It is currently Fri Dec 15, 2017 12:10 pm

All times are UTC + 9:30 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 96 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 6:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:23 pm
Posts: 3552
Location: St. Mystere
FINE! DEBATE HERE!

Magic Portal:http://www.customwars.com/viewtopic.php?p=152840#152840

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 1:07 am
Posts: 1723
Location: England
veggie wrote:
I just keep my flame-thrower water pistol under the stairs.


Lol, and my Bazooka behind the couch.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:36 am
Posts: 2669
Location: Wherever you aren't.
Kornelius wrote:
Unakau wrote:
Kornelius wrote:
I'm not gay. There's a queer in our troop, though. When we're forced to talk to him, we call him you godamn liberal faggot. 'Cause we're all conservatives and he's a liberal. He dislikes guns. Guns. Do you know how great it would be if everyone had a gun? No one would do shit to anyone else because they'd get capped! It would solve just about every problem. There's a town in NJ where everyone is required to have a gun, and there's been three murders in 25 years. In Philly, there's at least three every 24 hours, many times more. And now I've gotten myself into a rant again. I'll just stop now. I'll just say "I'm not interested in the rooster" and be done.
Holy shit you're an idiot. I thought you were smart.

And what exactly makes me an idiot? If you don't let people have guns, the only people with guns will have them illegally. Taking away legal firearms will only take away a person's right to bear arms and defend themselves. On the other hand, giving each household a weapon will deter those who wish to kill them. Would you want to steal something from someone who was required to own and know how to use a firearm?

People who want to kill can get weapons illegally. Taking away the legal right to own a weapon not only contradicts the second amendment, but deprives a person of something to defend themselves with.
I think I'll point to Canada and Australia.

Also, they're called amendments. Amendments can be repealed when we feel necessary.

Also, guns aren't needed to protect yourself. Wow. You look like the typical conservative from my area.

Also, showing that you think that he's an idiot for not liking guns is why I think you're an idiot. Also, picking on a gay kid. What the fuck is your deal?

_________________
I'm new warior in adault world
Because
sex and sexuality are sensitive subjects, young people and sex educators can
have strong views on what attitudes people should hold, and what moral framework
should govern people's behaviour - these too can sometimes seem to be at odds.
[wall of seventy-one lesbian porn links] - NewMOONSpirit
ImageImageImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 1:07 am
Posts: 1723
Location: England
Why are we arguing over guns in a topic about some gayboy not liking guns?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:23 pm
Posts: 3552
Location: St. Mystere
Tsk Tsk Unakau, this isn't the place to do such talkings. This is HELLO-GOODBYE

Click on the SERIOUS BUSINESS link I posted and talk about SERIOUS BUSINESS

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 8:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:36 am
Posts: 2669
Location: Wherever you aren't.
Ganging up on a gay kid. Wow. Just wow. I thought Korn was better than that.

_________________
I'm new warior in adault world
Because
sex and sexuality are sensitive subjects, young people and sex educators can
have strong views on what attitudes people should hold, and what moral framework
should govern people's behaviour - these too can sometimes seem to be at odds.
[wall of seventy-one lesbian porn links] - NewMOONSpirit
ImageImageImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 10:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:01 am
Posts: 1191
Location: Burning stuff on your lawn
I participated in something known as the day of silence, where I didn't talk for the school day to show support for the gay community. A large number of people I respect are gay or bi. I really don't care about orientation, I just threw in that fun fact for those who might care. We pick on him because, simply put, is about as intelligent as an insect. He can not swim, yet there is a pool in his backyard. He tries to bite people that happen to be much stronger than him, such as a hick beefed up on steroids. I don't care if he's gay, I hate him 'cause he's an annoying prick.

Yes, you may not need a gun to defend yourself. However, melee weapons aren't exactly as useful as a pistol under your pillow, and you'll need much more extensive training to be adept at them. A pistol is point and shoot.

Lastly, the first ten amendments are not to be touched. They are the Bill of Rights, the entire basis of the country's foundation.

_________________
sup


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:36 am
Posts: 2669
Location: Wherever you aren't.
You did? Okay, being an annoying prick is different than being gay.

Also, the second amendment currently has no relevance in today's society. It was more important back then, but it truly has become irrelevant.

_________________
I'm new warior in adault world
Because
sex and sexuality are sensitive subjects, young people and sex educators can
have strong views on what attitudes people should hold, and what moral framework
should govern people's behaviour - these too can sometimes seem to be at odds.
[wall of seventy-one lesbian porn links] - NewMOONSpirit
ImageImageImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:01 am
Posts: 1191
Location: Burning stuff on your lawn
It's not exaclty irrevelent. It makes it legal for someone to shoot you if you tresspass on their property. Obviously not in a crowded city, but if a farmer spots you in his feild, he can use you as practice. Similarly, if someone breaks into your house you get to shoot them. It's a bit extreme, but no one that hears of it is going to bother you again.

Let's say if shooting burgulars was a requirment for citizens. The burgulary rate would drop, as would be criminals wouldn't want to be caught and shot. There will always be a few that dare, but an example will be made of them.

In a more extreme example, let's say that every crime was punishable by death. How many criminals would there be? Yes, we'd spend a lot of money executing people, but we'd save tons on prison management.

The crime rate will dramatically fall if criminals knew that inside every house was a gun. If they knew bank tellers and store clerks had weapons, how many would dare to rob? It's impossible to wipe out crime altogether with so many people, but it's possible to cut almost all of it.

_________________
sup


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 12:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 1:01 am
Posts: 3866
Location: Green Bay
Unakau wrote:
Also, the second amendment currently has no relevance in today's society. It was more important back then, but it truly has become irrelevant.


No it isn't.

A gun owning society is a method of preserving democracy and preventing tyrannical governments from taking over. This is just as important now as it was then.

If some faggot president one day decided, hey, I'm going to ignore free speech, abolish congress, and use the military to enforce martial law, what would you do?

Without guns, we could do nothing. We would be at the mercy of our government, which is the opposite of the way it should be. They should be at the mercy of us.

With guns, even with all the over regulation brought on by liberal lawmakers, we could fight back significantly. We wouldn't lose in a guerilla war against our own military, and that's ONLY because we have millions of citizens who are armed, and have experience with arms and marksmanship.

Taking that away is a horrible idea. Every citizen should at least be trained to use a gun, even if they don't own one, and every citizen should be allowed to own one.

_________________
Lost in a New Horizon Campaign
Prequel Campaign Part II: When the Sun Sets in the West
Pessimists United Current Essay: Racism in America
Quote:
[19:46] Shane: Jim Morrison is hot

S= -.03 (V-21)^2 +12
Where S is Helen's score and V is votes cast.
A vote for Dark Matter is a vote for Fecal Matter.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 12:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 7:38 am
Posts: 6693
lol I was waiting for someone to mention that.

_________________
Advance Wars


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 1:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:36 am
Posts: 2669
Location: Wherever you aren't.
Silifi of Death wrote:
Unakau wrote:
Also, the second amendment currently has no relevance in today's society. It was more important back then, but it truly has become irrelevant.


No it isn't.

A gun owning society is a method of preserving democracy and preventing tyrannical governments from taking over. This is just as important now as it was then.

If some faggot president one day decided, hey, I'm going to ignore free speech, abolish congress, and use the military to enforce martial law, what would you do?

Without guns, we could do nothing. We would be at the mercy of our government, which is the opposite of the way it should be. They should be at the mercy of us.

With guns, even with all the over regulation brought on by liberal lawmakers, we could fight back significantly. We wouldn't lose in a guerilla war against our own military, and that's ONLY because we have millions of citizens who are armed, and have experience with arms and marksmanship.

Taking that away is a horrible idea. Every citizen should at least be trained to use a gun, even if they don't own one, and every citizen should be allowed to own one.
I'm not saying that it's invalid. Just not as relevant as it used to be. I should not have called it irrelevant.

However, absolutely everyone having a gun is just as bad as absolutely no one having a gun.

_________________
I'm new warior in adault world
Because
sex and sexuality are sensitive subjects, young people and sex educators can
have strong views on what attitudes people should hold, and what moral framework
should govern people's behaviour - these too can sometimes seem to be at odds.
[wall of seventy-one lesbian porn links] - NewMOONSpirit
ImageImageImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 2:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:23 pm
Posts: 3552
Location: St. Mystere
Silifi of Death wrote:
Unakau wrote:
Also, the second amendment currently has no relevance in today's society. It was more important back then, but it truly has become irrelevant.


No it isn't.

A gun owning society is a method of preserving democracy and preventing tyrannical governments from taking over. This is just as important now as it was then.

If some faggot president one day decided, hey, I'm going to ignore free speech, abolish congress, and use the military to enforce martial law, what would you do?

Without guns, we could do nothing. We would be at the mercy of our government, which is the opposite of the way it should be. They should be at the mercy of us.

With guns, even with all the over regulation brought on by liberal lawmakers, we could fight back significantly. We wouldn't lose in a guerilla war against our own military, and that's ONLY because we have millions of citizens who are armed, and have experience with arms and marksmanship.

Taking that away is a horrible idea. Every citizen should at least be trained to use a gun, even if they don't own one, and every citizen should be allowed to own one.


Even teens and seniors?

Also, we're already at the mercy of our government. We have millions of people with guns, but they have tanks and missiles. Not many out of those millions of armed citizens can defend against a tank. And that's only assuming the military is heartless and would attack their own family and friends at the snap of the president's fingers.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 1:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 1:01 am
Posts: 3866
Location: Green Bay
Unakau wrote:
I'm not saying that it's invalid. Just not as relevant as it used to be. I should not have called it irrelevant.


How is it less relevent now?

Quote:
However, absolutely everyone having a gun is just as bad as absolutely no one having a gun.


Okay, mentally unstable people, sure, whatever. If you don't let them drive a car you shouldn't let them own their own gun.

Point is, people who are full citizens without criminal records should not only be allowed to have guns, but they should be forced to learn how to use them at the very least.

Quote:
Also, we're already at the mercy of our government. We have millions of people with guns, but they have tanks and missiles. Not many out of those millions of armed citizens can defend against a tank. And that's only assuming the military is heartless and would attack their own family and friends at the snap of the president's fingers.


This is a fallacy. Tanks aren't exactly the most effective weapons versus civilians, and the fact is, due to all of the liberalization of guns, we also have a massive liberalization of explosives.

People who have been trained to use guns are probably capable of learning other weapons, including explosives.

Finally, if there is no armed resistance, the military would not be forced to shoot their own families and friends. By having citizens armed and fighting back, you force the military personnel to reconsider their actions.

My guess is that your average military man will be highly resistant to shooting civilians, especially his own people, but he would not be resistant to ordering them around and taking away their freedom. If he were forced to kill, which would only happen if there was an active resistance, he would probably defect.

_________________
Lost in a New Horizon Campaign
Prequel Campaign Part II: When the Sun Sets in the West
Pessimists United Current Essay: Racism in America
Quote:
[19:46] Shane: Jim Morrison is hot

S= -.03 (V-21)^2 +12
Where S is Helen's score and V is votes cast.
A vote for Dark Matter is a vote for Fecal Matter.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 6:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:23 pm
Posts: 3552
Location: St. Mystere
Well, you have me at the military part, I'll give you that. And I agree with you about giving guns only to full citizens, but the forcing them to learn, I can't agree with. At least strongly encourage them, like what we do with smoking.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 6:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2007 1:07 am
Posts: 1723
Location: England
It's the same with most TV adverts.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 6:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:01 am
Posts: 1191
Location: Burning stuff on your lawn
It's possible to have more than one child in China, too. It's just incredibly inconveintient. We can do that with guns, just tie them into a requirment for voting.

_________________
sup


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 6:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:36 am
Posts: 2669
Location: Wherever you aren't.
That would be incredibly stupid.

If you can do it another way, fine. However, I don't want to have to own more than one. I don't want to have to buy bullets more than once a month, and I certainly don't want it to be involved in my voting.

_________________
I'm new warior in adault world
Because
sex and sexuality are sensitive subjects, young people and sex educators can
have strong views on what attitudes people should hold, and what moral framework
should govern people's behaviour - these too can sometimes seem to be at odds.
[wall of seventy-one lesbian porn links] - NewMOONSpirit
ImageImageImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 6:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:01 am
Posts: 1191
Location: Burning stuff on your lawn
Fine, we can arrest or fine people that don't own a gun or aren't able to show that they know how to use it properly. We'll have it start in 2010 so everyone'll have plenty of time to buy one and learn. Obviously, exceptions apply, namely those under 18 and those incapable of weilding firearms. Possibly, former criminals as well as more of a deterent.

_________________
sup


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 6:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:36 am
Posts: 2669
Location: Wherever you aren't.
That's idiotic, as well. Arresting people for not wanting to have a gun is idiotic. Even if you're trying to force them to know how to operate it. Even if you stressed that it was a good idea, arresting people is stupid.

_________________
I'm new warior in adault world
Because
sex and sexuality are sensitive subjects, young people and sex educators can
have strong views on what attitudes people should hold, and what moral framework
should govern people's behaviour - these too can sometimes seem to be at odds.
[wall of seventy-one lesbian porn links] - NewMOONSpirit
ImageImageImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 6:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:23 pm
Posts: 3552
Location: St. Mystere
Yeah, that's kinda like Nazism.

"I'ma preist! I don't want a gun. They're EVIL!"

"FUCK YOU! YOU FUCKING GO TO JAIL NOW YOU FUCKING TERROSIST BAHAHAHAHA!"

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 1:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:01 am
Posts: 1191
Location: Burning stuff on your lawn
That's assuming that those people aren't intelligent enough to know that they don't have to use the gun, just know enough about it to project themselves. I want to know how to properly care for a gun and to own one. That doesn't mean I want to use it. I seriously doubt I'll ever fire a gun at anyone unless they're pointing one at me.

_________________
sup


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 1:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:23 pm
Posts: 3552
Location: St. Mystere
We're talking about forcing people to own/ know about guns now.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 11:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:01 am
Posts: 1191
Location: Burning stuff on your lawn
Doesn't mean you have to use it. The criminal just needs to know it's there and that you could use it. That's enough of a deterent for almost everyone.

_________________
sup


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 12:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 1:01 am
Posts: 3866
Location: Green Bay
Quismod wrote:
Well, you have me at the military part, I'll give you that. And I agree with you about giving guns only to full citizens, but the forcing them to learn, I can't agree with. At least strongly encourage them, like what we do with smoking.


You shouldn't be a citizen of this country if you aren't willing to defend the constitution.

Quote:
"I'ma preist! I don't want a gun. They're EVIL!"


They don't ever have to use the gun against anyone or anything (BESIDES A SHEET OF PAPER)

Also, no one ever said we'd arrest them. Just make them pay an extra tax which would be used to help pay for the National Guard or Peace Corp.

That's another thing. We should make at least a year of service mandatory, also penalized by a huge tax hike.

_________________
Lost in a New Horizon Campaign
Prequel Campaign Part II: When the Sun Sets in the West
Pessimists United Current Essay: Racism in America
Quote:
[19:46] Shane: Jim Morrison is hot

S= -.03 (V-21)^2 +12
Where S is Helen's score and V is votes cast.
A vote for Dark Matter is a vote for Fecal Matter.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:36 am
Posts: 2669
Location: Wherever you aren't.
To be fair, Kornelius said we would. ^____________^

_________________
I'm new warior in adault world
Because
sex and sexuality are sensitive subjects, young people and sex educators can
have strong views on what attitudes people should hold, and what moral framework
should govern people's behaviour - these too can sometimes seem to be at odds.
[wall of seventy-one lesbian porn links] - NewMOONSpirit
ImageImageImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:23 pm
Posts: 3552
Location: St. Mystere
Priests don't want a gun. It doesn't matter if they don't use it against a human. It's just their religion.

And I still think forcing is too harsh. Maybe start doing it for this generation after high school or something. I just can't agree with the idea of forcing people to do things. (Other than taxes and the obvious)

When you say extra tax, how much are you talking about?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 8:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 1:01 am
Posts: 3866
Location: Green Bay
Quismod wrote:
Priests don't want a gun. It doesn't matter if they don't use it against a human. It's just their religion.


Okay, I don't think there's any real religion that says you're not allowed to shoot a gun. Until you can name one that really says that, this point is gay.

Quote:
And I still think forcing is too harsh. Maybe start doing it for this generation after high school or something. I just can't agree with the idea of forcing people to do things. (Other than taxes and the obvious)


If we have a government that forces people to do things to begin with, we might as well force people to keep the government in check.

Quote:
When you say extra tax, how much are you talking about?


Who cares? It should be as high as possible in order to enforce the rule.

_________________
Lost in a New Horizon Campaign
Prequel Campaign Part II: When the Sun Sets in the West
Pessimists United Current Essay: Racism in America
Quote:
[19:46] Shane: Jim Morrison is hot

S= -.03 (V-21)^2 +12
Where S is Helen's score and V is votes cast.
A vote for Dark Matter is a vote for Fecal Matter.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 8:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:23 pm
Posts: 3552
Location: St. Mystere
Buddhist monks in America wouldn't want to. It states in Buddha's teachings that violence is prohibited. (Firing a gun at paper is considered violent)

And a tax high enough to enforce the rule? What about the people in poverty that work all day? They don't enough time to go to a training course. And the tax would just cause them to be even more poor.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:36 am
Posts: 2669
Location: Wherever you aren't.
I can just see the monks.

Shooting everyone in sight.


I would totally see that movie.

_________________
I'm new warior in adault world
Because
sex and sexuality are sensitive subjects, young people and sex educators can
have strong views on what attitudes people should hold, and what moral framework
should govern people's behaviour - these too can sometimes seem to be at odds.
[wall of seventy-one lesbian porn links] - NewMOONSpirit
ImageImageImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:23 pm
Posts: 3552
Location: St. Mystere
It's called Bulletproof Monk. It exists

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 10:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 8:40 am
Posts: 2108
Quismod wrote:
Buddhist monks in America wouldn't want to. It states in Buddha's teachings that violence is prohibited. (Firing a gun at paper is considered violent)
How is firing a gun at paper considered violent? That's like saying punching a pillow is violent.

_________________
Image
Sig by Sasquatch.
Hit: Kindness
Miss: Pain
Violence = Leading cause of death in this country = illegal = fine and dandy. Pg-13, R if it's really bad.
Sex = leading cause of life in this country = natural and perfectly legal biological process = OMG TEH NOES XXX!11!!! ---Someone at some forum, I forget
"If you have made mistakes. . . there is always another chance for you. . . You may have a fresh start any moment you choose, for this thing we call 'failure' is not the falling down but the staying down." -- Mary Pickford


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 11:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:01 am
Posts: 1191
Location: Burning stuff on your lawn
Target practice can easily be considered a game.

There could definatly be programs for those in poverty. Hell, we have homeless shelters, we can get training to those who need it. It can easily be a government funded project, and those that can't take a day off work can be paid a day's wages. If their employer doesn't like them missing a day, sucks to be them.

_________________
sup


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 11:36 pm
Posts: 3547
lo fucking l retarded americans


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 2:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:23 pm
Posts: 3552
Location: St. Mystere
I am not Buddhist, but they do consider it. Punching a pillow does not involve a weapon. Wielding a weapon and firing it is violent according to Buddha.

Maybe people with religious teachings that contradict this should be exempt from the "gun tax."

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 28, 2007 1:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:01 am
Posts: 1191
Location: Burning stuff on your lawn
A buddhist can simply have the gun in their house and never fire it. Common burgulars don't know much about their victims, but the fact that they are required to have a gun would deter them.

I personally don't think that violence is a solution in most cases, but I understand that there are people who don't care about others and the only thing that would make them stop is force. Therefore, I am willing to own and know how to use a gun in order to help keep myself safe.

_________________
sup


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 28, 2007 5:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:23 pm
Posts: 3552
Location: St. Mystere
I'm not talking about ordinary Buddhists. Ordinary Buddhists are allowed to kill insects and eat meat. I'm talking about Buddhist Monks. These guys don't enjoy being around a gun, which they see as something made for death.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 12:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:01 am
Posts: 1191
Location: Burning stuff on your lawn
This discussion has been a blast, but I'm leaving today. See you guys next Saturday, if I'm not tired, and mabye Sunday but I'm scheduled for 7 hours at work so mabye not. In all likelyhood, you'll see me.

_________________
sup


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 5:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 3:23 pm
Posts: 3552
Location: St. Mystere
Bye.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2007 6:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 8:40 am
Posts: 2108
Bye, Kornelius and have a good time!

_________________
Image
Sig by Sasquatch.
Hit: Kindness
Miss: Pain
Violence = Leading cause of death in this country = illegal = fine and dandy. Pg-13, R if it's really bad.
Sex = leading cause of life in this country = natural and perfectly legal biological process = OMG TEH NOES XXX!11!!! ---Someone at some forum, I forget
"If you have made mistakes. . . there is always another chance for you. . . You may have a fresh start any moment you choose, for this thing we call 'failure' is not the falling down but the staying down." -- Mary Pickford


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 96 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC + 9:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Blue Moon by Trent © 2007
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group