Opinions/Editorials
See other Opinions/Editorials Articles
Title: Libertysflame's Question of the Day: If we ban guns will there be an increase in knife related deaths?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Dec 24, 2012
Author: A K A Stone
Post Date: 2012-12-24 00:45:54 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 32319
Comments: 78
So I was thinking about all this talk of banning guns. If they ban guns do you think that there will be an increase in knife violence? I do. I know it If you are going to kill someone you are going to do it. Murder has existed since the first family. It will always exist. It is already against the law to kill someone. So by outlawing guns you are just taking peoples rights away and leaving them defenseless to someone can simply print out a gun and kill you anyways. It is pointless. Or is there an ulterior motive? 1. Would there be an increase in knife violence if guns were banned. (note you are dumb if you think they will stop with the guns currently targeted). 2. What is that ulterior motive?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-37) not displayed.
.
.
.
#38. To: A K A Stone (#37)
(Edited)
How can you be in favor of a movement run by corporations with their corresponding new found "rights" as "individuals" yet not know anything about the legal responsibilities that those same corporationss have to their owners?
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
I guess the silly question I have is how do you plan on making all the criminals register their firearms??? All you are doing is making it harder for the average person to defend themselves adequately from the people I mentioned in the above sentence... And if you think the police are going to solve the problem by responding faster well that ain't gonna happen either, some people live "HOURS" from police response!! Of course I know you don't see it that way because you think that what you think is right even though it's wrong, and that you also think money grows on trees!!!
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
All you are doing is making it harder for the average person to defend themselves adequately from the people I mentioned in the above sentence... And if you think the police are going to solve the problem by responding faster well that ain't gonna happen either, some people live "HOURS" from police response!! Of course I know you don't see it that way because you think that what you think is right even though it's wrong, and that you also think money grows on trees!!! Why can't we follow Israel's lead on this one?
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
And what would that be anyway???
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
I do enjoy killing them,but I did it for myself,not mommy.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Is it really lying if you don't know the difference between a lie and the truth?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Kinda like political parties,huh? ESPECIALLY leftist political parties,like the Dims and the Mini-Dims.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I KNOW! I KNOW! I KNOW! CALL ME! CALL ME! We just make it illegal to have unregistered firearms. See how simple this is? In EVERY sense of the world "simple".
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Anyone who disagrees with you is considered lying because you have no idea what the definition of the word "lying" is. Just like you have no idea what the definition of "corporation" really is.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
ESPECIALLY leftist political parties,like the Dims and the Mini-Dims. If you say so. But so far I haven't had to buy stock in either one in order to vote for their candidates.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
See how simple this is? In EVERY sense of the world "simple". LOL..... At least you could have used the sarc tag, I almost spewed my Margarita into my keyboard!!
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
What other "governments" have done, is irrelevant. "if people knew that murdering other people was illegal,surely nobody would commit murder,right? Straw man - irrelevant. There is one pesky little thing standing in the way of this,though. The US Constitution,which says this is a RIGHT,not a privledge. sp (privilege) Registering an inanimate object really has nothing to do with an individual's right...... While you are at it,which of the other 9 Bill of Rights do you want to nullify? Another straw man argument - boring This will keep all of those poor darkies and rednecks from having guns, Please keep your racist comments to yourself.
What other "governments" have done, is irrelevant. Why is it irrelevant? Are we a superior race and incapable of the evils of men of other nations?
"Making all the criminals register their firearms" Can't be done, However, illegally owning a firearm will result in criminals being incarcerated. Of course, lets understand that there are LOTS of nut jobs walking the streets who, if subjected to a simple background evaluation would not be allowed within 20 yards of a weapon. That is the point of this argument, I am not advocating any sort of gun ban, I am suggesting only that, our current approach has been a failure and perhaps some changes are in order.... Your point is valid, registration doesn't prevent all firearms from falling into the wrong hands - but it will help a lot more than pretending that nothing can be done, and sticking our heads into the sand.... if you think the police are going to solve the problem by responding faster well that ain't gonna happen either, some people live "HOURS" from police response!! Now you're just making shit up...I never suggested such a ridiculous thing....not even a valid argument Of course I know you don't see it that way because you think that what you think is right even though it's wrong, I DO believe what I've said is right. - just because you say it is wrong means nothing to me - it is just your opinion. and that you also think money grows on trees!!! Again, I have not suggested anything of the sort, don't make shit up!
Our society, and our form of government is indeed unique in the world, and this point in human history is also unique. And we are not predisposed to repeat the mistakes of other countries, and to suggest that we are is moronic.
Again, I have not suggested anything of the sort, don't make shit up! Uhhh yea you did when you said this... "For instance, effective at a certain date in the near future, all firearms must be registered. The registration must be renewed each year, and a registration tax must be paid. Additionally, all gun owners must pass a competency test, and carry specific liability insurance"... Your solution costs money and money is something that some people need more for food than they need to spend on another tax to feed the insatiable/insane needs of the local and federal governments... Some people only have weapons because they were given to them or they inherited them, otherwise they wouldn't have them (because they can't afford them) and wouldn't be able to protect themselves.... The way I see it poor people have just as much right to protect themselves as people who have more money, don't you???
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
Now you're just making shit up...I never suggested such a ridiculous thing....not even a valid argument You know you really should get out more.... Have you ever been in the mountains where roads follow the natural terrain of the land??? And even though you might live 15 miles from a town (as the Crow flies) it is 60-100 miles by vehicle!! So what do those people do, hire a cop to hide in the bushes 1/2 miles down the road waiting for them to call?? Duhhh, I think not!!
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
No, you're wrong. You are inferring what I did not imply. I never said a word about money growing on trees. Now as to your point about all the poor people who would go hungry because they would be required to pony up a registration fee for each firearm they possess.... One word - priorities
I never said a word about money growing on trees. I just pointed out the phallacy of your little plan!!
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
One word - priorities So are you saying poor people should not be able to own weapons or that they should not eat so they can protect themselves??
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
You know, maybe I should get out more - thanks. You should work on reading comprehension - or stop listening to the voices in your head - I haven't written a single word about the police responding faster - or about the police responding at all. I have no idea where you came up with this.
I am saying neither - I am confident that even the "poor" people can figure out for themselves their priorities and act accordingly.
Phallacy? seriously...... www.dictionary.com No you didn't You didn't even make a solid argument.
It really pisses you off that some people make money on their own,doesn't it?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I have no idea where you came up with this. You mean that isn't the typical Leftard response when talking about gun control?? Maybe I should just quit listening/reading what you guys say and just try to read your minds instead!! (But then again maybe not).. “We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
Of COURSE is is! Why don't we just totally ignore any history that conflicts with our personal beliefs,ok? Why not just ignore human nature,too. After all,it ain't like none of that stuff matters,right? You got nothing other than stupidity and lies to back you up. Are you Joe Biden's more evil twin?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Which is why you want to change it to a mode that has failed every time it has been tried.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
seriously...... www.dictionary.com No you didn't You didn't even make a solid argument. Looks like you don't know how to spell "dicked up idea" do you?? I haven't seen a solid plan yet if you really want to know the truth!!
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
Personally,I think he should be more confined. In a mental institution.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
One word-sanity. You ain't got it. Not only are you insane,you are a habitual liar.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
In a mental institution. $5 say he already lives in a Leftard Ghetto... Can it really get any worse??
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
WHO are the Tea Party's Corporate Owners? As you are so fond of saying,"Link,please".
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
You would want a constitutional amendment to implement this correct? You assume that the government (at *any* level) still gives a crap about the Constitution. There is abundant evidence to dispel this notion as nothing more than wishful thinking. The Constitution is dead, I regret to say. This is abundantly clear from your original post, where you infer that gun confiscation is a possibility. If the Constitution mattered, your statement would be dismissed as absurd. Given the number of responses on this thread, it is clear that it's *not* so absurd. Pity. And to your original question, I've spent a bit of time in communist countries, where firearms were difficult to acquire. The weapon of choice when you wanted to kill someone, was a knife. In such a society where guns are rare, traceability is much easier; knives are so common that traceability is impossible, as a practical matter.
WHO are the Tea Party's Corporate Owners? As you are so fond of saying,"Link,please". I think you meant to ask her this.
You're right. Sorry,and thanks for the correction.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I have no idea what you consider to be the "typical" response.
Something impossible or ignorant...
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
You are welcome to your opinion my friend..... It is clear that you have nothing to offer beyond empty accusations..... Your "position" is fairly typical, and carries no weight. I'll look forward a future discussion in which you might contribute something intelligent. Best wishes
In a mental institution. What a witty come-back - Your debating skills are absolutely underwhelming..... I hope you find something to be happy about soon.
I'm happy pretty much all the time.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
UK Considers Banning Kitchen Knives December 27, 2012 by Philip Hodges We joke about it here in the U.S. that maybe the UK should ban kitchen knives since they can be used to kill someone. It looks like the UK may have taken those jokes a little too seriously because they’ve been considering banning long, pointed kitchen knives for the past several years. Researchers from West Middlesex University Hospital found that crime in their country was on the rise, and that kitchen knives were used in as many as half of all stabbings. At least they’re being consistent. They thought guns were dangerous, so they banned guns. Now, they’re acknowledging that knives have taken the place of guns and are dangerous and should also be banned. BBC News reported: “The researchers said there was no reason for long pointed knives to be publicly available at all. They consulted 10 top chefs from around the UK, and found such knives have little practical value in the kitchen. None of the chefs felt such knives were essential, since the point of a short blade was just as useful when a sharp end was needed. The researchers said a short pointed knife may cause a substantial superficial wound if used in an assault – but is unlikely to penetrate to inner organs. In contrast, a pointed long blade pierces the body like ‘cutting into a ripe melon.’” After they’ve banned long, pointy kitchen knives, are they going to ban sharp pencils? Nail files? Screwdrivers? Fists? They can keep banning all these objects, but people will always find other means of inflicting injury or death if that’s what they really want to do. I think the U.S. is a long way away from banning kitchen knives. They’d first have to confiscate all the guns, and that’s just not going to be possible anytime soon. I really don’t think that those in power over us want an all-out bloody war in order to disarm us. They know they have to be careful. They would much rather “conquer” us through our consent. They just want us to submit. We’re the frogs in the pot of water, and with every law that gets enacted, the heat turns up a little. We acclimate, and then they turn up the heat again, but only a little. Over time, we Americans simply forget and get used to the tyranny that we’ve grown up in and lived through. Before we know it, the water will be boiling us, and by then it will be too late for us to fight back. They want nothing more than a bunch of willing slaves who believe they are free and secure in government’s chains, which they see as the protective arms of a loving mother. With every massacre that the media turns into an international spectacle, people’s brains will be numbed just a little more. With every opinion poll taken after each massacre, people will show their increasing willingness to just submit, turn in their guns and let the government take care of them. One hopeful thing is for sure, though. In the midst of all these self-deceived slaves, there will always be a remnant of real freedom-lovers who refused to acclimate to tyranny.
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
For example?
#39. To: Jameson, AKA Stone, sneakypete (#4)
For instance, effective at a certain date in the near future, all firearms must be registered. The registration must be renewed each year, and a registration tax must be paid. Additionally, all gun owners must pass a competency test, and carry specific liability insurance.
#40. To: CZ82 (#39)
I guess the silly question I have is how do you plan on making all the criminals register their firearms???
#41. To: mininggold (#40)
Why can't we follow Israel's lead on this one?
#42. To: mininggold (#26)
Why... there are Commies under every bed now, and you need to kill a few more for Mommy.
#43. To: A K A Stone (#32)
You sure lie a lot. Do you have a conscience?
#44. To: mininggold (#36)
CEOs routinely put their morals aside for the good of the corporation and stockholders which in all cases is to return a profit.
#45. To: CZ82 (#39)
I guess the silly question I have is how do you plan on making all the criminals register their firearms???
#46. To: A K A Stone (#32)
You sure lie a lot. Do you have a conscience?
#47. To: sneakypete (#44)
Kinda like political parties,huh?
#48. To: sneakypete (#45)
We just make it illegal to have unregistered firearms.
#49. To: sneakypete (#16)
After all,when has that never worked out and led to gun confiscation after the various governments that have done this found out where all the guns are.
#50. To: Jameson (#49)
After all,when has that never worked out and led to gun confiscation after the various governments that have done this found out where all the guns are.
#51. To: CZ82 (#39)
I guess the silly question I have is how do you plan on making all the criminals register their firearms???
#52. To: A K A Stone (#50)
Why is it irrelevant?
#53. To: Jameson (#51)
and that you also think money grows on trees!!!
#54. To: Jameson (#51)
if you think the police are going to solve the problem by responding faster well that ain't gonna happen either, some people live "HOURS" from police response!!
#55. To: CZ82 (#53)
Uhhh yea you did when you said this...
#56. To: Jameson (#55)
No, you're wrong. You are inferring what I did not imply.
#57. To: Jameson (#55)
Now as to your point about all the poor people who would go hungry because they would be required to pony up a registration fee for each firearm they possess....
#58. To: CZ82 (#54)
Have you ever been in the mountains where roads follow the natural terrain of the land??? And even though you might live 15 miles from a town (as the Crow flies) it is 60-100 miles by vehicle!!
#59. To: CZ82 (#57)
So are you saying poor people should not be able to own weapons or that they should not eat so they can protect themselves??
#60. To: CZ82 (#56)
I just pointed out the phallacy of your little plan!!
#61. To: mininggold (#47)
If you say so. But so far I haven't had to buy stock in either one in order to vote for their candidates.
#62. To: Jameson (#58)
You should work on reading comprehension - or stop listening to the voices in your head - I haven't written a single word about the police responding faster - or about the police responding at all.
#63. To: Jameson (#49)
What other "governments" have done, is irrelevant.
#64. To: Jameson (#52)
Our society, and our form of government is indeed unique in the world,
#65. To: Jameson (#60)
Phallacy?
#66. To: CZ82, Jameson (#54)
You know you really should get out more....
#67. To: Jameson (#55)
One word - priorities
#68. To: sneakypete (#66)
Personally,I think he should be more confined.
#69. To: A K A Stone (#34)
Actually the Tea Party's corporate owners have NO morals.
#70. To: A K A Stone (#5)
In your scenario since it obviously violates the second amendment.
#71. To: sneakypete, mininggold (#69)
Actually the Tea Party's corporate owners have NO morals.
#72. To: A K A Stone (#71)
#73. To: CZ82 (#62)
You mean that isn't the typical Leftard response when talking about gun control??
It was not my response, and you know it.
#74. To: Jameson (#73)
I have no idea what you consider to be the "typical" response.
#75. To: sneakypete (#67)
You ain't got it. Not only are you insane,you are a habitual liar.
#76. To: sneakypete (#66)
Personally,I think he should be more confined.
#77. To: Jameson (#76)
"I hope you find something to be happy about soon."
#78. To: A K A Stone (#0)
1. Would there be an increase in knife violence if guns were banned. (note you are dumb if you think they will stop with the guns currently targeted).
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]