Because then I know the law is working to remove/reduce guns around me as well and I will feel safer.
Gun control
- Thread starter ukbob
- Start date
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Because then I know the law is working to remove/reduce guns around me as well and I will feel safer.
adexkola
Doesn't understand sportswashing.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2008
- Messages
- 48,845
- Supports
- orderly disembarking on planes
The vast majority of career criminals, believe it or not, don't want to murder you. Call it a code of the streets or pragmatic avoidance of police attention. But if you are being targeted by a criminal for death, then it's either you're moving serious weight, or you're one of the very few Americans who have the misfortune of bumping into an Anton Chigurh kind of motherfeckers. The odds of both options for me are nil/almost-nil, such that the idea of me owning a firearm is absolutely absurd.
God that sounds awfully a lot like the Jim Jeffries bit
I say this as someone who's always wanted to own an original AK-47. Not for self defense, that's silly... Just to own a remarkable piece of hardware manufactured by a grizzled Soviet tradesman during the Cold War deep in Siberia in between swigs of homemade vodka... I'd take it to the range, or drive out into the wilderness and go Rambo at pieces of wood... Would turn it in for safekeeping or destruction by the authorities immediately if mandated by law to stop gun crime.
God that sounds awfully a lot like the Jim Jeffries bit
I say this as someone who's always wanted to own an original AK-47. Not for self defense, that's silly... Just to own a remarkable piece of hardware manufactured by a grizzled Soviet tradesman during the Cold War deep in Siberia in between swigs of homemade vodka... I'd take it to the range, or drive out into the wilderness and go Rambo at pieces of wood... Would turn it in for safekeeping or destruction by the authorities immediately if mandated by law to stop gun crime.
Stacks
Full Member
he/she said they believe in regulation not a total ban BUT IF they did ban them then they would not hesitate to hand theirs inThere is nothing stopping you right now to give your arms back to the state. If you would rush to do it then, why not do it now?
Frosty
Logical and sensible but turns women gay
The vast majority of career criminals, believe it or not, don't want to murder you. Call it a code of the streets or pragmatic avoidance of police attention. But if you are being targeted by a criminal for death, then it's either you're moving serious weight, or you're one of the very few Americans who have the misfortune of bumping into an Anton Chigurh kind of motherfeckers. The odds of both options for me are nil/almost-nil, such that the idea of me owning a firearm is absolutely absurd.
God that sounds awfully a lot like the Jim Jeffries bit
I say this as someone who's always wanted to own an original AK-47. Not for self defense, that's silly... Just to own a remarkable piece of hardware manufactured by a grizzled Soviet tradesman during the Cold War deep in Siberia in between swigs of homemade vodka... I'd take it to the range, or drive out into the wilderness and go Rambo at pieces of wood... Would turn it in for safekeeping or destruction by the authorities immediately if mandated by law to stop gun crime.
Out of interest, how easy would it be for you to get one?
shamans
Thinks you can get an STD from flirting.
[/QUOTE]
The problem is these averages are often using national statistics. Regional statistics differ especially if you get to a neighborhood level.
The vast majority of career criminals, believe it or not, don't want to murder you. Call it a code of the streets or pragmatic avoidance of police attention. But if you are being targeted by a criminal for death, then it's either you're moving serious weight, or you're one of the very few Americans who have the misfortune of bumping into an Anton Chigurh kind of motherfeckers. The odds of both options for me are nil/almost-nil, such that the idea of me owning a firearm is absolutely absurd.
God that sounds awfully a lot like the Jim Jeffries bit
I say this as someone who's always wanted to own an original AK-47. Not for self defense, that's silly... Just to own a remarkable piece of hardware manufactured by a grizzled Soviet tradesman during the Cold War deep in Siberia in between swigs of homemade vodka... I'd take it to the range, or drive out into the wilderness and go Rambo at pieces of wood... Would turn it in for safekeeping or destruction by the authorities immediately if mandated by law to stop gun crime.
The problem is these averages are often using national statistics. Regional statistics differ especially if you get to a neighborhood level.
Dr. Dwayne
Self proclaimed tagline king.
Out of interest, how easy would it be for you to get one?
Jut about anyone in the US can get a standard AK-47. There are dozens of manufacturers who offer them. Certain jurisdictions might make it harder to possess legally at your home (thinking of Chicago and NYC) but anywhere else it's just another rifle and a popular one at that.
Dr. Dwayne
Self proclaimed tagline king.
Exactly. Again with Jim Jefferies, but I can't stand the bullshit excuses. Why can't gun owners just admit they like guns? Or at the very, very least admit they are part of the problem.
I always like reading @Carolina Red and @Dr. Dwayne replies in threads like this as they often add much needed balance and sensible and articulate replies to an often very heated debate.
Oh I'm just about done with the Americans, langy. They're fecking it up for themselves by steadfastly resisting any attempt to stop the madness and can have no complaints when they lose all of their 2A rights.
Stacks
Full Member
That's doesn't make people feel more secure. It still happens all the time 2 weeks ago in the bronx a Chicago rapper was robbed and beaten then they gunned him down AFTER they robbed him right on camera. Innocent female door dash drivers gettin blown down in Baltimore because their cars ran out of gas in the wrong neighbourhood and 2 dudes decided to rob the 2 workers. The same week a boy ordered an uber and the driver was a female and he put a gun to her head. You can hear the audio of her pleading for he life and he still shot her in the head. the fact criminals are packing makes no one want to risk becoming a victim at any cost, even if it isn't the most frequent. The Cities with the highest gun homicides tend to have the strictest gun control because most of the shooting is done by illegal means.The vast majority of career criminals, believe it or not, don't want to murder you. Call it a code of the streets or pragmatic avoidance of police attention. But if you are being targeted by a criminal for death, then it's either you're moving serious weight, or you're one of the very few Americans who have the misfortune of bumping into an Anton Chigurh kind of motherfeckers. The odds of both options for me are nil/almost-nil, such that the idea of me owning a firearm is absolutely absurd.
God that sounds awfully a lot like the Jim Jeffries bit
I say this as someone who's always wanted to own an original AK-47. Not for self defense, that's silly... Just to own a remarkable piece of hardware manufactured by a grizzled Soviet tradesman during the Cold War deep in Siberia in between swigs of homemade vodka... I'd take it to the range, or drive out into the wilderness and go Rambo at pieces of wood... Would turn it in for safekeeping or destruction by the authorities immediately if mandated by law to stop gun crime.
this is a lady who lost her son to a criminal who killed her son and does not believe the gun laws will save anyone. she believes people in her community (black community) need to be able to protect themselves. watch the 1st 4 mins
Mike Smalling
Full Member
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2018
- Messages
- 13,840
Someone convince that the death penalty isn't the right course of action for the Highland Park shooter. I mean, we are as close to a 100% sure that he did it as we can possibly get, he committed horrific crimes, and he can probably never live a meaningful life in or have any functional role in society. He will spend the rest of his life behind bars or in a psych ward.
The only thing I can think of is, that it becomes difficult to draw the line, and the only way to ever avoid executing an innocent man, is to never have the death penalty in the first place. But seen in isolation, it could be justified.
The only thing I can think of is, that it becomes difficult to draw the line, and the only way to ever avoid executing an innocent man, is to never have the death penalty in the first place. But seen in isolation, it could be justified.
balaks
Full Member
Someone convince that the death penalty isn't the right course of action for the Highland Park shooter. I mean, we are as close to a 100% sure that he did it as we can possibly get, he committed horrific crimes, and he can probably never live a meaningful life in or have any functional role in society. He will spend the rest of his life behind bars or in a psych ward.
The only thing I can think of is, that it becomes difficult to draw the line, and the only way to ever avoid executing an innocent man, is to never have the death penalty in the first place. But seen in isolation, it could be justified.
Personally I don't believe in the death penalty but a life sentence should mean full life.
adexkola
Doesn't understand sportswashing.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2008
- Messages
- 48,845
- Supports
- orderly disembarking on planes
Someone convince that the death penalty isn't the right course of action for the Highland Park shooter. I mean, we are as close to a 100% sure that he did it as we can possibly get, he committed horrific crimes, and he can probably never live a meaningful life in or have any functional role in society. He will spend the rest of his life behind bars or in a psych ward.
The only thing I can think of is, that it becomes difficult to draw the line, and the only way to ever avoid executing an innocent man, is to never have the death penalty in the first place. But seen in isolation, it could be justified.
It's more expensive to execute him, given numerous appeals that will be filed, that he is entitled to.
calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
47s or 74s?Jut about anyone in the US can get a standard AK-47. There are dozens of manufacturers who offer them. Certain jurisdictions might make it harder to possess legally at your home (thinking of Chicago and NYC) but anywhere else it's just another rifle and a popular one at that.
calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
Death penalty should definitely be on the table for this crime.Someone convince that the death penalty isn't the right course of action for the Highland Park shooter. I mean, we are as close to a 100% sure that he did it as we can possibly get, he committed horrific crimes, and he can probably never live a meaningful life in or have any functional role in society. He will spend the rest of his life behind bars or in a psych ward.
The only thing I can think of is, that it becomes difficult to draw the line, and the only way to ever avoid executing an innocent man, is to never have the death penalty in the first place. But seen in isolation, it could be justified.
Mike Smalling
Full Member
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2018
- Messages
- 13,840
It's more expensive to execute him, given numerous appeals that will be filed, that he is entitled to.
You often hear this, but I wonder if it's actually true. Surely, there would also be appeals if he was simply imprisoned, and we are possibly looking at 60 years of prison here.
Either the death penalty is moral, or it isn't. And it isn't, not even for this guy.
RedDevilQuebecois
New Member
- Joined
- May 27, 2021
- Messages
- 8,256
If (and only IF) Federal authorities charge him with federal criminal charges of terrorism. That is how they sentenced Dzhokhar Tsarnaev to death for his crimes committed in a State that hasn't had the death penalty since 1984 (Massachussetts).Death penalty should definitely be on the table for this crime.
Either the death penalty is moral, or it isn't. And it isn't, not even for this guy.
Unlike most people leaning on the liberal spectrum of personal sets of ideologies (I consider myself as one), I personally believe that the death penalty should be kept as the only exit door for the most extreme and certified unredeemable cases out there. If one asks me how one can be judged as liable for capital punishment, I would answer that Japan have a very detailed 9-criteria sentencing guideline that they use to determine who gets the rope or not. That is known as the Nagayama standard, and death penalty over there is only dished for extreme cases who have screwed themselves beyond repair.
calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
I concur wholeheartedly. Never heard of that standard before. Love learning new shit.If (and only IF) Federal authorities charge him with federal criminal charges of terrorism. That is how they sentenced Dzhokhar Tsarnaev to death for his crimes committed in a State that hasn't had the death penalty since 1984 (Massachussetts).
Unlike most people leaning on the liberal spectrum of personal sets of ideologies (I consider myself as one), I personally believe that the death penalty should be kept as the only exit door for the most extreme and certified unredeemable cases out there. If one asks me how one can be judged as liable for capital punishment, I would answer that Japan have a very detailed 9-criteria sentencing guideline that they use to determine who gets the rope or not. That is known as the Nagayama standard, and death penalty over there is only dished for extreme cases who have screwed themselves beyond repair.
Unlike most people leaning on the liberal spectrum of personal sets of ideologies (I consider myself as one), I personally believe that the death penalty should be kept as the only exit door for the most extreme and certified unredeemable cases out there. If one asks me how one can be judged as liable for capital punishment, I would answer that Japan have a very detailed 9-criteria sentencing guideline that they use to determine who gets the rope or not. That is known as the Nagayama standard, and death penalty over there is only dished for extreme cases who have screwed themselves beyond repair.
I'm not sure Japan is the best example here. Isn't their justice system kinda messed up? I heard that nearly everyone who is charged is convicted, and that can't just be because their prosecutors are so good. Personally, the death penalty is a red line for me. I don't believe it's possible to be a secular democracy and still have the state killing people as punishment in times of peace. It's not healthy for society either.
Dr. Dwayne
Self proclaimed tagline king.
47s or 74s?
47. I think people prefer the 7.62 x 39 round.
Stacks
Full Member
if you have absolute proof as in cases like this then its fineSomeone convince that the death penalty isn't the right course of action for the Highland Park shooter. I mean, we are as close to a 100% sure that he did it as we can possibly get, he committed horrific crimes, and he can probably never live a meaningful life in or have any functional role in society. He will spend the rest of his life behind bars or in a psych ward.
The only thing I can think of is, that it becomes difficult to draw the line, and the only way to ever avoid executing an innocent man, is to never have the death penalty in the first place. But seen in isolation, it could be justified.
i think for extreme cases like this they could be put in solitary confinement in complete darkness until he goes crazyPersonally I don't believe in the death penalty but a life sentence should mean full life.
Death penalty should definitely be on the table for this crime.
I would be open to Ramsay Bolton style feeding to a pack of hungry dogs. The death penalty should be painful as a deterrent. He does not deserve a quick deathIf (and only IF) Federal authorities charge him with federal criminal charges of terrorism. That is how they sentenced Dzhokhar Tsarnaev to death for his crimes committed in a State that hasn't had the death penalty since 1984 (Massachussetts).
Unlike most people leaning on the liberal spectrum of personal sets of ideologies (I consider myself as one), I personally believe that the death penalty should be kept as the only exit door for the most extreme and certified unredeemable cases out there. If one asks me how one can be judged as liable for capital punishment, I would answer that Japan have a very detailed 9-criteria sentencing guideline that they use to determine who gets the rope or not. That is known as the Nagayama standard, and death penalty over there is only dished for extreme cases who have screwed themselves beyond repair.
balaks
Full Member
if you have absolute proof as in cases like this then its fine
i think for extreme cases like this they could be put in solitary confinement in complete darkness until he goes crazy
I would be open to Ramsay Bolton style feeding to a pack of hungry dogs. The death penalty should be painful as a deterrent. He does not deserve a quick death
That is an abhorrent opinion to me honestly. Supporting torture and a painful death is no more a deterrent than the death penalty already is - it clearly is no deterrent at all and what you are advocating makes me absolutely sick.
Yeah, that's monstrous. And it leads to a monstrous society. There's a reason we've moved away from torture as a form of punishment (and as a form of execution).
The US correctional system should be going more humane, not less.
The US correctional system should be going more humane, not less.
Which also ties nicely into the only valid argument for gun ownership Jim Jefferies gave us: feck it, I like guns!The vast majority of career criminals, believe it or not, don't want to murder you. Call it a code of the streets or pragmatic avoidance of police attention. But if you are being targeted by a criminal for death, then it's either you're moving serious weight, or you're one of the very few Americans who have the misfortune of bumping into an Anton Chigurh kind of motherfeckers. The odds of both options for me are nil/almost-nil, such that the idea of me owning a firearm is absolutely absurd.
God that sounds awfully a lot like the Jim Jeffries bit
I say this as someone who's always wanted to own an original AK-47. Not for self defense, that's silly... Just to own a remarkable piece of hardware manufactured by a grizzled Soviet tradesman during the Cold War deep in Siberia in between swigs of homemade vodka... I'd take it to the range, or drive out into the wilderness and go Rambo at pieces of wood... Would turn it in for safekeeping or destruction by the authorities immediately if mandated by law to stop gun crime.
WI_Red
Redcafes Most Rested
Thoughts and prayers, right gun owners? This little boy will grow up without parents, but you get to keep your death machine so feck that kid. Make sure you give your guns a little kiss tonight when you put them to bed. Like a parent would for their 2 year old son. But not Aiden cuz feck that kid.
calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
Goal just met.
Goal just met.
It'll be in the millions. But that's still a kid who has to grow up without his parents. Hell, without even knowing his parents, since he's two. I know I said two hours ago in this very thread that the death penalty is immoral, but the gun lobby deserves to be lined up against a wall.
RedDevilQuebecois
New Member
- Joined
- May 27, 2021
- Messages
- 8,256
The vast majority of career criminals, believe it or not, don't want to murder you. Call it a code of the streets or pragmatic avoidance of police attention. But if you are being targeted by a criminal for death, then it's either you're moving serious weight, or you're one of the very few Americans who have the misfortune of bumping into an Anton Chigurh kind of motherfeckers. The odds of both options for me are nil/almost-nil, such that the idea of me owning a firearm is absolutely absurd.
That is also why the Yakuza don't ever target random people nor carry guns themselves anywhere, unlike what cinema tries to portrait. And if criminal groups wanted to whack someone, they would not even need guns to do so unless for the sake of sending a strong message.
calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
It just jumped 30K in four minutes.It'll be in the millions. But that's still a kid who has to grow up without his parents. Hell, without even knowing his parents, since he's two. I know I said two hours ago in this very thread that the death penalty is immoral, but the gun lobby deserves to be lined up against a wall.
Frosty
Logical and sensible but turns women gay
Thoughts and prayers, right gun owners? This little boy will grow up without parents, but you get to keep your death machine so feck that kid. Make sure you give your guns a little kiss tonight when you put them to bed. Like a parent would for their 2 year old son. But not Aiden cuz feck that kid.
What support would the government provide in these situations? Is there a form of compensation scheme available?
calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
Making me cry scrolling through who donated what.
RedDevilQuebecois
New Member
- Joined
- May 27, 2021
- Messages
- 8,256
I cannot speak for US States, but we in Quebec have this thing called the FAVAC (Fonds d'aide aux victimes d'actes criminels - help funds for victims of criminal acts) since 1988. The funds is used to support projects and activities for people who have been victims of criminal acts.What support would the government provide in these situations? Is there a form of compensation scheme available?
Last edited:
WI_Red
Redcafes Most Rested
What support would the government provide in these situations? Is there a form of compensation scheme available?
Besides thoughts and prayers?
I guess basic child services should there be no family to take him in, but otherwise I don't think so. My countries government could not give a shit about a child once it is out of the womb.
Frosty
Logical and sensible but turns women gay
Similar to the UK - we have the criminal injuries compensation scheme, but really I think it should be more generous:I cannot speak for US States, but we in Quebec have this thing called the FAVAC (Fonds d'aide aux victimes d'actes criminels; help funds for crime victims) since 1988. The funds is used to support projects and activities for people who have been victims of criminal acts.
https://www.gov.uk/claim-compensation-criminal-injury
https://www.gov.uk/criminal-injuries-compensation-tribunal
The maximum award is £500,000.
Frosty
Logical and sensible but turns women gay
Besides thoughts and prayers?
I guess basic child services should there be no family to take him in, but otherwise I don't think so. My countries government could not give a shit about a child once it is out of the womb.
I honestly don't know what to say. The US feels like another world, albeit one with a shared language.
RedPed
Whatabouter.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2015
- Messages
- 14,558
Good luck trying to reason with gun owners. They're a lost cause and deserve everything they get. I don't think I've heard one logical argument from those people yet. They genuinely seem brainwashed.
Stacks
Full Member
its not a deterrent because its hardly actioned and its also rather quick and painless. They do firing squads in other countries (even as recent as the 60s in France), hanging and some countries stone people to death. they are all painful and a form of torture.That is an abhorrent opinion to me honestly. Supporting torture and a painful death is no more a deterrent than the death penalty already is - it clearly is no deterrent at all and what you are advocating makes me absolutely sick.
I doubt it. Hanging is a form of torture as is stoning. here are some countries current methods. MANY of these are not monstrous societies.Yeah, that's monstrous. And it leads to a monstrous society. There's a reason we've moved away from torture as a form of punishment (and as a form of execution).
The US correctional system should be going more humane, not less.
Hanging (Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Nigeria, Sudan, Pakistan, Palestinian National Authority, Israel, Yemen, Egypt, India, Myanmar, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Syria, UAE, Zimbabwe, Malawi, Liberia)
Shooting (the People's Republic of China, Republic of China, Vietnam, Belarus, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Somalia, North Korea, Indonesia, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, Yemen, and in the US states of Oklahoma and Utah).
Lethal injection (United States, Guatemala, Thailand, the People's Republic of China, Vietnam)
Beheading (Saudi Arabia)
Stoning (Nigeria, Sudan)
Electrocution and gas inhalation (some U.S. states, but only if the prisoner requests it or if lethal injection is unavailable)
Inert gas asphyxiation (Some U.S states, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Alabama)
MUW4Eva
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2022
- Messages
- 1,526
I honestly don't know what to say. The US feels like another world, albeit one with a shared language.
A shared language?
They call lots of different things to what we do in the UK...crisps, gas, motorway, boots, soo many different words, it is definitely a VERY different country!
MUW4Eva
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2022
- Messages
- 1,526
Good luck trying to reason with gun owners. They're a lost cause and deserve everything they get. I don't think I've heard one logical argument from those people yet. They genuinely seem brainwashed.
Anyone who owns a gun has dead children's blood on their hands, it is as simple as that.
They are all part of a tragic death cult.
God that sounds awfully a lot like the Jim Jeffries bit
Perhaps because it was both hilarious and accurate. Probably the best bit of standup ever.
Anyone who owns a gun has dead children's blood on their hands, it is as simple as that.
They are all part of a tragic death cult.
No we are not. I am all for stricter gun control and raising the age to own a gun. Heck, I even thing it should be 25 (not 21). I think there should be a process in order to gain a right to buy a gun etc... I have been for that since long, long time ago.
These are horrible tragedies that keep happening in USA, horrible. Something needs to be done for sure, but blaming responsible gun owners and assigned them guilt is not going to help the cause, it's just going to agonize them and shut them off from actually complying with any new laws.
Share: