The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Disarming the good guys will not prevent massacres > Comments

Disarming the good guys will not prevent massacres : Comments

By David Leyonhjelm, published 18/12/2012

Gun control laws could not have prevented the latest massacre in America. The problem is disarming the good guys.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. All
So the answer to the problem with guns is...MORE GUNS.

This "solution" owes more to the celluloid antics of John Wayne than it does to any kind of rational policy response. The author obviously lives his life in a fantasy world where good and evil meet on the streets of Dodge City and good always triumphs cause it is faster on the draw.
If this weren't so serious one would laugh at such a ludicrous suggestion.
Posted by Shalmaneser, Tuesday, 18 December 2012 9:01:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have to agree with the first comment. The author is delusional. He must be American!
Posted by David G, Tuesday, 18 December 2012 9:06:56 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So the speech by Obama should have read: "We can't tolerate this anymore. These tragedies must end. And to end them, we must change. From now on we will be allowing any citizen over the age of ten to carry firearms. Concealed weapons will be allowed in all former Gun Free Zones, in our shopping malls and in our schools."

Yeah, I think you're pulling your own trigger on this one David, and your stats aren't really worth a damn, because they are selective and don't take into account any other social influences, such as the increase in the use particular drugs and the rise of organised crime during the 'war on drugs' and drug prohibitions. Post hoc ergo prompter hoc.

What will happen when you think you're in the middle of what might turn out to be a terror attack or massacre, and a complete stranger pulls out a concealed weapon and starts firing it? Do you fore at them? When everyone has a gun, how do you tell the 'good guys' from the 'bad guys'? For that matter, how do you tell them apart at any time?
Posted by Bugsy, Tuesday, 18 December 2012 9:50:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
He is even quote mining like a creationist.

sad realy
Posted by Kenny, Tuesday, 18 December 2012 10:05:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am finally coming to accept that when people present a cogent argument against a knee-jerk reaction or policy, replete with firm and peer reviewed objective research to back it up, rather than offering an equally considered argument to the contrary, irresponsible people believe it is sufficient to emote a demand and ridicule and insult the contributor as though this constitutes an eloquent rebuttal. Worse, perhaps, is the overt bigotry. Oh yes, bigotry, because bigotry it is under the definition of the word. To assert that Americans who own guns are by definition cowboys keen to shoot it out on the streets of Dodge City, or that being ‘delusional’ must mean a person is American, is no less bigoted a stereotype than to suggest that all Arabs are keen to blow things up, or that if a person is drunk s/her must be aboriginal. You must be so proud. Or perhaps not…after all, such people do tend to post anonymously. It is more evident with each passing day, that ant-firearms lobbyists and extreme Greens will plumb the darkest deaths of insult and ridicule in order to sway popular support in favour of their agenda of intolerance towards people who fail to accept and mantra their world view.

Garry Mallard
Posted by Hunter, Tuesday, 18 December 2012 10:09:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Of course the "NO U" argument works quite well also don't it Gary?
Posted by Bugsy, Tuesday, 18 December 2012 10:14:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy