"Common" Sense isn't common?

Serious_Much wrote:lol, thermonuclear coffee, you can't argue with a hilarious simile like that one

i guess though you find it fine since your culture actively sues anything, while over here we don't sue for anything much except really bad things so i'd naturally find it ridiculous if someone couldn't handle a cup of coffee

then again i've heard stories of people suing someone for putting them in recovery position, essentially ensuring she was safe, but not turning her ring upside down so she got scratched. If I was the judge for that case I would have slapped that woman for being such a retard.

http://www.caoc.org/index.cfm?pg=facts

She got 3rd degree burns, the worst kind, in 3 to 7 seconds. That doesn't heal without hospitalization. The jury also said it was 20% her fault. 700 other people got 2nd or 3rd degree burns, but those were settled out of court.

Did you know in the 90s in britain, there was a school massacre just like the one experienced in america this year called the dunblane massacre. As a result, legislation passed to make every single firearm illegal in the hands of civilians. There have been no school shootings since and gun crime has dropped dramatically over the last 16 years. I dunno how people on here feel about that but frankly I think it's time america banned guns, you just can't police it effectively while it's still legal to own one.

That goes agains our 2nd amendment. Also, I think the highlighted part is obvious.

The fact is though, that America has had two high profile, high body count shootings in the last two years, frankly turning a blind eye to it and clinging to an old obviously outdated law that prevents progress in society isn't beneficial. I could liken you in this way to fundamentalist Christians, even when proven in literal and practical sense to be incorrect, you still cling to it blindly. Laws are meant to develop and change with society, and this is one law that needs to be changed for the benefit of society.

Of course the highlighted part is obvious, but you kinda just proved what needs to be done. It's obvious that these kinda shootings wouldn't happen if guns were banned, therefore they must be.

Reaper, while it may not work on alcohol, guns is a wholly different matter. Alcohol is universally accepted in most countries in the world, it's easy to get hold of so naturally it's easy to create underground sources, kinda like when you buy illegal protein shakes from other countries where it's legal. Guns however are different, in most countries the government controls all gun purchase and usage, it's much easier to avoid and illegal black market of guns than it is alcohol.

The 2nd amendment is there to protect us from anything the government can't, that includes the government itself. So if the government decided to all of a sudden become tyrannical, or something, the 2nd amendment would be the first thing they'd try to get rid of.

Serious_Much wrote:Reaper, while it may not work on alcohol, guns is a wholly different matter. Alcohol is universally accepted in most countries in the world, it's easy to get hold of so naturally it's easy to create underground sources, kinda like when you buy illegal protein shakes from other countries where it's legal. Guns however are different, in most countries the government controls all gun purchase and usage, it's much easier to avoid and illegal black market of guns than it is alcohol.

The only parallel I was trying to draw can basically be said as:
"Quitting cold turkey may have worked for you, but when we tried it, it didn't work out so well."

As you pointed out, there are some obvious differences between the two particular subjects that make direct comparison impossible. No metaphor (is that the proper use of the term in this context?) is perfect, so when someone tries to use one to provide insight onto their perspective, try to look at what does work with the comparison instead of what doesn't. Typically it's the former instead of the latter that the other person is trying to convey.

Anyway, I'm gonna step out before this gets too heavy. It's a personal code of mine that I stay out of political discussions, so I'll just leave it at that one little thought of mine

Sorry reaper, I got that, but I used the metaphor for my point as well cus... Well it worked both ways, but yeah I get why you wouldn't wanna be in this discussion..

Sloth maybe that is true, but as you well know, changing the law isn't scrapping things that don't work, it's tweaking them. This 2nd amendment could quite easily be edited so that guns were outlawed but still protect you from the government itself and other threats. The fact is guns are themselves are a threat that right now the government can't control; an obvious contradiction to the purpose of the 2nd amendment which is supposed to protect you. I think it should be changed as such to protect you from guns, and yourselves from using them.

Actually Serious, the UK hasn't banned all guns. They've an extremely strict Outline of guns available to civilians, and only with a justified use for the gun (hunting, sport, and historic. Note that self-defense and home-defense are not justified reasons to own a gun)

I'm for more gun control. It's just the most paranoid of people are now creating all these crazy scenarios where they'll be fighting off the government with force, and be praised as heroes. If the system isn't in your favor, demand for change! Don't just wait for congress to sit down with its thumb up its ***, go out of your way to contact these individuals. I mean for gods sake, if a petition to have Dianne Feinstein tried for treason can be made, what's to stop you from actually creating a petition for reform of any sort?!?!?!

Yes okay thats true, i know that but those guns aren't really designed to kill people. Air rifles and shotguns yeah are dangerous, but they're made for the purposes of sport and game hunting (though game ain't that nice to eat so i see no point).

I'd argue there's quite a difference between the guns we're talking about now and the firearms that can be purchased in america, which are made to kill people in the most effective way possible. I'd also argue that the measures you have to take to receive these hunting weapons in Britain are actually more difficult, long and thorough than those you have to go through to get firearms.

It actually scares me you need a special licence that has to be updated for an air rifle in britain, but you can just walk up to a counter in some states in the US and purchase a gun with no hassle

I agree though, more gun control would be a measure that could be effective, and is a good and relatively less opposed initial solution than banning firearms outright. More highly policed and thorough pathways to check people are of the right frame of mind to purchase a gun would be a good first step. However, i'd still say that this is a more difficult and possibly expensive solution to implement than a complete nationwide ban.

I understand serious. And we are way off topic but who cares.

I've been going through a lot of news sites and most of the pro-gun control stories get comments about overthrowing a tyrannical government and defending yourself, but how the *** are a bunch of riflemen going to fight the U.S. government without looking like a bunch of crazed terrorists?

well this is the off topic section, free flowing and thoughtful discussion is something you can have in this as oppose to ther dark specific sections as straying off topic for what might be an interesting discussion is against house policy, but yeah we're fine here haha.

Thats pretty bad. I hardly think a government is tyrannical for thinking "20 odd kids lost their lives due to bad gun policy, so we need to rethink it a bit", it makes no sense to me that they can be so utterly opposed to a bit of extra thought in gun control.

But yeah, if they do try and revolt, killing people... they're gonna look like terroists, going on a rampage isn't really gonna help their case that guns are absolutely fine they way they are either.

cloudyeki wrote:I understand serious. And we are way off topic but who cares.

I've been going through a lot of news sites and most of the pro-gun control stories get comments about overthrowing a tyrannical government and defending yourself, but how the *** are a bunch of riflemen going to fight the U.S. government without looking like a bunch of crazed terrorists?

Unless the government does something radical that pisses everybody off, it's impossible to fight the government without looking like "crazed terrorists". However, what would you do if the government did all of a sudden go mad with with power, and you had no weapons with which to stop them? Just because the idea seems a bit crazy,and probably is, it doesn't mean its not a valid issue. The founding fathers foreseeing this issue is one of the reasons the 2nd amendment exists. I'd imagine that if the government did go crazy, that there wouldn't exactly be many people willing to work for them though. So I don't think it would ever be an army of defenseless citizens vs the government and a fully armed army.

Sloth, I don't know about you but a coup in the government is so unrealistic it would require the army+national guard to actually take place. After all, if congress passed a law that allowed the confiscation of all arms it would have to be approved by the president and slip by the judges. I mean, FFS, be realistic of one sec.

When people get paranoid, they seem to forget the whole picture. And the whole picture in this case is that their irrational fears, their daydreams of being the 2nd generation of the sons of liberty, is founded on misinformation and near impossible situations that they'll probably never find themselves in.

Fear of the end of days is not a valid reason to stockpile an arsenal, 'the government is evil' does not justify your 30rd magazine, and self-defense does not permit you the right to carry AP rounds.

I never said that I believed any of that. I simply have a lot of Illuminati conspiracy believing friends and so I have to listen to them babel on about the NWO and all those other things. The one thing those conspiracy theorist are right about though is that no government take-over would look outwardly malignant, at least not until it's too late too stop it. On the contrary, if I wanted to manipulate people, I would want them to think I'm the good guy. However such a thing would require such a big conspiracy, that I believe it would be nearly impossible to actually pull off.

I'm pretty sure assault rifles are illegal in most states too, at least I know they are in California where I live. Though I won't pretend I know every states gun laws.

Sloth, I think you need to realise that if american government did go crazy, no number of civilians armed with pistols is gonna out fight the armies of your country. You gotta remember that it doesn't matter if people want it, it's not like everybody in Nazi Germany was pure evil, pretty much everyone was slowly without knowing before it was too late, oppressed and forced into a state of no freedom and no choice. Live as you are told or die were the only two options, and that is what the reality of a government gone crazy can do.

There would be a world wide international intervention most likely though in reaction. The fact is that if something that big ever went down (obviously it never would), it would be the other countries of the world stopping america from whatever it could do. Look at Libya as the most modern example of an unjust leader getting the forces of the world pounding on his door. The same would be true in your scenario, but on a much larger scale.

Right, the problem is explaining that to the other whackos. Too many action movies have made people delusional.

Sloth9230 wrote:Right, the problem is explaining that to the other whackos. Too many action movies have made people delusional.

That and the lose of trust in a 'just' government. Can't really blame them for that, with most senators and congressman in some rich groups' pockets. Whatever happened to 'the government must do for the people what the people they themselves can't" ?

It's in this kind of situation that politicians need to show some balls and make the changes that are needed and explain to those who need convincing why, but sadly it's all a popularity game and with obama probably wanting a 3rd term there's no way he's gonna jeopardise that so soon after being reelected.

It's sad that politicians can't do the right thing because of the constant popularity struggles.

Serious_Much: 2 terms max in the United States. Last president to have 3 was Franklin D. Roosevelt.

cloudyeki: not to mention that sometimes it seems like the parties are more interested in 1-upping and blocking each other

"Oh whats that? The other guys promised you 'this', if they won the election? We'll make sure 'it' doesn't happen"

Serious_Much wrote:It actually scares me you need a special licence that has to be updated for an air rifle in britain, but you can just walk up to a counter in some states in the US and purchase a gun with no hassle.

You need a permit to buy a gun in the US, and it takes a few days to get it. They do background checks, and will deny you a permit if your criminal record is too bad. Also, some guns are off limits to civilians. (It's ok to have a hand gun or hunting rifle. It's not ok to have a AK47.)

Even a few antique guns need a permit, but it's just because of technicalities.

Now, I just have to ask. What does this gun control debate have to do with a lack of common sense?

Because we can.

And wanderer, there's a MASSIVE loophole that circumvents the background check by selling from their personal collection.

Well wanderer i was originally linking it to the common sense theme, saying the people who are complaining about the US thinking of changing the laws on guns lack common sense.

Well that or they're willing to have the whole country at the risk of mass shootings just so they can own a gun, obviously i'd rather think that they lack common sense rather than have complete apathy for the well being of others.

Oh wait, I know why!

Yeah after watching Gun Fight on HBO, I was pretty surprised to see how easy it is to get a weapon. That includes things like Assault Rifles.