Shootings at Pulse nightclub in Orlando

[Tyrone Biggums]

Nonsense. A gun is not designed to give you a little buzz in small doses, and only does damage if you use it too much, or don't use it in accordance with operating instructions. It is a tool and a weapon as it's primary function.

Spoken like a person who has never used guns perhaps?

Absolutely you get a buzz out of using then. Going hunting is great fun, as is target shooting etc.

The vast majoirty of people own them because they are fun to use and you do get a buzz out of it.

Why do you think people own them?

A gun is designed to do one thing: propel ammunition at such force it can rip through whatever it is aimed at: animals (hunting), people (guns designed for war, personal protection, etc). Damage is a gun's design, not the side effect from a gun's misuse.

You left out tin cans, bottle and bits of paper and clay.

Those are also things guns are designed to hit. In fact the overwhelming majority of ammunition that is fired hits paper, clay, tin or glass.

 

[BadFish]

We should be discussing Islam and its anti gay ideologies here, not guns.

You are always baning on about peoples liberties and them being free to do as they please,. Yet here you are telling us all what we should be discussing.

 

[Simster]

Have I said guns should be illegal and alcohol shouldn't?

My view is that something that only does damage when misused (alcohol) can't be compared to something that's primary design is damage (guns)

My view is that it can because pragmatically, both of them end up causing problems to society when mis-used.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Fair enough.

Where do you stand on

1: Abortion
2: Seat belt use in cars
3: Smoking in bars and restaurants?

Is that also the state sticking it's nose into the affairs of individuals?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All should be personal choices.

A government shouldn't be able to tell you if you an or can't smoke somewhere unless it is a Government building.

That is up to the owner of the business to make that decision.

Seat belts in cars should also be a personal decision with provisos in regards to the health system. Wear one you're covered by the NHS, don't wear one you pay for your own medical costs.

Abortions should be paid for by the person getting it, not by the state.

I'm all about personal responsibility and personal liberty.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

You are always baning on about peoples liberties and them being free to do as they please,. Yet here you are telling us all what we should be discussing.

What have I said that stops anyone going about their day doing as they please?

 

[GOM]

All the time the republicans have the control over law making absolutely nothing will happen.

So what have the Democrats been doing the last 8 years ?

 

[Acker79]

Spoken like an anti-gun person who has never used guns.

Absolutely you get a buzz out of using then. Going hunting is great fun, as is target shooting etc.

The vast majoirty of people own them because they are fun to use and you do get a buzz out of it.

That buzz is a side effect, not the purpose of the gun. I'm not a big fan of guns, but I'm not calling for a ban on them. I am simply pointing out that a gun is designed to do damage. Gun designers do not waste time wondering how they can make a gun give you a bigger or longer lasting buzz, because that is not what guns are designed for. They are designed for damage and death.

Why do you think people own them?

For a variety of reasons including, but not limited to: protection, to hunt, family tradition, cultural tradition

You left out tin cans, bottle and bits of paper and clay.

Those are also things guns are designed to hit. In fact the overwhelming majority of ammunition that is fired hits paper, clay, tin or glass.[/QUOTE]

And what happens when bullets meet these things? Do they stop in mid air and give them a hug? No, they burst into/through them causing damage. And for a lot of people who shoot at these things, it is target practice so they can be better when it comes to shooting animals (hunters, animal control, farmers etc) and people (soldiers, police officers, paranoid isolationists etc)

 

[BadFish]

What have I said that stops anyone going about their day doing as they please?

It's a fine line isn't it.

 

[RossyG]

Ridiculous post.

My point is that every terrorist attack by Islam is immediately followed up by people blaming other factors and ignoring the real issue. You might get comfort in calling that a ridiculous observation. But then facts can be so irksome, can't they? Like the fact that Sweden is the rape capital of Europe.

But if it's any consolation, it seems Germany will be taking over that mantle.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

So what have the Democrats been doing the last 8 years ?

32% of Democrats own guns. That's why they do nothing.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

It's a fine line isn't it.

I don't have lines.

Boring things.

 

[scamander]

I note that there has been a lot of chat about tightening up gun laws. The issue is whether these really police those who would require a gun for varying levels of crime. Take the San Bernardino shooting, two handguns used were legally bought, California has some of the strictest gun laws in the US. But neither killer had done anything for them to register as a risk.

The assault rifles were sourced illegally, and here's the big problem. There's a lot of high calibre weaponry which can be bought in this manner, alternatively they can be borrowed or stolen form family members or friends (e.g. Glendale school).

It's still a check but what we are starting to see are fatalities committed by those who won't appear on the register or wouldn't obtain a gun in a way which the register would apply. It's a near impossible situation to manage.

 

[Acker79]

My view is that it can because pragmatically, both of them end up causing problems to society when mis-used.

So, you also want a ban on cars, religion, football (look at the trouble in france with people not being sensible fans) and sex (think of all those diseases being passed on by people not practising safe sex)?

I imagine you'll say I'm being ridiculous, but it is a simple extension of your position. These all cause damage to people and by extension society when misused.

 

[Simster]

So, you also want a ban on cars, religion, football (look at the trouble in france with people not being sensible fans) and sex (think of all those diseases being passed on by people not practising safe sex)?

I imagine you'll say I'm being ridiculous, but it is a simple extension of your position. These all cause damage to people and by extension society when misused.

No that's the extension of your position, not mine.

This discussion started because you took issue with my position that simply banning guns in the US wouldn't solve anything because they have a deep cultural issue, and to illustrate this I then drew a comparison with alcohol here. You suggested that wasn't a fair comparison because guns kill, drink doesn't unless mis-used - a position I don't agree with because I don't see it is relevant to the point being made.

I don't want either banned. I don't think simply tightening US gun laws will do any good at all.

 

[The Albion Roar]

So what have the Democrats been doing the last 8 years ?

They're not the majority party in the Senate nor the House of Representative. The Republican Party is.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

That buzz is a side effect, not the purpose of the gun. I'm not a big fan of guns, but I'm not calling for a ban on them. I am simply pointing out that a gun is designed to do damage. Gun designers do not waste time wondering how they can make a gun give you a bigger or longer lasting buzz, because that is not what guns are designed for. They are designed for damage and death.

The purpose of the gun is whatever the person who owns it makes it.

A great many things have started out with a military purpose and have morphed into being used in other aspects of life outside of their original purpose.

For a variety of reasons including, but not limited to: protection, to hunt, family tradition, cultural tradition

So nothing dangerous or sinister in those reasons.

And what happens when bullets meet these things? Do they stop in mid air and give them a hug? No, they burst into/through them causing damage. And for a lot of people who shoot at these things, it is target practice so they can be better when it comes to shooting animals (hunters, animal control, farmers etc) and people (soldiers, police officers, paranoid isolationists etc)

And targets. Shooting inanimate objects like targets is the sole purpose for a great many shooters.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

They're not the majority party in the Senate nor the House of Representative. The Republican Party is.

But they still own millions of guns themseves.

99% of black people in the US who have a gun aren't Republicans.

 

[The Albion Roar]

But they still own millions of guns themseves.

99% of black people in the US who have a gun aren't Republicans.

So what? I was answering a direct query unrelated to your erotic fantasies.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

So what's your story then @Tyrone Biggums? How come you are seemingly unwilling or unable to grasp the bleeding obvious. Do you enjoy shooting "roos" in the outback or something?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=seXi-AnfFzU

Yup, I grew up in the country.

Never really killed Roos, shot lots of vermin that destroys the native wildlife and habitat though.

Shot cats, dogs, pigs, birds, rabbits, buffalo, deer.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

So what? I was answering a direct query unrelated to your erotic fantasies.

So what? It relates to your insinuation it's the Republican fault for no reform.

Why else would you bring them up to defend the Democraps?