78 replies to this topic

[Beaver Vortex]

If you are so anti gun, Beaver Vortex, then why are you even on this site........?

Honestly, I don't care either way. But on topics such as this, I will debate for whichever cause others are debating against. I consider it a bad thing for people to not have anyone disagree with them. This breeds ignorance.

MysticNinja: Oh, so I'm "ignoring, not understanding?" Not quite. I'm not ignoring. I understand what you are saying, but am choosing to interpret the same things differently. Both of us are interpreting things differently to prove that we are right. That is basically what debating is. The ignorance never has been exclusively on my side of the argument.

[MysticNinja]

Your right, the second amendment was created solely to assure our rights to shoot each other and anything or one standing in between regardless of reason. It’s easy to interpret things anyway you want to support your side of an argument or debate. See though, I wasn’t trying to incite or participate either of those two things. I gave a quote on a relevant issue, one I though would be thought provoking, by one of those people who signed the constitution. That would have been the end of things except you had to go and attempt to be a smart ass, I’d assume by your disposition you’re usually better at it. In this case I really just think your being argumentative, hiding behind the guise of debate.

[Beaver Vortex]

And rather than try to argue logically, you reduce yourself to petty insults. I feel no need to continue this, since you have proven twice now how talking with you only ends in you getting angry. Feel free to bitch me out all you want. It just goes to show your OWN "disposition."

[MysticNinja]

I’m glad you have your dilutions, but I feel no need to argue. Especially when you don’t care either way, you’ve made it clear you’ve got your “interpretation” and I’ve got mine, and neither one of use is really adamant either way it would seem. You’ve done nothing more than try and pull apart my point and not build one of your own. I don’t see the problem here, what I said wasn’t an insult but me just trying to find out, one way or another, your motives. Next time I think your just trying to be a pain in the ass I’ll just except it as truth instead of mentioning it and giving you a chance to defend your self. If I was mad I wouldn’t keep trying to settle this. Maybe this is the second time I’ve tried to clear things up. Once again I’ll apologies though. I’m sorry I came off insulting. Most of my actual insults are jokes. I forget how many people take the things the little avatars on their monitors say too seriously.

[Talio]

Alright guys, this is getting a little personal and heated. Remember, friendly debate. If you have something valid to add, go for it. If your feeling ticked, cool off, think it through, then post.

And yes, I do have room to talk.

Talio.

[MysticNinja]

Your right Talio, and I’m really not angry here. I’ve even been trying to lighten the ‘mood’ so to speak by cracking a few jokes like the quill comment. I’m not trying to be insulting, not really even trying to be funny just trying not to keep things so serious. I just hate that I now I’m being portrayed as an ass. Not that I’m not an ass, I’m just not guilty of this particular crime. My first post said I’m not trying to take sides. That was relevant to the entirety of my post. I had just wrote an essay on that particular quote, and honestly thought hey what a coincidence when my mouse found it’s way to this thread apparently one to many times.

[Talio]

Just to let you know, that comment was in no way directed at you. You can use deductive reasoning to figure out who it was. Don't worry, no one looks like an ass, but this is an internet chat board, in which any idiot can spout his unsupported hair brained idea's, and I can see a few people aren't taking this into consideration. Your fine though, don't feel bad, no one should feel bad, it's a chat board.

Talio.

[Viper]

I stated earlier that the handgun was the most commonly used murder weapon(including suicides) , the knife being second, and the next gun being the shotgun at 10th place. Just a reminder to those people who will post something like "assault weapons are no longer needed" remember that there's been 5 crimes since 1929 that involved assault weapons. The entire argument that guns are no longer needed dissolves once you realize that yes, nerf is not absolutely neccesary for survival and one may interpret it as a sport of simulated killing. Having a corvette is not neccesary for survival, may be very dangerous if used improperly ,as is an SUV or any other vehicle. The truth is that's there's many dangerous hobbies and the such that would need to be eliminated if you were to use the argument that they are no longer neccesary in our modern society and it would benefit from the "ban" of these items.


If the "killing" of innocent animals is so horrible, why target the hunters, how about the cattle farmers, fisherman, or any relating occupations?

[merlinski]

That said, this isn't about a hatred for you. I personally don't mind you and I don't think many people here mind you either, its the fact that you were a part of the Nerf community, and now you're a shell of what you used to be. To explain more simply, you have become irrelevant to a community which once prided itself on having members like you.

Love,
Matt

Thank you for posting on that theme without using the words "retard" or "troll". That makes your opinion a lot easier to respect. I'm going to try to get back into posting about nerf. My comment about school wasn't an excuse, it was an explanation for why I really didn't care about nerf for the past 9 or so months. I'm not going to pretend like that was something beyond my control that forcibly ripped me away from nerf. But it is the reason that I didn't give a shit for a while, and I'm in a different situation now. So I'll say what I said in the PM I sent to Talio - I'm going to post more outside of OT, and I'm requesting that you stop following my posts here with irrelevant comments.

On a side note, I'm working on something that would definitely considered constructive, but I won't post about that unless I actually have results to show.

-Merlinski

Oh, and Viper - If the hunter actually eats the animal, that's one thing. But most hunters do it for sport, and that's why they're different than farmers. It's one thing to kill an animal for a productive reason (food) and quite another to kill it for the joy of killing.

Edited by merlinski, 30 May 2005 - 12:35 AM.

[texmustache]

remember that there's been 5 crimes since 1929 that involved assault weapons.

I highly doubt that.
Care to cite something?

As far as guns go, i'm a liberal but pro-gun.

[Davis]

Give them to the PoPos, what the hell do other people need them for?
If you feel the need to shoot something off, grab a paintball gun.

[Evil]

If you feel the need to shoot something off, grab a paintball gun.

If you've ever shot a gun you know there is no comparison to be made between a silly paintball gun and a real firearm.

[Viper]

The percentage of crimes done with assault weapons in the US is .00003%. The number 5 was something some guy stated to me earlier. The point is, assault weapons are irrelvant to gun control, or at least should be.

[cxwq]

The percentage of crimes done with assault weapons in the US is .00003%. The number 5 was something some guy stated to me earlier. The point is, assault weapons are irrelvant to gun control, or at least should be.

How about looking up the percentage of crimes committed with a firearm which involve assault weapons? I think you'll find that in most major cities the percentage of assault weapons vs guns overall seized from criminals is between 1% and 2% and that 4% of mass murders involving firearms are perpetrated with assault weapons.

Since the stock of assault weapons is estimated at 1.7% of total firearms in the US, it would seem that they are neither more or less likely to be involved in crime, but roughly twice as likely to be involved in a mass murder.

I'm honestly rather ambivalent about the gun control issue and don't fully agree with either party. I think that reasonable background checks and bans on select fire weapons are definitely good. I think that laws criminalizing features of guns that are not related to their efficacy in perpetrating crime are definitely bad. All the numbers I just provided were taken from relatively well documented sites maintained by assault weapon advocates - I'm sure I could find numbers which skew radically in the other direction by visiting gun control biased sites but hyperbole is not my cup of tea.

[MysticNinja]

that 4% of mass murders involving firearms are perpetrated with assault weapons.

Since the stock of assault weapons is estimated at 1.7% of total firearms in the US, it would seem that they are neither more or less likely to be involved in crime, but roughly twice as likely to be involved in a mass murder.

I believe we’re using similar facts, I haven’t seen anything that’s hasn’t checked out. “for the period 1976 to 1992, only 48.3% of victims killed in incidents with four or more victims were killed with guns” So out of say 4,000 people killed in mass murder only about 483 people would have been killed with guns. That’s roughly 121 (120.75) crimes, about 5 (4.83) committed by assault weapons. That’s a 1 to 200 person ratio. Keep in mind that’s before most major assault weapon bans or restrictions. Some numbers for thought.

Though assault weapons are crafted with one intention and that’s not self defense, hunting, or even showmanship. If someone wants one of these killing tools simply out of respect and intrigue over its efficiency in doing just what it was made to do (kill) then there should be measures in place to prevent it from ever foreseeing it’s destiny; that said there are. I suppose their effectiveness could be called into question, but I’m not sure what would be the basis.

Shotguns are generally the most dangerous in my mind as they’re very deadly in a verity of ways and for many reasons. Also they tend to have very lax regulations and are used often in domestic murders.

[Sqiggs89]

That's all I have to say.

[NerfMonkey]

Sqiggs, I believe the topic shifted a few pages ago to the issue of gun control, and although I have nothing to say on the matter, I don't think it really has anything to do with Bush/Kerry at all.

That is a pretty funny picture, though.

[Shotty Master]

hahahahahahahAHAHAHA!!!!!! yea, that about sums that picture up. how you like these?
http://www.almostapr.../JIHAD_THIS.jpg
http://www.almostapr...mages2/can1.jpg

and finally...

Edited by Shotty_Master, 31 May 2005 - 07:36 PM.

[Sqiggs89]

Well, that whoops ass.

[MattPaintballer]

Sqiggs, it doesn't matter which president is better at sports, it matters which one is smarter, a better leader, and will not destroy our country. I don't fucking care if George Bush is better at catching footballs than Kerry, he still doesn't know what the fuck he's doing. He's honestly one of the dumbest people ever.

Weapons of mass destruction? More like weapons of mass deception!

And you know what really kills me? The stupidity of our President. He doesn't know the definition of the word "disassemble." I've known what that meant since like 2nd grade, now c'mon. Somebody tell me how the hell he's been our President for 4 years, and then he was RE-ELECTED?! Mistakes are okay, as long as they're new ones. We've made this mistake twice now.

What's up with the electoral votes? They don't make sense. Popular vote should win it, not electoral. With electoral votes, not every vote counts. It's true. Say 4/10 of a state votes for Candidate A, and 6/10 of the state votes for Candidate B. Automatically, 4/10 of the state's votes DON'T COUNT. Say the state had 100,000 people in it. That's 40,000 votes that don't mean a thing. Gone. Just like that. Poof. That needs to change. Pretty soon too, otherwise we'll get a lot more dumbasses as our President.

What the hell is up with those "every vote counts" commercials? They're untrue.

Edit: Typo

Edited by MattPaintballer, 03 June 2005 - 08:38 PM.

[NerfMonkey]

Matt, I'm not going to insult you, but...was it really necessary to reopen a topic that's been dead for four days to insult someone for a joke? I don't think that he meant to offend anyone by it, it was a little joke that you shouldn't have flipped out over and insulted him for. Good job.

[MattPaintballer]

was it really necessary to reopen a topic that's been dead for four days

Dude four days old isn't dead.

I didn't flip out on him. Read the first sentence of my post. I was just telling him. Sorry if I was too harsh.

[NerfMonkey]

No harm done, sorry.

[AirApache]

Why the fuck is this thread still alive. I thought we'd established that we don't care/need a political discussion on Nerfhaven.

[Shotty Master]

Matt, the are weapons of mass destruction. look up " 1993 gas attack on kurds in iraq"
In 1993 Saddam used missiles loaded with mustard gas to attack HIS OWN PEOPLE! If thats not enough proof, then i dont know what is.