Quake3World.com Forums
     General Discussion
        This time it wasn't a school


Post new topicReply to topic
Login | Profile | | FAQ | Search | IRC




Previous topic | Next topic 
Topic Starter Topic: Re: This time it wasn't a school

Cool #9
Cool #9
Joined: 01 Dec 2000
Posts: 44132
PostPosted: 04-08-2018 12:56 PM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


YourGrandpa wrote:
Transient wrote:
Who is funding their movement, exactly?


Who EXACTLY picked the vegetables eat? Who EXACTLY built the car you drive? Do I have to know "exactly" who's funding it to know its happening?

When you're making statements about someone's political motives then yes you do.

You're saying I'm dodging the issue, but I bring up valid points against arguments you brought up yourself. Instead of addressing my points, you're dodging the issue by saying I dodge the issue.
Also, when two people ask you to clarify who you are talking about you reply with that it's not important to know. Who is doing the dodging now?




Top
                 

Cool #9
Cool #9
Joined: 01 Dec 2000
Posts: 44132
PostPosted: 04-08-2018 01:04 PM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Let me de-obfusciate this for you:

You claim someone wants to specifically get rid of AR-15's. We call bullshit and imply we want you to clarify why you think this is the case. Clearing up who this "they" is is instrumental in determining the motives and to verify the assumed abilities of said entity.

Instead you come up with the whole oppressive government bullshit and many repeats of the word "dodge".

So here's my theory: you bring up the whole government thing because you're a dumbass tinfoil hat redneck that believes the government is behind a push against AR-15's specifically to "disarm" the civil militia. Lemme tell you, it's just the crazy in you that's doing the talking now.




Top
                 

Soccer Practice!
Soccer Practice!
Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 15667
PostPosted: 04-08-2018 01:33 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


YourGrandpa wrote:
More dumb.



Thanks for proving me right. :)

The AR-15 (and its fellow murder tools, Not hunting rifles) is the staple for mass shooters. Its also something you could pick up at walmart with your groceries. The fact you keep focusing on the AR-15 part, and not the rest of what I'm saying (and I even specify its not just that gun) really proves that you don't give a shit about anything but your toys and you're fucking scared they are gonna get taken.

:olo: :olo:

I also even gave you the chance, to tell me (If i was incorrect about home protection being a reason to have an AR-15), what other reason you have it for. You dodged a valid question just to keep trying to "attack me". Its cute. I mean, thanks for using a proper weapon for home defense (Personally, a glock short frame fan for handguns, 45s been on my short list a while, though, 9s are cheaper to shoot at range so eh, stopping power and all that, another topic). But like, That wasnt the question. Nobody here is saying take away your pistol and shotgun or hunting rifle.



:olo: :olo:

Guns. Merica. :olo:




Top
                 

One Man Army
One Man Army
Joined: 23 Dec 1999
Posts: 10568
PostPosted: 04-08-2018 07:08 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


There's different kinds of shootings, and the idea is that assault rifle bans would help lessen the body count of mass shootings. 1% of shootings might be from AR-15's but that's 1% less shootings we gotta deal with, especially because there's no practical use for an AR-15. Plus, there's no hope for real gun control in this country, at least at the moment, so might as well start somewhere.

Also YGP, google burden of proof. What would the motivation be of somebody financing this anyway? To take all your guns, and somehow tyrannically take over the US? You got 2 sides, one is against gun violence cuz their friends just got shot up, and the other is the NRA with clear financial motivations for not wanting any kind of gun control. What information are you going by when you decide that the former is some kind of conspiracy, but what the NRA is doing is fine, cuz I'm confused as heck?




Top
                 

Blockheaded Blubberboy
Blockheaded Blubberboy
Joined: 16 Apr 2000
Posts: 20816
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 04:35 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Eraser wrote:
Let me de-obfusciate this for you:

You claim someone wants to specifically get rid of AR-15's. We call bullshit and imply we want you to clarify why you think this is the case. Clearing up who this "they" is is instrumental in determining the motives and to verify the assumed abilities of said entity.

Instead you come up with the whole oppressive government bullshit and many repeats of the word "dodge".

So here's my theory: you bring up the whole government thing because you're a dumbass tinfoil hat redneck that believes the government is behind a push against AR-15's specifically to "disarm" the civil militia. Lemme tell you, it's just the crazy in you that's doing the talking now.


