What's your opinion of gun control? - page 147.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

Quote from: bizerinm on February 02, 2016, 04:28:28 PM

If you are normal,stable person you won't mind if police have in their record that you own a gun. But all people that spits on gun control probably have their own reasons for that which are not with good intentions

We all have the right to private property. This includes privacy in the guns we hold. This is basic law in America and other countries. You never see government reporting which of its agents have guns and where their guns are located.

TheButterZone

legendary

Activity: 3038

Merit: 1032

RIP Mommy

Quote from: bizerinm on February 02, 2016, 04:28:28 PM

If you are normal,stable person you won't mind if police have in their record that you own a gun. But all people that spits on gun control probably have their own reasons for that which are not with good intentions

Libel ^

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

Quote from: Racey on February 02, 2016, 04:24:30 PM

Here is what the fat, world controller says.

"If the people want bread, give them bread.
If they want guns, shoot the bastards"

That's you, Mr. Gun. Hop right up there all by yourself and shoot somebody. Grin

bizerinm

full member

Activity: 140

Merit: 100

If you are normal,stable person you won't mind if police have in their record that you own a gun. But all people that spits on gun control probably have their own reasons for that which are not with good intentions

Racey

legendary

Activity: 1134

Merit: 1000

Soon, I have to go away.

Here is what the fat, world controller says.

"If the people want bread, give them bread.
If they want guns, shoot the bastards"

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

Quote from: Ernstew on February 02, 2016, 02:55:06 PM

People should not be allowed to by gun like a bread in the shop. Bread is bread and gun is gun, so increasing violence is connected to this. And also must controle people who have guns like they will open army shop

Waitress, thank you for the piece of bread with my meal.

The bread tastes good, even if it has a side flavor of arsenic, and the smell of cyanide.

Ernstew

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

★YoBit.Net★ 350+ Coins Exchange & Dice

People should not be allowed to by gun like a bread in the shop. Bread is bread and gun is gun, so increasing violence is connected to this. And also must controle people who have guns like they will open army shop

mOgliE

legendary

Activity: 1344

Merit: 1251

Quote from: TECSHARE on February 02, 2016, 08:33:04 AM

Quote from: mOgliE on February 02, 2016, 08:00:54 AM

Which make me come back to my original point.... Where is Michael Moore lying?

It seems he's perfectly right no?

And I'm seeing a HUGE problem with the fact that more or less anyone can sell firearms and bullets to more or less anybody Oo

What is the huge problem other than you knee jerk conditioning to associate guns with violence? Do you think that way every time you see a knife or do you think ham sandwich? Just because you have never had a ham sandwich doesn't make the knife only for violence.

I'm no longer arguing with you dude, you're just ignoring the parts of my speech that are troublesome for you.

Wanna know what I think is a problem? I think there is a huge correlation between gun freedom and the incredible high violent crimes rate of your country. And I see no really good point in gun liberty as you're not protected from anything, neither banks nor rapes. Again I brought to you stats making those points.

TECSHARE

legendary

Activity: 3318

Merit: 2008

First Exclusion Ever

Quote from: mOgliE on February 02, 2016, 08:00:54 AM

Which make me come back to my original point.... Where is Michael Moore lying?

It seems he's perfectly right no?

And I'm seeing a HUGE problem with the fact that more or less anyone can sell firearms and bullets to more or less anybody Oo

What is the huge problem other than you knee jerk conditioning to associate guns with violence? Do you think that way every time you see a knife or do you think ham sandwich? Just because you have never had a ham sandwich doesn't make the knife only for violence.

mOgliE

legendary

Activity: 1344

Merit: 1251

Which make me come back to my original point.... Where is Michael Moore lying?

It seems he's perfectly right no?

And I'm seeing a HUGE problem with the fact that more or less anyone can sell firearms and bullets to more or less anybody Oo

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1386

Quote from: mOgliE on February 02, 2016, 03:48:19 AM

Quote from: Spendulus on January 29, 2016, 07:18:08 PM

Quote from: mOgliE on January 29, 2016, 08:50:34 AM

Quote from: Spendulus on January 25, 2016, 03:41:57 PM

Quote from: mOgliE on January 25, 2016, 03:31:42 PM

Quote from: TECSHARE on January 25, 2016, 01:27:28 PM

Who gives a fuck what the French think about our domestic laws? What are they going to do? Not call us for help again next time they get their asses kicked?

