To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *11776 (-20)
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) You've correctly identified the problem--everyone in that scenario can be held responsible except the shootist and (in the case of a child shootist) the shootist's parents. (...) That is indeed a problem. If a cop (or civilian) has a real (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Of course not. But the point is you can then blame (and attempt to sue) toy manufacturers for the violent tendencies in your own kids. Along with video manufacturers, TV networks, the funny-looking guy next door et al. There's also the problem (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Yeah, that's never made much sense to me, either. Toy guns have been available and popular for many decades, so why are they all of a sudden responsible for violence? Toy bricks do not turn kids into real-world bricklayers... Dave! (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) That's an interesting perspective. I've witnessed a number of fist fights, none of which ended in fatality (though in some cases hospitilization was necessary), but the likelihood of death seems greater when firearms are in use. Granted, a (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) By whom? However deeply you or I think about this subject, the majority of gun owners (legal or illegal) do not. However noble your or the founding fathers' intentions, purchasing a gun for the purposes of home or personal defence, or carrying (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Drugs and guns
 
(...) Hmm. Yes. All that drug related violence. All those people resorting to violent crime to fund their habit, and the ensuing deaths where innocent bystanders have small bags of white powder thrown at them with sufficient force to cause gaping (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) national (...) I think that the strength of my claim makes it difficult to really defend. however the reading that I have done suggests that when concealed carry laws are passed and the propensity to carry increases for that venue the violent (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) They could comprehend that the same ordnance _must_ be available to both the military and the civilians. Chris (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Conveniently, we don't live in such fear. (...) Thanks for telling me my mind. But it turns out that you're wrong. I want, regardless of what others have, the maximally effective death-flinging device. I want that so that I am prepared for (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
 
(...) Democratic election is not just for show. It is a first attempt at getting things right. And we have 200 years of showing that it works out pretty well. (There have been some roadbumps along the way, but that's true for everyone.) Not (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) This is distortive and false. You're not thinking deeply enough, you're just buying the line fed you. (...) Again, distortive. Read the Federalist Papers before you comment further, would be my suggesting. The absolute level of technology is (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Good question. I don't believe there is always a surefire way to tell. (1) In that case the goal ought to be to stop the violence. 1 - how were the Branch Davidians to know that trailers full of armed men crashing into their compound, guns (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) That's admirable, but you do recognize that you're not a representative sample, right? That would be like saying that I've never deliberately run over anyone in my car, therefore no one has ever done so. Dave! (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Nope. You are trivialising the issue rather than addressing the point. "The forefathers" could not comprehend what weapons would do in a few hundred years time (ie today). What do you think handguns will be like a few hundred years from now? (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Drugs and guns
 
In light of the recent gun debate here, I thought that it might be ok to ask your thoughts on banning narcotics in America, afterall, they have had a dramatic negative impact on our society and getting the drugs off the legal market would certainly (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Whew!! now it all makes sense. The forefathers considered how long it took to load a muzzle and the likelyhood of the ammo spilling out when they proposed the right to bear arms... (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
 
(...) Unlike the media in many other countries, some of the media in the UK really is independant. Independent even of corporate advertising. Before I posted the message I had replied to, I read this article about how visitors to Turkey had been (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Strange, but my idea of freedom is not living in constant fear of being shot. That's why each of you wants a gun - to defend yourself against all the others who have guns. It doesn't even occur to you that everyone else wants a gun because (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Just out of interest, how do you go about determining whose side to come in on? Jason J Railton (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
 
(...) Ah, I get it. So, what you're saying, is that the whole democratic process is just for show. You place your vote, you elect your leaders, but at any time you can up arms as a mob and take them out again. Okay, sorry, that's unfair. Every (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR