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 / *11811 (-100)
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Does this not imply that you feel that the founders could not be wrong in any way, and that their intentions are 100% clear? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Perhaps. But the majority in the US does want more gun control. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) They don't scare me. Should they? (...) Or maybe I am not. Maybe I work for BATF? (...) Is democracy unconstitutional? (...) I am. That is what happened in all 3 places. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Do you think the could conciev how powerful democarcy would come. How everyone (more or less) would be able to vote? Or do you think they had events like the French revolution in mind? Scott A (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: *Child* Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) I shall try again: I was thinking more about the real kids that were killed with guns - ie those who were under 16. (...) Why? Do you think I am wrong? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Test them in some way. Inspect how the store their guns (this happens in the UK). Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) I don't. Because "used illegally" is a misnomer. When I was a teen, I knew kids (several) who carried guns daily. Those were all guns used illegally. And none of them were a problem. The problem only comes from people committing other crimes (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) I've certainly read a number of instances where this is true - but in Victorian times in England, people would tackle criminals, too, with neither side armed with guns. It may be more a function of the times. But then again, maybe it means the (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Well, for a start, if he really was a 'patriot', he'd have been on our side! (or Native American) You can't be a patriot if you don't have a country yet. Jason J Railton (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) judiciary's stance. I don't have any problem with the reporter's work, if that's what you mean. I think that the court has been cowardly in not embracing the obviously correct meaning of the second amendment. I suspect that they wish not to (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) As I mentioned in another message, my wife's cousin was shot and killed under just such circumstances. So I can't agree that it's funny (I know that's not how you meant it). Anyway, you statement doesn't change mine - I'm not talking about any (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) I'd welcome a straightforward proposal of amendments and an honest debate. What gets up my nose is the chinese water torture we've seen lately in which the constitution has been suborned one step at a time by "activist" judges. I support (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. I however, would urge and support a ban on weapons of mass destruction. Chris (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) I think you missed the path of the discussion - my comment was based on an earlier one that said everything would be peaceful and wonderful if *EVERYONE* walked around with a gun. Now, as to your statement, I take it you have never had a gun (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) How do you diagnose, let alone enforce that? (...) -Duane (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Yes. And that's a good thing. The way it's supposed to work is that our states are almost individual nations. loosely federated for the purpose of administration and holding to constitutional edicts. The fact that states (and the federal (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) It depends on how you define win. There isn't any point in dying for nothing. There are situations in which dying is worthwhile. But not when it's just pointless. If you could defend person X from a wrong, but would be killed, or you could go (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Yes. It does. Several. (...) I should, and I do. And there are many others like me. Chris (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: *Child* Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) What's that supposed to mean? (...) OK, show me. Find the numbers of violent deaths of children for the US and the UK and compare them. I'm not that interested in the number of gun deaths, because dying from a bullet is no worse than being (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Just the largest and scariest. (...) Or maybe you're wrong and argumentative for no purpose. (...) He doesn't. I don't. No one does...not in a visceral ever-present way. But when you look at their ability and willingness to forego reasonable (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) I think that we can assume authorial intent on this one Dave! Since the text wouldn't mean anything if there was no way to get the arms, I assume that the broader picture of gun availability is protected too. However, I agree that this is (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) It wasn't a bad film--it would have been a bad history text, if it had aspired to be a history text at all. As a piece of fiction, it was quite effective. Now The Patriot--*that* was a bad film. Dave! (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Yes, absolutely, and I don't think that's any misinterpretation. Quoting from the opening of the Declaration of Independence: (...) I think it's pretty clear that the founding fathers recognized that governments can and will become so corrupt (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Interesting. So what is your take on this: (URL) A (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Even tanks? Even fighter jets? Even chemical weapons? Even ICBM's? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) A fair enough analysis, but I don't feel it provides a good excuse in the long run. The example is there (i.e. the notion is not naive), the rest is a matter of logisitics (though a monstrously sizeable one, as you note). But then again, (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Another Legend dies....
 
(...) Wasn't the original reason Lego did not release the Guarded Inn in the States that it 'promotes drinking' ;) Maybe the inclusion of this minifig head is to show kids the dangers drinking can bring :D (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) One does not need guns do defend rights. Most of Europe does not have guns under their beds but we are still here. I feel safe that HM Gov is not about to oppress me. Even though you have the right to own a gun, you still fear what your (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) I'd handle that by not giving idiots guns. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) One should intervene if it is the right thing to do, irrespective of what the outcome may be(1). To say otherwise, suggests you would only use your gun to defend against "tyranny" if you thought you'd win. How weak is that? Scott A I shall (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) I wondered about this too. Do laws really vary that much state-by-state? Just wondering. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Some are just have-a-go heroes who do not know when to stop: (URL) others are good: (URL) A (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Your constitution is 100's of years old. Perhaps it needs to be updated. Perhaps it needs a few more amendments (...) Perhaps you should not view it in those terms. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: *Child* Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) I was think more about the real kids that were killed with guns. But if we use your stats. Compare them with the UK figures like you did before. I have a hunch the death rate in the USA will be 100 times higher than in the UK? Like I said (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) In your world is the BATF your worst enemy? Is that why you keep a gun under your bed? I expect you are either breaking the law, paranoid or live in a country with zero crime. Which is it? Why do you fear the BATF so much? Because they tackled (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  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)
 
