Guns are so cool?

Only the application of the standards of empirical evidence.

Its funny that you require evidence from only one side of the argument.

You can argue that my evidence is weak, but not that it is nonexistent. Topper's evidence is nonexistent.
 
Are often the single womanless white males. It gives them the power feel normal men get from woman. This board is chock full of gun nuts. :mad:

Which of "Topspin's" statements is incorrect?

1) "Are often the single womanless white males"

2) "It gives them the power feel normal men get from woman"

3) "This board is chock full of gun nuts"
 
Which of "Topspin's" statements is incorrect?

1) "Are often the single womanless white males"

2) "It gives them the power feel normal men get from woman"

3) "This board is chock full of gun nuts"

Which one did I address directly?

Actually, I would say all three are incorrect.
 
..."Federal statistics indicate that the background checks conducted for gun purchases did increase on Monday, but only by five percent nationally, compared with the same day last year.

Kristen Rand of the Violence Policy Center says those numbers do not translate directly into the number of guns sold.

Ms. KRISTEN RAND (Violence Policy Center): The FBI is very clear in saying that those numbers do not reflect gun sales, because they incorporate a lot of other things like background checks for concealed carry holders.

ABRAMSON: Some states, like Indiana, did see a 25 percent jump on Monday. But there could be many reasons for that - a special offer on a new gun, for example. Don Davis of Don's Guns and Galleries in Indianapolis says he has not seen much of a rise in sales. But people are coming to his shooting range to fire their Glock 19s, the handgun Jared Loughner used.

Mr. DON DAVIS (Owner, Don's Guns and Galleries): But we've noticed a lot of young people shooting their high-capacity Glocks and seeing - I think they're seeing how - why the guy couldn't change clips real quick, because it's really not that much of a big deal.

ABRAMSON: Davis says his customers want to see if they can reload more quickly than Loughner did. He was apparently tackled by bystanders as he tried to reload. He'd already fired off 31 shots in rapid succession, thanks to a special high-capacity magazine. He had another one of these with him, along with two standard magazines.

Those ammunition magazines are flying off the shelves at Glockmeister, an Arizona store in Mesa and Phoenix. Steven Zacker is the operations manager.

Mr. STEVEN ZACKER (Operations Manager, Glockmeister): Specifically, the G-18 magazine, which is the 33-round, nine-millimeter caliber magazine, we've seen well over 1,000 percent increase in sales on that particular item.

ABRAMSON: Zacker says gun sales have not risen in his store. He says customers say they're concerned that these high-capacity magazines will be banned. And they have some reason. Kristen Rand of the Violence Policy Center, which advocates for stronger gun laws, says her group is putting all its efforts behind getting these high-capacity magazines outlawed.

Ms. RAND: We think that the most effective thing that can be done - taking into account the current political climate - is to ban the manufacture and future transfer of high-capacity ammunition magazines like the one used in the Arizona shooting.

ABRAMSON: Democratic Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy plans to introduce a ban on high-capacity magazines as soon as next week. It will face tough odds in this Congress. The National Rifle Association, which has opposed such laws, would only say that at this time, anything other than prayers for the victims and their families would be inappropriate.

On its website, the organization makes no mention of the threat of additional gun controls. Steven Zacker of Glockmeister says he thinks some buyers are grabbing onto an item that might become rare and valuable. Whatever the reason, he's very uncomfortable with the attention his store is getting.

Mr. ZACKER: We want to high five and say, wow, wow, our numbers are just great and it's wonderful for business. But it's a terrible way to do well in business.

ABRAMSON: Analysts say it's much too soon to say for sure that the shooting has sparked new weapons sales. But they say, as a rule, when new restrictions are even mentioned, gun buyers tend to react quickly..."

http://www.npr.org/2011/01/13/132882273/Gun-Enthusiasts-Snap-Up-High-Capacity-Ammo-Magazines?ps=rs
 
You seem to be making a good case for 'big gun, small dick'. But the fear thing is strange. I mean, after all, if one is not afraid they have no need for guns.... or is there something wrong with my logic here.
Chicken shit scared little dicks get guns, normal civilised human beings don't. Not too difficult to understand?
Quite the opposite, asshole.

