LinuxQuestions.org
Register a domain and help support LQ
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 12-17-2012, 09:06 AM   #16
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,592
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nbiser View Post
What is this about kidnapping people from around the world? I have never heard of that before.
For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_El-Masri
Your government kidnaps, tortures, makes action against human rights, but yet:
Quote:
the government hasn't been tyrannical enough to warrant our standing up and fighting
So when do you stand up and fight? When it is you that get kidnapped and tortured, not some random stranger?

Quote:
I was pointing out that just because my country, the US is a major super power doesn't mean that it will not fall. Rome was also a major military super power, but it fell as well.
That Rome could be invaded by other peoples was a symptom of the fall, not the cause. Rome fell because of political reasons. Guns won't help there.

Quote:
Don't forget, many gun owners in the US hunt (I hunt) and the animals we hunt don't stand still and say 'shoot me' they are running or flying to get away from us.
Of course, they are unarmed and have no other chance than to run away. You are totally safe.
A criminal with a weapon will not do the same, he will charge you, he will shoot at you, he will try to kill you. Do you really think the situation is the same?

Quote:
I don't think that all of the training that our police receive is a waste of tax dollars; most of the gun owners in the US aren't allowed to carry their guns around which means that the police need training; even if we were allowed to carry our guns around we might not be at a scene of a shooting.
So basically you say: the police needs training for the case that armed civilians without training aren't available.
Why do policemen need training, but civilians don't?

Quote:
They may have been legally bought, but they weren't being carried legally, I highly doubt they had concealed carry permits.
They wouldn't have carried them illegally if they wouldn't be able to get them in the first place.

Quote:
This does indeed explain the high rate of violent crimes. We gun owners can't carry our guns to Walmart or the movie theater, so the bad guys are made more bold. They know that they can kill many people before the police get there.
Actually, no it doesn't explain that. In countries with gun control the citizens are also not allowed to carry guns around, so the bad guys have the same situation as in your country, were you can't carry your weapons to every place, but nonetheless is the crime rate with guns involved in your country much higher than in any other western country with gun control.

Quote:
They know that they can kill many people before the police get there. If we were allowed to carry our guns around with us the bad guys would get shot down before they could kill very many people.
Or more people would get shot, including the "defender", because the "defender" is untrained and can't handle the situation properly. Just owning a gun does not give you magically the ability to do that, extensive training does.
Quote:
I've read very many stories that go along these lines: ' There was a man at an armed bank robbery that had a concealed carry permit. This man pinned the armed robber down until the police got there."
I have seen many stories that go like this: "There was this man with his legally purchased weapons and he shot down innocent children and other civilians."
Why does your story count as argument against gun control, but the other story does not count as argument for gun control?

Last edited by TobiSGD; 12-17-2012 at 09:09 AM. Reason: fixed typos
 
Old 12-17-2012, 09:30 AM   #17
Celyr
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2012
Location: Italy
Distribution: Slackware+Debian
Posts: 314

Rep: Reputation: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nbiser View Post
No gun lovers don't all like the power that a gun gives you; well, maybe they do, the power to save lives.
I want just to point out how silly you are. How can you say that a gun is a LIFE SAVER DEVICE it's just ridiculous to even think that.
 
Old 12-17-2012, 09:34 AM   #18
dugan
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: distro hopper
Posts: 4,758

Rep: Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nbiser View Post
The fact that the US is a military super power is enough to make me want to hold onto my guns. After all, when there is a military superpower the government is strong; when the government is strong tyranny often comes. After all, England was a military super power and she tyranized over her colonies. Thus, I am defending my freedom and the freedom of others when I have a gun. Also, ancient Rome was a superpower, and she fell, overrun by enemy armies.
Let me point out that an "armed citizenry" overcoming a modern military is a supremely unrealistic scenario these days. To win, you're going to need to get the military to betray the government and join you (as the Romanians did).

