Non - Can This Bloke Become President Of The United States?

SlowDownDerek said:
Agree with most of this. Tbh I only brought it up because druss was trying to suggest pro-gun people are happy to let kids die. A silly point that I felt deserved a silly response.

As I've said I am happy with the relationship we have with guns in this country and think Americans are absolutely crazy to continually try to justify how they do it there but ... it's their country and I don't see why people in the UK get so vexed about it. Obviously in your case this doesn't apply.

What seems weird to me is how the 'freedoms' that are seen as so important in America are so geared towards what is commercial advantageous to the country. Guns are profitable and so require personal freedoms, drugs potentially reduce productivity so they are not an important personal freedom.
Click to expand...

Drug industry here is prob the biggest earner of All tbh massive amounts of money made by big pharma way more than guns
 
wayne189@ said:
Drug industry here is prob the biggest earner of All tbh massive amounts of money made by big pharma way more than guns
Click to expand...

....Also with the Southern Border open to the whole world the cartels have the freedom to send over immense amounts of illegal drugs which kill untold numbers of folk who are daft enough to take them.
 
sam adams said:
....Also with the Southern Border open to the whole world the cartels have the freedom to send over immense amounts of illegal drugs which kill untold numbers of folk who are daft enough to take them.
Click to expand...

and also traffic huge amounts of people for the sex trade and slave labor
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Have you given your car up then? It is comparable to gun control in that it is a freedom that involves risk to third parties.
Click to expand...
No I haven't. Would I if everyone did? Yes. It's not comparable at all and not related to gun ownership.

To take your weird argument to it conclusion, if we ban all pregnancies then eventually no kids will die.to cars or guns. The two are completely unrelated.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Agree with most of this. Tbh I only brought it up because druss was trying to suggest pro-gun people are happy to let kids die. A silly point that I felt deserved a silly response.

As I've said I am happy with the relationship we have with guns in this country and think Americans are absolutely crazy to continually try to justify how they do it there but ... it's their country and I don't see why people in the UK get so vexed about it. Obviously in your case this doesn't apply.

What seems weird to me is how the 'freedoms' that are seen as so important in America are so geared towards what is commercial advantageous to the country. Guns are profitable and so require personal freedoms, drugs potentially reduce productivity so they are not an important personal freedom.
Click to expand...

It's not a silly response. The fact you call it that just shows youve lost the argument.
 
I see the old illegal guns argument. Why have laws at all, just scrap them all if you think laws don't work.

Followed by the mental health excuse. It's disgusting to even use that as an argument.

Imagine looking at the stats for all the countries in the world and still believing all the deflecting arguments and not the fact it's the ownership of guns which is statistically the issue. Followed by the stats from all the countries that took the decision to restrict them and the impact on gun deaths. To even try to argue anything else is the equivalent of saying the world is flat or that 5g masts impact health.

I do agree on one thing though ..we might as well leave it there as those who want kids to continue to die in schools will continue to fight against gun laws. I certainly will not change any minds.

'Merica F+UK yeah!!
 
Druss_the_Legend said:
No I haven't. Would I if everyone did? Yes. It's not comparable at all and not related to gun ownership.

To take your weird argument to it conclusion, if we ban all pregnancies then eventually no kids will die.to cars or guns. The two are completely unrelated.
Click to expand...

Druss_the_Legend said:
It's not a silly response. The fact you call it that just shows youve lost the argument.
Click to expand...

As ever you are all over the place.

It is not a weird comparison. Like guns, cars kill kids, sometimes deliberately but mostly accidentally. By driving a car you implicitly accept the death of children even if you aren't directly responsible. This highlights the hypocrisy of you trying to imply that pro-gun people are unconcerned about child deaths. The obvious response is the one Def gave about the purpose of guns as opposed to the purpose of cars but this doesn't negate the point that you are by your actions prepared to live your life with freedom's that will result in children dying, same as pro gun people.

Your extension to banning pregnancies is completely ludicrous - I'd explain why it is not comparable but I honestly don't have a clue how you've come up with that as the apparent logical conclusion of comparing the ownership of two potentially lethal objects.

Your ability to think you've won an argument after you've just shat your crazy logic all over the conversation is quite frankly bizarre.
 
Druss_the_Legend said:
I see the old illegal guns argument. Why have laws at all, just scrap them all if you think laws don't work.

Followed by the mental health excuse. It's disgusting to even use that as an argument.

Imagine looking at the stats for all the countries in the world and still believing all the deflecting arguments and not the fact it's the ownership of guns which is statistically the issue. Followed by the stats from all the countries that took the decision to restrict them and the impact on gun deaths. To even try to argue anything else is the equivalent of saying the world is flat or that 5g masts impact health.

I do agree on one thing though ..we might as well leave it there as those who want kids to continue to die in schools will continue to fight against gun laws. I certainly will not change any minds.

'Merica F+UK yeah!!
Click to expand...

Obviously laws are not 100% effective or there would be no crimes anywhere would there. The fact is criminals don’t care about the law and are happy to break them which is why a ban on guns won’t stop most gun crime as criminals don’t purchase guns legally. Gun crime is no lower now in the uk than before heavy restrictions and the reason is the same criminals get guns along with drugs on the black market.
overall violent crime in USA is way lower now than the 90 and is gen in decline though you wouldn’t know that as the media likes everyone to be scared
 
SlowDownDerek said:
As ever you are all over the place.

It is not a weird comparison. Like guns, cars kill kids, sometimes deliberately but mostly accidentally. By driving a car you implicitly accept the death of children even if you aren't directly responsible. This highlights the hypocrisy of you trying to imply that pro-gun people are unconcerned about child deaths. The obvious response is the one Def gave about the purpose of guns as opposed to the purpose of cars but this doesn't negate the point that you are by your actions prepared to live your life with freedom's that will result in children dying, same as pro gun people.

Your extension to banning pregnancies is completely ludicrous - I'd explain why it is not comparable but I honestly don't have a clue how you've come up with that as the apparent logical conclusion of comparing the ownership of two potentially lethal objects.

Your ability to think you've won an argument after you've just shat your crazy logic all over the conversation is quite frankly bizarre.
Click to expand...

I sometimes think it's simply your inability to understand basic logic. But then you think science is a religion and that 5G could harm you so I guess logic is not your thing so you cannot work out simple extensions.
 
wayne189@ said:
Obviously laws are not 100% effective or there would be no crimes anywhere would there. The fact is criminals don’t care about the law and are happy to break them which is why a ban on guns won’t stop most gun crime as criminals don’t purchase guns legally. Gun crime is no lower now in the uk than before heavy restrictions and the reason is the same criminals get guns along with drugs on the black market.
overall violent crime in USA is way lower now than the 90 and is gen in decline though you wouldn’t know that as the media likes everyone to be scared
Click to expand...

And yet a ban on guns in every single country that has done it has resulted in a massive decline in gun crime. You know that don't you? Honestly, you've looked up the history of gun laws around the world and surely know that? I cannot believe that you deep down believe it wouldn't.

Edited to add...did your read what you wrote. Criminals don't care about laws..so why have them at all. The whole notion that there is no point in laws as they don't make a difference is, as SDD says, silly.
 
Druss_the_Legend said:
And yet a ban on guns in every single country that has done it has resulted in a massive decline in gun crime. You know that don't you? Honestly, you've looked up the history of gun laws around the world and surely know that? I cannot believe that you deep down believe it wouldn't.
Click to expand...

Uk it has not gun crime has pretty much stayed the same. Sometimes increasing sometimes decreasing.
Most of those countries also don’t have the same gang and drug problem that US cities have. it’s just so much larger here especially with cartels
 
Druss_the_Legend said:
I sometimes think it's simply your inability to understand basic logic. But then you think science is a religion and that 5G could harm you so I guess logic is not your thing so you cannot work out simple extensions.
Click to expand...

Same playbook when you're on the rough end of it again druss? Ignore and try and change the subject.

Btw bringing up banning pregnancies isn't basic logic when talking about ownership of potentially lethal objects. It's crackpot nonsense.
 
Druss_the_Legend said:
And yet a ban on guns in every single country that has done it has resulted in a massive decline in gun crime. You know that don't you? Honestly, you've looked up the history of gun laws around the world and surely know that? I cannot believe that you deep down believe it wouldn't.

Edited to add...did your read what you wrote. Criminals don't care about laws..so why have them at all. The whole notion that there is no point in laws as they don't make a difference is, as SDD says, silly.
Click to expand...


Ive never said get rid of all laws but criminals do ignore laws for their own benefit and you can add more and more laws with severe punishment but that won’t stop criminals
 
Druss_the_Legend said:
I see the old illegal guns argument. Why have laws at all, just scrap them all if you think laws don't work.

Followed by the mental health excuse. It's disgusting to even use that as an argument.

Imagine looking at the stats for all the countries in the world and still believing all the deflecting arguments and not the fact it's the ownership of guns which is statistically the issue. Followed by the stats from all the countries that took the decision to restrict them and the impact on gun deaths. To even try to argue anything else is the equivalent of saying the world is flat or that 5g masts impact health.

I do agree on one thing though ..we might as well leave it there as those who want kids to continue to die in schools will continue to fight against gun laws. I certainly will not change any minds.

'Merica F+UK yeah!!
Click to expand...

I trust you will be personally leading the charge into people's homes to confiscate all their legally owned firearms?;)
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Lol, how did you work that out?
Click to expand...

Because you've picked something not designed to kill and used it to compare to guns. You could then have used swimming or playgrounds or food all of which kills kids every year...the ultimate end of your example is for us not to have kids. Now if you want to discuss ownership of items whose only purpose is to kill things then your argument might have traction.
 
sam adams said:
I trust you will be personally leading the charge into people's homes to confiscate all their legally owned firearms?;)
Click to expand...

No, they would be illegally owned firearms...that's how changes in the law works. It was done in the UK, it was done in Australia... apparently you don't think it could be done in America?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;