[Politics]The Right to Arm Bears in a Crowded Theater

OmniaNigrum · Post by **OmniaNigrum** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:32 pm

If people want to kill themselves, then they should. This reduces the chance that those with a genetic disposition to kill themselves will exist in another dozen generations. The more, the merrier.

As has been said billions of times, Guns Do Not Kill anyone. People do. Guns may make it easier to do it, but who the fuck cares?

You shitbags that want to ban guns outright are ignoring the massively successful laws of shitty places like Chicago and New York. They have by far the most restrictive laws against guns in the entire United States, yet ironically they have more gun deaths per person than areas with more sane gun laws like my home state of Texas.

Fuck your states. Attempt to sway your lawmakers to change your own states laws before trying to inflict your idiocy on my state. Then when it fails, please kill yourself for failing.

If some shitbag breaks into my home, I will shoot them dead and my home state of Texas will not have to foot the bill for imprisoning the shitbag.

But something you are largely unwilling to hear is that here, people are afraid to break into homes because they know the odds of getting shot dead are higher by far due to sane gun laws and respect for the Second Amendment of the Constitution.

Who cares if the NRA is competent or corrupt? I sure as hell do not. I support sane gun laws. Not organizations that "May" support sane gun laws.

Bottom line on gun suicide is this: By shooting yourself in the face, you die instantly. By any other common method, you risk failure and become a liability and expense for the sane people in this world.

When a person commits a capital crime, suicide would be a great option. Give them a loaded pistol while they are locked in a cell. Do not open it for a week. They will be dead in that time either way.

A gun is a tool. Not a murder implement with no other function. I can buy a nailgun at a hardware store without even showing identification. Yet a pistol requires identification and a waiting period.

If your state is really wacko and restricts even nailguns, you can buy a fucking crowbar and murder someone almost as easily. And there will be no evidence to match the weapon used once you rinse the blood off.

Want to depict a evil thing? Get a mirror, not a gun.

Ancient History · Post by **Ancient History** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:44 pm

OmniaNigrum wrote:You shitbags that want to ban guns outright are ignoring the massively successful laws of shitty places like Chicago and New York. They have by far the most restrictive laws against guns in the entire United States, yet ironically they have more gun deaths per person than areas with more sane gun laws like my home state of Texas.

Wait, what? Bullshit. Texas has 11 gun deaths per 100,000 people; Illinois has 9.7, New York has 5.5. And considering how many more people there are in Texas, I think that works out to more in absolute terms as well.

[/edit] More recent statistics say that the gap is even wider.

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:44 pm

I was going to say stuff and point out all of the crap that OmniNegro's wrong about, but screw it, I'm ignoring him now. It's these kind of arguments that make me dislike being in Texas.

OmniaNigrum · Post by **OmniaNigrum** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 6:54 pm

Does that 11 count only murders, or are suicides included? If suicides are included, then I will repeat myself. "The more, the merrier."

Show some statistics that are exclusive to "Gun Crimes Committed Against Another" and I will give a damn.

John Magnum · Post by **John Magnum** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:00 pm

Fuck murder victims too. If they're too weak to defend themselves or too unaware to see an attack coming, they're polluting the gene pool as well. If they're murdered in the course of gang activities, we've achieved multiple social goods at once.

Ancient History · Post by **Ancient History** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:02 pm

I think that's all gun deaths, period. This has a table of 2011 gun violence data by state. Texas is #2 in the nation with 699 firearm murders, but has a lower percentage of firearm murders than New York and Illinois (barely). That doesn't count accidental firearm-related deaths and suicide, natch - I don't have exact statistics on that, but this map unsurprisingly suggests a higher per capita rate of accidental firearm death in Texas as well.

Whipstitch · Post by **Whipstitch** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:16 pm

OmniaNigrum wrote: Show some statistics that are exclusive to "Gun Crimes Committed Against Another" and I will give a damn.

I totally called this a page ago. Conservatives only give a shit about deaths when it falls under their extremely narrow interpretation of unjust. Fuck conservatives.

Shatner · Post by **Shatner** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:18 pm

OmniaNigrum wrote:Does that 11 count only murders, or are suicides included? If suicides are included, then I will repeat myself. "The more, the merrier."

Show some statistics that are exclusive to "Gun Crimes Committed Against Another" and I will give a damn.

I believe the "suicide deaths vs. homocides" and other argument re-framings/attempts to get apples-to-apples comparisons have already occurred in this thread. Before we start arguing the same points all over again, I urge folks, OmniaNigrum especially, to do some reading through the earlier pages of this thread. For example, we have this rebuttal to the suicide argument on page 10.

