Total posts: 4,140
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Firstly, the guns labeled assault weapons by California are civilian weapons designed for hunting, sporting, and self-defense, not mass killings.No hunter has ever needed 30 round mags in a semi-auto for hunting. If you need that much firepower then you are out to kill humans.
Firstly, the size of the magazine has very little to do with the type of gun. I can easily put a 30 round mag in a wooden Ruger Mini 14, which has never been classified as an assault weapon, and I can easily put a 5 round mag in an AR-15.
Secondly, hunting isn't the only use of a firearm. A 30 round mag can be very useful for sporting or self-defense against multiple assailants.
Thirdly, your subjective opinion that such guns are designed to kill humans because of the most common magazine sizes used in those guns has nothing to do with the objective fact that they are designed for civilians.
I would be very much in favor of gun control on handguns too.The point isn't to ban guns. The point, from my point of view anyway, is to ban, or heavily restrict, guns that are designed to kill humans.
What do you mean by "kill humans"? No, that is neither rhetorical nor a mockery. I'm dead serious. If one counts justified self-defense as "killing humans", then every gun on the face of the planet is designed for "killing humans". However, I think we can agree there is nothing wrong with self-defense. If you mean by "kill humans" that the weapons were designed specifically for the military and/or law enforcement, then it is an objective fact that most or all of the guns banned by the California assault weapons ban were not designed for "killing humans."
A handgun for example has no use other than killing people. Very few people need to own that.Any weapon that is capable of unloading 30 rounds in rapid succession is designed to kill humans. No one needs to own those.
Again, self-defense and sporting are also legitimate uses of firearms. Handguns are excellently suited for self-defense. There are a lot of people - one might even say nearly everyone, though some obviously more than others - who can use that. Also, what do you mean by "need"? Strictly speaking, no one "needs" anything beyond food, water, and shelter. Speaking more generally, there are a lot of people who need handguns and 30 round mags. For instance, a single mother in a high-crime neighborhood - or, for that matter, anyone in a high-crime neighborhood - would find such weapons very useful. Finally, what do you mean by rapid succession? The semiautomatic weapons that the law bans can only fire one shot per trigger pull.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
That's a good idea, but we don't know if we have one. Supa claimed BP, so it looks less likely. It would still be nice if we do have one, though.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
My bad. I didn't realize until after I'd posted that you wanted to see WP's reaction rather than clarify the mechanics.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
I'm not, but I don't have to be. I've played in drafter's games before. His roles are exactly what they say in his list, without variation. It's his method of avoiding any confusion about what roles do.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Zaradi
That's what it says it drafter's role list, so yes, he would die.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Did you talk to Water before revealing that? If not, you definitely should have.
Created:
Posted in:
Well, at the very least, WP and GP are almost certainly town. I can't see them pulling a stunt like this as mafia. It would be especially insane given that there's a recruiter, which the mafia couldn't fake.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
This doesn't even make any sense. Also, what are you doing FOS'ing me? All I did was point out a couple of apparent typos and the risks of outing your partner.Why don't you help out skumteam some more then with hypotheticals while you're pretending to skumhunt.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Come at me skum.I gotta say you got some ******* buffalo balls to go after the masons.
I'm not going after masons. I'm pointing out the inherent risks of blurting out your partner.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Nah, it helps POE.
And gets you and your partner NK'ed, leading to the death of the mason recruiter.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
translate Supa's garbage
Typical - except for one thing: Supa's not the mod.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Yes, I forgot about that. Are you sure you meant "miller"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Argh! Isn't it a bad idea to say who your mason buddy is?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Interesting. What were you originally?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Speedrace
I second that question. We must have a protective role around, since there was no NK.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
I'll get back to you tonight when I'm at a computer.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Yes, and it's because I think that the evidence shows that guns save more lives than they kill due to their widespread use in self-defense. Also, the evidence suggests that gun control and gun bans don't save lives. Instead, they just lead to a decrease in gun deaths accompanied by an increase in deaths from other weapons such as knives. This is why London, after banning guns failed to reduce crime, started instituting knife control.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Firstly, the guns labeled assault weapons by California are civilian weapons designed for hunting, sporting, and self-defense, not mass killings. Secondly, handguns are responsible for about 20 or 25 times as many deaths as all rifles put together. Thirdly, the reason I was referring to is that many pro-gun people believe that the end goal of gun control advocacy is a ban on all guns.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
You're right. clearly that ban doesn't go anywhere near far enough.
