You so know too much about guns for a Belgian.
You're a post office massacre waiting to happen.
You're a post office massacre waiting to happen.
Gun control thread yay
- Thread starter Brother None
- Start date
pffft... Belgians have always had a huge firearms production capability around Luik/Liège. at the time, mostly hunting rifles and stuff, but for the past 100 years we've also have FN Herstal downthere. best military firearms in ze weurld! (FN owns FN-H, FN USA, Browning and Winchester firearms)Brother None said:
funny, my closest colleague said the same thing a few days ago after he saw the playlist on my mp3...Brother None said:
SuAside said:
...
So? The Netherlands is one of the biggest arms exporters in the world to 3rd world countries and is thus one of the biggest progenitors of African civil strife. That doesn't make the Dutch like guns any more than a gun factory should make the Belgians like guns.
And yes, I hear FN Herstal produces for the Cypriot National Guard. Be proud!
Can I still say Belgian, or is it Flemish-Belgian now? Or just Flemish or Walloon? Or "nationally-challenged individual"?
SuAside said:
Just to clarify, buddy, we're not all after you and no, the world is not supposed to have a vague red haze over it.
really? didnt know that. odd, since the dutch army buys most of their stuff abroad?Brother None said:
well, true, but we (especially the walloons actually) have a gun culture, where the dutchies do not (because your laws pretty much banned most of the gunownership a century ago).Brother None said:
i'm belgian first, then european and then flemish.Brother None said:
funny how the politicians fuck up so badly... no one gives a shit about their problems really, we're more interested in jobs, inflation, and whatnot.
i'd never shoot up my workplace...Brother None said:
now, if i wanted to die, i might go shoot up some neonazi gathering or something. sounds like a hoot!
mkay...Maphusio said:
1) the basic gundesign used in that gun dates from 1969. back then, people thought it wasnt worth pursuing over the standard AR15 design.
2) the only reason why this is popular now is that you it is being produced by HK and that it is using a hypemachine to promote their rifle.
3) the same gun can be bought from other sources for 30 to 50% less cost. oh lulz.
4) you'll note that decades old guns actually use the same principles too (the FNC to name just one).
4) the things you described can be done with any decent modern firearm... way to impress the noobies!
SuAside said:
Yeah, but these guns are bought abroad too. I said "export", not produce or even sell. We just function as the port for (sometimes illegal but always immoral) worldwide guntrade, and make profit from transportation, but we don't produce as far as I know, and we don't have a lot of actual merchants.
SuAside said:
How anglo-american of you.
SuAside said:
Nationally challenged it is.
SuAside said:
Everyone always is.
Anyone who gets excited by an item which only purpose is to inflict harm is a sicko, mkay.
i never get excited over guns, but they're damn neat things...Madbringer said:
oh and guns are a tool, and as tools their usage depends entirely on you.
in my case: good for sport, contain marvelous mechanics and are simply a hoot to shoot.
so as such, my guns are made to kill evil paper targets and bowling pints that threathen my physical well-being!
This is not the fanbase you are looking for.Madbringer said:
SuAside said:i never get excited over guns, but they're damn neat things...
oh and guns are a tool, and as tools their usage depends entirely on you.
in my case: good for sport, contain marvelous mechanics and are simply a hoot to shoot.
so as such, my guns are made to kill evil paper targets and bowling pints that threathen my physical well-being!
Killing and destroying is the only thing for which real weapons are produced. Hence why they are called weapons, and why inflicting harm is their only purpose.
I'm not a "peace & love" kind of guy, but was always a little bleh about people who are crazy about guns.
And i was referring to the first poster. Should have quoted.
Silencer said:
Huh?
It still is a Fallout community, is it not? Not a "shiny new shotgun which can shoot 5 explosive rounds a second" community?
unless you're one of those people that played FO with 100% diplomacy and sneak skills without ever fighting, one might might wonder why you need games with violence. afterall, it is not required either, now is it?
Real life guns, sheesh. You know, the ones i can pick up and shoot someone in the head with. There is a difference between video game violence and real life violence.
you'll find that EXPONENTIALLY more people die from cigarettes, alcohol or cars than they do by guns, even in a violent country like the USA.
you'll also find that more people are killed by knives than by guns in western countries.
why arent you talking about banning cars and knives? they're both tools like guns, yet you dont think they're more dangerous, do you?
i assure you, if i hit you in the head with a hammer, you'll die. if i crush your larynx with my bare hands (which is retardedly easy to do), you'll die too.
what's your point?
i dont know about other countries, but i can tell you with CERTAINTY, that in Belgium sport- and recreative shooters (and hunters) are the most law abiding group of people in the country. hell, even if we get caught pissing against a tree near a road we can get fined for indecent exposure and LOOSE OUR GUNS... so we're rather careful about what we do.
an illegal unregistered firearm is 15 times more likely to be used in a crime than a legal weapon. and even then you have to take into account that suicide is a crime and as such it has crept into those statistics... a gun is rather easier than taking pills or cutting your wrists, so it's only natural those are used by legal gunowners, but it's not as if he wouldnt commit suicide if he didnt have a gun, so the statistics are colored a bit by that.
but do you actually think any kind of gunlaw is going to stop criminals from using guns? hell, if the recent laws in the UK and Australia proved anything, is that rigorously enforced firearm laws lead to more violent crime...
to get back to your comment, i fully realise that you meant real guns, and you think that i dont 'need' a gun for my recreation. well, sorry to break it to you buddy, but you dont 'need' a dangerous car, or a dangerous knife. you could live a good life without those, easily.
likewise, you dont 'need' violent games either. and you certainly dont need sneaky killers like cigarettes or alcohol.
yet, no one even thinks on the same scale about banning those as they do about banning guns.
but seriously, if i want you dead, i'll find a way to kill you. a gun is just a tool and there are plenty of tools to kill you.
oh, and there's a fundamental difference between me going out to put holes in paper targets and shooting people... just as big a difference as between violent games or violent movies and real life...
you'll also find that more people are killed by knives than by guns in western countries.
why arent you talking about banning cars and knives? they're both tools like guns, yet you dont think they're more dangerous, do you?
i assure you, if i hit you in the head with a hammer, you'll die. if i crush your larynx with my bare hands (which is retardedly easy to do), you'll die too.
what's your point?
i dont know about other countries, but i can tell you with CERTAINTY, that in Belgium sport- and recreative shooters (and hunters) are the most law abiding group of people in the country. hell, even if we get caught pissing against a tree near a road we can get fined for indecent exposure and LOOSE OUR GUNS... so we're rather careful about what we do.
an illegal unregistered firearm is 15 times more likely to be used in a crime than a legal weapon. and even then you have to take into account that suicide is a crime and as such it has crept into those statistics... a gun is rather easier than taking pills or cutting your wrists, so it's only natural those are used by legal gunowners, but it's not as if he wouldnt commit suicide if he didnt have a gun, so the statistics are colored a bit by that.
but do you actually think any kind of gunlaw is going to stop criminals from using guns? hell, if the recent laws in the UK and Australia proved anything, is that rigorously enforced firearm laws lead to more violent crime...
to get back to your comment, i fully realise that you meant real guns, and you think that i dont 'need' a gun for my recreation. well, sorry to break it to you buddy, but you dont 'need' a dangerous car, or a dangerous knife. you could live a good life without those, easily.
likewise, you dont 'need' violent games either. and you certainly dont need sneaky killers like cigarettes or alcohol.
yet, no one even thinks on the same scale about banning those as they do about banning guns.
but seriously, if i want you dead, i'll find a way to kill you. a gun is just a tool and there are plenty of tools to kill you.
oh, and there's a fundamental difference between me going out to put holes in paper targets and shooting people... just as big a difference as between violent games or violent movies and real life...
SuAside said:
Spinning pink Jesus in a disco bar. My point is in my first post, i also do not know why i'm forced to explain myself more and more.
YES, i know that GUNS are not the only things that make people die. They are, however, the kind of items that are SPECIFICALLY created to make people die. Hence, i always raise my brows up a little when i see a person who gets a gigantic hard-on about them. I consider them weird.
That's all.
I've always ridden the fence on the gun control issue. I mean, obviously people can and do die from many, many other causes. Also, obviously, criminals are more likely to use illegally obtained firearms than to go through the proper channels and buy one from a shop. Plus, I do like guns (I still want a Five-Seven, P90, and FAMAS just for fun).
On the other hand, it's also fairly obvious that firearms are much more efficient at killing people than a knife or hammer, and have little practical value outside of killing (as opposed to a knife, hammer, car, etc.). It's also rather more difficult to defend yourself against someone with a gun as opposed to someone using a melee weapon.
Anywho, as for the AA-whatever: yeah, it's cool. I'm sure it's really expensive, and the ammo too, not to mention probably fairly heavy (and its ammo too). Plus, would you really take one of those and one or two 20-round drums over an assault rifle with a few hundred rounds of ammo for general purpose use? Definitely a support weapon.
On the other hand, it's also fairly obvious that firearms are much more efficient at killing people than a knife or hammer, and have little practical value outside of killing (as opposed to a knife, hammer, car, etc.). It's also rather more difficult to defend yourself against someone with a gun as opposed to someone using a melee weapon.
Anywho, as for the AA-whatever: yeah, it's cool. I'm sure it's really expensive, and the ammo too, not to mention probably fairly heavy (and its ammo too). Plus, would you really take one of those and one or two 20-round drums over an assault rifle with a few hundred rounds of ammo for general purpose use? Definitely a support weapon.
[PCE said:el_Prez]My favorite gun ever invented
Ditto.
The level of anti-gun fervor and ignorance appears to be quite impressive, as well as quite hypocritical considering the game we all purport to love.
I own, use, and carry guns, appear to be a reasonably sane person, and have no particular desire to shoot or kill anyone.
If anything, it makes me calmer and more polite, as well as more willing to back down in a fight. Like I said, I have no particular desire to kill anyone in real life, particularly over something retarded.
Firearms owners are quite diverse as a group, and there are many different sporting aspects having nothing to do with killing things. Do you despise the Olympics for espousing violence for the Archery or Javelin throwing events? Or do you admire someone for developing skill and mastery over the technical and artistic merits of the event?
As for the psychoanalytic aspects of firearms ownership, I give you Don B. Kates on Sigmund Freud:
"In these other passages Freud associates retarded sexual and emotional development not with gun ownership, but with fear and loathing of weapons. The probative importance that ought to be attached to the views of Freud is, of course, a matter of opinion. The point here is only that those views provide no support for the penis theory of gun ownership. "
D
Deleted member 53669
Guest
I tend to ride the fence on the "Killing People" issue, rather than the gun issue. On either side of the fence, im not bitching about guns. Just the value of your meaty, fleshy, souls. So the whole gun thing is illrelevant to me. 75% of the time death bothers me, 25%....
I'm wanting that shotgun.
I'm wanting that shotgun.
actually, a gun is far less dangerous in close combat (within 2m) than a knife, which is the most likely range for muggings and whatnot. you'd be amazed...Kyuu said:
Yay for another ass-backwards gun control debate that will get no one anywhere!
Split from the thread that's actually about something.
I'll veer wide of this one, except for this retarded "argument" that I can't skip.
What're you, retarded?
Cars -> a tool to move people around
Knives -> a tool used for several purposes, mostly in the kitchen or crafts
Guns -> a tool that kills living beings
Trying to equate the functionality of these three objects must be that most retarded thing ever. Hey, why don't we legalize atomic bombs because they're just tools too!
Split from the thread that's actually about something.
I'll veer wide of this one, except for this retarded "argument" that I can't skip.
SuAside said:
What're you, retarded?
Cars -> a tool to move people around
Knives -> a tool used for several purposes, mostly in the kitchen or crafts
Guns -> a tool that kills living beings
Trying to equate the functionality of these three objects must be that most retarded thing ever. Hey, why don't we legalize atomic bombs because they're just tools too!
Guns -> used to kill things
Cars -> used to get you places
Alcohol -> Used to make you drunk
Alcohol/intoxicants -> 50 percent of violent crimes in the US
Alcohol/intoxicants -> the majority of auto accidents in the us.
Ban alcohol before you ban guns. Alcohol doesn't do anything productive. But leads to so much crap.
I think we could do it without the majority of the problems we had in the 20's
Cars -> used to get you places
Alcohol -> Used to make you drunk
Alcohol/intoxicants -> 50 percent of violent crimes in the US
Alcohol/intoxicants -> the majority of auto accidents in the us.
Ban alcohol before you ban guns. Alcohol doesn't do anything productive. But leads to so much crap.
I think we could do it without the majority of the problems we had in the 20's
Alcohol, like any drug, is another debate. SuAgirlyman here was making a point about three kinds of tools. And he's right, knives, cars and guns are all tools. Only one of them has the exclusive purpose to kill people. Ford never produced the model T with the thought of "they can use this to hunt for deer!" any more than Hitler hoped to win WWII by driving over England with Volkswagens.
Alcohol is not a tool, except if you argue it's a tool to make ugly women look pretty. Banning drugs, including alcohol, nicotine and caffeine (and, some would argue, MMOs), is simply a separate debate.
Alcohol is not a tool, except if you argue it's a tool to make ugly women look pretty. Banning drugs, including alcohol, nicotine and caffeine (and, some would argue, MMOs), is simply a separate debate.