FrankTrollman wrote:The thing is that the firearm suicides are also tragedies, and part of the same problem. The Belcher tragedy is that two people died, not that there was one homicide. The Oregon mall shooting is two homicides and one suicide. The Connecticut school rampage is 26 homicides and 1 suicide.

Murder-suicides are actually a really common problem, and a problem that is especially associated with firearms. By focusing on just the "homicide" portion of that problem, you're ignoring a quite large chunk of the deaths and unfairly reducing the magnitude of the overall tragedy and damage to our society that guns cause.

Edit: Note that gun control will not stop crazy people from attacking schools full of children. Why, just yesterday there was a mass attack in China of a similar scale carried out with knives. Thing is though, 22 injured children is a lot less worse than 20 dead ones.

-Username17

ishy · Post by **ishy** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:23 pm

OmniaNigrum wrote:A gun is a tool. Not a murder implement with no other function.

What other functions do guns have?

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 7:52 pm

ishy wrote:
OmniaNigrum wrote:A gun is a tool. Not a murder implement with no other function.
What other functions do guns have?

Homer Simpson did pretty well using it as a remote

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:21 pm

OmniaNigrum wrote:If people want to kill themselves, then they should. This reduces the chance that those with a genetic disposition to kill themselves will exist in another dozen generations. The more, the merrier.

As previously established, suicide attempts are not about a genetic predisposition to kill themselves. When all people experience bad things, they feel bad. Feeling bad causes you to look for ways to not feel bad. Killing yourself is one such way. Whether or not someone attempts a specific method of dealing with their feelings is not a genetic predisposition.

You are wrong and your opinions are poorly reasoned.

OmniaNigrum wrote:As has been said billions of times, Guns Do Not Kill anyone. People do. Guns may make it easier to do it, but who the fuck cares?

I would imagine the people who got killed because it was easier to kill them might care, except that they were killed specifically because it was easier to kill them.

OmniaNigrum wrote:You shitbags that want to ban guns outright are ignoring the massively successful laws of shitty places like Chicago and New York. They have by far the most restrictive laws against guns in the entire United States, yet ironically they have more gun deaths per person than areas with more sane gun laws like my home state of Texas.

The city of Chicago has more gun deaths per person than the State of Texas. On the other hand, the State of Illinois has fewer gun deaths per person than the city of Houston. It is almost like cities have higher gun crime for some reason...

However, the States that ban guns have fewer gun crimes per person.

OmniaNigrum wrote:Fuck your states. Attempt to sway your lawmakers to change your own states laws before trying to inflict your idiocy on my state. Then when it fails, please kill yourself for failing.

Hey, funny story, we already did. Guns are heavily regulated in New Jersey, reducing gun deaths in this state, the obvious next step is to increase the safety of a bunch of people I care about in Texas by banning guns there. Since we already know that gun regulations reduce gun crime.

OmniaNigrum wrote:But something you are largely unwilling to hear is that here, people are afraid to break into homes because they know the odds of getting shot dead are higher by far due to sane gun laws and respect for the Second Amendment of the Constitution.

Oh, that would explain why New Jersey had 492 burglaries per 100,000 people, but Texas only had 862 burglaries per 100,000 in 2011.

Or you know, you are an idiot, and wrong as fuck... again.

erik · Post by **erik** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:25 pm

Ancient History wrote: Wait, what? Bullshit. Texas has 11 gun deaths per 100,000 people; Illinois has 9.7, New York has 5.5. And considering how many more people there are in Texas, I think that works out to more in absolute terms as well.

[/edit] More recent statistics say that the gap is even wider.

You're wasting your time AH. Omni doesn't believe in evidence.
Let that sink in for a while, and I guess consider your options.

That second link is interesting as the division of red/blue is pretty distinct.

Ancient History · Post by **Ancient History** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:48 pm

The thing about private gun ownership is that for the vast majority of individuals, it is completely unnecessary. I submit there is nothing you own worth injuring or killing a human being over to protect; that your chances of successfully defending yourself or your family against an armed intruder are based significantly on regular training that is unavailable to the general public; and that hunting and target shooting are luxuries, not necessities of life. What it boils down to, at rock bottom, is that gun owners are willing to accept the completely preventable shooting deaths of children and toddlers so that they can support their hobby.

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 8:54 pm

Ancient History wrote:What it boils down to, at rock bottom, is that gun owners are willing to accept the completely preventable shooting deaths of children and toddlers so that they can support their hobby.

Hobby is too nice of a word. I prefer: 'simpering culture of fear and tribe-based authoritarianism'. I mean, at least car enthusiasts and amateur chefs/food manufacturers can accept the underlying logic behind regulating their hobbies. You never see a Hot Rad fan screech about the government looking to confine people to cities or hobbyist gardeners squeal that the government is trying to control peoples' diet.

You hear that inane shit from gun owners all the time.

Whipstitch · Post by **Whipstitch** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 9:23 pm

You must not watch a lot of Top Gear then. Car aficionados are generally pretty alright with licensing standards and the like but a fair number of them start frothing at the mouth once you start talking about emission standards and are still super pissed about the gubmint taking away their big blocks.

Ancient History · Post by **Ancient History** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 9:29 pm

True, but most of them don't start talking about how they need cars to start Civil War 2.0 in case the government gets out of hand. Jeremy Clarkson may piss on the idea of global climate change and average speed cameras, but he's not going to pretend that he needs to be able to drive a Bugatti Veyron at top speed on the M-25 as a check to keep the Queen from abolishing Parliament.

OmniaNigrum · Post by **OmniaNigrum** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 11:16 pm

Most of you are fucking retarded dickholes. A few of you make reasonable claims, but the vast majority of you would not know reason if it crawled out of your asshole and bit your ass.

I do not give one flying fuck what most of you believe, as you do not care what I believe.

If you want the Second Amendment thrown out since you surely know better, please get the fuck out of the USA and go to your Communist hellhole nation of choice. We do not need idiotic traitors like you here.

And when your Communist hellhole of choice bans plastic cutlery too, you can eat shit with your bare hands until they take those too. You deserve it.

Count Arioch the 28th · Fri Jan 11, 2013 11:20 pm

Yeah, really. You think we had something that gave us the right to speak whatever idea we want without government interference. The nerve of some people!

OmniaNigrum · Post by **OmniaNigrum** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 11:27 pm

I alone decide what I view as treason. Just as each of you are free to. Your First Amendment right is not obstructed by me calling you a dickhole traitor. You are still quite free to be an idiot loudly.

Want to ban Fireworks too? Oh too late. The same dicks behind banning everything else already got to fireworks.

Count Arioch the 28th · Fri Jan 11, 2013 11:32 pm

I think we've found someone even more miserable than I am. I don't know how to feel about that...

erik · Post by **erik** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 11:39 pm

Man, it would be nice if we had sane representatives that would constitutionally get the 2nd Amendment overturned or at least modified. Maybe some day.

C'mon 28th Amendment!

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Fri Jan 11, 2013 11:44 pm

Count Arioch the 28th wrote:I think we've found someone even more miserable than I am. I don't know how to feel about that...

Christopher Titus wrote:People, be proud you're screwed up. But don't be too proud, like me. I got into an argument with a guy in bar; I bet him fifty bucks that I was more dysfunctional than he was. And he raped me
So I tipped him.
I am very competitive.

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:12 am

OmniaNigrum wrote:If you want the Second Amendment thrown out since you surely know better, please get the fuck out of the USA and go to your Communist hellhole nation of choice. We do not need idiotic traitors like you here.

Or you know, amend the constitution, since that explicitly exists, Mr. fan of the Second Amendment.

OmniaNigrum wrote:I alone decide what I view as treason. Just as each of you are free to.

You can certainly decide to call whatever you want treason, but when you call something isn't treason, as defined in the U.S. Constitution treason, you are in fact just factually wrong.

So since advocating for an amendment of the constitution, or for a particular interpretation of it does not consist "only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." when you claim that it is treasonous, you can totally say that, but you are 100% factually wrong.

In conclusion. You are wrong, and your opinions are poorly reasoned.

name_here · Post by **name_here** » Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:47 am

It's sometimes shocking how people who like to call on the constitution to support their claims know so little about the constitution.

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Sat Jan 12, 2013 2:03 am

Why the hell are pro-guns so hyperbolic? Not a single politician is seriously/actually advocating (least of all Obama/Biden) the complete removal of firearms from the civilian population. Some of the serious suggestions are equivalent to what we require on cars. There really are options between 'only soldiers are armed' and 'less restricted than alcohol.' Before the Connecticut massacre, Obama didn't seem to even *consider* gun control (actually loosened it in a couple places), yet he's been the NRA's public enemy #1 before he was ever elected.
Makes gun advocacy really sound like a woodland hermit's paranoid rantings.

OmniaNigrum wrote:I alone decide what I want in my mouth. Just as each of you are free to stick whatever you want into my mouth, because I freely encourage this. Your First Amendment right is not obstructed by me calling you a kind and gentle soul who makes an awesome pizza. You are still quite free to be someone who sings me to sleep, like an angel.

Want to eat Pizza too? Oh too late. The same meanies behind banning me from buying pizza without money already got them.

Don't worry friend, you're invited to my pizza party. We'll have cupcakes and sparklers and have all sorts of fun!