Thread: this would make me very nervous, record gun sales in US

Originally Posted by waz

You mean apart from the American Revolution? or the Russian Revolution? Or the Soviet War in Afghanistan?

If you think NATO airstikes won the Libyan insurgency you're deluded. It was militia personel (primarily civilians) armed with guns, who walked into his compound. The UN resolution was only to stop Gaddafi forces' attacks on unarmed civilians.

OK - thanks. I guess I should take your word for it.

Originally Posted by akelly

OK - thanks. I guess I should take your word for it.

No problem.

Unless, and this is just hypothetical, the American Revolution was fought between two standing armies and had nothing to do with insurgency. Or, hypothetically again, the russian revolution was actually a series of events where miltary forces 'mutinied' and joined with the Bolsheviks. Or, and I stress this is just hypothetical, the Afghan/Soviet war outcome was largely due to externally provided asymmetric weapons such as the Stinger missile and insurgent tactics including use of IEDs and mines. And of course, Libya would potentially have been a different outcome if (hypothetically) the NATO aircraft had not exceeded the UN resolution and if, theoretically, the US and UK did not provide SF teams and weaponry...

These are all just hypothetical nonsense though, I'll stick with your rigorous and extensively researched opinion.

Thanks again,

Adam

Originally Posted by waz

No problem.

Glad we cleared that up then And Adam i wasn't talking about your sarcasm, i was talking about you having a go at the people posting here. And i agree, we cannot change your minds by quoting facts etc. The point is we dont care about changing your minds or what you think. We just dont like to be told how to live our lives. I am sure you wouldn't like it either if it was something you happened to care strongly about.

Originally Posted by Mick-Kelly

Glad we cleared that up then And Adam i wasn't talking about your sarcasm, i was talking about you having a go at the people posting here. And i agree, we cannot change your minds by quoting facts etc. The point is we dont care about changing your minds or what you think. We just dont like to be told how to live our lives. I am sure you wouldn't like it either if it was something you happened to care strongly about.

I get told I can't do lots of things I want to do, that I care strongly about. That's life I think.

When personal 'freedom' and the rights of others collide there has to be a sensible outcome where 'the greatest good for the greatest number' is the key factor. That's basically where gun control sits. It's great for people who shoot for sport (like me) to own guns, or for people who need them for their jobs (like farmers) to own them. Where it falls apart is when people who want a gun because it makes them feel safer are given permission to carry one around in the street. That's when it rubs up against the rights of others.

I have a right to not be caught in the crossfire of a trigger happy dickhead who pulls his glock out in a road rage incident. So does everyone else. The feelpinions of the gun lobby shouldn't impinge on my rights. Not too many people get caught in the crossfire of a stabbing or bashing - it can happen though!

How's that for cogent debate? Make any difference?

Nah.

Cheers,

Adam

it is their culture and history to own carry and use firearms

they are used to thousands being killed and maimed every year by guns and if they wanted to do something about it they would do so

I don't believe we need guns for protection or self defence and don't believe they promote a safe society, if they did then America would be a safe place, contrast that to living in Japan where you really are safe and there are very few guns in Japanese society

Liberal Gun laws and concealed gun carrying citizens has not yet prevented one mass murderer killing Americans in movie theatres, university campus, shopping malls or USA Presidents.

More Americans die by their own countrymen each year than Taliban or Iraqi terrorists have managed to kill in 10 years of war

So as long as they are happy to die by the gun, l see no reason why we should dictate to them or criticise them for having a gun culture.

To me it just proves that a gun culture is a fools paradise and below is link to latest statistics on Gun deaths USA released in 2011 by FBI

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datab...crime-us-state

Originally Posted by akelly

I get told I can't do lots of things I want to do, that I care strongly about. That's life I think.

When personal 'freedom' and the rights of others collide there has to be a sensible outcome where 'the greatest good for the greatest number' is the key factor. That's basically where gun control sits. It's great for people who shoot for sport (like me) to own guns, or for people who need them for their jobs (like farmers) to own them. Where it falls apart is when people who want a gun because it makes them feel safer are given permission to carry one around in the street. That's when it rubs up against the rights of others.

I have a right to not be caught in the crossfire of a trigger happy dickhead who pulls his glock out in a road rage incident. So does everyone else. The feelpinions of the gun lobby shouldn't impinge on my rights. Not too many people get caught in the crossfire of a stabbing or bashing - it can happen though!

How's that for cogent debate? Make any difference?

Nah.

Cheers,

Adam

Exactly how does a law-abiding person carrying a concealed handgun affect the rights of others?

News flash for you akelly, criminals already "pull their glocks out in road rage incidents". 100 years of Australian handgun regulation have not made a lick of difference to criminal behaviour.

Maybe give us a hint on which gun law a criminal is going to obey. I'm sure that would save the authorities a lot of time.

So WTF does criminal behaviour have to do with you carrying a concealed weapon?

Is this Strawman Friday? No one told me...