[worry]

But look at it this way, you're playing into all those anti-constitution people that really and truly exist in mass and are worth mentioning's greatest hopes! So it evens out.

[Nicodimas]

@ Worry. /whispers At my age I like to pretend people like that don't truly exist..that they are just figments of some part of my represented subconscious and am just dealing with all the random bad shit that has befallen me in life.

And that is why the left exists. A good balance.

This post has been edited by Nicodimas: 31 December 2012 - 09:20 PM

[QuickTidal]

Shinrei, on 23 December 2012 - 01:28 AM, said:

The point I would like you to address directly is why it's fair to take guns away from millions of Americans who are law abiding, over the actions of a few? That's the point I'm making in my analogies that many seem to be misunderstanding. Arguing other uses for alcohol/explosives etc is not even close to addressing the point I was making.


(and as an aside, you have a very rose-colored view of japanese society, but that's a whole other topic of discussion...)

Because as Macros said...THEY DON'T NEED THEM. FULL STOP. No one (regular citizen) NEEDS a gun...no one. Not even the hunters...but I've already said I'll let them have it. So yeah, I'm saying take them away, or regulate them to the nines, or make each bullet cost $100,000...whatever they have to do. The gun issue is one of the main reasons that the rest of the world keeps seeing the USA sliding into being a joke on the world stage. Because a refusal to address something so inherently SELFISH a thing as owning a death stick...is childish. Plain ans simple.

B. My view of Japanese society comes from my family, from my relatives who have spent long years there and here collectively. From my father who spent the better part of 10 years there, my great aunt who lived there every day of her life till her death at 90...from my best friend who moved there when he was 20 and lived there for 10 years before marrying there. I have an entire network of extended family in Japan who we are in regular contact and visits with... It's not rose coloured at all. I'm not saying Japan is perfect, but here, on this spinning ball of rock we have called a planet, it's one of the safest, well-ordered places we have.

[Shinrei]

QuickTidal, on 01 January 2013 - 02:53 PM, said:

Because a refusal to address something so inherently SELFISH a thing as owning a death stick

And I think this is exactly the point where we disagree. What you see as selfish (negative) I see as selfish (postive) in the light of individual empowerment.

As for the Japan thing - it's your doctor/janitor reference that prompted my comment. I'm not implying you know nothing about Japan, but doctors command a respect that goes beyond healthy, and janitors won't get the same. If you're implying that everyone will bow and be polite to each other regardless of job, that's true, but they are not viewed the same.

[Sick@Simpliciter]

few months ago a recently-fired employee in a small-town mall in Italy asked to see his former supervisor (with the intention to kill her on the spot)... when he was denied the access he started firing his illegally recently-acquired gun... the gun jammed after the first shot because the guy holding it didn't know how it worked and the gun itself was a piece of crap he overpaid from a local mobster... in America it would have been a massacre...
when I was still in my teen years I went for a trip in Germany with a friend of mine... on our last night there a visibly-drunk guy approached and asked for smoke... we didn't have any and politely waived him off... he suddenly attacked us with a knife... I was bruised but my friend kicked him in the balls and that was that... in America we might have been killed..
in Italy 80% (80%!!!!) of robberies is carried with fake-guns (toy-guns)... small criminals don't have easy access to guns despite the presence of several arms-trafficking criminal organizations... why? because those mobsters are sane enough not to distribute guns to everyone on their territories... a militia of criminal and violent people understands the virtues of gun control better than the greatest democracy on Earth

[Silencer]

Sick@Simpliciter, on 02 January 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

*snip*the greatest democracy on Earth

*Cough* *Choke* *Splutter*

Wait, which country are we talking about again? O.o



....

[HoosierDaddy]

The greatest (representative) Democracy on Earth greatest (representative) Democracy on Earth.

Suck it everyone else!

U-S-A! U-S-A!

[Gnaw]

Silencer, on 02 January 2013 - 09:26 PM, said:

Sick@Simpliciter, on 02 January 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

*snip*the greatest democracy on Earth

*Cough* *Choke* *Splutter*

Wait, which country are we talking about again? O.o



....

It all comes down to the definition of 'greatest'. There was a time I would have vociferously argued that the USA merited that title. Between W. and Obama though...

[Tapper]

Nicodimas, on 31 December 2012 - 07:18 PM, said:

Russian PoV:


http://english.pravd...ericans_guns-0/

Cough.

