Dr Guy Dr Guy

Guns Kill People

And sometimes that is not bad. 

China cannot be mistaken for an open society, or even a tolerant one when it comes to private ownership of guns.  So what's a killer to do?  Make do with a knife.  5 "oficials" were killed by one knife wielding (and that is just the party line) nut case.  One gun would have stopped him after 1, 2 at the most.

But Guns kill, so Guns are bad.  People dont kill, just Guns.  So take guns out of the equation, and no more killing!  Eden on earth!  The best of all worlds!  Paradise!

I guess in this case the nut job wanted to send a few to Shangra La sooner than god did.

But at least guns did not kill anybody.

8,413 views 43 replies
Reply #26 Top

I just want to know what the hell is going to be done about mentally unstable and just plain ignorant people laying their hands on these weapons. 

Reply #27 Top
Say whattt? Seriously? Thats what we never see on tv I guess (i mean the news of course).
End of quote


It has the reputation, but I think most of the cops are honest up there. The smiley face was a winky - as in not really. ;)
Reply #28 Top
The main reason the Chinese government doesn't allow gun ownership is that they know if the citizens were armed they wouldn't remain in power very long.
End of quote


I think that was demonstrated in Beijing not long ago. Does make the gun control advocates envious of the chinese though.
Reply #29 Top
I just want to know what the hell is going to be done about mentally unstable and just plain ignorant people laying their hands on these weapons.
End of quote


All that can be in a free society. Even in a not free one they get them. People with the intention to kill will find a way. The availability of guns is irrelevant as this article demonstrates.
Reply #30 Top
I just want to know what the hell is going to be done about mentally unstable and just plain ignorant people laying their hands on these weapons. 
End of quote


What exactly do you think can be done? Mentally unstable people have been around as long as people have been around. Whether they use a gun, a knife, or a rock, if they are determined to harm someone they will. The problem is when the rights of the majority are restricted in an attempt to prevent that minority from causing harm. That just doesn't make sense.

It would be impossible to identify and lock up every single sociopath and other types of broken people out there. Broken people are a fact of life. That shouldn't mean we treat every single citizen like they are broken too.
Reply #31 Top
The problem is when the rights of the majority are restricted in an attempt to prevent that minority from causing harm
End of quote


This is it in a nutshell, the source of every frigging nanny law on the books (which when viewed with a sane eye to the constitution, are unconstitutional). Just because you (the generic one) are a drooling child and must have your diaper changed daily does not mean I should be treated that way as well. Yet that is what happens and a new nanny law is passed.

Today we have clowns cheering for the fact it is illegal to not wear a safety belt. After all, it is "for our own good". Tomorrow, when they pass a law confiscating your bank account (the new law in Virginia comes close), you will scream. Why? There are plenty of people out there that cannot handle a bank account, so we "all" must be "protected" because of the drooling children.
Reply #32 Top
What about assualt weapons like the AK-47? Why would somebody need one of those unless there a collector or a gang member how wantes to shoot very fast.
Reply #33 Top

We have hunting rifles in our home. They could be used to protect if need be. But I would not be the one using them. I am afraid the kick would knock me on my butt. :LOL:

Reply #34 Top
What about assualt weapons like the AK-47?
End of quote


Fully automatic weapons are illegal already (unless you have a special license) so what is your point exactly? And what the hell does it have to do with this article?
Reply #35 Top
What about assualt weapons like the AK-47?Fully automatic weapons are illegal already (unless you have a special license) so what is your point exactly? And what the hell does it have to do with this article?
End of quote


first, I am talking in the world in genreal. And also arent we talking about gun control and if it is efective?
Reply #36 Top
And also arent we talking about gun control and if it is efective?
End of quote


Which you didn't seem to address at all.
Reply #37 Top
And also arent we talking about gun control and if it is efective?Which you didn't seem to address at all.
End of quote


yeah your right.
Reply #38 Top
yeah your right.
End of quote


Geez, you're no fun at all :LOL:
Reply #39 Top
What about assualt weapons like the AK-47? Why would somebody need one of those unless there a collector or a gang member how wantes to shoot very fast.
End of quote


Fully automatic weapons are already banned. Why worry about semi-automatic weapons when a fully automatic knife in the hand of a lunatic is just as deadly.

But to get to the question behind your question, the NRA feels (and history is on their side in this) that it will not stop with sane restrictions. It starts that way, and then becomes every other justification for nibbling at the right until the right has disappeared. That is how politicians do it. They have already done it with so many other laws and rights that it is no longer a question of "if" but when.

Remember WHOPPER in War Games? "The only way to win the game is to not play".
Reply #40 Top
But I would not be the one using them. I am afraid the kick would knock me on my butt.
End of quote


I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times I have used a gun. I will be the first to admit I am not competant in their use. So I do not own one. But that is my choice, not a law I have to live under.
Reply #41 Top
first, I am talking in the world in genreal.
End of quote


One of the errors of many Americans is to try to extend their nationalistic view to the world. IN some cases that works. But each nation is different, each region is different. America is fairly unique for 2 reasons. We are not a nation state (a term that Leauki uses and is true) and we were not "given" our freedom.

Other countries can try to immitate us, but unless they can resolve those 2 differences, chances are they will not be as successful. Others have been as successful because they have done their own thing without trying to be us, and what works for them is not always what works for everyone else either.
Reply #42 Top
I think guns should be freely available to anyone living outside my zip code. ;)

Seriously, though, I'd rather have a gun for self defense than a sword-sized kitchen knife (it's not that big, but 4 inches is all you need, with good aim, though mine isn't). I think guns should be legal because you should never have to engage an assailant on equal grounds.
Reply #43 Top
I think guns should be freely available to anyone living outside my zip code.
End of quote


Uh,huh. And then some jerk is going to publish that fact and guess who the robbers are going to target?

I would rather live in a zip code that requires all home owners to have a gun, than one who bans them.