That is one of the biggest reasons pro-gun people oppose gun control.
Created:
Posted in:
Here's an interesting (but obviously biased) video displaying just how useless the Assault Weapons Ban in California is. The guy in the video has two almost identical rifles. They have different grips, buttstocks, and means of attaching the magazine. One is illegal (to buy, anyway. Since this guy bought it before a certain date, it's legal for him to own). One isn't. Ironically, the legal rifle is easier to use and would be slightly more dangerous than the illegal rifle.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Thank you for the same.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I might be able to do that. but I can't be certain I'll have the time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
True. Would this be on a voice chat? If so, then I'm gonna have to say no. If it's on a discord group chat, I could do it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Singularity
I'll start off with a question of enormous importance.
Does pineapple belong on pizza?
Created:
-->
@DebateArt.com
He's right. When I click on the debate challenge, I get the same internal error that he's been getting.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I've done live mafia. I'll pass. It's only fun if you are the mafia or the mod.
Created:
-->
@LordLuke
I don't put my birthday because that would mean there are 1/365.25th the number of people I could be than before you knew my birthday. I'm not SirAnonymous, but it's a lot of information.
Ha!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Singularity
I have a few questions about this.
1. There are a lot of religions in the world. How is it reasonable to come to the conclusion that, based off of one scientific study, all of them are coping mechanisms?
2. Wouldn't it be possible that some of them are coping mechanisms and others aren't?
3. Wouldn't it make just as much sense to say that the religions founded in harsher environments are coping mechanisms, but others might not be?
4. Wouldn't it be possible for one religion to be true and for the others to be coping mechanisms?
5. Suppose that it was objectively and indisputably proven that every religion that has ever existed is a coping mechanism. Isn't it possible for something to be both true and a coping mechanism?
6. There are seven billion people in the world. Most of them follow a religion. Isn't it unreasonable to suppose that all of them have the same motivations for being religions? To clarify, wouldn't it be possible for some people to use a religion as a coping mechanism, but other people could be religious for different reasons?
7. Suppose every single religion is a coping mechanism and every single religious person uses it as such. What does that prove? What actual consequences would that have?
8. Aren't painkillers, therapy, music, many or all leisure activities, and any number of things also coping mechanisms?
9. Suppose there is a true religion. Wouldn't it be reasonable to expect that it would reduce stress, so one would expect a true religion to act as a coping mechanism?
10. Doesn't everyone use coping mechanisms?
I'm just failing to see the point of proving that religion is a coping mechanism, and failing to see how this study can be generalized to all, or even most, religions and religious people. Even if it's true that religion is a cope, I don't see how that in any way invalidates it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Open
Hello. What do you mean by "ascended"? Why should I bow? What do you mean that no one has spoken?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Sounds good. However, doing all that would require not being lazy, so I won't run for office.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Don't worry about it. We know what you mean. It's just that somebody has to give you a hard time about it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
I swear I know to read
Sure, you know to read. But do you know how to read?
All right, I'll stop now.
Created:
-->
@Dynasty
Yes, she was already dead.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Apparently so. Someone had to represent the letter R on this site, it seems.
Created:
-->
@Alec
It doesn't. BrotherDThomas does reference the passage he's talking about. It was one guy who did it to his concubine, who was already dead. The Bible nowhere says that God condoned his actions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
You're really bored? You are doing statistics. That goes without saying.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
That's true. I've told a lot of jokes so bad people didn't even realize they were jokes in my time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
I thought you were serious as well. That was even worse than my bad jokes, and that takes some doing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
You're hitting me at my weakest. I haven't read any books on the crusades.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
I ashamed to say that you're making a historical reference, and I didn't catch it. I might lose my license as a history buff for this.
Created:
-->
@Vader
Yes - that is, they are worthy of being kings conquered by knights.
Created: