Well i'm sorry all

[vindi C]

I started off on this forum thinking that i'd just post once then leave. I read some of your responses and was actually amazed at how logical and intelligently structured alot of them were. You had talked me into staying and were beggining to convince me of a few points when i opened up a new thread about which guns you people own and where you go shooting, i got this. "As would anyone who's been made to appear to be a buffoon as many times in a 24 hour period as you." "It's a troll!" "Look at me,Look at me! " "Not again ". Hmmm there i was thinking you might be a bunch of intelligent people with some interesting arguments but i guess i was wrong, maybe you are just a pack of gun stroking rednecks with an IQ lower than the current room temperature. It's a real pitty, some of your arguments were making me think twice, making me consider that it didn't matter if you killed someone over the $20 in your wallet and maybe a black eye, well i guess you just messed up.

I'm know for sure there are those of you out there who are intelligent and this may just be a group of 3 post fools who have no intelligence and so dismiss my ideas straight away without any concideration.

prove me wrong! go back to intelligent debates over guns and self defence, talk to me about where you're all from and what you do for a living, lets get to know each other!

I'll end on one note. There is no need for self defence and the defence of others around you if there is no crime. This is EXACTLY what taking guns away from Australlians has done! decreased crime tenfold, look at the statistics. All our gun laws do is take guns away from people who dont need them. Those who actually use them on farms or those who like having fun with them on gun ranges are aloud to and are most welcome to! It's a real pitty that harsh gun laws didn't work out in many European companys, i guess it's just the luck of the draw.

Talk intelligently and i'll listen, insult me and swear and I'll just switch off. I hope this isn't goodbye but its going to have to be depending on the replys I get. It all comes down to two things, do you want me to think that gun owners are intelligent and reasonable or do you want me to think you're all a pack of fools who know nothing about the rights of others.

 

[280PLUS]

Vin,

Unfortunately nomatter where you go you'll find a few that will act as you describe. Even here on THR. I think we call them the 1% or 3%, I can't remember the exact number. Your best bet is to ignore those and just pay attention to the other 99% who have taken the time to try to make you understand their positions in logical and reasonable terms Don't let a few bad apples spoil the whole bunch, as it were. Those calling you a troll, for example, are no more than "Pots trying to call the kettle black."

280

 

[Spiphel Rike]

Vindi C, may you please show the stats to this board?
If you will cite information could you please show it to us, a link, copied information perhaps.

I am a responsible person, I like to talk things down, and de-escalate. Most responsible gun owners would do this prior to shooting someone unless there was a violent crime being perpetrated. I know I won't do anything stupid if I had a gun, and I believe that I should be able to own whatever gun I like provided I pass a background check, and some tests on the laws relating to the usage of this weapon. Gun control does not decrease crime, it has been shown time and again, in england there is a lot of violent crime but not a lot of gun crime. Australia has the fourth highest incidence of rape in the world (quoted from today tonight on australia day) which is a very serious problem.

People are attacked in the streets late at night while walking home with a girlfriend after a night out. In a free country I should be able to walk the streets as late at night as I want and be perfectly safe, Australia is not a free country. This risk makes me feel that some form of defensive weapon is necessary, and it is well known that martial arts would not help a less than strongly built person like me, and that less lethal weapons are not totally effective. If I owned a gun I would definitely carry less lethal items as well, but I would not believe in them as blindly as you do. Pacifists like you are the reason that people should be armed, you won't do a lot to protect yourself so other people will have to do it for you. Get a few more years under your belt before you make sweeping statements.

"A person without a sword can still die on the blade of one."

 

[vindi C]

-

ok, If u guys would like to see some figures on decreasing crime rates against the time since the gun ban in aussie i'll go dig some up, I suppose you 'll all take me abit more seriously then. i'm gonna hit the hay and i'm going away for the weekend so i'll get onto it when i get back.

I'll leave you with some background behind the gun ban in Australia. The primeminister had been thinking it over for sometime when one day something tipped the scales. Two men walked into a coffee shop in Tasmania with two sports bags FULL of guns, long story short there where 14 killed, excluding the shooters. Among the dead was a 4 year old girl, my sister who would be older than me now.

Maybe you'll all understand why i'm so passionately against the use of guns out of a firing range now?? Please dont give me sympathy, i've had three life times full.

 

[peacefuljeffrey]

Hmmm there i was thinking you might be a bunch of intelligent people with some interesting arguments but i guess i was wrong, maybe you are just a pack of gun stroking rednecks with an IQ lower than the current room temperature. It's a real pitty, some of your arguments were making me think twice, making me consider that it didn't matter if you killed someone over the $20 in your wallet and maybe a black eye, well i guess you just messed up.

We have seen your kind come and go.

You come in here, disingenuously claiming that your mind is open; you bait us with a bunch of obviously ridiculous arguments, statements, and beliefs; you KNOW we are going to point out how ridiculous they are, with logic and fact; you set yourself up to be able to claim that we were sooo unfair and mean and disrespectful; and then you get to leave with a pout, saying, "See, I guess I was wrong when I thought you were gentlemanly and fair and mature and virtous..." We knew what was coming, vindi. You are not clever enough to be original.

I'm know for sure there are those of you out there who are intelligent and this may just be a group of 3 post fools who have no intelligence and so dismiss my ideas straight away without any concideration.

Let me tell you something: Your ideas BEG to be dismissed straight away. Everything from "no man has the right to take another man's life" to "use anything else for self defense, but guns are a no-no" to "it's easy to disarm a criminal using lots of other means besides guns." These are preposterous on their face.

I'll end on one note. There is no need for self defence and the defence of others around you if there is no crime.

PLEASE TELL US WHEN THERE WILL BE NO MORE CRIME, ANYWHERE AND AT ANY TIME, AND I'M PRETTY SURE WE'LL GLADLY STOP CARRYING GUNS AND OTHER DEFENSIVE WEAPONS, BECAUSE WHAT YOU'LL BE DESCRIBING WILL BE, WELL, HEAVEN. Imagine that -- a paradise where there is not a single crime committed anywhere at any time!

Until that comes -- and it won't be coming any time soo... I mean, ever -- it would be ridiculous to render ourselves defenseless as we sit and wait for it.

This is EXACTLY what taking guns away from Australlians has done! decreased crime tenfold, look at the statistics.

LOL!! Taking guns away from Australians has completely eliminated CRIME in Australia, says vindi.

Nope, wait, then vindi says that crime has "decreased tenfold." That's not exactly "no crime."

Vindi says that it's not hard to get guns in Australia despite the ban -- all you have to do is show big mommy government that you "need" guns and presto, no impediment!

But nope, wait, then vindi says that guns were taken away from Australlians! (sic)

Vindi can't keep his own story straight, but gets indignant when we shoot holes in it!

It all comes down to two things, do you want me to think that gun owners are intelligent and reasonable or do you want me to think you're all a pack of fools who know nothing about the rights of others.

When has anyone tried to shut down your right to say what you have to say? It sounds more to me like YOU are the one trying to deny anyone else the right to point out how idiotic your arguments and claims are! You get all touchy as soon as you are made to look foolish when you justifiably should be made to look foolish. Who here -- quote the post -- has said that they think you should not be able to say what you wish to say?

For the record, vindi, I don't give a rat's hindquarters what you think of me or gun owners in general. It is my firm belief that you came here to flaunt your anti-gun/anti-self-defense views and certainly NOT to keep an open mind and let us inform you about guns and self defense rights. You behaved as the same sort of troll we've seen time and again all over the internet, spouting inflammatory rhetoric that has been debunked a million times, and then getting falsely indignant when the intellectual bankruptcy of your views was exposed for all to see, and sometimes with prejudice.

No one cares if someone with such crippled rational thought processes as yourself holds a low opinion of us.

