3 killed in shooting near Texas A&M University

[Ansel]

If someone caught you with a hand grenade you would go to jail for a long time. (They can be bought though on the black market here, they certainly are available).

Ok so you can shoot someone you just can't lob a grenade at them.

[sgreger1]

are hand-grenades legal in the US?

Lol no. Though you could make one pretty easily. Grenade launchers like M203 rifle attachments are legal, but you cannot use explosive grenades in them. The grenade launcher can be used legally to fire smoke shells, parachute flares and a "chalk dust training rounds".

If someone caught you with a hand grenade you would go to jail for a long time. (They can be bought though on the black market here, they certainly are available).

[Frosted]

..........I will however wait on a response to Whalen's comment that I am a "highly exciteable wingnut" who is the type who would go crazy and start a massacre and should therefore not be allowed to own a firearm.


............. based on the information available instead of using our "gut feelings" to decide whether something is good or bad. That's how abolition type thinking starts and we don't need to go down that road again. I enjoyed talking with you.

You made a comment to Whalen on another thread which he found offensive. This naturally made him angry. You have come across to me as being excitable and obsessive about this subject and it looks like I'm not the only person picking up on that.

Squeezy was not using "gut feelings"...he was simply speaking as a citizen of a country with gun control to give an alternative viewpoint which you are obviously so deeply uncomfortable with to the point of saying that we're not allowed to comment which is weird coming from a person that champions individual freedom.

[sgreger1]

Hear Hear!!!

....and Sgreger - Who says who can take part in what thread? You? Who wants to take guns of you? Us? LMFAO.

I can see this quickly becoming a "hate on sgreger1" thread so I will tone it down. Obviously I have no authority nor any intention of saying who posts where. I am just saying that when commenting on US politics, realize that you are not in the know, similar to how I am not in the know about what is going on in Ireland currently. I have laid out the facts in as civil a manner as possible and tried to bring rational debate to the situation, and now i'm being called a wingnut and potential mass-killer etc for defending something that is, in this country, a big deal to it's citizens. It's just that, similar to snus, they continue to regulate firearms in every way possible, outright banning them in some areas (which are now the highest crime cities in America BTW), and so there is a constant asault against these rights which are guaranteed to us by our constitution and that is why I am so passionate about it.

I can see that no one wants to have rational discussion, they just want to shout their opinions and not back it up with anything. That is fine, I get it, i'm out.

[Ansel]

are hand-grenades legal in the US?

[sgreger1]

sgreger1 - I have said all I am going to say in this thread and I assure you I am not going to say anything further on the subject. I am aware that I don't have a barrage of neatly to hand statistics and reports in support of my previous statements the way that you do. I am aware that I could spend days of my life researching it and find at least something that would support my arguments.

But...

#1 - I am too busy to do that. I don't spend hours talking on the internet usually. Just a few minutes here and there normally. I will spend hours researching things which are directly relevant to my life as I see fit.

#2 - I have much less to gain by doing so than you do. I'm happy with the gun law situation in my country and most european countries - happy that they work within the structures of our societies here for the most part. You seem happy with the unregulated nature of firearms in the USA and have spent a long time finding evidence to back up your position - and it would appear from the passion with which you insist it should remain that you see the current situation as under threat - and naturally are incredibly defensive on the subject. Fair enough.

If I were you I'd leave this thread alone for a while. You've made it quite clear that there are far more important things going on in your life at the moment than carrying on a high-maintenance argument online with a band of random tobacco users around the globe.

I'm not telling you what you can or can't do by the way ... just suggesting, but I won't be drawn in to looking up a load of reports and statistics for you to disagree with. I'm not posting in this thread again because I want to be able to be friendly with you on subjects closer to my heart.

Cheers

Squeezy

It took me 10 minutes to find those numbers, because if you look around there is so much evidence against gun control that you don't have to dig very deep to find it. You were making comments about how the US has unregulated gun control (completely false in every way to say we are unregulated), and that guns increases the crime rate, and therefore gun control reduces the crime rate. I'm simply saying that I base my opinions on what can be proven on paper and on paper it appears to show that guns aren't as bad a thing as you are painting them to be.

Anyways, you asked for rational discussion, so I toned it down and brought rational discussion to it. Aparently that's not what everyone was here to see so I agree, we can let the thread die if no one else has anything to say.

I will however wait on a response to Whalen's comment that I am a "highly exciteable wingnut" who is the type who would go crazy and start a massacre and should therefore not be allowed to own a firearm. Again, I am willing to bring rational discussion into the debate, but only when others will rationally defend their side and not cop out when the numbers are not in support of their arguments.


You appear to be a good man squeezy and I don't mean this to be an "argument on the internet". Just posting the facts for folks to see, and maybe someday as a society we can form both personal & policy decisions based on the information available instead of using our "gut feelings" to decide whether something is good or bad. That's how abolition type thinking starts and we don't need to go down that road again. I enjoyed talking with you.

[Frosted]

You lot tried twice already. Didn't work out so well, did it?

Now that's funny

[Crow]

Who wants to take guns of you? Us? LMFAO.

