not where i live...... if your a US citizen... the whole killing deal is proberly thanks to the "bearing of arms" deal.
I call ********. The criminals in your country are no more courteous than the ones in the US. If they feel threatened, they are going to protect themselves, and if there are more than one, and they have knives, you're in a lot of trouble.
Now, don't take me the wrong way. I'm not looking forward to any event that would lead me to shoot someone. In fact, if I could rack a shotgun and scare them out of my house, that would be ideal. But if they start moving in my direction, they will be shot.
Putting certain restrictions on owning and purchasing a firearm =/= taking away your 2nd Amendment.
If you want a gun that bad to "protect your family," then take a training course based upon which firearm you plan on purchasing, have the city register that you are in possession of a firearm, and take a test every XX amount of years to see if you still arn't crazy.
Certainly this is reasonable.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"...But don’t worry, you’re not alone, there are many men like you left in the world, and some of them even used to be your friends. After all, this is America, and we only kill our friends." - Immortal Technique
Putting certain restrictions on owning and purchasing a firearm =/= taking away your 2nd Amendment.
If you want a gun that bad to "protect your family," then take a training course based upon which firearm you plan on purchasing, have the city register that you are in possession of a firearm, and take a test every XX amount of years to see if you still arn't crazy.
Certainly this is reasonable.
You have to have a license to drive a car, and it must be registered. I agree, I am not against licensing and registration.
I also think parents should teach their kids about safe gun handling, especially if they own guns.
Putting certain restrictions on owning and purchasing a firearm =/= taking away your 2nd Amendment.
If you want a gun that bad to "protect your family," then take a training course based upon which firearm you plan on purchasing, have the city register that you are in possession of a firearm, and take a test every XX amount of years to see if you still arn't crazy.
Certainly this is reasonable.
I shouldn't have to take tests to prove I want to defend myself from people. Registration and training would consume more time than what should be necessary just to protect myself from potential danger.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Off Topic is so troll-free and friendly! I love it!
The test wouldn't be about your willingness to defend yourself, it would show that you can properly handle a gun. I think this is very important to learn if you want to own a gun. It may seem obvious, but you would be surprised at how many people walk around with fingers on the trigger, swing their gun around towards their family after shooting a few rounds, and other completely dumb stuff. How many times do we have to hear "I didn't know it was loaded" before we start educating people?
Putting certain restrictions on owning and purchasing a firearm =/= taking away your 2nd Amendment.
If you want a gun that bad to "protect your family," then take a training course based upon which firearm you plan on purchasing, have the city register that you are in possession of a firearm, and take a test every XX amount of years to see if you still arn't crazy.
Certainly this is reasonable.
I shouldn't have to take tests to prove I want to defend myself from people. Registration and training would consume more time than what should be necessary just to protect myself from potential danger.
Who's to say YOU arnt the "potential danger"? God forbid you have to take a 3 day training course to make sure you arnt a raving ****ing lunatic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"...But don’t worry, you’re not alone, there are many men like you left in the world, and some of them even used to be your friends. After all, this is America, and we only kill our friends." - Immortal Technique
I shouldn't have to take tests to prove I want to defend myself from people. Registration and training would consume more time than what should be necessary just to protect myself from potential danger.
Ok, now dont be stupid.
I am all for tests.
Insane or incredibly stupid people should not be allowed to hold guns.
Who's to say YOU aren't the "potential danger"? God forbid you have to take a 3 day training course to make sure you aren't a raving ****ing lunatic.
I'm not completely against the training, but the annual test idea is completely unnecessary.
Quote from Garret »
Should we not have driving tests because "I shouldn't have to take tests to prove I need to drive safely"?
Obviously not, but owning a firearm and knowing how to drive are different on the priority scale for people. Everyone is required to pass a driving test, but not for owning a weapon. If there were some way to filter out the people who want to own a gun just for owning a gun, I'd would be for it.
Quote from XDragon350 »
The test wouldn't be about your willingness to defend yourself, it would show that you can properly handle a gun. I think this is very important to learn if you want to own a gun. It may seem obvious, but you would be surprised at how many people walk around with fingers on the trigger, swing their gun around towards their family after shooting a few rounds, and other completely dumb stuff. How many times do we have to hear "I didn't know it was loaded" before we start educating people?
As I said, not completely against the training, but the idea of taking a test to show that you haven't become insane in the past year is ridiculous.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Off Topic is so troll-free and friendly! I love it!
As I said, not completely against the training, but the idea of taking a test to show that you haven't become insane in the past year is ridiculous.
What if you're going senile/blind, and you still are in possession of a gun? Your 25 year old son comes home from a long day at work, opens the door, and accidently knocks a lamp over. You spring to attention, grab your revolver, run to the site of the noise. It's dark, but you see a figure, but you cant quite make it out. He's obviously a robber trying to steal your expensive, top of the line, black-an-white television, right? Anyone else would obviously recognize it's their own son. To late, blam, blam. You shoot your son dead because your mind happened to be slipping and your eyesight is horrendous. This could have been avoided by simply taking an annual test.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"...But don’t worry, you’re not alone, there are many men like you left in the world, and some of them even used to be your friends. After all, this is America, and we only kill our friends." - Immortal Technique
As I said, not completely against the training, but the idea of taking a test to show that you haven't become insane in the past year is ridiculous.
Why?
Hell, I'd have a test and re-training every 3 months. This is important.
I don't think that undergoing training and registration is too outrageous, but spontaneously becoming unable to properly handle a weapon after the two former isn't likely at all, or credible for any of my time.
Quote from XDragon350 »
Well, yeah I agree with you there.
I'm not sure what you mean by filtering out people that want a gun just to have one. What's wrong with that?
I'm thinking more as a kind of cool toy to show to friends.
Quote from Vincenzo »
What if you're going senile/blind, and you still are in possession of a gun? Your 25 year old son comes home from a long day at work, opens the door, and accidently knocks a lamp over. You spring to attention, grab your revolver, run to the site of the noise. It's dark, but you see a figure, but you cant quite make it out. He's obviously a robber trying to steal your expensive, top of the line, black-an-white television, right? Anyone else would obviously recognize it's their own son. To late, blam, blam. You shoot your son dead because your mind happened to be slipping and your eyesight is horrendous. This could have been avoided by simply taking an annual test.
If you are becoming too senile to handle a firearm, then you would have yourself unregistered and the gun taken. I thought it would be a given to return guns if you were going blind, too.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Off Topic is so troll-free and friendly! I love it!
What if you're going senile/blind, and you still are in possession of a gun? Your 25 year old son comes home from a long day at work, opens the door, and accidently knocks a lamp over. You spring to attention, grab your revolver, run to the site of the noise. It's dark, but you see a figure, but you cant quite make it out. He's obviously a robber trying to steal your expensive, top of the line, black-an-white television, right? Anyone else would obviously recognize it's their own son. To late, blam, blam. You shoot your son dead because your mind happened to be slipping and your eyesight is horrendous. This could have been avoided by simply taking an annual test.
How can it obviously be a robber if you can't make out who it is? In that case, dad is not a responsible gun owner, you should ALWAYS know what you are aiming at before you fire your gun.
Quote from Lord Cricket »
Quote from XDragon350 »
I'm not sure what you mean by filtering out people that want a gun just to have one. What's wrong with that?
I'm thinking more as a kind of cool toy to show to friends.
I still don't see a problem. Unless that person is waving the gun around like an idiot, why shouldn't he be able to collect them?
How can it obviously be a robber if you can't make out who it is? In that case, dad is not a responsible gun owner, you should ALWAYS know what you are aiming at before you fire your gun.