-Jeffrey

 

[peacefuljeffrey]

I'll leave you with some background behind the gun ban in Australia. The primeminister had been thinking it over for sometime when one day something tipped the scales. Two men walked into a coffee shop in Tasmania with two sports bags FULL of guns, long story short there where 14 killed, excluding the shooters. Among the dead was a 4 year old girl, my sister who would be older than me now.

Maybe you'll all understand why i'm so passionately against the use of guns out of a firing range now?? Please dont give me sympathy, i've had three life times full.

First off, I don't really believe you.

Second, there is a logical disconnect between being upset about the murderers using guns, and advocating for no good citizens to be allowed to have them. What about the argument that if someone nearby had been armed -- maybe even a FEW people -- that they could have stopped the murderers before the full massacre of 14 people was carried out?

Hey, what if a guy went to a firing range and decided to open fire on a bunch of innocent shooters who were lined up and focused on their targets?! I guess then you would be opposed to using guns even on a firing range, right? Because as we already know, you would oppose any of those shooters using their guns to kill (and stop) the guy from using his gun to kill all of them. Right? You've voiced your opposition to the use of guns for defense. According to you, surely there would be some non-lethal way they could stop him and save all of their lives. I don't understand how you make a connection between the wrongness of murder and the supposed wrongness of using a gun in a righteous way to stop murder by killing a murderour perpetrator, and thus ending the cycle of violence with his death.


Do you see how ridiculous you sound? NONE of the stuff you've said here is well-thought-out and logical.

-Jeffrey

 

[denfoote]

The same thing happened in Klieen (sp) Texas a few years back at a Denny's restaurant. A patron had to watch her parents killed by a madman because she complied with the state law which forced her to leave her legally owned pistol locked in her car. (She is now a Texas state legislator) Instead of banning guns (which the Demonratic Governor Ann "Ma Barker" Richards would have wanted to do) the people of Texas fought for and won the God given right to carry a concealed handgun. Our current President ran against the Democrat incumbent on the promise of signing the CCW bill as soon as it reached his desk . (It was vetoed twice by Ma Barker and she vowed that no such law would pass as long as she was Governor. The People of Texas took care of that!!)

Guess what?? Crime rates in Texas dropped like a rock, soon after the law went into effect!!

Same crime. Different, freedom loving, mindset. Opposite results!!

Gun control is not crime control. It's people control!! Tyranny, just the same!!

Professor John Lott has the relavent stats in his book "More guns. Less crime." if you are interested .

 

[CannibalCrowley]

I'll end on one note. There is no need for self defence and the defence of others around you if there is no crime. This is EXACTLY what taking guns away from Australlians has done! decreased crime tenfold, look at the statistics

Please show said statistics.

We recently touched upon the firearms issue on another forum. This is what one Aussie had to say:
"Likewise. You have no idea what you would have to do to get such weapons (sidearms) legally registered here in Australia. Also they could never be used or even carried beyond the boundaries of a sporting shooters' club. Unfortunately the crims don't particularly care whether they have legal firearms or not.

Melbourne is in the middle of a gang war with rivals being popped off every other month - sometimes weeks. As usual it's mainly drug related. Sorry off topic!"

 

[SAG0282]

I don't know why I'm wasting my time with you, but since I'm at work and have nothing better to do......*shrugs*

I'll end on one note. There is no need for self defence and the defence of others around you if there is no crime. This is EXACTLY what taking guns away from Australlians has done! decreased crime tenfold, look at the statistics.

OK, let's look at the statistics. That you would a) assert that crime has decreased tenfold in Australia, and that b) even if Australia had experienced a crime rate decrease, banning or restricting guns was the reason for this does NOT speak well at all for your intelligence.

