10 dead in Oregon College Shooting

[Spirit of Hope]

Might as well get arrested for trying to defend myself. I PLEAD GUILTY YOUR HONOR.

Well in New Zealand there is nothing to defend yourself from, unless you think that nature and unarmed civilians are a threat, in which point you are probably physically weak and should stay at home or better, in a hospital.
Seriously, guns kill people, since they were invented just for that purpose, to hurt, maim, injure or kill anything, guns have never healed anyone, only hurt or killm such was the point of their creation, so I tend to stay away from people who own them, you know just in case they're not of sound mind (which statistically speaking is becoming a recurrent occurrence in the States lately).

There is no crime in New Zealand? I should never fear that I may be robbed or assaulted? No wait, ~3,000 assaults every month and ~5,000 burglary every month.

Anyhow on the last point their are experimentally 60,000,000-100,000,000 people with access to guns in the United States. There are ~150,000 deaths and injuries from all sources involving a gun. That means that their is a .25% that they may injure or kill someone, including themselves (on purpose or accidental).

[Alyakia]

the answer is no. it was a yes/no question. i literally gave you answer. go back and read.

It is singular. There were multiple questions. I'm not sure why you're getting confused by this easy concept

viewtopic.php?p=26180731#p26180731

this is a yes/no question and it is the only question in that post.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Well in New Zealand there is nothing to defend yourself from, unless you think that nature and unarmed civilians are a threat, in which point you are probably physically weak and should stay at home or better, in a hospital.
Seriously, guns kill people, since they were invented just for that purpose, to hurt, maim, injure or kill anything, guns have never healed anyone, only hurt or killm such was the point of their creation, so I tend to stay away from people who own them, you know just in case they're not of sound mind (which statistically speaking is becoming a recurrent occurrence in the States lately).

There is no crime in New Zealand? I should never fear that I may be robbed or assaulted? No wait, ~3,000 assaults every month and ~5,000 burglary every month.

Anyhow on the last point their are experimentally 60,000,000-100,000,000 people with access to guns in the United States. There are ~150,000 deaths and injuries from all sources involving a gun. That means that their is a .25% that they may injure or kill someone, including themselves (on purpose or accidental).

Like I said before

I know me
You know you
I don't know you

[Uxupox]

Might as well get arrested for trying to defend myself. I PLEAD GUILTY YOUR HONOR.

Well in New Zealand there is nothing to defend yourself from, unless you think that nature and unarmed civilians are a threat, in which point you are probably physically weak and should stay at home or better, in a hospital.
Seriously, guns kill people, since they were invented just for that purpose, to hurt, maim, injure or kill anything, guns have never healed anyone, only hurt or kill such was the point of their creation, so I tend to stay away from people who own them, you know just in case they're not of sound mind (which statistically speaking is becoming a recurrent occurrence in the States lately).

It doesn't matter where you are whether it's Sweden, Australia and yes even New Zealand there will always be a person that will try to kill others for some obscure reason and I should be able to defend myself against such an aggressor.

[Rusozak]

See? This is what I'm talking about. It's all about the guns. It's ONLY about the guns. Nevermind location, mental health of the shooters, motives, provocations, etc. People are blind to the real issue and focus only on HOW so many people die, not WHY. I bet these strong pro/anti gun advocates are hoping for another shooting to use as ammunition for their cause. Maybe if we asked why so many crazy people are running around with the motive to kill instead of how they got guns and how other people with guns could have stopped them, we might get somewhere.

Yea, people kill people, we get it, but the gun helps you know?

A LOT more people kill each other in America, though, and it's not just about gun control. Other factors are in play which are giving people the motive to do these things.

[Spirit of Hope]

There is no crime in New Zealand? I should never fear that I may be robbed or assaulted? No wait, ~3,000 assaults every month and ~5,000 burglary every month.

Anyhow on the last point their are experimentally 60,000,000-100,000,000 people with access to guns in the United States. There are ~150,000 deaths and injuries from all sources involving a gun. That means that their is a .25% that they may injure or kill someone, including themselves (on purpose or accidental).

Like I said before

I know me
You know you
I don't know you

My point exactly, I don't know you and you could be planning a criminal action. So I will be prepared to defend myself and others.

[The Republic of Pantalleria]

Well in New Zealand there is nothing to defend yourself from, unless you think that nature and unarmed civilians are a threat, in which point you are probably physically weak

The weak have as much a right to self-defense as anyone else.

Seriously, guns kill people, since they were invented just for that purpose, to hurt, maim, injure or kill anything, guns have never healed anyone, only hurt or killm such was the point of their creation

Guns can kill people. Guns can also protect people. They can also be used in olympic sporting events or backyard plinking. They can be used to clear build-up in kilns, they can be used to signal distress, they can be used to obtain food and control pests. The notion that a gun can only kill is not based in reality.

Protect by killing or seriously hurting someone else, entertainment is a legitimate point so I'll give you that, don't know what a kiln is so I guess I'll give you that, that's not really the case, I mean when a person using common sense hears a gun shot, they tend to run away from the shot, to avoid any deadly force from where it came from, but then again Americans are stereotypically famous for not adhering to the laws of common sense, by killing the food, by killing the pests.
So that's 3 kills, 2 non-lethal uses?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Like I said before

I know me
You know you
I don't know you

My point exactly, I don't know you and you could be planning a criminal action. So I will be prepared to defend myself and others.

