Five more children dead in assault weapons massacre. When will it end? - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

brassmonkey · 12-30-2012, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MattO

That's a stupid comparison because vehicles aren't made for the sole purpose of killing humans.

uh guns are weapons. If you are careless with a vehicle there should be harsh punishments.

epitome · 12-30-2012, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dvae

I'll bet if you polled 50 people on this board and without them looking at Google or a map, very few would know there is a Philadelphia, Mississippi.

Ever heard of Susan Smith?

They probably wouldn't but I would hope that after they read that article they would realize it was not PA.

Since when is Philly rural? Or known for their tribal land? Or how about the first few words in the article itself?

You're really reaching all the way back to Susan Smith? Wasn't that like 20 years ago?

Barry-xlovecam · 12-30-2012, 12:54 PM

Were they drinking? That would be a good reason for a new "Prohibition"

You cannot outlaw stupidity -- we haven't got the jail space.

dgraves · 12-30-2012, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xenigo

Yes, absolutely. Contrary to popular belief, speed does NOT kill. Impacts kill. Performance vehicles are built to bring down the chance of impacts to absolutely minimal levels.

The reality is that the Porsche 911 Turbo, BMW M3, and vehicles like these are orders of magnitude safer than the Toyota Prius or Honda Civic. Know why? They have 10+ inch wide tires, independent front and rear suspension, and brakes that are the size of manhole covers.

When a vehicle is built for speed, it is built for literally ANY situation you can throw at it on the road.

And your analogy is not a good one for this debate, because performance vehicles are built with the express purpose of safe and efficient travel, not to splatter maximum brain matter on the wall.

Travel = reasonable

Bullets spraying brain matter on walls = unreasonable

And technically guns don't kill, bullets do.

tony286 · 12-30-2012, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dvae

It makes more sense than taking everybody's gun away.
Newsflash! I don't care how many laws you pass how many cops you put on the street the criminals are still going to have guns.

who said take everyones gun away? Having regulation is not banning. But these all nra talking points.

GrantMercury · 12-30-2012, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony286

I will ask the question again. If the bush tax cuts were so great why didnt he push to make permanent ? He had both houses.

Right. And if they were so great, where the fuck are the jobs they were supposed to create?

GrantMercury · 12-30-2012, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony286

who said take everyones gun away? Having regulation is not banning. But these all nra talking points.

Right. A rational discussion about common sense gun regulation is usually hard to have. Many people make massive leaps of reason.

"I think we need to stop allowing unlimited amounts of ammo to be purchased online by anybody."

"WHY DO YOU WANT TO CONFISCATE EVERY GUN IN AMERICA?!?!"

CheeseFrog · 12-31-2012, 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

As about the cars... Yes they are dangerous too, but they are NOT INTENDED to kill, and the modern civilization can't exist without them. And yes, we have to pay a deathly toll for using cars too.

You say that as if all killing is a bad thing.

12-30-2012, 12:54 PM	#53
Barry-xlovecam It's 42 Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Global Posts: 18,083	Were they drinking? That would be a good reason for a new "Prohibition" You cannot outlaw stupidity -- we haven't got the jail space.