Another school shooting.... What is going on?!?!

[Tex :)]

Originally Posted by EnR

Edit: Wtf Tex has himself sigged twice.

I can sigg myself 100 times for all I care, but thanks for the comment?

[purebloodtexan]

Originally Posted by Tex :)

You never know. I would use a sword! My friend Will, would use a fork. Ha! But anyways, shouldn't chainsaws be outlawed for casual use? I don't know.

So by the same token, take away butter knives, forks, TV's, lamps, cups, baseball bats, hockey sticks, skateboards, video game consoles, and vases as well? Those can kill people, too.

As a matter of fact, our hands can kill as well. I think we'd better chop them off.

@Fido: So when a man walks into my house unannounced and brings a gun inside, I'll just simply run to the kitchen (which is on the other side of the house) and take my knife, and do what from there? Throw it at him, and hope that it hits him in one shot? Try to use my half-ass ninja skills and stab him at close range? Why don't I just put a bullseye on my forehead when I'm home alone?

[Tex :)]

Originally Posted by purebloodtexan

So by the same token, take away butter knives, forks, TV's, lamps, cups, baseball bats, hockey sticks, skateboards, video game consoles, and vases as well? Those can kill people, too.

As a matter of fact, our hands can kill as well. I think we'd better chop them off.

Lets not be sarcastic here...

[fido123]

Originally Posted by purebloodtexan

@Fido: So when a man walks into my house unannounced and brings a gun inside, I'll just simply take my knife, and do what from there? Throw it at him, and hope that it hits him in one shot? Try to use my half-ass ninja skills and stab him at close range? Why don't I just put a bullseye on my forehead when I'm home alone?

You should obviously barricade yourself in a room (which you should do if you have a gun anyway) and have a non-leather ranged weapon. You should also have a phone in your bedroom for this reason.

[purebloodtexan]

Originally Posted by Tex :)

Lets not be sarcastic here...

You should get my point: There are many things on your property that are efficiently lethal. That doesn't mean that we should ban them.

Also, sarcasm tends to be effective, so I use it often.

@Fido: Sure, a barricaded room. If you don't mean a complete bedroom fortress, then surely the attacker can't shoot through the lock, or even bust down the door with brute force.

Trust me, guns are necessary. Although they're often used for the wrong reasons, we'd be in even more trouble without them.

Also, Fido, you're a complete idiot if you don't think that (at least behind projectile weapons) knives are effective.

[Tex :)]

Originally Posted by purebloodtexan

You should get my point: There are many things on your property that are efficiently lethal. That doesn't mean that we should ban them.

Also, sarcasm tends to be effective, so I use it often.

Trust me, guns are necessary. Although they're often used for the wrong reasons, we'd be in even more trouble without them.

I never said guns should be banned! Guns are important! I was just responding to RoastedNoob saying what weapon I would use is guns WERE banned.
Get the picture?

[smartdude1212]

Originally Posted by fireking550

This was nothing compared to Virginia Tech

From certain standpoints it could be, taking into account that a person, whoever they may be, took it upon themselves to harm whomever they wished. In a school. Just because less people were killed/injured (so far, at least) shouldn't be seen as insignificant in comparison to something like VTech.

[fido123]

@Pureblood: Robbers don't usually break and enter to kill you, they just want to get in and grab as much crap as they can before running out. If by chance the robber is retarded enough to break into your room, a tazer or blunt weapon would probably give you as much a chance of living with a gun.

(sorry, lagging like a beast atm)

[RoastedNoob]

Originally Posted by purebloodtexan

You should get my point: There are many things on your property that are efficiently lethal. That doesn't mean that we should ban them.

Guns shouldn't be banned. They should have never existed. Guns should be destroyed. We had a perfectly fine, nearly balanced weapon set in the past. A few "top tier" weapons, such as a the bow and spear/polearm... but at least no one was at a true disadvantage in that time. Most everyone was trained in some sort of self-defense. Guns made everything stupid. It's way too damn easy to kill people now. They auto-win anyone that uses one. The only way to beat a gun is a gun or a lightsaber. There was no overpowered weapon in the medieval days. Sigh.. I wish I was born back in those days.


Scroll two posts down for the tier list thanks to Relambrien. Hehe ^-^

[Tex :)]

Originally Posted by fido123

(sorry, lagging like a beast atm)

Yeah, me too.

[Relambrien]

**** ninja'd now I need to quote

Originally Posted by RoastedNoob

We had a perfectly fine, nearly balanced weapon set in the past. A few "top tier" weapons, such as a the bow and spear/polearm... but at least no one was at a true disadvantage in that time.

Swords > Axes
Axes > Lances
Lances > Swords

lol weapon triangle

Automatic > Sidearm
Sidearm > ???
High-explosion > Automatic?

Modern-day weapon triangle.

[Tex :)]

Ok, time to go to bed, it's after 11. Debate on without me...

[Kekeb]

Originally Posted by Emo_Saur_

because if we didn't have guns we wouldn't need them for protection.

Lmao, that's some good logic.

"Because if it works theoretically, it works in practice."

EDIT: Also, explain how destroying weapons would work? Which country goes first? Someone lets down their guard and then gets bitch slapped by an opposer.

[RoastedNoob]

Guns are destroyed by a wish. They all vanish at once, never to be remade. Other than that, I just wish they were never invented. That's all I'm saying. Now that they're here, there's nothing we can do. =\

[purebloodtexan]

Originally Posted by Tex :)

I never said guns should be banned! Guns are important! I was just responding to RoastedNoob saying what weapon I would use is guns WERE banned.
Get the picture?

That wasn't directed towards you. It was directed toward the thread in general.

@RoastedNoob: Because guns and explosives were initially made for effective warfare, and they're clearly more effective than medieval weapons alone. Again, I think that they're not always used for the right reason, but I'd rather shoot my attackers than having a long-ass duel with them.

@Fido: There are robbers that do kill, and I'm not going to depend on a baseball bat to battle down someone that could have a semi-automatic for all I care.

Just to make this straight: I only support projectile weaponry for defensive purposes, seeing how many people don't use it for the same reason.

[Nyokou]

Making guns illegal would be Prohibition V2, regarding the outcome.

[arrekusuof93]

Originally Posted by fido123

Then again, why not use a tazer or other non-leather alternative?

Originally Posted by fido123

If you still feel like you have to protect yourself why not a tazer or other non-leather alternative to a firearm.

Because killing animals for weapons is just wrong.

[SSCUJO]

Why is it that Canadians don't have problems with robbers breaking into their homes with automatic weapons... hmmm i wonder.

its a circular arguement: letting everyone have guns -> the innocent gets a gun for protection -> the idiot gets the gun for what ever they want. creating strict requirments in order to own a gun -> innocent get gun for protection -> idiots get no guns...

figthing fire with fire is pointless, the guns only get bigger.

not like there is any point argueing this subject with a person by the name of 'Purebloodtexan'

[Relambrien]

Well, SSCUJO, the general rebuttal to that argument goes like this.

If you create stricter gun control laws, you decrease the number of people who can own a gun. However, criminals, who likely already get their weaponry from illegal sources anyway, are unaffected. Thus, the ones who would use guns for illegal purposes are unaffected by stricter gun control, therefore such a thing would result in a negative overall effect.

Of course, anyone presenting this argument has to show that criminals do normally get their weapons illegally, and that these illegal sources will not be affected by gun control.

(Not taking sides here, just helping further the debate)

[MarukuAntoni]

the worlds crazy. when life gets tough for someone you just never know what might happen.