Shooting of the Day
- Started
- Last post
- 2,785 Responses
- qoob0
If banning some forms of guns and making them harder to obtain saves lives even if it doesn't prevent all killngs, isn't it worth it?
- hans_glib0
They care because they think they look COOL standing in their camo holding proper military grade looking weapons.
Single shot or bolt action hunting rifles with wooden stocks just don't seem that cool because, even though they're more accurate, the military don't use them.
- yeah, I tried taking a picture with my bolt action rifles next to my guitar hero guitar, it just wasn't the samemoldero
- hans_glib0
- This is totally normal behaviour.calculator
- yeeee-haw!scruffics
- Git-r-done white peopleutopian
- yeah us white people are so bad... I hate myself... utopian u a racist bro.whhipp
- ebertzjaw0
It's about time we drew a line under the events and moved on.
- whining in a gay fashion about banning guns is getting oldebertzjaw
- I know. If we ignore it, the problem is bound disappear.Morning_star
- calculator0
^ ebertzjaw - yeah move on to the next school shooting.
- mind boggling attitude.calculator
- cant legislate for lone nutters.ebertzjaw
- where there's a will, there's a way. not vice versaebertzjaw
- As i've said before. Ban guns totally. Lets see how far they get with knives.Morning_star
- I seen a total gun ban before it was called nazi germany. not sure if you rememberyurimon
- Thats' right, of course. You can't move for death camps in the UK at the moment. Jeez.Morning_star
- drgs0
The chance of catching a random bullet is not determined by whether you carry a weapon, but by how many other people than you who carry guns, and how many of them are alcoholics, crack heads, people who suffer from frustration, psychosis etc.
Even if everyone was carrying a gun, this percentage is unlikely to change – if anything it would even increase.
In America drunken cowboys who are ready to rush into any fray without provocation make up 10% of the population. Additional 80% are practically zombies -- raw material for bioreactor anyway
In principle, all social ailments are rooted in the fact that the density of these people is off scale, and it would be nice to thin out the stock by about as much, but to call this "security" is ridiculous.
This is not security, it’s a meat grinderDon’t get me wrong, I have nothing against guns. I am against you, dear readers, personally...
- Hmm, social engineering...where have i heard that before.Morning_star
- drgs0
Also, I was reading an article about some guy in US who is involved in some sort of local search and rescue services (volunteers), looking for people who are lost, sometimes in places where wildlife is truly wild, removing corpses etc.
The rescuers are strictly prohibited to bring any weapons (privately owned or issued by the government). A violation of this rule leads to lifelong exclusion from the organization.Why such strict rules? It turns out that it is because of the insurance. Each rescuer must have his own personal insurance, which he buys on his own account, but this type of insurance does not cover all specific conditions of the rescuers. Therefore, they have additional, so-called secondary insurance for each volunteer bought by the organization
Unlike us, the insurance companies are betting money on the calculations they make: the company which once calculates incorrectly loses its business.
And no insurance company agrees to provide their services at a reasonable price, if to an already dangerous work of saving people we add the probability of having a firearm.So this is for people out there who like the idea of free market and less government restrictions in all areas of human life, including the right to carry a guns:
The invisible hand of the market has decided that weapons are an unnecessary element- Compulsory insurance is not exactly free market if you are required to have any this not free market.yurimon
- It is. They are free to choose ANY provider of insurance. That is a free market.Morning_star
- the customer is the organization, not the volunteers
sit down, yurimon, D minusdrgs - you guys are crazy... if your forced to buy anything its not free market. lolyurimon
- No. You're wrong.Morning_star
- locustsloth0
it kind of cracks me up that this picture/quote is showing up so much since last friday. i don't disagree that people need to take personal responsibility for their actions, but this is a quote that he made against social welfare programs following the urban riots that erupted after Martin Luther King's assassination. Not after a madman shot up innocent people.
And speaking of madmen shooting people, Reagan supported the Brady bill. You know, the one named after the guy who took a bullet for him when a madman tried to shoot Reagan.
- i_monk0
Finding out a medical/mental cause for something, investigating how an event came to pass (how the weapons were acquired, who knew he was planning something, what signs were ignored along the way, etc), and changing the laws to prevent it from happening again, *and* holding the individual responsible, are not mutually exclusive things.
I wouldn't expect a conservative to understand that though.
- ********0
MK Ultra
