When Draven gets older, I hope he'll go into Boy Scouts, and learn about them as well. You can't be afraid of something, if you know about it.
See, I tought tat was true, so I learned a shit load of stuff about snakes, asked my mom to take me to the Snake house at the zoo when I was young, followed every Steve Irwing special about Snakes, but I'm still scared shitless of them. Maybe I should have done the Boy Scout thing. Do they have a snake badge?
Yes. Yes they do, called "Reptile Studies"
Don't get me wrong about my previous statement, I'd still be scared if someone pointed a gun at me or mine (unless the safety was off) but I'm not afraid to handle one due to my training in Boy Scouts.
It would amuse me if next year Byrne did a women's fed or Texas fed. I'd just like to see how he tries to make it a dark, demonic, ECW homage led by James Mitchell or Raven. -- Lucky, 2009
see. i told you byrne was the way to go here. like i said, he's a big dork. -- Ziggy, 2009
Post by Jack Quinn on Dec 27, 2008 15:24:27 GMT -5
That's really strange, I don't remember ever having a fear of guns. And its not like I grew up around them. I am sure my step-father had them, but its not like they were always out in the open, or they were shooting them all the time either. My family is not a bunch of gun nuts (for the most part)
When I was a kid, I had a pellet and bb gun, and when I got older, my folks bought me the 22 that I have. I remember going out and shooting it Christmas morning, and never hesitating with it.
Seems foreign to me, for some reason, to be afraid of guns, at least shooting them. Having one pointed at you in anger, yeah that is something I think you SHOULD probably be pretty afraid of
The Phillies are everything I hoped the Mets would be - a team that plays their fucking asses off for all 27 outs. They're never out of a game. Solly 10/20/09
Post by Jack Quinn on Dec 27, 2008 15:30:08 GMT -5
I look good in the bunny suit too
I mean,
uh
What?
The Phillies are everything I hoped the Mets would be - a team that plays their fucking asses off for all 27 outs. They're never out of a game. Solly 10/20/09
Why did this become about being scared? I hardly think I'm scared of guns, beyond the basic obviousness of it. And the fact that I've known folks who have been shot or killed in accidental shootings so I recognize that you don't need bad intent to ruin lives with a gun. I'm not a big fan of items that can take life with such ease and which exist in such abundance in this country. I see no sane reason anyone has a freaking armory in 2008 America. If you think that makes me "scared" so be it, but I prefer to think of it as practical.
So it always strikes me as crazy to learn how casual and plentiful they are. That they make pink guns for girls. That they have merit badges for kids in boy scouts. That Moose's stepdad who is NOT a gun nut owns enough guns to warrant making that distinction. I just don't understand why. Why in the world does someone who is NOT a gun nut own that many guns? Why in the world do they make FASHION guns for girls? What possible purpose is there to give guns to kids and teach them how to use them in 21st Century America? I understand teaching a kid to handle something if it wasn't for the fact that the kid should never ever EVER be in a position to handle a gun in this society. And if Moose's stepdad is a collector who disarms the guns then I start to understand things a bit better. But its this whole gun culture that is completely, 100% foreign to me. Despite the fact that I'm basically saying "I don't understand America."
And yeah, sorry, Byrne. I'm going to have to call BS on "you can't be scared of things you understand." I suspect I could be the most well trained gun user in the world and I'd still recognize that 1 idiot making 1 small mistake can take a life. Or 1 mistake on my part, and NO ONE is above mistakes.
If you own a shotgun to protect your home I can't say I really blame you. I don't and I don't feel any less safe so I'm not sure if its truly necessary and I clearly don't see eye to eye with you. But assuming your act responsibly with it and keep it safely locked up and empty then I certainly don't think strange of you that you want it there to protect you or that you might take it to the firing range now and then so you'll know how to use it if you ever need to, God forbid. My problem is that so many own them casually and so many behave irresponsibility.
But I can understand people's hesitation about guns in general, especially in urban areas when guns are equated with youth doing bad shit, hurting good people.
I don't want to start anything here but that seems about as worthless a generalization as if I had just assumed you were all gun nuts. Or that "mini-NRA" thing you felt you needed to assure me the Boy Scouts weren't when I never intended to suggest anything like that. I'm not some bleeding heart liberal who associates guns solely with gang violence and crime and wants them purged from society. I don't associate guns with crime and gangs.
