Discussion about hot topics trending today

[garhkal]

No they wouldn't mind. BUT your above post seemed to indicate if the office responding to a black person in need of medical assistance was KKK, he would just stand by and let him die..

[aretood2]

No they wouldn't mind. BUT your above post seemed to indicate if the office responding to a black person in need of medical assistance was KKK, he would just stand by and let him die..

My second post? Listen, if someone prances around wearing a swastika while preaching some form of racial superiority and denying the holocaust and what not, I don't owe them an ounce of the benefit of the doubt. You'd have to prove to me first that they deserve the benefit of the doubt. Then you'd have to prove that they are professional before I can even begin to consider the possibility of even slightly trusting them with my life. If I had a choice, I'd ask for someone else.

That said, if I were the cop/paramedic and helping a man like that, I'd be even just as diligent in making sure that I did my job to the best of my ability had he been any other person.

[imzadi35]

I really don't understand the KKK anyway. I think those who are part of it and say they are Christian are the biggest hypocrites! I don't mean to get really religious here, but
it clearly states in the Bible that everyone, everyone, whether red, yellow, black, white or polka-dotted, are precious to Jesus. The Bible also clearly says in the New Testament that Jesus had a Samaritan woman ask Him for help, and He helped her, even though she wasn't a Jew.

My point is this. If Jesus could help someone who wasn't a Jew, no matter what, can't we do the same? If Jesus loved EVERYONE, no matter their faith/color, can't we do the same?

[Gatefan1976]

I really don't understand the KKK anyway. I think those who are part of it and say they are Christian are the biggest hypocrites! I don't mean to get really religious here, but
it clearly states in the Bible that everyone, everyone, whether red, yellow, black, white or polka-dotted, are precious to Jesus. The Bible also clearly says in the New Testament that Jesus had a Samaritan woman ask Him for help, and He helped her, even though she wasn't a Jew.

My point is this. If Jesus could help someone who wasn't a Jew, no matter what, can't we do the same? If Jesus loved EVERYONE, no matter their faith/color, can't we do the same?

Your problem is not weather people of any colour are precious to Jesus, it's weather they are Equal, and there is enough in the Bible, when cobbled togeather to state that God does not consider all equal based on their skin colour. I'm not saying that is the -right- interpretation, just ONE that people could draw from it.

[garhkal]

I really don't understand the KKK anyway. I think those who are part of it and say they are Christian are the biggest hypocrites! I don't mean to get really religious here, but
it clearly states in the Bible that everyone, everyone, whether red, yellow, black, white or polka-dotted, are precious to Jesus. The Bible also clearly says in the New Testament that Jesus had a Samaritan woman ask Him for help, and He helped her, even though she wasn't a Jew.

My point is this. If Jesus could help someone who wasn't a Jew, no matter what, can't we do the same? If Jesus loved EVERYONE, no matter their faith/color, can't we do the same?

I have never understood the ties of KKK to religion either.
BUT then again i also see the hypocrisy in gang members going to church, same as drug barons doing the same.

[Gatefan1976]

I have never understood the ties of KKK to religion either.
BUT then again i also see the hypocrisy in gang members going to church, same as drug barons doing the same.

What about the hypocrisy of the church offering them absolution and protection?

[imzadi35]

True, Gatefan1976. True. Unfortunately, now we have another theater shooting to deal with. I understand the right to bear arms, but not the right to get stupid with them. No offense meant, mind you. I just think that it's the people and their ideas, not the guns themselves. For example, I HATE going to the dentist. But it's the tools they use, like the drill and pick that they use, NOT the person. The person is okay, just not the tools.

Same way with guns. It's not the person I hate, it's the guns themselves. I was raised with a BB pistol and three rifles in the house, and learned at a young age NOT to touch them or play with them from my dad. If I did, I was royally punished. So I learned to respect them and even fear them a little. Besides that, because of one of my brothers being careless with his handgun, another of my brothers would have died because he was playing with the gun.

My oldest brother was home for a visit, and he had brought his rifle and handgun because he was pheasant hunting. He'd gone out for a class reunion, and our parents were milking. My youngest brother, who has moderate Down's Syndrome, and I were watching TV. A few moments later, he'd disappeared, and all of a sudden I heard a loud 'BANG!' I raced to the back of the house and there he was holding my oldest brother's handgun, still smoking, with a shattered door and screen door behind him. He was okay, but my parents came running up from the barn to see what had happened. When my other brother came home, he got royally chewed out for leaving his handgun where our other brother could get at it.

My point is this. It's not the guns themselves that are the problem. Guns don't go off themselves, nor do they go and shoot random people down. It takes a human being to hold the gun to do the damage. Most people, about 95% in my opinion, are responsible and know what they're doing. It's just the other 5% we have to worry about.

