Topic: 22 Kids Stabbed At School In China - page 7. (Read 15564 times)

So, because he had a harmless (well, not totally, but certainly relative to a real firearm) toy, 5 or six cops pulled real guns on him and locked him in a cage?

And this is seen not only as OK, but a good thing? What if he'd been shot?

Similar? Laws are a LOT more stricter than in the US. Basically, everything that is semi-automatic, automatic is completely banned. Everything that could help concealed guns (silencers, small handguns) are banned. Every permitted firearms need to be sealed, unloaded with the ammunitions separated from the firearm. If you want to transport your gun, it must be unloaded. You also need a permit to own a gun (but the conservatives are trying to break the registry right now).

Laws alone don't prevent gun crimes. But it help, especially since the firearm culture is different. Seeing a loaded gun is unusual here, so people are going to call the police when they see a gun in a unusual location (like everywhere except shooting ranges and hunting grounds). For example, two months ago in my city, a teenager was going to a paintball activity with his school and brought his own paintball gun with him while walking to school. Somebody spotted the paintball gun, called the police, and the teenager was arrested with 5-6 police cars with guns draw against him.

People are afraid of guns, so as soon as one is seen, they usually report it really fast to the police. And the police have access to a good group of laws to presses charges.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Canada

Seriously, FirstAscent, just stop. This is like Verne Troyer trying to take on Mike Tyson. Funny, but it gets painful to watch after a few rounds. You're not even putting on as good a show as Verne would.

I did answer that. You even quoted it.
Now who's the dumbfuck?

No, my arguments precede and/or follow my labeling of you. Now answer the question about the Brinks guards. Or were you hoping that would go by unnoticed?

If your best argument is "you're a dumbfuck," then it's quite clear that you are much less intelligent than I.

You suffer from the notion that because something is possible, it is the norm. As I said in the other post, you're a dumbfuck. And you suffer from the delusion that the others you're arguing with are as dumb as you.

No, I am not. However, when I travel, I am carrying something infinitely more precious: my two daughters.

http://bit.ly/UlqqWy

Yes they do. Nice try, though.

Door locks are to keep honest people honest.  They do nothing to deter dishonest people.

As well they should - they might be carrying your money or my money. But are you carrying a million dollars in cash and simultaneously advertising the fact? Please answer.

And how is that supposed to stop someone from stealing cargo? You'll note that Brinks guards, when transporting money, use both cars, and guns.

I've never encountered a mugger in all my life. I don't know a single person who has. Maybe there are intelligent and sensible ways to reduce ever encountering a mugger in the first place.


Try locking your door at night.

And when a mugger tries to take your wallet, you'll convince him to leave you alone with your impressive movie knowledge? No, I know, you'll paint him away!


Guns enable personal defense, and the defense of the land as a whole. I would say security is much more important to trade than speed.

You remind me of my daughter. She sputters and flails, too.

Cars certainly enable things within our economy and our personal lives. Guns, not so much.

Thank you for sharing these insights into your character and personal life. When I was a kid, like many other boys, I liked to squash, damage and destroy things. Like most adults, I outgrew such things. Suggestion: find a hobby which is stimulating to your mind and/or body. Try hiking, cooking, sailing, photography, reading, movie watching, painting, gardening, design, tennis, whatever.

Well guns are bad... Mmmkay? They are only used for murdering people. Mmmkay? And knives, they are for killing people too. Mmmkay?


No but really guys, guns aren't the concern here. People have been killing each other for thousands of years first with rocks, then clubs, knives, spears, swords, bows, crossbows, and the list goes on. Banning firearms is only a shortcut to civil war. Gun control didn't stop a few men with box cutters from flying planes into buildings, it didn't stop a man with a fertilizer from bringing down a building, it hasn't stopped countless mothers from drowning their kids in a bathtub. Canada is just next door to us, and they have similar laws with the same population owning firearms. They have significantly less crime, and I think this is due to our own culture. Hell, even the FBI has shown that States with laws that don't restrict the people from owning and carrying are better off.

I'm not saying everyone should be granted RPG's and Tanks. Yes, lots of high firepower is restricted to the general people. This man that killed the kids was denied a firearm at a gun store a week before the shooting. And thumbs up for the store's seller that decided not to sell to the lunatic. He illegally stole firearms from relatives, in the same way other criminal's illegally acquire their own. I'm not fluent in CT law, but I would argue that non of the school staff were armed because of laws preventing them from protecting the children.

My argument here is that gun laws only helped this man commit the crime easier. But that's just my opinion guys. I really do think that banning firearms and taking them from homeowners will be a quick shortcut to civil war, and the collapse of the United States.

And last, please take a minute of your time to research "Zip Guns" and "Prison Guns". You can build firearms out of typical pens you write with, and simple plumbing. The Four Winds Shotgun is an excellent example:

Guns are only tools, you can ban them but you won't stop people from murdering each other with knives or screwdrivers.
UK is an example, even most knives are difficult to acquire and illegal to possess in a public place unless one has a good excuse (works as a butcher, etc.):

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2236426/Former-civil-servant-killed-frail-pensioner-71-hammer-screwdriver-attack-falsifying-will.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-149856/Screwdriver-killing-Accused-hiding-man-attacked.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-16035128

And:

Knives most common weapon in youth murders

I went shooting this weekend. Put about 100rnds. through each of my assault rifles. But I must be doing it wrong because I didn't kill anything. In fact none of the guns I currently own have ever killed anything. With the exception of my CC weapon, they are for competitive shooting at targets.
I guess one equates guns with killing if you only know about them from crime reports on the news. I grew up shooting with friends and associate guns with fun times and friendly competition. The only "danger" we thought about was tripping and shooting yourself.  

As far as practical danger, art should definitely be banned. Art has lead to countless disruptions of the public order. It gives people ideas that can lead to violent change. It is simply not needed.

[/muahahaha]

And no matter what you think of my argument, it does not change the fact that yours is invalid. If guns had only one purpose, to kill, then someone or something would die every time they are used. Since the vast majority of times a gun is used, nothing dies, your argument is invalid.

But please, continue. It's quite comical to watch you sputter.