You're telling me I'm dodging, but reiterate what I've already said. Then berate me for my opinion and you still haven't explained why I'm wrong.




Top
                 

Cool #9
Cool #9
Joined: 01 Dec 2000
Posts: 44132
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 04:55 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Why don't you get the poo out of your eyes and read for once?

You make some wild claims about there being some kind of conspiracy against AR-15 owners, which have been questioned by multiple members of these forums but yet when pressed for further elaboration you fall into this "no u" tangent. The ball is in your court, Gramps, whether you like it or not. Either come with proof (or at the very least the information on which you base your crazy ideas) or admit that making baseless claims is a very stupid idea.




Top
                 

Cool #9
Cool #9
Joined: 01 Dec 2000
Posts: 44132
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 04:59 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


I'll make it easy for you. Here's a list of quoted statements and questions that you should counter or answer before continuing in this debate:

Eraser wrote:
I'm pretty sure them protesting kids are asking for stricter gun control in general, not just for AR-15's.


Eraser wrote:
So who is "they"?


Eraser wrote:
what about the "oppressive government" argument?


Transient wrote:
Who is funding their movement, exactly?


DooMer wrote:
You got 2 sides, one is against gun violence cuz their friends just got shot up, and the other is the NRA with clear financial motivations for not wanting any kind of gun control. What information are you going by when you decide that the former is some kind of conspiracy, but what the NRA is doing is fine, cuz I'm confused as heck?


So?




Top
                 

Blockheaded Blubberboy
Blockheaded Blubberboy
Joined: 16 Apr 2000
Posts: 20816
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 05:31 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


DooMer wrote:
There's different kinds of shootings, and the idea is that assault rifle bans would help lessen the body count of mass shootings. 1% of shootings might be from AR-15's but that's 1% less shootings we gotta deal with, especially because there's no practical use for an AR-15. Plus, there's no hope for real gun control in this country, at least at the moment, so might as well start somewhere.

Also YGP, google burden of proof. What would the motivation be of somebody financing this anyway? To take all your guns, and somehow tyrannically take over the US? You got 2 sides, one is against gun violence cuz their friends just got shot up, and the other is the NRA with clear financial motivations for not wanting any kind of gun control. What information are you going by when you decide that the former is some kind of conspiracy, but what the NRA is doing is fine, cuz I'm confused as heck?


How anyone can justify penalizing millions of law abiding citizens to maybe/possibly prevent the deaths of so few is ridiculous. Because there is absolutely NOTHING that guarantees banning AR-15 style rifles will prevent mass shootings. If the real concern is saving lives there are so many other endeavors they could pursue. But our government doesn't care about saving lives or what Americans want. If they did we'd have a balanced budget, term limits and health care, just to name a few.

The motivation is to remove the last layer of defense Americans have against a rouge government. I'm not saying the government is ever going to start enslaving or murdering Americans. But a well armed populace does help maintain the balance between citizens and government. Without that balance government is free to make choices that do not represent the people. And if you can't see how governments around the world are getting out of control, you're blind. Beside, there are many other things that could be done before a ban that I think ALL Americans would be willing to do. Because there are more than two sides to this issue. There are certainly extremes on both sides. Unfortunately, those side are the loudest and get the most press. However, there are many Americans that are ready to put better measure in place to help insure we keep guns out of the wrong people's hands. I think that all of those options should be exhausted before we even talk about banning anything.




Top
                 

Cool #9
Cool #9
Joined: 01 Dec 2000
Posts: 44132
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 06:03 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


YourGrandpa wrote:
But a well armed populace does help maintain the balance between citizens and government. Without that balance government is free to make choices that do not represent the people. And if you can't see how governments around the world are getting out of control, you're blind.


Fucking lol! Says the one living under the rule of an orange faced madman :olo:




Top
                 

Blockheaded Blubberboy
Blockheaded Blubberboy
Joined: 16 Apr 2000
Posts: 20816
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 06:21 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Eraser wrote:
I'll make it easy for you. Here's a list of quoted statements and questions that you should counter or answer before continuing in this debate:


Eraser wrote:
I'm pretty sure them protesting kids are asking for stricter gun control in general, not just for AR-15's.


What am I suppose to say to this? Kids don't vote or create policy so what they think, say or want really doesn't matter.

Eraser wrote:
So who is "they"?


The government.

Eraser wrote:
what about the "oppressive government" argument?


Do you think your government represents you. I think our government is already out of control. The government doesn't need to be oppressive or tyrannical to malign it's populace.

Transient wrote:
Who is funding their movement, exactly?


I answered this. We KNOW the movement is being paid for. Kids don't fly around the country doing interviews, organize marches, promote policy, etc. without funding. Why do I have to know who exactly is picking up the tab?

DooMer wrote:
You got 2 sides, one is against gun violence cuz their friends just got shot up, and the other is the NRA with clear financial motivations for not wanting any kind of gun control. What information are you going by when you decide that the former is some kind of conspiracy, but what the NRA is doing is fine, cuz I'm confused as heck?


There are more than 2 sides and I think all sides are against gun violence. This notion that if you're not for gun control you're for gun violence is just stupid. Furthermore, there is no practical reason to explain the push we are seeing to ban AR-15 style rifles other than to offset the balance between the people and the government.

Now please explain otherwise.




Last edited by YourGrandpa on 04-09-2018 06:24 AM, edited 1 time in total.

Top
                 

Kempston Joy
Kempston Joy
Joined: 11 Aug 2000
Posts: 48594
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 06:21 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


YourGrandpa wrote:

How anyone can justify penalizing millions of law abiding citizens to maybe/possibly prevent the deaths of so few is ridiculous.


OK Dana.




Top
                 

Blockheaded Blubberboy
Blockheaded Blubberboy
Joined: 16 Apr 2000
Posts: 20816
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 06:23 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Eraser wrote:
Fucking lol! Says the one living under the rule of an orange faced madman :olo:


I'm not a Trump voter or supporter. Sooo... :rolleyes:




Top
                 

Cool #9
Cool #9
Joined: 01 Dec 2000
Posts: 44132
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 06:40 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


YourGrandpa wrote:
Now please explain otherwise.


Maybe a group of people is genuinely sick and tired of all the gun violence happening around America? Maybe they really feel something needs to be done about it? You know, the thing is, your theory seems to be based on two issues:

-> You state there's a push for a ban on AR-15's specifically.
I'm not in the US myself so maybe I can't judge this accurately, but what I'm seeing is a push against guns in general, not just AR-15's. But still, even if it were against assault rifle type of weapons specifically, maybe that's because the US is very stubborn when it comes to gun control, and the group of people who want more regulation are simply playing it safe by starting off with stricter laws around fully automatic rifles because they know the general population is more likely to be in favor of a ban of these weapons.

-> You believe the government is afraid of people with automatic rifles.
Do you really believe that an entity who can easily control the availability of such weapons/ammunition and who is in possession of trained professionals wielding sniper rifles with armor piercing bullets, drones, attack helicopters, armored troop carriers and jet fighters if need be, is afraid of a bunch of hooligans with AR-15's? I think not. Besides, the idea of controlling a nation with weapons and oppression is such a naive and outdated idea. My good man, the government has you in it's grips already without you even realizing it. The whole Cambridge Analytics thing is just the tip of the iceberg. You don't need guns if you can sway the public opinion in your favor anyway.

YourGrandpa wrote:
I'm not a Trump voter or supporter. Sooo... :rolleyes:

Perhaps not, but you're still living under his rule. To say that an armed populace is needed to keep the government in check while Europe seems to do just fine without weapons is hilariously misguided. Especially now that Trump is in power in the US, making your own government probably the most disruptive, unpredictable and unproductive government the western world has seen in centuries.




Top
                 

Blockheaded Blubberboy
Blockheaded Blubberboy
Joined: 16 Apr 2000
Posts: 20816
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 07:13 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


I disagree. Furthermore, there is no way the US government would be permitted to use tanks/planes/drones on it's own people. There would be a nation wide revolution if that happened. To even suggest such a thing is ridiculous. The only available option would be to use our troops and AR-15s work perfectly against that.

I don't think you (like many other gun control advocates) really understand your argument or what you're arguing for/against. Fully automatic firearms are already heavily regulated. What we're talking about here is banning something that kills les than two hundred people per year. Why would you think it's a good idea to pass legislation that negatively affects millions of people without any proof it would have the benefits you're after? That seems insane. There are so many other things that could be done that would guarantee many more lives would be saved.




Top
                 

Lead Pipe Mafia
Lead Pipe Mafia
Joined: 15 Oct 2007
Posts: 5943
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 07:33 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


You're hypothetical on the US government is hilarious Gwamps... Trust me, if they decide to murder you they'll murder you. Your AR15 isn't going to stop them. Using that as your excuse to keep a rifle intended to kill other people is moronic at best. As for banning those types of weapons, and hand guns, in preventing mass shootings just go see the stats on any country that has those bans in place. They work. It doesn't mean it'll prevent them 100% but they help in reducing that type of attack. Get your head out of your ass please it's getting awkward to watch.




Top
                 

Blockheaded Blubberboy
Blockheaded Blubberboy
Joined: 16 Apr 2000
Posts: 20816
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 08:29 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


It's your not you're... the end. :tard:




Top
                 

Lead Pipe Mafia
Lead Pipe Mafia
Joined: 15 Oct 2007
Posts: 5943
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 08:44 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


3 out of 4 ain't bad.




Top
                 

Arrr?
Arrr?
Joined: 09 Feb 2001
Posts: 35460
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 08:46 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


You have to get a license to drive a car, you should have to get a license in order to own a gun. You have to register your car every year, you should have to register your guns, too. The 2nd amendment was written at a time when the most advanced weapons were flintlock pistols and muskets which fired 3 rounds per minute and were only accurate up to 100 some-odd yards. It was written right after the American Revolution, when it was seen as necessary for the people to be able to defend themselves from a tyrranical government. Even though it initially only applied to well-regulated militias, the Supreme Court recently has said that it applies to individuals but that the right is not unlimited and doesn't prohibit regulation.




Top
                 

Blockheaded Blubberboy
Blockheaded Blubberboy
Joined: 16 Apr 2000
Posts: 20816
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 09:35 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


I agree that you should have to have a license if you want to own a mag fed firearm or a gun that has a fixed capacity of more than 10 rounds. Otherwise, you can own it without restriction. I don't agree with a registry. You shouldn't have to report what you own to the government if you are a law abiding citizen. Also the musket argument moot. We have to know that our founding fathers had enough foresight to know that as time passed there would be advancements.




Top
                 

Cool #9
Cool #9
Joined: 01 Dec 2000
Posts: 44132
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 09:59 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


I don't think the founding fathers could have any idea we'd have guns that can shoot 600 rounds per minute or kill people at a distance of over 3km. I'm pretty sure they also had no idea about tanks, fighters, remotely controlled drones, ballistic missiles or nuclear warheads.




Top
                 

Blockheaded Blubberboy
Blockheaded Blubberboy
Joined: 16 Apr 2000
Posts: 20816
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 10:33 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


The the original concept was to protect ourselves from the government. If the government's weapons advance, so should the people's.




Top
                 

Kempston Joy
Kempston Joy
Joined: 11 Aug 2000
Posts: 48594
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 11:12 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


That's so fucked up.




Top
                 

One Man Army
One Man Army
Joined: 23 Dec 1999
Posts: 10568
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 02:15 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


If you could go to a gun range and shoot all the assault rifles that you wanted but couldn't take them home I'd be open to something like that. It would be closer to what the 2nd amendment arguably is with the well regulated militia and all that.




Top
                 

Soccer Practice!
Soccer Practice!
Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 15667
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 02:50 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


DooMer wrote:
If you could go to a gun range and shoot all the assault rifles that you wanted but couldn't take them home I'd be open to something like that. It would be closer to what the 2nd amendment arguably is with the well regulated militia and all that.



Thats the only way these gun should stay in civilian hands anyways.


Gramps. You're losing your assault rifles :olo:




Top
                 

Blockheaded Blubberboy
Blockheaded Blubberboy
Joined: 16 Apr 2000
Posts: 20816
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 03:44 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Poor SOAP-on-a-ROPEboy is so upset and foolish.




Top
                 

Blockheaded Blubberboy
Blockheaded Blubberboy
Joined: 16 Apr 2000
Posts: 20816
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 03:47 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


DooMer wrote:
If you could go to a gun range and shoot all the assault rifles that you wanted but couldn't take them home I'd be open to something like that. It would be closer to what the 2nd amendment arguably is with the well regulated militia and all that.


I think we need licensing and better regulations before anything else is considered.




Top
                 

Soccer Practice!
Soccer Practice!
Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 15667
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 04:30 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


YourGrandpa wrote:
Poor SOAP-on-a-ROPEboy is so upset and foolish.


:olo: If you think I'm upset :olo:

:olo: If you think YOU actually have any effect on my mood :olo: Oh wait, I guess you do make me laugh :olo:


YourGrandpa wrote:

I think we need licensing and better regulations before anything else is considered.



Anything so you don't lose your MURDER TOYS right? :olo:

Just admit you like guns because they are fun man. You don't need em. :olo:




Top
                 

Blockheaded Blubberboy
Blockheaded Blubberboy
Joined: 16 Apr 2000
Posts: 20816
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 05:49 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


London now considering knife bans? They are supposedliy looking at prohibiting the online sale and home delivery of knives.

Don't focus on the problem, focus on the tool.

Lunacy.




Top
                 

Blockheaded Blubberboy
Blockheaded Blubberboy
Joined: 16 Apr 2000
Posts: 20816
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 05:52 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


SOAPboy wrote:
:mad:


I think you might need a few more smileys to prove how not upset you are.




Top
                 

Soccer Practice!
Soccer Practice!
Joined: 12 Apr 2003
Posts: 15667
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 08:16 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


YourGrandpa wrote:

I think you might need a few more smileys to prove how not upset you are.


:olo: :olo: :olo: :olo: :olo: :olo: :olo: :olo: :olo: :olo: :olo:




Top
                 

Arrr?
Arrr?
Joined: 09 Feb 2001
Posts: 35460
PostPosted: 04-09-2018 09:47 PM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


DooMer wrote:
You got 2 sides, one is against gun violence cuz their friends just got shot up, and the other is the NRA with clear financial motivations for not wanting any kind of gun control. What information are you going by when you decide that the former is some kind of conspiracy, but what the NRA is doing is fine, cuz I'm confused as heck?

I recently listened to a great podcast episode about the history of the NRA by Radiolab, it's really worth a listen and puts this whole discussion into perspective.

Quote:
For nearly 200 years of our nation’s history, the Second Amendment was an all-but-forgotten rule about the importance of militias. But in the 1960s and 70s, a movement emerged — led by Black Panthers and a recently-repositioned NRA — that insisted owning a firearm was the right of each and every American. So began a constitutional debate that only the Supreme Court could solve. That didn’t happen until 2008, when a Washington, D.C. security guard named Dick Heller made a compelling case.




Top
                 

Bück Dich
Bück Dich
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Posts: 6228
PostPosted: 04-10-2018 12:09 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Surely the prospect of someone with the cognitive dysfunction and mental disability that Gwamps presents is reason enough alone that firearms should banned completely?

Does it not scare you that someone this stupid is armed with no regulation?



_________________
[size=85]


Top
                 

Blockheaded Blubberboy
Blockheaded Blubberboy
Joined: 16 Apr 2000
Posts: 20816
PostPosted: 04-10-2018 04:05 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


I'm stupid because I have a different opinion...

That certainly took an enormous amount of contemplation to form that thought. :tard:




Top
                 

Cool #9
Cool #9
Joined: 01 Dec 2000
Posts: 44132
PostPosted: 04-10-2018 04:12 AM           Profile   Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


Your main arguments against a ban on AR-15's seem to be the oppressive government fallacy and the "but they're doing it worse" fallacy. Two very poor ways of reasoning.




Top
                 

Blockheaded Blubberboy
Blockheaded Blubberboy
Joined: 16 Apr 2000
Posts: 20816
PostPosted: 04-10-2018 05:35 AM           Profile Send private message  E-mail  Edit post Reply with quote


But that's your opinion. I'm not the only person who has my opinion. You don't actually KNOW anything. So what you think has no more value than what I think.

BTW, I've never made any claims about an oppressive or tyrannical government. You did. I actually disputed your original statement. But keep saying it if it makes you feels better about your ignorance.




Top
                 
Quake3World.com | Forum Index | General Discussion


Post new topic Reply to topic


cron
Quake3World.com
© ZeniMax. Zenimax, QUAKE III ARENA, Id Software and associated trademarks are trademarks of the ZeniMax group of companies. All rights reserved.
This is an unofficial fan website without any affiliation with or endorsement by ZeniMax.
All views and opinions expressed are those of the author.