You lot tried twice already. Didn't work out so well, did it?

[Frosted]

sgreger1 - I have said all I am going to say in this thread and I assure you I am not going to say anything further on the subject. I am aware that I don't have a barrage of neatly to hand statistics and reports in support of my previous statements the way that you do. I am aware that I could spend days of my life researching it and find at least something that would support my arguments.

But...

#1 - I am too busy to do that. I don't spend hours talking on the internet usually. Just a few minutes here and there normally. I will spend hours researching things which are directly relevant to my life as I see fit.

#2 - I have much less to gain by doing so than you do. I'm happy with the gun law situation in my country and most european countries - happy that they work within the structures of our societies here for the most part. You seem happy with the unregulated nature of firearms in the USA and have spent a long time finding evidence to back up your position - and it would appear from the passion with which you insist it should remain that you see the current situation as under threat - and naturally are incredibly defensive on the subject. Fair enough.

If I were you I'd leave this thread alone for a while. You've made it quite clear that there are far more important things going on in your life at the moment than carrying on a high-maintenance argument online with a band of random tobacco users around the globe.

I'm not telling you what you can or can't do by the way ... just suggesting, but I won't be drawn in to looking up a load of reports and statistics for you to disagree with. I'm not posting in this thread again because I want to be able to be friendly with you on subjects closer to my heart.

Cheers

Squeezy

Hear Hear!!!

....and Sgreger - Who says who can take part in what thread? You? Who wants to take guns of you? Us? LMFAO.

[squeezyjohn]

sgreger1 - I have said all I am going to say in this thread and I assure you I am not going to say anything further on the subject. I am aware that I don't have a barrage of neatly to hand statistics and reports in support of my previous statements the way that you do. I am aware that I could spend days of my life researching it and find at least something that would support my arguments.

But...

#1 - I am too busy to do that. I don't spend hours talking on the internet usually. Just a few minutes here and there normally. I will spend hours researching things which are directly relevant to my life as I see fit.

#2 - I have much less to gain by doing so than you do. I'm happy with the gun law situation in my country and most european countries - happy that they work within the structures of our societies here for the most part. You seem happy with the unregulated nature of firearms in the USA and have spent a long time finding evidence to back up your position - and it would appear from the passion with which you insist it should remain that you see the current situation as under threat - and naturally are incredibly defensive on the subject. Fair enough.

If I were you I'd leave this thread alone for a while. You've made it quite clear that there are far more important things going on in your life at the moment than carrying on a high-maintenance argument online with a band of random tobacco users around the globe.

I'm not telling you what you can or can't do by the way ... just suggesting, but I won't be drawn in to looking up a load of reports and statistics for you to disagree with. I'm not posting in this thread again because I want to be able to be friendly with you on subjects closer to my heart.

Cheers

Squeezy

[Skell18]

Tony Martin got 8 years after it was appealed and would have been out after 9 years if the original conviction stuck (for the two offences he was convicted of), it was reduced to manslaughter on appeal. The only people who didn't think he was a hero were the people associated with the scum who tried to rob him, typical chav scum.

[sgreger1]

Glad you asked actually, while I support the right of "responsible" citizens the right to bear arms, I think that Angry, "Highly Excitable" "Wingnuts" such as yourself should never be allowed any where near a gun! It is the angry obsessive loonies that seem to act out! Just sayin!

Was that directed at me? I hope not, as I am certainly not a wingnut by any definition of the term. I am a responsible gun owner and am trained in how to properly use a firearm. Regardless of that, currently the onyl restrictions against being a gun owner are if you are a felon, if you have been declared 51/50 by the state, or if you have violated the brady law and abused someone during a domestic violence dispute. I am not an "angry obsessive loonie, I am just pissed that people are coming on here and invollving themselves in american politics with no facts to back up their assertions. I have posted a treasure trove of reasons why gun control does not work, cited multiple studies from reputable sources, and provided more than a dozen instances where having a legally posessed firearm stopped criminals and saved a victims life. I then went on to give several statistics regrding how many millions of poeple have been saved by defensive use of a firearm.

Because I get pissed off at someone in a forum for spouting what I believe to be complete nonsense with nothing to back it up, you would say that I shouldn't be able to possess a firearm? What is the test to determine how "highly excitable" someone is, and what threshold should be used to determine if one is of the optimum level of excitability to where they could be allowed to legally own a firearm?

[Crow]

Damn, Whalen.. don't ya think that's a little rough?

[whalen]

Glad you asked actually, while I support the right of "responsible" citizens the right to bear arms, I think that Angry, "Highly Excitable" "Wingnuts" such as yourself should never be allowed any where near a gun! It is the angry obsessive loonies that seem to act out! Just sayin!

[sgreger1]

If anyone has any evidence to be pro-gun control, please speak your piece now. So far we have seen only sources that show gun control intrinsically does not work, if the other side of the debate would like to offer some evidence than now is the time. If not than i think we should finally put this issue to bed and rule that gun control has failed in literally every country it has been tried in. If I am wrong please prove it.