Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #20 on: December 15, 2015, 04:48:23 PM »
i don't totally get the fixation on mass shootings.  i get that they're viscerally more frightening, but statistically they make up only a tiny fraction of 30,000+ firearms deaths in america each year.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8931
    • View Profile
Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #21 on: December 15, 2015, 05:17:12 PM »
i don't totally get the fixation on mass shootings.  i get that they're viscerally more frightening, but statistically they make up only a tiny fraction of 30,000+ firearms deaths in america each year.

Mass shootings are simple and easy to know the entirety of the situation because there are few of them and the details are widely broadcasted. If we start talking about general firearm deaths, we'll end up talking about why, which will end up talking about race. People that like gun control tend to also be the same people who don't like talking about race, so therefore they avoid the subject entirely and concentrate on the easy mass shooting dilemma instead.

*

Offline mikeman7918

  • *
  • Posts: 46
  • Round Earther
    • View Profile
Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #22 on: December 15, 2015, 07:22:05 PM »
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

56 million defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control.

During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

It should be noted that I do not 100% oppose gun control of any kind.  I believe that the solution to the vast majority of probelems lies between extremes and this is no exeption.  I do believe that things like a minimum age to own guns and requiring at least 3 steps to fire a concealed gun are good laws, but it shouldn't be taken too far.
If we are having a debate and you resort to using insults and ad hominem fallacies then I will consider that a win.  You have been warned.

*

Offline Luke 22:35-38

  • *
  • Posts: 382
  • The earth is round. Prove I'm wrong.
    • View Profile
Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #23 on: December 15, 2015, 07:37:03 PM »
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

56 million defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control.

During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

It should be noted that I do not 100% oppose gun control of any kind.  I believe that the solution to the vast majority of probelems lies between extremes and this is no exeption.  I do believe that things like a minimum age to own guns and requiring at least 3 steps to fire a concealed gun are good laws, but it shouldn't be taken too far.

Thank you. It's nice to meet a fellow round earther from the other site, hiya.
Isaiah 40:22 "It is he that sitteth upon the CIRCLE of the earth"

Scripture, science, facts, stats, and logic is how I argue

Evolutionism is a religion. Can dumb luck create a smart brain?

Please PM me to explain sunsets.

*

Offline Jura-Glenlivet

  • *
  • Posts: 1537
  • Life is meaningless & everything dies.
    • View Profile
Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #24 on: December 15, 2015, 08:39:00 PM »

What a complete and utter load of garbage!

Where to start?
Well China, Russia and Cambodia to begin, all of these revolutions started with an uprising against an incumbent state with an army, at the end of which these places were awash with weapons, so if a regular army with tanks and planes couldn't stop say Mao, you expect me to believe that what was left of the population could have done it with a few hunting rifles? Please?

This ridiculous myth that good old cotton eyed Joe with his second amendment is all that stands between you and anarchy/genocide is fantasy. Grow up.
Just to be clear, you are all terrific, but everything you say is exactly what a moron would say.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8931
    • View Profile
Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #25 on: December 15, 2015, 08:45:32 PM »
What a complete and utter load of garbage!

Where to start?
Well China, Russia and Cambodia to begin, all of these revolutions started with an uprising against an incumbent state with an army, at the end of which these places were awash with weapons, so if a regular army with tanks and planes couldn't stop say Mao, you expect me to believe that what was left of the population could have done it with a few hunting rifles? Please?

This ridiculous myth that good old cotton eyed Joe with his second amendment is all that stands between you and anarchy/genocide is fantasy. Grow up.

All I see is one poster that has presented evidence of gun control leading to bad events and another poster that responds with "ur dum grow up lol"

*

Offline Jura-Glenlivet

  • *
  • Posts: 1537
  • Life is meaningless & everything dies.
    • View Profile
Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #26 on: December 15, 2015, 08:51:48 PM »
What a complete and utter load of garbage!

Where to start?
Well China, Russia and Cambodia to begin, all of these revolutions started with an uprising against an incumbent state with an army, at the end of which these places were awash with weapons, so if a regular army with tanks and planes couldn't stop say Mao, you expect me to believe that what was left of the population could have done it with a few hunting rifles? Please?

This ridiculous myth that good old cotton eyed Joe with his second amendment is all that stands between you and anarchy/genocide is fantasy. Grow up.

All I see is one poster that has presented evidence of gun control leading to bad events and another poster that responds with "ur dum grow up lol"

All I hear is some blinkered good old boy who didn't read the whole post
Just to be clear, you are all terrific, but everything you say is exactly what a moron would say.

*

Offline Luke 22:35-38

  • *
  • Posts: 382
  • The earth is round. Prove I'm wrong.
    • View Profile
Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #27 on: December 15, 2015, 08:52:17 PM »
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

56 million defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control.

During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

It should be noted that I do not 100% oppose gun control of any kind.  I believe that the solution to the vast majority of probelems lies between extremes and this is no exeption.  I do believe that things like a minimum age to own guns and requiring at least 3 steps to fire a concealed gun are good laws, but it shouldn't be taken too far.

Say...did got this from Don Boys because I heard this from Kent Hovind who quoted him.
Isaiah 40:22 "It is he that sitteth upon the CIRCLE of the earth"

Scripture, science, facts, stats, and logic is how I argue

Evolutionism is a religion. Can dumb luck create a smart brain?

Please PM me to explain sunsets.

*

Offline Luke 22:35-38

  • *
  • Posts: 382
  • The earth is round. Prove I'm wrong.
    • View Profile
Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #28 on: December 15, 2015, 08:53:45 PM »
What a complete and utter load of garbage!

Where to start?
Well China, Russia and Cambodia to begin, all of these revolutions started with an uprising against an incumbent state with an army, at the end of which these places were awash with weapons, so if a regular army with tanks and planes couldn't stop say Mao, you expect me to believe that what was left of the population could have done it with a few hunting rifles? Please?

This ridiculous myth that good old cotton eyed Joe with his second amendment is all that stands between you and anarchy/genocide is fantasy. Grow up.

All I see is one poster that has presented evidence of gun control leading to bad events and another poster that responds with "ur dum grow up lol"

All I hear is some blinkered good old boy who didn't read the whole post

Um, the point was that millions died because of gun control, not that a civilian army will always win.
Isaiah 40:22 "It is he that sitteth upon the CIRCLE of the earth"

Scripture, science, facts, stats, and logic is how I argue

Evolutionism is a religion. Can dumb luck create a smart brain?

Please PM me to explain sunsets.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8931
    • View Profile
Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #29 on: December 15, 2015, 09:09:48 PM »
All I hear is some blinkered good old boy who didn't read the whole post

Is it common in your country to respond to evidence with speculation?

*

Offline Jura-Glenlivet

  • *
  • Posts: 1537
  • Life is meaningless & everything dies.
    • View Profile
Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #30 on: December 15, 2015, 10:33:34 PM »
All I hear is some blinkered good old boy who didn't read the whole post

Is it common in your country to respond to evidence with speculation?

I don't see any evidence, and the speculation is all on the side of the “milkman”, gun control didn't kill those millions, tyrants with their followers did, no causal relation exists between the two.

Take Hitler, despite the gun control put in by the Versailles treaty he managed the Beer Hall Putsch but I am expected to believe that  the 1% of Germany's population (the Jews) could have fought off the Nazi's, both sides would have been able to get arms if they became widely available and they would have still been massively outnumbered.

As far as Stalin is concerned armed civilians were the problem in the first place, that is what the Bolsheviks were. 
Just to be clear, you are all terrific, but everything you say is exactly what a moron would say.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 8419
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #31 on: December 15, 2015, 11:06:33 PM »
A lot of those factoids are too broad to draw such conclusions.


For example, gun control in nazi germany actually decreased over time.  Also, Jews didn't know they were going to die early on.  So defend from what? 
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8931
    • View Profile
Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #32 on: December 15, 2015, 11:10:22 PM »
Take Hitler, despite the gun control put in by the Versailles treaty he managed the Beer Hall Putsch but I am expected to believe that  the 1% of Germany's population (the Jews) could have fought off the Nazi's, both sides would have been able to get arms if they became widely available and they would have still been massively outnumbered.

What you're telling me is that gun control allowed a small minority political party to gain control and push the country into WWII.

As far as Stalin is concerned armed civilians were the problem in the first place, that is what the Bolsheviks were.

As far as Stalin is concerned everyone was a problem which could be solved by killing them.

gun control in nazi germany actually decreased over time

As time progressed, most people that vocally disagreed with the Nazis were either dead, dying, or in jail.

Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #33 on: December 15, 2015, 11:12:56 PM »
the carthaginians at cannae: no guns.
anglo-saxons at hastings: no guns.
cumans at kalka river: no guns.

america, on the other hand, has lots of guns and has never been invaded by romans, normans, or mongols.  not even once.  checkmate, liberals.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 8419
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #34 on: December 15, 2015, 11:18:39 PM »
the carthaginians at cannae: no guns.
anglo-saxons at hastings: no guns.
cumans at kalka river: no guns.

america, on the other hand, has lots of guns and has never been invaded by romans, normans, or mongols.  not even once.  checkmate, liberals.
Vikings invaded America before Columbus existed.  And they had no guns, just axes.


Check mate conservatives.
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

*

Offline Luke 22:35-38

  • *
  • Posts: 382
  • The earth is round. Prove I'm wrong.
    • View Profile
Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #35 on: December 15, 2015, 11:40:13 PM »
the carthaginians at cannae: no guns.
anglo-saxons at hastings: no guns.
cumans at kalka river: no guns.

america, on the other hand, has lots of guns and has never been invaded by romans, normans, or mongols.  not even once.  checkmate, liberals.
Vikings invaded America before Columbus existed.  And they had no guns, just axes.


Check mate conservatives.

Don't call checkmate so quickly. Sure, in ancient time they didn't had guns but that I think what garygreen was saying is that in those examples they didn't had arms.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2015, 12:37:30 AM by Luke 22:35-38 »
Isaiah 40:22 "It is he that sitteth upon the CIRCLE of the earth"

Scripture, science, facts, stats, and logic is how I argue

Evolutionism is a religion. Can dumb luck create a smart brain?

Please PM me to explain sunsets.

Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #36 on: December 16, 2015, 12:07:27 AM »
fwiw i was being sarcastic.  cherrypicking a few historical examples and taking them wildly out of context is a silly method of evaluating the net benefits of private gun ownership.

the carthaginians at cannae: no guns.
anglo-saxons at hastings: no guns.
cumans at kalka river: no guns.

america, on the other hand, has lots of guns and has never been invaded by romans, normans, or mongols.  not even once.  checkmate, liberals.
Vikings invaded America before Columbus existed.  And they had no guns, just axes.


Check mate conservatives.

yeah, and how many vikings have invaded america since the second amendment was passed?  DOUBLE CHECKMATE, LIBERALS.  KING ME.
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Luke 22:35-38

  • *
  • Posts: 382
  • The earth is round. Prove I'm wrong.
    • View Profile
Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #37 on: December 16, 2015, 12:36:22 AM »
fwiw i was being sarcastic.  cherrypicking a few historical examples and taking them wildly out of context is a silly method of evaluating the net benefits of private gun ownership.

the carthaginians at cannae: no guns.
anglo-saxons at hastings: no guns.
cumans at kalka river: no guns.

america, on the other hand, has lots of guns and has never been invaded by romans, normans, or mongols.  not even once.  checkmate, liberals.
Vikings invaded America before Columbus existed.  And they had no guns, just axes.


Check mate conservatives.

yeah, and how many vikings have invaded america since the second amendment was passed?  DOUBLE CHECKMATE, LIBERALS.  KING ME.

I think you mixed chess and checkers together.
Isaiah 40:22 "It is he that sitteth upon the CIRCLE of the earth"

Scripture, science, facts, stats, and logic is how I argue

Evolutionism is a religion. Can dumb luck create a smart brain?

Please PM me to explain sunsets.

Saddam Hussein

Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #38 on: December 16, 2015, 12:40:08 AM »
The idea that the Japanese decided not to invade continental America because of the armed civilian population is a myth (as is the "every blade of glass" quote), and like a couple of people pointed out, boiling those genocides down to "ermahgerd gun control did this!!!1" is absurd.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/05/gun-control-in-australia/

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/05/misquoting-yamamoto/

*

Offline Fortuna

  • *
  • Posts: 2984
    • View Profile
Re: "Assault" weapons, for it or against it?
« Reply #39 on: December 16, 2015, 01:07:42 AM »
Would it be harder to capture and hold a nation in which a lot of the population owned guns, or one in which none of the population owned guns?