I associate guns with killing. Because that is their sole purpose for existing. Killing can have different purposes. Safety, protection of your family, hunting for food, hunting to compensate for your failings as a man, war, law enforcement, crime, revenge, anger, etc. But when it comes down to it a gun's sole use is to take life or to make people fear you will take life. And if I trusted that the world were full of responsible people who aren't capable of leaving the gun available for your kid to play with, or playing with it when you get drunk, or being overwhelmed with anger or sorrow and picking it up... well, I'd STILL be uncomfortable with the common presence of guns in our country because even a perfect society would still be prone to mistakes, accidents, and extremes.
So its not that I don't realize guns have a real purpose and can be used responsibility. Its that as best I can figure putting a gun in a hand of a child, owning a private armory, fashioning up guns so they look like toys, and having a country absolutely FLOODED with guns is inherrently irresponsible as a society.
Or don't do either. If you can't find an image you like at either than don't force it. Just give me something you like and which will look good on the board.
Post by Byrntrigan on Dec 27, 2008 16:12:04 GMT -5
I think we might be arguing the same side of this argument. I'm not saying that properly trained people take gun safety less seriously.
In fact, I'd stake just the opposite, that properly trained people are exactly the ones who understand just what the proper application of a gun entails. And what 1 mistake can mean.
I have a uncle who is a cop who has never fired his gun in the 30 years of his police career.
To me it's an issue of training. Not to say that proper training doesn't eliminate gun accidents, but it sure has to limit it.
Untrained people are the real danger. Of course this is just my opinion, with no real stats or facts baking them up.
I'd be interested in knowing what our Candian PH'ers think, as guns are illegal to own except for hunting, yes? And you have your hunting gun(s) being held by the police until you check it out to use it.
What's the gun violence like up there? Does the Candian method limit gun violence?
Last Edit: Dec 27, 2008 16:12:55 GMT -5 by Byrntrigan
It would amuse me if next year Byrne did a women's fed or Texas fed. I'd just like to see how he tries to make it a dark, demonic, ECW homage led by James Mitchell or Raven. -- Lucky, 2009
see. i told you byrne was the way to go here. like i said, he's a big dork. -- Ziggy, 2009
That Moose's stepdad who is NOT a gun nut owns enough guns to warrant making that distinction. I just don't understand why. Why in the world does someone who is NOT a gun nut own that many guns? Why in the world do they make FASHION guns for girls?
No no, you misunderstood, my step father and sister ARE gun nuts, but the majority of my family is not
What possible purpose is there to give guns to kids and teach them how to use them in 21st Century America? I understand teaching a kid to handle something if it wasn't for the fact that the kid should never ever EVER be in a position to handle a gun in this society.
See, you and I disagree here. You seem to assume that by teaching a kid to shoot, you are setting them up for something bad in the future. Target practice and skeet shooting is a pretty common form of sport and/or relaxation, well, outside of that little isolated world called the tri-state area. There is nothing wrong with teaching kids to shoot, as long as you also take the time to explain responsibility to them too, and make sure they understand the dangers of guns and all that.
And if Moose's stepdad is a collector who disarms the guns then I start to understand things a bit better.
nope, he is just a gun nut.
But when it comes down to it a gun's sole use is to take life or to make people fear you will take life.
and not to sound like the head of the NRA, but this is just wrong
Last Edit: Dec 27, 2008 16:22:00 GMT -5 by Jack Quinn
The Phillies are everything I hoped the Mets would be - a team that plays their fucking asses off for all 27 outs. They're never out of a game. Solly 10/20/09
I'm not assuming that if you put a gun in a kid's hand something will go wrong. I'm saying that there's absolutely ZERO need to put the gun in the kid's hand and thus eliminating ANY possibility of it going wrong seems to make common sense to me. Target practice and skeet shooting are super and all but our country has dozens upon dozens of equally enjoyable hobbies and sports that don't involve "sports equipment" that can
I see absolutely zero reason to ever teach a kid to shoot a gun. What possible purpose is there for it in this day and age? If its just for fun then I call that remarkably irresponsible. If its because you worry they'll need to have that information than our society is remarkably fucked up for putting them in that situation. You can explain all the responsibility to them you want. They're still CHILDREN and thus you can't actually TRUST them to make the sort of decisions that should really be left to adults. They're kids. They're stupid. Its not their fault. And if their parents and adults put them in situations where that stupidity can yield potentially fatal results? That's all on the adults.
You both feel untrained gun users is the problem here and I 100% disagree. The problem is the presence of the guns. X number of guns are necessary and they should be handled by responsible people. And I can stretch that to include home protection by private citizens. But ultimately its the ungodly number of guns in our society and how easy it is to get your hands on one that's the true problem. And a society that SHOULD be above this. We have gun violence and death numbers that compare only to countries mired in war and revolution. How can we not see a connection between that and our loose gun laws and casual view of them?
Or don't do either. If you can't find an image you like at either than don't force it. Just give me something you like and which will look good on the board.
and not to sound like the head of the NRA, but this is just wrong
Dude... a gun's purpose is to kill. Sure, you CAN use it to shoot skeet or put out candles. But that's not why it was made. The gun was made to kill. And all that other stuff you think is fun can be done without using an advanced piece of technology designed to take a life with efficiency and ease. You can own a gun exclusively to shoot clay pigeons but there's absolutely nothing but luck keeping it from being used for the purpose it was designed.
Why can't we just enjoy using BB or air guns to shoot targets? Or bows and arrows? At least they demand a certain level of knowledge and ability to be turned into effective killing machines. With a gun all you need is stupidity or bad luck.
Or don't do either. If you can't find an image you like at either than don't force it. Just give me something you like and which will look good on the board.
Post by Jack Quinn on Dec 27, 2008 16:35:31 GMT -5
I think it also depends on the age we are talking about here. Giving a five year old a gun is stupid. Giving a 15 year old a gun, not so much.
And again, I think we just disagree. Clearly you think guns have no use outside of police or military. While I don't think we should all arm ourselves to the teeth and have shootouts at high noon, I see nothing wrong with having them for recreation.
And why SHOULD we be above this as a society? As a society we have made American Idol the most watched show in television history. As a society, we are not all that swift. I think you have far too much faith in us as a whole.
The Phillies are everything I hoped the Mets would be - a team that plays their fucking asses off for all 27 outs. They're never out of a game. Solly 10/20/09
I think it also depends on the age we are talking about here. Giving a five year old a gun is stupid. Giving a 15 year old a gun, not so much.
And again, I think we just disagree. Clearly you think guns have no use outside of police or military. While I don't think we should all arm ourselves to the teeth and have shootouts at high noon, I see nothing wrong with having them for recreation.
And why SHOULD we be above this as a society? As a society we have made American Idol the most watched show in television history. As a society, we are not all that swift. I think you have far too much faith in us as a whole.
You know, the rest of the world is just as stupid as us. American Idol isn't an American creation as much as the name would suggest. But somehow most societies at our level have determined that the negatives of guns outweigh how fun they are to shoot stuff. Look across a list of countries and gun violence and almost every country that is near us or past us are countries lost in violence and war. How is that not raise flags?
Honestly, if I had as little respect for America as you seem to, Moose, I'm pretty sure I'd leave. And that's not a "Love it or leave it" sort of comment. That's me pointing out that if you really do think we're incapable of doing the things other societies have then I'd want to be part of one of those better societies.
Or don't do either. If you can't find an image you like at either than don't force it. Just give me something you like and which will look good on the board.
and not to sound like the head of the NRA, but this is just wrong
Dude... a gun's purpose is to kill. Sure, you CAN use it to shoot skeet or put out candles. But that's not why it was made. The gun was made to kill. And all that other stuff you think is fun can be done without using an advanced piece of technology designed to take a life with efficiency and ease. You can own a gun exclusively to shoot clay pigeons but there's absolutely nothing but luck keeping it from being used for the purpose it was designed.
Why can't we just enjoy using BB or air guns to shoot targets? Or bows and arrows? At least they demand a certain level of knowledge and ability to be turned into effective killing machines. With a gun all you need is stupidity or bad luck.
Guns can be used to kill. Certainly. And maybe they were made just for killing, but that doesn't mean that is their only use. Again, there are recreations that involve shooting, you may not see that as legitimate, but the fact is, it is a legitimate form of recreation for a lot of people. And it is not luck that keeps them from being used as weapons of death, it is skill. Accidents happen, of course, but if you know what you are doing, just like with anything else potentially lethal, the odds of it ending in a fatal accident are reduced tremendously.
A bow and arrow can be just as lethal as a gun, why is that ok then? You need skill to shoot a bow well, but you can get just as dumb shit lucky and kill someone with a bow and arrow as you can a gun. Again, its about being trained to USE these things properly.
Like I said, I own a gun. It is not to compensate for anything, it is not to threaten people, it is not to kill anything. It is because I enjoy shooting it on occasion at targets. I was taught how to use it properly, and I make sure I know what is around me before I ever shoot it. What is so wrong with that? For a lot of people that is a hobby, and amazingly, in that hobby, you probably have very few deaths over the course of a year. So, you say guns are bad, so this hobby is bad, we shouldn't allow people to participate in a recreation where they could die. Or am I missing your argument here?
I said it in chat, owning an arsenal is bad. Giving guns to untrained people and just turning them lose is bad. Owning a weapon to use on occasion by someone who knows what they are doing, and using it to shoot targets or something, not a problem.
EDITED to take the "No, you are wrong" part out. Clearly it is your opinion and you are entitled to it, I just don't agree
Last Edit: Dec 27, 2008 16:47:33 GMT -5 by Jack Quinn
The Phillies are everything I hoped the Mets would be - a team that plays their fucking asses off for all 27 outs. They're never out of a game. Solly 10/20/09
Honestly, if I had as little respect for America as you seem to, Moose, I'm pretty sure I'd leave. And that's not a "Love it or leave it" sort of comment. That's me pointing out that if you really do think we're incapable of doing the things other societies have then I'd want to be part of one of those better societies.
Eh, moving would require effort and I am a lazy American. I hope for better, but from what I have seen, I don't really expect it
The Phillies are everything I hoped the Mets would be - a team that plays their fucking asses off for all 27 outs. They're never out of a game. Solly 10/20/09
Yes, Moose. I think any sport that involves a gun is a stupid sport that we'd be better off without.
The only think keeping your gun from being used to take a life is no one breaking into your home and stealing it. Your car not being stolen on the way back from the gun range. You making a simple mistake any human is capable of. Or God forbid, you losing your sanity for even 5 minutes due to unforeseen stress and pressure. And lets be real, ANY ONE of us is capable of losing it because that's the sort of thing you can't see coming. All it takes is horrible tragedy or something screwy in your chemical balance or God knows what.
I'm talking about practicality. You assume that training reduces the risk of harm being caused by the gun. You know what reduces it even more? No gun. Is skeet shooting actually worth the difference between 0% and whatever number training brings you to? You said it yourself. With your nephews around you you wouldn't want to have your step dad's guns in your house. Because even if you put them lock and key behind closed door and act as responsibly as possible... the even small risk is too high for you to ignore.
Or don't do either. If you can't find an image you like at either than don't force it. Just give me something you like and which will look good on the board.
In Boy Scouts there are 3 merit badges, Riflery, Shotgun Shooting and Archery.
And yet, they refuse to have a badge for 'martial arts' because it's 'too violent.'
For all my liberal leanings, I'm not anti gun. But I'm also not buying the 'guns are just a tool' thing. They are a tool to shoot at stuff with the express purpose of destroying it, whether the target is a tin can, a paper cut out of a dude, a deer, or that kid on my lawn.
I guess you could do the Homer Simpson thing and use it to turn the lights and TV off and on, but there's better tools for that.
[DevSop] god your sex life scares me
[SeamusMcNasty] And that is why I hate the Miz. He's got potential, but he just doesn't live up to it. Unlike Randy Orton, who has no potential and lives right up to that.
MHJ: "if it is kinky, depraved, erotic, or a fetish, you will find it"
Cyclops698 "I'm 100% committed to our fake marriage"
Or don't do either. If you can't find an image you like at either than don't force it. Just give me something you like and which will look good on the board.
Seriously. (Unless that has changed, it's been a while since I dated boy scouts).
[DevSop] god your sex life scares me
[SeamusMcNasty] And that is why I hate the Miz. He's got potential, but he just doesn't live up to it. Unlike Randy Orton, who has no potential and lives right up to that.
MHJ: "if it is kinky, depraved, erotic, or a fetish, you will find it"
Cyclops698 "I'm 100% committed to our fake marriage"
Yes, Moose. I think any sport that involves a gun is a stupid sport that we'd be better off without.
The only think keeping your gun from being used to take a life is no one breaking into your home and stealing it. Your car not being stolen on the way back from the gun range. You making a simple mistake any human is capable of. Or God forbid, you losing your sanity for even 5 minutes due to unforeseen stress and pressure. And lets be real, ANY ONE of us is capable of losing it because that's the sort of thing you can't see coming. All it takes is horrible tragedy or something screwy in your chemical balance or God knows what.
Ok, so we are just talking about practicality and ease then? Because if I snapped, really you could use anything as a lethal weapon. A gun would be more handy, and faster, sure, but I could just as easily beat my neighbor to death with a hammer, or run him over with my car. People snap, and if they want to kill someone bad enough, they will. I can see how eliminating guns would reduce that, but it would not eliminate that.
I'm talking about practicality. You assume that training reduces the risk of harm being caused by the gun. You know what reduces it even more? No gun. Is skeet shooting actually worth the difference between 0% and whatever number training brings you to?
See, this is where we just disagree. You want to eliminate guns because bad things COULD happen. Well bad things COULD happen with any number of things. Again, you said archery requires some skill, thats true, it does, but a bow and arrow in skilled hands is just as lethal as a gun in untrained hands.
You said it yourself. With your nephews around you you wouldn't want to have your step dad's guns in your house. Because even if you put them lock and key behind closed door and act as responsibly as possible... the even small risk is too high for you to ignore.
And that is a personal choice. And one that should be made by the individual. I think that is my issue. If you don't WANT to own a gun, I support that 100%, that is your decision. But there is just a part of me that can't get behind a government telling me that I CAN'T do this because "it is for your own good"
The Phillies are everything I hoped the Mets would be - a team that plays their fucking asses off for all 27 outs. They're never out of a game. Solly 10/20/09
My sister freaked out months ago because she was angry that the government was telling her what she couldn't do for her own good. The problem was that she had just learned that there are laws prohibiting the sale of liquor during certain times. She wanted a bottle of wine and was angry that she couldn't get one. Somehow this became a matter of the government having too much control of us and it being wrong that they can keep us from doing things because its for our "own good." Lost on this was that it wasn't about "our own good" but was about the basic public safety of our society and was the same basis for setting a blood alcohol level or closing the bars after a certain hour. Or setting gun restrictions.
Quite frankly, Moose, I couldn't give a shit if a gun owner kills himself. If he chose to take on that risk and he suffered for his stupid or irresponsibly so be it. My concern is other people suffering for the decisions of others. It may be your personal decision to not have guns in your home or to have them there, your decision doesn't just affect you. So that's where "personal decision" gives way to "the society needs to make decisions as a society."
Ok, so we are just talking about practicality and ease then? Because if I snapped, really you could use anything as a lethal weapon. A gun would be more handy, and faster, sure, but I could just as easily beat my neighbor to death with a hammer, or run him over with my car.
No, Moose. You could NOT "just as easily" kill him with a hammer. That's the point. With a gun you can kill your neighbor from the comfort of your own home without him even knowing what was going on. It takes a bit more time, effort, and a lot less distance to kill him with a hammer. Or a gun, for that matter. Hard to miss a gun coming at you and hard to not notice you're standing in the way of an oncoming car and a psychotic driver.
People snap, and if they want to kill someone bad enough, they will. I can see how eliminating guns would reduce that, but it would not eliminate that.
Never suggest it would. Just like cutting off a drunk doesn't eliminate the possibility he hurts himself or others drunk. You still do it because it certainly can't hurt the situation and the couple of extra bucks you make off him isn't worth the risk.
I've never understood the notion people have that if you can't ELIMINATE a problem you shouldn't take the steps to LIMIT it. If you can reduce gun violence by 5% why in the world would skeet shooting keep you from doing that?
And for what its worth I've shot a bow and arrow and I feel fairly certain I couldn't manage to kill anyone with it unless I take the arrow and stab you repeatedly and then hold you down as you bleed out slowly. The entire point is that a retarded chimp can pull a trigger.
Or don't do either. If you can't find an image you like at either than don't force it. Just give me something you like and which will look good on the board.
And yet, they refuse to have a badge for 'martial arts' because it's 'too violent.'
Wow. Seriously? Christ, the Boy Scouts are fucking retarded, huh?
Yes. There are many things I hate that they do, as an Eagle Scout.
For instance their stance that you have to believe in God, to be a Eagle Scout, or that if you are gay, you can't be in Scouts.
Or that apparently martial Arts is too violent for a merit badge, but it was ok to have me learn Animal Science and stick my hand up a cows ass to earn it...
You won't get arguments about their archaic learnings in certain areas.
It would amuse me if next year Byrne did a women's fed or Texas fed. I'd just like to see how he tries to make it a dark, demonic, ECW homage led by James Mitchell or Raven. -- Lucky, 2009
see. i told you byrne was the way to go here. like i said, he's a big dork. -- Ziggy, 2009
but it was ok to have me learn Animal Science and stick my hand up the merit badge counselors' ass to earn it...
A pre-emptive "Fixed that for ya"
It would amuse me if next year Byrne did a women's fed or Texas fed. I'd just like to see how he tries to make it a dark, demonic, ECW homage led by James Mitchell or Raven. -- Lucky, 2009
see. i told you byrne was the way to go here. like i said, he's a big dork. -- Ziggy, 2009
Quite frankly, Moose, I couldn't give a shit if a gun owner kills himself. If he chose to take on that risk and he suffered for his stupid or irresponsibly so be it. My concern is other people suffering for the decisions of others. It may be your personal decision to not have guns in your home or to have them there, your decision doesn't just affect you. So that's where "personal decision" gives way to "the society needs to make decisions as a society."
and again, that is where we disagree. I can see your point on some of the things, limiting the sale of alcohol and such, but to me, banning guns is something different. I just don't like the idea of the government saying you can't have a gun because something bad might happen, no matter what steps you might take to prevent that.
No, Moose. You could NOT "just as easily" kill him with a hammer. That's the point. With a gun you can kill your neighbor from the comfort of your own home without him even knowing what was going on. It takes a bit more time, effort, and a lot less distance to kill him with a hammer. Or a gun, for that matter. Hard to miss a gun coming at you and hard to not notice you're standing in the way of an oncoming car and a psychotic driver.
Fine, its not just as easy, but the end result is still the same, they are dead. So those things are bad too. A gun makes it easier, but honestly, if you are in that state of mine, is ease of killing really what is going through your mind? And again, how often does that happen? it does happen more than we think, I am certain. But by the same token, you also have people who own guns their entire lives and no one dies. It just seems like an overreaction to me. Well something bad might happen, so let's eliminate even the slight possibility of something happening by eliminating all the guns.
I've never understood the notion people have that if you can't ELIMINATE a problem you shouldn't take the steps to LIMIT it. If you can reduce gun violence by 5% why in the world would skeet shooting keep you from doing that?
And that's where we sort of agree. I am all for taking steps toward eliminating the problem, I just think that eliminating guns is going TOO far. Personal decision and all. I mean if I want to get a gun, and I am trained in how to shoot it, I have taken measures to make certain that my gun is stored properly in a locked cabinet with the ammo somewhere else, why shouldn't I be allowed to do that? Because there is that 1% chance that someone might break into my house and break into the gun cabinet, then find the ammo cabinet, leave the house, and go out and commit murder?
And for what its worth I've shot a bow and arrow and I feel fairly certain I couldn't manage to kill anyone with it unless I take the arrow and stab you repeatedly and then hold you down as you bleed out slowly. The entire point is that a retarded chimp can pull a trigger.
That's why I said a bow and arrow in trained hands. A chimp could pull a trigger. A person well trained on the bow and arrow can be just as lethal
Last Edit: Dec 27, 2008 17:34:01 GMT -5 by Jack Quinn
The Phillies are everything I hoped the Mets would be - a team that plays their fucking asses off for all 27 outs. They're never out of a game. Solly 10/20/09