A debate question....

Snakebabies

Snakebabies

Registered User
Joined
Sep 2, 2012
Messages
6,963
Age
39
Well, I watched a bunch of Piers Mrgan getting pissed off trying to convert people, and I couldnt help realize he asks almost everyone this question(or close to it): Why do people need assault rifles? or What someone would need a 30+round magazine clip (dumbass) for?

I was just curious as to what some of us would say to that...

As for assault rifles, my rhetort really isn't justifiable until the situation arises, but I am a FIRM believer in: Better to have it and not need it; than to not have it and need it.

30+ round mags/drums: To piers, this is what I would say, "To eliminate every threat in my immediate AO....Let me explain: Should a riot ensue, to defend my home and family, and to have the means to extract myself(and family) from a situation should I be out numbered."
 
He says assault rifles but he means guns, period. He conveniently won't talk about the murder rate of his own origins from knives/edged blades (since guns are banned there) because that would look bad and make the number of homicides by gun in this country seem like a paltry number.
 
My biggest gripe with him, besides being hypocritical, is that he refuses to be analytical about this topic. As always, the people are the problem, ban one thing, and they'll use another to achieve the same ends.
 
Look at the ukraine crisis, that's what happens when Russia has interest in your country and your average joe doesnt have any means to fight back. Russia has interest in your country (Alaska)

You have 260 million people eligible to arm themselves, this gives your country absolute self-determination, no country can scare yours with their army, nor can no country randomly take a part of yours due to "ancestral lands of 200 years ago which were acquired by conquest to make them ancestral lands.".

In the UK they are banning many knives already, the society has no protection against foreign powers and no protection against its own power. That's shit.
 
2Tartu said:
Look at the ukraine crisis, that's what happens when Russia has interest in your country and your average joe doesnt have any means to fight back. Russia has interest in your country (Alaska)

You have 260 million people eligible to arm themselves, this gives your country absolute self-determination, no country can scare yours with their army, nor can no country randomly take a part of yours due to "ancestral lands of 200 years ago which were acquired by conquest to make them ancestral lands.".

In the UK they are banning many knives already, the society has no protection against foreign powers and no protection against its own power. That's shit.
Click to expand...
But Tartu, the sheeple have been convinced by the "opinion media" that you are FAR more likely to be killed with your own weapon than to use it for self-defense. Or that the US violent crime rate is astronomical compared to similar countries. Or that gun enthusiasts are all pistol packing lunatics. It's simply not true!! It's a bunch of bullshit the opinion media feeds the sheeple. And most of them buy it, hook line & sinker! Does the media EVER report when a legally owned firearm is used to defend one's self or family in a lawful manner? Very rarely, and even then they usually get a sound bite of the dumbest sounding mother-fucker to walk this earth to state something like how the now deceased dirt bag was "a good child thats done nuttin wrong". If there is an opinion recorded on camera that doesn't meet their agenda then they simply don't broadcast it. I know this, because I have been the victim of this type of media bullshit.
When a poll is financed by Handgun Control Inc. what do you think the outcome of said poll is going to be? Pro gun, maybe even? Not a fucking chance.

News isn't news and fair isn't fair. Hasn't been for a long time.
 
CrackyMcSlapnuts said:
But Tartu, the sheeple have been convinced by the "opinion media" that you are FAR more likely to be killed with your own weapon than to use it for self-defense. Or
that the US violent crime rate is astronomical compared to similar countries. Or that gun enthusiasts are all pistol packing lunatics. It's simply not true!! It's a bunch of bullshit the opinion media feeds the sheeple. And most of them buy it, hook line & sinker! Does the media EVER report when a legally owned firearm is used to defend one's self or family in a lawful manner? Very rarely, and even then they usually get a sound bite of the dumbest sounding mother-fucker to walk this earth to state something like how the now deceased dirt bag was "a good child thats done nuttin wrong". If there is an opinion recorded on camera that doesn't meet their agenda then they simply don't broadcast it. I know this, because I have been the victim of this type of media bullshit.
When a poll is financed by Handgun Control Inc. what do you think the outcome of said poll is going to be? Pro gun, maybe even? Not a fucking chance.

News isn't news and fair isn't fair. Hasn't been for a long time.
Click to expand...

Keep your guns, the world is starting to fuck itself over again.
 
There are places in the world where you don't have to worry what the guy in the supermarket is packing.
 
I don't worry about what anyone else is carrying because I carry. I don't know who the other carriers are and they don't know me. It doesn't matter that I know or that they know. I can relax and enjoy my day anywhere knowing that I can, Lord willing, put down any unlikely threat that chooses to put itself in my path or the path of my family.
 
I answer that question the same way every time Snake, "need" has no more relevance to my constitutional rights than your "need" to ask that question has to yours. Need does not justify rights, often they have nothing to do with each other. Your rights exist regardless of need, they would exist the same in a "need" vacuum, or a "need" flood. Do I "need" to plead the 5th today (a lot of people forget "plead the 5th" actually refers to your 5th Amendment right to not testify against yourself)? Nope, but I have that right today all the same.

It's a different way of attacking sideways, in the 90's they attacked the 2nd Amendment from the flank by automatically linking it to hunting. They did this with impunity because the news media back then had absolutely NO counterweight unlike today. Every argument went something along the lines of "you don't (need) an assault weapon to hunt deer!" Automatically equating your 2nd Amendment right to hunting alone, regardless of the fact that hunting is actually not mentioned one single solitary time in the Constitution much less the bill of rights, the ability to fight other human beings being the sole justification of the 2nd Amendment in the ACTUAL Constitution. This is how they passed the Assault Weapons Ban (a fabricated term that describes something that does not in fact exist) in '95 the last time we had a Democrat in the White House. It was a major part of the reason the Democrats lost the House for the first time in over 40 years. They try to couch your rights in their terms, their terms being a degradation of your rights meant to benefit their feelings.
 
Example: The Governor of my state is anti-2nd Amendment. My neighbor's son is a disabled veteran recently discharged from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. The Governor hosted this young man and several other recently recovered disabled veterans at a dinner to show his "support" for our veterans. After dinner, the Gov asked this young man if he would speak out against the 2nd Amendment. The response was as follows:
Gov: "Would you speak out against the 2nd Amendment?"
Veteran: "Sir, why would I speak out against a freedom for which I put my life on the line?"
Gov: "I understand. Would you have an interest in joining my security detail?"
Veteran: "Sir, are the members of your detail armed?"
Gov: "Of course, you would be one of the few in the state to be granted a concealed carry permit."
Veteran: "Sir, with all due respect, you are one of the biggest cheerleaders for gun control and disarming the nation, but you surround yourself with men who are meant to protect you by way of firearms. Do you not understand that you are contradicting your stance? You think, "I'm important, I need protection." Guess what, everyone is important and has a fundamental right to protect themselves. Gun control has no effect on criminals, it only disarms law-abiding citizens."
Gov: "I have bodyguards, but the police are meant to protect the general population."
Veteran: "As the old saying goes, when seconds count the police are just minutes away."​
 
CrackyMcSlapnuts said:
But Tartu, the sheeple have been convinced by the "opinion media" that you are FAR more likely to be killed with your own weapon than to use it for self-defense.
Click to expand...
A great man once said "if you torture statistics enough, they'll tell you ANYTHING". This is a perfect example of that, when they make that claim, they fail to tell you that almost half of all firearms deaths in America are suicides, and those suicides are ALWAYS included in the violent crime statistics and almost entirely account for people killed by their own firearms.
 
Just for the record, the reason Piers has crossed the pond is because we despise him over here. Jeremy Clarkson beat him up once, and I play this clip at the drop of a hat:


0:13 to 0:55 or so, although the rest of that video is pretty good too.
 
Avery78 said:
There are places in the world where you don't have to worry what the guy in the supermarket is packing.
Click to expand...
Just about any American will tell you that is true here too. The only places where people really worry about that are the places where citizens have no 2nd Amendment rights, in other words the large urban areas that are dominated by violent crime and Democrats, or as I like to call them the conjoined twins.
 
Piers lost his show over here too Rails, he's just too condescending and nobody likes to be lectured on their way of life by an outsider. I don't agree with how lots of countries tend their business, but I wouldn't fucking dream of pontificating to the people of those countries how they should live. It's just fucking rude.
 
2Tartu said:
Keep your guns, the world is starting to fuck itself over again.
Click to expand...

The world is always fucking itself over again and again history is the reinvention of the wheel. The typical response in this day and age is we are so much more civilized and educated to be resorting to violence. My answer to this is bullshit over education breeds stupidity.

We have domesticated dogs to be house pets but there's still animals and will steal the food right out of your plate if you let them. Then you have the theory of evolution but you know what man wiIl steal the same food right out of your plate too in this day and age just in a more educated fashion. There are a lot of animals I mean humans so I need alot of 30, 40, 100 round clips/drums and bullets to thin the rabid pack if ever the need to came about.
 
Police are minutes away when seconds count. There is about a 1:5 ratio between deaths (of victims) in a shooting stopped by an average joe on the street vs stopped by police. Gun free zones are like hunting grounds, will never live in or go to one if i can help it. If every person had an AR or shotgun in there house and was ready to use it, and carried a pistol on them, imagine how low violent crime would become. And making it illegal does nothing to the people who dont care about it being illegal because they will be the ones committing the crimes anyway.
 
I would tell good old Pierce, that first of all, unless you are in the military you cannot have an Assault Rifle (M-16 or M-4). Sure you can buy a gun that looks a lot like one, but an assault rifle is fully automatic. Not semi-automatic. It still boggles my mind that I could buy a gun today that does more damage, carries more ammo, and is cheaper than a AR-15/16. It looks nothing like an AR, but hey Piers and the crew know it all don't they.
 
I try to stay out of these sorts of conversations, as in most time in public; Logic does not preside... Emotions. Make it difficult to really have a discussion.

Too often we get so wrapped up in our opinion we let it become us.
 
Bungied2theTree said:
I try to stay out of these sorts of conversations, as in most time in public; Logic does not preside... Emotions. Make it difficult to really have a discussion.

Too often we get so wrapped up in our opinion we let it become us.
Click to expand...
thats where diplomacy kicks in!
I usually stay out of politics, because I dont know enough about the topic to properly debate
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top