have guns is generally unwise?
 
Werbung:
Back
Top