Which next gen console are you guys getting, Ps4 or XboxOne?
I will probably get the PS4 as I like some of the games they've showed off, plus there's the hope…See More
The Spill Movie Community
If it's crap ... We'll tell you
Follow Spill!
Latest Activity
The Loading Bar Appreciation and Remembrence Society
For The Loading Bar: Gone but not forgotten.A place for Ladyboy Tequila Slaves and Cocaine…See More
T-Wilk posted a status"good,hamgover part 3 onlymade 11 million on Thursday which way less than ,part 2 made on a Thursday (31million) in 2011"
Leo Alexander posted a status"Jason, Jeff, Brian Phoenix Fund http://ning.it/12Aaiq5 DONATE AS MUCH AS YOU CAN FOR OUR FALLEN HEROES OF REMOTE VIEWING/LOADING BAR"
Music
Your stance on gun control?
I figured now is as good a time as any to bring this up. Now that it's a main point in the election.
Views: 1695
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Gift of the Magi on -
Maybe he wants YOU to check it out?
-
Permalink Reply by MDS on -
Uh, how is more regulation going to change anything? I mean the last 2 that have happened (The theater-shooting, and the temple-shooting) were both done by people who had shown NO SIGNS of mental issues until AFTER they had purchased their weapons.
Plus, the temple-shooting appears to be done for "racial reasons" more than anything else. How do you "regulate and control" a mind-set like that? No matter what laws you pass, or laws you enforce, or even if there were NO firearms.... racist motivated attacks are still going to happen.
The most you can do is start to pass laws on ammunition or total number of weapons you can own. But even that is going to be hard to enforce, because the current laws regarding ammunition and numbers are not being enforced as it is.
-
Permalink Reply by Gabriel on -
I never said that racist motivated attacks wouldn't happen...I just said I would like to see more regulation and control. I'd rather make an attempt to promote legislation that would regulate and control guns than just sit back and say it's not going to work. The current system we have sure isn't doing anything, so why not make an attempt for more regulation? The system's already broken enough as it is.
-
Permalink Reply by MDS on
-
Because the only people that would follow those new regulations are the ones who follow the law and are sane.
Because if someone is a criminal, you think they give 2 shits what "new regulation" is in place? They are CRIMINALS. Even if they haven't broken a single law their entire life, the split second they attempt to side-step those regulations they become criminals. You think the guy who is going to turn his single-fire rifle into a semi-auto or fully-auto by modifying it gives a DAMN about what new laws are in place to prevent him from "legally owning" that weapon? Fuck no.
And therein really is the main issue with the whole "gun control" debate. Every law, every regulation, every restriction, every guideline that is put into place... it's only the LAW-MINDING people that are effected. People who are going to go ahead and break the laws anyway.... like criminals and people who go crazy (either planned attacks or racist-based attacks) are the ones who don't give a shit about doing everything "legally".
The "Hollywood Bank Shootout" in LA shows the point exactly. Police (Who are required to enforce the gun-laws) are the example of the "legal" gun owners... the criminals (who don't care about the laws) show why putting "more restrictions" in place, because they don't give a shit about the laws anyway.
-
Permalink Reply by Dirac on -
That would be a valid point, if the suspects in that shooting had acquired their weapons through illegal means. Which they didn't. The fact that they modified weapons illegally is irrelevant to the issue of whether or not such weapons should be sold in the first place.
That said, I have no problem with people owning guns; I was taught firearm safety and shooting technique before I was ten years old (my father had the bright idea to let me shoot his .44 magnum revolver. Almost gave myself a concussion). But I can't really argue against people calling for AR-15s and other civilian models of assault rifles to be banned, since I've yet to hear a convincing argument for why citizens need access to them. I don't openly support such legislation, because I think they're a blast to shoot, but I'm not necessarily against it, either.
-
Permalink Reply by Woosp Vision on -
one for MDS
-
Permalink Reply by MDS on
-
ROFL.. Yep, pretty much sums it up right there. 84,999,989 legal firearm owners didn't shoot a single person all day. =)
And you know, it's those damn 11 assholes that has to ruin it for all the others. =)
-
Permalink Reply by Einrick Quiznos on -
Excellent. I've been meaning to get rid of that son of a bitch. Once he's gone, people will truly learn to fear the HEART-DISEASE-BOSS. You plebes will cower to my Obese missiles, Slurpee slaps, Caloric kicks, and Diabetes death rays...and that's IF you can get past Mr. Fatal-Alchohol-related-accidents-Boss...
-
Permalink Reply by mohammed albanai on -
i have been to many third world countries and i would say, having easy access to guns and ammunition is usually a sign of a third world country (a particularly bad one at that). some might argue that many people need guns for protection, i would say if you live in a place where you need a weapon to defend yourself, well then the place you come from must suck ass
© 2013 Created by The Spill Crew.
