Forum menu
TJ - read this from over two years ago:
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/the-stw-having-been-a-soldier-thread#post-544632
apology please
Neal - its was years ago and I ain't searching for it. Might even have been the pre hack forum.
people are regularly killed by legally held guns.
but not necessarily by the legal owners... 😉
Aracer - I ain't ignoring you. People are regularly killed by legally held guns - I made no reference to how may or how often but it does happen on a more than one off basis hence it is regular - several times a year
TJ - you really are full of shite 🙄
Plus, you've still not answered - [b]what exactly is wrong with killing things[/b]
People are regularly killed by legally held guns - I made no reference to how may or how often but it does happen on a more than one off basis hence it is regular - several times a year
I'm sure you have some evidence you can provide us with to back up that assertion...
Zulu -= you wnat to dispute it?
It would be several years ago maybe even the pre hack forum. You claimed ( or insinuated) that you had been under fire doing patrols outside the green zone. When an Iraq veteran who was really there called you on it you had to backtrack hastily as yo couldn't back it up. I am not surprised you have banished it from your mind as yo must have been well embarrassed - so yes -you were outed as a Walt.
regular - several times a year
How regularly? Very, very rarely. Compared to the numbers killed on motorbikes, I'd suggest we all know which should be banned first!
Then again, I wouldn't just adopt some stupid knee jerk, headline grabbing "BAN IT!" approach. Motorbikes are licenced. This works. Guns are also licenced. This works.
People steal motorbikes. People steal guns.
Most legal gun owners don't flout the laws. I would suggest that most legal motorbike owners do.
...and if you're not ignoring me, here's another one of mine you presumably just missed:
guns are almost unique in their ability to kill easily from a distance
What exactly is the significance of "from a distance" which makes guns so unique? If you mean when not standing right next to somebody so that they're in a position to defend themselves, or being far enough away to have emotional detachment, then I can think of one obvious instrument which is used to kill several orders of magnitude more people than legally held guns which meets both of those criteria.
TJ, I will debate with you when you are wrong and agree with you when you are right.
You're on your own with this one, i'd stop whilst you're behind.
Is your moral compass so faulty you do not understand why killing things for fun is wrong?
'Night all, citing the pre-hack forum is definitely the weakest reference I've yet to see on the post-hack forum. Hopefully I'll find the energy to do something more constructive tomorrow.
TandemJeremy - Member
Neal - its was years ago and I ain't searching for it. Might even have been the pre hack forum.
That's handy Eh. 😳
Not bothering to back up the other thing I asked for either ?
Or are you simply glossing over the fact that Official Home Office statistics, (released under the freedom of information act) say exactly the opposite of what you claimed.
i'd stop whilst you're behind.
Except there's plenty of evidence to show that's exactly what TJ refuses to do.
Aracer - both.
If you mean when not standing right next to somebody so that they're in a position to defend themselves, or being far enough away to have emotional detachment,
it is a spurious claim to suggest that cars are more dangerous as they would tend to be accidental deaths where as gun kills would tend to be almost 100 % deliberate - drunk american hunters aside]. Nearly every sing;e car journey has no injuries and every gun shooting [ unless you are a very bad shot] is quite bad.
accidental? as in i accidentally went too fast? or accidentally drove like a prick? accidentally used my mobile while driving and accidentally failed to see the child/cyclist/other vehicle?
nearly every shot fired in the this country doesn't kill a human being.
under the mental health act about* 11 innocent people are killed every year due to vulnerable people being given free reign in the community. it's the price we pay for wanting to integrate people rather than have people locked up sedated and kept out of sight.
"26,096 people were killed or seriously injured on Britain's roads in 2009" (source BBC)
that number would be significantly reduced if speed limits were lowered and cars speed/power limited and tougher penalties for bad driving/mobile phone use while driving etc.
'fun' 'drivable' 'dynamic' cars are not a necessity yet people die every year because of their misuse.
ban guns.
ban cars
ban alcohol
ban cigarettes
ban knives (use onion slicer and get your meat cut at approved licensed) butchers)
ban the internet.
Or are you simply glossing over the fact that Official Home Office statistics say exactly the opposite of what you claimed.
🙄
C'Mon, TJ.
MrSmith, you forgot motorbikes, and specifically those who knowingly break the speed limit, and then almost seem to boast about it online. As we all know, speed kills.
Neal - are you trying to say that no one gets killed in the UK by legally held guns? Cos that is bunkum
ach - I really meant not to get into stupid pointless debates on here on stuff like this.
It is amusing tho to watch people trying to justify the unjustifiable.
I can definitely remember CaptainHaddock used to strongly hint about his time in the military and his implied membership of The Hereford Gun Club,fairly sure I can remember Jah-womble having a dig at him about it a couple of times,cos it was about the time I ordered a guitar off him.
Oddly enough, I was only wondering the other day why he'd stopped hinting about it 🙂
YesRecent gun murders like this have all been legally held guns.
there simply is no reason nor excuse for anyone to have guns except in some occasional circumstances such as farmers.
Everyone who holds guns without this sort of reason is the sort of person who should be denied a license
that way only criminals have guns, personally i think guns should be available for personal defence, after all can you think of any other way a 8 stone woman could defend her self against a 20 stone rapist..
Its funny in places were guns are legal,burglary is very low... self defence should be a human right
Is your moral compass so faulty you do not understand why killing things for fun is wrong?
its called hunting, its what humans have done since the dawn of time... i mean im three meals away from eating you...
Aracer - both.
Right - so see my point that a gun isn't unique on either ground, and in terms of legally owned things kills trivial numbers of people compared to the alternatives.
TJ - I'm afraid there's only one fantasist on here, and you've just proved who it is 😉
jumpupanddown, self defence is indeed a human right, but using guns for that purpose is not the way forward. That way an arms race lies, and that's not good.
What other things aracer - if you mean cars or knives both have another useage that is of benefit
It is amusing tho to watch people trying to justify the unjustifiable.
At least there's something everybody else on this thread agrees with you about.
What other things aracer - if you mean cars or knives both have another useage that is of benefit
What about speeding motorbikes, TJ?
jumpupanddown, self defence is indeed a human right, but using guns for that purpose is not the way forward. That way an arms race lies, and that's not good.
lol, then tell me how a 8 stone woman stops a high 20 stone rapist.....
TJ,
You need to change The Second Amendment (Amendment II) you know because they shoot everyone ...
😆
It is amusing tho to watch people trying to justify the unjustifiable.
And you still haven't justified why legally held guns should be banned to my satisfaction.
[i]after all can you think of any other way a 8 stone woman could defend her self against a 20 stone rapist[/i]
I'm pretty sure I could outrun one...
BTW, TJ i'll let my gf's dad know that you think (without meeting him) that he's a violent fantasist. 🙄
TJ - I reiterate my comment, you're full of shite
+1
I don't see any reference to (or relevance of) guns not having a use which is of benefit in:
guns are almost unique in their ability to kill easily from a distance
You could just admit you're wrong on this one small point, but I doubt you will.
I've just watched that film about Iris Murdoch, and then read this thread.
It's a dementia overload.
I'm pretty sure I could outrun one...
not when he is in you bedroom you cant, a big hole in is head is sure fire way to make him stop.
@jumpupanddown - The advice I remember the MET giving out many years ago was, cheap perfume or body spray in a handbag! Used as a mace substitute.
The problem with guns as self defence is that it escalates. House owner has totally legal shotguns, so assailant will buy an illegal pump action. House owner gets an illegal semi-auto, just in case. Assailant buys an AK from somewhere, etc. etc. etc.
Not good. Guns aren't for self defence.
I think we've also established quite clearly that there is a benefit to guns, even if that spoils your point.
aracer sorry I have lost your point here.
Waht else has the ability to kill easily from a distance?
The advice I remember the MET giving out many years ago was, cheap perfume or body spray in a handbag! Used as a mace substitute.The problem with guns as self defence is that it escalates. House owner has totally legal shotguns, so assailant will buy an illegal pump action. House owner gets an illegal semi-auto, just in case. Assailant buys an AK from somewhere, etc. etc. etc.
Not good. Guns aren't for self defence.
thats not what has happened in Texas.. burglary rates have got very low.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine
not when he is in you bedroom you cant, a big hole in is head is sure fire way to make him stop.
A kick in the sack would make him stop and think for a couple of seconds too.
[b]TJ[/b]
Why do you do this?
You have clearly articulated your view.
You have refused to provide any evidence to back your statements up other than ex cathedral bombast.
You have insulted someone and refused to back your allegation with evidence.
You selectively answer questions
What does this give you? Do you think you have won converts? Or any of your comments past page 2 have any utility at all?
Neal - are you trying to say that no one gets killed in the UK by legally held guns? Cos that is bunkum
No, I didn't say that, and you know I didn't. stop trying to weasel out of it by inventing stuff.
You said that increased Private Gun ownership meant more deaths as a result.
I posted official home office statistics that proved you wrong.
You have subsequently ignored them, and then made something up that I didn't say.
It is amusing tho to watch people trying to justify the unjustifiable.
Trust me on this
It's not half as funny as watching someone [b]avoid[/b] justifying anything they claim, despite constantly being asked to. 🙄
true jumpupadown, very true, but I think that's unlikely, don't you.
thanks Flashy, that sounds like good advice.
god made all men, but colt made them all equal.
The risk could be [b]almost eliminated[/b] with the banning of private ownerships of guns without good cause. The cost to society would be minimal as there is no utility in owning guns - they serve no purpose ( bar the few rural workers who use them to kill vermin).
Private ownership of guns is already banned without good reason. A figure I briefly heard on the news seemed to indicate that out of the total number of annual homicides involving firearms 14% involve legally held weapons, almost certainly shotguns.
That means that 86% involved illegal weapons.
There have been a significant number of multiple homicides recently carried out by a family member. This is the only one I'm aware of involving a gun. All the others involved the most commonly available weapon, a knife.
Because every kitchen has a selection readily to hand.
Banning all private gun ownership will do one thing: make TJ even more smug and self-satisfied than he already is. It won't save a single life because the perp will always find a weapon; a hammer, a kitchen knife, a pillow, his fists, a golf club...
TJ on these sort of threads always reminds me of one of my favourite sayings:
The ethical dwarf, posturing on the moral high-ground, presents a ludicrous spectacle
I'm convinced TJ is a secret Daily Mail writer, and I claim my five pounds.
Gawd knows stoatsbrother.
If on the insult you mean Zulu I have asked the person who outed him for their recollections