Signature thread about gun control and gun violence

Non-neopets general discussion.

What should my new sig say?

Molon labe, bitch.
3
9%
Pwushie killer. In more ways than one.
2
6%
In Soviet Russia, pwushie gets you!
8
24%
Reply to this post or the pwushie gets you.
1
3%
Cute. Cuddly. Deadly.
5
15%
Walk softly and carry a killer pwushie.
0
No votes
My name is Pwushie. You killed my tiger. Prepare to die.
12
36%
Are these things edible? No?! Then why'd you give them to me?!?
2
6%
Reply to this post or Commander Pwushie will find out it was your fault that Mr. Tiger died.
0
No votes
He wasn't called Two-Gun Pwushie because he carried two guns...
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 33

Illuen
Posts: 1042
Joined: 08 Jan 2006 02:39 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Windurst Residential Area

Post by Illuen »

syldssuf wrote:If they were good shots? Yes. Absolutely. 30-something % (too lazy to look it up) of people who comply with a criminal are injured or killed anyway, compared to less than 10% who fight back with a gun.

Look at it this way.

A knife-weilding rapist is threatening you or a loved one or whatever with death unless you submit to their every whim for an indeterminite period of time. What is more desirable?

A. You call the police. They arrive 10 minutes later. You are bleeding badly and have been raped and spend days in the hospital and years going to therapy. This is the most common outcome. Fatal injuries are also pretty common.

B. A police officer miraculously appears behind you and shoots the attempted rapist. This almost never happens.

C. You shoot the rapist. Also almost never happens, sadly.

D. You use a "stun gun," (I used to have a video of a woman zapping herself with one then laughing and saying it tickled, but sadly this is lost) or other ineffective device, which the rapist inserts in your anus, then #A occurs (yes, number A).

E. You run away. Actually, that's the best thing to do unless cornered, disabled, or otherwise unable to. But if you can't run, then what?
I am probably, yanno, different than most people, but I would rather be raped than become a murderer
Image
No spoony bard could spin a sweeter tale.
syldssuf
Posts: 68
Joined: 10 Jun 2006 06:49 pm
Location: PA, USA
Contact:

Post by syldssuf »

And I suppose you want the bank robber bleeding to death after some wonderful citizen shot them? Robbers do not deserve to die, ever.
That's your own moral choice. But would you inflict that choice on everyone else? "Less-lethal" devices are much less effective at stopping lethal force than firearms are. Would you sacrifice police lives, or innocent private citizen lives, so that criminals may live?

Firearms are the best means which private citizens have of defending themselves against imminent lethal force, including armed robbery (30+% of people who comply are injured or killed, remember). For pure property crimes with no threat of force, there's 911.
Image
VanillaCoke
Posts: 286
Joined: 18 Jan 2006 11:03 pm
Location: England

Post by VanillaCoke »

Putting an adult killing machine into an image of toy, that children play with, disturbs me.
Bitch in big bold letters in a signature, so I cannot ignore it, annoys me.
Comparing a wrong to something else you consider wrong does not make your original wrong more right, especially when they are completely different. It's still wrong.

D. You shoot with your gun and a child dies in the miss fire.

Gun crime is rising in England. I heard one guy died over a 20p. Every person on the news, killed by a gun, has died innocently.
syldssuf
Posts: 68
Joined: 10 Jun 2006 06:49 pm
Location: PA, USA
Contact:

Post by syldssuf »

So, you would say that killing a rapist, in order to prevent an immenant rape, is "murder," rather than justifiable homicide? That's your choice, then. Sadly.
Image
VanillaCoke
Posts: 286
Joined: 18 Jan 2006 11:03 pm
Location: England

Post by VanillaCoke »

syldssuf wrote:
And I suppose you want the bank robber bleeding to death after some wonderful citizen shot them? Robbers do not deserve to die, ever.
That's your own moral choice. But would you inflict that choice on everyone else? "Less-lethal" devices are much less effective at stopping lethal force than firearms are. Would you sacrifice police lives, or innocent private citizen lives, so that criminals may live?

Firearms are the best means which private citizens have of defending themselves against imminent lethal force, including armed robbery (30+% of people who comply are injured or killed, remember). For pure property crimes with no threat of force, there's 911.
Sorry, are you god?
Cheese
Posts: 1371
Joined: 19 Jan 2006 05:44 pm
Location: :noitacoL

Post by Cheese »

Jazzy wrote:Please. Put your second amendment away; you've no use for it here.
I'm a bit late because I only just saw this whole thing, but that is the coolest thing I've possibly heard anyone say in a long time.
syldssuf
Posts: 68
Joined: 10 Jun 2006 06:49 pm
Location: PA, USA
Contact:

Post by syldssuf »

The news only covers violent crimes, because that's all people want to hear about.

Right here in PA, a school shooting was stopped by a restaurant owner who had a legally concealed handgun on him at the time, while at a school assembley. Untold lives were saved. No one was shot or killed. The guy just held the kid at gunpoint until police got there, about 15 minutes later. How many people could be killed in 15 minutes?

But there was zero media coverage. None at all. Nothing, nada. That's how the liberal media works. Anything that doesn't reinforce their beliefs, doesn't get shown.
Image
Jazzy
Devil's Advocate
Posts: 2037
Joined: 04 Jan 2006 06:06 pm
Gender: Female
Location: a g-orbital
Contact:

Post by Jazzy »

Yes, I damn well would. We have no death penalty in this country and I'm hardly going to say "oh, but if you want to kill them, that's okay, I shan't stop you." I'd feel like an accessory to a murder if I let someone kill someone else.

"(30+% of people who comply are injured or killed, remember)."
42.7% of statistics are made up on the spot. Remember, in my last post I asked you how many bodies they had to dig up and question to verify that one?
Illuen
Posts: 1042
Joined: 08 Jan 2006 02:39 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Windurst Residential Area

Post by Illuen »

syldssuf wrote:So, you would say that killing a rapist, in order to prevent an immenant rape, is "murder," rather than justifiable homicide? That's your choice, then. Sadly.
You shoot a gun, the bullet goes into them, and they die, you are a murderer, no matter what happy little spin you want to put on it. "Justifiable Homicide"? Homicide=murder, and it may be justified, but you still took another humans life, and are therefor a murderer. And the mental damage of dealing with the fact that you took another human beings life is worse than that of being raped, I would be willing to say.
Image
No spoony bard could spin a sweeter tale.
Figment
Girl Anachronism
Posts: 457
Joined: 07 Jan 2006 11:24 pm
Gender: Female

Post by Figment »

Chickvw: I grew up in a rural area. I can count on two hands the number of families I know who might genuinely need guns to survive, and that's being generous. I would have to move to a different counting system (perhaps the hair on my head) to take in the number of families I know who own guns. And the people I know who have been killed with guns? Is disproportionately large considering that I come from a very small town.

"42 killed by handguns"? In comparison to the 11,000 killed by homicide alone in the US in 2003, a number that doesn't even take into account suicides, accidents, and law reinforcement shootings? Less than a hundred is damn good.

Drive-by-shootings wouldn't happen quite so often if teenagers in gangs didn't have easy gun access.

The truth of the matter is that vigilantism just breeds more vigilantism. If people feel they have a right to kill anyone who remotely threatens their physical safety or offends their moral beliefs, more people are killed. I am not suggesting that strict gun control would have an immediate affect in the US. I'm sure it would take several generations for the culture of fear and the famous american entitlement to be trained out of us. But it has to start somewhere, and arming everyone in the country is hardly going to make changes.

I don't even know why we started this debate. It's rather like docking or declawing: no one's opinion will change. I suppose the question, really, is whether or not it is appropriate to advertise extreme political and religious views via neopets -- that is all Jazzy and I initially commented on. That's been a neopets rule that I've never had a problem with. I'm not suggesting we implement something similar here, but using the vehicle of an internet game to promote gun rights is rather ridiculous.
Last edited by Figment on 23 Jun 2006 12:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
syldssuf
Posts: 68
Joined: 10 Jun 2006 06:49 pm
Location: PA, USA
Contact:

Post by syldssuf »

*Sigh*. And now it degenerates into completely random observations and absolutely ridiculous statements. Digging up people, indeed. Police statistics keep track of what happens.

Everyone just read the goddamned book and check the sources.

http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts ... Screen.pdf

Argue with it instead of me. It does a better job. Find your issues in there, read the reality.
Last edited by syldssuf on 23 Jun 2006 12:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
VanillaCoke
Posts: 286
Joined: 18 Jan 2006 11:03 pm
Location: England

Post by VanillaCoke »

syldssuf wrote:So, you would say that killing a rapist, in order to prevent an immenant rape, is "murder," rather than justifiable homicide? That's your choice, then. Sadly.
Is that aimed at me? If so by saying "Comparing a wrong to something else you consider wrong does not make your original wrong more right, especially when they are completely different. It's still wrong."

I meant that comparing cars to guns for instance is silly, sorry I didn't quote.
Kantark
Posts: 1927
Joined: 18 Jan 2006 08:59 pm
Gender: Male
Location: UK

Post by Kantark »

You also totally sidestepped my question - you say that banning personal ownership of anything on moral grounds is wrong, yet I will assume that you were primarily thinking about gun ownership and that even you would draw the line somewhere. If morality is not a valid reason for banning ownership how do you hope to draw the line?

Ignoring our points and countering with a shedload of quotes garnered from a pro-gun propaganda* site isn't exactly building a strong argument for yourself ;)

* and before you say it isn't, that site is definitely a propaganda site and makes no bones about admitting it.
Image
Neopets: sparkygoesforth, decommissioned, nightfall, LiveJournal:kantark, Last.FM:Kantark
syldssuf
Posts: 68
Joined: 10 Jun 2006 06:49 pm
Location: PA, USA
Contact:

Post by syldssuf »

No, that was to Illuen. I really don't feel like quoting. {sighs} I really should stop arguing with liberals. I used to argue with conservatives, but that went equally badly.

"But, but, but, that gay guy from canada! Niggers invented AIDS! Baby rapists!"

*sighs* Liberals are just as bad, unfortunately.

Oh, I forgot to mention, http://www.a-human-right.com/
Image
Kamil
Not the nice one
Posts: 1788
Joined: 08 Jan 2006 02:47 am
Gender: Female
Human Avatar: 72834
Location: the comfy chair
Contact:

Post by Kamil »

Illuen wrote:
I am probably, yanno, different than most people, but I would rather be raped than become a murderer
Not all that different - because if those are my choices, I too would rather be raped.

I can get over that.

If I kill someone, they're not going to get over it - ever. And rape is never worth killing over - nothing is, actually.
Image Image
MM and Twofold rock, yo.
Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests