|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Adam Carolla
Joined: 26 Feb 2010
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 05, 2014 5:54 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Gun nuts always respond with "blah blah 2nd amendment blah blah." In reality, they don't have guns because they seriously think they'll have to rise up against the U.S. military. They have guns because they like playing with big, dangerous toys.
They will go to great lengths to defend their right to these toys, at times they'll even sound logical, but underneath it all is "You can't take my toy away."
Let's imagine a world in which there were no personal firearms.
Now, a gun nut will say, yeah, but you can still use a knife to kill people.
That's true. That's also a really stupid point. The last time I heard about a knife-wielding maniac attempting to go on a killing-spree in a school, he claimed zero lives. Now, that's just one example. But let's cast our minds back and see if we can put up numbers of knife-wielding killing sprees vs. gun-wielding killing sprees. Gee, I wonder which type of maniac has claimed more lives?
This gun debate is asinine. There is no debate. Widespread access to guns makes the world a more dangerous place. I felt way more safe in Korea than I do here in the U.S. A couple months ago, an 8 year old girl riding a bike was shot at by 2 guys in a Chevy pickup truck in my neighborhood. And I live in the midwest, not exactly a dangerous place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Old Painless
Joined: 01 Jan 2014
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 05, 2014 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The reason there's no sane debate about guns is because they'll NEVER EVER go away. Anyone that thinks guns can be eliminated completely is seriously deluded.
Not until the death laser ray comes out anyway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adam Carolla
Joined: 26 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2014 6:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Old Painless wrote: |
The reason there's no sane debate about guns is because they'll NEVER EVER go away. Anyone that thinks guns can be eliminated completely is seriously deluded.
Not until the death laser ray comes out anyway. |
Yes, and gun nuts will respond to the question of "How can we reduce gun related crimes?" with "MOAR GUNZ!"
Gun nuts are not interested in restricting access, reducing the number of firearms one can own, putting restrictions on assault rifles (which, you know, they need to hunt heavily armored wildlife LMFAO,) etc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2014 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I know Tea Baggers like to talk about facing down Obama with their shotgun in the town square, but it wouldn't even get to that point if the government didn't want it to. So instead, the government lets Americans have their toys so they can shoot each other and believe they're big strong men, when in reality they're just being distracted while their country gets more and more tyranical. |
I agree with this. Seriously, what do these people think? That they can take on an F-16 hitting them with an AGM-65 Maverick? Are they going to do the "Jihadi high step" (seriously, whats with all the Arab armies and terrorist groups that do that stupid high step march?) and spray the front of an M1A2 tank with their assault rifle?
People say "But look at Afghanistan and Iraq where they its a bunch of guys with AKs", except they have a lot more- military equipment like RPGs and MANPADS. They also do things like strap bombs to their chest and go blow themselves up, something I don't see any of those types doing.
===============================================
| Quote: |
| Gun nuts always respond with "blah blah 2nd amendment blah blah." In reality, they don't have guns because they seriously think they'll have to rise up against the U.S. military. They have guns because they like playing with big, dangerous toys. |
While I agree with you that most of them just want to play with toys and have deluded fantasies that somehow their gun is going to be take on a US Predator drone in their imaginary war against the government, there is a section out there that does take the 2nd Amendment seriously.
The fact is, the 2nd Amendment is not just some "blah blah blah". And getting rid of it is not something to be considered lightly. It would have PROFOUND legal consequences if it were overturned via constitutional amendment, and even more profound consequences if guns were banned via legislation or executive decree.
| Quote: |
| and see if we can put up numbers of knife-wielding killing sprees vs. gun-wielding killing sprees. Gee, I wonder which type of maniac has claimed more lives? |
One could in theory say that a couple of guys with box-cutters caused way more death and destruction than any school shooter or gang banger ever did, if we're looking at big dramatic killing acts in the U.S.
I think a better comparison would be to look at the number of casualties in Chinese knife attacks vs. American shooting sprees. You can still get a sizable number of dead in the knife attacks, but they don't reach the horrific numbers of some of the worst shootings that have taken place.
| Quote: |
| Gun nuts are not interested in restricting access, reducing the number of firearms one can own, putting restrictions on assault rifles (which, you know, they need to hunt heavily armored wildlife LMFAO,) etc. |
I agree that "more guns" is moronic. Unfortunately, anti-gun advocates have done themselves no favors with many of their assault rifle ban legislation criteria. Most of the things they ban are cosmetic things that make the gun "look scary", but aren't based on actual functionality.
