perhaps, if he knew about the magic. but the possibility of buddha smoking spice is still within the equation

Haha, perhaps, perhaps.

I did meet a gargantuan golden Buddha in hyperspace once. Interesting guy, that one.

Are you speaking from direct experience or is this pure conjecture on your part? I personally every day carry a gun for self defense. I do my best to avoid sketchy situations, sleezey people, and basically keep aware of my surroundings without undue anxiety. I have no desire to present (draw) my weapon and blow anybody away, but if necessary to protect my life or the life of those I love I will go that far.




No kidding! Tell me where I can go that is completely free of violent idiots? If you think that you live there, I think you are mistaken if it is any place that has enough air to breathe and remain conscious.

Have you ever been forced to use it/what was the situation?

No I have not been in the situation where I have felt the need to present the weapon. All I have done is practice drills with rotating timed targets, practiced in low light, practiced in a 'house' with targets representing lone opponents, and opponents with hostages. I hope that I never have to shoot anyone.

I share the sentiment, of course.

See, what I don't understand is why you feel the need carry a gun for self defense if you have never been in a situation which has demanded such.
Just because the possibility of violence exists? Better get working on that bomb shelter too...just in case.

The need for self assurance by means of firearms just seems like a fearful lifestyle to me. What exactly are you so afraid of?
I have no doubt that many gun owners are perfectly capable and responsible in their usage, but it does not necessarily follow that such actions are beneficial.
I realize some may disagree, but [more guns]=[more peace] just does not present itself as valid to me.

I have a right to my opinion, and I have the legal right to be armed in my jurisdiction. I am not trying to change anybody's mind. I do not walk around in terror. I just choose to carry a tool with me that only about 5% of Americans choose to carry with them. If you choose to be unarmed, then so be it. I don't have an issue with your choice, nor should you with mine.

I would like to ask you a question: What are you so afraid of when you put that seat belt on every time you drive your car? I would guess that you are not afraid of driving. I carry as a precaution just as wearing a seat belt is a precautionary act. It is not a state of mind as you are so expertly psychoanalyzing.

Please allow each of us the freedom to be individuals without being overtly authoritarian. How is the Authoritarianism you propose any better or any different that the crap that we put up with as far as drug laws are concerned?

I wasn't saying you dont have a right to your opinion, I simply don't understand the justifications. That is why I was asking... that is the entire basis of my stance.

And comparing guns to seat belts is just....well, I think you know as well as I.

As for Authoritarianism:

I in no way want to make you give up your "rights" or opinions. I just don't believe you need to be armed to feel safe or be able to protect yourself.

I think we are so ingrained in this system of fear and distrust that we can't even begin to change our violent tendencies. Naive idealism or not, I truly believe we can drastically reduce the level of needless violence we observe in this world. Humans, though we can never completely escape the forces of natural selection, have moved into a new stage of our evolution. It isn't a dog eat dog world out there, regardless of what anyone tells you.
There is enough to go around, if only we can escape this ego-game that is modern society.

I take it that the people who're in favor of the right to carry guns (only americans from the rural areas where they used to burn crosses and other stuff) to 'keep the government in check' and for self-defence, then also must totally agree that iran is building itself an atomic bomb. It is doing this to keep the same government in check that the NRA-members among us aparently fear so much and for self defence against that very same government even. The NRA-americans must have a deeply rooted understanding for this iranian position i suppose?

I dont have an opinion here other than that I think some people just should not have guns..my grandfather is one of those people..he likes to drive around on his ATV with a case of beer completely smashed and go "hunting"...my uncle hunts alot and I think he told me he refuses to hunt with my grandfather becasue he fears that he will seriousily shoot a human one of these days.

Give him a toy-gun. Maybe he won't notice the difference.

I agree.
It's an all or nothing position. No compromise.

Maybe we should ban violent videogames and movies? So the young depressed adult doesnt take a gun and shoot everyone in sight.
Because i think that he is the one (of 10?) who can not anymore violently use guns when they are not any more accesible to / banned from civilians.
All the other gunwhores can still acces guns from the blackmarket. For killing and robbery and so on. As a means of power.

Where i live one does not need a gun for self protection. There is no gun in my house, and i do not carry a gun. I do fear the threat of the iranian nuclear program, since irans leaders are to be feared. But i must admit, i am not even aware of the full media coverage that is out on the subject, let alone know what is really going on.

Comparing guns with atombombs feels to me like comparing guns with knives. But that is just my first impression.
Good points though. Things are situational. Like the grandpa of FE. Situations can be handled with specific measures. It is not always necessary to apply general rules that can be abused against humanity. I am not in fear. And in my world guns are no different than sportscar or whatever. The only problem could be waste of resources? That applies to almost any product (involving lets say plastic and/or transport by fuel).

The problem about safety (and wasting resources) is in the system. This not a bad thing, humans are not good or evil imo.
But it needs to be fixed soon if you want to multiply.

About banning violent videogames and movies: i think the movie mary poppins should definately fall into this category as well...it contains a violent scene where a guys hat and umbrella are being ripped to pieces. It could also inspire people to cause financial mayham in the city of london. The movie clearly shows how you only need twopence to do that!!! and then there's a captain who fires a cannon from the roof of his house at chimneysweepers!!!

If you ask me, having this movie availabvle to the public is just as dangerous as any al-quaida instruction video.

Dear Government please take care of me. You probably know better what I need than do I myself. I know you will give me three hots and a cot along with a nice shower said the disarmed Jews to the Nazi SS.

if you're going to pull random examples from history which had so many contextual characteristics you cant really compare, I might also: If gandhi had a weapon, india probably wouldnt be an independent country now

If gandhi had a weapon he would have probably ate it...he always looked so hungry.

lol. If he ate a gun, there would not be an independant india now.
Dont give guns to Gandhi.

My feeling is that the pro gun versus anti gun debate generates as much rancor as does the pro drug versus the anti drug debate.