Florida news: Zimmerman - free of all charges

[GuitarBilly]

well the royal baby is here and the media will move on.

[Casey4s]

well the royal baby is here and the media will move on.

I hope so Billy, this has run it's course

[Repner]

Indeed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/07 ... ref=topbar

[Dickarms]

Yeap, they're great for opening doors & cans of tuna too.

they actually are. There is something called a breecher round, which is fired from a shotgun into a locked door knob, often granting LEO/military personnel access to non-lethal diffusion of hostage situations, etc. in my time in the military, my crew never killed even one person, but we effectively fired several rounds in applications completely removed from "death dealing"--breeching during boardings and warning shots when capturing pirates. an M14 rifle affixed with a rubber projectile is used to project lines to tankers for refueling. granted, these are military exmaples and thus has little to do with civilian owner/operatorship of firearms, but an example nonetheless. i've never opened tuna with one though. hunting/field defense are other examples too. but agian, not really applicable here, just saying that your reactionary blanket statement is pretty ridiculous.

I find it interesting that the people who say guns are not just for killing are the same people who normally tell you you don't aim to injure, you aim to kill.

one has nothing to do with the other. tire irons are used for lug nut removal, but if you are forced to use one to defend yourself or for some other unrelated purpose than lug nut removal, procedural steps such as knowing where and what to hit have nothing to do with its original intended purpose, no matter how closely related in concept.

as greatly illustrated here:

Thats not my point, really. I dont really like the sensationalism of statements like "deal death", its just sort of.....lame

Technically you aim to stop, not necessarily kill in a defence sort of situation but death is a fairly effective way to stop an attack.

The saying you are thinking of is that you never use a gun to injure or threaten, if you use a gun you must be prepared to kill anything that you are aiming it at, never mistake the gravity that comes in a guns use.

Also to be totally clear a guns sole purpose is to contain an explosion to propel a mass of metal in a singular direction, it doesnt "deal death". Its a tool because this contained explosion can be used for a wide variety of purposes and not limited just killing,it just happens to be damn effective at that.

very true. hey there, think guns are death machines? have a propane stove/grill? so you like bombs but not guns? sounds stupid, but if we're arguing potential for serious injury/death, its there. and i see more mishandling of flammables/combustibles on a daily basis than i EVER do of firearms.

i see it as you are either logical enough to accept the "guns are tools" argument or you are not. but thats my opinion i guess. but, like when arguing with my girlfriend, its hard to argue with people who don't actually employ logical retorts but simply cling to an ideal regardless of the demonstrations of the contrary.

Indeed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/07 ... ref=topbar

lol awesome!

[Meelosh]

very true. hey there, think guns are death machines? have a propane stove/grill? so you like bombs but not guns? sounds stupid...

You still don't get it...

[rear naked]

Personally, I never found the "designed for killing" argument very compelling...

[Dickarms]

You still don't get it...

lol likewise.

i frankly dont understand the communication breakdown. we know, we know "whatever you're comparing to isnt A SCARY GERN!!!!!!" that doesnt not mean comparisons, good ones, can be drawn and applied

[Meelosh]

that doesnt not mean comparisons, good ones, can be drawn and applied

That's kinda where we disagree...it's not a good one...those usual comparisons require some major tunnel vision. It's like you're missing the big picture.

[clipless bumper]

I would say that the unequivocal 'guns bad' outlook is missing the big picture.

[Meelosh]

I would say that the unequivocal 'guns bad' outlook is missing the big picture.

Do you realize that I can look back on your previous posts and see what you have to offer...?

[clipless bumper]

go right ahead

[Meelosh]

I already did dude...it was an arrogant thing to say, my bad. Ahh nevermind.

[Dickarms]

that doesnt not mean comparisons, good ones, can be drawn and applied

That's kinda where we disagree...it's not a good one...those usual comparisons require some major tunnel vision. It's like you're missing the big picture.

at this point i really am (non-sarcastically) having trouble understanding how someone who sees only one use for something views a person who sees the many uses for it as the one missing the big picture. please qualify that statement.

[Meelosh]

Nevermind, Texas. This will never go anywhere. So you can have it, guns = phones = cars = gas grills.

[clipless bumper]

Nevermind, Texas. This will never go anywhere. So you can have it, guns = phones = cars = gas grills.

You still aren't getting the analogy aspect of it.

Nobody said guns = phones = cars = gas grills.........
They were referring to the absurdity of anti-gun hyperbole.
check the posts.

[Meelosh]

[~Abstract~]

It's hard to get guns in China.

Murderers there go on murdering sprees with knives and clubs.


$5 says that murderers in China with knifes don't typically kill others who also have knives.

[~Abstract~]

http://dailyanarchist.com/2012/07/31/au ... tatistics/


The average number of people killed in mass shootings when stopped by police is 14.29

The average number of people killed in a mass shooting when stopped by a civilian is 2.33

[Dickarms]

Nevermind, Texas. This will never go anywhere. So you can have it, guns = phones = cars = gas grills.

look up the definition of analogy.

compare it to metaphor.


report back.



hint: it doesn't involve an equals sign.


austin is not texas, btw

[Dickarms]

i love gun control threads. and they never start as gun control threads, which is one of the best parts.



and cops are notoriously worse shots than civilians.

[Casey4s]

:lol: i love gun control threads. and they never start as gun control threads, which is one of the best parts.



and cops are notoriously worse shots than civilians.

Keep in mind the national average IQ for police officers is just 126, they are not exactly brainiacs.

[rear naked]

:lol: i love gun control threads. and they never start as gun control threads, which is one of the best parts.



and cops are notoriously worse shots than civilians.

Keep in mind the national average IQ for police officers is just 126, they are not exactly brainiacs.

LOL


top 5% isn't impressive enough for you?


Mean IQ is 100.

Cops mean IQ is not anywhere near 126

[~Abstract~]

:lol: i love gun control threads. and they never start as gun control threads, which is one of the best parts.



and cops are notoriously worse shots than civilians.

Keep in mind the national average IQ for police officers is just 126, they are not exactly brainiacs.

Link?

I've heard that it was exactly 100. Some may be 103 and some may be 97...but 100 was where they fell.

fyi: 100 is statistical "average". 126 is nearing "brainiac" territory...they would be smarter than 96% of the general population.


http://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barr ... y?id=95836

says it's 104.

[Casey4s]

:lol: i love gun control threads. and they never start as gun control threads, which is one of the best parts.



and cops are notoriously worse shots than civilians.

Keep in mind the national average IQ for police officers is just 126, they are not exactly brainiacs.

LOL


top 5% isn't impressive enough for you?


Mean IQ is 100.

Cops mean IQ is not anywhere near 126

I read that somewhare on the internet a few years ago. Of course we all know if it's on the internet it has to be true

I could have misquoted that, if so my bad . . . I need to find my source I guess.

[Casey4s]

:lol: i love gun control threads. and they never start as gun control threads, which is one of the best parts.



and cops are notoriously worse shots than civilians.

Keep in mind the national average IQ for police officers is just 126, they are not exactly brainiacs.

Link?

I've heard that it was exactly 100. Some may be 103 and some may be 97...but 100 was where they fell.

fyi: 100 is statistical "average". 126 is nearing "brainiac" territory...they would be smarter than 96% of the general population.


http://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barr ... y?id=95836

says it's 104.

Hmmmmm well I guess I'll have to admit I was WRONG on this, maybe it was 106?

Oh well