Mass Murder by Blade, you Vast Idiots

Pinworm

Pinworm

Well-Known Member
Uncle Bens blatant bulshippy nonsense is epidemic, and his douchebaggery will not be tolerated. At least, not on my front. He want's to play the "real motherfucker" card - fine - order up some beef, I'll gladly serve that shit right up....
 
Beefbisquit

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
Doer said:
Chicken Little had no Constitutional guarantees. And the slip slope is to disarm citizens by mind fuck.

Of course, no Saganist sees that as destruction. That is what is desired.

It is the main road to scrape the 2nd Amendment and then rewrite the Constitution for better "law and order".

America's self rule is the Achilles heel because we are so gullible to flim-flam.

Back to the mirror, for you.
Click to expand...
I love Carl Sagan, brilliant man. Not sure why that would be considered a slander, but I've found it difficult to decipher your posts from time to time due to your wording and writing style. So... whatever I don't really give a shit.

Storing a firearm properly and safely, is no different than cleaning and using a firearm safely. It comes with the territory. If people were smart/responsible enough to use good sense (common sense is rarely good, and good sense is rarely common) when it came to firearms, no one would need any law for anything. Unfortunately, that's not the case for instance, 25% of Americans think the sun orbits the Earth FFS.

Why are there laws against owning certain property? You could make the same silly slippery slope argument against anything if you want to take it far enough. The point is, a 'slippery slope' is no guarantee of something bad happening. You're just getting a fear boner for no reason.

People have the right to not be murdered, guns allow people to be murdered easier, therefore letting people have guns is a slippery slope to people being murdered. It's a stupid argument, and so is one against proper storage laws for firearms.
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
Beefbisquit said:
I love Carl Sagan, brilliant man. Not sure why that would be considered a slander, but I've found it difficult to decipher your posts from time to time due to your wording and writing style. So... whatever I don't really give a shit.

Storing a firearm properly and safely, is no different than cleaning and using a firearm safely. It comes with the territory. If people were smart/responsible enough to use good sense (common sense is rarely good, and good sense is rarely common) when it came to firearms, no one would need any law for anything. Unfortunately, that's not the case for instance, 25% of Americans think the sun orbits the Earth FFS.

Why are there laws against owning certain property? You could make the same silly slippery slope argument against anything if you want to take it far enough. The point is, a 'slippery slope' is no guarantee of something bad happening. You're just getting a fear boner for no reason.

People have the right to not be murdered, guns allow people to be murdered easier, therefore letting people have guns is a slippery slope to people being murdered. It's a stupid argument, and so is one against proper storage laws for firearms.
Click to expand...
no all made up and you are not counting saves

guns stop murder there is no slippery slope to good....what utter ignorance. Are we good? We didn't slip down into good

good is up, fool

i write to your barest understanding and that is why you are not always meant to understand it
 
thecannacove

thecannacove

Well-Known Member
Beefbisquit said:
People have the right to not be murdered, guns allow people to be murdered easier, therefore letting people have guns is a slippery slope to people being murdered. It's a stupid argument, and so is one against proper storage laws for firearms.
Click to expand...
Seriously beefqueef? Lets say we took away every piece of property that has the potential to make killing easier. Well FUCK, there goes electricity, cars, steak knives, twine, fire, water.... should I go on?

I mean take whichever side you want but that's just a really piss poor argument for your case my friend.
 
Beefbisquit

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
Doer said:
no all made up and you are not counting saves

guns stop murder there is no slippery slope to good....what utter ignorance. Are we good? We didn't slip down into good

good is up, fool

i write to your barest understanding and that is why you are not always meant to understand it
Click to expand...
You use odd wording, disjointed sentences, and lack punctuation. I was trying not to be a dick, but I don't really care anymore.

I'd LOVE to see the stats on how many lives guns save, in civilian hands, each year. Oh wait, those stats don't exist so you're just making shit up. How can you possibly think guns save lives, when the USA has incredibly lax gun laws, and the highest rate of gun murder of any developed nation? More guns, less laws, more murders. Pretty fucking simple.

This isn't even the point. The point is that when you use logical fallacies, e.g. Argument from absurdity, you can turn anything into a slippery slope argument. This is what you've done.

"Making people store firearms responsibly is the first step to confiscation." That's you're argument, and it's fucking stupid.


The one-week survey by TIME found a similar ratio on a national basis: only 14 of the 464 gun deaths resulted from defensive firing. An alarming 216 were suicides, 22 were accidental, and many of the rest involved homicides among people who knew each other well rather than citizens gunned down by strangers.
Click to expand...


Such statistics do not refute the argument that a gun, even if not fired, can save a life by discouraging a murderous attacker. Still, Tulane sociologist James Wright points out that guns have limited usefulness in preventing crimes. About 90% of crimes in homes occur when the resident is away, he notes, while violent crimes often take place on the streets. Says Wright: "Unless you make a habit of walking around with your gun at all times, you're not going to stop that either."
Click to expand...
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
Beefbisquit said:
You use odd wording, disjointed sentences, and lack punctuation. I was trying not to be a dick, but I don't really care anymore.

I'd LOVE to see the stats on how many lives guns save, in civilian hands, each year. Oh wait, those stats don't exist so you're just making shit up. How can you possibly think guns save lives, when the USA has incredibly lax gun laws, and the highest rate of gun murder of any developed nation? More guns, less laws, more murders. Pretty fucking simple.

This isn't even the point. The point is that when you use logical fallacies, e.g. Argument from absurdity, you can turn anything into a slippery slope argument. This is what you've done.

"Making people store firearms responsibly is the first step to confiscation." That's you're argument, and it's fucking stupid.
Click to expand...
we are not talking about storing so you are arguing in endless circles with yourself and beneath my punctuation

that is your moronic incomprehension and completely off topic sewer, of rhetorical bs thinking i am debating anything

i am not arguing that position, nice try

i present these facts thread after thread do some homework
 
Beefbisquit

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
thecannacove said:
Seriously beefqueef? Lets say we took away every piece of property that has the potential to make killing easier. Well FUCK, there goes electricity, cars, steak knives, twine, fire, water.... should I go on?

I mean take whichever side you want but that's just a really piss poor argument for your case my friend.
Click to expand...
The last sentence, literally states "It's a stupid argument, and so is the one against proper storage of firearms."

I saw showing that any situation can be turned into a slippery slope if you try hard enough.
 
Pinworm

Pinworm

Well-Known Member
Beefbisquit said:
The last sentence, literally states "It's a stupid argument, and so is the one against proper storage of firearms."

I saw showing that any situation can be turned into a slippery slope if you try hard enough.
Click to expand...
Slope? that's fucking racist, man.
 
Beefbisquit

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
Beefbisquit said:
If the gun is in use, I agree, there are no 'locking mechanisms' that are quick or reliable enough to use. No one wants to fuck with a fingerprint scanner, or retina scanner, or even have the risk of it not working, during a moment of crisis.

When the gun is being stored because you're not around it, I think some sort of locking mechanism should be mandatory. If not a locking mechanism, the bolt should be removed and stored elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Doer said:
Yeah, I would not have been able to shoot my brother.....or would I? Yep, shot him right in the chest across the kitchen with a 30-06.

My friend had the key to the guns, we get pulled the slug out of a round and wadded it with tissue paper. I came around the corner with it and BOOOOOMMMMMM!!!!!
I think we could have gotten hold of the trigger lock key. It was a deer rifle so didn't count as a murderous weapon and does not even today.

No harm done, just some powder grain cuts and a wad bruise. The look on his face though!!! Priceless. I was 14, he 13. We had a lot of rough play, back then.

But, that is different from what these anti-gun proposals are after. These have nothing to do with storage. It is an extra condition, if you will.

With the .45 ACP, C-1 is cocked and locked. C-2 is hammer down, live round.(needs to be cocked) C-3 is no round in battery and the slide must be worked.

So, these proposals add a C-0 as a finally impediment to defense. I already went through 3 Conditions to get to Ready, and I have 2 mechanical safes, after that.

So, my revolver, DA. Hammer is down on an empty. C-3. I don't do C-2, I only load 5 rounds. If I had 6 rounds there would be no C-3, no empty chamber to rest the firing pin.

All these locks and blocks do is provide a Stalking Horse for Agenda. But, they get people killed and they do not save lives.

So, do you think the anti-gun nuts are worried, really, about Storage? I don't.

They care to interrupt the heat of the moment. What they don't understand is that THIS IS the 2nd Amendment Right to live, that cannot be interrupted.

So, please Beef, don't go sounding "all reasonable," here. It plays right into their hands. :smile:
Click to expand...
Beefbisquit said:
LOL - sorry, I'll try to be more irrational. :grin:

I don't know much about home invasion, but if I was a criminal and I broke into someones house to steal shit, and I came across a gun safe, I'd move on. Unless of course, I'm some 'supercriminal' that can break into safes super fast and quietly... then I'd totally rob that son of a bitch.

My long guns have a 'cut proof' wire going through the trigger guards and are store in a gun cabinet... Well, except for my Rem 870, that's got beside the bed. :grin:
Click to expand...
Doer said:
So, to you the opposite of this fake "so reasonable" slip slope of Executive Power, is irrational? HA Haaaaa

Check the mirror. You too may be a Saganist. :smile:
Click to expand...
Beefbisquit said:
Not every slippery slope is a means to destruction.

Chicken little.
Click to expand...
Doer said:
Chicken Little had no Constitutional guarantees. And the slip slope is to disarm citizens by mind fuck.

Of course, no Saganist sees that as destruction. That is what is desired.

It is the main road to scrape the 2nd Amendment and then rewrite the Constitution for better "law and order".

America's self rule is the Achilles heel because we are so gullible to flim-flam.

Back to the mirror, for you.
Click to expand...
Beefbisquit said:
I love Carl Sagan, brilliant man. Not sure why that would be considered a slander, but I've found it difficult to decipher your posts from time to time due to your wording and writing style. So... whatever I don't really give a shit.

Storing a firearm properly and safely, is no different than cleaning and using a firearm safely. It comes with the territory. If people were smart/responsible enough to use good sense (common sense is rarely good, and good sense is rarely common) when it came to firearms, no one would need any law for anything. Unfortunately, that's not the case for instance, 25% of Americans think the sun orbits the Earth FFS.

Why are there laws against owning certain property? You could make the same silly slippery slope argument against anything if you want to take it far enough. The point is, a 'slippery slope' is no guarantee of something bad happening. You're just getting a fear boner for no reason.

People have the right to not be murdered, guns allow people to be murdered easier, therefore letting people have guns is a slippery slope to people being murdered. It's a stupid argument, and so is one against proper storage laws for firearms.
Click to expand...
Doer said:
no all made up and you are not counting saves

guns stop murder there is no slippery slope to good....what utter ignorance. Are we good? We didn't slip down into good

good is up, fool

i write to your barest understanding and that is why you are not always meant to understand it
Click to expand...
Beefbisquit said:
You use odd wording, disjointed sentences, and lack punctuation. I was trying not to be a dick, but I don't really care anymore.

I'd LOVE to see the stats on how many lives guns save, in civilian hands, each year. Oh wait, those stats don't exist so you're just making shit up. How can you possibly think guns save lives, when the USA has incredibly lax gun laws, and the highest rate of gun murder of any developed nation? More guns, less laws, more murders. Pretty fucking simple.

This isn't even the point. The point is that when you use logical fallacies, e.g. Argument from absurdity, you can turn anything into a slippery slope argument. This is what you've done.

"Making people store firearms responsibly is the first step to confiscation." That's you're argument, and it's fucking stupid.
Click to expand...


Doer said:
we are not talking about storing so you are arguing in endless circles with yourself and beneath my punctuation

that is your moronic incomprehension and completely off topic sewer, of rhetorical bs thinking i am debating anything

i am not arguing that position, nice try

i present these facts thread after thread do some homework
Click to expand...




Do you not remember this part of this thread? You know, the one you started, that I'm typing in, right now? The same one you responded to me in?

Sit boy, sit.
 
Freedom35

Freedom35

Active Member
i really hope this isnt a debate stating that we should not have guns, because without guns we wouldnt even be in the state we are today. guns have won wars, protected america, and created this country by feeding americans a long time ago when we had no other option but to hunt. it is in our constitution that we are allowed to possess them. so if you dont agree with guns than you might as well be a fucking terrorist, and should prob get the fuck out of us americans country. the "guns kill" argument is bull shit, come over to my house and ill kill u with a bat. are they gonna outlaw baseball then? i literally despise people who dont like guns because they are all ignorant hippy scum bags.
 
Pinworm

Pinworm

Well-Known Member
Freedom35 said:
i really hope this isnt a debate stating that we should not have guns, because without guns we wouldnt even be in the state we are today. guns have won wars, protected america, and created this country by feeding americans a long time ago when we had no other option but to hunt. it is in our constitution that we are allowed to possess them. so if you dont agree with guns than you might as well be a fucking terrorist, and should prob get the fuck out of us americans country. the "guns kill" argument is bull shit, come over to my house and ill kill u with a bat. are they gonna outlaw baseball then? i literally despise people who dont like guns because they are all ignorant hippy scum bags.
Click to expand...
[video=youtube;zfQ6W13o-dU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfQ6W13o-dU[/video]

Social dogma, you think you're safe. There's guns all over the fucking place.

I like guns - They made "Murica free.
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
Beefbisquit said:
Do you not remember this part of this thread? You know, the one you started, that I'm typing in, right now? The same one you responded to me in?

.
Click to expand...
Hey, I not going around in the Saganist cloud where the slip slope goes down to Good. Ha Haa
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top