Guns kill people.

People with guns are nerds.

No. Speedy little bits of metal can kill people if someone puts them into another person. I don't think a gun alone has ever killed anyone. And I doubt that even a loaded gun has killed anyone without human intervention.

Closest was that dropped uzi scene from True Lies, but in all fairness that was AWESOME.

Also I'd technically say CIWS can in theory kill people without being 'fired', but that's more like a computer killing people. Also totally awesome.

True. But it requires someone to load and arm it before it can be completely awesome. And the software was written by people to make it do what it does.

I think the South Koreans use similar lighter setups for sentry guns along their DMZ, but they're more often remote controlled than automated, and I think even the automated ones send back a feed and ask for 'permission'.

That's not awesome at all, seek help!!

It was a movie. I've yet to shoot at a living thing. Well, with a firearm at least... squirrels don't like low power BBs stinging them in the ass.

Don't split hairs. Guns kill people. It's a simple point, I'm not arguing it.

Guns don't kill people. Inanimate objects don't act on their own. You don't have an argument.

It's a really, really simple point to get. Guns kill people. They're made for killing people. It's what they're designed for. They're designed to make the naturally killing urges of humans able to be carried our more efficiently. They Are Machines What Which Kill. I swear to goodness, it's simple. It's really simple. It's really, really simple.

A swiss firm made a 2mm pinfire that I don't think could kill a mouse. Most guns are made to just be projectile throwers, much like machetes are made to be a heavy sharp blade. You can use them on foliage or people but you will suffer the consequences, not the tool.

In fact anything below say .32 ACP is really ineffective at killing people. Most that size are intended for training marksmanship or maybe rabbit hunting at best. I suppose you could say actual military weapons are meant for being fatal, but many never get fired in anger.

You can't be this dense. Guns Are Made To Kill People. You can't split hairs incessantly and think that disproves something that is obvious. The United States will spend more money on bullets and only bullets this year than it will on the Peace Corps. Those bullets are intended to be fired from guns so as to kill people. That's the intention. That's the goal. Guns Kill People.

I do see the point you're trying to make, but it's simply not true. It's an oversimplification of something far more complex. Nearly all guns, pretty much all guns in civilian hands, are not made for killing people. While it's true that many are made for hunting purposes, many more are built as sporting rifles, a great deal of which will never, in their life, shoot at anything but paper, cardboard, and maybe steel plates if they're lucky. Many common calibers are wildly inefficient for killing people, as well, most sporting calibers are too small, while most hunting calibers are too large to be efficient.

For those that are made to "kill people", they're intended to stop the person who's trying to do harm on the one who has the gun.

Nope, guns are made for killing people. Even if one were to completely disregard the authorial intent, so to speak, of the maker of the gun: Guns provide the most efficient method of killing the most people, should a person want to. This would certainly contribute to the fact that the majority of homicides in the United States are committed with: Guns. These are basic facts. Guns Are Made And Used for Killing People.

And the US's largest purchaser of guns explicitly for killing people, the Military, cannot possibly be said to be using the guns in any way other than an aggressive, dangerous fashion.

So swords don't kill people? Golf clubs don't kill? Glasses can't kill?

Sounds like you're saying only guns can kill, when in truth, anything can kill, even bare hands.

Let's use a simple example: A gun left by itself on a table, can it kill someone? Better yet, no bullets around it, can it kill someone?

Swords kill people and golf clubs kill people and yarn kills people and coat hangers kill people and all objects kill people.

No other object kills people as efficiently as guns do, when considering ease of use of the object, ease of obtaining the object, and ultimately successfulness of the object in completing the task (of killing people). This combination of factors explains why guns, of all the objects that can conceivably be used to kill people, are the method of choice in the United States.

This is likely owed to the fact that guns are explicitly designed to kill people.

Let me put it in an insultingly simple comparison, for you, since you're that goddamn dumb. I can get from here (Washington DC) to Jacksonville, FL hopping on a pogo stick. I could get there much quicker, and many more people could come with me, and we could do it much more cheaply, by taking a greyhound bus. This is because greyhound buses were designed for the task of carrying people long distances, while pogo sticks - adaptable to transportation as they may be - were designed for hopping on.

You are the guy in this scenario who is going: "I'M NOT RIDING THE BUS CAUSE I CAN GET TO JACKSONVILLE ON A POGO STICK"

Why use a pogo stick or a bus when one already has a vehicle of their own?

How does this statement even challenge my point??

Simple: Keep your opinions to yourself, and I'll keep mine.

Why not be the bigger person and leave the topic?

I actually think nerve gas would work a lot better for killing mass numbers of people as efficiently as possible. Heck if you look historically small pox killed a lot more Native Americans than any group of yahoos with rifles could ever hope to. Violence predates firearms. Violence will exist after firearms are obsolete by the next invention. Nations where firearms are tightly controlled or prohibited still experience 'spree killings', namely China where one man killed many innocents (double digits) with just a knife. I can look that one up if you like.

I think the argument about whether a military is a force of good or not is a moot point. They have weapons capable of killing most human life on Earth too, yet they mount rescue operations, drug busts, enforcement of basic aide.

You can't uninvent any weapon. Sorry, time doesn't work that way.

Nerve gas and flamethrowers and nuclear bombs and any other number of objects are theoretically more efficient at killing more people but barriers to their procurement or use mean that they still lag behind guns in the ultimately important statistic of How People Kill Each Other, which, in the United States, guns lay claim to easily.

And the US's largest purchaser of guns explicitly for killing people, the Military, cannot possibly be said to be using the guns in any way other than an aggressive, dangerous fashion.
Soldiers have guns to defend themselves. Many of them are never even fired in the line of duty.

Now, if guns are made to kill people, and are supposedly the most efficient method of killing the most people, why aren't they all in calibers that can kill people efficiently? And why did large, oppressive governments take guns away when they wanted to kill more people, and then kill those very same people without guns?

25 states allow people to carry a handgun for self-defense without any form of licensing. The other 25 states (and D.C.) account for 4 out of 5 murders in the U.S.

"Soldiers have guns to defend themselves." Their very presence, with their guns, is an aggressive demonstration. They are not "protecting themselves." If they wanted to protect themselves they would /!\ NOT ENLIST IN THE ARMY /!\ or /!\ REFUSE TO DEPLOY /!\

I mean that's what I did and I, gunless, am much safer from "enemy combatants" than any soldier. All I had to do was not join the army!!

Hey, imagine if everyone had your "won't do" attitude!

I'm gonna be honest with you I'm totally cool with people having a "won't do" attitude if they're applying it to "won't devise ways of more efficiently murdering people." I mean I think that's one area where American Know-How and Ingenuity can be held back.

Guns have been around way, way longer than America.

Are you autistic?

No, nerd. Guns suck. Deal with it.

By that logic cars kill more.

Yeah, they do. Cars are similarly bad, when compared to guns. Thanks for pointing this out before I had to. The prevalence of cars should be minimized in the same way the prevalence of cars should be minimized.

Prevalence of guns, I mean. Typos aside, there should be fewer cars and fewer guns. The world would be better. That's what I'm trying to say.

Maybe we should all wrap ourselves in bubblewrap too. Are you seriously in favor of 'car control'?

I'm in favor of public transportation as a practical means to reduce reliance on cars and improve public safety as well as improve individual living standards. Roads with fewer cars mean fewer accidents means fewer deaths, means a higher standard of living for everybody. This in combination with the myriad other economic benefits to public transportation.

This is how Real People address Real Problems, nerd, figure it out and apply it to Real Life.

So you want to trade car deaths for bus deaths and bulldoze woodlands for more rail lines? Okay... I don't think you can minimize the chances of accidental death to nearly nothing and still have a life worth living. Ever see Surrogates?

Are You Even Serious look any objective examination of the issue shows that increasing public transportation lessens the number of deaths caused by vehicular accidents by reducing the total number of vehicles on the roads. You are not "trading" car deaths for bus deaths, it is not a zero sum game. Fewer people die, more people have access to cheaper transportation, and the local economy benefits from the infrastructure. It's not about giving something up so as to minimize the chance of danger. There's no cost to it. The crazy goddamn thing is that you increase safety while raising standard of living and improving local economies. The cost of reliance on personal cars is not only higher rate of vehicular death, but an inefficient economy.

You are such a hypocrite, Toonces the DRIVING CAT, THE CAT WHO COULD DRIVE A CAR.

Only if they're sufficiently heavy enough, or bayoneted. Otherwise it tends to be bullets that do most of the grunt work.

Like I told the guy above, don't split hairs. Guns kill people. It's a very simple point, you ought to be able to comprehend it.

I think I'm going to go with Penn on this one...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPnvwdwuU9M

More guns may mean more gun deaths, just like the freedom to swim may mean more drowning deaths or the freedom to drive may mean more traffic deaths. It's part of the price paid for living in a free society.

Security and liberty aren't necessarily things that come in equal doses.

Hey here's a thing: Don't YouTube Penn Jillette At Me.

Tell me where I said that the freedom to own guns should be in any way abridged. I guarangoddamntee you I am more supportive of gun rights than you are. I just think they're stupid and stupid people like them.

