Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

A USA gun thread. That won't be controversial, will it?

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

A USA gun thread. That won't be controversial, will it?

Old 15th Nov 2014, 19:23
  #1801 (permalink)  
PTT
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 441
Yeah, that's pretty much the childish reply I expected when it was shown to you that your "freedoms" are paper-thin and cost the blood of innocents. Perhaps you should show that oversized cartoon to some of the parents of the victims at Sandy Hook.

You may have missed it, but I don't want a handgun.
PTT is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2014, 19:26
  #1802 (permalink)  
Dushan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by PTT View Post

You may have missed it, but I don't want a handgun.
Doesn't matter, does it? You can't have it. I can and I do. And they never hurt anyone, especially at Sandy Hook*.











* Where I believe no handguns were used...
 
Old 15th Nov 2014, 19:35
  #1803 (permalink)  
PTT
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 441
they never hurt anyone
Really?
In the United States, according to figures from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), annual handgun homicides total

2010: 899
2009: 1,013
2008: 961
2007: 976
2006: 997
2005: 1,074
2004: 1,011
2003: 1,011
2002: 1,024
2001: 1,014
2000: 1,068
1999: 1,082
- http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/united-states
PTT is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2014, 19:39
  #1804 (permalink)  
Dushan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by PTT View Post
Really?
In the United States, according to figures from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), annual handgun homicides total

2010: 899
2009: 1,013
2008: 961
2007: 976
2006: 997
2005: 1,074
2004: 1,011
2003: 1,011
2002: 1,024
2001: 1,014
2000: 1,068
1999: 1,082
- http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/united-states
Are you suggesting that my guns had something to do with these? What do you think? That I am posting from SuperMax in CO?
 
Old 15th Nov 2014, 19:40
  #1805 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
And they never hurt anyone,
Actually the way I see it is that it is your "freedoms" that hurt people. But you don't care about that do ya.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2014, 19:42
  #1806 (permalink)  
Dushan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
That's it. I'll give up my freedoms so people don't get hurt. How long before I have none?
 
Old 15th Nov 2014, 19:43
  #1807 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Where did I suggest you give up your freedoms?
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2014, 19:47
  #1808 (permalink)  
PTT
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 441
Originally Posted by Dushan View Post
Are you suggesting that my guns had something to do with these? What do you think? That I am posting from SuperMax in CO?
Your comment was "they never hurt anyone" with reference to "a handgun" as opposed to a specific (i.e. your) handgun. Let's hope it stays that way with your own handguns.
PTT is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2014, 19:56
  #1809 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: long island
Posts: 306
The way I read his post, it clearly implied his own firearms. Therefore when I saw your (apparently non responsive) reply, I didn't understand at first how you could have misunderstood. Now, I think I do.

Although I love the utility and detail of on-line maps, I sometimes miss the clarity and ease with which big wall maps of the world can make some things easier to understand.

Much of the US gun violence which appears in the statistics is very concentrated in specific parts of the US which can be as remote from where I live as Turkey is from the UK.

Which I why I stress for the third time...it is a BIG country, and has a lot of people in it. The population DENSITY may be about one eighth of the UK as well.
finfly1 is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2014, 19:58
  #1810 (permalink)  
Dushan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Reading comprehension problems?




Dushan: You got it. No argument. I can have a handgun(s) and you can't.

PTT: You may have missed it, but I don't want a handgun.

Dushan: Doesn't matter, does it? You can't have it. I can and I do. And they never hurt anyone, especially at Sandy Hook*.
Here is what that means:

Doesn't matter, does it? You can't have it (a handgun) . I can (have a handgun) and I do (have handguns). And they (my handguns) never hurt anyone, especially at Sandy Hook.

So the "they" refers to my handguns. The ones I have and can have. My own handguns. The ones I bought and have.

Last edited by Dushan; 15th Nov 2014 at 20:14.
 
Old 15th Nov 2014, 20:03
  #1811 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Dushan, try seeing the whole post as one instead of focussing on a specific part of it.

Here's the first paragraph. I hope PTT doesn't mind me helping you out with it.
Yeah, that's pretty much the childish reply I expected when it was shown to you that your "freedoms" are paper-thin and cost the blood of innocents. Perhaps you should show that oversized cartoon to some of the parents of the victims at Sandy Hook.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2014, 20:06
  #1812 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: egsh
Posts: 415
I just dredged up a post I made on PPRuNe in 1925, commenting upon the absolutely sacrosanct 18th amendment prohibiting the ownership of a fine single malt whisky.

I realised while re-reading my post, that Americans are so lucky to have rights enshrined in a constitution which they can quote (with its amendments) as if it were some kind of divine doctrine, and I realised that of course, the 18th amendment was not in any shape or form an infringement on freedom.

I so wish to be back then when I could have owned an arsenal, but was saved from owning a bottle of whisky by a constitution which held such high regard for my freedom.
wings folded is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2014, 20:10
  #1813 (permalink)  
PTT
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 441
Dushan
Reading comprehension problems?
Irony. You quoted where you said a handgun then changed it to the handgun in the post in order to try to make your point about it being your handgun, which it never was. I'm sure your handguns haven't hurt a thing, and I hope it stays that way.

finfly1
Much of the US gun violence which appears in the statistics is very concentrated in specific parts of the US
Absolutely, and I've not suggested otherwise.
PTT is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2014, 20:11
  #1814 (permalink)  
Dushan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by wings folded View Post
I just dredged up a post I made on PPRuNe in 1925, commenting upon the absolutely sacrosanct 18th amendment prohibiting the ownership of a fine single malt whisky.

I realised while re-reading my post, that Americans are so lucky to have rights enshrined in a constitution which they can quote (with its amendments) as if it were some kind of divine doctrine, and I realised that of course, the 18th amendment was not in any shape or form an infringement on freedom.

I so wish to be back then when I could have owned an arsenal, but was saved from owning a bottle of whisky by a constitution which held such high regard for my freedom.
Wings, mock all you want, but the process was followed as was the process to bring in the 21st. When the same happens with the 2nd, then it will be so.

Don't hold your breath, though.
 
Old 15th Nov 2014, 20:15
  #1815 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: egsh
Posts: 415
Don't hold your breath, though.
OK, I will not. As a quid pro quo, how about dropping your scorn on lack of freedom?
wings folded is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2014, 20:16
  #1816 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Where the Quaboag River flows, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 3,332
wingsfolded,

We had the good sense to repeal the 18th; wish I could say that about the "war on drugs". By the way, there is no "right to alcoholic beverage" as there is a "right to keep and bear arms". Do keep up.

About your freedoms; at one time it was completely legal to possess handguns in the UK until such a weapon was used to commit a crime. Then came Dunblaine and a Parliament knee jerk reaction. The reaction was to take law abiding citizens and retroactively make them felons without having committed a crime. The government had not iota of evidence these "citizens" had committed or threatened to commit a crime but were suddenly felons. To avoid a felony conviction and jail, they had their previously legal property confiscated. Is that it? Is that freedom from tyranny in the UK?

GF
galaxy flyer is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2014, 20:17
  #1817 (permalink)  
Dushan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Pedantry at its Best

Originally Posted by PTT View Post
DushanIrony. You quoted where you said a handgun then changed it to the handgun in the post in order to try to make your point about it being your handgun, which it never was. I'm sure your handguns haven't hurt a thing, and I hope it stays that way.
There go back and check. I fixed it so you don't think that it was meant to be some sinister, underhanded, attempt to trick you. Just trying to explain what was meant, as finfly1 understood it, first glance.
 
Old 15th Nov 2014, 20:21
  #1818 (permalink)  
PTT
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 441
And there you change from "a handgun" to "handguns" in order to work with the plural "they". If you had said "and I do have them" then it would have been clear.
I can see why finfly1 read what he read, but he also stated he can see why I read what I did. The fact is that your statement was not clear, but we have now cleared that up. I still hope that your handguns remain unblooded.

Regardless, the point is this: it was shown to you that your "freedoms" are paper-thin and cost the blood of innocents. Perhaps you should show that oversized cartoon to some of the parents of the victims at Sandy Hook.
PTT is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2014, 20:23
  #1819 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
I think Dushan is unaware of the significance of a paragraph.
Lord Spandex Masher is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2014, 20:24
  #1820 (permalink)  
Dushan
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by wings folded View Post
OK, I will not. As a quid pro quo, how about dropping your scorn on lack of freedom?
Only when you (not you personally) drop your scorn of the Constitution and rights to own and bear arms.
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.