NATION

PASSWORD

10 dead in Oregon College Shooting

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Alyakia
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18422
Founded: Jul 12, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Alyakia » Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:59 am

Soldati senza confini wrote:
BK117B2 wrote:
I agree, your straw man is very unreasonable.

That brings up the question: why bother creating it then?


Your argument that it is a punishment is quite unreasonable.

Trying to minimize the ownership of guns so that some idiot doesn't get their hands on a gun is hardly comparable to putting innocent people at risk.


no you don't get it. despite arguing it is a punishment earlier in the thread he is actually now just bringing up a completely unrelated question about punishment that has nothing to do with the conservation or thread at hand that we are just avoiding.
pro: good
anti: bad

The UK and EU are Better Together

"Margaret Thatcher showed the world that women are not too soft or the weaker sex, and can be as heartless, horrible, and amoral as any male politician."

User avatar
Spirit of Hope
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12103
Founded: Feb 21, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Spirit of Hope » Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:59 am

Soldati senza confini wrote:
Spirit of Hope wrote:
I would like to point out to legally carry a gun on a Texas university you have to have a concealed carry permit, and that permit requires you pass a shooting test, a written test, fingerprinting, and a back ground check. So it isn't just anyone wondering around with a gun.


I would like to point out that I don't know if your emotions are going to run high, pull out your weapon, and shoot me.


How often does that happen? Do you have any source that says that allowing concealed carry has demonstrably increased the number of homicides?

So I don't know if I am ever going to be safe with some idiot teenager or early-20s carrying on campus. And I wouldn't like to carry a gun in campus because I know I run on the same risks of my emotions running high and pulling out my weapon by mistake.


You have to be 21 to get a Texas concealed carry permit. And do your emotions honestly get so out of control that you may attempt to use deadly force on another person? Mine don't, and neither do the emotions of every teenage and early 20's person I know.
Fact Book.
Helpful hints on combat vehicle terminology.

Imperializt Russia wrote:Support biblical marriage! One SoH and as many wives and sex slaves as he can afford!

User avatar
Soldati Senza Confini
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 86050
Founded: Mar 11, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Soldati Senza Confini » Fri Oct 02, 2015 8:59 am

Spirit of Hope wrote:
The Republic of Pantalleria wrote:Question is, why carry a gun around you at all times? What's gonna happen a sudden Mexican invasion? I don't get the point.


Security of mind. Yes, most people are never going to need it, but I'm the type of person who has stockpiled a years worth of food and water in case of an emergency. Plus there are some people who have specific reason to feel afraid.


I'd like to point out that I have never had to carry a gun to get out of my house and I feel relatively safe knowing people don't carry their guns around in places I happen to frequent.
Soldati senza confini: Better than an iPod in shuffle more with 20,000 songs.
Tekania wrote:Welcome to NSG, where informed opinions get to bump-heads with ignorant ideology under the pretense of an equal footing.

"When it’s a choice of putting food on the table, or thinking about your morals, it’s easier to say you’d think about your morals, but only if you’ve never faced that decision." - Anastasia Richardson

Current Goal: Flesh out nation factbook.

User avatar
Eastern Equestria
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7719
Founded: Feb 17, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Eastern Equestria » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:00 am

Inguala wrote:It's a failure of the US as a country that people feel so in fear of their surroundings that a gun is not simply considered a luxury item by many but a necessity to ensure their safety. The entire nation should see that as an embarrassment.


The entire nation doesn't need to because the conditions that allow for such an environment aren't consistent throughout it.

User avatar
BK117B2
Minister
 
Posts: 2090
Founded: May 14, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby BK117B2 » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:00 am

Alyakia wrote:
BK117B2 wrote:
My question is a general one about punishment. No specific punishment was ever mentioned.

Your response was to avoid the question...which you're still doing.

The only way you could honesty argue "it's not a punishment" without there ever being an it in the first place is if you believe that there is no such thing as punishment.


yeah i edited my response to that in. i know exactly where you are going with it so i'm refusing to treat it is a general question, because it's not and you damn well know it isn't.

you expect me to say no so you can go "what about guns" and now you're going on a tangent about me refusing to answer the question because i can't be arsed going through these hoops.