  Re: *Child* Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) I understand that you are not responding to me here, but I thank you anyway. I'm glad that someone else here actually understands that there are valid arguments against gun paranoia. (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Admittedly, no. At least as far as I knew, they weren't. At some remove, I can tell you I'd think I'd be less likely to intervene in a fist fight, though, than in a situation where someone had a gun drawn, assuming I was carrying. Fist fights (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Not to lessen the significance of your prior actions, but for the context of this debate, were these life-or-death situations, on the street, in which you put yourself in harm's way for a stranger? Even if it was breaking up a fist fight (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
"Bruce Schlickbernd" <corsair@schlickbernd.org> wrote in message news:GGMv7M.CBM@lugnet.com... (...) entire national (...) peace and (...) West for a (...) they do (...) <snip> Funny, I have been carrying a concealed firearm for 5 years now and no (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) I don't agree. (...) I do agree - THAT is the answer. Stop penalizing law-abiding citizens (or unnecessarily making them criminals by outlawing something the Constitution protects), and swiftly/harshly deal with the real criminals. (...) And (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) And what if it doesn't work, what then? Are you going to reimburse everyone, or just say "sorry about that" and make everyone buy new ones? (...) Reread this one a few times, everyone, and think about what it means. Dan, on the other hand, you (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Let's be realistic here: there is no *carnage*! I don't even agree that we have a "gun problem". The fact is - *less than* ONE PERCENT of firearms are used illegally! Doesn't sound like much of a problem to me. There are over 200 million guns (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) I gave the wrong impression here. I am perfectly comfortable conversing with any level of profanity. I do so daily elsewhere. However, because I once had my posting priveledge suspended for the use of a word describing the excrement of a male (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: *Child* Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) I'd like to take issue with the word *accidental* above: The number of firearm related deaths under 21 actually includes juvenile offenders shot by police in the commission of crimes! More kids are killed each year by drowning in 5 gallon (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) I'll respect that request because I agree that those *words* don't need to be used. I didn't think the word I used (***hole) was not allowed on this forum because I'm pretty sure I've seen it used before (as well as the words I usually add (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Brick quality (was Re: Another Legend dies....)
 
(...) Well then I must be blind. I've got two bricks on my desk, both steep 2x2x3 bricks. One is yellow, from <set:6075_2>; the other is dark grey, and from <set: 7184>. I can't discern, either by the naked eye, or by touch, any difference(1) (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) So don't bother trying at all, eh? Is there any way to prove your notion, Tom? I think America could at least TRY to ban all handguns, for heaven's sake. And make penalties stiffer for people, namely criminals, found with guns. I really hate (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Another Legend dies....
 
(...) And what about the weaker material? Do you want to tell me the ABS becomes harder over the years and that is the reason why new plates are deformed, when I use my fingernails to take them apart and old ones are not? I could make a material (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Another Legend dies....
 
(...) I have to side with this sentiment some, though I have seen some quality problems (a malformed 1x8 plate, a misprinted Princess Storm head, poor print quality on the straight wall of the 1st 10000 I opened, an almost unprinted head in same (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Another Legend dies....
 
(...) Ok, here's one reason against a different color 4558: For the US market, 4558 represents one of the most likely to be recognizeable passenger trains to today's kids. I was just thinking the other day that perhaps one reason that there have (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Because people are basically good, and want to help? That's why I would and have in the past. (...) Michigan just passed a relaxed CCW law. Now, the CCW boards have to approve anyone who passes a background check and pays the fee and complies (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Being that CCW permits are next to impossible to get in most states, I wouldn't be able to help. The intent to help would be there, but I'd have to stand by and watch someone possibly die, thanks to the ridiculous laws we have. (...) program (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Not going to happen, it's too late. There are untold millions of legal guns out there. Take those away from law-abiding citizens, and you still have millions of ILlegal guns in the hands of criminals. (...) Sure it does. But life is dangerous, (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) It's too late - the market is in the untold millions already, closing the floodgates will only insure that ONLY criminals have them. If we were starting from ground zero, without millions out there, it would be a different matter. (...) I'm (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Probably too many, but you handle that by making the punishment for losing track of a gun tougher, you don't ban guns when there are already millions out there. -- | Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support | Netscape Communications (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
GB doesn't count - they don't HAVE the massive amount of guns already easily available on the primary new and secondary new/used market. Two TOTALLY different bases to start from. (...) -- | Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support | (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  quality of new Lego bricks (was: Another Legend dies....)
 
(...) past (...) That's right. Old bricks have been less weak and more precise. In the 1000steine.de this is called the "Kürbis-Effekt" (= pumpkin-effect), since the Halloween pumpkin has been the fist Lego set, which was delivered in really bad (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Another Legend dies....
 
(...) To be perfectly honest, it's just not something I've ever seen. I've never gotten a misprinted brick, I've never gotten a set with missing or damaged parts, I've not noticed a general decline(1) in part quality in recent years. I think I've (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Another Legend dies....
 
(...) Shame your discussion didn't take off. I for one think that the old bricks we're of a much higher quality than the new ones. I noticed this when I ordered a pack of bulk grey bricks. When built into a wall it didn't seem flat as if their we're (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Another Legend dies....
 
(...) Sorry I was just drifting into off-topic.... I have tried to start a discussion on the topic of quality of Lego in the past a few times, but most people seem to agree with you, that this is a minor problem. (I am of the opposite opinion!) (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: *Child* Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) on a related note (well, somewhat at least) The preacher at my church asked how many people in the congregation had been involved in automobile accidents...out of a group of about fifty people, just under a dozen raised their hands. (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) For the moment, yes. Are you concerned that there may actually be a sound reason that people should maintain the ability to defend themselves? (...) Though I am not well read on this issue, I can imagine many reasons why arms may not have been (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Spot on. Those that sacrifice freedom for peace shall have neither. (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Heh, if I'm not mistaken, the prefered *get-away* method is the use of an automobile... (...) Well, of course, that explains why so *few* people die in automobile accidents. And certainly no under-age drivers ever get ahold of a vehicle and go (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Just out of curiosity, is there any basis for this assertion? Or real-world precedent, other than romanticized and falacious notions of the "Old West?" (...) Why should a witness feel a need to stop a crime, thereby placing himself in harms' (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Kind of like the old west, eh? Oh wait, that was called the Wild West for a reason. You'd even more people shooting each other for trivial reasons than they do now. God only knows the carnage that would happen on the freeways. I mean in excess (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Which is a violation of the constitution. (...) Which is a violation of the constitution. (...) It should be training for none. Chris (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
Dan, please stop profaning here. In the thread about eduporn you keep profaning but using an asterix in place of one letter. I don't buy that that is appropriate. In this note you didn't even bother. Please do. (...) I prefer to have better than the (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: *Child* Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) shocking. Do you mean this: Based on 1998 data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, over 37% of the 866 people who died from unintentional firearm wounds were under the age of 21 ? Shockingly low if you compare it to what (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Like the BATF? I agree. (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) <doing a little jig> Bring it on baby. There is one and only one way to bring the next American revolution on and that's to outlaw a significant class of weaponry. I'll tell you what...you'll be the first against the wall. (...) Agreed. It (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
 
(...) Originally to produce a state where the citizenry would have it in their power if they ever deemed it necessary to overthrow the governance by force. Now to maintain (and try to get back to) a state where the citizenry would have it in their (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Porn for sex education
 
(...) I mean wrong. Counterfactual. Not correct. (...) I'm in a somewhat different boat. I've thought this through and through and I'm convinced that it is a disservice to not treat sexuality as a casual and natural physical loving gesture. It would (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Cute. But the point remains that more deaths are caused yearly by handguns than by stabbings, and in any case multiply-fatal stabbings are rare, and certainly don't often involve the same number of victims as a shooting spree. (Again--not that (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Really, what do we need handguns and automatic weapons for except to protect ourselves from assholes with the same weapons? Get rid of them all and it significantly lowers the odds of getting shot or accidentally shooting yourself. If someone (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: What is spam? (was Re: Scary Survey results about the US First Amendment
 
(...) total (...) distorted, (...) you (...) state (...) current (...) stupid (...) Are you cluless or what? Yeah I'm really meaning it. I know what sort of place Turkey is, but do you really? For your information, political islam is very strong (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) Doesn't it disturb you that a guy with a knife killing eight Japanese schoolchildren makes worldwide news, and yet mass murders in the US often barely get a mention beyond local news? Doesn't that tell you something about this country? I would (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) You honestly believe that having a huge domestic market has no effect whatsoever on a criminals' access to weapons? That criminals would obtain handguns just as easily without a gun shop in every high street? That every handgun-related death (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
 
(...) And this is something we need to be extremely carefull of. Anyone can become a suspect. Probing of suspects (and witnesses) must be based on careful documentation of the expectation of finding something. Extreme care must also be taken to keep (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Handgun Death Rate
 
(...) And how many illegally held guns were at one point were in the hands of Joe Public legally? How many were obtained due to poor storage on the part of Joe Public (eg under the bed/pillow)? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more | 100 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

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