Okay, so you're basically arguing for no reason in particular and enjoy the mental masturbation?

No, dummy, are you too goddamn dense to understand how a person can think a constitutionally protected freedom is practiced in fucking dumb ways? If a guy says "The Universe spins around the Earth" he is Constitutionally protected by the First Amendment to be able to make that statement in any way he damn well pleases, and no government force should ever be mobilized so as to prevent him from doing so, but I can still point at him and say "Hey idiot you're dumb and almost as bad as those people who own guns but not quite as bad because at least you're not a danger to those around you."

So if you lived in a nation without a protected right like the second Amendment would you still be 'more supportive of gun rights than any NRA member'? You'd fight to help people own and bare weapons in this case?

Because it seems to me you're less of a crusading poet and more just like an anti-gun person who doesn't have enough balls to try to influence policy.

I wholly support the repeal of the second amendment nerdbot and have actively fought toward that goal. But I'm not one of those nerds who thinks I can pretend Constitutional protections don't exist just cause I think they're bad.

So then you aren't very supportive in reality of gun rights, it's just you have your eyes on too big of a fish. You know, I think I respect the Brady Campaign more than people like you. At least they can strategize.

In what way am I not supportive of gun rights? I oppose any and all regulations and criminalization of the use of guns. I just support a repeal of the second amendment so that a new one can be written that enables the deaths of fewer people.

How can you rewrite the second to protect lives without it mimicking, opening the way for or mandating regulations or criminalization?

Jeezum Crow am I the only person who understands how the Constitution works around here?

I don't support criminalization or regulation of the use of guns because the second amendment explicitly prohibits either. I support the repeal of the second amendment as so that criminalization and regulation of the use of guns can be in accord with the foundation of US Law.

You do the same thing I did when I went to the range

WRONG....

Guns don't kill people...the Government does.

Via guns.

Yes

<3 Dale.

You know more than me though, and I'm not sure about the rifle shells either.

It makes me feel sad and empty inside, just as those spent cases are sad and empty.

Sounds like fun, though. Hope you enjoyed yourself and stayed safe.

They're only sad and empty when all by themselves. They're in a nice little, loving box.

The big red ones are just copper coated, they're likely steel case surplus 7.62x54r. It's an old Russian round mostly used in bolt action Mosin Nagant rifles.

Well, the gun the guy fired them from was an old Russian gun from 1941.

That would be it. Probably the only thing at that range that offed Nazis.

You probably shouldn't go around picking up duds, anyway yay going to the range!

Those are a couple of the same types of bullets I could stand to shoot.

I doubt they duds, but I'm keeping them in a cooler spot in my house.

Oh, just some extra .22? Okay, thought you might have picked them up off the ground after someone tried to fire them. .22s aren't bad at all, even 7.62Rus isn't bad, it's just loud. But 30-30, that's loud.

Yes, I could hear the sounds going on around me, even with the earmuffs on. That was also the first time I ever shot a real gun, deffinately different from video game guns.

Guns don't kill people. Not even the bullets kill people. Blood loss and hydrostatic shock kills people. Quit blaming partially involved third parties.

Stumbled across this looking up stuff and read the shitstorm Toonces spewed in his piehole verbal diarrhea because HE'S ALWAYS RIGHT!!!

I blocked his worthless ass years ago when he opened his mouth and shit spewed from it.

BTW, those copper colored casings are 7.62X54R , Soviet ammo, and the 1941 rifle he used is a M91/30 Mosin Nagant rifle. The smaller rounds are .22 Long Rifle, the most common cartridge in the world, the next biggest casing is a .32ACP round, the next is 9mm. The next biggest rifle casing looks like its .223 or 5.56mm (basically the same ) The next biggest and the nickle cased is likely .308 and the big tall one in back is .30-06 caliber.

I'm technically not that far away from VikingVille, who knows, maybe I can take you shooting sometime.

Well if you ever get to visit, I have the perfect place to take you, it's called Ahlman's. This weekend was an event called Shooter's Round-Up, and for a fee, you go through a 'course' and fire any of the weapons they have at their stations, it's amazing. Also, Civil War reenactment stuff is fun to watch.

Sadly, I think I lost the bit of video of me shooting some kind of mini-gun, and I look beyond ecstatic.

https://www.ahlmans.com/shooters-roundup.html

OMG!!! You got my dick hard just with the Crushing cars with a T-55 tank!

I assume they charge you for the ammo used.

Yes, shooting a mini-gun will get literally EVERYBODY all tingly! I once fired a .50 machine gun at a school bus target (It was a wrecked bus) I swear I was cutting glass for hours afterward! Feeling the heavy recoil pounding a 100 round can down range!