And my point is that I shouldn't need to carry a gun everywhere simply because you carry a weapon yourself.

Being alert 24/7 at the risk someone might kill me doesn't make me feel better about my safety.

[Sevvania]

The weak have as much a right to self-defense as anyone else.


Guns can kill people. Guns can also protect people. They can also be used in olympic sporting events or backyard plinking. They can be used to clear build-up in kilns, they can be used to signal distress, they can be used to obtain food and control pests. The notion that a gun can only kill is not based in reality.

Protect by killing or seriously hurting someone else, entertainment is a legitimate point so I'll give you that, don't know what a kiln is so I guess I'll give you that, that's not really the case, I mean when a person using common sense hears a gun shot, they tend to run away from the shot, to avoid any deadly force from where it came from, but then again Americans are stereotypically famous for not adhering to the laws of common sense, by killing the food, by killing the pests.
So that's 3 kills, 2 non-lethal uses?

You don't have to shoot someone to deter them. A kiln is a large furnace, and there are special types of shotguns made specifically for cleaning out the junk that builds up in there. Flare guns and pyrotechnic 12 gauge shells are gun-related means of signalling distress. The money spent by hunters also adds up to billions of dollars that go into animal conservation efforts, so there's that.

Being alert 24/7 at the risk someone might kill me doesn't make me feel better about my safety.

There's a difference between "I live in constant fear that any individual I meet may kill me at a moment's notice," and "I don't expect to need this, but if I do, I have it."

[Alyakia]

Well in New Zealand there is nothing to defend yourself from, unless you think that nature and unarmed civilians are a threat, in which point you are probably physically weak

The weak have as much a right to self-defense as anyone else.

Seriously, guns kill people, since they were invented just for that purpose, to hurt, maim, injure or kill anything, guns have never healed anyone, only hurt or killm such was the point of their creation

Guns can kill people. Guns can also protect people. They can also be used in olympic sporting events or backyard plinking. They can be used to clear build-up in kilns, they can be used to signal distress, they can be used to obtain food and control pests. The notion that a gun can only kill is not based in reality.

only the signalling distress is valid, which generally requires a special gun. everything else falls under the umbrella of weaponry.

like, even half of the things you just listed is killing. protecting through killing and killing animals is still killing. protecting through the threat of killing is a useless diversion.

[The Republic of Pantalleria]

Well in New Zealand there is nothing to defend yourself from, unless you think that nature and unarmed civilians are a threat, in which point you are probably physically weak and should stay at home or better, in a hospital.
Seriously, guns kill people, since they were invented just for that purpose, to hurt, maim, injure or kill anything, guns have never healed anyone, only hurt or kill such was the point of their creation, so I tend to stay away from people who own them, you know just in case they're not of sound mind (which statistically speaking is becoming a recurrent occurrence in the States lately).

It doesn't matter where you are whether it's Sweden, Australia and yes even New Zealand there will always be a person that will try to kill others for some obscure reason and I should be able to defend myself against such an aggressor.

I get that, but understanding what weapon they use is key to surviving, for example getting a gun in China is a lot harder than in the States, as a result, when a mad man tried to kill students in a school using a knife, the results were no deaths, keep in mind this was shortly after Newtown, where the kids essentially died in vain. Same storyline, two different weapons, two different results. Clearly facts that cannot be denied, nonetheless I get that you are entitled to defend yourself, just expect me to never stay within a certain distance of anyone who seems to be holding a deadly weapon.

[BK117B2]

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 did.

I don't think it is a punishment to regulate weapons.

That isn't a truthful statement. Why are you so unwilling to answer?

[Sevvania]

only the signalling distress is valid, which generally requires a special gun. everything else falls under the umbrella of weaponry.

like, even half of the things you just listed is killing. protecting through killing and killing animals is still killing. protecting through the threat of killing is a useless diversion.

This assumes that all forms of killing are wrong, and that's not true, nor is the notion that a gun cannot realistically be used as a deterrant.

[The Republic of Pantalleria]

only the signalling distress is valid, which generally requires a special gun. everything else falls under the umbrella of weaponry.

like, even half of the things you just listed is killing. protecting through killing and killing animals is still killing. protecting through the threat of killing is a useless diversion.

This assumes that all forms of killing are wrong, and that's not true.

Not saying it is, just making the point that the main purpose of the gun is to kill.

[BK117B2]

It is singular. There were multiple questions. I'm not sure why you're getting confused by this easy concept

viewtopic.php?p=26180731#p26180731

this is a yes/no question and it is the only question in that post.

Which is utterly irrelevant to my post.

[Alyakia]

viewtopic.php?p=26180731#p26180731

this is a yes/no question and it is the only question in that post.

Which is utterly irrelevant to my post.

>there are multiple questions
>you only asked one

come the fuck on

[Spirit of Hope]

My point exactly, I don't know you and you could be planning a criminal action. So I will be prepared to defend myself and others.

And my point is that I shouldn't need to carry a gun everywhere simply because you carry a weapon yourself.

Being alert 24/7 at the risk someone might kill me doesn't make me feel better about my safety.

I'm not saying you have to carry a gun, or any weapon, yourself. It is a personal choice.

The weak have as much a right to self-defense as anyone else.


Guns can kill people. Guns can also protect people. They can also be used in olympic sporting events or backyard plinking. They can be used to clear build-up in kilns, they can be used to signal distress, they can be used to obtain food and control pests. The notion that a gun can only kill is not based in reality.

Protect by killing or seriously hurting someone else, entertainment is a legitimate point so I'll give you that, don't know what a kiln is so I guess I'll give you that, that's not really the case, I mean when a person using common sense hears a gun shot, they tend to run away from the shot, to avoid any deadly force from where it came from, but then again Americans are stereotypically famous for not adhering to the laws of common sense, by killing the food, by killing the pests.
So that's 3 kills, 2 non-lethal uses?

First most studies of guns used in self defense show that defensive gun uses rarely end in someone being killed. Instead the defender shows or discharges the gun, and the criminal/attacker flees. The best evidence I have at hand to this is that their are only around 400 justifiable homicides in the US every year while the low statistics for defensive gun uses are around 100,000 a year.

For signaling distress he may be talking about hunters or hikers, that is actually how my dad got rescued. After getting lost he discharged his rifle when he heard the helicopters searching, helicopter investigated and found him.

And killing for food is how you get burgers, I simply like venison and elk. Hunting can also be entertaining. Plus deer in many areas are pests that destroy crops, gardens, and cars. The only way to control their population is through hunting.

[Alvecia]

As a more efficient tool of force guns provide a great deal for defensive capabilities for the owner. However they also provide a great deal more offense to the aggressor. By that standard more deaths in a shorter time frame follows logically. Hence, more mass shootings. If you want guns for defensive purposes you have to accept the offensive capabilities it brings with it.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

That isn't a truthful statement. Why are you so unwilling to answer?

Do you think someone else's bad behavior justifies punishing you?

This was your question.

My answer is, I don't think that because someone of else's bad behavior the government passes a regulation on what I can and can't do means someone is punishing me.

It might not be the answer you expect as a yes/no; but rather saying your question doesn't make any sense to me.

[Sevvania]

This assumes that all forms of killing are wrong, and that's not true.

Not saying it is, just making the point that the main purpose of the gun is to kill.

There are purposes that involve killing, but it depends on the type of gun. If you own a competition target rifle, you're probably not going to take that hunting, and you're probably not going to carry it around under the premise of self-defense. You're probably going to spend most of your time using it against stationary targets, because that's what it's tailored towards.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

And my point is that I shouldn't need to carry a gun everywhere simply because you carry a weapon yourself.

Being alert 24/7 at the risk someone might kill me doesn't make me feel better about my safety.

I'm not saying you have to carry a gun, or any weapon, yourself. It is a personal choice.

When other people I don't know carry weapons, and I know they are, it's not a question of whether or not I'd like to carry one. It's more of a question whether or not the benefits of carrying a gun outweight the risks of not carrying one.

[Spirit of Hope]

I'm not saying you have to carry a gun, or any weapon, yourself. It is a personal choice.

When other people I don't know carry weapons, and I know they are, it's not a question of whether or not I'd like to carry one.

You can certainly not carry one if you want to. Only about 4% of the US population has a concealed carry license, and they likely aren't all carrying all the time. In addition those that have concealed carry permits are some of the least likely to commit crimes with their guns (around 0.006%)

[Soldati Senza Confini]

When other people I don't know carry weapons, and I know they are, it's not a question of whether or not I'd like to carry one.

You can certainly not carry one if you want to. Only about 4% of the US population has a concealed carry license, and they likely aren't all carrying all the time. In addition those that have concealed carry permits are some of the least likely to commit crimes with their guns (around 0.006%)

And of those 0.006% all it takes is for me to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Not that in general the street is safe, mind, but having to secure my own safety in a college institution is not what I have in mind.

[BK117B2]

Might as well get arrested for trying to defend myself. I PLEAD GUILTY YOUR HONOR.

Well in New Zealand there is nothing to defend yourself from, unless you think that nature and unarmed civilians are a threat, in which point you are probably physically weak and should stay at home or better, in a hospital.
Seriously, guns kill people, since they were invented just for that purpose, to hurt, maim, injure or kill anything, guns have never healed anyone, only hurt or kill such was the point of their creation, so I tend to stay away from people who own them, you know just in case they're not of sound mind (which statistically speaking is becoming a recurrent occurrence in the States lately).

While true that New Zealand is short on snakes, large cats, etc, it still has a healthy population of a very dangerous species: us.

If you honestly think that hitting the gym will magically mean you can beat any combination of other people on Earth, even if you are sick, injured, elderly.....and even if there are four of them and they have knives, hammers, etc....then you'd be living not in New Zealand, but in fantasyland

[Sevvania]

all it takes is for me to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

The same goes for pretty much any and all potential causes of death.