Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
Unless you can prove that your proposed parallels hold true, and also provide us with sufficient evidence that your assertions are real problems, I fail to see why any of us should take you seriously.
I'll need to give this some thought.
I should be more general; the argument against guns is typically based on the assumption that guns somehow magically increase crime rates, when this is pretty obviously untrue. The crime that happens was going to happen anyway. People don't just think "Oh hey guise! I haz gun! Imma kill a bitch for the lulz!" They have a reason (however fucked up) for committing the crime, and they will do it with whatever weapon they have available.
Thus, restricting guns is arbitrary denial of personal freedom and is thus undesirable.
@Cygy: Why in the name of sanity would someone break into your house without a weapon? I don't think I've ever heard of a case of someone breaking into a house, robbing something, and mauling the homeowner with their fists (and I think that would hit the news.)
You are attacking an argument I have not made and expecting me to rise to your rebuttal of it based on the idea you made a mistake. I have not once asserted what you claim and for that matter neither has anyone else.
Stop. Strawmanning.
I never asked you to rise to the rebuttal, I clarified that I fucked up in who I was talking to, and stated a more general argument not directed at you in any way.
Strawmanning is, coincidentially, a serious case of You Keep Using That Word. "Help help I'm being repressed" for the Internet, if you will.
No?
Chagen, get one of these:
I want a pink MP5 now.
I'll need to give this some thought.
Not shitting you.
Chagen: The .50 cal revolver? Its for show mostly. You could do stand or blind hunting with it if you wanted to.
on what you can carry.
Mace/Pepperspray for the record has a number of
issues with it's effectiveness. namely anyone who has been sprayed
often enough can adapt to it and learn to ignore it's effects, some
people are hardly bothered by pepper spray like me. It hurts yeah but
it is pretty easy to ignore pain. If the target is drunk or on drugs it
might not have any effect at all. It can also be easily be blocked by
someone wearing goggles, large sunglasses, a solid object, or even with
your hand.
Tasers that have reach are more practical are harder
to block but you have to hit what your aiming at. Stun Guns the
variety you touch them with requires getting in close.
Guns require training to use and handle properly and are a bit more pricey. They are more of a long term item.
Folks gun owner ship is perfectly fine if done responsibly. There is the caveat. There is always an idiot.
@Tuefel: THANK YOU SO MUCH. I love you, man. ;_;