Well I don’t see that this is at all relevant as were talking about gun control.
But I do know this; car manufactures have thousands of regulations on making cars safer for people, and pedestrians. We have hundreds of road rules to control how we use cars to make them as safe as we possibly can.
I believe in Europe they are trying to pass regulation right now that would force all new cars to be equipped with breathalyzers.
Guns are made to be as efficient at killing as possible full stop.
If they brought in regulations to make them safer, like only selling rubber bullets, just like it is the law that cars are made with seat belts and you must wear them I wouldn’t have a problem with gun control.
But they are made to kill, and that’s it full stop !
I don’t agree that guns are made only to kill. I think guns are made to shoot a projectile at whatever target the shooter is pointing at. And, I still don’t even see why cars aren’t bad even though they may not have been designed to kill, when they still do.
I also think comparing breathalizers in cars to rubber bullets in guns is missleading. Sober people can and do kill people in cars. How about rubber cars vs rubber bullets or breathalizers on both cars and guns. I think a bad driver and a bad gun owner are equally as deadly.
I hope you didn’t miss the point about rubber bullets Blind cause it seems you did.
For cars we do everything we possible can to make them safer for all. Guns are designed for the exact opposite, to be as effective at killing as possible.
I just posted this in another thread, and thought I would post it here for those that missed it !
Blind
I will also admit that I get frustrated with Blind and often feel that he is grasping at straws and hence tries to compare Oranges and Apples.
However Blind never resorts to name calling or making personal criticisms of other people.
So although I find Blind frustrating at times, as I am sure he finds me.
I have respect for him because he doesn’t make it personal when he is not getting his way.
I think a lot of people should think about that !
If this were a real debate and you made a comment about the other team, you would be out of the debate, and just lost it for your team.
So even when you are frustrated, I think people should think twice before they make a comment about someone else. It is really unprofessional and uncalled for………
Kirupa
to bully each other. That’s what the Battle forum is for!
Awww what’s this ??? A Battle forum
Is that the place for no rules cage fighting !
Lets drop Rev and Blind in the pit and watch the love grow
Perhaps we could have a real debate on one of these subjects and get Upuaut to mediate.
I don’t think it matters what side he is on, I think he can put aside his views on a topic and make a judgment on which side has put forth the better argument…
I think a bad driver and a bad gun owner are equally as deadly.
Debateble but EVEN IF that were true, the point still stand you cannot feasibly ban cars in modern society it would bring the country to a standstill, where as you CAN ban guns without any detremental effect.
Strange sense of Deja’vu here, but then i tend to get that alot arguing with you Blind, we have discussed this point at least 8 times already and ALREADY pointed out the fundemental difference between banning cars and guns…
Not that your point is becoming laboured and repetative or anything
Ok cars are just IRRELIVANT to this thread people, seriously. Listen, the Second Amendment was put their for a reason. Back in the day the firearm was a necessary tool in American society to defend yoru home, and hunt for food. In a sense firearms are simply an engrained part of our society. Now I certainly agree with the Brady Bill and the limitation of assault weapons, to me thats a no brainer. But can those of you, such as Ave, that are argueing for a complete ban on firearms supply any evidence that shows this will actually reduce crime?? Or is the simply a matter of opinion, in which case this is not the forum for that.
According the the National Center for Victims of Crime, in 2001 only 9% of violent crime in the US involved a firearm, 2% for rapes and sexual assualts. The National Center for Health Statistics reports that for 2000 16,586 of the 28,663 killed by firearms died in acts of suiced. The importance of this fact being that they would have killed themselves whether firearms were legal or not, and this dramatically changes the picture for firearm deaths.
If banning cars saves ONE life is that not worth it in you mind ave?
As he pointed out to you society would come to a holt.
Imagine tomorrow if there were no cars, you would have to include trucks and busses.
Stores would not be restocked, goods could not be delivered, and many people couldn’t get to work.
Society as we know it would collapse and there would be millions and millions of deaths.
I thought this would have been self explanatory to you Blind….
As for your statistics RussianBeer they do nothing to show how many people die needlessly or how many people may have saved their own life because they had a gun……
NOTE:
If shown that guns save more life’s than they take I will be immediately anti-gun-control.
However I find it extremely unlikely that any numbers will show that, so until they do I am still very gun-control.
In 2002, about 67% of all murders, 42% of all robberies, and 19% of all aggravated assaults that were reported to the police were committed with a firearm.
How many were legaly owned weapons and how many were not? That is the relivant information I’m looking for. In addition, this doesnt’ state anything about the stats involved in legal gun ownership detering violent crime. Finding those numbers is not hard at all Russianbeer, it’s these other numbers that I’m finding hard to find.
However I find it extremely unlikely that any numbers will show that, so until they do I am still very gun-control
keep in mind that just because I brought this up, I have no illusions. I’m sure that the stats if found will show that guns do not save more lives than they take. I’m just interested in the results because no one talks about them.
*Originally posted by Redrvltn *
**So it is worthwhile to curtail 340 million people rights, for a single person. We live in a democracy here, and that is anything but democratic. So no, that surely is not proof enough. Ave, for you it may not be about the right, but about owning a gun. But for us Americans it’s about the right. Yes, the constitution is precious, I’m glad you see that now, maybe the rights within will also start to be important to you.
Seriously Ave, you need to get a dictionary. A pacifist is merely
“in opposition of war or violence as a means of settling disputes”. No where does it say a pacifist must not have access to weapons.**
Yes cause i happen to think that one persons life is more precious than your ‘right’ to own weapons.
If you could show how weapons benfit society and how banning them would detrement society ill happily change my mind. BUT WE BOTH KNOW YOU CANT
So you can bandy metaphors and compariosns around all day mate, we both know that humans lives are far more important than any of our opinions.
Take a look inside yourself and ask if one of your loved ones (god forbid) ever got killed by a gun accidentally for whatever reason cause they were in wrong place at wrong time would your consitution or rights give you any comfort then ??
And As you said “A pacifist is merely
in opposition of war or violence as a means of settling disputes”
so why would he need pepper spray ??
I dont recall ghandi using pepper spray and he pretty much apitamises pacifism.
And on a note some one else brought up, except the occasional life saved in the wilderness guns NEVER save lives, even if you are about to be murdered and use a gun for protection you stand a good chance of KILLING the other guy to protect yourself. Which is taking a life to save a life…ill accept this is a valid response BUT it doesnt SAVE lives…
