When we outlaw guns...

[TruthAboveAll]

I will buy the first citation, but the other two are op-ed. Well done.

I'm a bit confused. You accept the BBC news article, but reject the Wikipedia information, and the data on firearm offenses?

I understand that Wikipedia is subject to "editing", but that was relating to the information on England's Bill of Rights, and some historic parameters. Under very extreme classification I guess this could be considered op-ed.

The data on the firearm offenses was published by a group called Gun Control Network, but oddly, their objective is to work towards banning firearms. Their cited statistics, showing the increase in gun-related crimes since the 1997 absolute restrictions in England occurred, are numbers obtained from a Home Office Statistical Bulletin, a document by the Research, Development and Statistics Directorate. I'm from the U.S., and not intimately familiar with the governmental entities, but this appears to be part of the British government. I fail to see how you would consider this an op-ed piece.

Here is the link to that one, too: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs07/hosb0207.pdf

 

[Lindsay]

What kind of fantasy world do you live in.

It's a magical one. You're always on a trip and only see the goodness in others. It's when the trip ends that you see the world for what it really is.

 

[9sublime]

It's a magical one. You're always on a trip and only see the goodness in others. It's when the trip ends that you see the world for what it really is.

I would love to see all guns banned, it would be a great day, but it wouldn't work. I think guns are horrible things to use on other living things, but very occasionally its neccessary, and human nature also gets in the way.

Its a nice dream, but I prefer to discuss fesable politics on here.

 

[Lindsay]

I would love to see all guns banned, it would be a great day, but it wouldn't work. I think guns are horrible things to use on other living things, but very occasionally its neccessary, and human nature also gets in the way.

Its a nice dream, but I prefer to discuss fesable politics on here.

I love that you said "living things" as opposed to just "humans".

 

[9sublime]

Yes, because I don't agree with pointlessly shooting lots of animals. However, there is often a need to cull rabbits, foxes etc. and if they are going to die, you might as well satisfy someones human nature and let them shoot the thing with a gun.

 

[Lindsay]

Right on.

 

[9sublime]

I hope thats genuine agreement, I haven't got my sarcasm recognizer fitted on my PC yet.

 

[Think for myself]

I'm a bit confused. You accept the BBC news article, but reject the Wikipedia information, and the data on firearm offenses?

I understand that Wikipedia is subject to "editing", but that was relating to the information on England's Bill of Rights, and some historic parameters. Under very extreme classification I guess this could be considered op-ed.

The data on the firearm offenses was published by a group called Gun Control Network, but oddly, their objective is to work towards banning firearms. Their cited statistics, showing the increase in gun-related crimes since the 1997 absolute restrictions in England occurred, are numbers obtained from a Home Office Statistical Bulletin, a document by the Research, Development and Statistics Directorate. I'm from the U.S., and not intimately familiar with the governmental entities, but this appears to be part of the British government. I fail to see how you would consider this an op-ed piece.

Here is the link to that one, too: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs07/hosb0207.pdf

You are correct. The BBC, for all of it's faults, I accept as a legitimate news agency. Your reference to that article was excellent, and I certainly concede to you on the point made.

Wikipedia is useful, but not necessarily 100% factual as I doubt the editors are masters of objectiveness.

A statstic publish by a group with an agenda, be it pro or anti any given debate, I always suspect.

Again, my hat is off to you for proving your point.

 

[Lindsay]

I hope thats genuine agreement, I haven't got my sarcasm recognizer fitted on my PC yet.

It was genuine agreement. I'm an animal rights activist, and it pleased me to hear someone recognize all living things and not just humans alone.

 

[TruthAboveAll]

You are correct. The BBC, for all of it's faults, I accept as a legitimate news agency. Your reference to that article was excellent, and I certainly concede to you on the point made.

Wikipedia is useful, but not necessarily 100% factual as I doubt the editors are masters of objectiveness.

A statstic publish by a group with an agenda, be it pro or anti any given debate, I always suspect.

Again, my hat is off to you for proving your point.

Why thank you, Think. I strive VERY hard to substantiate information. Not to say I can't be wrong, but I try to test everything I hear or see, to the best of my ability. Facts can and should be substantiated as much as possible. Opinions, beliefs and perspectives are another matter...

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Yes, because I don't agree with pointlessly shooting lots of animals. However, there is often a need to cull rabbits, foxes etc. and if they are going to die, you might as well satisfy someones human nature and let them shoot the thing with a gun.

I curious then, 9sublime, since it's necessary to cull/execute people for heinous crimes, should we pander to the very real human desire for revenge and let the victim or the victim's family members pull the switch? Or would it be reasonable in these tight fiscal times to sell a "tag" that entitles the owner to pull the switch on some scumbag--how much could the government have gotten for a tag to pull the switch on Saddam?

 

[9sublime]

I curious then, 9sublime, since it's necessary to cull/execute people for heinous crimes, should we pander to the very real human desire for revenge and let the victim or the victim's family members pull the switch? Or would it be reasonable in these tight fiscal times to sell a "tag" that entitles the owner to pull the switch on some scumbag--how much could the government have gotten for a tag to pull the switch on Saddam?

Um, I'm actually against capital punishment.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Um, I'm actually against capital punishment.

Yeah, me too, I just extend that distaste for murder to all sentient beings.

If I did believe in "culling" then I would, without a doubt, start with the one group of creatures on this planet that need culling the most: humans.

 

[vyo476]

Yeah, me too, I just extend that distaste for murder to all sentient beings.

If I did believe in "culling" then I would, without a doubt, start with the one group of creatures on this planet that need culling the most: humans.

Look out folks, we've got ourselves an Eco-Nazi!

 

[9sublime]

Its wether or not you believe in dominion or stewardship. I believe we should do a lot to look after the earth and the rest of its inhabitants, not causing unneccessary slaughter/pain etc.

Humans can be the worst animals of them all. But, I still favour us over anything else.

A lion is attacking you, do you let it kill you or the police shoot it?