I should add, for the benefit of those of you giving me rep for "being censored", Lobo was right to nuke my original post. I was extremely pissed off (this happens when I try to make a good argument, and someone ignorant calls me, well, ignorant.) I used a lot of inappropriate and uncalled-for language in there, which weakened my point.
Fot those fellows: Lobo doesn't censor you, he teachs you good education
Second: ignorant in my homeland is not an insult, you can call ignorant to your best friend with no duel at dawn
Third: maybe I choosed a not acurate word, you are not ignorant, you are camuflating with your brilliant retorique the esence of the question: you want to have fun with YOUR weapons because the world spins around you and period, Year 33 P.F. (Post Fuzzy), and excuse me but this is naive, selfish and fuzzycentric. There is a clear problem with the free buffet of firearms in NorthAmerica, face it, and the fact that you...likely...will never use yours against your postman, wife, neighbour's grandmother or the pets of your uncle has not interest for the discussion.
Last edited by Lobo; April 18th, 2007 at 03:21 PM.
you want to have fun with YOUR weapons because the world spins around you and period, Year 33 P.F. (Post Fuzzy), and excuse me but this is naive, selfish and fuzzycentric
I have weapons and i dont have them because i want to have fun with them. This isnt rooting-tooting cowboys over here ya know...
I need them for hunting, self protection in the woods, target shooting, and also importantly, for the Civil Defence of my Country. Something we feel strongly about over here.
You know why? Because I own a 1945 Remington .45 M1911, a Karabiner 31, a Langgewehr '08, a Mossberg 12", and a SIG-Sauer .45. I go target shooting with them a lot, because it's fun
Excuses, dude, excuses, you don't need automatic rifles to hunt those poor bears, that likely feel more fear of us (with great common sense) than oposite
In Europe they hunt too, you know?, there are also hunt weapons but not that absurd concept that every dude "has right" to have a pre-belic armory at home, that's bullshit and don't wonder why sometimes europeans nod about that particular issue...paraphrasing Asterix: these Romans are crazy
Listen, my father is hunter and has five or six shotguns and scoped rifles (I hate hunting, btw, like any other thing my father loves, included political ideas...yes, I guess some kind of Edipus bullshit floating around). So here people can get hunt weapons, but it is so pain in the ass that only people that really want to get them makes the effort, and that is good, mon frère, less chances to become an unwanted starring of mass media here
* Twice as many children are killed playing football in school than are murdered by guns. That’s right. Despite what media coverage might seem to indicate, there are more deaths related to high school football than guns. In a recent three year period, twice as many football players died from hits to the head, heat stroke, etc. (45), as compared with students who were murdered by firearms (22) during that same time period.6
Justice Department study:
* 3/5 of felons polled agreed that "a criminal is not going to mess around with a victim he knows is armed with a gun."42
* 74% of felons polled agreed that "one reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot during the crime."43
* 57% of felons polled agreed that "criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police."44
* Gun-free England not such a utopia after all. According to the BBC News, handgun crime in the United Kingdom rose by 40% in the two years after it passed its draconian gun ban in 1997.18 And according to a United Nations study, British citizens are more likely to become a victim of crime than are people in the United States. The 2000 report shows that the crime rate in England is higher than the crime rates of 16 other industrialized nations, including the United States.19
And the number one reason stylie is a gun owner is???
D. Police cannot protect—and are not required to protect—every individual
* The courts have consistently ruled that the police do not have an obligation to protect individuals, only the public in general. For example, in Warren v. D.C. the court stated "courts have without exception concluded that when a municipality or other governmental entity undertakes to furnish police services, it assumes a duty only to the public at large and not to individual members of the community."45
Yes, the bullfights lovers here also compile tons and tons and tons of documents to defend the killing of a living entity and is still a crapload of bullshit
This site is part of the Defy Media Gaming network
The best serving of video game culture, since 2001. Whether you're looking for news, reviews, walkthroughs, or the biggest collection of PC gaming files on the planet, Game Front has you covered. We also make no illusions about gaming: it's supposed to be fun. Browse gaming galleries, humor lists, and honest, short-form reporting. Game on!