Anybody watch 60 Minutes tonight?

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"Tim O" <timo56@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b63s21p3ch2frch2lik7ghjh86i40896i9@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 02:47:01 GMT, "Robin" <robinandtami@nospam.com>
> wrote:
>

>
> There is an issue with trying the statistical method of firearm
> protection is the number of unreported cases. It only counts the times
> where the weapon was fired.

Yep, and even then the numbers are staggering (in favor of gun ownership).

> Here is the scenario I think is more common. A thug approaches an
> armed person, the person shows the weapon, and the thug heads the
> other way at ludicrous speed. I *do* know of two firsthand cases of
> this. The police aren't called because they're not going to do
> anything anyway, except possibly hassle the person smart enough to
> ensure their own safety. That is the whole reason for carrying a
> concealed weapon -the police don't get there till its over.
>
> Good luck to all of you hoping for the best.
>
>
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"Paul Heslop" <paul.heslop@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:422E14A6.8C942937@blueyonder.co.uk...
> Tim O wrote:
ludicrous speed.
>
> but what about thug approaches subject WITH gun and either uses gun to
> rob or subject pulls own gun and gets shot?
> --


This happens, obviously, but what is the point here? Tim was talking about
incidents that by their nature go unreported.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"Paul Heslop" <paul.heslop@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:422E64A2.A9BCE618@blueyonder.co.uk...


these things you mention are all things which kill accidentally as
they aren't designed for it, whereas a gun's main purpose, even if
used for target practice, is to kill. It was designed with that
purpose only in mind, unlike your bucket of paint, summer heat or
family dog (unless the dog was an attack dog in which case it is a man
made lethal weapon)
/


It doesn't matter what they were designed for; bicycles, pools, and buckets
cause more accidental deaths for children than firearms do. And, these
items are much less important than guns are. Guns save lives, bikes and
pools are just for recreation. (OK, I guess they get you in shape, too.)
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 14:32:54 -0500, Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net>
wrote:


>It's a bit hard for someone to be "accidently shot" by a properly stored
>and secured firearm.

What is a "properly stored and secured" firearm? One that is in a
safe, locked up so that the kids can't get to it? And you can't either
in the case you really needed it fast to protect yourself in your own
house?

That's the dilemma I see with firearms at home. If you keep it
available so that you it is actually useful in a life-threatening
situation, then your kids could easily get it too.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 10:04:27 -0500, Tim O <timo56@hotmail.com> wrote:

>What you're saying is meaningless because it's not realistic.
>Guns aren't going away. If registered firearms are taken from everyone
>that has them, what guns does that leave on the street? The ones that
>are already there, being used by gangs. Prepare yourself for the
>reality, not dream of a utopian world which is never going to exist.

The utopia already exists. Outside America. Funnily enough, there are
lots of big cities outside America where it is very rare for street
punks to have guns (either). Go figure.

Oh yeah, and then there are the "good citizens with guns" who just
happen to have a quick temper. Very nice of them also having a (legal)
gun in their possession. The kind of people who pull it out if someone
overtakes them on the street. Or who pull it out during a heated
family quarrel. Or who pull it out if their neighbour's dog pisses on
their lawn one too many times.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"riku" <riku@invalid.none.com> wrote in message
news:d7qu2156omnu0cphl859qe05jsvhj1lal6@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 10:04:27 -0500, Tim O <timo56@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> Oh yeah, and then there are the "good citizens with guns" who just
> happen to have a quick temper. Very nice of them also having a (legal)
> gun in their possession. The kind of people who pull it out if someone
> overtakes them on the street. Or who pull it out during a heated
> family quarrel. Or who pull it out if their neighbour's dog pisses on
> their lawn one too many times.
>

OK, everyone is talking about hypotheticals and anecdotal evidence. Let's
all do our homework (get actual data) and meet back here in a week.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 21:22:52 GMT, riku <riku@invalid.none.com> wrote:

>The utopia already exists. Outside America. Funnily enough, there are
>lots of big cities outside America where it is very rare for street
>punks to have guns (either). Go figure.
>
>Oh yeah, and then there are the "good citizens with guns" who just
>happen to have a quick temper. Very nice of them also having a (legal)
>gun in their possession. The kind of people who pull it out if someone
>overtakes them on the street. Or who pull it out during a heated
>family quarrel. Or who pull it out if their neighbour's dog pisses on
>their lawn one too many times.

Yea, it's so great out there that you worry about whats going on here?
You're full of wacko stories from like minded Utopians, too.

Tim
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

In article <422E0B3C.56E8068C@blueyonder.co.uk>,
Paul Heslop <paul.heslop@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>I guess in the states where things were so lawless for so long it's
>hard to give up this thing which was seen so essential it was written
>into the constitution.

It was not written into the constitution so that people could protect
themselves against criminals. It was written into the constitution so
that people could protect themselves against the government.

Of course, this distinction may or may not be relevant 🙂

The text in question (from house.gov) is:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
infringed."

Cheers
Bent D
--
Bent Dalager - bcd@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd
powered by emacs
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 13:26:05 -0500, massivegrooves
<massivegrooves@massivegrooves.net> wrote:

>Thing is though that even if guns were to be eliminated people are still
>going to find a way to harm, threaten, and kill each other. If not guns

The thing is, it is much easier and faster to kill people, and
_several_ people, with a gun than with e.g. a knife. You can outrun a
knife; you can't outrun a bullet. And it is much easier to knock down
someone with a knife than someone with a gun, especially with several
people.

>some form or another. You eliminate one and another is going to spring
>up or an existing item will take over as the chief threat.

That hasn't happened outside US.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"riku" <riku@invalid.none.com> wrote in message
news:3tqu21p9i58gs4slffah63cmmh2icvk85v@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 13:26:05 -0500, massivegrooves
> <massivegrooves@massivegrooves.net> wrote:
>
>>Thing is though that even if guns were to be eliminated people are still
>>going to find a way to harm, threaten, and kill each other. If not guns
>
> The thing is, it is much easier and faster to kill people, and
> _several_ people, with a gun than with e.g. a knife. You can outrun a
> knife; you can't outrun a bullet. And it is much easier to knock down
> someone with a knife than someone with a gun, especially with several
> people.
>

Have you ever tried to outrun a knife someone has thrown at you?

>>some form or another. You eliminate one and another is going to spring
>>up or an existing item will take over as the chief threat.
>
> That hasn't happened outside US.
>
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

riku wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 13:26:05 -0500, massivegrooves
> <massivegrooves@massivegrooves.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Thing is though that even if guns were to be eliminated people are still
>>going to find a way to harm, threaten, and kill each other. If not guns
>
>
> The thing is, it is much easier and faster to kill people, and
> _several_ people, with a gun than with e.g. a knife. You can outrun a
> knife; you can't outrun a bullet. And it is much easier to knock down
> someone with a knife than someone with a gun, especially with several
> people.

All true, but I don't think there is truly any civilized place out there
that has COMPLETELY eliminated guns within their country. People there
still have or can get them if they REALLY want them (be it smuggled in,
etc..) Until you have the scenario of NO possible way of getting and
using a gun in a given place then this other scenario (another weapon
taking its place/etc..) is not going to show up. Guns are the easiest,
and also the most cowardly form of weapons and are almost ALWAYS going
to be the preferred choice. As long as they exist and there is a will
and a way other forms of weaponry are not going to take its place,
unless someone comes up with something better or as easy and cheap to
make/use. You can go back historically and see the move from one weapon
form to the next as THE preferred weapon...from sticks and stones, to
sharpened stones and sticks, and so on and so on. It is never ending and
constantly evolving.


>
>>some form or another. You eliminate one and another is going to spring
>>up or an existing item will take over as the chief threat.
>
>
> That hasn't happened outside US.
>
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 09:34:42 -0600, "Kroagnon" <kroagnon@kroagnon.com>
wrote:

>Trying to argue with a Euro about guns is like trying to have a conversation
>with a cement block with a better chance of the cement block actually
>understanding. Today's Euros blindly believe anything their socialist
>government tells them because they don't know any better.

Funny thing is that Europeans feel exactly the same way about
Americans. Americans have probably forgotten already that the reason
to attack Iraq was to find WMD. Which never were found. Just one
example.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

In article <d0npka$3gj$1@orkan.itea.ntnu.no>, bcd@pvv.ntnu.no says...

>Of course, this distinction may or may not be relevant 🙂
>
>The text in question (from house.gov) is:
>
>"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free
>State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
>infringed."

Problem is that, these days, those that cite a fear of government tyranny
are those that really don't have anything to fear, and those that want
more gun control do.


-Tim
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

In article <3tqu21p9i58gs4slffah63cmmh2icvk85v@4ax.com>,
riku@invalid.none.com says...

>>some form or another. You eliminate one and another is going to spring
>>up or an existing item will take over as the chief threat.
>
>That hasn't happened outside US.

Not true. Violence, gun and otherwise, is quite prevalent and powerful in
many areas affected by colonialism. The US is just the high-profile 1st
world example.


-Tim
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

In article <1110279613.912287.172900@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
vercingetorix@hotmail.com says...
>
>
>> Mean_Chlorine wrote:
>> Thusly "seems to me" <asdlf@alkjfd.com> Spake Unto All:
>> >
>> >Yeah, the thousands of people who saved their own lives this year
>here in
>> >the U.S. with firearms didn't "need" them.
>>
>> Of course they did. As your gun culture means your villains are armed
>> with firearms.
>
>Don't pretend to understand the situation here in America. You don't
>have 50 million Africans to contend with. In some areas, it's like
>Johannesburg, South Africa. Detroit and D.C. come to mind. Our lives
>are in danger because of it.

Ah yes, the whole, "I need guns to shoot the black people," argument. Of
course, with his friends, he doesn't use the terms "Africans" and "black
people."


-Tim
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

In article <1110217193.525105.297340@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
gilbertviolette@sbcglobal.net says...
>
>
>I have to take issue with the fellow who remarked how you don't have to
>kill cops in GTA - the mission that the illustrated can only be
>accomplished by shooting up the police station. I agree that they made
>the game look like Cop Killer instead of GTA, but there are quite a few
>spots where you have to shoot at the cops to get through the level. The
>"free the imprisoned guy in the police station" is one of the more
>memorable ones.

Actually, I'd say using a tanker truck to blow up the police HQ in GTA1
would be about the most memorable.


-Tim
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

Sean Scott wrote:

> Have you ever tried to outrun a knife someone has thrown at you?
>

Made me laugh anyway.
--
Paul (That’s what keeps me down)
------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

In this discussion we've had people talk about banning violent games
because they influence kids. We've had people talk about banning guns
because kids get into them and kill people. (accidently or on purpose)

Seems to me the real solution is to ban the making and posession of
kids. They're loud, expensive, too stupid to tell the difference
between games and reality, and not much benefit to their parents. (at
least in western society)

Sure, people say THEIR kids are well behaved and would never hurt
anyone, but you hear the same thing from pit bull owners. Then the dog
bites someone and they try to blame the victim or anyone else. (just
like parents do)

And imagine the holidays you could take with that 150 grand it costs
to raise a kid. (not to mention the extra sleep and lack of ulcers)

And if you just have to have the pitter patter of little feet around
the house, get a cat. You can house train them in a tenth of the time
and while they may claw your drapes, they'll never crash your car on a
joyride.

So ban kids for a safer quieter world. :)


Remove nospam_ to reply by email

Jeff H........


Lies, All lies. Don't believe a word Difool/sayNO says.
He fears the truth!
 
Archived from groups: alt.games.video.xbox (More info?)

"Paul Heslop"
SNIP
>but for others meat is murder. I agree I was
>being sweeping in my
>condemnation, but this is a rather emotive
>subject

Vegetarian is Piegan for "Bad Hunter". Yes your
teeth are optimized for vegetation...but not
exclusively. Your GI tract is one meant for a
predator. So you tell me...herbivore or predator.
Hint your seacum doesn't work anymore and can
become infected to the point it kills you...anyway
WHO CARES? Starve to death because you wont eat
the way the body is designed to eat. i.e. every
and anything that doesn't eat you first.

Yes I'm a PETA member. People Eating Tasty
Animals...we've only been around 6million years so
we're a rather new organization.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"Jeff Holinski" <Holinski@shaw.ca> wrote in
message
news:emcv21di3bvnjm4fskooj7pngo34uhl94t@4ax.com...
> In this discussion we've had people talk about
> banning violent games
> because they influence kids. We've had people
> talk about banning guns
> because kids get into them and kill people.
> (accidently or on purpose)
>


HUZZAH! HUZZAH!
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

Jeff Holinski wrote:
>
> In this discussion we've had people talk about banning violent games
> because they influence kids. We've had people talk about banning guns
> because kids get into them and kill people. (accidently or on purpose)
>
> Seems to me the real solution is to ban the making and posession of
> kids. They're loud, expensive, too stupid to tell the difference
> between games and reality, and not much benefit to their parents. (at
> least in western society)
>
> Sure, people say THEIR kids are well behaved and would never hurt
> anyone, but you hear the same thing from pit bull owners. Then the dog
> bites someone and they try to blame the victim or anyone else. (just
> like parents do)
>
> And imagine the holidays you could take with that 150 grand it costs
> to raise a kid. (not to mention the extra sleep and lack of ulcers)
>
> And if you just have to have the pitter patter of little feet around
> the house, get a cat. You can house train them in a tenth of the time
> and while they may claw your drapes, they'll never crash your car on a
> joyride.
>
> So ban kids for a safer quieter world. :)
>
Yay!

--
Paul (That’s what keeps me down)
------------------------------------------------------
Stop and Look
http://www.geocities.com/dreamst8me/
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 17:55:06 -0500, "Sean Scott" <Its@secret> wrote:

>
>"riku" <riku@invalid.none.com> wrote in message
>news:3tqu21p9i58gs4slffah63cmmh2icvk85v@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 13:26:05 -0500, massivegrooves
>> <massivegrooves@massivegrooves.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Thing is though that even if guns were to be eliminated people are still
>>>going to find a way to harm, threaten, and kill each other. If not guns
>>
>> The thing is, it is much easier and faster to kill people, and
>> _several_ people, with a gun than with e.g. a knife. You can outrun a
>> knife; you can't outrun a bullet. And it is much easier to knock down
>> someone with a knife than someone with a gun, especially with several
>> people.
>>
>
>Have you ever tried to outrun a knife someone has thrown at you?

By a ninja you mean?

1. Very few people know how to properly throw a knife, let alone own
throwing knives.

2. A throwing knife does much less damage than a bullet. The shock
effect that rips the surrounding tissue to a jelly is missing, for
example.

3. It is very hard anyway to hit anything which is moving with a
throwing knife.

4. You can't throw several throwing knives effectively in a matter of
few seconds.

5. Depending on how much clothes you have, a throwing knife can be
pretty much ineffective.

Really, if someone entered a bank or their ex-workplace with throwing
knives, most probably he would be laughed and kicked out.

Not to mention, IMHO it could be made illegal to carry throwing knives
on street, just like carrying a gun would be.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

"riku"
SNIP

> Not to mention, IMHO it could be made illegal to
> carry throwing knives
> on street, just like carrying a gun would be.

You do realize you are on the list to be the first
against the wall when the revolution comes. People
with your attitude end up as food for the rest of
us...poor pacifist.

--
Keith Schiffner
History does not record anywhere at any time a
religion that has any rational basis. Religion is
a crutch for people not strong enough to stand up
to the unknown without help. But, like dandruff,
most people do have a religion and spend time and
money on it and seem to derive considerable
pleasure from fiddling with it.
Robert Heinlein
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 23:24:07 GMT, try@again.spammers (The Enigmatic
One) wrote:

>In article <3tqu21p9i58gs4slffah63cmmh2icvk85v@4ax.com>,
>riku@invalid.none.com says...
>
>>>some form or another. You eliminate one and another is going to spring
>>>up or an existing item will take over as the chief threat.
>>
>>That hasn't happened outside US.
>
>Not true. Violence, gun and otherwise, is quite prevalent and powerful in
>many areas affected by colonialism. The US is just the high-profile 1st
>world example.

I should have been more clear in my words. My meaning was, outside US
there are many many places where banning guns hasn't made people arm
themselves and kill each others just as much with hunting knives, bows
etc.

I just love thinking the image of someone walking on a street with a
hunting bow. I think the police would stop him promptly and ask what
the hell he thinks he is doing.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,alt.games.video.xbox,alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 (More info?)

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 18:45:49 -0500, Tim O <timo56@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 21:22:52 GMT, riku <riku@invalid.none.com> wrote:
>
>>The utopia already exists. Outside America. Funnily enough, there are
>>lots of big cities outside America where it is very rare for street
>>punks to have guns (either). Go figure.
>>
>>Oh yeah, and then there are the "good citizens with guns" who just
>>happen to have a quick temper. Very nice of them also having a (legal)
>>gun in their possession. The kind of people who pull it out if someone
>>overtakes them on the street. Or who pull it out during a heated
>>family quarrel. Or who pull it out if their neighbour's dog pisses on
>>their lawn one too many times.
>
>Yea, it's so great out there that you worry about whats going on here?

No, I am merely pointing out a hole in your logic. Keep shooting
yourselves, I don't care.

Ps. I owned a license to a handgun (.357 Dan&Wesson), but I decided to
get rid of it when I got kids. Wow, one would think I should have kept
it in order to "protect my family"? Yet, I got rid of it to protect my
family. How come I am not afraid a grazed lunatic armed with a gun
will attack me or my family at my home?