PDA

View Full Version : 14 injured...



sandsjames
04-10-2013, 03:35 PM
...by a knife attack in Texas. Time to limit the magazine size on pointy objects? Maybe a national registry for all knife owners? Your thoughts...

Sergeant eNYgma
04-10-2013, 03:56 PM
Yep time to confiscate all knives...this lone dumbass will ruin it for everyone...

JD2780
04-10-2013, 03:59 PM
All veterans are mentally ill and we must take knives away from them, although this wasnt done by a veteran. He used an assault knife.

garhkal
04-10-2013, 07:28 PM
Just awaiting the Anti gun nuts saying "Look, all the anti gun push we have done has caused someone to go to a knife.. no dead. YAY!

Banned
04-16-2013, 03:48 AM
...by a knife attack in Texas. Time to limit the magazine size on pointy objects? Maybe a national registry for all knife owners? Your thoughts...

Nice to see a headline that says "14 INJURED", not "14 shot dead"....

sandsjames
04-16-2013, 02:34 PM
Nice to see a headline that says "14 INJURED", not "14 shot dead"....

Yes, I'm sure that makes those involved feel really lucky. Outlaw knives and this shit would stop.

Banned
04-16-2013, 05:40 PM
Yes, I'm sure that makes those involved feel really lucky. Outlaw knives and this shit would stop.

So would you say that guns and knives have equivalent levels of lethality? Do you also find it interesting that a man easily sliced up a bunch of people in Texas, which is supposed to be the pinnacle of freedom and manliness?

sandsjames
04-16-2013, 05:58 PM
So would you say that guns and knives have equivalent levels of lethality?

Of course not. Would you say that the possession of guns by law abiding citizens is the reason for mass shootings?


Do you also find it interesting that a man easily sliced up a bunch of people in Texas, which is supposed to be the pinnacle of freedom and manliness?I do not as I'm not one to generalize based on the residence of an individual.

Banned
04-19-2013, 12:31 PM
Of course not. Would you say that the possession of guns by law abiding citizens is the reason for mass shootings?

Absolutely. Virtually every recent mass shooting was used with legally purchased weapons.


I do not as I'm not one to generalize based on the residence of an individual.

I suspect if this guy had been shot by a law abiding citizen, you would be raving about how high gun ownership in a state reduces crime. Yet when this crime occurs easily, you don't "generalize based on the residence of an individual."

20+Years
04-19-2013, 12:36 PM
Why does no-one give the number of inter-city gang killings that happen every year with illegally owned guns? A WAY bigger number than legally owned weapons.

Banned
04-19-2013, 12:49 PM
Why does no-one give the number of inter-city gang killings that happen every year with illegally owned guns? A WAY bigger number than legally owned weapons.

Tell me - wasn't almost every illegally owned weapon at some point or another legally purchased by somebody?

JD2780
04-19-2013, 01:07 PM
Tell me - wasn't almost every illegally owned weapon at some point or another legally purchased by somebody?

Valid point.

sandsjames
04-19-2013, 01:13 PM
Tell me - wasn't almost every illegally owned weapon at some point or another legally purchased by somebody?

Wasn't every stolen car at some point purchased legally? What the fuck is your point?

Banned
04-19-2013, 01:57 PM
Wasn't every stolen car at some point purchased legally? What the fuck is your point?

Yes, every stolen car was at some point purchased legally. Cars are also registered.

Pullinteeth
04-19-2013, 02:02 PM
Yes, every stolen car was at some point purchased legally. Cars are also registered.

So you are saying that if weapons were registered, they wouldn't be stolen and used to kill people? Works well for cars right?

sandsjames
04-19-2013, 02:03 PM
Yes, every stolen car was at some point purchased legally. Cars are also registered.

Car registration isn't about monitoring the owner, it's about collecting money.

Gun registration is about keeping tabs on free, law abiding citizens.

Banned
04-19-2013, 02:12 PM
Car registration isn't about monitoring the owner, it's about collecting money.

Gun registration is about keeping tabs on free, law abiding citizens.

Really? So if a camera takes a photo of your license plate while you're running a red light, that's not "monitoring you"?

Yet you being required to register your gun is some villainous conspiracy to "keep tabs" on you?

