(June 14, 2016 at 12:25 am)Maelstrom Wrote: The only people who should have guns are the ones in the military.

I honestly believe that problems only progressed due to the fact that the Supreme Court made the erroneous decision that any fucking idiot could own a gun.

If the only people who should have guns are the ones in the military how would the colonists have ever successfully revolted against the English?

Didn't Saddam allow common Iraqis to own guns?

https://www.quora.com/How-were-gun-laws-...on-in-2003

(June 13, 2016 at 6:34 pm)paulpablo Wrote:

(June 12, 2016 at 11:01 pm)dyresand Wrote: Huggy the issue here is the fact that there is terrible gun regulation and having better gun regulation would have prevented this.

Not necessarily.  It prevented nothing in Paris or Brussels.  Both countries have quite strict gun regulation.

Of course there's no mention that Paris, unlike most US mass killings wasn't a failure of gun control policy but of the Belgian (especially) and French intelligence and security services. Hence the highly visible overkill at Euro 2016.

The more balanced articles I have seen, seem to indicate, that statistics don't really help either side.

http://www.mintpressnews.com/the-facts-t...ol/207152/

It's a social problem, not a gun problem.   Having guns, may prevent some crimes, but increase others.   Gun bans may have a short decrease in murders, and then people figure out, that there are other ways to kill people.  It's a social problem.   I also don't think that telling people that there is no real right or wrong, or that they can decide their own right and wrong, and then being surprised when they behave immorally is all that intelligent.

(June 14, 2016 at 1:22 am)Marsellus Wallace Wrote: I think my approach is becoming more suitable everyday.

KILL ALL THE MUSLIMZZZZ, AND NUKE THAT FUCKING BLACK BOX IN MECCA.

You keep telling yourself that.

(June 14, 2016 at 4:19 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:

(June 14, 2016 at 12:25 am)Maelstrom Wrote: The only people who should have guns are the ones in the military.

I honestly believe that problems only progressed due to the fact that the Supreme Court made the erroneous decision that any fucking idiot could own a gun.

If the only people who should have guns are the ones in the military how would the colonists have ever successfully revolted against the English?

Didn't Saddam allow common Iraqis to own guns?

https://www.quora.com/How-were-gun-laws-...on-in-2003

There is a bullshit myth that one party states or despots dont allow weapons. Depending on location and point in history it is common for even those states only to extend weapons rights to party loyalists. The Allies after WW1 put heavy restrictions on Germany, it was Hitler who relaxed gun laws but only for nationalist and part loyalists. There was no outright ban on weapon by Hitler.

And we see the same rise in paranoia by right wing gun owners who have refused to sell to Obama supporters. These fucking hypocrites claim the 2nd amendment applies to everyone, but pull that bullshit. There has never been a party or religious oath to own a firearm. 

This proves to me for the worshipers that this has never been about "the right to bear arms" and everything to do with being asshole crybabies who refuse to accept that we have a gun death crisis.

(June 14, 2016 at 12:25 am)Maelstrom Wrote: The only people who should have guns are the ones in the military.

Why should the military have guns?

(June 14, 2016 at 1:22 am)Marsellus Wallace Wrote: I think my approach is becoming more suitable everyday.

KILL ALL THE MUSLIMZZZZ, AND NUKE THAT FUCKING BLACK BOX IN MECCA.

No.

Just.

No.

(June 14, 2016 at 8:50 am)KUSA Wrote:

(June 14, 2016 at 12:25 am)Maelstrom Wrote: The only people who should have guns are the ones in the military.

Why should the military have guns?

They seem to be the only responsible ones at this point.

(June 14, 2016 at 8:50 am)KUSA Wrote:

(June 14, 2016 at 12:25 am)Maelstrom Wrote: The only people who should have guns are the ones in the military.

Why should the military have guns?

That has to be the dumbest fucking question I have ever heard.

The evolutionary reality is that our species has always formed groups, and has always competed over resources. It would be awesome if no nation on the planet had a military or weapons. But because our species sets up artificial construct in the form of political and religious and economic ideologies, humans will compete over those resources with weapons. 

It is an unfortunate reality in our species, yes I do want a military to protect me from theocracies like Iran and despots like Kim Jong Un. A military is what defeated the monster Hitler.

The problem has always been our species lack of understanding of our local tribalism. We defend what is local. And since I don't see that changing anytime soon, damned right I want a military. Not because we should be using it as a default, but because there are political and religious rivals who would run us over if we didn't have one.

If you want to seek to reduce the need to use military, then what we should do is address global corporatism which every nation invests in and gets rich off of banks, oil and weapons by using political, economic and religious ideology to divide our species.