Dude if you don't want my opinion don't go on a thread named "your opinion on guns' control".
For the "not call us for help" part, yeah thanks when you see how you screwed us after I wonder if nazis were not better...
And I like it how WWII is the proof of French incapacity to protect themselves and American great heart but how Lafayette is forgotten.

I'll take the time to read your links later. But as I said and as you ignored, I apologized for the misunderstanding of the stats you provided. I can't really give you more than an apology. But it doesn't demonstrate your point as I was talking about violent crimes. Of course you could argue that "making a population safe" aso includes minor crimes like thefts. But guns won't increase thief, that's rather obvious there is no corelation between the two.

So I was talking about violent crimes rates and homicides. That's why I was talking about mass shootings.

And if my opinion offenses you, again don't go on a thread made for that or ignore me.

LOL, an opinion based on "facts" from Michael Moore is fundamentally insulting.

But go read some of the links and see what you think then.

Ok so I took the time to read PARTS of your link. Yeah parts because it's deep and heavy legislation text in English and sorry but I took some times to read what seemed important, I' to me so I might have omitted some things. If you're not happy with that then go read the whole French legislation to have an idea of how difficult it is for a non native English speaker ><

And... Well it perfectly confirms Michael Moore documentary sorry. I don't see any "propaganda" in what he made. The very basis of owning a firearm dealer license is "Is not prohibited from shipping, transporting, receiving or possessing firearms or ammunition, nor in the case of a corporation, partnership, or association, is any individual possessing, directly or indirectly, the power to direct or cause the direction of the management and policies of the corporation, partnership, or association prohibited from shipping, transporting, receiving or possessing firearms or ammunition;"

So in short, not doing anything illegal. Which means that more or less any business can sell weapons and bullets if the local police force allows it.

I don't see the propaganda here. Again, I'm trying to be humble as I'm pretty sure I don't understood everything of the USA legislation, but all I see is an incredible freedom of firearms.

what the hell you talking about? The specific rights acquired by someone getting the Federal Firearms License is to sell guns as a dealer. It has nothing at all to do with the local police department.

This affirms several aspects of the right to possess guns as laid out in our constitution.

Not sure I understand your point then...

In what is Michael Moore wrong? Can't a barber sell guns if he gots the license? Doesn't it seem like totally crazy that more or less anyone can sell guns and anyone can buy some? Cause that's what I understood from your link ^^'

Assuming the barber passed the background check and paid the fees, then after his application for the FFL was approved, he could sell guns to people who passed their background checks. Some states have more restrictive requirements, in which case the individual would also have to qualify for the requirements of his state.

Few people would see anything wrong with that.

jak1

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 250

Should be some control so people with criminal record and past and violent people can not have it at least on legal way. And must be some database of type of weapons. Police and forces must know what civilians have in their homes

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

Quote from: Spendulus on January 29, 2016, 07:18:08 PM

Quote from: mOgliE on January 29, 2016, 08:50:34 AM

Quote from: Spendulus on January 25, 2016, 03:41:57 PM

Quote from: mOgliE on January 25, 2016, 03:31:42 PM

Quote from: TECSHARE on January 25, 2016, 01:27:28 PM

Who gives a fuck what the French think about our domestic laws? What are they going to do? Not call us for help again next time they get their asses kicked?

Dude if you don't want my opinion don't go on a thread named "your opinion on guns' control".
For the "not call us for help" part, yeah thanks when you see how you screwed us after I wonder if nazis were not better...
And I like it how WWII is the proof of French incapacity to protect themselves and American great heart but how Lafayette is forgotten.

I'll take the time to read your links later. But as I said and as you ignored, I apologized for the misunderstanding of the stats you provided. I can't really give you more than an apology. But it doesn't demonstrate your point as I was talking about violent crimes. Of course you could argue that "making a population safe" aso includes minor crimes like thefts. But guns won't increase thief, that's rather obvious there is no corelation between the two.

So I was talking about violent crimes rates and homicides. That's why I was talking about mass shootings.

And if my opinion offenses you, again don't go on a thread made for that or ignore me.

LOL, an opinion based on "facts" from Michael Moore is fundamentally insulting.

But go read some of the links and see what you think then.

Ok so I took the time to read PARTS of your link. Yeah parts because it's deep and heavy legislation text in English and sorry but I took some times to read what seemed important, I' to me so I might have omitted some things. If you're not happy with that then go read the whole French legislation to have an idea of how difficult it is for a non native English speaker ><

And... Well it perfectly confirms Michael Moore documentary sorry. I don't see any "propaganda" in what he made. The very basis of owning a firearm dealer license is "Is not prohibited from shipping, transporting, receiving or possessing firearms or ammunition, nor in the case of a corporation, partnership, or association, is any individual possessing, directly or indirectly, the power to direct or cause the direction of the management and policies of the corporation, partnership, or association prohibited from shipping, transporting, receiving or possessing firearms or ammunition;"

So in short, not doing anything illegal. Which means that more or less any business can sell weapons and bullets if the local police force allows it.

I don't see the propaganda here. Again, I'm trying to be humble as I'm pretty sure I don't understood everything of the USA legislation, but all I see is an incredible freedom of firearms.

what the hell you talking about? The specific rights acquired by someone getting the Federal Firearms License is to sell guns as a dealer. It has nothing at all to do with the local police department.

This affirms several aspects of the right to possess guns as laid out in our constitution.

Getting a license doesn't have anything to do with rights. Licenses only grant privileges, or require duties. Rights are inherent.

mOgliE

legendary

Activity: 1344

Merit: 1251

Quote from: Spendulus on January 29, 2016, 07:18:08 PM

Quote from: mOgliE on January 29, 2016, 08:50:34 AM

Quote from: Spendulus on January 25, 2016, 03:41:57 PM

Quote from: mOgliE on January 25, 2016, 03:31:42 PM

Quote from: TECSHARE on January 25, 2016, 01:27:28 PM

Who gives a fuck what the French think about our domestic laws? What are they going to do? Not call us for help again next time they get their asses kicked?

Dude if you don't want my opinion don't go on a thread named "your opinion on guns' control".
For the "not call us for help" part, yeah thanks when you see how you screwed us after I wonder if nazis were not better...
And I like it how WWII is the proof of French incapacity to protect themselves and American great heart but how Lafayette is forgotten.

I'll take the time to read your links later. But as I said and as you ignored, I apologized for the misunderstanding of the stats you provided. I can't really give you more than an apology. But it doesn't demonstrate your point as I was talking about violent crimes. Of course you could argue that "making a population safe" aso includes minor crimes like thefts. But guns won't increase thief, that's rather obvious there is no corelation between the two.

So I was talking about violent crimes rates and homicides. That's why I was talking about mass shootings.

And if my opinion offenses you, again don't go on a thread made for that or ignore me.

LOL, an opinion based on "facts" from Michael Moore is fundamentally insulting.

But go read some of the links and see what you think then.

Ok so I took the time to read PARTS of your link. Yeah parts because it's deep and heavy legislation text in English and sorry but I took some times to read what seemed important, I' to me so I might have omitted some things. If you're not happy with that then go read the whole French legislation to have an idea of how difficult it is for a non native English speaker ><

And... Well it perfectly confirms Michael Moore documentary sorry. I don't see any "propaganda" in what he made. The very basis of owning a firearm dealer license is "Is not prohibited from shipping, transporting, receiving or possessing firearms or ammunition, nor in the case of a corporation, partnership, or association, is any individual possessing, directly or indirectly, the power to direct or cause the direction of the management and policies of the corporation, partnership, or association prohibited from shipping, transporting, receiving or possessing firearms or ammunition;"

So in short, not doing anything illegal. Which means that more or less any business can sell weapons and bullets if the local police force allows it.

I don't see the propaganda here. Again, I'm trying to be humble as I'm pretty sure I don't understood everything of the USA legislation, but all I see is an incredible freedom of firearms.

what the hell you talking about? The specific rights acquired by someone getting the Federal Firearms License is to sell guns as a dealer. It has nothing at all to do with the local police department.

This affirms several aspects of the right to possess guns as laid out in our constitution.

Not sure I understand your point then...

In what is Michael Moore wrong? Can't a barber sell guns if he gots the license? Doesn't it seem like totally crazy that more or less anyone can sell guns and anyone can buy some? Cause that's what I understood from your link ^^'

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1386

Quote from: eon89 on February 01, 2016, 10:49:12 AM

I'm not saying that people should not protect themselves. But at the same time protection doesn't have to come in the shape of a AK-47 when going to buy bread. I wouldn't go to that store again if I saw a customer like that again. You can protect yourself with mace, a tazer or any other type of non-lethal weapon. You need to get out safe of that harmful situation, not to permanently put the attacker into the ground. At least that's my opinion.

This is an issue all to itself - lethality of force - how much and when?

Generally speaking, the answer is guns, not tasers or other types of non lethal weapons.

The reason is that if you must protect your life, or that of your loved ones, the non lethal options are not sufficiently reliable. Take a look at youtube. You will see people tasering themselves and showing that they can take it, same with stun guns and pepper spray. These are better than nothing, but they are not a match for firearms for personal safety.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

Quote from: eon89 on February 01, 2016, 10:49:12 AM

I'm not saying that people should not protect themselves. But at the same time protection doesn't have to come in the shape of a AK-47 when going to buy bread. I wouldn't go to that store again if I saw a customer like that again. You can protect yourself with mace, a tazer or any other type of non-lethal weapon. You need to get out safe of that harmful situation, not to permanently put the attacker into the ground. At least that's my opinion.

And just who is going to take the guns away? Will he be able to do it without using guns? You better have guns around so that you can stand on somewhat of an equal footing with all who would use guns on you, especially if they come to take your guns away. Of course, you could always just lie down and die...

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1386

Quote from: Ernstew on January 30, 2016, 10:52:53 AM

It sholud be controlled who and when buy guns, and how much..for example if somebody has 100 guns it sholud be good to pay attention on him..also must be see if the person has a criminal record.

Actually, this is not true at all. Someone with 100 guns is a "collector." No different from someone who collects antique teapots, in my opinion. Now someone who has 100 guns and is on the ISIS websites everyday....

eon89

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 292

★YoBit.Net★ 350+ Coins Exchange & Dice

I'm not saying that people should not protect themselves. But at the same time protection doesn't have to come in the shape of a AK-47 when going to buy bread. I wouldn't go to that store again if I saw a customer like that again. You can protect yourself with mace, a tazer or any other type of non-lethal weapon. You need to get out safe of that harmful situation, not to permanently put the attacker into the ground. At least that's my opinion.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

Quote from: eon89 on February 01, 2016, 10:25:52 AM

Quote from: BADecker on January 29, 2016, 04:50:58 PM

Looks like we need a lot more guns to protect ourselves from GOVERNMENT MURDERERS who murder us in the name of a government that doesn't allow murder. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13717719

So your solution is to get more guns and in turn to kill other people? Isn't that exactly the thing we want to avoid? Wouldn't that turn you into a murderer as well? I see no one here talking about non-lethal solutions. Why is that?

You said it, not me.

There are two kinds of people in this world - the violent, and the peaceful. However, both kinds have built into them the will to live... the desire for self protection.

If we all had guns equally, the violent people would do one of two things. They would either die at the hands of the peaceful people who were protecting themselves from the violence of the violent, or they would become peaceful people so they would not die.

Among peaceful people, guns are not important when there is no need.

eon89

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 292

★YoBit.Net★ 350+ Coins Exchange & Dice

Quote from: BADecker on January 29, 2016, 04:50:58 PM

Looks like we need a lot more guns to protect ourselves from GOVERNMENT MURDERERS who murder us in the name of a government that doesn't allow murder. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13717719

So your solution is to get more guns and in turn to kill other people? Isn't that exactly the thing we want to avoid? Wouldn't that turn you into a murderer as well? I see no one here talking about non-lethal solutions. Why is that?

Topic: What's your opinion of gun control? - page 147. (Read 450482 times)