Last edited by dugan; 12-17-2012 at 09:36 AM.
 
Old 12-17-2012, 10:06 AM   #19
moxieman99
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Distribution: Dabble, but latest used are Fedora 13 and Ubuntu 10.4.1
Posts: 413

Rep: Reputation: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
Man, all that training for law enforcement officers and soldiers that enables them to hit moving targets, keep an overview in dangerous situations, keep calm (master the adrenaline rush, fighting the tunnel vision, ...) must clearly be a waste of tax money in your eyes, since the average citizen seems to be able to do all that without training.
Not at all. Simple fact is that the police can't be everywhere, and owning weapons IS an effective substitute for when the police aren't around and the bad guys are.

Keep in mind that it is not just a question of adding more police. I for one wouldn't want to live in a society where we did have cops on every corner. I suspect that a lot of other people wouldn't want to either.

The question we have to ask is, "What in society is turning out all these violent fruit loops?" Once we answer that question, we can reduce the incidence of that factor and thereby reduce violence.
 
Old 12-17-2012, 10:14 AM   #20
moxieman99
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Distribution: Dabble, but latest used are Fedora 13 and Ubuntu 10.4.1
Posts: 413

Rep: Reputation: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
I have seen many stories that go like this: "There was this man with his legally purchased weapons and he shot down innocent children and other civilians."


Why does your story count as argument against gun control, but the other story does not count as argument for gun control?
It does, but you have to change the Second Amendment first. The greater damage isn't from wackos with guns, it's from people who would ignore the Constitution. It says what it says for a reason. Don't like it? Change it.


Propose a new constitutional amendment addressing gun rights, have a full and unhindered debate by society about the proposal, and get the Constitution changed. We have an amendment process, use it.
 
Old 12-17-2012, 10:16 AM   #21
moxieman99
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Distribution: Dabble, but latest used are Fedora 13 and Ubuntu 10.4.1
Posts: 413

Rep: Reputation: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Celyr View Post
I want just to point out how silly you are. How can you say that a gun is a LIFE SAVER DEVICE it's just ridiculous to even think that.
Not at all. Citizens on the scene using their own guns are widely credited with pinning down Charles Whitman, the Texas Library Tower sniper in 1964 ('65?) and keeping him from killing and wounding more people.
 
Old 12-17-2012, 10:44 AM   #22
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,592
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by moxieman99 View Post
Not at all. Citizens on the scene using their own guns are widely credited with pinning down Charles Whitman, the Texas Library Tower sniper in 1964 ('65?) and keeping him from killing and wounding more people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman
Quote:
On the morning of August 1, Whitman rented a hand truck from Austin Rental Company and cashed $250 of worthless checks at the bank before driving to a hardware store, where he purchased a Universal M1 carbine, two additional ammunition magazines and eight boxes of ammunition, explaining to the cashier that he planned to hunt wild hogs.[39] Whitman then drove to Chuck's Gun Shop, where he purchased four further carbine magazines, six additional boxes of ammunition and a can of gun cleaning solvent, before driving to Sears, where he purchased a 12 gauge semi-automatic shotgun and a green rifle case. He then drove his purchases home.
The real question is: Would that incident have happened, at least to that extent, if Whitman wouldn't have been able to legally purchase those weapons?
The argument: "People should have the right to legally buy and wear guns to enable them to stop other people from using those legally purchased guns." sounds somewhat weird to me.

Last edited by TobiSGD; 12-17-2012 at 10:45 AM.
 
Old 12-17-2012, 11:20 AM   #23
moxieman99
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Distribution: Dabble, but latest used are Fedora 13 and Ubuntu 10.4.1
Posts: 413

Rep: Reputation: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
The argument: "People should have the right to legally buy and wear guns to enable them to stop other people from using those legally purchased guns." sounds somewhat weird to me.
So you propose to ignore the Second Amendment?
 
Old 12-17-2012, 11:30 AM   #24
Nbiser
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2012
Location: Maryland
Distribution: Fedora, Slackware, Debian, Ubuntu, Knoppix, Helix,
Posts: 288
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 43
Quote:
TobiSGD;4850951]For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_El-Masri
Your government kidnaps, tortures, makes action against human rights, but yet:So when do you stand up and fight? When it is you that get kidnapped and tortured, not some random stranger?
Now don't get me wrong, I don't think that it is right for my government to do these kinds of atrocities......I am very shocked that the government does these kinds of things; however, with the current state that our government is in I am not surprised. Now that I have clarified how I feel....the US constitution doesn't apply outside the borders of the US, and it most certainly doesn't cover foreigners outside the borders of the US. I would rather carry on this kind of fight in the courts and in the legislative bodies, not with guns; perhaps make it so citizens of other countries are protected from the CIA and other government agencies even when outside of the nation. Though the US is going downhill, it is not yet as bad as the USSR was. If were to get closer to how the USSR or Nazi Germany was, then would be the time to fight.

Quote:
That Rome could be invaded by other peoples was a symptom of the fall, not the cause. Rome fell because of political reasons. Guns won't help there.
You say that Rome fell because of political reasons. These political reasons were basically corruption and inept management. The US is now going down the same road. And the inept political management will leak over into the military. Thus we seen that the US hasn't won a war since WII. Vietnam, North Korea, and the various wars in the middle east have all gone down in military history as a defeat for the US. Even if we successfully defeated the standing army of the country we were defeated by armed citizens waging a guerrilla war.

Quote:
Of course, they are unarmed and have no other chance than to run away. You are totally safe.
A criminal with a weapon will not do the same, he will charge you, he will shoot at you, he will try to kill you. Do you really think the situation is the same?
I was merely pointing out that we are able to hit moving targets even though we aren't trained to do so.

Quote:
So basically you say: the police needs training for the case that armed civilians without training aren't available.
Why do policemen need training, but civilians don't?
You may have a point, perhaps the civilians should receive training from qualified individuals like the Swiss used to do. That was the reason that Hitler didn't invade Switzerland during WWII, he knew that their highly trained militia would defeat his army.

Quote:
They wouldn't have carried them illegally if they wouldn't be able to get them in the first place.
No, there would be a black market of guns that would be run by the criminals. Excluding all of us good guys.

Quote:
Actually, no it doesn't explain that. In countries with gun control the citizens are also not allowed to carry guns around, so the bad guys have the same situation as in your country, were you can't carry your weapons to every place, but nonetheless is the crime rate with guns involved in your country much higher than in any other western country with gun control.
Yes, but I have read some Scottish publications and they have high amounts of knife crimes, I have heard the same for the rest of Europe. So, I guess we should take away all knives and then (since you can smother people with pillows)take away all pillows. Oh.....you can strangle people with computer cables, take away computer cables. Almost everything can be used as a weapon, government can only regulate so much.
Quote:
Or more people would get shot, including the "defender", because the "defender" is untrained and can't handle the situation properly. Just owning a gun does not give you magically the ability to do that, extensive training does.
I have seen many stories that go like this: "There was this man with his legally purchased weapons and he shot down innocent children and other civilians."
Why does your story count as argument against gun control, but the other story does not count as argument for gun control?
I will admit, some people may get shot by the armed civilian; however, in nine out of ten cases the death toll will be less than if the armed civilian had just stood by and watched (or fled). If there was somebody at Sandy Hook Elementry school that had a gun when the shooting started, a teacher, for instance, and was able to shoot the shooter, ten kids may have died, not twenty.

Last edited by Nbiser; 12-17-2012 at 11:35 AM. Reason: Clarify
 
Old 12-17-2012, 11:43 AM   #25
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,592
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047
Quote:
perhaps make it so citizens of other countries are protected from the CIA and other government agencies even when outside of the nation
This is ridiculous. The default position should be that an US agency should have to respect other countries citizen's rights, if you specifically have to make them behave that way then there obviously is something wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nbiser View Post
Yes, but I have read some Scottish publications and they have high amounts of knife crimes, I have heard the same for the rest of Europe. So, I guess we should take away all knives and then (since you can smother people with pillows)take away all pillows. Oh.....you can strangle people with computer cables, take away computer cables. Almost everything can be used as a weapon, government can only regulate so much.
Knifes usually have a different purpose than stabbing people. like cutting vegetables or what not. Pillows usually have the purpose to make you feel comfortable. Computer cables main purpose is to connect with with other things.

Guns only purpose is to shoot with them, they are intended to be used for killing or at least injuring people. It should be pretty obvious that those things are simply not the same and should be treated differently.

Last edited by TobiSGD; 12-17-2012 at 11:47 AM.
 
Old 12-17-2012, 11:57 AM   #26
Nbiser
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2012
Location: Maryland
Distribution: Fedora, Slackware, Debian, Ubuntu, Knoppix, Helix,
Posts: 288
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 43
Irrelevant!

Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
This is ridiculous. The default position should be that an US agency should have to respect other countries citizen's rights, if you specifically have to make them behave that way then there obviously is something wrong.
This doesn't directly bear on whether a citizen can bear arms and use them well to defend others. He can defend others even better if he has the training.

Quote:
Knifes usually have a different purpose than stabbing people. like cutting vegetables or what not. Pillows usually have the purpose to make you feel comfortable. Computer cables main purpose is to connect with with other things.

Guns only purpose is to shoot with them, they are intended to be used for killing or at least injuring people. It should be pretty obvious that those things are simply not the same and should be treated differently.
I was being sarcastic; a gun's only purpose is to kill, but you can use a gun to stop a killer. The argument that you made here is an irrelevant argument. An armed citizen can stop a killer from killing, its just that simple. There have been many times and many places were an honest citizen with a gun has defended himself and others.
 
Old 12-17-2012, 12:30 PM   #27
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,592
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nbiser View Post
An armed citizen can stop a killer from killing, its just that simple.
Would be better to start with: Don't give people easy access to weapons, so that it is much more difficult for the killers to arm themselves.

Quote:
There have been many times and many places were an honest citizen with a gun has defended himself and others.
There also have been time and places were it wouldn't have been necessary when guns weren't so easily available.
 
Old 12-17-2012, 01:13 PM   #28
dugan
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: distro hopper
Posts: 4,758

Rep: Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465Reputation: 1465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nbiser View Post
An armed citizen can stop a killer from killing
Or, of course, escalate the situation into something even worse.
 
Old 12-17-2012, 01:39 PM   #29
commandguru
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Dec 2012
Posts: 4

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Personally, I don't want to live in a modern day Dodge City where everyone can bear arms because some trigger happy a$$hole might shoot me by accident.
 
Old 12-17-2012, 01:48 PM   #30
Blinker_Fluid
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Clinging to my guns and religion.
Posts: 682

Rep: Reputation: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by commandguru View Post
Personally, I don't want to live in a modern day Dodge City where everyone can bear arms because some trigger happy a$$hole might shoot me by accident.
I would prefer to live somewhere I can shoot a trigger happy a$$hole on purpose.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Recommend software for an elementary school computer lab jsugi Linux - Software 11 08-18-2010 04:00 PM
LXer: Skegness Grammar School, using GNU/Linux and thin-clients across the school LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 08-23-2008 11:00 PM
Rsync homework from school to home, and home to school RandomLinuxNewb Linux - Software 2 05-05-2006 04:41 AM
Does anyone have hardware for my elementary school classroom? tuxthelinuxpeng Linux - Hardware 0 04-05-2004 06:48 PM
school help robot182 Linux - General 3 04-13-2001 09:39 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:37 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration