BTGBullseye

And why should that matter in this discussion? 1. I most certainly can say that, because I dare you to find any other country that puts the right of firearm ownership directly in the founding principles of their country, (besides Mexico which doesn't actually allow that right in practice, or Guatemala which was not one of your espoused countries of "sanity") even so much as to put it second only to the freedom of speech. The culture of excess is literally what I described at the beginning that you disagreed with. 2. None of that proves objectively that their social systems are "better". 3. I'm comparing all of the UK to anywhere in the USA, because it's a valid comparison that you don't like. The UK has a MUCH higher rate of violent crime than the USA, just not with as many guns. 4. That has absolutely nothing to do with sanity, or proof of anything related to this particular subdiscussion. This statement doesn't make any sense. I didn't miss the context, and it's only your opinion that the subversion of values isn't a bad thing. I bet you would consider it bad if that subversion caused people to steal your stuff, and kill you for being a witness.

Cherry Picking, especially when considering it ignores the officially recognised side effects of the drugs themselves. The only source I can find for that statistic is from 2013; 4 years old. Unless you have an up to date source, I'm going to say that sort of argument needs a clarification to indicate that the argument may be out of date. Almost all guns are obtained legally initially, (how many guns are stolen from the gun store, or directly from the manufacturer?) it's what happens after that determines legality. Though I'm not sure why you're bringing this up, as no law that can be enforced will ever change that someone can always just hand another person a firearm to use. Some of the shooters do so just to get on TV. I agree that the information should be provided though. I see no workable way not to publicize in a way that would appeal to the shooters that desire that publicity without also harming the public knowledge. The fact that nothing ever gets done is because as far as we can tell nothing that can be done will actually fix anything related to the problem, and most that can be done will make things much worse for the law abiding citizens of this country. I'm going to need to see some unbiased objective proof that that is the case, because that doesn't make any logical sense. Again, I'm going to need to see some objective unbiased proof of these claims. It was a valid example. Why are you complaining about it?

What commonwealth? The one in Massachusetts? 1. They have a very different culture there, one that isn't directly compatible with that of the USA. 2. Prove that their social systems are "better" objectively, and not just in your opinion. 3. Safe is not what I would call it in the UK, where you're far more likely to get physically accosted than anywhere in the USA. 4. Please provide objective proof that their conditions are "sane", and what conditions would be insane. 5. Why are you bringing up countries that aren't related to the conversation? What about it? It wasn't a part of the discussion. They just recently got rid of Apartheid as well. None of this actually discusses anything in relation to the subject at hand. You're going off topic. You're about to contradict yourself... It's coming right up... And there it is... Self contradiction.

That is very much a political discussion, please restrict that sort of conversation to the Gun Control thread. This thread is for discussing the weapons themselves, not relating to politics.

Those homeless numbers are pretty accurately representing the truly homeless, but not if including those that don't have their name on leases or deeds. Multiple housing (multiple people sharing the rent) shouldn't really be considered for this, as that may or may not be because of an inability to afford it alone.

Modern society is messed up. That's the TL;DR. Here's a bit longer version. Modern secular society has popularized so many things that are inherently unhealthy for our human minds. (the devaluation of family, the blatant hate directed towards all religions, the emphasis on trying to make people experiment with being LGBT, single parents, etc.) In addition, it makes it seem as though not having the newest shiny is the same as being worthless as a human being. This has gradually resulted in an incredibly self-centered populace that doesn't care about anything else, (including the other people in their lives, whom they treat as objects) so long as they get what they want. This is why not only is this movie "relatable" to modern children, but also doesn't even try to tell them it's wrong. (it's not telling them it's wrong because even the writer isn't sure anymore what is right and wrong) Kids are taught to feel "empowered", yet power almost always leads to abuse of the power, and a feeling of superiority over others they perceive as "beneath them". There aren't any losers anymore, everyone is taught that they should be rewarded for simply showing up, even if they put no effort into it. Society is killing us.

Necrobump. Almost 2 years since last post. Just making it easier to find for new people. Remember, this is for discussing the weapons only, not for the politics surrounding them.

Necrobump. Over 2 years since last post. Would rather have gun control thoughts that appear to be arising from recent events coming her than other threads.

These two threads cover much about firearms opinions held by many of the members of these forums. viewtopic.php?f=55&t=1520 viewtopic.php?f=55&t=5915 Note: Many may have changed their opinions over time, so give them the benefit of the doubt.

I've always hovered around the middle for thinking and feeling... Apparently that just means I'm balanced between the two.

Well, I'm still INFP-A... Introverted - 89% Intuitive ----- 77% Feeling ------ 53% Prospecting - 79% Assertive ---- 78% I can still switch to INTP-A mode though... No problems doing that. (not like that's any great achievement when it's only 3% away)

So... Which team are you on? [EDIT} Found it... Arstotzka. Honestly, it really is too bad I can't play it with you... I had that game down to a science. Rolled the points over maximum multiple times.

But that's not as fun as having a challenge that involves the destruction of the vast majority of the human race! Honestly, I doubt we'll ever see anything resembling true sentience in a computer program in our lifetimes.

More often than not, the scripture is actually the source of those teachings, not the other way around.

Everything in moderation. Funny how that's mentioned a lot in Christian scripture isn't it...

Those 3 are the primary focus of most religions, some of which are even called the root of all evil. Interesting isn't it?

You should read the book of Daniel... It describes what appear to be helicopters and MLRS launchers in terms that he could relate to. It's a great example of "we don't have words to describe this yet".

Honestly, I have trouble holding a grudge through the night... I'll still argue or disagree, but no grudges are ever held by me.

Depends on your tastebuds... Wine is good though. Much antioxidants.

Those were both terrible deals for everyone except for the shareholders of a select few companies... Anyone who can't see that needs to get their eyes checked. 1. Nuclear is the only way to get enough power for the national grid efficiently enough, short of fossil fuel plants. Solar and wind are both extremely temperamental, more polluting, more lethal, and more costly. 2. Battery improvements are not sufficient enough to allow for a full transfer from fossil fuel to electric vehicles en-masse, especially considering that the average battery STILL only lasts a year or two. (you'd have to spend a minimum of $10k each time to replace the battery at their current cost) 3. Natural Gas is a severely underappreciated fuel source. Most gasoline powered vehicles could be converted to use it for less than $1000 per car, for a 1-time fee. This would reduce pollution by around 90%, reduce all fuel costs, (after the initial CNG cost rise to compensate for the demand) improve mileage, and allow for a great many more resources to be devoted to "green tech" research. I have read nothing but unsubstantiated rumor about him in regards to the accusations you're making. If you have supporting evidence, please provide it. I have read nothing but unsubstantiated rumor about him in regards to the accusations you're making. If you have supporting evidence, please provide it. One of the major reasons that Planned Parenthood was defunded was because of their repeated use of scaremongering to push people to get abortions at clinics that gave kickbacks directly to PP. These clinics also had reputations for being incredibly bad at their job, occasionally even removing the child alive, then leaving it to die of exposure, or simply beating it to death. PP however was protected by their friends in the government, and so was never shut down, despite being proven to be corrupt way beyond even what the government is. Another reason is that it was using tax dollars to directly fund this corruption, effectively forcing people with religious prohibitions on the support of murder of unborn children to fund the murder of unborn children. (please don't argue the "they're not a person yet" thing, as that definition is false according to any form of scientific scrutiny that has been used to define it)

Fluids and rest. Hope you feel better soon.

In response to Templar Knight:

Unfortunately your definition of "provably false" is completely different from every official definition I've ever heard/read. And yet never was any proof presented to counter my experience. Just because it doesn't add up with your own limited personal experience, doesn't mean that it can't ever happen anywhere ever. And nobody ever truly countered that. People still treat science as a religion, blindly following the teachings of those that claim to be scientists, irregardless of their actual methods. Same could be said for anyone else in those situations. It takes 2 to argue, and I have always stated that I don't back down from an argument just to appease someone who tries to misinform or mislead people. (intentionally or not) If factual evidence that is not controversial is provided to counter my position, then I will back down, but so far that has not happened. I would, but I have the policy of never sending invites out to others, except inside a game, and then only to those I am already friends with. (it is a good way to keep from having trouble with many of the truly bad people that are out there)

Well... I have a machine gun. Happy b-day Ross!

Red Faction Guerrilla was a far superior game. Open world, fully destructible buildings, extensive weapons selection, upgrades, mods, you name it. That said, this was a decent game, until it decided that saving at 1 specific checkpoint was no longer something it wanted to do on my system. (impossible to progress because of it, tried nearly 20 times)