Working with criminals on a daily basis, I have to say you are grossly exaggerating the effectiveness of a camera. You'd be better off laying on the floor and doing what you're told during a robbery than recording the perpetrator and informing them of it. Good way to get your phone taken/destroyed and yourself injured or killed.
A Thug Pulled a Knife on Students in the UNO Library Today...
- Thread starter HuskerJack95
- Start date
- Status
Working with criminals on a daily basis, I have to say you are grossly exaggerating the effectiveness of a camera. You'd be better off laying on the floor and doing what you're told during a robbery than recording the perpetrator and informing them of it. Good way to get your phone taken/destroyed and yourself injured or killed.
Why is this particular amendment so infallible? Why is it so rock solid that one need only state what it says and drop the mic? Amendments have been changed before and it would be my guess that the men who wrote it "seeming like problem solving types of dudes" are rolling in their graves at the lack of action going to to address an obvious problem.
The lack of ability to pass even basic background checks is baffling while many states go the other way allowing anyone to walk into a Walmart, buy a gun and legally carry it in public without any sort of license or training required. I get that criminals don't go through the "correct channels" but can we at least make them work for it a little bit?
Well, here
Hilarious that you left out the inconvenient "a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state" part of the Second Amendment. What does that mean to you? I have my thoughts. In any event, if the Second Amendment means we can't have background checks or prohibitions on magazine capacities, why can't I have my own nuclear weapon or carry around a grenade launcher around on the street? Obviously you agree with "gun control" at some level; it's just a matter of degree.
I can just about promise that anyone calling themselves "Militia" these days would go INSANE if you tried to "well-regulate" them.
Beav i never underestimate stupidity, even yours. (Joking abt you). But when you blatantly misconstrue my words i have to wonder. The anti-gun bias is media perpetrated by fear. Just ask yourself why you're so against guns but there is no campaign against removing cars from the road.
The record is pretty clear about what happens when assailants choose gun free type areas vs areas where people are armed and willing to defend themselves. If you want to form your opinions based on outliers thats up to you.
I didnt say everyone should carry a gun. You and Beav are either not reading the posts or making up stuff to respond to.
The thing about cars is...society has guidelines and training in place to be able to drive to minimize the inherent risk. It's too bad that cars weren't around in the days of the founding fathers...then they could have been an inalienable right and we wouldn't have to go through all that pesky paperwork, charges, and you know...proving that we can see...proving that we know the rules of the road.
Whats the big deal with everyone carrying? Anytime Im rolling with my P90 or AR and I accidentally unload on some guy with a blue name, nothing happens. No friendly fire. Only the bad guys with red names get hurt. Easy peezy lemon squeezy.
Firstly, I don't agree that there is any anti-gun bias in "the media" when you understand that term factors in ALL outlets, not just The Daily Show.
I gave you an actual academic study in gun ownership, I don't know how much more objective anyone can try to be.
I don't have a problem with the idea of guns, if that makes sense. My problem is that we've seen about how well this goes. The proverbial "bad guys with guns" are waaaaaay ahead on the scoreboard. And the problem with thinking you're going to arm the good guys is that a lot of people don't want a gun, and out of the those "good guys" a lot of them are more danger to themselves and those around them than they are help.
I'd be a great person to own and carry. I have a deep respect for safety and believe it or not, I'm a pretty decent shot. But I don't want one. I'm not willing to live my life constantly scanning for who I might wanna shot, why and how.
We can do the whole "let's compare guns to cars" thing if you really want to, but the short answer is that cars are intended for transportation and guns are intended to kill things. Also, I'd be 100% fine with guns if they were REALLY comparable to cars. Let's start with a few easy ways that guns are not at all regulated like cars are. Imagine a world where:
A nice, new gun costs upwards of $40,000 and the REALLY fun ones will run you a bout $100,000 (now that's not a law, but it's sure a reason guns aren't the same as cars)
If you kill somebody with it, it's probably also completely ruined and you're going to have to buy a new one
No drinking and carrying
You have to go take a written test and a demonstration test that proves you know how to properly use the gun
You have to have insurance on your gun
You have to carry a license on you at all times while carrying the gun (this does exist in some places)
You have to renew your registration on the gun annually
You may have to bring the gun in for testing every so often to ensure it's in proper working order (as some places require with emissions testing)
The gun has hundreds of safety features on it (rather than just one) that are for the sole person of preventing injury/death
- Status
