Dad shoots son after refusing to look at his Xbox 360

This is almost as ridiculous as that story where the little girl was killed by someone imitating Mortal kombat moves :|

Chaos_Daro

i remember that story >___>

[QUOTE="Pump_man44"]Only in America.......... (no offence)Squeets

Yeah right... there was a story a few years back about some british guy killing himself because his lifelong friend stole his everquest account... that dude commited suicide over everquest... i mean come on...

i live it how people use america to shrowd their problems..........

[QUOTE="Tamashii-sosaku"][QUOTE="simpsons1fan"]

tylea....who can't find the continent of America on a map of the world.

how bout taking a little look at this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9dCwwzXC4I

simpsons1fan

Well done, now try going back and reading what I wrote with the context intact.

[QUOTE="Chaos_Daro"]

This is almost as ridiculous as that story where the little girl was killed by someone imitating Mortal kombat moves :|

firebreathing

i remember that story >___>

[QUOTE="Pump_man44"]Only in America.......... (no offence)Squeets

Yeah right... there was a story a few years back about some british guy killing himself because his lifelong friend stole his everquest account... that dude commited suicide over everquest... i mean come on...

i live it how people use america to shrowd their problems..........

Whats that supposed to mean buddy? I don't play MMOs... I don't have $15 a month to waste on 1 game...

[QUOTE="simpsons1fan"][QUOTE="Tamashii-sosaku"][QUOTE="simpsons1fan"]

tylea....who can't find the continent of America on a map of the world.

how bout taking a little look at this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9dCwwzXC4I

HellRazer360

Well done, now try going back and reading what I wrote with the context intact.

That was awesome...

It's true, Martin was going to get killed eventually; there were more people like you, some in power, at that time. Life is very precious though, and we should prolong it as much as possible.

Benjamin-T

[QUOTE="Squeets"]

Hmmm Vietnam... a country of no military power? Well lets see... the north Vietnam army had over 7,000,000 troops in it and there were only at max 275,000 Americans on the ground in vietnam at one time during the war(over 750,000 troops in vietnam, just circled in and out through different tours)... also there were brits there as well seeing as how it was a NATO task force under the command of brits? hmmm thats strange?

So lets see... 7,000,000 native troops who know the terrain and have lived in the environment their entire life vs. 250,000 foreign troops who do not know the terrain and have never fought/trained in a Jungle?

British Empire? Is that the same Empire that my country gained its independence from? No it couldn't be seeing as how they were so victorious... so victorious in fact that they still rule the world today... Oh wait?

killerfist

why did you invade Vietnam in the first place? or Korea? or Iraq (twice). afganistan?

why did US sell weapons to the taliban and now the US wants it back?

lol you guys arent making friends on this little planet. and more and more US soldiers are getting killed because of it.

btw if it werent for pearl harbour, the US wouldnt even been in the 2nd world war.

actually if it wasnt for the Russian defeat of Hitler he could have became a BIT of a problem........oh but wait...............didn't the US get involved in WWII because it was, get this, SHIPPING SUPPLIES TO THE ALLIES??? Might have YOUR country been on the ally list??? why can't everyone just quit being a bastard, we're all people so get over it.

I gotta hand it to the Brits... you might not like our gun laws... but at least your government lets you beat little Iraqi kids for throwing rocks... we here in the US get no such pleasure...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_J13U3OGZE&NR=1

British Empire? Is that the same Empire that my country gained its independence from? No it couldn't be seeing as how they were so victorious... so victorious in fact that they still rule the world today... Oh wait?

simpsons1fan

It's the same Empire that created a little colony now known as the United States of America. Don't forget that America wouldn't have won it's war of independance from Britain if it wasn't for the aid of France. Bet that must sting for such a patriot as yourself. You know the statue of liberty? That was a gift from France as well.

Considering the U.S. was barely in either WWI or WWII I wouldn't really call them American victories. If anything we owe the victory of WWII to Russia. And I wouldn't be so cocky about America's power when it's been the world super power for a little over 50 years and is mainly a result of dodging their enty into WWII for so long. Just over 50 years and already the cracks are starting to show when the worlds largest, most powerful and advanced army can't even maintain law and order in 2 undeveloped third world nations.

Let me know when the U.S. decides to pick on someone other than the 3rd world.

I'll answer it as soon as you answer my most recent post and admit that you were a stereotypical idiot who assumed I was British because I went against your ideals, because, buddy, you avoided those two issues too, so don't point fingers.

While you are a complete piece of work, I should've admitted you were right, since sex is a natural thing that should not be trifled, and all I said is that it should be controlled.

There, I proved I'm a man, since I admitted to my own fault. Now, repeat after me.

"I don't care about life"

"I am a xenophobic idiot, and jumped to conclusion based on the fact that you were too 'goody goody'"

"I am an idiot that keeps on arguing even when he has lost"

"I am very barbaric minded"

and here's my favorite. Make sure you say it

"I am American and a Dominican can write better English than me"

Sorry benjamin, I'm british, I think he mixed us up, as we both think hes an idiot.

This thread should be renamed soon.

[QUOTE="HellRazer360"]no i dont waish a ban on guns...if you wish that then you are a **** wouldnt you want something to defend your home with if someone robs it besides your fists...obviously a robber will be more scared of a gun then your weak little handsTamashii-sosaku

Introduce his face to your baseball bat. I find it amazingly ironic when people try to defend owning guns by saying they need guns to protect themselves from other people with guns.

In England you can get a rifle with a hunting license. But the idea is that you have to prove that hunting is a part of your livelihood. There's no reason why the U.S. couldn't just do the same thing. America is about the only country in the entire developed and civillised world that permits the ownership of guns and denies its people free health care. A pretty nasty combination.

To bad there is no such thing as "free" health care.

This is another reason why guns should be banned in america, if they are there, there is a chance of this happening.
tylea002

And you are the reason why people should have a license to speak their mind. There is so much wrong with your statement (aside from grammar) that I can't even begin to keep up!

Wolf-

That's why u shouldn't have a gun in the house...creativeminded

Because obviously it was the gun that jumped up, pointed itself at the kid, and pulled its own trigger.

Only in America.......... (no offence)Pump_man44

Don't be a dumb @$$. Next time maybe the kid won't ask to be shot and give someone a gun. Bad idea.

[QUOTE="simpsons1fan"]

British Empire? Is that the same Empire that my country gained its independence from? No it couldn't be seeing as how they were so victorious... so victorious in fact that they still rule the world today... Oh wait?

Tamashii-sosaku

It's the same Empire that created a little colony now known as the United States of America. Don't forget that America wouldn't have won it's war of independance from Britain if it wasn't for the aid of France. Bet that must sting for such a patriot as yourself. You know the statue of liberty? That was a gift from France as well.

Considering the U.S. was barely in either WWI or WWII I wouldn't really call them American victories. If anything we owe the victory of WWII to Russia. And I wouldn't be so cocky about America's power when it's been the world super power for a little over 50 years and is mainly a result of dodging their enty into WWII for so long. Just over 50 years and already the cracks are starting to show when the worlds largest, most powerful and advanced army can't even maintain law and order in 2 undeveloped third world nations.

Let me know when the U.S. decides to pick on someone other than the 3rd world.

listen tel ya what, once britian wins a war, ill shut up... but thats never going to happen

I'll answer it as soon as you answer my most recent post and admit that you were a stereotypical idiot who assumed I was British because I went against your ideals, because, buddy, you avoided those two issues too, so don't point fingers.

While you are a complete piece of work, I should've admitted you were right, since sex is a natural thing that should not be trifled, and all I said is that it should be controlled.

There, I proved I'm a man, since I admitted to my own fault. Now, repeat after me.

"I don't care about life"

"I am a xenophobic idiot, and jumped to conclusion based on the fact that you were too 'goody goody'"

"I am an idiot that keeps on arguing even when he has lost"

"I am very barbaric minded"

and here's my favorite. Make sure you say it

"I am American and a Dominican can write better English than me"

Benjamin-T

[QUOTE="falloutfan101"]

Because if it's illegal, all you are doing is keeping the normal people from owning them.

Drugs are illegal, people get those super easy, alcohol is illegal for people to drink under 21 here, but I know more kids that drink than adults. Guns being illegal = someone who wants a gun for self defense is screwed. Tell me this, if someone is already willing to kill someone, why wouldn't they be willing to illegally get a gun? Does that not click in your head that a person who will do a worse crime wouldn't do a small crime? It's not a shock if a mass murderer stole a car sometime in his life, so yeah.

Benjamin-T

Your reasoning is absurd and used by the tobacco and beer companies many times over. No matter how many times I hear it, it still don't make it right. You're right, we can't stop people completely from commiting crimes, but we can sure reduce it. Reducing is better than letting it be.

That being said, however, I do agree with people having guns, just not by your silly reason.

How is it absurd? D.C. has a gun ban yet they have one of the highest gun related murder rates in the country, and it rose after the gun ban.

What's wrong hellrazer? Too big of a word for you? Like I said, repeat after me:

"I am American and a Dominican can write better English than me"

[QUOTE="Benjamin-T"][QUOTE="falloutfan101"]

Because if it's illegal, all you are doing is keeping the normal people from owning them.

Drugs are illegal, people get those super easy, alcohol is illegal for people to drink under 21 here, but I know more kids that drink than adults. Guns being illegal = someone who wants a gun for self defense is screwed. Tell me this, if someone is already willing to kill someone, why wouldn't they be willing to illegally get a gun? Does that not click in your head that a person who will do a worse crime wouldn't do a small crime? It's not a shock if a mass murderer stole a car sometime in his life, so yeah.

The_SandRock

Your reasoning is absurd and used by the tobacco and beer companies many times over. No matter how many times I hear it, it still don't make it right. You're right, we can't stop people completely from commiting crimes, but we can sure reduce it. Reducing is better than letting it be.

That being said, however, I do agree with people having guns, just not by your silly reason.

How is it absurd? D.C. has a gun ban yet they have one of the highest gun related murder rates in the country, and it rose after the gun ban.

[QUOTE="tylea002"]This is another reason why guns should be banned in america, if they are there, there is a chance of this happening.
orionwolf

And you are the reason why people should have a license to speak their mind. There is so much wrong with your statement (aside from grammar) that I can't even begin to keep up!

Wolf-

Well I apologize for my bad grammar, this thread moves fast. And free speech MEANS my opinion can't be wrong, it can only be an opinion - what I meant was, if guns are in peoples houses, this could happen again. No self defence involved. So what is wrong with that OPINION. Explain.

[QUOTE="The_SandRock"][QUOTE="Benjamin-T"][QUOTE="falloutfan101"]

Because if it's illegal, all you are doing is keeping the normal people from owning them.

Drugs are illegal, people get those super easy, alcohol is illegal for people to drink under 21 here, but I know more kids that drink than adults. Guns being illegal = someone who wants a gun for self defense is screwed. Tell me this, if someone is already willing to kill someone, why wouldn't they be willing to illegally get a gun? Does that not click in your head that a person who will do a worse crime wouldn't do a small crime? It's not a shock if a mass murderer stole a car sometime in his life, so yeah.

HellRazer360

Your reasoning is absurd and used by the tobacco and beer companies many times over. No matter how many times I hear it, it still don't make it right. You're right, we can't stop people completely from commiting crimes, but we can sure reduce it. Reducing is better than letting it be.

That being said, however, I do agree with people having guns, just not by your silly reason.

How is it absurd? D.C. has a gun ban yet they have one of the highest gun related murder rates in the country, and it rose after the gun ban.

IT ROSE because more things became illegal! WHEN YOU MAKE SOMETHING ILLEGAL, YOU GET INCREASED CRIME!

[QUOTE="HellRazer360"][QUOTE="The_SandRock"][QUOTE="Benjamin-T"][QUOTE="falloutfan101"]

Because if it's illegal, all you are doing is keeping the normal people from owning them.

Drugs are illegal, people get those super easy, alcohol is illegal for people to drink under 21 here, but I know more kids that drink than adults. Guns being illegal = someone who wants a gun for self defense is screwed. Tell me this, if someone is already willing to kill someone, why wouldn't they be willing to illegally get a gun? Does that not click in your head that a person who will do a worse crime wouldn't do a small crime? It's not a shock if a mass murderer stole a car sometime in his life, so yeah.

tylea002

Your reasoning is absurd and used by the tobacco and beer companies many times over. No matter how many times I hear it, it still don't make it right. You're right, we can't stop people completely from commiting crimes, but we can sure reduce it. Reducing is better than letting it be.

That being said, however, I do agree with people having guns, just not by your silly reason.

How is it absurd? D.C. has a gun ban yet they have one of the highest gun related murder rates in the country, and it rose after the gun ban.

IT ROSE because more things became illegal! WHEN YOU MAKE SOMETHING ILLEGAL, YOU GET INCREASED CRIME!

While I still say that bans work, sometimes they don't work, particularly when people get too attached to it. That's why prohibition didn't work. However, the alternative is to sit back and ignore everything happening. Should we? I think not.

ummmm correct me if im wrong but isnt germany and korea and japan and all em 1st world.... and im pretty sure they got owned...

listen tel ya what, once britian wins a war, ill shut up... but thats never going to happen

simpsons1fan

Funny because Britain was involved in every single one of those wars. To be honest listing all the Wars Britain has won would take up quite a bit of space. You really should try reading up on a little thing called history.

It's true, Martin was going to get killed eventually; there were more people like you, some in power, at that time. Life is very precious though, and we should prolong it as much as possible.

Benjamin-T

I'm sure most people agree with you. But the argument to prolong life deflects the answer. So does the health care topic.

U.S. citizens are slowly losing their rights. Law after law comes tumbling down the idiot chain inch by inch. 1984 is only a few votes away. You watch. "The new world order is coming. You can't stop it!"

One of the last fundamental rights that we as United States citizens feel is inalienable is the right to defend oneself and ones property - to the death if need be. Now, whether someone broke the law or not does not relate to the topic. It's a scenario. And scenario's belay the discussion.

If we cannot defend our own, who will? The government? Big government? Yeah. Ok. There are places in this country that are so dangerous that the police don't even show up. There are places in other countries that are so dangerous that the police don't show up. We as U.S. citizens see this as a flaw. The police are supposed to be there to defend against violent criminals and they have a redline? Very well, you must defend yourself at any cost. This viewpoint has not changed in over 230 years. Yes there has been arguments against the right to bear arms but the foundation has not changed - and for good reason.

A law preventing the legal ownership of a weapon does not prevent a criminal from obtaining and using one. Because criminals don't care about the law. This is the common misconception by anti-weapon activists. All you on this forum who argue against weapons - this is your misconception.

Flame on.

Wolf-

[QUOTE="Squeets"]

British Empire? Is that the same Empire that my country gained its independence from? No it couldn't be seeing as how they were so victorious... so victorious in fact that they still rule the world today... Oh wait?

Tamashii-sosaku

It's the same Empire that created a little colony now known as the United States of America. Don't forget that America wouldn't have won it's war of independance from Britain if it wasn't for the aid of France. Bet that must sting for such a patriot as yourself. You know the statue of liberty? That was a gift from France as well.

Considering the U.S. was barely in either WWI or WWII I wouldn't really call them American victories. If anything we owe the victory of WWII to Russia. And I wouldn't be so cocky about America's power when it's been the world super power for a little over 50 years and is mainly a result of dodging their enty into WWII for so long. Just over 50 years and already the cracks are starting to show when the worlds largest, most powerful and advanced army can't even maintain law and order in 2 undeveloped third world nations.

Let me know when the U.S. decides to pick on someone other than the 3rd world.

(THIS IS THE CUTOFF BETWEEN MY POST AND HIS)

Do you know anything about history at all my friend? I mean you just went completely against your own statements in the same post lol... and you say we won because of the French... that is most certainly true... we were a rebel country who military was a militia of mostly farmers against the most highly trained and disciplined army on the earth at the time... I think we did alright considering the circumstances...

I get barely in WW1... we didn't enter that war until Germany killed Americans... but barely in WW2...? There were American pilots going over to fight in the RAF even before Pearl Harbor... then after Pearl... the United States sent over 400,000 troops to help defend England and invade Africa with the Brits in 1942-43 all the way to Italy... then We invaded Mainland Europe with the Brits.Canadians/French in an attack we planned and supplied all the way to the Rhein River of Germany...

You say Russia bailed you out of WW2 huh? Um did you miss the small fact that Stalin was an Ally of Hitler and helped start WW2 by invading Poland? and he continued to be Hitler's ally until 1943 when Italy fell...?

Oh and you say we can't maintain Law and order in a 3rd world country...? well do you think you could do better? there are extremist there who disagree with our efforts... and the only way to stop that... would be to go door to door in Iraq and just kill all Iraqis... and we aren't going to do that... they are fighting for their religion... so us simply saying "no... don't do that..." isn't enough...

Then you say come talk to you when we pick on something other than a 3rd world country... um do you really want that? a war between us and another modern county would mean an end to the earth? you really want one of those?

I mean everything you say is either completely untrue or completely stupid...

Wow...pure stupidity.

So stupid, only in America.

I blame terrorism, invade..... Ecuador.

[QUOTE="orionwolf"]

[QUOTE="tylea002"]This is another reason why guns should be banned in america, if they are there, there is a chance of this happening.
tylea002

And you are the reason why people should have a license to speak their mind. There is so much wrong with your statement (aside from grammar) that I can't even begin to keep up!

Wolf-

Well I apologize for my bad grammar, this thread moves fast. And free speech MEANS my opinion can't be wrong, it can only be an opinion - what I meant was, if guns are in peoples houses, this could happen again. No self defence involved. So what is wrong with that OPINION. Explain.

Apology not needed but accepted.

However, your opinion isn't an opinion. It's a fact. Saying that this headlining story is cause for banning weapons in America is an opinion. It's also a falacy: slippery slope. Hundreds of scenarios are not justification for judicial cause - let alone one scenario. We should not take away the rights of the people due to the flaws of the few for if we did we would undermine everything about the free world.

Taking your rights away doesn't make you safe. It makes you weak and powerless. It takes training and responsibility to own and use a weapon. Even with that, you can't stop the idiots from being idiots. This story justifies that.

Wolf-

You do present a valid point Wolf. However, my argument against this is extremely basic, and this phylosophy has been proven over and over again.

Two wrongs don't make a right. While I do recognize the rules of survival, us having a weapon and killing does not make us different from them. That's why I love DC and many marvel superheroes; defend the innocent and crush the oppressors, but never kill them.

So stupid, only in America.

I blame terrorism, invade..... Ecuador.

Hoobinator

No argument there.

Love my country, hate my government.

Wolf-

[QUOTE="Benjamin-T"]

It's true, Martin was going to get killed eventually; there were more people like you, some in power, at that time. Life is very precious though, and we should prolong it as much as possible.

orionwolf

I'm sure most people agree with you. But the argument to prolong life deflects the answer. So does the health care topic.

U.S. citizens are slowly losing their rights. Law after law comes tumbling down the idiot chain inch by inch. 1984 is only a few votes away. You watch. "The new world order is coming. You can't stop it!"

One of the last fundamental rights that we as United States citizens feel is inalienable is the right to defend oneself and ones property - to the death if need be. Now, whether someone broke the law or not does not relate to the topic. It's a scenario. And scenario's belay the discussion.

If we cannot defend our own, who will? The government? Big government? Yeah. Ok. There are places in this country that are so dangerous that the police don't even show up. There are places in other countries that are so dangerous that the police don't show up. We as U.S. citizens see this as a flaw. The police are supposed to be there to defend against violent criminals and they have a redline? Very well, you must defend yourself at any cost. This viewpoint has not changed in over 230 years. Yes there has been arguments against the right to bear arms but the foundation has not changed - and for good reason.

A law preventing the legal ownership of a weapon does not prevent a criminal from obtaining and using one. Because criminals don't care about the law. This is the common misconception by anti-weapon activists. All you on this forum who argue against weapons - this is your misconception.

Flame on.

Wolf-

If you take away the legal right to carry weapons, you can arrest those who carry them, THEREFORE, preventing the use of the gun, therfore possibly saving lives.

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n24/conor_jm92/navy.jpg

/End thread.

You do present a valid point Wolf. However, my argument against this is extremely basic, and this phylosophy has been proven over and over again.

Two wrongs don't make a right. While I do recognize the rules of survival, us having a weapon and killing does not make us different from them. That's why I love DC and many marvel superheroes; defend the innocent and crush the oppressors, but never kill them.

Benjamin-T

Fairytales and stories should be used to teach - not justify wrongful persecution.

I agree with you. Two wrongs don't make a right. But owning a weapon for the cause of self defense isn't a wrong. It is a right. In the event of crime the right thing to do would be to call the police. In the event of the police not showing up you have to take matters into your own hands to protect yourself, your loved ones, and your property. Denying this right is a huge step toward controling the people.

The United States government's job is to serve the people. Not the other way around.

Wolf-

Do you know anything about history at all my friend? I mean you just went completely against your own statements in the same post lol... and you say we won because of the French... that is most certainly true... we were a rebel country who military was a militia of mostly farmers against the most highly trained and disciplined army on the earth at the time... I think we did alright considering the circumstances...

Explain how that went against anything I said in that post.

I get barely in WW1... we didn't enter that war until Germany killed Americans... but barely in WW2...? There were American pilots going over to fight in the RAF even before Pearl Harbor... then after Pearl... the United States sent over 400,000 troops to help defend England and invade Africa with the Brits in 1942-43 all the way to Italy... then We invaded Mainland Europe with the Brits.Canadians/French in an attack we planned and supplied all the way to the Rhein River of Germany...

You say Russia bailed you out of WW2 huh? Um did you miss the small fact that Stalin was an Ally of Hitler and helped start WW2 by invading Poland? and he continued to be Hitler's ally until 1943 when Italy fell...?

Who had the most number of German kills? Who stopped Germany's invasion plans by attacking their eastern front? Who were the first to capture Berlin? I'm not saying the U.S. weren't in the war at all or that I'm not grateful for American aid but for you to claim it as an American victory is just arrogant and ignorant.

Oh and you say we can't maintain Law and order in a 3rd world country...? well do you think you could do better? there are extremist there who disagree with our efforts... and the only way to stop that... would be to go door to door in Iraq and just kill all Iraqis... and we aren't going to do that... they are fighting for their religion... so us simply saying "no... don't do that..." isn't enough...

If you think the anti-U.S. attacks in Iraq are fuelled by religion then you have little grasp of Middle East history or even what's actually going on in Iraq.

Then you say come talk to you when we pick on something other than a 3rd world country... um do you really want that? a war between us and another modern county would mean an end to the earth? you really want one of those?

Fair point but you're the one going around claiming your greatness because of how many wars you've won.

I mean everything you say is either completely untrue or completely stupid...

You didn't point out a single factual error in anything I've written. Where as you just a few posts ago were very delibratley distorting and fabricating something I said to try and win an arguement against me. Don't you dare accuse me of lying when you are the one who has to resort to ripping my quotes out of context and twisting them to try and justify your own racism.

Snake, that was hillarious lol. I don't totaly disagree, but I disagree nonetheless

There is no reason for a militia in US but we do need people to protect the country should the unthinkable happen.

[QUOTE="Benjamin-T"]

You do present a valid point Wolf. However, my argument against this is extremely basic, and this phylosophy has been proven over and over again.

Two wrongs don't make a right. While I do recognize the rules of survival, us having a weapon and killing does not make us different from them. That's why I love DC and many marvel superheroes; defend the innocent and crush the oppressors, but never kill them.

orionwolf

Fairytales and stories should be used to teach - not justify wrongful persecution.

I agree with you. Two wrongs don't make a right. But owning a weapon for the cause of self defense isn't a wrong. It is a right. In the event of crime the right thing to do would be to call the police. In the event of the police not showing up you have to take matters into your own hands to protect yourself, your loved ones, and your property. Denying this right is a huge step toward controling the people.

The United States government's job is to serve the people. Not the other way around.

Wolf-

Its not a right, not one person on this earth has the right to end someones life. And snake, that was pretty funny :P.

[QUOTE="orionwolf"][QUOTE="Benjamin-T"]

It's true, Martin was going to get killed eventually; there were more people like you, some in power, at that time. Life is very precious though, and we should prolong it as much as possible.

tylea002

I'm sure most people agree with you. But the argument to prolong life deflects the answer. So does the health care topic.

U.S. citizens are slowly losing their rights. Law after law comes tumbling down the idiot chain inch by inch. 1984 is only a few votes away. You watch. "The new world order is coming. You can't stop it!"

One of the last fundamental rights that we as United States citizens feel is inalienable is the right to defend oneself and ones property - to the death if need be. Now, whether someone broke the law or not does not relate to the topic. It's a scenario. And scenario's belay the discussion.

If we cannot defend our own, who will? The government? Big government? Yeah. Ok. There are places in this country that are so dangerous that the police don't even show up. There are places in other countries that are so dangerous that the police don't show up. We as U.S. citizens see this as a flaw. The police are supposed to be there to defend against violent criminals and they have a redline? Very well, you must defend yourself at any cost. This viewpoint has not changed in over 230 years. Yes there has been arguments against the right to bear arms but the foundation has not changed - and for good reason.

A law preventing the legal ownership of a weapon does not prevent a criminal from obtaining and using one. Because criminals don't care about the law. This is the common misconception by anti-weapon activists. All you on this forum who argue against weapons - this is your misconception.

Flame on.

Wolf-

If you take away the legal right to carry weapons, you can arrest those who carry them, THEREFORE, preventing the use of the gun, therfore possibly saving lives.

And the bigger and more bloated the government becomes, the more and more mistakes it shall make.

You aren't catering to the subject. You're creating false answers. Non sequitur. It does not follow. If you take away weapons from everyone, you can arrest those that have them. Can you? I suppose that would stop violence, wouldn't it? Yep. Stopped it everywhere else too.

This has been proven before. You cannot stop violence by taking away the right to defend oneself. Taking that right away only makes the people live in fear and terror.

Wolf-

[QUOTE="tylea002"][QUOTE="orionwolf"][QUOTE="Benjamin-T"]

It's true, Martin was going to get killed eventually; there were more people like you, some in power, at that time. Life is very precious though, and we should prolong it as much as possible.

orionwolf

I'm sure most people agree with you. But the argument to prolong life deflects the answer. So does the health care topic.

U.S. citizens are slowly losing their rights. Law after law comes tumbling down the idiot chain inch by inch. 1984 is only a few votes away. You watch. "The new world order is coming. You can't stop it!"

One of the last fundamental rights that we as United States citizens feel is inalienable is the right to defend oneself and ones property - to the death if need be. Now, whether someone broke the law or not does not relate to the topic. It's a scenario. And scenario's belay the discussion.

If we cannot defend our own, who will? The government? Big government? Yeah. Ok. There are places in this country that are so dangerous that the police don't even show up. There are places in other countries that are so dangerous that the police don't show up. We as U.S. citizens see this as a flaw. The police are supposed to be there to defend against violent criminals and they have a redline? Very well, you must defend yourself at any cost. This viewpoint has not changed in over 230 years. Yes there has been arguments against the right to bear arms but the foundation has not changed - and for good reason.

A law preventing the legal ownership of a weapon does not prevent a criminal from obtaining and using one. Because criminals don't care about the law. This is the common misconception by anti-weapon activists. All you on this forum who argue against weapons - this is your misconception.

Flame on.

Wolf-

If you take away the legal right to carry weapons, you can arrest those who carry them, THEREFORE, preventing the use of the gun, therfore possibly saving lives.

And the bigger and more bloated the government becomes, the more and more mistakes it shall make.

You aren't catering to the subject. You're creating false answers. Non sequitur. It does not follow. If you take away weapons from everyone, you can arrest those that have them. Can you? I suppose that would stop violence, wouldn't it? Yep. Stopped it everywhere else too.

This has been proven before. You cannot stop violence by taking away the right to defend oneself. Taking that right away only makes the people live in fear and terror.

Wolf-

You can defend yourself in other ways, having a phone near to call the police, instead of a gun. Getting a security system, not going down back alleys in the night, that is still defending yourself, just by not killing someone, something which is MORALLY WRONG.

I dissagree with your last statement, you belive in america, I would feel MORE SAFE if everyone carried guns? You are misguided.