Non-muslim terriorist kills 84 in Norway.

[Rhythm]

Guns are easier to use, but nowhere near as lethal as a well built, well placed, well timed explosive. Where was the gun nut with his concealed carry that could've shot this asshole in the face?

[Violet Lilly Blossom]

Toxins are particularly effective at wiping out masses of humans. As a bonus: it is harder to trace who did it, and it acts subtly enough it isn't readily apparent what happened.

Next I recommend is delayed bombs. The problem with these is they make a loud sound a huge hole in a couple things... making it readily apparent what happened. Reccomend toxic layer on top of this.

Next is knife. And not talking a little pocket knife here... we're talking a shiv. And this is better combined with a toxin of some sort.

Guns you can't even intoxicate. Loud. And not delayable. Only resort to in worst case scenarios... and don't fuck about with it: Shoot and run. Run fast. Hiding in a crowd is helpful in cities... forests are dangerous ground against helicopters and dogs and what have you. Never let there be a witness in the forrest.

...

I really do like wholesale pernicious slaughter by various toxins when I decide to annihilate people randomly.

---

(26th July 2011 05:43)Rhythm Wrote:  Guns are easier to use, but nowhere near as lethal as a well built, well placed, well timed explosive. Where was the gun nut with his concealed carry that could've shot this asshole in the face?

Guns are usually for smalltime thugs and self-defense. Often criminals who don't have a fucking clue what they are doing. Go pro or go broke... go prepared or go home.

---

(26th July 2011 05:38)Minimalist Wrote:  He did use a bomb....got 1/10th of what he did with the gun. Japanese nuts set off five sarin gas devices in the Tokyo subway and killed 13. Guns are very good at what they do.

Agreed.

[Rhythm]

Might also consider that he probably didn't make his gun, his bomb, on the other hand....well. Chalk the difference in death toll up to a manufacturing error.

Sae, my unit motto "In Omnia Paratus"

[Shell B]

(26th July 2011 05:38)Minimalist Wrote:  He did use a bomb....got 1/10th of what he did with the gun. Japanese nuts set off five sarin gas devices in the Tokyo subway and killed 13. Guns are very good at what they do.

So aren't bombs and poison if you use them right. I'm not arguing that guns aren't dangerous. I am arguing that you can kill a lot of people without them. You can't say that bombs have never killed a great deal more people than this man did with a gun. Shit, two airplanes aimed at a couple of buildings are apparently weapons as well. I simply find it illogical to vilify an object when it is harmless without stupidity or evil involved, especially when there are other equally dangerous weapons out there.

[Minimalist]

He chose his weapons, Shel. He may be crazy but he understood fully what tools to use for the job.

[Shell B]

(26th July 2011 06:18)Minimalist Wrote:  He chose his weapons, Shel. He may be crazy but he understood fully what tools to use for the job.

And if guns did not exist, he would have chosen something else. That is the core of my belief on the subject, not to mention the importance of actually upholding the Constitution rather than interpreting it like the Bible.

[Minimalist]

Quote:That is the core of my belief on the subject, not to mention the importance of actually upholding the Constitution

I doubt that he is a member of a well-regulated militia.

Quote:A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.[

[Shell B]

(26th July 2011 07:13)Minimalist Wrote:  

Quote:That is the core of my belief on the subject, not to mention the importance of actually upholding the Constitution

I doubt that he is a member of a well-regulated militia.

Quote:A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.[

Min, I think you know that I was speaking of the issue in general, not for this specific case, considering I mentioned our Constitution.

He still would have chosen another weapon.

[Rhythm]

That would be a provision I'd love to see enacted by the letter. Gun owners (if they chose to be so) joining an auxilary militia (unpaid of course), taking some basic weapon safety and accuracy drills. A well regulated militia sounds fantastic in that context.

Wheres the damned politician pushing that agenda as "gun reform", instead of banning weapons that "look scary". Handguns are directly descended from weapons designed to facilitate crime or enforce monarchies from the back of a horse..lol. More anti-handgun laws and less rifle laws are where it's at.

[Judas BentHer]

Lawyer: Norway terror suspect will never walk free
By BJOERN H. AMLAND - Associated Press, KARL RITTER - Associated Press

As far as comments for more anti-gun laws, that's perfectly fine. Move to a country where you find those and make yourself right at home. However, don't expect America to go that route. Our militias, our armed citizens, are what whipped the ass of the British that thought they'd take this country as their own. And the French too. Reading the second amendment would do foreigners a great service. As well as the ignorant pacifist American as well. The language is clear. The rights of a well regulated militia and the people, shall not be infringed. An inalienable right. For which there is room for discussion, but there is no debate.