You are scared of big bad firearms. Why is beyond me, since no firearm just goes around randomly shooting things without some person behind the trigger. So, whatever the reason for your fear, your reaction is to denigrate firearms, and those who carry them. (Talk about compensating....)

A very wise person once said any man who is not afraid is a fool. And he was right. So it's not about fear itself. No society is absolutely safe at all times and in all circumstances - not even your precious socialist totalitarian utopia. There are criminals out there who will and do prey on others for their livelihoods. Then there are the terrorists, the sociopaths, etc. all of whom are quite willing to take out a bunch of random people for their own insane reasons. It is not unreasonable to have some fear over these circumstances we live in today. So much for fear being a bad thing.

What it's all about is how one reacts to fear. There are those who react to fear by taking positive steps to be able to counter - if needed - the things in this world there are to be afraid of. The fear of poverty is mastered by hard hard work ethic. Fear of illness is mastered by healthy life style first, and working even harder to assure access to good medical care. And fear of crime is mastered by the willingness to protect oneself and other around them should the need arise. These are people who do not run from fear, but rather face it down and master it: people willing to take personal responsibility for the circumstances that induce fear. These kinds of people are the ones who tend to carry firearms.

Then there are those who run from their fears. They hide from them, wishing them away with their heads in the sand. They are not willing to face down their fears, so they place that burden on society and government. (And then squawk like the chickenshits they are when government - invariably - fails to keep them as safe as they desire to be.) Cowards to the core, their base desire is to unload their fears onto another entity so they do not have to take the responsibility to face their fears themselves. They are the ones who want mommy government to take care of it all for them. They fear poverty, so they want government to control the economy for them. They fear illness, so they want government to control the doctors for them. And they fear bad guys with firearms, so they want government to take firearms away. And then, as if sheer cowardice is not bad enough, they clothe their cowardice in fake claims of altruism and "civilization".
 
Quite the opposite, asshole.

You are scared of big bad firearms. Why is beyond me, since no firearm just goes around randomly shooting things without some person behind the trigger. So, whatever the reason for your fear, your reaction is to denigrate firearms, and those who carry them. (Talk about compensating....)

A very wise person once said any man who is not afraid is a fool. And he was right. So it's not about fear itself. No society is absolutely safe at all times and in all circumstances - not even your precious socialist totalitarian utopia. There are criminals out there who will and do prey on others for their livelihoods. Then there are the terrorists, the sociopaths, etc. all of whom are quite willing to take out a bunch of random people for their own insane reasons. It is not unreasonable to have some fear over these circumstances we live in today. So much for fear being a bad thing.

What it's all about is how one reacts to fear. There are those who react to fear by taking positive steps to be able to counter - if needed - the things in this world there are to be afraid of. The fear of poverty is mastered by hard hard work ethic. Fear of illness is mastered by healthy life style first, and working even harder to assure access to good medical care. And fear of crime is mastered by the willingness to protect oneself and other around them should the need arise. These are people who do not run from fear, but rather face it down and master it: people willing to take personal responsibility for the circumstances that induce fear. These kinds of people are the ones who tend to carry firearms.

Then there are those who run from their fears. They hide from them, wishing them away with their heads in the sand. They are not willing to face down their fears, so they place that burden on society and government. (And then squawk like the chickenshits they are when government - invariably - fails to keep them as safe as they desire to be.) Cowards to the core, their base desire is to unload their fears onto another entity so they do not have to take the responsibility to face their fears themselves. They are the ones who want mommy government to take care of it all for them. They fear poverty, so they want government to control the economy for them. They fear illness, so they want government to control the doctors for them. And they fear bad guys with firearms, so they want government to take firearms away. And then, as if sheer cowardice is not bad enough, they clothe their cowardice in fake claims of altruism and "civilization".

So the purpose of carrying guns around is to make others fearful of disagreeing with you?
 
Oh, how could I forget my standard warning?

Dont-Feed-the-Trolls.png
 
Back
Top