The debate "Gun laws are a loop hole causing murder and chaos even amongst those granted police permission" was started by
November 7, 2017, 2:30 pm.
9 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 10 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
Najam1 posted 18 arguments to the agreers part.
Nemiroff posted 4 arguments to the disagreers part.
Najam1, YoungVoicesof_Tomorrow, AntiTHEIST and 6 visitors agree.
historybuff, Nemiroff, soccer19 and 7 visitors disagree.
The man who did the Norway killings was not even police. Those he killed were fooled by his uniform. They sentenced him to 21 years total.
Now, if there is open warfare like what happens in Syria, police won't do anyone any good, not even for themselves , and it's clearly every man for himself.
If you go back a few entries in our debate, you can refresh your memory about what happened to the civilians in Norway that I posted here.
I am the biggest opponent to us being prey for anyone on a murderous rampage, whether they claim police gave them permission, or if they are actually wearing a policeman's uniform and being paid to kill.
same thing I'm talking about.
you are saying that criminals don't kill local citizens in other countries besides america?
I haven't had much opportunity to analyze or properly scrutinize murders occurring amongst locals in visited countries. Sure, they kill their own police more often than they kill tourists, but these are often corruption based killings. I am more focused on the murders of people who have no personal transgressions against their opponents.
so you are saying no local people get killed in these countries? only Americans?
Let's take Port-Au-Prince for example.
You have a tourist from Japan, China, and USA....
Between those foreigners and a local, the American is the one in the most danger if alone and unarmed.
are you saying there are no robberies or murders outside of America that target nonAmericans?
I have been outside of America and never encounter people willing to attack or harm you for any reason except suspecting that you are American. That's just the usual bunch of young toughs trying to gain a reputation for national pride, but they can be dangerous if there are enough of them, and you are alone without a translator.
Now, in Chicago, there are police who will attack and attempt to search you for something they can take from you, there are young toughs who will attack even a sleeping passengers. If you go further south towards Texas, there are toughs riding in cars who will attempt to provoke some kind of battle just because of your skin color.
So outside of America, you need to hire security just based on your origin country,
while inside America, you have to fight, just because some people are stupid.
I don't understand what is different about America.
other western nations have guns, they have people, and some have strict gun laws, some don't.
why do you seperate America from the world?
The gun laws are extremely weak against the false god in police uniform. Such a person thinks those laws are funny, and doesn't obey any except the law of Death.
Here is a supporting example for my argument of how deadly it is when the masses are lead to believe that only false god police and their open allies/worshippers have exclusive ownership and rights to any gun they have knowledge of.
America is special. Hypocrisy is the root cause of the shooting deaths.
The gun laws are tricks that only allow certain people to walk around with a gun on their hip.
For instance, you would have no problem seeing anyone with a police uniform with a gun on his hip, whether he actually worked as a police and could produce an identification card proving it or not, but if you see someone who clearly refuses to be a police with a gun on his hip, you might attempt to get him murdered by them or his gun confiscated by them, or he might have paid $1000 for the gun and decide to kill those police attempting to rob him before he commits suicide and ends his own life, or goes to live in the prisons full of waiting homosexual sodomite rapists who are not even trying to escape or break out of jail, because they hate guns in the hands of their potential victims.
It's still a good ole boy atmosphere in USA, and there will continue to be death as long as people like you believe you have the right and authority to tell humans who don't have jobs as police that they may not return fire if someone fires at them.
Basically, your kind orders people who refuse to be police to surrender or simply allow anyone who has a gun to shoot and kill them.
It's clear your strategy of dictating who is allowed to survive, and who is allowed to shoot back at a killer is a massive fail.
I am glad that nobody has to listen to your kind while a killer is shooting at them, and trying to blow their head off.
if your argument had any merit then countries with strict gun laws should see violent crime increase dramatically. since the general public isn't armed, by your logic that makes them easy targets. but that isn't what happens. America, a land of plentiful guns, has some of the highest death rates caused by guns in the developed world.
Lots of people wouldn't celebrate that law being removed because of the rules and etiquette of society already in place.
It's really, really funny to make an armed person realize they are out of place while you are empty handed.
It's no fun doing that if he spies a gun on your hip as well.
Go out and live a little.
Nah, my proof is that the robbers and muggers don't attack the police stations. Common knowledge tells them that guns are there, and the occupants will return fire.
What you all have done is create soft targets by force, under the pretention of protection.
Those situations you mention are nullified if the wrongdoer doesn't have to wait on people with jobs as police or those with police permission to interfere in his mayhem.
I'm not saying everyone will get a gun, but alot of people will. there are hundreds or thousands of road rage incidents in any single metropolitan city. If most of them involve at least one armed person, wouldn't just one incident a month create far too many tragedies?
And that's just road rage!
most won't turn to a gun, but how many of these per year are we willing to accept?
Your little shirk gun law produces impotence amongst the masses, once abolished, the appropriate aura of fear of consequences can resurface.
Sure, there are people who can shoot a gun out of your hand without killing you.
You are missing the point. Even if you also lowered the price of all guns to $1 some people won't go buy one. Though it is extremely difficult to earn the honest dollar bill in Chicago, some fools refuse to try and would mask up and attempt to rob the $1 gun store.
Not everyone gambles, not everyone drinks, not everyone road rages. But everyone does something that can make them get emotional and lose control.
imagine if even more people had guns in their emotional moments!
Who says that I am a good Muslim brother?
I try to be a good neighbor to those that I am forced to share the planet with.
Now, do you know how easy it is to buy lottery tickets without showing ID?
Yet, we don't find that the overwhelming majority of people have spent all of their money gambling.
You are discrediting the average people by suggesting that the majority have the skill and finances to perpetually wield rifles and shotguns in public if there were no fear of being attacked by police.
We are living in a situation where both the masked and unmasked robber is benefiting from police controlling guns.
Nobody can ever prove that police don't give free guns to robbers and direct them to sections where there are no police.
Nobody can prove that police don't pat and frisk people in certain geographical areas before alerting allied robbers that the coast is clear.
I can prove that a random drunk with a gun is far easier to control than a sober armed robber who plots and coordinates with police to target unarmed civilians.
So many more people will have guns. not all, but let's say close to 50% of the people.
And of course most people are not good Muslims like you, so they will drink and gamble, and are otherwise corruptable by impulse.
so what happens when a good person with a gun gets very very drunk or loses wayyy too much money? The bad man will certainly be scared, but ordinary men are very unpredictable. How many deadly disputes over road rage? how many dead spouses from domestic violence?
The goal post has to be changed. It's the conduct of one wielding the gun which must be combated instead of the current situation which provides a smorgasbord of prey to the ones with contempt for mankind.
The same amount that are able to afford and publicly shoot off so called illegal fireworks in Chicago's 4 of July festivities . Do you know what would happen if dropping a lit M-80 inside a car full of passengers got as much fame as a six shot revolver? It seems people are only killing with guns because they are famous.
How many people do you think would get a gun?
You have to use logic when others have none. How could everyone suddenly have guns, just because that chaotic law is removed? The only thing that will happen is that the robbers will fear the intended victim or else. Not one person should be forced to be the soft target of any suicidal manifestation of hell.
There's rules to society without those extraneous laws, as people already know when and where guns are permitted, or else.
So if everyone had guns there would be no murder or chaos?
The element known as the robber is proof enough.
The element of a society of people who are required to get explicit police permission to return fire is burning the city to ashes.
Some of the robbers are even given a free pistol by some cold hearted ones who work as the very police.
False gods who laugh at death of those they work so hard to disarm and prep for the muggers amongst society.