+- Sinisterly (https://sinister.ly)
+-- Forum: General (https://sinister.ly/Forum-General)
+--- Forum: World News (https://sinister.ly/Forum-World-News)
+--- Thread: Child kills family, inspiration from movie. (/Thread-Child-kills-family-inspiration-from-movie)
RE: Child kills family, inspiration from movie. - Marvie - 01-31-2013
(01-30-2013, 11:59 PM)The Anarchist Wrote:I'm beginning to think of you as some type of genius. Haha. Everything you say is like exactly on par and what I would like to hear. I'd even say most of it.(01-30-2013, 05:35 AM)w00t Wrote: Murder is always bad.
Sex is not always bad.
Yet murder is accepted as a public thing, but sex is not?
Annnnnd onto the gun debate, times have changed. There's not any privately owned warships, and close to no privately owned warplanes. Even if you had an M4, it won't be shooting down a stealth bomber dropping JDAMs. If a people wanted to revolt, they would need the military's backing, their small arms will not be of any use.
Sex never happens in public, murder does. Are you suggesting murder should happen in private and we all have sex in the street? I guess that might be one way to look at things, but a lot of people would agree sex is a very private thing that should remain in the bedroom. As for guns, I guarantee you that my city's gun-owners alone would be able to take over a small province. Maybe we wouldn't be able to stand against a corrupt government in America, but we'd at least have a fighting chance. You might be willing to give up your fighting chance, but a lot of Americans aren't.
America was founded upon secession and guns. The founding fathers wanted to be sure we had these guns, so that we would be able to secede if necessary. The constitution defends this right and now people are trying to bend the meaning. Back then, a citizen's weaponry was on-par with military's, and that was why citizens were able to stand a chance against the military of Britain. Now, our weapons may not be on-par with the military's today, but Americans would still like a chance. The founding fathers wanted us to have weaponry on-par with the governments, but because of technological advancement that's not possible.
"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." - George Washington
But yes, this is what Hitler did to the Jews as well.
RE: Child kills family, inspiration from movie. - w00t - 01-31-2013
I'm not saying drop your guns, I'm saying stop trying to have the same guns the army has. You don't need a fully automatic assault rifle, for insurgency or for day-to-day use(personal protection, hunting).
The Hitler argument never makes sense. Hitler also built a giant freeway using government money, should we ban that? Should we ban all things that can be made into lethal gas because Hitler used them?
RE: Child kills family, inspiration from movie. - Kinanizer - 01-31-2013
(01-31-2013, 05:32 AM)w00t Wrote: I'm not saying drop your guns, I'm saying stop trying to have the same guns the army has. You don't need a fully automatic assault rifle, for insurgency or for day-to-day use(personal protection, hunting).
The Hitler argument never makes sense. Hitler also built a giant freeway using government money, should we ban that? Should we ban all things that can be made into lethal gas because Hitler used them?
I think this is the first time I completely agree with w00t.
RE: Child kills family, inspiration from movie. - Oni - 01-31-2013
(01-31-2013, 05:32 AM)w00t Wrote: I'm not saying drop your guns, I'm saying stop trying to have the same guns the army has. You don't need a fully automatic assault rifle, for insurgency or for day-to-day use(personal protection, hunting).
The Hitler argument never makes sense. Hitler also built a giant freeway using government money, should we ban that? Should we ban all things that can be made into lethal gas because Hitler used them?
My argument is that the constitution defends our right to guns equivalent of the military's. However, the founding fathers may not have had technological advancements in mind when they wrote the constitution. Regardless, a ban won't happen anytime soon, and if one does I'll be filing a police report stating that my guns were all conveniently stolen.
RE: Child kills family, inspiration from movie. - Kinanizer - 01-31-2013
(01-31-2013, 06:11 AM)The Anarchist Wrote:(01-31-2013, 05:32 AM)w00t Wrote: I'm not saying drop your guns, I'm saying stop trying to have the same guns the army has. You don't need a fully automatic assault rifle, for insurgency or for day-to-day use(personal protection, hunting).
The Hitler argument never makes sense. Hitler also built a giant freeway using government money, should we ban that? Should we ban all things that can be made into lethal gas because Hitler used them?
My argument is that the constitution defends our right to guns equivalent of the military's. However, the founding fathers may not have had technological advancements in mind when they wrote the constitution. Regardless, a ban won't happen anytime soon, and if one does I'll be filing a police report stating that my guns were all conveniently stolen.
Or you could join me in taking over the government, we could conquer a whole province together!
Child kills family, inspiration from movie. - Fury - 01-31-2013
(01-31-2013, 12:24 AM)w00t Wrote: You wouldn't have a fighting chance. You might be able to take over a whole province, but a few warships and a B2 would ruin the entire province.
I'm not trying to fight a damn war. I just want to hunt and defend my wife an daughter if someone tries to intrude. It happens everyday.
They want to limit clips to 10 rounds. I can tell you my wife is a terrible shot. Bullshit.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RE: Child kills family, inspiration from movie. - w00t - 01-31-2013
(01-31-2013, 08:08 PM)Fury Wrote:(01-31-2013, 12:24 AM)w00t Wrote: You wouldn't have a fighting chance. You might be able to take over a whole province, but a few warships and a B2 would ruin the entire province.
I'm not trying to fight a damn war. I just want to hunt and defend my wife an daughter if someone tries to intrude. It happens everyday.
They want to limit clips to 10 rounds. I can tell you my wife is a terrible shot. Bullshit.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Then an automatic gun surely wouldn't help, as they're a bitch to aim, especially with no experience. Not to mention giving guns to people that can't aim sufficiently to hit a target is just asking for people getting caught in crossfire.
You also don't need more than 10 rounds, really. Even if you're completely panicked and just jerking the trigger, at least two rounds will hit your target if you have any experience with a gun.
RE: Child kills family, inspiration from movie. - Oni - 01-31-2013
(01-31-2013, 09:28 PM)w00t Wrote:(01-31-2013, 08:08 PM)Fury Wrote:(01-31-2013, 12:24 AM)w00t Wrote: You wouldn't have a fighting chance. You might be able to take over a whole province, but a few warships and a B2 would ruin the entire province.
I'm not trying to fight a damn war. I just want to hunt and defend my wife an daughter if someone tries to intrude. It happens everyday.
They want to limit clips to 10 rounds. I can tell you my wife is a terrible shot. Bullshit.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Then an automatic gun surely wouldn't help, as they're a bitch to aim, especially with no experience. Not to mention giving guns to people that can't aim sufficiently to hit a target is just asking for people getting caught in crossfire.
You also don't need more than 10 rounds, really. Even if you're completely panicked and just jerking the trigger, at least two rounds will hit your target if you have any experience with a gun.
Disregard the alarmingly stupid YouTube title, as I found the video while watching a parody and it just happened to remind me of this post. I tend to side with Ventura's argument and as I said, the 2nd amendment wasn't to protect hunters and farmers but was to provide a means of secession and protection if and when necessary. Sure, resistance might be futile in such an event, but that's no reason to take away military-grade weapons. Firearms (not necessarily the automatic ones) serve a legitimate purpose and provide protection during the 20-30 minutes it takes the cops to arrive. Keep in mind, in one of the noted incidents a teenager managed to stop armed robbers and defend his little sister - with an assault rifle. Whenever I hear British people make your argument, it truly saddens me. Not because you disagree with me, but because you have willingly given up a small amount of freedom, for a small amount of security. Like Ventura says, it's like banning cars because people have poor judgement and accidentally kill others while driving them. Additionally, I'd like to remind you that very few (if any) murders were committed by licensed automatic owners (that includes FFL dealers and Form-4 transferees).
“Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” - Benjamin Franklin
RE: Child kills family, inspiration from movie. - w00t - 01-31-2013
I'm not saying guns should be outright banned, they aren't in the UK either. Sure, you can defend yourself with an automatic rifle, but you can defend yourself the same with a semiautomatic 9mm pistol.
RE: Child kills family, inspiration from movie. - Phytrix - 01-31-2013
That's pretty sick, but it happens I suppose. Just because one person loses it because of one movie doesn't mean violence or gore in movies provoke this kind of behaviour commonly or excessively.