JD2780
04-19-2013, 02:35 PM
Really? So if a camera takes a photo of your license plate while you're running a red light, that's not "monitoring you"?

Yet you being required to register your gun is some villainous conspiracy to "keep tabs" on you?

It takes a picture when a crime is committed.

sandsjames
04-19-2013, 02:46 PM
It takes a picture when a crime is committed.

Absolutely right.

sandsjames
04-19-2013, 02:51 PM
Yet you being required to register your gun is some villainous conspiracy to "keep tabs" on you?

Here's the issue I have with it. Currently, there may be no other motives than to know where the weapons are in case police have to enter someone's home (though most of those people will not have them registered). However, it makes it way to easy down the road to use it for other reasons, like knowing which houses to raid in the event of some sort of revolution.

How do you feel about a DNA database? Are you all for that? Should the average law abiding citizen be required to submit DNA to a database? That would make it much easier to solve several different crimes.

garhkal
04-19-2013, 09:19 PM
Here's the issue I have with it. Currently, there may be no other motives than to know where the weapons are in case police have to enter someone's home (though most of those people will not have them registered). However, it makes it way to easy down the road to use it for other reasons, like knowing which houses to raid in the event of some sort of revolution.

How do you feel about a DNA database? Are you all for that? Should the average law abiding citizen be required to submit DNA to a database? That would make it much easier to solve several different crimes.

Good point Sand.. take a look at CA and NY. both have started (or seemed to) rounding up legally purchased guns in the hands of those who the state feels should not have them.. Now i fully agree with thoe with criminal backrounds should not, but those with mental issues (Taking depression drugs)>> Who determines if your mental issues warrants your gun taken?
And as for the DNA databases, i am fully against taking and storing the DNA of anyone NOT convicted of any crime.

Banned
04-20-2013, 11:46 AM
Here's the issue I have with it. Currently, there may be no other motives than to know where the weapons are in case police have to enter someone's home (though most of those people will not have them registered). However, it makes it way to easy down the road to use it for other reasons, like knowing which houses to raid in the event of some sort of revolution.

How do you feel about a DNA database? Are you all for that? Should the average law abiding citizen be required to submit DNA to a database? That would make it much easier to solve several different crimes.

Absolutely! If shit hits the fan and there's civil unrest, and my unit is activated, I absolutely would like to have a rough estimate of how many assault weapons are in that neighborhood.

It would also be good to know where all the gun nuts live, with stockpiles of dozens of weapons. Not that the owner himself would necessarily use them against me, but he'll probably the first one to get his throat cut and his house looted by a gang.

sandsjames
04-20-2013, 12:26 PM
Absolutely! If shit hits the fan and there's civil unrest, and my unit is activated, I absolutely would like to have a rough estimate of how many assault weapons are in that neighborhood.

It would also be good to know where all the gun nuts live, with stockpiles of dozens of weapons. Not that the owner himself would necessarily use them against me, but he'll probably the first one to get his throat cut and his house looted by a gang.

Glad to know which side your on. And you are EXACTLY the reason the government should NOT know what weapons I have.

Banned
04-20-2013, 12:36 PM
Glad to know which side your on. And you are EXACTLY the reason the government should NOT know what weapons I have.

Yeah sure buddy, because the people trying to reestablish security, evacuate people, and bring in water, food, and medical supplies are the bad guys and we deserve to be shot down in the street.

Exactly the reason why I'm queasy about so many ignorant people having assault rifles.

sandsjames
04-20-2013, 12:55 PM
Yeah sure buddy, because the people trying to reestablish security, evacuate people, and bring in water, food, and medical supplies are the bad guys and we deserve to be shot down in the street.

Exactly the reason why I'm queasy about so many ignorant people having assault rifles.

The only people being shot down in the street will be the ones coming to my house to get my guns because they know I have them due to the registry.

Banned
04-20-2013, 04:21 PM
The only people being shot down in the street will be the ones coming to my house to get my guns because they know I have them due to the registry.

Yes, paranoid people opening up on the ANG because they think we're coming to take der gunz - yup, exactly what we need. Good thing we got uparmored gun trucks in the motor pool.

sandsjames
04-20-2013, 10:56 PM
Yes, paranoid people opening up on the ANG because they think we're coming to take der gunz - yup, exactly what we need. Good thing we got uparmored gun trucks in the motor pool.

Do you even believe half of what you say anymore, or do you just randomly spout disagreements?

JD2780
04-21-2013, 09:00 PM
Yeah sure buddy, because the people trying to reestablish security, evacuate people, and bring in water, food, and medical supplies are the bad guys and we deserve to be shot down in the street.

Exactly the reason why I'm queasy about so many ignorant people having assault rifles.

Just like the cops in Katrina that killed some people? Those guys?

I guess you guys would stay in the up armored vehicles the whole time. No movements on foot.

Banned
04-21-2013, 11:12 PM
Do you even believe half of what you say anymore, or do you just randomly spout disagreements?

I just find the thought amusing of you trying to shoot an armored vehicle rolling down the street because you think they're going to disarm you.


Just like the cops in Katrina that killed some people? Those guys?

Or the heavily armed punks taking pot shots at Soldiers and rescue workers with assault rifles.



I guess you guys would stay in the up armored vehicles the whole time. No movements on foot.

If there's some idiot perched up in his window with his zombie survival kit, AR-15, and collector's edition of Ayn Rand novels - sure, I don't see any issue with taking him out from afar.

JD2780
04-21-2013, 11:25 PM
I just find the thought amusing of you trying to shoot an armored vehicle rolling down the street because you think they're going to disarm you.



Or the heavily armed punks taking pot shots at Soldiers and rescue workers with assault rifles.
K


If there's some idiot perched up in his window with his zombie survival kit, AR-15, and collector's edition of Ayn Rand novels - sure, I don't see any issue with taking him out from afar.

Nope I was referring to the cops that actually killed people and tossed them off a bridge. The same cops that were supposed to be helping people. Yea, I believe in trust but verify.

Being the type of person you are, I surprised you're using the gov assets as helping people instead of as a controlling tool of the man.

So you would shoot at a lawfully armed man for simply exercising his second amendment right and having his choice or reading material. Good to know what side you'll be on when the shit hits the fan. Joe your flip flopping on what side you're supporting these days these days.

Banned
04-21-2013, 11:30 PM
Nope I was referring to the cops that actually killed people and tossed them off a bridge. The same cops that were supposed to be helping people. Yea, I believe in trust but verify.

Weren't you just a little while ago accusing me of lumping all cops together by condemning the few who commit crimes?


Being the type of person you are, I surprised you're using the gov assets as helping people instead of as a controlling tool of the man.

I'm not sure what this sentence is supposed to mean.


So you would shoot at a lawfully armed man for simply exercising his second amendment right and having his choice or reading material. Good to know what side you'll be on when the shit hits the fan. Joe your flip flopping on what side you're supporting these days these days.

I don't have a problem with him until he takes pot shots at me.

sandsjames
04-22-2013, 03:35 PM
I just find the thought amusing of you trying to shoot an armored vehicle rolling down the street because you think they're going to disarm you.




Not sure where I said this. I would shoot once they attempt to enter my house in order to confiscate my "illegal" weapons.

Pullinteeth
04-23-2013, 02:28 PM
Yes, paranoid people opening up on the ANG because they think we're coming to take der gunz - yup, exactly what we need. Good thing we got uparmored gun trucks in the motor pool.

Air National Guard doesn't have motor pools...that is an Army thing...

Banned
04-25-2013, 02:56 PM
Air National Guard doesn't have motor pools...that is an Army thing...

Yes and once again - I'm in the Army, not the Air Force. I know it can be confusing because we all hang out in the Air Force forum. ;)

JD2780
04-25-2013, 04:34 PM
Yes, paranoid people opening up on the ANG because they think we're coming to take der gunz - yup, exactly what we need. Good thing we got uparmored gun trucks in the motor pool.

You said ANG. That air force's component of the guard. For the Army's component it's ARNG. I would think you would know that.

Banned
04-25-2013, 08:25 PM
You said ANG. That air force's component of the guard. For the Army's component it's ARNG. I would think you would know that.

I honestly didn't notice I left out the r until I reread it. :p