Reply to Re: My opinion on the school shootings in the US
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
Well, you made an argument that finished with conjecture. I ignored the conjecture of You supporting guns and American gun laws is just as bad as going to schools and shooting little kids yourself. because it is a bad argument. That statement is an expression of your passion against guns, which is not grounded in logic and fact.
Unless I've somehow missed some meaning that is obviously not stated in the whole statement, the argument that 'guns kill people' has been debated and the conjecture that followed is moot.
A tank is a vehicle, and as such a person could have it. If they started to buy tank ammunition, then they'd get in trouble.
I personally don't see the point in buying and owning a tank, unless you own a military museum.
We need a gun for: A) Hunting, when my dad actually follows that dream to fruition. We like to eat free range and organic and like to be self-sufficient. Hunting is an extension of that. I could learn how to hunt with a bow and arrow, but that requires more strength and great accuracy. If I miss the right spot, the animal suffers and might run away to die elsewhere. I lose not only an arrow, but a meal. If I have a gun and I'm well versed in gun safety and how to aim and use it, then I can kill the animal and lessen its suffering.
B) Because if nobody owned a gun, then criminals who use guns would obtain them illegally.
C) And this is my only conjecture, but C), it is my constitutional right to own a firearm. While I'm not actively seeking out a bunch of guns to buy and hang on my wall, I want to own a gun for hunting and protection from whatever dangers there are out there. The hunting gun would be used only for hunting, the protection gun would only be used as a deterrent unless I was in absolute danger. (Example, if a rabid animal is attacking me, I can use the gun to end its suffering and to protect myself. If a non-rabid animal is attacking me, the sound of the gun firing could scare it off, and if that doesn't work, killing it to protect myself and any others.)
Yes, but do you suggest we take people's fists away too. They can be used to kill as well, y'know
That is exactly my point. If a person wants to kill someone, they will find a way to do it.
But hands, like any other object that can kill, is a tool, and inherently not able to kill on their own. It is the force behind them, the person who owns those hands, that can kill.
Unless I've somehow missed some meaning that is obviously not stated in the whole statement, the argument that 'guns kill people' has been debated and the conjecture that followed is moot.
A tank is a vehicle, and as such a person could have it. If they started to buy tank ammunition, then they'd get in trouble.
I personally don't see the point in buying and owning a tank, unless you own a military museum.
We need a gun for: A) Hunting, when my dad actually follows that dream to fruition. We like to eat free range and organic and like to be self-sufficient. Hunting is an extension of that. I could learn how to hunt with a bow and arrow, but that requires more strength and great accuracy. If I miss the right spot, the animal suffers and might run away to die elsewhere. I lose not only an arrow, but a meal. If I have a gun and I'm well versed in gun safety and how to aim and use it, then I can kill the animal and lessen its suffering.
B) Because if nobody owned a gun, then criminals who use guns would obtain them illegally.
C) And this is my only conjecture, but C), it is my constitutional right to own a firearm. While I'm not actively seeking out a bunch of guns to buy and hang on my wall, I want to own a gun for hunting and protection from whatever dangers there are out there. The hunting gun would be used only for hunting, the protection gun would only be used as a deterrent unless I was in absolute danger. (Example, if a rabid animal is attacking me, I can use the gun to end its suffering and to protect myself. If a non-rabid animal is attacking me, the sound of the gun firing could scare it off, and if that doesn't work, killing it to protect myself and any others.)
Yes, but do you suggest we take people's fists away too. They can be used to kill as well, y'know
That is exactly my point. If a person wants to kill someone, they will find a way to do it.
But hands, like any other object that can kill, is a tool, and inherently not able to kill on their own. It is the force behind them, the person who owns those hands, that can kill.
