The KGB Oracle
Serving the online gaming community since 1997
Visit www.the-kgb.com
For additional information

Join KGB DISCORD: http://discord.gg/KGB
 
KGB Information
Untitled 1

Visit KGB HQ
www.the-kgb.com

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 6 guests, and 27 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
ShoutChat
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.
Today's Birthdays
Devan Omega
Newest Members
Luckystrikes, Shingen, BillNyeCommieSpy, Lamp, AllenGlines
1,477 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums53
Topics13,094
Posts116,355
Members1,477
Most Online276
Aug 3rd, 2023
Top Likes Received (30 Days)
None yet
Top Posters(30 Days)
Popular Topics(Views)
1,986,836 Trump card
1,323,918 Picture Thread
473,873 Romney
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 21 of 64 1 2 19 20 21 22 23 63 64
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,528
Likes: 10
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
King's High Council
**
Offline
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
King's High Council
**
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,528
Likes: 10
So 2 people so far confirmed that they support NRA statement. I will give it a little bit more time and then we can start analyzing what exactly was said.


[Linked Image]
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,526
Likes: 1
KGB Supreme Knight
****
Offline
KGB Supreme Knight
****
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,526
Likes: 1
Originally Posted By: sini
So 2 people so far confirmed that they support NRA statement. I will give it a little bit more time and then we can start analyzing what exactly was said.


You complete me.

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,174
Likes: 1
KGB Supreme Knight
***
Offline
KGB Supreme Knight
***
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,174
Likes: 1
Originally Posted By: sini
So 2 people so far confirmed that they support NRA statement. I will give it a little bit more time and then we can start analyzing what exactly was said.


I told you I already know what you're going to say. Why wait go ahead and spill the beans.

Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,174
Likes: 1
KGB Supreme Knight
***
Offline
KGB Supreme Knight
***
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,174
Likes: 1
Originally Posted By: sini
I assume that ample opportunity was given to everyone to distance from the statement. After re-reading this thread and giving people benefit of the doubt, following people appear to support NRA:

Kaotic
Wolfgang (confirmed 12/23/12)
Helemoto (confirmed 12/23/12)
Brutal

Please respond to this thread if you want your name added to the list. Also respond here if you want your name off the list, once I see your post I will cross you name off the list and put a date next to it.

Just to be perfectly clear, here is full transcript of NRA statement.


Man you are one dramatic little queen. wow... just go ahead and spew the left wing BS that your going to spew. I'm pretty sure your words won't cause us to throw our guns away and hope we don't ever need them. /facepalm

Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 941
KGB Supreme Knight
*****
Offline
KGB Supreme Knight
*****
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 941
Originally Posted By: sini
So I am curious to hear what local gun nuts think about NRA response?

Key points:
a) Video game and media violence to blame, not guns
b) Armed guards, TSA-style, in all schools

I assume you all agree with this, because after asking couple times I yet to see any objections.


Pre-point:

Simply owning a firearm or two does not make one a " gun-nut " any more than the ownership of a Bible makes one a religious zealot.

Point A:

If you live within the US, you know we are saturated with ultra-violence in every aspect of our culture. All forms of media can catch the blame here. TV, News, Games, Movies, Books, everything. You have to look pretty hard to get away from it. For the strong minded, this isn't an issue. It's just another aspect of life. We can process and filter out the imagery just as easily as we can any other. For others, this isn't so easy. It's these others whose behavior is shaped by what they are inundated with that become potential issues for society later on.

Point B:

The statement about armed guards just about everywhere except schools makes sense because it's pretty much the truth. In all high profile targets, we have armed guards on site to deal with potential problems that may arise. Once upon a time, schools were not considered a " high profile target ". However, this is the 21st century and apparently that has changed since we have so many massacres on school property in recent years. Problem will be how to fund it. Schools aren't known for their amazing budgets. Will likely see a " Think of the Children " Tax on every firearm sold from here on out :|

Anyone arguing the point against armed guards at any location needs to ask themselves why they would call police ( who will bring guns ) for any issue they believe was necessary.

There exists a critical period of time between your calling the police and their ability to arrive on site and neutralize an event in progress. Putting them on site ( or an equivalent ) greatly reduces this time. As the response time drops, so does the potential for additional casualties or would you argue that an armed guard is more important in a bank or a sporting event instead ?

Since everyone who isn't a VIP, elected official, or any other type who has armed security following them around all day long, your safety falls upon you.

You can either spend the time pleading with the lunatic to spare your ( or anothers ) life during a rampage or, since diplomacy and negotiation seems to be a waste of time during these things, you can have folks on site with a bit stronger power of persuasion than words alone.

Last edited by Daye; 12/24/12 10:58 AM.
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,174
Likes: 1
KGB Supreme Knight
***
Offline
KGB Supreme Knight
***
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,174
Likes: 1
Originally Posted By: Daye
Originally Posted By: sini
So I am curious to hear what local gun nuts think about NRA response?

Key points:
a) Video game and media violence to blame, not guns
b) Armed guards, TSA-style, in all schools

I assume you all agree with this, because after asking couple times I yet to see any objections.


Pre-point:

Simply owning a firearm or two does not make one a " gun-nut " any more than the ownership of a Bible makes one a religious zealot.

Point A:

If you live within the US, you know we are saturated with ultra-violence in every aspect of our culture. All forms of media can catch the blame here. TV, News, Games, Movies, Books, everything. You have to look pretty hard to get away from it. For the strong minded, this isn't an issue. It's just another aspect of life. We can process and filter out the imagery just as easily as we can any other. For others, this isn't so easy. It's these others whose behavior is shaped by what they are inundated with that become potential issues for society later on.

Point B:

The statement about armed guards just about everywhere except schools makes sense because it's pretty much the truth. In all high profile targets, we have armed guards on site to deal with potential problems that may arise. Once upon a time, schools were not considered a " high profile target ". However, this is the 21st century and apparently that has changed since we have so many massacres on school property in recent years. Problem will be how to fund it. Schools aren't known for their amazing budgets. Will likely see a " Think of the Children " Tax on every firearm sold from here on out :|

Anyone arguing the point against armed guards at any location needs to ask themselves why they would call police ( who will bring guns ) for any issue they believe was necessary.

There exists a critical period of time between your calling the police and their ability to arrive on site and neutralize an event in progress. Putting them on site ( or an equivalent ) greatly reduces this time. As the response time drops, so does the potential for additional casualties or would you argue that an armed guard is more important in a bank or a sporting event instead ?

Since everyone who isn't a VIP, elected official, or any other type who has armed security following them around all day long, your safety falls upon you.

You can either spend the time pleading with the lunatic to spare your ( or anothers ) life during a rampage or, since diplomacy and negotiation seems to be a waste of time during these things, you can have folks on site with a bit stronger power of persuasion than words alone.


Great explanation Daye. I didn't think anyone would have to have this explained to them, apparently I was wrong. The whole banning guns isn't an issue, because that's not going to happen. Even Sini himself has said guns are to prevalent to do such a thing.

NOBODY should ever have to explain WHY they need a weapon to defend themselves, family or a stranger in the case of a "lunatic" going wild with a gun. For some reason people like Sini think someone...anyone with a gun equals BAD! Would it have been bad if an armed security officer was at Columbine when those two boys started shooting, Or would have it been bad If someone in the theater in Colorado had a gun and shot the shooter before he could kill those people? Is one life not Important as 10?

I could go on, but I shouldn't have to. It should be common sense that if you have a bad guy with a gun, you also need a good guy with a gun as well. The video I posted should really set off some common sense. Had that woman kept her pistol in her purse, there could have been a lot more people alive Including her parents.

Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 941
KGB Supreme Knight
*****
Offline
KGB Supreme Knight
*****
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 941
For the latest in lunacy in the US of A:

The goofball who decided to light his home on fire in New York, then shoot the Firefighters responding to it. Managed to kill two I think. That, of course, is not going to be my point but is certainly the basis for it.

This man beautifully demonstrates why putting more laws in place will be a pointless exercise in futility.

This man, according to reports so far, was an ex-con. Felony level ex-con. Killed his grandmother with a HAMMER and served seventeen years for doing so. Hot damn, lets hear it for rehab ! Where's that hammer ban . . . . :D

BY LAW, this man was not allowed to possess firearms of any sort due to his classification as a felon. Yet he had them anyway. Good thing we had the law in place to prevent that from happening :|

Once again, and I do sincerely hope this point eventually sticks for some folks, criminals DO NOT CARE about what laws they are breaking. Thus, the definition of a criminal. Thus the reason I don't rely on laws to ensure my safety. I know the folks who would commit any crime really aren't bothered by what laws they're going to break in doing so. By following the rules, you are already at a disadvantage against those who will not. Police can't protect everyone, the best they can do is pick up the pieces afterwards and try to figure out the who and why of it all.

There are laws on the books for all of the following actions he committed and it didn't seem to slow him down one bit:

Murder ( by hammer )
Murder ( by firearm )
Arson ( he burned down seven frikkin homes )
Assault ( for the folks he shot at but didn't kill )

So, do tell, how anyone can possibly rationalize that yet another law would have somehow prevented this man from engaging in his final rampage ? It's already been stated there are too many firearms out there now for any sort of ban to be effective. Assault rifles or high capacity magazines being irrelevant if you know how to shoot. Substitute a hunting rifle or a frikkin crossbow here and the end result is the same.

So, other than punishing millions of lawful gun owners, how exactly would additional legislation have stopped this ?



Last edited by Daye; 12/27/12 08:51 AM.
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,174
Likes: 1
KGB Supreme Knight
***
Offline
KGB Supreme Knight
***
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,174
Likes: 1
I wonder why this wasn't on the national news 2 days after the CT school shooting? Oh wait, that's because someone with a Gun STOPPED HIM! No juicy details there when the bad guy gets shot. Fucking media blows!

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_n...ing-4123414.php

Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 941
KGB Supreme Knight
*****
Offline
KGB Supreme Knight
*****
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 941
*deleted*

It was more of a rant against some anti-gun type fearmongering over suppressors anyway.

The story is over on:

http://www.salon.com/2012/12/30/silencers_the_nras_latest_big_lie/

Where do we get these people I swear . . . .

Last edited by Daye; 12/31/12 09:11 AM.
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,653
Likes: 6
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
****
Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
****
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,653
Likes: 6

These people come from a desire to

1) Feed a self-righteous ego

and/or

2) Make the world a better place, just they have no idea how to actually accomplish such a difficult thing.

Its the left wing equivalent of right wingers who genuinely think that God hates gays, and is punishing us collectively for tolerating homosexuality.

Somewhere, deep down, the intent is good. Its just obscured by irrational beliefs , twisted by personal emotion, and amplified by unjustifiable confidence in their own correctness and righteousness.


For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)
Page 21 of 64 1 2 19 20 21 22 23 63 64

Moderated by  Derid 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5