Thats right PJ and you never will. Thats because it doesnt happen like that anymore. Its all about who can shoot the straightest.PJ wrote:
anyway..... I've never heard of 2 guys slugging it out in an ally then buying one another drinks.
An E-mail I Received
-
This_name_sucks
- Posts: 539
- Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2003 10:55 am
- Location: UK, Essex, Southend
I agree with Pink (whhhaaaatttt??!!!!!) If you guys made guns legal, then only the really nuts hillbillys would have the guns and you'd all be a lot safer off 
Until of course you realise that you wouldn't have anything to defend yourself with against the maniacs with the guns. But I suppose even with guns the nuts hillbillys are still on the loose, and camouflaged amongst every other trigger happy punk. So what can you do? In fact lets ask another question, why should you do anything? Maniacs will always have guns, because they're determined to go crazy on someone's unsuspecting arse (much like Mid, but with a gun 
).
I guess you can at least defend yourself against them while you have guns. But I suppose the other view is that it's easier to get your hands on guns and every other dumbshit kid is gonna have one cause it's SOOO COOOOL.
Until of course you realise that you wouldn't have anything to defend yourself with against the maniacs with the guns. But I suppose even with guns the nuts hillbillys are still on the loose, and camouflaged amongst every other trigger happy punk. So what can you do? In fact lets ask another question, why should you do anything? Maniacs will always have guns, because they're determined to go crazy on someone's unsuspecting arse (much like Mid, but with a gun ).I guess you can at least defend yourself against them while you have guns. But I suppose the other view is that it's easier to get your hands on guns and every other dumbshit kid is gonna have one cause it's SOOO COOOOL.
There will never be a law banning firearms in their entirety.
Not against the NRA's bastardization of the second amendment, and not against the full second amendment.
The government can regulate shipment, taxation, identification, and sale of firearms (meaning they can and have banned the importing and purchasing of certain firearms, like machine guns and assault rifles), but they cannot remove firearms from legal citizens' posession (unless that firearm was used for illicit acts or carried into federal property). The control of guns is a state issue. And as per the Second Amendment, the people in a state can amass their weapons and form a militia to ensure their land remains a free state (situation related to such as the Civil War).
If all firearms were somehow banned, everybody would go back to using crossbows and swords (yay for me), tools that are not traceable in the ways that bullets are, so the cops who are armed with nothing but wooden sticks will both have far less evidence of the crime against the culprits, but also will be far less successful when they have an encounter (except if they get upgraded to metal sticks and get some disarming and grappling techniques to compensate for the lack of an accurate ranged weapon).
Trained officers hit... 60% of the time with their well-maintained, properly fit guns.
Thugs in the street hit 10% of the time with their pawn shop-bound, functionally fucked up guns.
The citizenry will always have to deal with firearms in this nation, though shitty handguns amassing for 90% of gun violence are much better than the Thompsons and Browning Rifles during the olden days. A good thing to do for concerned families is to purchase a shotgun. Not a pistol, unless you perhaps live alone or for some reason you would need more than ten yards to make a shot. Robbers don't like shotguns: they're too big and not concealable for their purposes, but they'll swipe a pistol like it was a pearl necklace.
Shotguns are also a lot easier to maintain and control than pistols, as well (though revolvers are even more reliable and rigid). And to ensure safety and a means to only make the criminal flee instead of killing him (and cleaning up the mess of blood on your rug), is to use some reduced loads available to civilians, less pellets, much weaker, still more than enough instead of a .38 special.
---
"People" want to ban things they see as "extreme" and "unnecessary". "Shit" and "Fuck" are "extreme", and don't exist on network cable, now the same fools want to remove more subtler words like "damn" and "hell" because THEY are now the extremes in their localized view. There can be massive violence and the game will still be Teen-Rated, but even a drop of blood (which is extreme!) will turn it to M.
While machineguns in the past was a trule extreme issue which then stopped sale of them at corner stores for the mafia to easily take hold of, pistols and self-loading rifles are now the extreme, but are a necessary evil/good.
Not against the NRA's bastardization of the second amendment, and not against the full second amendment.
The government can regulate shipment, taxation, identification, and sale of firearms (meaning they can and have banned the importing and purchasing of certain firearms, like machine guns and assault rifles), but they cannot remove firearms from legal citizens' posession (unless that firearm was used for illicit acts or carried into federal property). The control of guns is a state issue. And as per the Second Amendment, the people in a state can amass their weapons and form a militia to ensure their land remains a free state (situation related to such as the Civil War).
If all firearms were somehow banned, everybody would go back to using crossbows and swords (yay for me), tools that are not traceable in the ways that bullets are, so the cops who are armed with nothing but wooden sticks will both have far less evidence of the crime against the culprits, but also will be far less successful when they have an encounter (except if they get upgraded to metal sticks and get some disarming and grappling techniques to compensate for the lack of an accurate ranged weapon).
Trained officers hit... 60% of the time with their well-maintained, properly fit guns.
Thugs in the street hit 10% of the time with their pawn shop-bound, functionally fucked up guns.
The citizenry will always have to deal with firearms in this nation, though shitty handguns amassing for 90% of gun violence are much better than the Thompsons and Browning Rifles during the olden days. A good thing to do for concerned families is to purchase a shotgun. Not a pistol, unless you perhaps live alone or for some reason you would need more than ten yards to make a shot. Robbers don't like shotguns: they're too big and not concealable for their purposes, but they'll swipe a pistol like it was a pearl necklace.
Shotguns are also a lot easier to maintain and control than pistols, as well (though revolvers are even more reliable and rigid). And to ensure safety and a means to only make the criminal flee instead of killing him (and cleaning up the mess of blood on your rug), is to use some reduced loads available to civilians, less pellets, much weaker, still more than enough instead of a .38 special.
---
"People" want to ban things they see as "extreme" and "unnecessary". "Shit" and "Fuck" are "extreme", and don't exist on network cable, now the same fools want to remove more subtler words like "damn" and "hell" because THEY are now the extremes in their localized view. There can be massive violence and the game will still be Teen-Rated, but even a drop of blood (which is extreme!) will turn it to M.
While machineguns in the past was a trule extreme issue which then stopped sale of them at corner stores for the mafia to easily take hold of, pistols and self-loading rifles are now the extreme, but are a necessary evil/good.
Monks in the Xia Dynasty in 2500 BC could kill people instantly through pressure points. Blew darts, shot arrows -- dipped in poison. They could ambush you even. Maybe they should have banned Monks.
Farmers had scythes for their wheat. Criminals lopped off people heads too easily. SHOULDA BANNED SCYTHES.
You could buy a chainsaw in 1949 ... shoulda banned them chainsaws too. Just think, the Texas chainsaw massacre would have never happened. The killer would have been stopped dead in his tracks and would have had to admit defeat.
Actually what we need to do is ban anything that could hurt anyone. Then them pesky criminals will surely give up!
Farmers had scythes for their wheat. Criminals lopped off people heads too easily. SHOULDA BANNED SCYTHES.
You could buy a chainsaw in 1949 ... shoulda banned them chainsaws too. Just think, the Texas chainsaw massacre would have never happened. The killer would have been stopped dead in his tracks and would have had to admit defeat.
Actually what we need to do is ban anything that could hurt anyone. Then them pesky criminals will surely give up!
All i want to say is there is a big problem these days because of parenting skills. Im not saying that anyone in this guild are bad parents im just saying ive seen a lot the past 2 years ive worked in costcos. I was raised by if i didnt listen i would get whooped for it. Few smacks on the ass and i was good to go. Nowadays no one ever does that. I think its BS that people say well spanking a kid is child abuse. One or two whops isnt child abuse but beating the living hell is. People need to parent there kids. We are growing up in a generation where i go work and i see 3 year olds crying there eyes out and the parents just stand there looking around having the "Poor me" look. Maybe if kids were parented right maybe we wouldnt have the problems. I laughed about when people talk about the government. I just wanna make it clear i am a conservative, but i am not a christian. I believe that this government has done a hell of a job to keep us safe. THe only problems that i see with people trying to blame society on what has happened these days are because of some liberals. Now i dont have a hate on for liberals. But there are some out there that down right piss me off. Ya know if you dont want kids to play GTA:San Andreas or GTA:Vice City. Then make the parents acually tell their kids NO!. Instead of beating around the bush and the kid getting the game.
You bring up a very good point on the parenting issue Gemme and let me tell you, my kids get out of hand and they get a good crack. I am not affaraid to admit it. Hell thats the way I was raised. When I was a kid, if you chewed with your mouth open at the dinner table you got hit with a wooden spoon right across the chops. Like you said, a good crack in the butt is not child abuse. I have also heard that they are finally looking into this so called child abuse and are starting to realize that hey, maybe this is needed. I don't know how true this is, or what states are looking into it, but I have heard something along these lines. And 1 more thing you need to remember:
GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE.
I own firearms and am not crazy!
GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE.
I own firearms and am not crazy!
Ahhh good ole Geme, you hit the nail right on the head. Parenting skills are lacking. you should be MADE to go to a Parenting class while you are pregnant or if my evil brain had its way maybe an assesment test prior to becoming a potential parent, maybe middle teens. if you fail this test you get sterilized (maybe upon the second or third shot at the test) no need to perpetuate your undo burden on society by allowing another non-productive member to encroach upon upstanding citizen's civil liberties. Soylent Green is PEOPLE (real people not the weekly magazine People). In closing I would like to say to PinkRabi, go ahead and laugh at the American Government. America doesn't need any validation, it is the greatest Superpower there is, you don't like? who cares.
I am not sure what side of the fence I am on about swatting a kid, I am just not sure I see the wisdom of smacking a YOUNG child for hitting, or yelling at a kid for being loud or screaming seems to be teaching the kids a contradictory lesson, if you hit a kid when your angry over anything the kid does, does the kid learn that it shouldn't do what it did or it's going to be smacked? or did it learn that when your angry over something you should smack the person who made you angry? children are usually a product of their upbringing. well seems that in about 3 months or so i will be a parent and I can try to work out these conundrums for myself (poor kid)
Oh boy Grudge. Just wait till your son/daughter tells you NO when you tell him to pick us his/her room. I for one will never do to my kids what my parents did to me, but, there will come a time, as you will learn, when a good smack on the butt is needed. Now please don't misunderstand what I am saying, I am nt as evil as I sound.
A quick note:
1. I do not laugh at America in general i like the people, just not the ruling
2. I believe America's ecomony to be lower in G.W Bush's term then most others
3. Death i think you will find its.. GUNS DONT KILL PEOPLE, RAPPERS DO
(if you have no clue who Goldie Lookin' Chain are you will not get teh last joke)
1. I do not laugh at America in general i like the people, just not the ruling
2. I believe America's ecomony to be lower in G.W Bush's term then most others
3. Death i think you will find its.. GUNS DONT KILL PEOPLE, RAPPERS DO
(if you have no clue who Goldie Lookin' Chain are you will not get teh last joke)
-
This_name_sucks
- Posts: 539
- Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2003 10:55 am
- Location: UK, Essex, Southend
Lmao Pink, at least I get it.
I love how this has got onto parenting, it's really interesting. I have a rather peculiar view when it comes to smacking your kids. I have absolutely nothing against smacking kids. I think physical punishment is as important a lesson as mental punishment (e.g. no sweets for a month). However, I can't see myself ever being able to smack a child because I am not a physical person. I can't cause any kind of pain cause it takes itself back out on me, making me sick and headachy. I'd probably suck as a parent in many respects.
My cousin has 2 kids, and my dad has scores of friends with young children. Every single one of those behaves around me and tells me I am one of their best friends, with the exception of my cousins kids, who instead started calling me Uncle Tom and now call me Daddy Thomas (don't even ask, cause I don't know). I know I don't have those kids to worry about night and day, but even when they're being a pain I just try the old "well if you wanna ignore me, I'll ignore you" trick. They come running back to you in the end. And when they're bawling their eyes out over something, hug'em first until they're ready to talk and then get them to tell you what's up. If kids figure that telling you what's bothering them is gonna help, then they'll be much more willing to open up to you. And if they learn respect for daddy or mummy because their problems stop when daddy or mummy are around, then they listen to you. You give a little, you get a lot.
I'll admit, some kids with no brains and a major case of ADHD aren't gonna listen to shit. But the average kid, whether you believe it or not, has a brain. So make them use it.
I love how this has got onto parenting, it's really interesting. I have a rather peculiar view when it comes to smacking your kids. I have absolutely nothing against smacking kids. I think physical punishment is as important a lesson as mental punishment (e.g. no sweets for a month). However, I can't see myself ever being able to smack a child because I am not a physical person. I can't cause any kind of pain cause it takes itself back out on me, making me sick and headachy. I'd probably suck as a parent in many respects.
My cousin has 2 kids, and my dad has scores of friends with young children. Every single one of those behaves around me and tells me I am one of their best friends, with the exception of my cousins kids, who instead started calling me Uncle Tom and now call me Daddy Thomas (don't even ask, cause I don't know). I know I don't have those kids to worry about night and day, but even when they're being a pain I just try the old "well if you wanna ignore me, I'll ignore you" trick. They come running back to you in the end. And when they're bawling their eyes out over something, hug'em first until they're ready to talk and then get them to tell you what's up. If kids figure that telling you what's bothering them is gonna help, then they'll be much more willing to open up to you. And if they learn respect for daddy or mummy because their problems stop when daddy or mummy are around, then they listen to you. You give a little, you get a lot.
I'll admit, some kids with no brains and a major case of ADHD aren't gonna listen to shit. But the average kid, whether you believe it or not, has a brain. So make them use it.
Açieeed! style by