Why do people want guns?

Chikombo

Active member
Elite
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
7,420
Kin
9,371💸
Kumi
1,003💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Awards
I don't understand the infatuation people have with weapons.

More guns in society escalates violence and makes things less safe, yet it's like people think it's reasonable to have more guns, like you need guns to make society better.


I get the argument you want a gun in your home to feel safe but it's ridiculous and doesn't matter, I have no feeling of need for that.

If people took away guns from civilians in a country then that country would be safer, that's reality, yet people pretend they want guns for other reasons than just some cultural or traditional, tribal reason.
 

Animegoin

Active member
Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2018
Messages
4,020
Kin
4,124💸
Kumi
2,010💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
“If people took away guns from civilization in a country then that country would be safer. That’s reality.”

Lmfao well that’s a subjective statement if I’d ever seen one.
 

HowDidIGetPrem

Active member
Elite
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Messages
5,820
Kin
5,803💸
Kumi
1,192💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Awards
Guns don't escalate violence, they end it whether by causing someone to die, drop, or run. I guess it'd be safer in the sense of less deaths though not in the amount of incidents. Someone willing to mug another still holds that sentiment whether they have a gun or not, unleashing it just becomes a task of finding surefire opportunities that a gun would otherwise create or being ballsy.
 

chopstickchakra

Active member
Legendary
Joined
Jun 4, 2012
Messages
12,896
Kin
4,684💸
Kumi
129💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Guns don't escalate violence, they end it whether by causing someone to die, drop, or run. I guess it'd be safer in the sense of less deaths though not in the amount of incidents. Someone willing to mug another still holds that sentiment whether they have a gun or not, unleashing it just becomes a task of finding surefire opportunities that a gun would otherwise create or being ballsy.
No they don't, if that were true then there'd be no more violence, I agree with you on the rest
 

Azarath Metrion Zinthos

Active member
Legendary
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
11,713
Kin
375💸
Kumi
87💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Awards
First of all, it's not something that only can be explained as an infatuation, for others, it's for defense, so they can protect their family if things ever went haywire. Also, the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." A state with completely unarmed citizens would mean the citizens are defenseless, if ever the government turned against them. It would be so easy subjugating everyone if the entire state didn't have guns besides the government. The centralization would be excessive, and would put everyone in potential danger of an emergence of a tyrannical government.
 

Koibito

Active member
Regular
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
1,578
Kin
15💸
Kumi
12💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Guns don't escalate violence, they end it whether by causing someone to die, drop, or run.
Well thats definitely, not true, ever heard of shoot outs? Or what if only 1 person in a conflict has a gun? Guns are weapons, weapons promote violence, end of story.

Although I think it is equally naive to say that guns should be taken away from "civilians." The moment the general populace surrenders the right to bear arms (thus leaving the only guns in the hands of the corrupt world governments) we civilians will have signed any semblance of freedom away. Do you really think any government is going to give up their guns? No, they would take guns from civilians and keep them therefore meaning only corrupt gov'ts as well as criminals who do not abide by the laws will have guns making the general populace easy pickings for either side. People act like world history isnt full of manipulative governments taking advantage of their citizens. Wake up people.

I do however think that IF there where a way to disarm the entire world and not just a fraction of the population, we would have a better society. Guns make killing mass amounts of people too easy, yes a person can still be violent with something like a sword but in all honesty, who the f#ck is going to be able to kill a room full of hundreds of people in 2 minutes with a broadsword? who the f#ck is going to be able to kill multiple classroom's worth of children an instant with a d@mn katana? Haha unless youre implying that we are all Kenshin Himuras walking around, its impossible to deny that guns alone make MASS acts of violence possible for violent people.
 

HowDidIGetPrem

Active member
Elite
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Messages
5,820
Kin
5,803💸
Kumi
1,192💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Awards
No they don't, if that were true then there'd be no more violence, I agree with you on the rest
I don't mean violence in general, I mean in one instance. I doubt a mugger would stick around if his victim whipped out a pistol.
Well thats definitely, not true, ever heard of shoot outs? Or what if only 1 person in a conflict has a gun? Guns are weapons, weapons promote violence, end of story.
That's what I mean't. In the scenario that only 1 person has a gun. I'm not saying all or most outcomes of a gun can result in are good.
 

Yeah right

Active member
Regular
Joined
May 25, 2016
Messages
1,267
Kin
4💸
Kumi
-6💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
First of all, it's not something that only can be explained as an infatuation, for others, it's for defense, so they can protect their family if things ever went haywire. Also, the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." A state with completely unarmed citizens would mean the citizens are defenseless, if ever the government turned against them. It would be so easy subjugating everyone if the entire state didn't have guns besides the government. The centralization would be excessive, and would put everyone in potential danger of an emergence of a tyrannical government.
It’s not the government turned against you. You turned against the government which makes you a traitor. Traitors need to be shot. Laws are laws. Laws change. Freedoms change. I don’t remember guns saving your civil liberties during the bush era. How did guns stop the NSA?

You idiots think a gun can save you from corruption. But you let private companies in your homes. Give all your private information over to third parties. The days of guns are over. They have you already. The Facebook scandal already proved how you idiots can be manipulated. How did guns help you guys with that?

The only good gun owner is a dead gun owner. So put that gun in your mouth and pull the trigger. Join the other thousands of casualties every year. Or just go a start shooting the corrupt government officials. Why wait when it’s too late? Go. Go now. Shoot them. At least I will be entertained.
 
Last edited:

Koibito

Active member
Regular
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
1,578
Kin
15💸
Kumi
12💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
It’s not the government turned against you. You turned against the government which makes you a traitor. Traitors need to be shot. Laws are laws. Laws change. Freedoms change. I don’t remember guns saving your civil liberties during the bush era. How did guns stop the NSA?

You idiots think a gun can save you from corruption. But you let private companies in your homes. Give all your private information over to third parties. The days of guns are over. They have you already. The Facebook scandal already proved how you idiots can be manipulated. How did guns help you guys with that?

The only good gun owner is a dead gun owner. So put that gun in your mouth and pull the trigger. Join the other thousands of casualties every year. Or just go a start shooting the corrupt government officials. Why wait when it’s too late? Go. Go now. Shoot them. At least I will be entertained.
Do you really think Facebook selling some data on my favorite TV shows is as bad as it can get? I suppose a gun wont stop the gov't from meddling in my cyber life but it will stop soldiers from invading my home if the govt ever decided to start quarting again, for example.

Youre obviously naive if you think that the only dangers within society are virtual. If guns were truly useless than every cop/soldier and criminal/gangster wouldn't still be armed you idiot. How about you take your own advice and blow your own brains out, you dumb cuck.

ps. A lot of people, myself included, dont use facebook so whats your point anyways?
 

Yeah right

Active member
Regular
Joined
May 25, 2016
Messages
1,267
Kin
4💸
Kumi
-6💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Do you really think Facebook selling some data on my favorite TV shows is as bad as it can get? I suppose a gun wont stop the gov't from meddling in my cyber life but it will stop soldiers from invading my home if the govt ever decided to start quarting again, for example.

Youre obviously naive if you think that the only dangers within society are virtual. If guns were truly useless than every cop/soldier and criminal/gangster wouldn't still be armed you idiot. How about you take your own advice and blow your own brains out, you dumb cuck.

ps. A lot of people, myself included, dont use facebook so whats your point anyways?
[video=youtube;75Cd7oHG6pk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75Cd7oHG6pk[/video]

owning a gun wont stop quartering retard. Police and military already can take your land with eminent domain, or for tactical usage. If you fire at them, you are part of a rebel aliance and a traitor.

SO please, place that barrel in front of your frontal lobe a fire. But make a show of it so at least your existence brought some joy to the world.

Guess what retard? You obviously use the internet. 99% likely you use google. What really is the difference then? they have a file on you. You probably use amazon. You probably have a cell phone. All the ingredients to have a predictable and manipulatable human being.
 
Last edited:

Fountain

Active member
Elite
Joined
Nov 16, 2012
Messages
5,415
Kin
13💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Awards
I don't understand the infatuation people have with weapons.
I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't understand my infatuation with many things. And i'm sure the same goes to you. Who knows what things you like. I'm not a big fan of guns myself but if they like guns they like guns, that's their business.

More guns in society escalates violence and makes things less safe, yet it's like people think it's reasonable to have more guns, like you need guns to make society better.
Yeah, less safer for any lunatic perhaps. At least we don't have acid attacks, daily assaults, stabbings, grooming and gang rapes left and right.

I get the argument you want a gun in your home to feel safe but it's ridiculous and doesn't matter, I have no feeling of need for that.
Then don't. You probably wouldn't pass the test anyway.

If people took away guns from civilians in a country then that country would be safer, that's reality, yet people pretend they want guns for other reasons than just some cultural or traditional, tribal reason.
Lol
 

Calpal

Active member
Veteran
Joined
Mar 19, 2013
Messages
4,225
Kin
5💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
We need to stop advocating forks and spoons because of obesity

where do you live? Have you been a witness to gun violence?
have you seen that there are other ways to harm someone than with a gun?
do you have kids?
 
Last edited:

Fountain

Active member
Elite
Joined
Nov 16, 2012
Messages
5,415
Kin
13💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Awards
God gave moses the second amendment to stop the spread of athiesm,homosexuality,liberals,and islam
Obviously. You also forgot to add in communism, fascism, racism, censorship, harassment, murder, hypocrisy, and degeneracy.

You could add even more. Vandalism, abuse, theft etc. but i think degeneracy covers everything.
 
Last edited:

~WastelandSociety~

Active member
Elite
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
5,164
Kin
0💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
No. The reality is even if you do take away guns from people who wants to kill someone,they will find another way to do it. You will see knife violence go up,people making hand made guns , etc.
 

Aim64C

Active member
Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2012
Messages
3,681
Kin
0💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Awards
It’s not the government turned against you. You turned against the government which makes you a traitor. Traitors need to be shot. Laws are laws. Laws change. Freedoms change. I don’t remember guns saving your civil liberties during the bush era. How did guns stop the NSA?
In the military and law enforcement, we have something called the "Use of Force Continuum." The idea is that not every threat requires a bullet to the face to resolve, and that one should use the minimum necessary force to resolve a problem. At the lowest end of the continuum is simply presence. This can be as simple as a sign, a barrier, or a uniformed presence. When an officer is watching, people tend to behave themselves.

At the opposite end of the continuum is deadly force. Whatever it is that someone is doing, it is imperative that they be stopped and if the force necessary to do that kills them, then so be it.

Expand this concept to the grand scale of society. What we witnessed was not a failure of firearms. What we witnessed was a failure of the other methods of containing government expansion. The failure of representatives. The failure of the free press. The failure of electoral processes and referendums. Things were rapidly approaching the point where firearms were necessary.

Only complete savages would run out into the streets and begin shooting politicians as a defacto response to the creation of something like the CIA to replace the OSS.

You idiots think a gun can save you from corruption. But you let private companies in your homes. Give all your private information over to third parties. The days of guns are over. They have you already. The Facebook scandal already proved how you idiots can be manipulated. How did guns help you guys with that?
I would prefer the private company to the government one. Unfortunately, there are no such things as private companies in this day and age. Not at the international scale of the variety you describe. They are neither part of the elected government nor are they part of the free market. They exist as a separate structure of power that serves a different interest, entirely - a power which you are ancillary to, wittingly or not.

Once again, these problems, however, are not something to charge into the streets and begin killing people over.... yet. Rest assured, the contingency existed and would have been enacted. A stay of execution was afforded, however, with the results of the election in 2016.

The only good gun owner is a dead gun owner. So put that gun in your mouth and pull the trigger. Join the other thousands of casualties every year. Or just go a start shooting the corrupt government officials. Why wait when it’s too late? Go. Go now. Shoot them. At least I will be entertained.
This is the reason why firearms are the tool of last resort for the civilized person. It is also why you are encouraging such behavior. The problem is that civil wars and chaos rarely end the corruption. The people with the most capital assets can afford to pay for security and production in times when such things are in high demand. They are usually well positioned for market turmoil. They are usually well positioned, geographically. They are well positioned with regard to information and other such things.

If push came to shove, sure - there would be people like me who would make it a personal priority to hunt and kill them - but the fact of the matter is that they have many mind slaves and hired hands to make such a task very difficult. Part of the problem we face is the question of who is corrupt and who deserves to be killed, with people lobbing accusations at each other left and right (myself not exempt from this). There are deceivers and liars within the media and established power structures who try to make the innocent look guilty and the guilty appear as martyrs.

We can go out and start shooting - but there will be no turning back once it starts, and the war will become something that resembles the French Revolution - with a perpetual revolving door of execution as the movement's own leaders are slaughtered just the same as the people they fought to depose.

Perhaps that is a pessimistic view of things. Perhaps it wouldn't be that bad. It is, however, the fear. It is why it is the absolute last measure, as it may very well kill our society.
 

minamoto

Active member
Supreme
Joined
Nov 3, 2011
Messages
22,884
Kin
26,853💸
Kumi
12,430💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Status
In the military and law enforcement, we have something called the "Use of Force Continuum." The idea is that not every threat requires a bullet to the face to resolve, and that one should use the minimum necessary force to resolve a problem. At the lowest end of the continuum is simply presence. This can be as simple as a sign, a barrier, or a uniformed presence. When an officer is watching, people tend to behave themselves.

At the opposite end of the continuum is deadly force. Whatever it is that someone is doing, it is imperative that they be stopped and if the force necessary to do that kills them, then so be it.

Expand this concept to the grand scale of society. What we witnessed was not a failure of firearms. What we witnessed was a failure of the other methods of containing government expansion. The failure of representatives. The failure of the free press. The failure of electoral processes and referendums. Things were rapidly approaching the point where firearms were necessary.

Only complete savages would run out into the streets and begin shooting politicians as a defacto response to the creation of something like the CIA to replace the OSS.



I would prefer the private company to the government one. Unfortunately, there are no such things as private companies in this day and age. Not at the international scale of the variety you describe. They are neither part of the elected government nor are they part of the free market. They exist as a separate structure of power that serves a different interest, entirely - a power which you are ancillary to, wittingly or not.

Once again, these problems, however, are not something to charge into the streets and begin killing people over.... yet. Rest assured, the contingency existed and would have been enacted. A stay of execution was afforded, however, with the results of the election in 2016.



This is the reason why firearms are the tool of last resort for the civilized person. It is also why you are encouraging such behavior. The problem is that civil wars and chaos rarely end the corruption. The people with the most capital assets can afford to pay for security and production in times when such things are in high demand. They are usually well positioned for market turmoil. They are usually well positioned, geographically. They are well positioned with regard to information and other such things.

If push came to shove, sure - there would be people like me who would make it a personal priority to hunt and kill them - but the fact of the matter is that they have many mind slaves and hired hands to make such a task very difficult. Part of the problem we face is the question of who is corrupt and who deserves to be killed, with people lobbing accusations at each other left and right (myself not exempt from this). There are deceivers and liars within the media and established power structures who try to make the innocent look guilty and the guilty appear as martyrs.

We can go out and start shooting - but there will be no turning back once it starts, and the war will become something that resembles the French Revolution - with a perpetual revolving door of execution as the movement's own leaders are slaughtered just the same as the people they fought to depose.

Perhaps that is a pessimistic view of things. Perhaps it wouldn't be that bad. It is, however, the fear. It is why it is the absolute last measure, as it may very well kill our society.

can you not write wall of texts..sum up ur ideas..
 
Top