NationStates

Resilient Acceleration wrote:

Punished UMN wrote:If you don't hunt them for conservation purposes, overpopulation will result in dangerous interactions between people and animals (predatory attacks on humans have increased because bear populations have gone up, and the first fatal predatory attacks on humans by wolves and coyotes happened recently), and disease would spread which could potentially be totally destructive on the population and could be transmissible to other species.

Or more likely, such threat will incentivize the local population to hunt them for non-sport purposes. Especially if they start threatening local farms or whatnot.

Ors Might wrote:

Greater Cesnica wrote:An automatic pistol was not used.


No. An automatic pistol was not used in Dunblane.

So this is a case of someone meaning semi-automatic? Lame. For a moment I thought English boys at least used to be cool.

San Lumen wrote:

Grinning Dragon wrote:No it isn't.

Why is killing an animal not harming you not morally and ethically wrong? Some of those wolves killed likely had cubs who now will not be able to survive.

Adamede wrote:

Greater Cesnica wrote:To be fair having them for self defence is fine in Northern Ireland. Also, if someone wants to do another Dunblane, nothing's truly stopping them.

And they can always do a repeat of the University of Texas Tower shooting. Guy used only a hunting rifle and was still able to kill 18 people

Thermodolia wrote:

San Lumen wrote:
Why is killing an animal not harming you not morally and ethically wrong? Some of those wolves killed likely had cubs who now will not be able to survive.

Dude who are you to argue about morals? You literally where ok with kicking out millions of people from their homes because the courts said so.

How the fuck is it more moral to protect a predatory animal but not a human?

Greater Cesnica wrote:

Adamede wrote:And they can always do a repeat of the University of Texas Tower shooting. Guy used only a hunting rifle and was still able to kill 18 people

Oh I don't even mean that. It is really easy to get a semi-automatic handgun if one knows what they're doing. 3D printers and CNC mills, with bare minimum materials easily found at hardware and tool stores can complete the weapon. Even ammunition can be manufactured at home now. Not to mention ammunition and weapons being smuggled into the country illegally.

Champagne Socialist Sharifistan wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:Not as easily as with automatic pistols, no.


Irrelevant.


Irrelevant.

So you’re saying a gun is useless against a burglar with a knife?

They probably kill more than one school shooting.

I never said automatic pistols should be legal but self-defence should be a legit reason to buy a shotgun.

A-Series-Of-Tubes wrote:

Champagne Socialist Sharifistan wrote:So you’re saying a gun is useless against a burglar with a knife?

This is corner-case paranoiac delusion. Burglars want something they can sell, and they don't want to get identified. They especially do not want to murder someone. Any more than an honest citizen on the street, wants to murder someone.

In what Gun Culture world do burglars with a knife, inside someone else's house, fight to the death? They get the fuck out. Think about it. What would you do? Run to wherever you came in.

Yell at the bastard burglar, if that makes you feel better. Get out of the way so the burglar can leave, call the cops, and stash your obvious valuables up in the attic. Lie to the cops, claim the insurance, you're alive and not a killer, and 10 grand up on a bad night for other people. So you're a criminal now, what's it matter, fight crime with crime I say!

They probably kill more than one school shooting.

I never said automatic pistols should be legal but self-defence should be a legit reason to buy a shotgun.

Yeah, I could tell another story, but the bottom line is shotguns good. Except you don't have to load them with shot. Oh I should shut up. Shotguns are best guns.

Ors Might wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:Dude who are you to argue about morals? You literally where ok with kicking out millions of people from their homes because the courts said so.

How the fuck is it more moral to protect a predatory animal but not a human?

I’m sorry, I think I need to read the thread this was in, this sounds barbaric

Champagne Socialist Sharifistan wrote:So you’re saying a gun is useless against a burglar with a knife?

Greater Cesnica wrote:An automatic pistol was not used.

Thermodolia wrote:

Ors Might wrote:I’m sorry, I think I need to read the thread this was in, this sounds barbaric

Start here my friend viewtopic.php?f=20&t=498379&start=4250

Greater Cesnica wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:That very good reason being Dunblane.

To be fair having them for self defence is fine in Northern Ireland.

Greater Cesnica wrote:Also, if someone wants to do another Dunblane, nothing's truly stopping them.

Thermodolia wrote:

Ors Might wrote:I’m sorry, I think I need to read the thread this was in, this sounds barbaric

Start here my friend viewtopic.php?f=20&t=498379&start=4250

The New California Republic wrote:

Greater Cesnica wrote:Also, if someone wants to do another Dunblane, nothing's truly stopping them.

Semi-automatics are far more difficult to get hold of now, so yes there is something stopping them.

Greater Cesnica wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:Semi-automatics are far more difficult to get hold of now, so yes there is something stopping them.

Keyword truly. 3D printers have now advanced to the point that they can accurately print out firearm parts that can be used to put together near-functional firearm. Metal parts required to make such a nearly-complete firearm functional are innocuous and widely available, and cheaply available in most hardware and tool stores, and even in some dollar/discount stores. CNC mills are also increasingly becoming cheap and available to the general populace, and blocks of metal can be milled out using instructions freely available on the internet to create firearm parts that can be put together to create a fully functioning firearm.

What am I trying to get at? A determined attacker will use whatever means necessary to unleash mass carnage. The Manchester bomber used TATP, a primary high explosive that can be manufactured with relative ease using freely available chemicals often found within the house. Trucks, and vans, and cars can all be used to unleash mass murder within seconds. With guns, there is at least a practical defensive application. Why should we implement draconian restrictions then?

Greater Cesnica wrote:One last point: Northern Ireland, with all of those "issues" that you referred to, has a similar homicide rate to the United Kingdom average. Yet their gun laws are much looser. What gives?

The New California Republic wrote:

Greater Cesnica wrote:Keyword truly. 3D printers have now advanced to the point that they can accurately print out firearm parts that can be used to put together near-functional firearm. Metal parts required to make such a nearly-complete firearm functional are innocuous and widely available, and cheaply available in most hardware and tool stores, and even in some dollar/discount stores. CNC mills are also increasingly becoming cheap and available to the general populace, and blocks of metal can be milled out using instructions freely available on the internet to create firearm parts that can be put together to create a fully functioning firearm.

What am I trying to get at? A determined attacker will use whatever means necessary to unleash mass carnage. The Manchester bomber used TATP, a primary high explosive that can be manufactured with relative ease using freely available chemicals often found within the house. Trucks, and vans, and cars can all be used to unleash mass murder within seconds. With guns, there is at least a practical defensive application. Why should we implement draconian restrictions then?

Sure if someone's absolutely determined then yes they'll find a way. But there's a world of difference made between the ingredients of such things being easily available and having to jump through dozens of hoops.

Adamede wrote:Burglars aren’t a monolithic group.

Some want to get in and get out, others have no qualms harming you to get your shit.
Anyway that shotgun is going to do fuck all when you’re mugged outside your home.

A-Series-Of-Tubes wrote:

Kathol Rift wrote:Because the meat tastes very good, honestly.

That's pathetic. Do you eat the whole animal yourself, or do you distribute the meat to friends?

Also, I'm not entirely certain if it's possible to get close enough to a wild bull elk to tag it without being noticed. I'll be sure to try next time I get a chance, though.

How about a harmless laser device. Challenge yourself and set the laser gun to 30 metres. You do it, you don't, either way you go home happy with a good day's sport. Or if you get tired with that, make it up to 1200 metres or whatever you consider awesome marksman range.

I'm weird. I only learned to drive 5 years ago, yet I'm 65. But being weird, I have some insight into driving cars and the outcome of driving a car. Driving a car is a whole lot of logical skill-application shit, which I must admit I still enjoy (I try to be the best driver possible), but motivating that is (a) not dying, and (b) not killing anyone else. I have rock solid concentration (even when I'm drunk, I try to avoid that) because life and death is a huge fucking deal to me.

Now I understand the urge to own guns. But I resist it. I see it as like having a car to drive, except that owning a gun has no positive purpose (as having a car clearly does). I see from having a car that having a gun invites one to make varied uses of it. The inherent power of the thing invites you to use it in every way you can.

Today it's an elk. Tomorrow ... when you have lovingly cleaned it and stored it in a concealed cabinet above your bed ... tomorrow you may shoot a homeless person whose nest-making in your shrubbery, you mistook for a home-invader setting up a machine-gun nest.

No really. I've seen horror movies where cars where used as weapons. They forestalled me from ever getting a driver's license but eventually I had to. Those movies influenced me, badly, so now occasionally it crosses my mind to ram some fucker who was rude with the right-of-way. But don't worry, I 'think' a lot of things I would never ever do.

I can source it if you want, but the US has terribly high rates of gun homicide. Homicide overall really, but particularly gun homicide. Ask yourself if that might have something to do with detective movies, then westerns, then three decades of movies with lots of other stuff but sudden plot twists where someone gets shot and dies. Ask yourself if the "gun culture" you are proud to be a part of, was not so much born with the Second Amendment, as with entertainment which didn't care a shit about human or animal life, but just wanted to push the "DEATH BAD" button in your brain ... and your father's brain ... and your grandfather's.

Gun culture is a heritage of dying patriarchal culture. Abandon the culture, you might as well be dead. All good men must kill someone, and if the sissy trannie feministy culture gets you in its clutches, then do the only honorable thing: shoot yourself in the head.

Elk are fucking huge. Do you eat the meat yourself, or do you distribute it to friends?

WeeTurds wrote:

Paddy O Fernature wrote:
Says you.

Others I'm sure will disagree.

This is exactly the quote i'd expect from someone who's flag is a man in a mask holding a crap ton of bullets. In england, nobody is allowed guns, because of this, we don't have school shootings, church shootings, etc. It's the kind of people, like you, that believe hunting should be allowed and have multiple guns, that do things like this.

Silvedania wrote:Yes, yes it should be.

Kathol Rift wrote:

A-Series-Of-Tubes wrote:
That's pathetic. Do you eat the whole animal yourself, or do you distribute the meat to friends?

How about a harmless laser device. Challenge yourself and set the laser gun to 30 metres. You do it, you don't, either way you go home happy with a good day's sport. Or if you get tired with that, make it up to 1200 metres or whatever you consider awesome marksman range.

I'm weird. I only learned to drive 5 years ago, yet I'm 65. But being weird, I have some insight into driving cars and the outcome of driving a car. Driving a car is a whole lot of logical skill-application shit, which I must admit I still enjoy (I try to be the best driver possible), but motivating that is (a) not dying, and (b) not killing anyone else. I have rock solid concentration (even when I'm drunk, I try to avoid that) because life and death is a huge fucking deal to me.

Now I understand the urge to own guns. But I resist it. I see it as like having a car to drive, except that owning a gun has no positive purpose (as having a car clearly does). I see from having a car that having a gun invites one to make varied uses of it. The inherent power of the thing invites you to use it in every way you can.

Today it's an elk. Tomorrow ... when you have lovingly cleaned it and stored it in a concealed cabinet above your bed ... tomorrow you may shoot a homeless person whose nest-making in your shrubbery, you mistook for a home-invader setting up a machine-gun nest.

No really. I've seen horror movies where cars where used as weapons. They forestalled me from ever getting a driver's license but eventually I had to. Those movies influenced me, badly, so now occasionally it crosses my mind to ram some fucker who was rude with the right-of-way. But don't worry, I 'think' a lot of things I would never ever do.

I can source it if you want, but the US has terribly high rates of gun homicide. Homicide overall really, but particularly gun homicide. Ask yourself if that might have something to do with detective movies, then westerns, then three decades of movies with lots of other stuff but sudden plot twists where someone gets shot and dies. Ask yourself if the "gun culture" you are proud to be a part of, was not so much born with the Second Amendment, as with entertainment which didn't care a shit about human or animal life, but just wanted to push the "DEATH BAD" button in your brain ... and your father's brain ... and your grandfather's.

Gun culture is a heritage of dying patriarchal culture. Abandon the culture, you might as well be dead. All good men must kill someone, and if the sissy trannie feministy culture gets you in its clutches, then do the only honorable thing: shoot yourself in the head.

Elk are fucking huge. Do you eat the meat yourself, or do you distribute it to friends?

Having hunted and killed 2 elk, I'm fully aware of their large size. And yes, both of them were fully eaten by my family and I. We don't waste.

And that's a stunning take on american psychology, but gun violence really isn't the topic of this thread.

Also, another stunning take there with the "patriarchal culture" piece. I guess all my female friends and LGBT+ friends that hunt and own guns are in the wrong club, it seems. I'll be sure to let them know that hunting is supposed to only be for testosterone factories and psychopaths, according to you.

The Military State of the Galapagos wrote:

Silvedania wrote:Yes, yes it should be.

No no it shouldn’t

A-Series-Of-Tubes wrote:Gun culture is a heritage of dying patriarchal culture. Abandon the culture, you might as well be dead. All good men must kill someone, and if the sissy trannie feministy culture gets you in its clutches, then do the only honorable thing: shoot yourself in the head.

Paix Angevin wrote:

A-Series-Of-Tubes wrote:Gun culture is a heritage of dying patriarchal culture. Abandon the culture, you might as well be dead. All good men must kill someone, and if the sissy trannie feministy culture gets you in its clutches, then do the only honorable thing: shoot yourself in the head.

As a sissy tranny feminist who really likes guns, I disagree with this sentiment. Gun owners aren't a monolith; not everyone with a rifle or a concealed-carry permit is a chud.