It's like saying sports cars are dangerous because of their speed and banning rims, stickers, spoilers, the color red, and carbon fiber hoods, while doing nothing about the engine underneath. Just as anyone who knows anything about cars would tell you those things have little or nothing to do with how fast a car goes, same with many of the criteria in assault weapons bans.
Same with magazine capacity bans. There was a ban in NY to reduce ammunition capacity to something like 8 rounds, even though you could use grandfathered in 17 round magazines. This is utterly moronic as this is not going to stop criminals but would get a lot of legal gun owners in trouble. I have no problem with banning say, the manufacture of high capacity magazines, but to restrict existing ones to something lower than their capacity is just stupid.
If you really want to ban anything approximating an assault weapon, you'd have to restrict people to single-shot, bolt action rifles. Heck, you'd have to go back and ban Henry rifles from the Civil War as they are darn near as effective in trained hands as an assault rifle.
As I'm starting to do regularly- tldr points are in bold. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adam Carolla
Joined: 26 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2014 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| blah blah blah |
There's a thing called poisoning the well. You've done it to yourself. I know I'm not going to read or address anything you have to say. I recommend others do the same. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
trueblue
Joined: 15 Jun 2014
Location: In between the lines
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2014 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Statements like this just don't make any sense. |
It does make sense. You just don't agree, that's all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2014 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Adam Carolla wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| blah blah blah |
There's a thing called poisoning the well. You've done it to yourself. I know I'm not going to read or address anything you have to say. I recommend others do the same. |
You're free to do as you please. I on the other hand take each person's comments at face value and don't instantly disregard what they have to say based on their screen name. I may have had frequent arguments with BlackCat, atwood, and others on this site, but when they make a post I look it over with a blank slate in my mind regarding their history, especially if the topic is something outside of Korea, where the usual "lines" are less likely to take place. Of course, when the sparks start to fly we may look back on each other's past posts. I always try my best to look at the text first and the screen name/avatar 2nd.
I'll always take the time to read someone's post and consider what they have to say. I did so with yours. I'm sorry you lack that same ability and have instead turned me into some sort of internet bogeyman. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adam Carolla
Joined: 26 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2014 7:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| blah blah blah |
I can only imagine what you are talking about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Died By Bear
Joined: 13 Jul 2010
Location: On the big lake they call Gitche Gumee
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2014 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When you are dead, you don't know that you are dead.
It is difficult only for the others.
It is the same when you are stupid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adam Carolla
Joined: 26 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2014 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Died By Bear wrote: |
When you are dead, you don't know that you are dead.
It is difficult only for the others.
It is the same when you are stupid. |
Thumbs up! But I'd replace stupid with crazy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
le-paul
Joined: 07 Apr 2009
Location: dans la chambre
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2014 11:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Adam Carolla wrote: |
| Died By Bear wrote: |
When you are dead, you don't know that you are dead.
It is difficult only for the others.
It is the same when you are stupid. |
Thumbs up! But I'd replace stupid with crazy. |
And I, with ignorant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
guavashake
Joined: 09 Nov 2013
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 2:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
I watched a fascinating movie in which only police and military had guns
The name of the movie is Schindler's List
Really, what will it take for people to learn... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 2:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| guavashake wrote: |
I watched a fascinating movie in which only police and military had guns
The name of the movie is Schindler's List
Really, what will it take for people to learn... |
LOL + WTF?
Did you just post that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
guavashake
Joined: 09 Nov 2013
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2014 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| guavashake wrote: |
I watched a fascinating movie in which only police and military had guns
The name of the movie is Schindler's List
Really, what will it take for people to learn... |
I watched another intriguing movie in which only police and military had guns
The name of the movie is The Killing Fields
Really, what will it take for people to learn... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
trueblue
Joined: 15 Jun 2014
Location: In between the lines
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 2:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
I watched another intriguing movie in which only police and military had guns
The name of the movie is The Killing Fields
Really, what will it take for people to learn... |
Yes, he DID post that....and he presents a good question. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