I was being sarcastic. If you're crazy, I'm sure you'd always jump to the worst case scenario. My point was, if you are going senile and you believe someone is robbing you, you obviously wouldn't talk before you shoot. My main reasoning behind that story was that that wouldn't be a problem if you had to re-test every XX years, because they'd realize you cant see worth a damn, and need to be checked into an old's folks home. Two birds, one stone.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"...But don’t worry, you’re not alone, there are many men like you left in the world, and some of them even used to be your friends. After all, this is America, and we only kill our friends." - Immortal Technique
I'm sorry but I just laughed my ass off. My brain recognized that as sarcasm. I feel like an asshole
I call ********. The criminals in your country are no more courteous than the ones in the US. If they feel threatened, they are going to protect themselves, and if there are more than one, and they have knives, you're in a lot of trouble.
Now, don't take me the wrong way. I'm not looking forward to any event that would lead me to shoot someone. In fact, if I could rack a shotgun and scare them out of my house, that would be ideal. But if they start moving in my direction, they will be shot.
Heh, it was more sarcastic than serious, but people who manage to misunderstand others so radically are really frustrating.
Good, lol. But I agree. They're opinion seems too stupid to be true :tongue.gif:
If you want a gun that bad to "protect your family," then take a training course based upon which firearm you plan on purchasing, have the city register that you are in possession of a firearm, and take a test every XX amount of years to see if you still arn't crazy.
Certainly this is reasonable.
You have to have a license to drive a car, and it must be registered. I agree, I am not against licensing and registration.
I also think parents should teach their kids about safe gun handling, especially if they own guns.
I shouldn't have to take tests to prove I want to defend myself from people. Registration and training would consume more time than what should be necessary just to protect myself from potential danger.
Who's to say YOU arnt the "potential danger"? God forbid you have to take a 3 day training course to make sure you arnt a raving ****ing lunatic.
Ok, now dont be stupid.
I am all for tests.
Insane or incredibly stupid people should not be allowed to hold guns.
The world doesnt need any more school massacres.
I'm not completely against the training, but the annual test idea is completely unnecessary.
Obviously not, but owning a firearm and knowing how to drive are different on the priority scale for people. Everyone is required to pass a driving test, but not for owning a weapon. If there were some way to filter out the people who want to own a gun just for owning a gun, I'd would be for it.
As I said, not completely against the training, but the idea of taking a test to show that you haven't become insane in the past year is ridiculous.
Well, yeah I agree with you there.
I'm not sure what you mean by filtering out people that want a gun just to have one. What's wrong with that?
What if you're going senile/blind, and you still are in possession of a gun? Your 25 year old son comes home from a long day at work, opens the door, and accidently knocks a lamp over. You spring to attention, grab your revolver, run to the site of the noise. It's dark, but you see a figure, but you cant quite make it out. He's obviously a robber trying to steal your expensive, top of the line, black-an-white television, right? Anyone else would obviously recognize it's their own son. To late, blam, blam. You shoot your son dead because your mind happened to be slipping and your eyesight is horrendous. This could have been avoided by simply taking an annual test.
I don't think that undergoing training and registration is too outrageous, but spontaneously becoming unable to properly handle a weapon after the two former isn't likely at all, or credible for any of my time.
I'm thinking more as a kind of cool toy to show to friends.
If you are becoming too senile to handle a firearm, then you would have yourself unregistered and the gun taken. I thought it would be a given to return guns if you were going blind, too.
How can it obviously be a robber if you can't make out who it is? In that case, dad is not a responsible gun owner, you should ALWAYS know what you are aiming at before you fire your gun.
I still don't see a problem. Unless that person is waving the gun around like an idiot, why shouldn't he be able to collect them?
I was being sarcastic. If you're crazy, I'm sure you'd always jump to the worst case scenario. My point was, if you are going senile and you believe someone is robbing you, you obviously wouldn't talk before you shoot. My main reasoning behind that story was that that wouldn't be a problem if you had to re-test every XX years, because they'd realize you cant see worth a damn, and need to be checked into an old's folks home. Two birds, one stone.
10 seems a little low age,mabey 16?
It's super effective!
Pointless thread has fainted!
This is why i love MC fourm's moderators