daskog Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 Media says a 23 year old Norwegian woman just got killed in the UK after visiting a nightclub in the UK! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running With Scissors Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark4181 Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 An honest question for you anti-gun people: Why don't the serial gunmen ever go shoot up a police station or "the Hood" (or wherever they could have a nice satisfying gunfight *sarcasm*)... Why instead do they go to "gun free zones" and start shooting innocent people that they KNOW FOR A FACT WILL BE UNARMED? A: Because they're scared {censored} and know they would get capped QUICK if they tried it, thereby bringing their shooting spree to an end. People that want to kill others GO TO WHERE THEY KNOW PEOPLE WILL BE UNABLE TO RESPOND Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_cope Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Carrying a weapon in public actually increases your chances of being a victim of murder or other violent crime. so you can walk around with a glock in each hand, but you are really just causing yourself more danger. I'd love to see those statistics, since that goes completely against any sort of logic. Think about it, there are really only two types of people who are going to commit a violent crime: Those who are committed to the act (as in they'll do it no matter what) and those that are opportunistic (they see an old lady walking away from an ATM with a large amount of cash) Now openly carrying a firearm isn't going to change anything about the first type. He doesn't care if you've got a gun or not. But the second type is NOT going to go after the guy with the gun. Beyond being stupid, it's also a harder target. Why would he go after the guy who might shoot back when there are plenty of sheeple ripe for the picking? No one said criminals are smart, but I doubt they are all suicidal. So it would appear that openly carrying a firearm would, in fact, reduce the chances of you being a victim. Come to think of it, I have yet to hear of a massacre at a gun show. I mean by your logic that'd be a hot-spot for violent crime. Lots of guys with guns walking around, aught to draw criminals like stink on {censored}. Right? Wonder why there are so many more people killed in schools and churches than gun shows. Just doesn't make sense if openly carrying a firearm makes you a more attractive victim. Huh. I'll wait until I see some facts that people openly carrying are more often victims of violent crime until I believe a word of that. Personally it sounds like you pulled it out of your ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paranoid Marvin Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 One simple fact remains though. If people don't carry guns, no one can shoot or shoot at someone Partial disarming of the population causes more problems than it solves. People shouldn't have guns. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark4181 Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 ban guns and the only ones that will have them are CRIMINALS.. if you hadn't noticed, it's CRIMINALS that go on shooting sprees. the nature of the word CRIMINAL is to be in opposition to the LAW in short, gun toting criminals don't care about breaking the law Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killbot1000 Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 I'm all for bringing swords back...(if guns could go away) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark4181 Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 ^i'd actually agree with you there. it would take skill to fight with swords... no standing out of reach and shooting someone before they can respond i've always thought there was more honor in the way of the sword than in any gun happy society. also, i don't really like guns, i just believe that according to the second amendment, we have the right to have them if we want them. it saddens me that honor is pretty much a forgotten word in today's world. all it ever sees is lipservice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superhai Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 A lot of gun incidents are caused by mentally confused persons. Of course you have hardcore criminals, but they usually dont fire at will (life isn't like the movies or gta ). I feel some argues in the line of i should have the right to steal so i can steal back what other steals from me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonTheSavage Posted March 19, 2008 Author Share Posted March 19, 2008 ^i'd actually agree with you there. it would take skill to fight with swords... no standing out of reach and shooting someone before they can respond i've always thought there was more honor in the way of the sword than in any gun happy society. also, i don't really like guns, i just believe that according to the second amendment, we have the right to have them if we want them. it saddens me that honor is pretty much a forgotten word in today's world. all it ever sees is lipservice Swords would do nicely. However, in REALITY, people have guns, will always have them, and will advance them. Balance of power. The right to bear arms, means to defend yourself with a balance of power. Against criminals, and thugs, wether they be citizens, or government. I garantee you, that if the average citizen, had an F-16, the government wouldn't be doing the stupid {censored} they do now. It's common sense. Don't delude yourself, and think that guns can be banned. If they try it, war will break out, people will die, and the nation will fall into tyranny. We don't live in a drone society, and never will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special-K Posted March 19, 2008 Share Posted March 19, 2008 We don't live in a drone society, and never will. Uh, yea we do. Most of our society are drones towards the media. You phail. Again. {censored} loser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_cope Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Uh, yea we do. Most of our society are drones towards the media. You phail. Again. {censored} loser. Please take your stupidity somewhere else. I wish people who use dumbass mis-spellings like "phail" would lose a finger each time. That way the really dumb people would only be able to mash their club-like hands onto their keyboards in frustration. That or type with their tongue, which might require more thought be put into their responses. Either way it's a win-win situation. Oddly enough I've seen no actual reasons why guns should be further restricted here in the US. Lots of "feel good" sentiment about NO guns existing, but since that isn't based in reality, it's pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special-K Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Please take your stupidity somewhere else. I wish people who use dumbass mis-spellings like "phail" would lose a finger each time. That way the really dumb people would only be able to mash their club-like hands onto their keyboards in frustration. That or type with their tongue, which might require more thought be put into their responses. Either way it's a win-win situation. Oddly enough I've seen no actual reasons why guns should be further restricted here in the US. Lots of "feel good" sentiment about NO guns existing, but since that isn't based in reality, it's pointless. I'm stupid cause I didn't want to use the tradition spelling of fail and cause I said most of our society is basically married to the media? Yea, real smart. I use phail solely because I got bored with fail, so you can go suck a fat one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running With Scissors Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Please take your stupidity somewhere else. I wish people who use dumbass mis-spellings like "phail" would lose a finger each time. That way the really dumb people would only be able to mash their club-like hands onto their keyboards in frustration. That or type with their tongue, which might require more thought be put into their responses. Either way it's a win-win situation. Your telling me it really pisses me off when people wrongly spell colour with color or spell grey wrongly as gray the are countless other examples of this blatant dumbing down of the English language. /sarcasm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollcage Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 I garantee you, that if the average citizen, had an F-16, the government wouldn't be doing the stupid {censored} they do now. And with the constant gunfights on streets, we'd be a third-world country. I'm sure Canada would be nice and take over after we kill all our elected leaders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_cope Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 For Canada to take us over they'd have to have people to take us over. And with a bunch of armed, stupid, media drones, we'd be one tough country to take over. Oh and to the "smart" guy: I guess you fail a lot if you're getting bored with the correct spelling. Your ability to make any point is greatly diminished by your childish antics. You remember that retarded thing kids used to do? Making an "L" shape with their thumb and forefinger and putting it on their forehead? It'd be like pulling one of those in the middle of a conversation. Sure you might have had a good point, but you've still shown yourself to be a world-class idiot. It's in line with winning at the Special Olympics and fighting online. Getting "bored" with a spelling doesn't cut it. That's just plain stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special-K Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 For Canada to take us over they'd have to have people to take us over. And with a bunch of armed, stupid, media drones, we'd be one tough country to take over.Oh and to the "smart" guy: I guess you fail a lot if you're getting bored with the correct spelling. Your ability to make any point is greatly diminished by your childish antics. You remember that retarded thing kids used to do? Making an "L" shape with their thumb and forefinger and putting it on their forehead? It'd be like pulling one of those in the middle of a conversation. Sure you might have had a good point, but you've still shown yourself to be a world-class idiot. It's in line with winning at the Special Olympics and fighting online. Getting "bored" with a spelling doesn't cut it. That's just plain stupid. What's with the quotations? I don't fail alot actually. I point out other people's failures. I doubt that. I've made many a great points that a number of people agreed with even though I used phail. So your 'childish antics' statement is null and void. And yes, those L things were pretty stupid, that's why I never did it. Not even to make fun of someone that used it. You may think I'm a world-class idiot, go right ahead, doesn't bother me one bit. There's a bunch of people here that would disagree and there's more outside of here, but since you're never going to meet them, they don't count all that much. I can get bored with whatever I wish, even spelling. But I know when to use proper English. The only place I use phail is here actually, and I'm not even here all that often, so that says something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djet Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 Guys.....really? He said phail...... grow up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running With Scissors Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 The English language is not set in stone. New words are being added to the dictionary all the time and the only way to add new words to the dictionary is for more people to use them. Todays slang is tomorrows common language. If not we would all be speaking "Ye Olde Englisc". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special-K Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 That's true. I remember when Ginormous was just a word someone came up with. Now it's in the dictionary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djet Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 I like it when English evolves..... gives my "I'm gonna make a word" campaign have some hope. Melabosity? Having the qualities of a outdoorsman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lozzo Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 I think they should make guns that fire both forwards and backwards... I'm sure there's a load of rednecks out there who would be terminally surprised at that one... Anyway. New words. The meaning of Liff. http://folk.uio.no/alied/TMoL.html Classtastic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killbot1000 Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 The English language is not set in stone. New words are being added to the dictionary all the time and the only way to add new words to the dictionary is for more people to use them. Todays slang is tomorrows common language. If not we would all be speaking "Ye Olde Englisc". I agree, all languages change and evolve slowly through time until they end up being completely different languages than when they started. I don't have a problem with this. What I do have a problem with however is ignorance. The average American only has a vocabulary of around 800 words...pathetic. Honestly, we need to hold the mirror up to ourselves and take a long hard look, if we don't make a turnaround we are the same as Rome circa 400AD, beginning a downward spiral toward ruin... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djet Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 And with our education system the way it is it doesn't seem like we are going to be changing anytime soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apowerr Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 And with our education system the way it is it doesn't seem like we are going to be changing anytime soon. You should read the book 'My Ishmael', its very interesting. It provides some insight into modern society. Something it proposes about the modern educational system is that it's purpose is to keep young people off the job market. I don't feel like elaborating on work thats not mine, but think about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts