- Joined
- Sep 17, 2012
- Messages
- 5,058
- Reaction score
- 1,402
- Location
- East Waboo USA
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
All the above because all of them cause issues.
Except Adam might have to do his dirty work with a cumbersome Bowie knife.
No, a broad sword, long sword, katana, dai Katana, etc would trump a Bowie Knife. When I visited the Philippines, they made all kinds of knifes and swords from old automobile leaf springs, not complicated to do. The curvature and shape of a Bowie would actually make it harder to make. True, the are more readily available. And then you have all kinds of bows.
No, even without the Chinese invention of gun powder (assuming someone else didn't invent it), we would still have lots of ways to kill each other.
A well trained and practiced swordsman can probably actually kill/injure more people per minute than most people can with a gun, even with a semi-auto. He just has to get closer is all and he doesn't have to stop and reload. Anyone up for Kendo classes?
Interesting that in our society we have the term "Axe-Murderer" but not "gun-murderer". hmm.
Vote now-I am hearing lots of lefties blaming the NRA rather than the killers
How can you ask who is most responsible and then allow for multiple votes? Most means more than half. Only one choice can be MOST.
All of the above and then some.
A culture that glorifies gun violence will spawn gun violence.
several senior LEOs suggested the best thing to do is not give these massacres or their perpetrators massive coverage because that inspires others. Of course when many in the media hate the NRA and gun rights, that advice will fall on deaf ears
several senior LEOs suggested the best thing to do is not give these massacres or their perpetrators massive coverage because that inspires others. Of course when many in the media hate the NRA and gun rights, that advice will fall on deaf ears
Yeah...I don't generally give a crap what law enforcement officers have to say because I've met enough corrupt ones to know their opinion isn't worth much more than any other individuals.
That said, the media does play a huge role, but it goes full circle because the media is simply a business providing its consumers with what they want. Trying to blame the media for how people use what is reported is no different than blaming gun manufactures for how guns are used.
several senior LEOs suggested the best thing to do is not give these massacres or their perpetrators massive coverage because that inspires others. Of course when many in the media hate the NRA and gun rights, that advice will fall on deaf ears
its a chicken or the egg issue with the media and "what the public wants
an unreasonable expectation
like refusing to broadcast news of 9/11 for fear it might be imitated
No, it's always what the public wants. The public wants more guns then gun manufacturers will make more guns. The public wants more movies, TV shows, news reporting, and video games featuring gun violence then that is what the media will provide. It is simple economics. The public provides the demand and the businesses provide the supply. All you are doing is trying to blame the media the same way others try to blame the gun manufacturers. The real problem is with the public. Why do we have a public that has such an insatiable thirst for guns and violence? When are we going to have enough?
you can want to own guns and not want violence.
A gun is a weapon. It is, by its very nature, an instrument of violence. If you want one, then you want if for its capacity to inflict violence. Whether it is for hunting or defense, you own it for its ability to create violence if needed. It is naive to assume that a person would want a gun for any other reason.
you are lying now.
you obviously are clueless about the thousands of children who are in NRA or 4H rifle clubs or HS and college varsity rifle teams.
so I am considering your posts to be based on ignorance or just outright dishonest. I spent a summer as a Resident Athlete at the USO training center preparing for the (later cancelled by jimmy carter) 1980 games as a shooter. your moronic claim about why I had a perazzi shotgun is just that-moronic
The fact that you got that offended by the implication should probably tell you something.
You may buy a gun to use as a paperweight but that doesn't change what it is. How you use your gun doesn't change its capacity to inflict violence or kill. No matter how badly you want to pretend it isn't true, a gun is a WEAPON.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?