[Gatefan1976]

True, Gatefan1976. True. Unfortunately, now we have another theater shooting to deal with. I understand the right to bear arms, but not the right to get stupid with them. No offense meant, mind you.

I am Australian Imzadi (now don't that feel creepy knowing what it means.........), so no offence to be had

I just think that it's the people and their ideas, not the guns themselves. For example, I HATE going to the dentist. But it's the tools they use, like the drill and pick that they use, NOT the person. The person is okay, just not the tools.

The Drill and the pick are the -most efficient- tool to fulfil a dentist's role at the moment, the -gun- is the single most efficient way to kill people because that is what the tool is designed to do -kill people- A nail gun can kill people, so can a knife, or even a rock, but a gun has NO other function but to kill.

Same way with guns. It's not the person I hate, it's the guns themselves. I was raised with a BB pistol and three rifles in the house, and learned at a young age NOT to touch them or play with them from my dad. If I did, I was royally punished. So I learned to respect them and even fear them a little. Besides that, because of one of my brothers being careless with his handgun, another of my brothers would have died because he was playing with the gun.

For sure, I was raised around guns (well, rifles so a lot more unwieldy for a little kid) and I learned a deep respect for just what they could do as well.

My oldest brother was home for a visit, and he had brought his rifle and handgun because he was pheasant hunting. He'd gone out for a class reunion, and our parents were milking. My youngest brother, who has moderate Down's Syndrome, and I were watching TV. A few moments later, he'd disappeared, and all of a sudden I heard a loud 'BANG!' I raced to the back of the house and there he was holding my oldest brother's handgun, still smoking, with a shattered door and screen door behind him. He was okay, but my parents came running up from the barn to see what had happened. When my other brother came home, he got royally chewed out for leaving his handgun where our other brother could get at it.

And that is the problem.
There is no room for error with a gun. A knife, a sword, an axe, or even a rock requires intent to kill or harm, but a gun can just be played with to kill people.

My point is this. It's not the guns themselves that are the problem. Guns don't go off themselves, nor do they go and shoot random people down. It takes a human being to hold the gun to do the damage. Most people, about 95% in my opinion, are responsible and know what they're doing. It's just the other 5% we have to worry about.

See, I find this contrary to what you have said. Does it take a mind and will to wield a weapon? YES.
Can you accidently kill someone just because the chamber is loaded with a gun?
YES.
If I kill you with a knife, I require intent, but I can kill you with a gun -by accident!-

Guns -are- the problem, and until people realise that, the body count will rise in the US. To be frank, next time 30 people get killed in the US because of a gun, I won't care. You (as a nation) refuse to see the problem, so I fail to see why I should -care- about the problem when I don't even live there.

Fun fact. (and feel free to check this one out)
At the end of 2013, MORE people have died due to gun related violence or accident in the US than have been killed by enemy action in all wars since the USA existed.

[Womble]

Fun fact. (and feel free to check this one out)
At the end of 2013, MORE people have died due to gun related violence or accident in the US than have been killed by enemy action in all wars since the USA existed.

And more people still have been killed by car accidents, so clearly something must be done about car control.

Statistics can be fun to twist.

Here's some more interesting data (feel free to check this out):

The majority of USA murders are by handgun, so handguns are a problem - but long guns, not so much. Approximately four times more people get killed in the USA with knives and other cutting objects than with either rifles or shotguns (and 2.5 times more than with rifles AND shotguns combined). In fact, more people were beaten to death in 2010 by a completely unarmed attacker than killed by rifles and shotguns combined.

Random or accidental killings are quite rare even in the USA; the majority of homicides are by people the victim knew closely.

When you take a good look at the statistics as a whole, the entire American gun control debate is completely off target from both sides. More firearms regulation is necessary, but the laws being proposed do not address the problem correctly because hey are driven by wrong motivation.

(On a statistical side note, a UK citizen is twice as likely to be attacked with a knife as a US citizen is to be shot at with a firearm).

[Gatefan1976]

And more people still have been killed by car accidents, so clearly something must be done about car control.

At least they are trying with that one.
I do doubt however that most people who get in a car and have an accident are using the car for what it is designed to do. Anything -can- kill, guns serve no purpose -but- to kill.

Statistics can be fun to twist.

Yes, they can.

Here's some more interesting data (feel free to check this out):

The majority of USA murders are by handgun, so handguns are a problem - but long guns, not so much.

Correct.

Approximately four times more people get killed in the USA with knives and other cutting objects than with either rifles or shotguns (and 2.5 times more than with rifles AND shotguns combined). In fact, more people were beaten to death in 2010 by a completely unarmed attacker than killed by rifles and shotguns combined.

Not by gunshot.
Feel free to keep having fun with stats however

Random or accidental killings are quite rare even in the USA; the majority of homicides are by people

Wow, HOMICIDES are caused by people.................... who would have thunk it!!!

When you take a good look at the statistics as a whole, the entire American gun control debate is completely off target from both sides. More firearms regulation is necessary, but the laws being proposed do not address the problem correctly because hey are driven by wrong motivation.

What motivation do you think is driving the debate?

(On a statistical side note, a UK citizen is twice as likely to be attacked with a knife as a US citizen is to be shot at with a firearm).

I wonder why............

[Annoyed]

A gun is an inanimate object, it is neither good nor evil. It is a tool, nothing more.
The problem isn't tool, it's the criminal use of tools. (and leaving a loaded gun where a child can get at it is stupidity on a criminal level)

And now, due to Louisiana, the gun control crowd will get all excited again. Why is it that they cannot seem to understand that making guns illegal will not deter criminals from owning them and using them in the slightest. It will just keep them out of the hands of the good folks.

[Gatefan1976]

A gun is an inanimate object, it is neither good nor evil. It is a tool, nothing more.
The problem isn't tool, it's the criminal use of tools. (and leaving a loaded gun where a child can get at it is stupidity on a criminal level)

No.
A hammer is a tool, as is a tyre iron.
A Sword is a weapon, same as a gun.
What you fail to differentiate is that the -main function- of gun is to -kill-. It's not to hammer in nails, or change a tyre, but both of these things -can- kill people. A gun cannot hammer a nail, or change a tyre, it can kill, and it is really good at it.

And now, due to Louisiana, the gun control crowd will get all excited again. Why is it that they cannot seem to understand that making guns illegal will not deter criminals from owning them and using them in the slightest. It will just keep them out of the hands of the good folks.

What you cannot understand is that control does not equal banning guns. It MAY stop you from buying an assault rifle, a sub-machine gun, or any other gun with a high fire rate, but it will NOT stop you from buying a pistol for home defence, Or a rifle if you live on a farm (even a semi auto one) for vermin control, or either with a hunting or target shooters licence.

The other issue, and probably a more important issue is supply.
You can get guns anywhere, and ALL of them are legal, until you do something illegal with them.

[Annoyed]

No.
A hammer is a tool, as is a tyre iron.
A Sword is a weapon, same as a gun.
What you fail to differentiate is that the -main function- of gun is to -kill-. It's not to hammer in nails, or change a tyre, but both of these things -can- kill people. A gun cannot hammer a nail, or change a tyre, it can kill, and it is really good at it.

And there are times when the use of a tool to kill is appropriate and times when it is not, just like any other tool.
If some thug is threatening harm to me or mine, that thug needs to stop, even if he has to be killed to convince him to do so. Perfectly appropriate use of a tool.

[Britta]

No.
A hammer is a tool, as is a tyre iron.
A Sword is a weapon, same as a gun.
What you fail to differentiate is that the -main function- of gun is to -kill-. It's not to hammer in nails, or change a tyre, but both of these things -can- kill people. A gun cannot hammer a nail, or change a tyre, it can kill, and it is really good at it.

TNT was first used as a yellow dye, and Dynamite was invented for mining purposes. Consequently, neither of these are weapons. Of course this isn't true. What I'm getting that is that it's absolutely irrelevant what something was made for, what matters is what it's used for.

Privately owned guns are overwhelmingly used for lawful purposes, mostly sporting purposes and hunting. There is also self defense. Most gun murders are gang violence, primarily gang-on-gang. Legalise and regulate all controlled substances and gun violence will plummet. A lot more gun violence can probably be attribute to indirect social harm caused by the war on drugs.

Then there's the big question. If you somehow got rid of all guns, would the murder rate go up or down? Do they kill more than they save? Unfortunately there aren't good statistics kept of defensive uses of guns, but I wouldn't be surprised if they outweigh the lives lost.

Besides, I don't think you should ban or restrict something for everyone because of the actions of a criminal minority, when there are far better solutions to explore. I think a lot of politicians use gun control as a big distraction to hide their disinterest in tackling the real issues.

[Gatefan1976]

And there are times when the use of a tool to kill is appropriate and times when it is not, just like any other tool.
If some thug is threatening harm to me or mine, that thug needs to stop, even if he has to be killed to convince him to do so. Perfectly appropriate use of a tool.

Tool's are NOT designed to be weapons, and this is what you folks will -always- miss.
A car is not a weapon, it is a transportation device.
A standard hardware hammer is not a weapon, it is a building device
A tyre iron is not a weapon, it is a nut removal device.

A sword is a weapon, it exists to slice or batter human flesh and bone.
A gun is a weapon, it exists to shoot small projectiles at hypervelocity to cause tissue trauma.

Column A -can- all be used as weapons, but it is -not- their intent.
Column B -ARE- weapons, and pretty much suck for any other use.