FlintyV Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Look up Mao he killed 15 million people. The people were not and are still not allowed to own guns in China. And you think owning a gun would have prevented that? really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azies Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 And you think owning a gun would have prevented that? really? lol I know right? I was thinking the same thing but was too busy trying to figure out how hacking a computer is relevant to the uncertainty of a person with a gun killing another person.. What gets me is that he's so incredibly defensive, I'm not attacking the fact that he's a gun owner, I just don't like the idea of him or anyone else bringing a gun to a public event, or public setting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingCracker Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 How do I know you won't shoot up everyone? If you go outside and come in contact with more than a few people you'll more than likely run into more than a few gun owners. Not everyone is an insane murderer. Most people are good people so I wouldn't worry to much about it but owning a gun and carrying one does give you the opportunity to protect yourself if such an event occurs. I ran into a guy open carrying his firearm when I was in a restaurant recently I didn't get paranoid because common sense tells me not everyone is going to go around shooting people up just because they own a gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingCracker Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 And you think owning a gun would have prevented that? really? Certainly. I don't know about you but i'll be damned if i'd let me and my family be hauled off to a prison camp to be executed. Look at Libya they faught back and won. What makes you think that a population so huge as china couldn't fight back and win if they had weapons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azies Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 If you go outside and come in contact with more than a few people you'll more than likely run into more than a few gun owners. Not everyone is an insane murderer. Most people are good people so I wouldn't worry to much about it but owning a gun and carrying one does give you the opportunity to protect yourself if such an event occurs. I ran into a guy open carrying his firearm when I was in a restaurant recently I didn't get paranoid because common sense tells me not everyone is going to go around shooting people up just because they own a gun. I don't give a **** that you're a gun owner, I just don't like the idea of you or anyone else bringing said gun to a public event. I personally would be uncomfortable, and would probably alert authorities to the fact that you're carrying a weapon, I know they may not be able to do anything, but they'll be ready to put a bullet in your head if you do. Certainly. I don't know about you but i'll be damned if i'd let me and my family be hauled off to a prison camp to be executed. Look at Libya they faught back and won. What makes you think that a population so huge as china couldn't fight back and win if they had weapons? and then they'd kill you, and go about doing what they did before, remember how big the Chinese military is, even back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingCracker Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 I don't give a **** that you're a gun owner, I just don't like the idea of you or anyone else bringing said gun to a public event. I personally would be uncomfortable, and would probably alert authorities to the fact that you're carrying a weapon, I know they may not be able to do anything, but they'll be ready to put a bullet in your head if you do. Sounds like you need to grow some balls and stop being so scared of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azies Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Sounds like you need to grow some balls and stop being so scared of the world. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlintyV Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Sounds like you need to grow some balls and stop being so scared of the world. I'd say the guy with the gun is more scared of the world. And I think that an army of millions, who are well trained, well equipped and have far more resources will win over civilians any day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudslag Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Certainly. I don't know about you but i'll be damned if i'd let me and my family be hauled off to a prison camp to be executed. Look at Libya they faught back and won. What makes you think that a population so huge as china couldn't fight back and win if they had weapons? Im all for gun rights but that's just retarded thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingCracker Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 I'd say the guy with the gun is more scared of the world. And I think that an army of millions, who are well trained, well equipped and have far more resources will win over civilians any day. What would I be scared of? I own a gun and carry one but that doesn't mean that people should be scared of me or anyone else that carries legally. They would of had a chance. They wouldn't have steam rolled over them like you think they would. Sure they would kill a lot of civilians but the will of the population to make a long drawn out war for them. Much better than surrendering to them and letting them execute millions at will. Im all for gun rights but that's just retarded thinking. How is giving a population of millions and millions of people a chance to fight back vs just surrendering and being murdered, retarded thinking. If anything its retarded to not want to give the people a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlintyV Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 What would I be scared of? I own a gun and carry one but that doesn't mean that people should be scared of me or anyone else that carries legally. They would of had a chance. They wouldn't have steam rolled over them like you think they would. Sure they would kill a lot of civilians but the will of the population to make a long drawn out war for them. Much better than surrendering to them and letting them execute millions at will. How is giving a population of millions and millions of people a chance to fight back vs just surrendering and being murdered, retarded thinking. If anything its retarded to not want to give the people a chance. I meant that a person who carries a gun is more scared of the world than a person who doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingCracker Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 I meant that a person who carries a gun is more scared of the world than a person who doesn't. Well you're wrong at-least in my case. A gun to me is insurance. I know that 99% of the time when I go out that nothing is going to happen but I would like to know I have something that can protect me just in case. I don't go outside with my head on a swivel or sweating up a storm thinking that someones going to attack or shoot me. When I carry a gun its almost an after thought. I don't even notice its there some times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudslag Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 What would I be scared of? I own a gun and carry one but that doesn't mean that people should be scared of me or anyone else that carries legally. In all fairness this shooter had legally obtained guns to. Carrying legally doesn't equate to being the sane, as per the original topic. How is giving a population of millions and millions of people a chance to fight back vs just surrendering and being murdered, retarded thinking. If anything its retarded to not want to give the people a chance. You equate having a gun as automatically fighting back and winning, that doesn't automatically mean that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshall Veteran Posted July 22, 2012 Veteran Share Posted July 22, 2012 I meant that a person who carries a gun is more scared of the world than a person who doesn't. Scared? Quite the opposite. As a CCL holder I'm willing to risk my life in order to save yours. And who are you? A stranger. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingCracker Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 In all fairness this shooter had legally obtained guns to. Carrying legally doesn't equate to being the sane, as per the original topic. You equate having a gun as automatically fighting back and winning, that doesn't automatically mean that. He didn't carry them legally, he went into a movie theatre with them ILLEGALLY. Also carrying doesn't make you insane either. --- Of course it doesn't but it gives them better odds as opposed to not having them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theyarecomingforyou Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 How is giving a population of millions and millions of people a chance to fight back vs just surrendering and being murdered, retarded thinking. If anything its retarded to not want to give the people a chance. I still find it bizarre that people in the US believe that possessing firearms will help them resist an oppressive government. Most firearms can't penetrate tanks; they certainly won't protect you from drone attacks; they won't protect you against bombing runs, cruise missiles, land mines, cluster bombs, chemical weapons, etc. In fact going out into the streets with weapons is more likely to make you a target. Countries with stricter regulations on weapons have fewer firearms fatalities - it really isn't a coincidence. The US system doesn't work and these sorts of shootings will continue to happen until something is done. Americans can talk all they want about freedoms and liberties but what good is that "freedom" if you're more likely to lose your life because of it? You may feel safer carrying a firearm but statistically and objectively you're not because everybody else does as well. It's a false sense of security. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingCracker Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 I still find it bizarre that people in the US believe that possessing firearms will help them resist an oppressive government. Most firearms can't penetrate tanks; they certainly won't protect you from drone attacks; they won't protect you against bombing runs, cruise missiles, land mines, cluster bombs, chemical weapons, etc. In fact going out into the streets with weapons is more likely to make you a target. Countries with stricter regulations on weapons have fewer firearms fatalities - it really isn't a coincidence. The US system doesn't work and these sorts of shootings will continue to happen until something is done. Americans can talk all they want about freedoms and liberties but what good is that "freedom" if you're more likely to lose your life because of it? You may feel safer carrying a firearm but statistically and objectively you're not because everybody else does as well. It's a false sense of security. Coming from a Brit. Didn't we fight you guys 200+ years ago. I guess tyranny never really goes away. Why is it that more gun violence happens in inner cities than it does out in the rural area's where everyone owns guns legally? Washington D.C banned handguns at one point and the homicide rate rose dramatically why is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudslag Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 He didn't carry them legally, he went into a movie theatre with them ILLEGALLY. Also carrying doesn't make you insane either. --- I didn't say carrying makes you insane, I said carrying or being a legal gun owner, doesn't equate you to being sane. You CAN be a legal gun owner and still not be right in the head, again as per the shooter in this case. James Holmes was a legal gun owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlintyV Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Why is it that more gun violence happens in inner cities than it does out in the rural area's where everyone owns guns legally? Washington D.C banned handguns at one point and the homicide rate rose dramatically why is that? Higher population density in cities compared to rural areas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingCracker Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Higher population density in cities compared to rural areas? But why would there be more deaths by guns when theres tighter restrictions of firearms. Like I said Washington D.C at one point had an outright ban on handguns and the murder rate was sky high. If banning guns works why didn't the murder rate drop?? why didn't the people in the rural area's start killing each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Veteran Posted July 22, 2012 Veteran Share Posted July 22, 2012 This keeps devolving into a gun debate rather that focusing on the actual story it was based on. I've cleaned it several times, as have others. If you wish to debate gun ownership make a new thread in RWI. This one has worn out it's welcome. thread closed Hum 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts