You cant educate the anti-gun brigade, no matter how much you try

[spector969]

LOL This is fucking PRICELESS, please, PLEASE, don't talk about people lacking intelligence. Seriously, you're a grown man who hasn't even mastered primary school level literacy or numeracy, you play with little plastic porn dollies. You say you get 200-300 messages per day on youtube, yet your channel does not garner ANYTHING like that amount of views per day, and the majority of viewers don't comment. Sorry but you're an embarrassment to yourself.

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@spector969 When you write the English language you do not spell priceless and anything with all capital letters, oh i think i have more qualifications than you will ever have in your hippy tree hugging life, also if you fucking listened to my words you will hear me commenting on my original youtube channel you fucking turd

[spector969]

@TheGhostOfPainsey Hilarious, in the same comment you criticise my use of capitalized words (which is widely accepted as a way of accentuating a word or phrase) then you yourself go on to use a lower-case "i" when referring to yourself which even the thickest of people know is incorrect. LOL, mate this is too easy, I know 7 year olds who could outsmart you with EASE. lol, I honestly am starting to pity you man.

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@spector969 Well of course you know 7 year olds, they are probably your friends.

[spector969]

@TheGhostOfPainsey As opposed to them being...my enemies? LOL, give up man, you're making a fool of yourself and there's no point getting your girlfriend "AnalAllen" involved, aren't you able to stand up on your own two feet, or do you need Allen to hold and caress your flaccid pecker while you go to the potty? Am I too much for you to combat alone? Is that why you need guns? Not enough intellect to work out your problems in a non-violent manner? Makes sense...

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@spector969 Oh here we go i was waiting for you to try and say that owning firearms was because a gun owner cant fight without a firearm, listen to me asshole if you ever want to come down to Cardiff and face me before you come on down make sure you phone an ambulance for yourself first ok asshole, oh yes your one of those pussies that would rather try and talk it over with some criminal than defend yourself responsibly you tit.

[spector969]

@TheGhostOfPainsey You do realise that offering out random people from the internet makes you look incredibly thick, right? The saddest part is that you're not some 13 year old boy, you're pretty much 40 years old, I'm actually going to leave it there man as I'm honestly starting to think you may have aspergers or some other learning disability. If that's the case I apologise, I would never knowingly enter into an argument with someone who is mentally handicapped.

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@spector969 i really do think you have a drug addiction or maybe just brain damaged from when you was born in some back alley

[ColonelAllan]

@spector969 Jesus Christ. Your bitchin' essays are not discrediting the video at all. Get a life you pointless cunt.

[ColonelAllan]

@spector969 Why don't you address some of the points in the video? Instead of bitching like a bitch? It's established that you do not like Mr. Painsey. Change the CD sweetheart.

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@ColonelAllan He wont address the points as hes a fucking idiot

[ColonelAllan]

@TheGhostOfPainsey LOL you get em on here. Could be Lucy Cope herself.

[paranorma1palace]

@ thespacialone

but then you get people like brevik who make up for it in 30 minutes :/ who legally owned his guns, funnily enough im sure statistically that people who go on these kind of rampages are very often legal owners

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@paranorma1palace if he didnt have guns he would have used other means, a cpl of years ago a man in china stole a bus and killed 39 people, and you can not even own a gun in china but he managed to kill 39 people oh and dont say 39 ppl is not as bad as killing 92 people just dont try and play the numbers game with me killing one person is as bad as killed 39 ppl or 92 ppl

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

yeh man ive no doubt if people used vehicles for murder as much as they did guns there would be stringent restrictions on vehicle use, i see today in the mirror a coach driver in uk tried a similar thing coz some schoolkids called him a fat bastard search google news for coach driver, i have to say im glad he didnt have a gun, although in this case whilst behind a wheel i will not deny his instant access to impulsive harm was facilitated by his coach, yet nobody was killed

[ColonelAllan]

@paranorma1palace Something for you to think about, did you know it is legal to carry guns in the UK? It states clearly on my license that I can "possess shotguns, and I can carry a shotgun for the purpose of sale, transport to and from a place where I have permission to shoot it." Or words to that effect. Which basically means I can have one in my car or on my person and they would have to prove I'm not showing it to a potential buyer in order to arrest me. How about that?

[ColonelAllan]

@paranorma1palace In actual fact a friend died and his wife didn't have a license so I got his gun and put it in my cabinet. Sure enough the police went round and asked her the whereabouts of her late husband's gun. They thanked me for my safe thinking and safe custody of the gun actually.

If you "would have shot someone by now" then you're not fit to own a gun since you lack the self control to not kill anyone. Which is disturbing. I presume you do have a criminal record?

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace The point is you can have all the restrictions on inanimate objects you want in this world and those who see to kill enmasse are still going to find a way to do it. (And the ones that used the homemade or more creative ways have proven to kill more than those who used firearms.)

[CRTV1982]

@TheGhostOfPainsey Got one better, in 95' a nutcase blew up the Murray building in OKC with a bomb made of widely available materials and killed over 160 people. I guess by the gun control advocate's point of view we should ban those materials too.

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace Not exactly. And moreover, in none of theses cases occur outside of places marked "gun free zones". In Norway there is no legal carry for civillians and the police had to get permission from the chief of police to draw their firearms from the arms room. I thought police reponses were slow in the US but Norway takes the cake.

[ColonelAllan]

"i hope you get through your life without ever having to use it." I used it fifty times today :D Along with about 60 other people.

[paranorma1palace]

@ColonelAllan

really what were u doing ?

[quedorf]

To be honest, you are doing exactly what you accuse the anti gun people of doing. You accept the 2 to 3 million defensive uses of firearms as fact (and actually use the upper end of the claim in your video), and I must assume you got this from the Kleck telephone survey. This survey has been refuted many times by others, and are almost definitely exaggerated. I am assuming you checked all the opposing views for this study?

[CRTV1982]

@quedorf How so? Kleck's survey uses over 5000 cases which is enough to be considered scientific. Top that off the survey only takes into account actual DGUs from the sruveyed to estimate DGUs nationwide. Brana's Study uses less than 700 (1000 is required to be classed as scientific). Moreover, I suspect Brana's study is nothing more than another Kellerman Study and just another non-scientific hatchet job posing as a study.

[quedorf]

@CRTV1982 Sample size is not all that is taken into account in making a reliable and scientific study. Double blinding is almost necessary, plus more. A studies design is equally if not more important than sample size. Telephone surveys are notoriously unreliable for many reasons. For an example of a critique, "SURVEY RESEARCH AND SELF-DEFENSE GUN USE: AN EXPLANATION OF EXTREME OVERESTIMATES". I also only criticize this video, as this study was passed as a reliable source

[CRTV1982]

@quedorf And you are right, there are other factors than just sample size. Methodology also is a big role. These are things I also know the Kellerman Study and I suspect Brana's study neglect. Brana's study used cases only in Philadelphia. Not the rest of the country. The larger the same size will also aid in assuring you are getting a more a accurate overall picture and not just what happens in one slither of the population.

[quedorf]

@CRTV1982 I agree that sample size is important, but because the Kellerman, and Brana studies are flawed, this does not in any way make the Kleck study any more reliable. They are just flawed in different ways. I will have to read up on the Kellerman study as although I have heard of it, I am not all that familiar with it.

[CRTV1982]

@quedorf Flawed studies do not make other studies more reliable, that is true. However, Kleck's survey does show that there is infact a strong possibility that firearms are used defensively far more than what is reported in the news. Though with Kellerman's study, it goes beyond flawed as data was misrepresented in the conclusion.

[CRTV1982]

@quedorf As for Kleck's survey, there were a total of 14 studies conducted that gave DGU estimates. All but one ranged from 700K annually to 3.26 million annually. Kleck did his survey after those studies released their data and with a bit better methodology. NCVS did not yield as many DGUs for numerous reasons. If you like I can do a video explaining that.  I read the paper and while the methodology may lead to overestimation, it could lead to underestimation as well.

[nov284]

So a decade's worth of statistsics showing strong relationships between CCW and crime reduction (upon which the VPC's own Black and Nagin could only say caused now harm. Honestly, the gun control's own statisticians forced to concede CCW didn't HURT crime rates), along with decreasing crime rates as more and more Americans arm themselves means nothing? Even though, the UK's crime rate has surpassed America's on a per capita basis? Come on, wake up. Banning dangerous things doesn't save you.

[nov284]

The anti gun argument is pretty thoroughly debunked as a crime reducing policy. For a decade after banning guns the UK saw a continuous and drastic rise in gun crime that didn't stop until after they changed the way they do crime statistics. Strangely enough the number of gunshot wounds treated in hospitals continued to climb even after the gun crime started to taper off. Almost as if the people no longer trusted to police enough to report crimes to them.

[paranorma1palace]

@nov284

"The anti gun argument is pretty thoroughly debunked as a crime reducing policy"

no its not

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace Actually it has been. You see for a policy to be considered effective it actually has to show results. In the case of gun control it would have to show reduced crime, which it has shown the OPPOSITE. Case point, after DC enacted the Handgun Ban in 76' handgun crime went up even as the national average went down.

[paranorma1palace]

@CRTV1982

you have no gun control in the usa lol, no logical person can decide there will be more shootings if theres less guns lol, and if nobody has a gun..guess what..theres zero shootings, you guys have gone too far down the rabbit hole to come back, you country is saturated with firearms, ours isnt ..just yet, id like to keep it that way, hell even our regular police dont carry handguns, its a measure how civillised your society is imho, its pretty fucked if u all need a gun

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace Excuse me? We have plenty of firearm laws in the US. As for shootings, I beg to differ. Mexico has prohibitive gun laws and all that has accomplished is leaving the people defenseless against criminals who intend to cause them harm. As for your comment "it is pretty fucked if u all need a gun", ironically the places where everyone carries and has a gun are the places where crime does not happen. I think it is even more fucked that you think you have to ban them.

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace And no, I would not consider it a measure of being "civillised", I would consider it a measure of being enslaved  Free men bear arms, slaves do not.

[JackBlackBlues1]

Britain needs guns....yeah thats going to provide a balanced view...not. 200 BNP numbskulls a day who think (oxymoron there lol)....that you provide ''good information'' one we only have your word and two if people really believe the bullshit that you spout is good information the country is in a worse state than I thought. The American numbskull proved that he is another fascist but offered nothing else. As for the rest of your video its just BS and a manipulation of info.

[nov284]

@JackBlackBlues1 Way to cherry pick statistics. How do you explain a general decrease in all types of crime nationwide as Americans own more firearms per capita than at any point in our history? Or the fact that the states with the least restrictive firearms laws are leading the downward trend? If you removed 9 of the 5,330 some counties in the US, our crime rates would be lower than the UK. All of those counties rank as the strictest gun law areas in America.

[CRTV1982]

@JackBlackBlues1 "200 BNP numbskulls a day who think (oxymoron there lol)...."

Yes, it is an oxymoron as it seems "BNP" and "numbskulls" are quite the opposite.

An oxymoron is two contradictory terms paired together.

You really should learn the definitions of the words you use before you say them because you just again exposed yourself for being an utter dumbass.

[JackBlackBlues1]

@CRTV1982 I got the definition correct the first time Nazi....BNP and thinking definitely is an axymoron so who's the dumbass. BNP also equals wolves in sheeps clothing and want the gun laws changed for their own agenda....simple.

[CRTV1982]

@JackBlackBlues1 Still calling me a Nazi while you have more in common with them I see. I see that facts do not matter to you, anyway. Do I have to continue to spell out how you are more like the nazis than anyone you accuse of this again? I am pro-limited government, not exactly a value held by nazis. Labour and the UAF are pro-big government, right up Nazi-Lane.

[JackBlackBlues1]

Approximately 60 percent of all murder victims in the United States in 1989 (about 12,000 people) were killed with firearms. According to estimates, firearm attacks injured another 70,000 victims, some of whom were left permanently disabled In 1985 (the latest year for which data are available), the cost of shootings-either by others, through self-inflicted wounds, or in accidents-was estimated to be more than $14 billion nationwide for medical care, long-term disability, and premature death

[CRTV1982]

@JackBlackBlues1 Ah, so you are saying approx. 8000 people were murdered in the US in 1989 by people wielding something other than a firearm? You just destroyed your own case.

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

i have never said for everyone to carry a firearm, only the law abiding people should be allowed and also if you have no mental problems

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

makes revenge too easy n sometimes its hard to ell if sum1 has a mental problem till they go kill sum1, also its another "choice" you have when sum1 pisses u off, the amount of road rage i get, if i had a gun, id be doing 20 yrs m8

[paranorma1palace]

i would not feel safer if i had a gun, if every fucker had a gun in liverpool i can guarantee a rise in the number of shootings, just like if the u.s had never legailsed firearms, they could pretty much expect a reduction in firearm related crime, its not hard to figure out, most illegal guns were owned by somebody legally at some time and for whatever reason fell into the wrong hands, it would be a shame if we became americanised in this way

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace What do you mean "legalised firearms", firearms have always been legal here with some exceptions since 34' nationwide and a few jurisdictions made so restrictions prior to that. The NFA of 34' was a "response" to the increased violence brought on by Prohibition (another instance of people abusing government for their own stupid ends), did it help? No, only the repeal of Prohibtion cut the gangs funds enough.

[paranorma1palace]

@CRTV1982

you don't know what i mean by legal firearms ? when you own one legally, as opposed to illegally ? strange it seems pretty self explanatory

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace With the way you wrote it you made it sound like firearms were illegal in the US and we all the sudden legalised them. Anyway, my question still stands, why is it that you think you need the government to make the choice on whether or not you yourself own a firearm?

[paranorma1palace]

@CRTV1982

we aint like the usa, we don't really hunt that much, only in rural areas, and gun ownership is legal for that, you can own a gun legally in the uk, am thinking a criminal record and you cant own one here or in the u.s, a lot of illegal guns used in crime etc are obtained from stealing guns from legitimate owners, if u wanna rob me n have a gun il give u my £, if i have a gun..were having a gunfight, id rather lose a few $ than shoot someone..im british lol

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@paranorma1palace but gun ownership in the states is nothing to do with hunting

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

hunting isnt everything to do with gun ownership in the states, but a big part of it, here its probably the vast majority..farmers etc.

lets not forget what the u.s is founded on, youve seen enough westerns surely..the wild west, thats why they have guns lol, the uk never had that, when the uk was a new frontier guns werent invented

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace How do you know the person robbing you is not going to kill you afterwards to eliminate the witness? That has happened in the past. How do you know that they are not out there to kill you for the hell of it? That has also happened in the past. As for having a criminal record, it is illegal for you to be in possession of a firearm in the US if you are a felon, adjudicated mentally defective, have a restraining order, a fugitive, under indictment for a felony, drug user,

[paranorma1palace]

@CRTV1982

you dont know

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace So why on earth put yourself at the mercy of one of those violent thugs and pray that all that he/she/them want is just your money?  You may make the choice to take that additional risk by not carrying a firearm and that is your choice. Where the line is crossed is when you either directly tried to force someone out of that choice yourself or demand the government make the choice for everyone else.

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace convicted of a Domestic Violence misdemeanor, not a US Citizen (with certain exceptions), dishonorably discharged from the US Armed Services, or if you fall under a prohibited category in your State of Residence. And guess what, criminals get guns in the UK too. As for them stealing firearms, they get their firearms from other means too, importing them from south of the border, illicit markets, etc... Hell you can make your own firearm if you know what you are doing.

[paranorma1palace]

@CRTV1982

majority of people who get enraged easily blow it off quickly, i doubt they would be able to manufacture themselves a gun in this cooling off period

[ColonelAllan]

@paranorma1palace You said robbing. My stance is that crimes of this nature would happen a lot less frequently and have a chance of being stopped. Which is observed and does happen. Enraged and reach for the gun to blow that bastard away - Again this is fiction. Conceal carry states have not seen a rise in "fit of rage" shootings. This is called the OK Corral theory. It just doesn't happen.

[CRTV1982]

@ColonelAllan There were those predictions everytime a State enacted RTC laws and in every case none of those OK Corral ever happened and the only acknowledgement the media gave after they were wrong on the doom and gloom scenarios never materialized was "nothing happened". No admissions that they were wrong about the "RTC Apocalypse" they were predicting, we never heard "Tonight on News 9 Right to Carry actually made us safer". This is why people who know need to speak up so the truth is heard.

[ColonelAllan]

@paranorma1palace There are a lot of legal gun owners in the uk, me included and a few members of my family. If the law changed so that we can own handguns (once again) we would not all just decide to start shooting each other in fits of rage.

Non-owners only see guns in films so I can understand the fictional gun fighting scenarios.

[paranorma1palace]

@ColonelAllan

not many legal gun owners in the uk compared to the states, if it were more socially acceptable and easier to get a gun/carry a gun i guarantee more people would be shot, its not rocket science dood, a gun has the ability for the user to kill instantly at distance, multiple times, i just don't believe most people can control themselves enough to justify owning one, i hope you get through your life without ever having to use it, which if you live in the uk you probably will

[ColonelAllan]

@paranorma1palace "i guarantee more people would be shot, its not rocket science dood, a gun has the ability for the user to kill instantly at distance, multiple times, i just don't believe most people can control themselves enough to justify owning one."

It doesn't happen. People with a lack of self control and violent tendencies as a result are not allowed to own guns. And rightly so. It should not be easy to get a gun.

[Fuunken]

@paranorma1palace Get rid of your elitist attitude first off. Crime shot up in the UK after the gun ban, stabbings shot up a bunch too, crime increased. In the UK you will probably get through your entire life without using a gun, because you don't have one. Meaning when someone breaks into your house, your life won't be so long after getting stabbed or tortured to death. It apparently is rocket science since you don't understand the concept.

[paranorma1palace]

@Fuunken

guns have always been illegal in the uk what fucking gun ban ?

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@paranorma1palace well maybe the machine gun ban of 1920, the handgun ban in 1997, the possible shot gun ban after the cumbrian massacre that could have been stopped but wasnt and also a possible crossbow registration plans the government has

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

so you have a problem with registering a crossbow ? or think theres any need to own a machine gun legitimately in the uk? wtf are you sas:p

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@paranorma1palace yes i have a problem with registering a crossbow as registration can be used by the authorities to take it away, and the legitimate reson for owning a machine gun or any other firearms is because i value the ideology of defending your life seriously but people like yourselves would rather for people not to defend themselves due to being brainwashed by the uk anti gun ownership media and fascist uk governments.

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

i'm not brainwashed silly, i'm just ideological

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@paranorma1palace you are brainwashed realise it

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

im guessing its hard to grow up in a society with institutions like the education system to not be a bit brainwashed about something, im an atheist so their feeble attempts at mind control failed there, i suggest to you very strongly that i am a very single minded individual,

politicians are like people who want to own guns..if you want to be one, you probably shouldn't be allowed to

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@paranorma1palace no your not single minded, you believe the nonsense the media tell you

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

a lot of what the media tells you is true, we must all choose what to believe, i don't happen to believe that guns symbolize a civilized society..and am perfectly entitled to that viewpoint

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@paranorma1palace an armed society is a polite society

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

yeh man, especially in the poor black areas of the usa, you know the places rappers come from.. the places where gun crime is at its highest they are all so polite :) lifes like a fking marie poppins movie for them, i wish the english were so polite lol



[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@paranorma1palace and were do the criminals get their guns? certainly not from Bobs big gun mart

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@paranorma1palace as a whole Americans are more polite than the English, thats why most of my youtube subscriber base is from America as i can understand their ideology as it makes sense and i can debate rational with them which is more difficult than with most English people as ignorance is higher with english people

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

their ideology is borne from the wild west, america is founded on the gun, cant say ive found americans to be "more polite" than us tbh, politeness is only a small part of being civilised, i put it to you that poverty leads to crime leads to americans neding guns to defend themselves against hoods, i think they should tackle their poverty instead of just arming every cunt, then nobody would need a gun..now that's civilised

[ColonelAllan]

@paranorma1palace none of those "poor black" areas have registered guns. They get them thrown in with their drugs or whatever. The problem is the poor black area. Not the guns. We don't need poor black areas do we? And they're dangerous. Lets ban poor black areas.

[ColonelAllan]

@paranorma1palace We don't need rappers. How do you justify the need for more rappers?

[paranorma1palace]

@ColonelAllan

i don't to be honest, but that's a totally different subject, music does reflect culture, as does the need for guns, its a shame

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@paranorma1palace are you blaming rap music for crime?

[ColonelAllan]

@TheGhostOfPainsey It certainly glamourises crime and gang culture. And we don't "need" it. Why he doesn't want to ban it is beyond me.

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

i wouldnt blame all rap music for all crime, proabably could be successfully argued that rap music may give the wrong message to a particular demographic and has some link to some crime yeh, im probably blaming poverty and racism for rap music tbh

[ColonelAllan]

@paranorma1palace You don't expect people to justify the need for rap music. Since you don't care for it and you acknowledge its potential danger...if say a lunatic might listen to it. Or a young impressionable person decides to emulate it. Yet you don't wish to ban it. You obviously believe rap music has its place in society.

[paranorma1palace]

@ColonelAllan

rap music is a broad description, with several sub types, but i think we know what type of rap music we are talking about, pretty important to establish that, i don't like rap music, but banning it would be like nazi germany banning mendelssohn , i like freedom of speech so i wouldn't ban it, but then again if america wasn't packed with ill educated poverty stricken negros with guns, rap music might not even exist or have evolved

[ColonelAllan]

@paranorma1palace I just don't understand this "why do you need guns? lets ban them they're dangerous." mentality with you. Fear of guns is all I can thing of. I'm sure there's a fear of rap music equivalent who want to ban that through fear of what people "need" to listen to it for. They're a funny lot I imagine.

[paranorma1palace]

@ColonelAllan

you only need a gun when there's a gun problem, ergo no guns no gun problems its pretty basic actually,

g = guns p = shooting problem

g therefore is equal to p, remove g and there is no p, sorry im a programmer so i tend to think of things in a certain way, although g is not equal to all problems

[ColonelAllan]

@paranorma1palace That's very good but it doesn't rationalise your argument my friend. Restricting cars to within the 70mph limit is in a similar vain. Imagine the accidents that would be prevented, be that the case. People who are not criminals/lunatics who enjoy driving should have the right/responsibility to do so though. In my opinion.

[paranorma1palace]

@ColonelAllan

I agree fully, that's why there's shooting ranges and race tracks :)

[ColonelAllan]

@paranorma1palace You're suggesting that guns and cars that do over 70 should only be available at race tracks and shooting ranges? I'm glad you people are not more commonplace. Though you are harmless and I find you slightly amusing.

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@paranorma1palace how do you exactly connect programming to shootings? thats retarded , oh and you say no guns no gun problem.Thats the worse idiotic comment ever, just look at countries that have full gun bans, the criminals have all the guns and the law abiding public dont have guns, so in your way of thinking there should not be even 1 handgun shooting here in the uk but there are murders with people with handguns here in the uk so your comment fails epically, try again you just failed.

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

its the application of logic to a problem, distilling it to very basics, usually mathematical, its not retarded its probably one of the most commonly used ways to realise an idea, frequently used in things like quadratic equations, algebra and statistics, even gravity and the speed of light were worked out on similar principles, i see no reason to not apply it to social statistics or crime

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

"oh and you say no guns no gun problem.Thats the worse idiotic comment ever, just look at countries that have full gun bans, the criminals have all the guns"

that's not no guns then is it

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@paranorma1palace somehow you miss the point, what about we have a discussion on blogtv about this, you seem to be confused. I am on blogtv at the moment under the blogtv user name painsey

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

aww man id love to do a blog tv discussion, some other time maybe i just started drinking me brandy and chatting to the missus, maybe il get lucky :)

really though am not against guns provided they are licensed and used appropriately for sport or hunting, the police are supposed to be the buffer between the public and violent crime, they fail of course, but shootouts in the street am thinking would just not be cricket, i mean im a scouser ffs we already got it

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@paranorma1palace the idea that shoot outs would happen is unfounded, there are millions of firearms owned legally here in the UK and mass shoot outs never happen, where exactly do you get your information from?

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

i look at it this way a violent criminal or someone with a vendetta is just gonna shoot ya in the back or spray ya windows, not fucking chat to ya first, so i dont see a gun as a preventative measure, just a way of assuring your own death if you miss first time, thats if u get a chance

[TheGhostOfPainsey]

@paranorma1palace and how exactly is a criminal who has been to prison going to get a firearms licence? and if a person has a vendetta against some one he can always use his car to run him over cant he or use a kitchen knife and stab him to death, or burn his house down etc etc etc etc. Just because a certain object is not available it doesnt mean he/she cant use another method in getting revenge on some one else.

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

they dont need a licence coz theyre criminals, sum1 who owned one legally got theirs stolen, i mean thats the point you made yourself that crims have guns, they have to come from somewhere they aint all homemade, most were legally owned at some time by someone, which brings me back to my point of no guns = no need for defense against guns, the facts are that some crims have guns, here in scouseland they tend to fire them @ rivals for drug rounds, not for robbing etc

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace Not exactly true. You expect a woman who weighs 110 lbs to successfully defend herself against an attacker that weighs 250 lbs? What about a man who wieghs 175 trying to defend himself against 4 thugs who weigh a total of 600 lbs? What about a 120lbs woman armed with a knife trying to defend herself against a 200lbs thug with a baseball bat? If you said that any of these scenarios were okay and that the defenders did not need a pistol then you really need an IQ test.

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

and yeh they can use another method but its been kinda agreed that a gun is a really easy quick dispassionate way of killing someone, like i said i drive a lot and meet a lot of cunts on the road, and in life in general, i probably would have shot sum1 by now, i have no record of criminality ot mental instability

[paranorma1palace]

@TheGhostOfPainsey

and tbh if you believed what you just said you wouldn't need guns, if you think a knife or a car are just as easy for the job, why want a gun ?

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace For personal protection? Excuse me, but I find it very hard to keep a car inside my house and I find a knife to be a much less effective tool for personal protection than a firearm. Let me ask you this, do you believe a bomb or a firearm better tool to kill more people? Okay, now would you use bomb or a firearm for personal protection? See the difference? Okay now which would you prefer to have to defend yourself with a knife or a firearm? Understand yet?

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace You claim you look at this from the point of a violent criminal. With this being said, as a violent criminal would you be more or less likely to attempt a robbery, rape, car-jacking, burglary, or murder knowing that there is a possibility that either your targeted victim or someone in the vicinity of your targeted victim was armed?

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace I have given you several scenarios where a firearm would be the ONLY viable means for effective self protection and you have continued to spout that same line over and over again. 

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace And the funny thing is that all of those rappers that sing (if you call it that) about how they "capped some n-----" and then turn around and take anti-firearm freedom position. You have also said you would be more likely to shoot someone in a fit of rage. Meanwhile you say that all those who want a firearm should not have one. With these facts I am wondering how you come to that conclusion.

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace And these are the very same places where the firearm restrictions are the highest. So far you or any of the gun control advocates can explain to me how it is that gun control works to stop "gun crime" and "gun deaths" when the highest rates of said incidents occur in places with the highest restrictions while in all the places where you find the "gun nuts" you do not seem to have so much of those problems.

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace No dude, you are pretty brainwashed. If you were just ideological you would not be quoting the gun control advocates with a fury while pretending that your sources are neutrally biased.

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace WTF? So your handgun licensing and registration did not work as a result you banned handguns so tell me this, what crossbow owner in their right mind would think it is a good idea to register crossbows? The ONLY REASON why the gun control/anti-self-defense types want firearms, crossbows, and swords registered is because they know that is the only thing that makes a confiscation from the law abiding possible.

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace Yeah but not to the point of shooting people at random or shooting the person they are enraged at. The majority do not go that far. Look at every single shooting spree out that you can think of. Klebold and Harris, Cho, Brevik, Whitman, the Cumbria shooter, the DC Snipers, etc... all of them planned those shootings out MONTHS in advance. And you are right someone who pops off is not going to have the time to build a firearm prior to cooling off, however, criminals will

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace have all the time in the world to make their own (and some do). I know of a guy in the Phillipines who makes some excellent Sub-Machine Guns in the basement of his home. The point is that gangbangers will still be armed and more emboldened against the law abiding and gang-bangers are the ones doing most of the killing and being killed in the US.

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace As for DGUs, it is clear that you have no clue how they take place. In most cases the criminal flees as they are not looking for a fair fight. As for your thought process of "id rather lose a few $ than shoot someone", that is not everyone else's sentiments. Quite frankly if someone is trying to rob me or some one else and a gun gets defensively drawn on them and they do not run or surrender then they deserve what they get.

[ColonelAllan]

@paranorma1palace You wouldn't have to shoot someone who wants to rob you. Pardon me for butting in here. How would someone rob you if you had a gun? Think about it.

[paranorma1palace]

@ColonelAllan

precisely, they would have to shoot me first

[ColonelAllan]

@paranorma1palace Which is why it doesn't happen. The US states that have carry permits would have seen a rise in mugging related gun deaths if this was the case. With all the muggers pulling illegally held weapons on people for their mobile phones. Pretty fictional idea if you ask me.

[paranorma1palace]

@ColonelAllan

well it was your idea i didnt mention muggings or mobile phones

[CRTV1982]

@paranorma1palace NYC enacted the Sullivan Laws (strict gun legislation) in 1911 did it make NYC any safer? No, infact even with the increases of gun control there seems to be no end to the "gun" violence insight. BTW, I still don't get the term "gun violence", as I have never seen a gun that thought it would be a nifty idea to get out of the drawer, load itself, and head down to the school to off a few students. I have heard of people that thought it was though.