I wouldn't say this is a *reliable* article/PoV. It glorifies the Whites (who were fairly anti-semite, western supported, unlike what the article says), misrepresents the revolution, goes on about the lower classes being all corrupt and Putin the shining reformist hero, and so on. Which is not surprising, seeing how it is apparently owned by a political party. Furthermore, it's articles seem to have a decided anti-Western, nationalistic bent to them. To quote it's front page for the 10 most read articles:

1 Obama's Laughter
2 Russia throws poisonous meat back to US
3 Migrants strangle France alive
4 Why Americans cannot discipline their children
5 USA Land of disposable people
6 Citizens of poorest countries are happiest in the world
7 USA takes the lead in killings of children
8 Video of Syrian boy beheading hostages shocks the world
9 Cliff Notes
10 The stupidity of US Foreign Policy

I would not call the titles striving for objectivity, instead hunting for sentiments. And by the by, if you are so against government controlled countries, don't quote russian papers. They're mostly - badum-tishhhh - state controlled.

EDIT: not to mention that one article mentions the USA being one of the Communist countries attacking free Russia by any means possible, another mentioning 'the shortcomings of the capitalist system in the US', and yet another comparing Putin building churches in the Holy Land with Obama not doing so and saying Obama is not allowed to do so by the secular communists in the west, presenting Putin as the defender of the Faith - in the Tsarist tradition of seeing themselves as the heirs of Byzanthium (and thereby Rome) and the protectors of the Holy Sepulchre.

This post has been edited by Tapper: 02 January 2013 - 10:24 PM

[Gnaw]

Tapper, on 02 January 2013 - 10:12 PM, said:

Nicodimas, on 31 December 2012 - 07:18 PM, said:

Russian PoV:


http://english.pravd...ericans_guns-0/

Cough.

I wouldn't say this is a *reliable* article/PoV. It glorifies the Whites (who were fairly anti-semite, western supported, unlike what the article says), misrepresents the revolution, goes on about the lower classes being all corrupt and Putin the shining reformist hero, and so on.
and by the by, if you are so against government controlled countries, don't quote russian papers. They're mostly - badum-tishhhh - state controlled.

EDIT: not to mention that one article mentions the USA being one of the Communist countries attacking free Russia by any means possible, another mentioning 'the shortcomings of the capitalist system in the US', and yet another comparing Putin building churches in the Holy Land with Obama not doing so and saying Obama is not allowed to do so by the secular communists in the west, presenting Putin as the defender of the Faith - in the Tsarist tradition of seeing themselves as the heirs of Byzanthium (and thereby Rome) and the protectors of the Holy Sepulchre.

My favorite was "If it had not been for Washington's clandestine support of and for the Reds, history would have gone quite differently." Yeah. Never mind those 3 US regiments in Siberia and 1.5 more in Archangel, sent by Woodrow Wilson. In hindsight it was a pathetic attempt to be sure, but at the time many people thought the Whites could win. (Edit: To be clear, they were there to help the Whites, not the Reds.)

The author of that piece is extremely reliable. Truly, just go to his blog and find out that women who get abortions are demonically worshipping Baal.
http://www.mat-rodina.blogspot.ru

This post has been edited by Gnaw: 02 January 2013 - 10:41 PM

[Sick@Simpliciter]

Gnaw, on 02 January 2013 - 09:58 PM, said:

Silencer, on 02 January 2013 - 09:26 PM, said:

Sick@Simpliciter, on 02 January 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

*snip*the greatest democracy on Earth

*Cough* *Choke* *Splutter*

Wait, which country are we talking about again? O.o



....

It all comes down to the definition of 'greatest'. There was a time I would have vociferously argued that the USA merited that title. Between W. and Obama though...

I'm sure there are "more democratic" countries around the world... not sure whether the democratic structures put in place in those countries can be applied to a more populated country with a huge sphere of influence...
(e.g. trying to apply the uber-democratic Finnish welfare state in the US would be impossible)

considering size, world-wide political importance and quality of democracy the US are still the greatest... on my account of course... opinions may diverge...

of course even a good (balanced) representitive democracy can originate very bad decisions when fanatical minorities have their way (bribe their way) for a long time (NRA and the so-called "gun-enthusiasts")

This post has been edited by Sick@Simpliciter: 03 January 2013 - 01:30 AM

[worry]

Don't worry, Sick. I'll stand by you, if nobody else is man enough!

[LinearPhilosopher]

Shinrei, on 01 January 2013 - 11:03 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 01 January 2013 - 02:53 PM, said:

Because a refusal to address something so inherently SELFISH a thing as owning a death stick

And I think this is exactly the point where we disagree. What you see as selfish (negative) I see as selfish (postive) in the light of individual empowerment.

http://www.economist.../12/gun-control
Here's a reccomended read.

By the line of reasoning you have demonstrated, individual empowerment takes precedence over the lives of others. Having an over abundance of gun leads to more deaths and incidents. They don't all have to be deranged psychos. They don't all have to be fatalities as well.
http://www.nationmas...s-with-firearms
Notice how after the top 5 there's a sharp decline. This is without controlling for comparable in countries, in which case the Americans would be #1 and there would be a sharp decrease in #2. By your own logic, the marked increase in deaths is justified via the individual empowerment one receives from owning a weapon. I strongly hope you reword that or point out some flaw in my reasoning, cause from where I'm standing that statement is nothing short of ludicrous.

This post has been edited by BalrogLord: 03 January 2013 - 04:36 PM

[pathos]

Quote

http://www.nationmas...s-with-firearms
Notice how after the top 5 there's a sharp decline. This is without controlling for comparable in countries, in which case the Americans would be #1 and there would be a sharp decrease in #2. By your own logic, the marked increase in deaths is justified via the individual empowerment one receives from owning a weapon. I strongly hope you reword that or point out some flaw in my reasoning, cause from where I'm standing that statement is nothing short of ludicrous.

We win at killing people with guns it appears

[King Lear]

BalrogLord, on 03 January 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

http://www.nationmas...s-with-firearms
Notice how after the top 5 there's a sharp decline. This is without controlling for comparable in countries, in which case the Americans would be #1 and there would be a sharp decrease in #2. By your own logic, the marked increase in deaths is justified via the individual empowerment one receives from owning a weapon. I strongly hope you reword that or point out some flaw in my reasoning, cause from where I'm standing that statement is nothing short of ludicrous.

I can't figure out what you're trying to say here. In any case that graph is meaningless because it's based on number of murders with firearms total, so it's useless for comparison (not to mention it's incomplete, but giving the source used I suppose that's not surprising). The same website also has this link which is sort of more useful, but I noticed that they're using figures from wiki, and wiki's source figures look like they're 20 years old? In any case, America slips down to number 8 using the figures from the per 100,000 population graph and it sits under that dramatic drop you mentioned.

By comparable countries do you mean other first world countries? Or countries with lower gun restrictions? One of these things is more relevant than the other to this discussion, because if you're talking about western vs. non-western (and good luck with that definition too) America isn't really comparable because of its gun laws.

Also, pathos, south africa still wins at murdering people with guns on the other graph.

[Nicodimas]

My next purchase



America rules!!! be jealous.

Totally legal too! My buddy showed me this weekend..wowzers.

[Tsundoku]

Nicodimas, on 04 January 2013 - 08:44 AM, said:

My next purchase



America rules!!! be jealous.

Totally legal too! My buddy showed me this weekend..wowzers.

Mate, I truly hope you are trolling, because that shit is way over the top. What do you NEED it for? The zombie apocalypse?

Also, carefully note at 1:36 the caption says "semi-auto AR-15 with sliding stock" etc and goes on to demonstrate full-auto fire. I don't care what the second bullshit disclaimer says at the end - I saw a single pull of the trigger for multiple rounds fired, and that's automatic fire.

If this "sliding stock" is some dodgy way of getting around the full-auto restriction then frankly I hope this technology is one day used on those who invented, proposed and bought it.

If this shit is legal, then it's just a matter of how high your next massacre body count goes, not even when or if.

From a professional perspective, if they have found a way to limit the spread of rounds due to full-auto recoil, then it just makes so much easier to land even more rounds on target in a short space of time.

EDIT: upon further reflection, I'm wondering how many yeehaws have used it from the hip?

EDIT2: and when I say "yeehaws" I mean:

This post has been edited by Sombra: 04 January 2013 - 11:09 AM

[Silencer]

@Sombra - incidentally, have you seen/read/heard about that Russian rifle, the AN-94? It has an 1800rpm burst-fire mode which effectively means the second round has left the chamber before the recoil is felt - i.e. two rounds land extremely close together?

Awesome technology, but terrifying increase to effectiveness - just your comment about that vid Nico linked (which I haven't watched yet) made me think of this gun.

EDIT: OK, I've watched that video now. And do you know what really works for making that whole thing seem less fun and more terrifying? Imagine if you will, that downrange from where that nice fellow in the shades is firing his modified-to-basically-be-fully-automatic "semi-auto AR15", are a bunch of a children. Does THAT explain why the capability to do something like that is more terrifying than a bolt-action? Not to mention, that nice fellow with the shades has equipped his practically-now-fully-automatic AR15 with a Beta-C magazine. Aka he has a HUNDRED ROUNDS to fire out of that death machine. Makes that little grin he gives to himself at the end fucking chilling, that does.
And you are telling me that not only is this legal, but it SHOULD be legal and that it has a valid reason to exist in the hands of the general public? What. The. Fuck.

[LinearPhilosopher]

Ornery Owl, on 04 January 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

BalrogLord, on 03 January 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

http://www.nationmas...s-with-firearms
Notice how after the top 5 there's a sharp decline. This is without controlling for comparable in countries, in which case the Americans would be #1 and there would be a sharp decrease in #2. By your own logic, the marked increase in deaths is justified via the individual empowerment one receives from owning a weapon. I strongly hope you reword that or point out some flaw in my reasoning, cause from where I'm standing that statement is nothing short of ludicrous.

I can't figure out what you're trying to say here. In any case that graph is meaningless because it's based on number of murders with firearms total, so it's useless for comparison (not to mention it's incomplete, but giving the source used I suppose that's not surprising). The same website also has this link which is sort of more useful, but I noticed that they're using figures from wiki, and wiki's source figures look like they're 20 years old? In any case, America slips down to number 8 using the figures from the per 100,000 population graph and it sits under that dramatic drop you mentioned.

By comparable countries do you mean other first world countries? Or countries with lower gun restrictions? One of these things is more relevant than the other to this discussion, because if you're talking about western vs. non-western (and good luck with that definition too) America isn't really comparable because of its gun laws.

Also, pathos, south africa still wins at murdering people with guns on the other graph.

http://www.hsph.harv...eath/index.html
Comparable countries would be countries of similar income level. G20 comes to mind. The comparison still holds as america has considerably higher gun deaths per capita then anyone else. The major difference to be found is lack of adequate gun control, and a culture that is crazy about guns. Income disparity and other factors likely play a factor but a small one at best. There are many posts from quite a few pages back that illustrate this further from the anecdotal to the empirical. Finally if the data seems dated, i see no reason why a desparity of a decade would invalidate the results, there are also economic reasons such as lack of funding, (NRA wink wink nudge nudge) or simple lack of interest in the field.

Silencer, on 04 January 2013 - 11:57 AM, said:

@Sombra - incidentally, have you seen/read/heard about that Russian rifle, the AN-94? It has an 1800rpm burst-fire mode which effectively means the second round has left the chamber before the recoil is felt - i.e. two rounds land extremely close together?

Awesome technology, but terrifying increase to effectiveness - just your comment about that vid Nico linked (which I haven't watched yet) made me think of this gun.

EDIT: OK, I've watched that video now. And do you know what really works for making that whole thing seem less fun and more terrifying? Imagine if you will, that downrange from where that nice fellow in the shades is firing his modified-to-basically-be-fully-automatic "semi-auto AR15", are a bunch of a children. Does THAT explain why the capability to do something like that is more terrifying than a bolt-action? Not to mention, that nice fellow with the shades has equipped his practically-now-fully-automatic AR15 with a Beta-C magazine. Aka he has a HUNDRED ROUNDS to fire out of that death machine. Makes that little grin he gives to himself at the end fucking chilling, that does.
And you are telling me that not only is this legal, but it SHOULD be legal and that it has a valid reason to exist in the hands of the general public? What. The. Fuck.

shhh, your post implies people can understand causality and responsibility. Why shoud manufacturer be responsible for killings. It's not like they knew guns could be used to harm people.

This post has been edited by BalrogLord: 04 January 2013 - 03:26 PM

[Nicodimas]

I want one because its available to own..legal..you know a freedom? Do you need a car that goes really quick..its makes it exceptionally dangerous...yet it can and is illegal to go that quickly.

Not an exact comparison for sure as you might effect a few people crashing, more than likely yourself the most.

Try banning em someone is going to find out a way via technology to just sidestep a ban..See above slide stock. Its the way we are as people. /shrug

I gave a fair proposal imo..work on the mental system try to figure it out before it occurs. As it is occurring is to late and they will use the best tool to inflict the most harm.

We should absolutely keep them around for Defense purposes. And Zombies.