keltoi Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Guns are not designed purely for killing.. what were they designed for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mirezzi Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Guns are not designed purely for killing.. what were they designed for? They were designed for killing and for the threat of killing. DUH! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Guns are not designed purely for killing.. what were they designed for?oh, here, i can think of one!intimidating & threatening! Guns are not designed purely for killing.. what were they designed for?They were designed for killing and for the threat of killing. DUH!oh dang, by a second... i'll shoot you in the face!lol jk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Iain C Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Just as anyone who is for abortion is against life ... I'm not against all life - just the lives of the unborn and my ideological enemies (like you) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweepstakes Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 If guns were designed purely for killing, knives are designed purely for stabbing. How about chopping veggies, fucktard? Or do you get all your meals from fraydem-lovin' drive-thrus? You sound like such a dumb redneck I'm embarrassed for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RandySicko Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 There is no point in even toying with the idea that we will have the slightest chance against our (world) government / military. The police state is too solidified. I think most people miss the point on gun control too - with the paranoid delusional "black chopper flying over my house to get me" folks clouding the issue. The only thing these horrific massacres serve to do are create talking points for the talking heads and allow the govt to chip away at our rights and further tighten down the screws on us citizens (note the lowercase 'c'), their federal property. Do I understand this correctly, do the anti-gun control folk ... Try pro-freedom. No need to blur the lines. I wonder how many of you anti-gun folks will be picking up the new GTA. Or will you be the ones firing at your own "anti-government" american citizens in Rainbox 6 "Patriots"? Oh the irony!!! Before I digress too much... I am also wondering how many here have actually handled a weapon outside of a video game and don't see them as these mysterious unattainable objects of death and murder. Maybe it is just a coincidence, but out of all the people I know, the ones who own guns seem to be more politically charged and less likely to be glued to a television being spoon fed by the mainstream media. Is it because they own a gun? probably not... but I believe owning a gun is secondary to having the desire to preserve your rights and the safety of family, while at the same time acknowledging how far big government has stuck their fingers up our collective rectum. tell me where your constitutional rights extend to ownership of assault rifles. point it out to me. edit: I have fired shotguns and hunting rifles. still not a big fan. “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" edit - but my lovely state of ct agrees with you, as possessing one is a class D felony. But here is the interesting part - http://www.jud.ct.gov/JI/criminal/glossary/assaultweapon.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd syside Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Could argue that guns were designed for eating animals... or at least making it easier... just as a knife makes it easier to eat animals... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Iain C Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Your constitution is a piece of shit anyway lol This is the constitution your grandchildren will defend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mirezzi Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" "Tell me more...just a bit...more..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RandySicko Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Could argue that guns were designed for eating animals... or at least making it easier... just as a knife makes it easier to eat animals... Why think when we can name call! ..And if our forefathers had any foresight, our constitution would not be the piece of toilet paper it is. We should be defending the Declaration of Independence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR4 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Your constitution is a piece of shit anyway lol This is the constitution your grandchildren will defend. lol I like your passion....Im a big Marx fan in some ways but he still has some serious kinks in his theories...I dunno if Das Kapital is that much better than the US Constitution. I think the Constitution would still be a great document if we weren't afraid to follow it and adapt it as needed. The process of government is respectable, more than most....but it just doesn't work like that in reality anymore. “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" edit - but my lovely state of ct agrees with you, as possessing one is a class D felony. But here is the interesting part - http://www.jud.ct.gov/JI/criminal/glossary/assaultweapon.htm Even Jefferson would have been tearing his hair out at how everyone misinterpreted this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keltoi Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Could argue that guns were designed for eating animals. they weren't though. guns are small portable cannons. cannons were designed for destroying defences and killing or maiming enemies. guns were designed to be more accurate and portable in the task of destruction, killing and maiming. hunting squirrels and shooting cardboard baddies came later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keltoi Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 a car was designed to get from A to B but now some people (americans) like to drive them round and round from A to A again and again just for fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adieu Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Armed men turns into a militia when there is an obvious and apparent threat but without armed men their can be no militia. We have militia's in some parts of Texas though. Like, the Minute Men at the border. (not that I necessarily agree with their philosophies and methods.) Also, there was a gun threat at the school my Aunt works at here today. I believe it is on the news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd syside Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Could argue that guns were designed for eating animals. they weren't though. guns are small portable cannons. cannons were designed for destroying defences and killing or maiming enemies. guns were designed to be more accurate and portable in the task of destruction, killing and maiming. hunting squirrels and shooting cardboard baddies came later. Seems kind of black and white... surely if you lived in the middle of nowhere you would want a gun to hunt? And since they have been around for awhile they definitely would have been used/invented for that kind of purpose if humans were somehow universally peaceful to one another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RandySicko Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Your constitution is a piece of shit anyway lol This is the constitution your grandchildren will defend. lol I like your passion....Im a big Marx fan in some ways but he still has some serious kinks in his theories...I dunno if Das Kapital is that much better than the US Constitution. I think the Constitution would still be a great document if we weren't afraid to follow it and adapt it as needed. The process of government is respectable, more than most....but it just doesn't work like that in reality anymore. “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" edit - but my lovely state of ct agrees with you, as possessing one is a class D felony. But here is the interesting part - http://www.jud.ct.gov/JI/criminal/glossary/assaultweapon.htm Even Jefferson would have been tearing his hair out at how everyone misinterpreted this one. You just grabbed a hold of his entire scalp with that one. Here, shift your focus to the part of the sentence that actually answered your question: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." ...Arms being short for weapons and ammunition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshuatxuk Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Guns are not designed purely for killing... this is a misconception I can't stand. Right To Own Handheld Device That Shoots Deadly Metal Pellets At High Speed Worth All Of This Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RandySicko Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Guns are not designed purely for killing... this is a misconception I can't stand. Right To Own Handheld Device That Shoots Deadly Metal Pellets At High Speed Worth All Of This Guns don't kill. People kill. They are spot on with the 'shooting deadly metal pellets at high speed' part though... that is correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vamos scorcho Posted December 18, 2012 Author Share Posted December 18, 2012 anyone that can't admit to some level of empathy or sympathy for the shooter is part of the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mirezzi Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Guns are not designed purely for killing... this is a misconception I can't stand. Right To Own Handheld Device That Shoots Deadly Metal Pellets At High Speed Worth All Of This Guns don't kill. People kill. They are spot on with the 'shooting deadly metal pellets at high speed' part though... that is correct. Nukes don't destroy nations, unaccountable dickhead leaders do. I fully expect dumbasses like RandySicko et al. to get behind Iran and N. Korea's bid to become a nuclear power. They're just as entitled to that right as the U.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweepstakes Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Could argue that guns were designed for eating animals... or at least making it easier... just as a knife makes it easier to eat animals... What in the actual fuck, how is ANYONE taking this analogy seriously? Try eating your next meal with a spoon and a gun and let us know how that works out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RandySicko Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 anyone that can't admit to some level of empathy or sympathy for the shooter is part of the problem. Any time following one of these events, a focus on guns/government always seems to imply a lack of compassion for the people that were hurt ...but empathy or sympathy for the shooter? I am torn with that because on one hand, I think that is quite absurd - as I don't believe guns, psych conditions or medicine are to blame. On the other hand, I believe pure evil was working through that individual and I do feel bad for him in that respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audioblysk Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Could argue that guns were designed for eating animals. they weren't though. guns are small portable cannons. cannons were designed for destroying defences and killing or maiming enemies. guns were designed to be more accurate and portable in the task of destruction, killing and maiming. hunting squirrels and shooting cardboard baddies came later. Seems kind of black and white... surely if you lived in the middle of nowhere you would want a gun to hunt? And since they have been around for awhile they definitely would have been used/invented for that kind of purpose if humans were somehow universally peaceful to one another. It's worth mentioning that most early firearms couldn't hit the broad side of a barn.. and that you never read any academic/historical writings on the subject of guns from the perspective of the vast improvements shooting Bambi while hunting. Guns and gun technology have been improved upon to be better suited for war and multiple targets, because if you need a 60 round banana-clipped semi-to-burst machine gun to take down a single deer, you may need to improve your aim... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RandySicko Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Guns are not designed purely for killing... this is a misconception I can't stand. Right To Own Handheld Device That Shoots Deadly Metal Pellets At High Speed Worth All Of This Guns don't kill. People kill. They are spot on with the 'shooting deadly metal pellets at high speed' part though... that is correct. Nukes don't destroy nations, unaccountable dickhead leaders do. I fully expect dumbasses like RandySicko et al. to get behind Iran and N. Korea's bid to become a nuclear power. They're just as entitled to that right as the U.S. How can you make such a wild assumption? I don't believe anyone should have nuclear weapons. They are an abomination and were created by and for mad men in government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mirezzi Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Correct, and unlike the musketry you're entitled to fetishize under the 2nd Amendment, most modern firearms are not intended to do anything but kill human beings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.