"We should not ban firearms. Person A's decision to do something bad does not justify violating the rights of Person B."

you're not randomly bringing up a philosophical conversation about punishment in a gun thread


No, I'm bringing up the general, since a frame of reference is needed before being able to be clear on specifics.

You have adequately demonstrated through your avoidance and attempts to mislead that you are not comfortable sharing your position.

User avatar
Inguala
Civil Servant
 
Posts: 6
Founded: Oct 02, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Inguala » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:01 am

Eastern Equestria wrote:
Inguala wrote:It's a failure of the US as a country that people feel so in fear of their surroundings that a gun is not simply considered a luxury item by many but a necessity to ensure their safety. The entire nation should see that as an embarrassment.


The entire nation doesn't need to because the conditions that allow for such an environment aren't consistent throughout it.


Are you not the UNITED states of America? Is one of the basic premises of said nation that you come together in times of need to support one another and to better the nation as a whole?

Ach sure I can understand the basic human need to pull the old "Nu uh I don't have responsibility for this i'll just be over here looking the other way" schtick.

User avatar
Soldati Senza Confini
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 86050
Founded: Mar 11, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Soldati Senza Confini » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:02 am

Spirit of Hope wrote:
Soldati senza confini wrote:
I would like to point out that I don't know if your emotions are going to run high, pull out your weapon, and shoot me.


How often does that happen? Do you have any source that says that allowing concealed carry has demonstrably increased the number of homicides?

So I don't know if I am ever going to be safe with some idiot teenager or early-20s carrying on campus. And I wouldn't like to carry a gun in campus because I know I run on the same risks of my emotions running high and pulling out my weapon by mistake.


You have to be 21 to get a Texas concealed carry permit. And do your emotions honestly get so out of control that you may attempt to use deadly force on another person? Mine don't, and neither do the emotions of every teenage and early 20's person I know.


Just because it doesn't happen very often, according to you, doesn't mean it can't happen. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

See, I don't know if my emotions will run out of control that I may attempt to use deadly force on another person if I can get away with it. Neither do I know if the other person has the capacity to do so. Just because yours don't and those of every teen and early 20s person you know doesn't mean it doesn't, or that it wouldn't happen.
Soldati senza confini: Better than an iPod in shuffle more with 20,000 songs.
Tekania wrote:Welcome to NSG, where informed opinions get to bump-heads with ignorant ideology under the pretense of an equal footing.

"When it’s a choice of putting food on the table, or thinking about your morals, it’s easier to say you’d think about your morals, but only if you’ve never faced that decision." - Anastasia Richardson

Current Goal: Flesh out nation factbook.

User avatar
The Republic of Pantalleria
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5731
Founded: Aug 23, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby The Republic of Pantalleria » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:02 am

Soldati senza confini wrote:
Spirit of Hope wrote:
Security of mind. Yes, most people are never going to need it, but I'm the type of person who has stockpiled a years worth of food and water in case of an emergency. Plus there are some people who have specific reason to feel afraid.


I'd like to point out that I have never had to carry a gun to get out of my house and I feel relatively safe knowing people don't carry their guns around in places I happen to frequent.

Indeed, in fact the only time I feel unsafe is around someone with a gun that isn't a part of the police force, since I don't know when they might try to kill people at random or when they might use for crime, etc. As such, the U.S. can be a pretty unsafe place whether you be law abiding or not, because it only takes one shot to turn your law abiding record into a criminal one.
The Pantallerian Economy and Other Details

The Pantallerian Bureau of Tourism: Treading on maggots since we got our magnificent go go boots.

User avatar
Alyakia
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18422
Founded: Jul 12, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Alyakia » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:02 am

BK117B2 wrote:
Alyakia wrote:
yeah i edited my response to that in. i know exactly where you are going with it so i'm refusing to treat it is a general question, because it's not and you damn well know it isn't.

you expect me to say no so you can go "what about guns" and now you're going on a tangent about me refusing to answer the question because i can't be arsed going through these hoops.

"We should not ban firearms. Person A's decision to do something bad does not justify violating the rights of Person B."

you're not randomly bringing up a philosophical conversation about punishment in a gun thread


No, I'm bringing up the general, since a frame of reference is needed before being able to be clear on specifics.

You have adequately demonstrated through your avoidance and attempts to mislead that you are not comfortable sharing your position.


a frame of reference? why? so you can then say that gun control is punishment and that punishment is wrong? yes, i know, which is why i just skipped forward to saying it isn't a punishment.

just fucking drop it, seriously. it's already obvious what you're trying to do.
pro: good
anti: bad

The UK and EU are Better Together

"Margaret Thatcher showed the world that women are not too soft or the weaker sex, and can be as heartless, horrible, and amoral as any male politician."

User avatar
Spirit of Hope
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12103
Founded: Feb 21, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Spirit of Hope » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:03 am

The Republic of Pantalleria wrote:
Spirit of Hope wrote:
Security of mind. Yes, most people are never going to need it, but I'm the type of person who has stockpiled a years worth of food and water in case of an emergency. Plus there are some people who have specific reason to feel afraid.

Yes that reason being that you never know if the other person has a concealed gun, correct?
Spot the irony in the above sentence.



No, I'm not scared others may have a concealed gun, the reason I want to carry is I don't know the intent of everyone around me. No irony in that statement. I'm "paranoid" that some one may attempt to rob me, or rob others around me, or assault me, or those around me. I would like to be in a position to intervene and stop.

Soldati senza confini wrote:
Spirit of Hope wrote:
Security of mind. Yes, most people are never going to need it, but I'm the type of person who has stockpiled a years worth of food and water in case of an emergency. Plus there are some people who have specific reason to feel afraid.


I'd like to point out that I have never had to carry a gun to get out of my house and I feel relatively safe knowing people don't carry their guns around in places I happen to frequent.


Your decision. Your mind is not my mind.
Fact Book.
Helpful hints on combat vehicle terminology.

Imperializt Russia wrote:Support biblical marriage! One SoH and as many wives and sex slaves as he can afford!

User avatar
BK117B2
Minister
 
Posts: 2090
Founded: May 14, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby BK117B2 » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:03 am

Soldati senza confini wrote:
BK117B2 wrote:
I agree, your straw man is very unreasonable.

That brings up the question: why bother creating it then?


Your argument that it is a punishment is quite unreasonable.

Trying to minimize the ownership of guns so that some idiot doesn't get their hands on a gun is hardly comparable to putting innocent people at risk.


You're being dishonest by claiming that your straw man is my argument.

Why don't you try responding to my actual post? Why won't you answer me question?

User avatar
Spirit of Hope
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12103
Founded: Feb 21, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Spirit of Hope » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:05 am

Soldati senza confini wrote:
Spirit of Hope wrote:
How often does that happen? Do you have any source that says that allowing concealed carry has demonstrably increased the number of homicides?



You have to be 21 to get a Texas concealed carry permit. And do your emotions honestly get so out of control that you may attempt to use deadly force on another person? Mine don't, and neither do the emotions of every teenage and early 20's person I know.


Just because it doesn't happen very often, according to you, doesn't mean it can't happen. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

See, I don't know if my emotions will run out of control that I may attempt to use deadly force on another person if I can get away with it. Neither do I know if the other person has the capacity to do so. Just because yours don't and those of every teen and early 20s person you know doesn't mean it doesn't, or that it wouldn't happen.


You are the one saying X will happen, you have to prove that X happens. I don't have to disprove something, that is impossible. You have to prove something happens, which is why I ask for evidence.
Fact Book.
Helpful hints on combat vehicle terminology.

Imperializt Russia wrote:Support biblical marriage! One SoH and as many wives and sex slaves as he can afford!

User avatar
Soldati Senza Confini
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 86050
Founded: Mar 11, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Soldati Senza Confini » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:05 am

BK117B2 wrote:
Soldati senza confini wrote:
Your argument that it is a punishment is quite unreasonable.

Trying to minimize the ownership of guns so that some idiot doesn't get their hands on a gun is hardly comparable to putting innocent people at risk.


You're being dishonest by claiming that your straw man is my argument.

Why don't you try responding to my actual post? Why won't you answer me question?


I already answered the question. I don't think it is punishment to regulate guns.

You are trying to spin it as a punishment. It isn't.
Soldati senza confini: Better than an iPod in shuffle more with 20,000 songs.
Tekania wrote:Welcome to NSG, where informed opinions get to bump-heads with ignorant ideology under the pretense of an equal footing.

"When it’s a choice of putting food on the table, or thinking about your morals, it’s easier to say you’d think about your morals, but only if you’ve never faced that decision." - Anastasia Richardson

Current Goal: Flesh out nation factbook.

User avatar
Immoren
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 65248
Founded: Mar 20, 2010
Democratic Socialists

Postby Immoren » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:06 am

The Republic of Pantalleria wrote:since I don't know when they might try to kill people at random or when they might use for crime, etc.


TBH this kind of attitude feels like as paranoid as those most extreme arguments for gun ownership for self-defence.
IC Flag Is a Pope Principia
discoursedrome wrote:everyone knows that quote, "I know not what weapons World War Three will be fought, but World War Four will be fought with sticks and stones," but in a way it's optimistic and inspiring because it suggests that even after destroying civilization and returning to the stone age we'll still be sufficiently globalized and bellicose to have another world war right then and there

User avatar
BK117B2
Minister
 
Posts: 2090
Founded: May 14, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby BK117B2 » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:06 am

Alyakia wrote:
BK117B2 wrote:
No, I'm bringing up the general, since a frame of reference is needed before being able to be clear on specifics.

You have adequately demonstrated through your avoidance and attempts to mislead that you are not comfortable sharing your position.


a frame of reference? why? so you can then say that gun control is punishment and that punishment is wrong? yes, i know, which is why i just skipped forward to saying it isn't a punishment.

just fucking drop it, seriously. it's already obvious what you're trying to do.


So you're so uncomfortable with sharing your position that you prefer whining to answering.

Obviously you aren't be truthful about what you know. There are various forms of gun control which I would find very reasonable and useful. You wouldn't know about any of that, because you have been refusing to discuss it.

User avatar
Alyakia
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18422
Founded: Jul 12, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Alyakia » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:09 am

BK117B2 wrote:
Alyakia wrote:
a frame of reference? why? so you can then say that gun control is punishment and that punishment is wrong? yes, i know, which is why i just skipped forward to saying it isn't a punishment.

just fucking drop it, seriously. it's already obvious what you're trying to do.


So you're so uncomfortable with sharing your position that you prefer whining to answering.

Obviously you aren't be truthful about what you know. There are various forms of gun control which I would find very reasonable and useful. You wouldn't know about any of that, because you have been refusing to discuss it.


your entire argument is based on the premise that everyone has already agreed that the answer i-

no. how about this. promise that if we answer you won't 1) make the exact argument we already know you're going to make the minute we answer 2) if you do so admit we were right and this entire thing was stupid and i'll give you your answer.

wow, so you intend to argue that specific forms of gun control are punishment. egg on my face.
Last edited by Alyakia on Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
pro: good
anti: bad

The UK and EU are Better Together

"Margaret Thatcher showed the world that women are not too soft or the weaker sex, and can be as heartless, horrible, and amoral as any male politician."

User avatar
Soldati Senza Confini
Post Kaiser
 
Posts: 86050
Founded: Mar 11, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Soldati Senza Confini » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:10 am

Spirit of Hope wrote:
Soldati senza confini wrote:
Just because it doesn't happen very often, according to you, doesn't mean it can't happen. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.

See, I don't know if my emotions will run out of control that I may attempt to use deadly force on another person if I can get away with it. Neither do I know if the other person has the capacity to do so. Just because yours don't and those of every teen and early 20s person you know doesn't mean it doesn't, or that it wouldn't happen.


You are the one saying X will happen, you have to prove that X happens. I don't have to disprove something, that is impossible. You have to prove something happens, which is why I ask for evidence.


The fact that there is a risk it might happen puts it at odds with what I have to prove.

I only have to make a case for a risk to exist, not that there are statistics.

I could also make the case that, because I was well taught how to drive I won't have a car accident because I am always careful. Doesn't mean I won't get into a car accident ever.
Soldati senza confini: Better than an iPod in shuffle more with 20,000 songs.
Tekania wrote:Welcome to NSG, where informed opinions get to bump-heads with ignorant ideology under the pretense of an equal footing.

"When it’s a choice of putting food on the table, or thinking about your morals, it’s easier to say you’d think about your morals, but only if you’ve never faced that decision." - Anastasia Richardson

Current Goal: Flesh out nation factbook.

User avatar
BK117B2
Minister
 
Posts: 2090
Founded: May 14, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby BK117B2 » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:10 am

Soldati senza confini wrote:
BK117B2 wrote:
You're being dishonest by claiming that your straw man is my argument.

Why don't you try responding to my actual post? Why won't you answer me question?


I already answered the question. I don't think it is punishment to regulate guns.

You are trying to spin it as a punishment. It isn't.


The fact is that you still are not answering me. Why pretend like you've already done it rather than just actually do it?

How could confiscating personal property not be accrately described as a punishment?

User avatar
The Republic of Pantalleria
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5731
Founded: Aug 23, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby The Republic of Pantalleria » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:11 am

Spirit of Hope wrote:
The Republic of Pantalleria wrote:Yes that reason being that you never know if the other person has a concealed gun, correct?
Spot the irony in the above sentence.



No, I'm not scared others may have a concealed gun, the reason I want to carry is I don't know the intent of everyone around me. No irony in that statement. I'm "paranoid" that some one may attempt to rob me, or rob others around me, or assault me, or those around me. I would like to be in a position to intervene and stop.

Soldati senza confini wrote:
I'd like to point out that I have never had to carry a gun to get out of my house and I feel relatively safe knowing people don't carry their guns around in places I happen to frequent.


Your decision. Your mind is not my mind.


Paranoia is bred out of fear, an understandable fear considering that criminals have equal open access to deadly weapons that have proven time and time again, can change the World forever, whether it be killing Presidents (Lincoln and JFK) or starting wars (Franz Ferdinand and World War I) guns have done more harm than good, since they were invented for the very purpose of harming. I honestly don't mind if you carry a gun or not, but know that people will avoid you if you're carrying a weapon which maybe is what your aiming for, but note that if you ever even raise the slightest suspicion, the police knowing you being armed will be permitted to use deadly force, because they will always assume you will shoot first.
The Pantallerian Economy and Other Details

The Pantallerian Bureau of Tourism: Treading on maggots since we got our magnificent go go boots.

User avatar
Eastern Equestria
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7719
Founded: Feb 17, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Eastern Equestria » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:11 am

Inguala wrote:
Eastern Equestria wrote:
The entire nation doesn't need to because the conditions that allow for such an environment aren't consistent throughout it.


Are you not the UNITED states of America? Is one of the basic premises of said nation that you come together in times of need to support one another and to better the nation as a whole?


Ummm...yes?

Are you aware that each state has its own legislature which determines, among other things, the efficacy of its gun control (or lack thereof)?

Ach sure I can understand the basic human need to pull the old "Nu uh I don't have responsibility for this i'll just be over here looking the other way" schtick.


I really don't have to take responsibility for the way other states govern themselves.

User avatar
BK117B2
Minister
 
Posts: 2090
Founded: May 14, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby BK117B2 » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:12 am

Alyakia wrote:
BK117B2 wrote:
So you're so uncomfortable with sharing your position that you prefer whining to answering.

Obviously you aren't be truthful about what you know. There are various forms of gun control which I would find very reasonable and useful. You wouldn't know about any of that, because you have been refusing to discuss it.


your entire argument is based on the premise that everyone has already agreed that the answer i-

no. how about this. promise that if we answer you won't 1) make the exact argument we already know you're going to make the minute we answer 2) if you do so admit we were right and this entire thing was stupid and i'll give you your answer.

wow, so you intend to argue that specific forms of gun control are punishment. egg on my face.


That sure is a lot of typing just to avoid answering. Let me know if you ever have anything to actually say

User avatar
Alyakia
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18422
Founded: Jul 12, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Alyakia » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:13 am

BK117B2 wrote:
Alyakia wrote:
your entire argument is based on the premise that everyone has already agreed that the answer i-

no. how about this. promise that if we answer you won't 1) make the exact argument we already know you're going to make the minute we answer 2) if you do so admit we were right and this entire thing was stupid and i'll give you your answer.

wow, so you intend to argue that specific forms of gun control are punishment. egg on my face.


That sure is a lot of typing just to avoid answering. Let me know if you ever have anything to actually say


BK117B2 wrote:
Soldati senza confini wrote:
I already answered the question. I don't think it is punishment to regulate guns.

You are trying to spin it as a punishment. It isn't.


The fact is that you still are not answering me. Why pretend like you've already done it rather than just actually do it?

How could confiscating personal property not be accrately described as a punishment?


i hate to go caps but NOW WE ARE AT THE SAME FUCKING POINT WE WERE 2 PAGES AGO BACK WHEN WE ALREADY ADDRESSED THIS POINT BECAUSE WE ALREADY FUCKING KNEW YOU WERE GOING TO MAKE IT BUT YOU DECIDED TO WASTE EVERYONE'S TIME WITH THIS BULLSHIT
pro: good
anti: bad

The UK and EU are Better Together

"Margaret Thatcher showed the world that women are not too soft or the weaker sex, and can be as heartless, horrible, and amoral as any male politician."

User avatar
Alyakia
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18422
Founded: Jul 12, 2011
Democratic Socialists

Postby Alyakia » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:15 am

BK117B2 wrote:
Soldati senza confini wrote:
I already answered the question. I don't think it is punishment to regulate guns.

You are trying to spin it as a punishment. It isn't.


The fact is that you still are not answering me. Why pretend like you've already done it rather than just actually do it?

How could confiscating personal property not be accrately described as a punishment?


the idea that not letting people have weapons openly is a punishment is a fallacy

i am actually just going to copy + paste my post from last page verbatim (it fits perfectly, how strange) in the hopes you will see how fucking stupid this entire thing was
pro: good
anti: bad

The UK and EU are Better Together

"Margaret Thatcher showed the world that women are not too soft or the weaker sex, and can be as heartless, horrible, and amoral as any male politician."

User avatar
The Republic of Pantalleria
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5731
Founded: Aug 23, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby The Republic of Pantalleria » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:15 am

Immoren wrote:
The Republic of Pantalleria wrote:since I don't know when they might try to kill people at random or when they might use for crime, etc.


TBH this kind of attitude feels like as paranoid as those most extreme arguments for gun ownership for self-defence.

It is the truth though, I mean look at New Zealand, they are pretty much a nation with similar standards of living and a somewhat similar culture, the only difference is their population doesn't carry around guns in their pants, don't get me wrong there are people there who still love guns and stuff like that, but when you are found out to be carrying a gun, you'll be treated in the same way a Jihadist would be treated while carrying a bomb in downtown Washington D.C.
The Pantallerian Economy and Other Details

The Pantallerian Bureau of Tourism: Treading on maggots since we got our magnificent go go boots.

User avatar
Spirit of Hope
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12103
Founded: Feb 21, 2011
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Spirit of Hope » Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:15 am

Soldati senza confini wrote:
Spirit of Hope wrote:
You are the one saying X will happen, you have to prove that X happens. I don't have to disprove something, that is impossible. You have to prove something happens, which is why I ask for evidence.


The fact that there is a risk it might happen puts it at odds with what I have to prove.

I only have to make a case for a risk to exist, not that there are statistics.

I could also make the case that, because I was well taught how to drive I won't have a car accident because I am always careful. Doesn't mean I won't get into a car accident ever.


Just because their is a risk of something happening doesn't mean it does happen. The risk of what you propose is incredibly low, because most people can control themselves to not go homicidal (evidenced by the fact that their are only about 12,000 homicides in a nation of 310,000,000).
Fact Book.
Helpful hints on combat vehicle terminology.

Imperializt Russia wrote:Support biblical marriage! One SoH and as many wives and sex slaves as he can afford!

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Colmaijo, Hrstrovokia, NationalPizza, Point Blob, Sapim, The Remote Islands, Upper Magica, Vassenor

Advertisement

Remove ads