Guns Are Evil!

  • Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.

Goat Fucker

No Future!
Aug 18, 2000
2,625
0
0
Denmark
Visit site
The media really deserves allot of responcibillty for the misguidance of the populace, not only does it pimp the fraudulent "findings" of others, it creates its own aswell, coupled with the vast quanteties of people who's sould view and opinion on the world and politics stems from TV, and what it tells them, you have disaster on youre hands, mass brainwashing, or should i say indoctrination.

I can tell you one thing, all the people i have talked to who where pro-gun, have all studied this for a long time, whilst all the people i have talked to who where anti-gun, have done little to nothing to educate themselves about the topic.

Someone tell you "guns kill people, therefor they are evil" on the TV, and you know what? that sounds logical, guns are pretty good at killing people, so they must be evil, because killing is bad, and thats what most people imediately tell themselves.

But they do not see the further consquences, guns have been invented, they are part of our world now, and there will allways be a need for weapons, our basic human instincts are preprogramed to make and use tools and weapons, that is the gift we traded fangs, claws and incredible running speeds for, and therefor, guns will be part of society legally or not, as will "bad people", they wont go away, and when you mix them with guns, but dont give them to the "good people" aswell, you set youreself up for disaster, mix that once more with a government lead by one of the "bad people", and you have the perfect demoside cocktail.

We cannot get rid of guns, and we cannot get rid of evil, so then by all means, lets arm ourselves so we can fight it wherever it pop's up.

Annother thing that doesent help here, is that Hollywood has forced a totally scewed idea about what a gun is onto people, if you ask most people about what happens when someone is shot, they will answer "they die", well yeah, that posibillity is indeed there....13% of the time, the remaining 87% of the time, they just get hurt.
Spearing someone with a broad sword is more likely to kill them then shooting them with an AK-47, especially in todays civilian society, where an ambulence can be on the scene in 20 minutes, in war things a different, but if you get shot on the street, theres a 87% chance that you will live, thouse are great odd's, but most people still think all weapons are "one shot, one kill".
 
Originally posted by jaeg

And striderteen, reducing ones high-level beliefs to a function of their character is just asinine. That's the type of thing that makes arguments personal and ineffective. I'd prefer it if you'd refrain from such things in the future, but that's just my opinion.

Being misguided is not a function of one's character. It's a matter of having beliefs that are both sincerely held and wrong. I did not mean that as a personal attack on anyone, and if anyone felt offended by my choice of words, I apologize for that.
 

Zundfolge

New Member
Dec 13, 1999
5,703
0
0
54
USA
striderteen is correct, the majority of supporters of gun control are just misinformed...this is not a character flaw unless once you see the truth you maintain your position.

It's easy to see how people can be so duped by the gun control advocacy because the mainstream media are willing accomplices in spreading their lies.

He does forget one of the biggest groups of gun control supporters though; The Partisans.

The Partisans are Democrats and/or liberals who support gun control because they are locked in mortal combat with the Republicans/conservitives/Libertarians (who are all anti-gun control). Generally these people have no real opinion on gun control one way or the other, but their deep-seated hatred of conservatives/Libertarians/Republicans, their hatred of white males (particularly rural white males) and their blind support of the Democrat party keeps them firmly in the gun control camp.
 

jaeg

PopeyeTurbo
Oct 18, 2000
711
0
0
Well, I was going to try to post a counter point here but apparently that'd be futile since the majority here seems to believe that any point I'd make would just be because I hate conservatives/am misinformed/hate rural white males/am arrogant/am just listening to the liberal media/blindly support US Democratic party ideals/am evil/am incapable of "seeing the truth".

Come on guys, can anybody here put aside their blinders and try to understand the oppositions beliefs without dismissing them as misinformed? That's exactly what I did and I was met with this. Has the gun control debate really been reduced to name-calling?

By the way Goat, thank you for civility.
 
Last edited:

perrin98

New Member
Aug 17, 2000
630
0
0
A good friend of mine (i'm 16 years old) has owned several guns since he was very young, and is very responsible with them. He stores his rifles and ammunition in different places, had trigger locks on all of them, and keeps the key in a safe place. He is my nominee for gun education as opposed to gun control. and hey, this follows my general rule of "STUPIDITY BAAAAD, SMART GOOOOOOD". '

Down with soccer moms, up with free thought.
 

DeadeyeDan[ToA]

de oppresso liber
Mar 2, 2000
969
0
0
Tucson, AZ, US
www.clantoa.com
jaeg, I know it sounds bad, but I don't think anybody is trying to call people names. We aren't saying dumb, we're saying misinformed; it's not necessarily their fault, it's mostly the mainstream news media's biased coverage.