Following shocking killings in 1996, the Australian government
made sweeping changes to the firearm legislation
in 1997. Unfortunately, the recent firearm regulations
have not made the streets of Australia any safer.
The total homicide rate, after having remained basically
flat from 1995 to 2001, has now begun climbing again.
The decline in homicide rate in the gun-permissive United
States stands out against the trend in Australia.
The divergence between Australia and the United
States is even more apparent with violent crime. While violent
crime is decreasing in the United States, it is increasing
in Australia. Over the past six years, the overall
rate of violent crime in Australia has continued to
increase. Robbery and armed robbery rates continue to
rise. Armed robbery has increased 166% nationwide.
The confiscation and destruction of legally owned firearms
cost Australian taxpayers at least $500 million.
The costs of the police services bureaucracy, including
the hugely costly infrastructure of the gun registration
system, has increased by $200 million since 1997. And
for what? There has been no visible impact on violent
crime. It is impossible to justify such a massive amount of
the taxpayers’ money for no decrease in crime. For that
kind of tax money, the police could have had more patrol
cars, shorter shifts, or maybe even better equipment.
Think of how many lives might have been saved.

http://www.sfu.ca/~mauser/papers/failed/FailedExperiment.pdf

The above by the way isn't an NRA stat or study, but rather a CANADIAN study. I sure don't see any tenfold decreases. The US rates HAVE been decreasing, yet our gun laws have gotten more liberal and more and more guns are sold every year.

Go away troll. If you're not prepared enough to know something simple and fundamental like crime trends in your own country, you shouldn't be here.

 

[SAG0282]

 

[jobu07]

Those speak for themselves

 

[peacefuljeffrey]

Go away troll. If you're not prepared enough to know something simple and fundamental like crime trends in your own country, you shouldn't be here.

The most telling thing is that he claimed the "tenfold decrease in crime" but when pressed for proof, he now says he has to go FIND it.

Wait a minute. If he knew of the alleged decrease, he'd have to have already seen/possessed the stats that bear it out.

So something tells me he was spouting this alleged crime drop out his a$$ and now claims he's gonna find proof of it.

Don't be surprised if we don't see him back after his weekend away.

-Jeffrey

 

[SAG0282]

It all comes down to two things, do you want me to think that gun owners are intelligent and reasonable or do you want me to think you're all a pack of fools who know nothing about the rights of others.

(Non-High Road comment removed by Art)

I'll leave you with some background behind the gun ban in Australia. The primeminister had been thinking it over for sometime when one day something tipped the scales. Two men walked into a coffee shop in Tasmania with two sports bags FULL of guns, long story short there where 14 killed, excluding the shooters. Among the dead was a 4 year old girl, my sister who would be older than me now.

Maybe you'll all understand why i'm so passionately against the use of guns out of a firing range now?? Please dont give me sympathy, i've had three life times full.

The gun ban was what, '96. A 4 year old in '96 would be 13. You identified yourself as 15. Above you say your sister would be older.

 

[peacefuljeffrey]

True, if she was 4 in 1996, she'd be 13 now.
But he's 15, and he says she'd be older than he is.

I'm glad I didn't demur from saying I didn't believe him, but I am sorry I didn't use the term "filthy lying scumbag troll" when I had the chance.

He came in here knowing that the idiotic drivel he was going to spout would annoy us and cause us to refute him in no uncertain terms.

Then he passive-aggressively made a pseudo-exit from the thread/forum saying Gee, I thought I could have a rational discussion with ya'll but you're too impolite and don't respect my opinion... Like we didn't see that coming...

Anyone who would LIE and claim that he had a sister who was murdered...
-Jeffrey

 

[ReadyontheRight]

do you want me to think that gun owners are intelligent and reasonable or do you want me to think you're all a pack of fools who know nothing about the rights of others.

Most of us couldn't care less what you think of "gun owners". We're just trying to get you to THINK.

 

[280PLUS]

Thr Rule #4

4.) Spamming, trolling, flaming, and personal attacks are prohibited. You can disagree with other members, even vehemently, but it must be done in a well-mannered form. Attack the argument, not the arguer.

Enough Said

No, One question. Define, precisely, "Troll" for my benefit as I don't seem to catch the meaning.

Then try to get with rule #4

 

[Cool Hand Luke 22:36]

I'll leave you with some background behind the gun ban in Australia. The primeminister had been thinking it over for sometime when one day something tipped the scales. Two men walked into a coffee shop in Tasmania with two sports bags FULL of guns, long story short there where 14 killed, excluding the shooters. Among the dead was a 4 year old girl, my sister who would be older than me now.

Maybe you'll all understand why i'm so passionately against the use of guns out of a firing range now?? Please dont give me sympathy, i've had three life times full.

If you're going to lie like this you might have at least taken the time to get the details of the Port Arthur shootings correct (hint: It was one shooter).

The way in which you have dishonored the memory of the victims of that massacre, by using it as a cheap front to get the attention you crave, is contemptable.

 

[Spot77]

Accordingly, there was no bag "full of guns". There was ONE rifle. I cannot find any article which describes otherwise.

The man was a lunatic, with a history of mental disorder. Shouldn't law enforcement in Australia have dealt with this problem previously?

According to a survivor, and in total contrast to the sensationalist media, the gunman fired aimed, specific individual shots. There was no "spraying of bullets".

Gun bans revolving around semiautomatic weapons were, and still are a liberal's knee jerk reaction to and fatal shooting.

Google searches provided some information. Here is a few links:

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9604/28/australia.shooting/

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9604/28/australia.shooting/


Unless ther ewas another less famous shooting in Tasmania that you're referring to.

 

[sumpnz]

He also lists is B'day as April 1. While possibly true it doesn't bode well.

I'll hold my tounge on his posts until I see supporting data. From a credible source.

 

[The_Antibubba]

A man who is convinced of his safety because the Government tells him he is safe cannot possibly understand Freedom.

Freedom begins in the mind, vindi. Maybe someday you'll understand freedom. Read Orwell's 1984-he understood.

Meanwhile, this is The High Road. We gave you the benefit of the doubt, but you've become a troll. Lurk if you want-heck, maybe you'll learn something!-but please don't spout your blinded serf beliefs anymore.

 

[CannibalCrowley]

No, One question. Define, precisely, "Troll" for my benefit as I don't seem to catch the meaning.

An internet troll is a person who sends duplicitous messages to get angry responses, or a message sent by such a person. The term derives from the phrase "trolling for newbies" and ultimately from trolling for fish. It's use to refer to unwanted internet posts originates on usenet. (taken from Wikipedia )

Mmm, Google.

 

[Third_Rail]

Vindi C,

You'll not get any response other than what you've received, nor will you get any facts other than what you read: facts are just that, the truth.

You ask us to be open-minded and hear you out, but when we ask the same of you, we're "gun stroking rednecks". I live in MA, and I own very few firearms. Am I really a "gun stroking redneck"? Could you define that for me?

You say that you have statistics to prove a "tenfold decrease in crime". Wonderful! May I see them?

There are many statistics from your own Australian Government that directly contradict what you have been telling us about crime.

I truly hope that you didn't lie to us about your sister being killed, for liars get little slack in the real world.



Never be so open-minded that your mind falls out, nor so close-minded that your mind suffocates.

 

[280PLUS]

Thank you!

Ah, another one of life's great mysteries solved at THR.

Everybody try to fight nicely now...

 

[Partisan Ranger]

"go back to intelligent debates over guns and self defence,"

Those are funny words to hear from a fellow who engaged in silly ad hominem attacks on our president without provocation. You surely are 15, and a rather immature and arrogant one at that.

Respectfully,
PR

 

[sig&wesson]

i refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed ..opponent you give false information no sources to back up any information you give then you say you want intelligent conversation but yet you offer no intelligent conversation only a little boy who likes to pout and not answer any time hes asked for statistics or facts you dont want intelligent conversation you want to make mindless points that arent true nor factual your 15 you have a lot to learn im in my 30's i learn every day i dont profess to know it all i do howver know if i or my family or another is attacked or in danger of losing there life i will make a stand even if it costs my life to say as you did in your original posting to use a tazer or mace or to just let a violent attacker rape your loved ones if all they want is sex is pure and sheer stupidity as Aids kills also among other std's ingorance can be fixed unfortunatly stupidity is forver