My dad is probably the smartest person I know and always has been... even when he used to be "anti-handgun."
 

Zundfolge

New Member
Dec 13, 1999
5,703
0
0
54
USA
Come on guys, can anybody here put aside their blinders and try to understand the oppositions beliefs without dismissing them as misinformed?

I've been involved in the gun control debate for over 15 years.

I've heard every argument for and against gun control, I've read tons of scientific studies on the subject...both for and against.

After years of careful study and consideration I've come to the conclusion that gun control costs more lives then it saves...that gun rights are the ultimate guarantor of the rest of our freedoms and that the gun control movement is run by people who lie and lie and lie.

I don't dismiss the opinions and beliefs of people who agree with gun control because I don't understand them...I dismiss them because I do understand them and have already figured out that they are wrong.

I believe it is good for someone to be open minded when they first enter into a debate, but after a while if you never make up your mind it's not a sign of "enlightenment" it's a sign of wishy washy ness and feeble minded ness.

I have my mind made up, and unless you can pull a new argument our of your ass or something I doubt that you will convince me to change my opinion, or see any opinion that supports gun control as anything less then foolish.


...We aren't saying dumb, we're saying misinformed...
Exactly.
Once upon a time I bet that you believed in Santa Claus (I did). At the time you where misinformed...but eventualy you learned the truth and where open to believeing the truth and now you don't believe in Santa Claus.

You weren't an idiot or retarded for believing in Santa...just misinformed.


Maybe it is you that needs to take his blinders off and not dismiss the pro-gun rights crowd as a bunch of close minded bigots...maybe some of us came to our position for good reasons.

One of the things that annoys me the most about debating gun control is that most of the proponents of gun control will call me close minded and say I'm not "open to new ideas" or I'm "brainwashed by the NRA" because I won't believe their position...yet it is their position that lacks scientific backing.
 
Last edited:

Goat Fucker

No Future!
Aug 18, 2000
2,625
0
0
Denmark
Visit site
Very well worded there Zündy, too well worded, cus now all i can say is a boring "i agree".

And let me take back my "because they are dumb" statement, it was uncalled for, i should have used "misguided" instead, sorry.

But my opinion of "not seeing further than the tip of their noses" still stands, let me give you an example from the real world.

Not so long ago, there was another school shooting, a kid had taken his farthers hunting rifle to school, and was shooting at people in the yard bellow from a roof top.

The media coverage was über dramatic as usuall, including phrases like "he then took a sniper position"...a phrase that is ment to bias the viewer, by making it apear profecional, but all the kid did was lay on his stomache, and ofcourse, the word "assault weapon" came up...it was a hunting rifle, bolt-lock aswell, an untruthfull statement at best. The whole cverage was one big propaganda fest.

Now people see this, and what do they think? well meny will think along the lines of "That is horrible! that kid should never have had that weapon!", but you know what? that is just short sightedness.

If someone is so far out that he is willing to kill his classmates, nothing in this world is going to stop him, no amount of trigger locks or locked cabinets will hinder him, locks are easilly drilled out, and if the weapon wassent in the house allready, he would have gotten one from the street, you cannot stop people from doing this, and it will happen again no matter what laws you pass.

The real chrisis here is that a whole school full of unarmed kids where beeing shot at, and no-one was able to shoot back.

You want a good solution to stop school shootings? well you wont get it trough gun-controll, all that acomplishes is making the victims lifes even more misserable, armed and trained teachers, however, can stop an attacker dead in his tracks before too meny get hurt.

People see the tragedy that someone was shot, and they blame it on the gun, what they do not see, is that someone was shot because they did not have guns themselves, how far do you think this kid would have come if students could carry arms? chances are he wouldent even dare pull off this stunt in the first place, schools are the perfect target ONLY because it is a 100% gun free zone, only someone with ill intent ever has one there, this means ALL victims will be sitting ducks.

But people refuse to see that, they want to blame the gun, because it is easy, but the one that should be blamed is the attacker, and the people who diddent act on any prior distress calls from him, it takes a long time to buildt that much hatred, there would have been sighns, it could have been prevented.
Doing nothing to stop it is just as much a crime as comitting the act.

Would a "gun free" society have stoped this from happening? no, because no society is "gun free", all it acomplished was that people got shot, but couldent shoot back.
 

Zundfolge

New Member
Dec 13, 1999
5,703
0
0
54
USA
If someone is so far out that he is willing to kill his classmates, nothing in this world is going to stop him...

In the Columbine shooting, those two guys overwhelmingly relied on their guns and didn't use but a small fraction of the pipe bombs they had made...they would probably have killed many more people if they had just used their bombs and left the guns at home.

You can't stop the evil people by restricting the good people.
 

jaeg

PopeyeTurbo
Oct 18, 2000
711
0
0
Okay then....tell me what the benefits of an armed population are.
 

DeadeyeDan[ToA]

de oppresso liber
Mar 2, 2000
969
0
0
Tucson, AZ, US
www.clantoa.com
Haven't we been doing that? Oh well, just take one hard look at Switzerland. The power rests in the hands of the people, making government opression next to impossible, and the crime rates are among the lowest in the world.
 

Zundfolge

New Member
Dec 13, 1999
5,703
0
0
54
USA
So it's about putting power in "the hands of the people"?


DING DING DING DING DING

Give this man a cigar! :)


Now I think you've got it. Although I would word it more like "it's about keeping power in the hands of the people".



Ultimately gun rights are what reinforce all our other rights because it leaves us with the power to overthrow a corrupt government (which the US gov. is quickly heading toward).

"And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that the people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants"
--Thomas Jefferson in a letter to William S. Smith in 1787. Taken from Jefferson, On Democracy p. 20, S. Padover ed., 1939
 

Goat Fucker

No Future!
Aug 18, 2000
2,625
0
0
Denmark
Visit site
Its about meny meny things.

Its about right and capabillity to selfdefence, the defence of familly, and of posetions, and even country.
Its about freedom from opretion.
Its about allowing the people to take actions for themselves, but allso about keeping them acountable for them.
Its about equillity.
Its about overall safety.
Its about etc etc etc

Its about a better world, period.
 

MadWoffen

Soon! ©
May 27, 2001
2,593
2
38
53
Belgium
www.bifff.net
Originally posted by DeadeyeDan[ToA]
Haven't we been doing that? Oh well, just take one hard look at Switzerland. The power rests in the hands of the people, making government opression next to impossible, and the crime rates are among the lowest in the world.


I didn't read all the thread but here, you are wrong. Switzerland has one of the toughest gun control I know. They are armed because each civilian has to do a military duty. He is therefore trained to use his gun. It is not the same as a total gun-control free policy. When you enter the army, you have a check-up, if you are insane, you are revoked. Funny that you praise this system... :p
 
Originally posted by jaeg
Well, I was going to try to post a counter point here but apparently that'd be futile since the majority here seems to believe that any point I'd make would just be because I hate conservatives/am misinformed/hate rural white males/am arrogant/am just listening to the liberal media/blindly support US Democratic party ideals/am evil/am incapable of "seeing the truth".

Come on guys, can anybody here put aside their blinders and try to understand the oppositions beliefs without dismissing them as misinformed? That's exactly what I did and I was met with this. Has the gun control debate really been reduced to name-calling?

By the way Goat, thank you for civility.

Believing you are misinformed simply means I think you're wrong; I'll still listen to you as objectively as I can.
 

DamienW

I'm no stranger to sarcasm, sir
Feb 4, 2001
1,678
0
0
Bayonne, France
Funny that you praise this system

They praise it because it promotes responsible ownage of guns, not one of the two extremes : "Gun control" or "Far-West"... So their argument is extremely valid. Actually, it is the one that made me change my mind when Zund used it a while ago ....
 

MadWoffen

Soon! ©
May 27, 2001
2,593
2
38
53
Belgium
www.bifff.net
Originally posted by STW Max Sterling


They praise it because it promotes responsible ownage of guns, not one of the two extremes : "Gun control" or "Far-West"... So their argument is extremely valid. Actually, it is the one that made me change my mind when Zund used it a while ago ....

Yes but how will you implement a responsible ownage without a minimum of control ? See my answer to DeadEye in this thread. The ppl I met until now want a total free of gun-control policy. I disagree because ppl will start to buy guns and won't pay attention to the responsability it involves. Check my passage about parallelism between diving and gunning. No need to be monitored directly by the gvt.
http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=90902&pagenumber=2
 

DamienW

I'm no stranger to sarcasm, sir
Feb 4, 2001
1,678
0
0
Bayonne, France
I'm not saying it would easily be implementable ... I just say it changed my opinion a bit. That i'm no longer so radically oppposed.... Maybe with a long process of evolving mentalities ...