Weapons, poll

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

Mundial treatys at UN are respected by states and enforced by their own governments in each countries.

Do you want Russia to take over all of Europe?

[The Man]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

Mundial treatys at UN are respected by states and enforced by their own governments in each countries.

So you are simply, evidently deliberately and once again going to ignore the potential need of arms in the enforcement of arms regulations?

Clearly, cheaters and violators (as nation states) aren't having it "enforced by their own governments in each countries". So even leaving out what you did deliberately ignore, your reply is still directly invalidated by what you did quote.

[Gaetan]

Originally Posted by Craig4

Do you want Russia to take over all of Europe?

For what purpose?

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

For what purpose?

Have you not read anything Putin as written or said?

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by Sideroxylon

What is it with the very obvious language affectation?

We have a couple of people on the board who do this; perfect Lord Buckley BBC King's English when making a speech about their pet theory, but then the spelling and formatting go out the window and it's all "You no take candle" affect ridden alien Engrish run through Google translate and back when they are responding to questions or criticism.

[Gaetan]

Originally Posted by Craig4

Have you not read anything Putin as written or said?

I don't listen what the medias say, i listen what they don't say.

[Jack by the hedge]

You don't say!

[llwyd]

I think people should have the right to own guns but that this right should also be quite strictly regulated. Hand guns, hunting guns, various sports guns are fine - any others should largely be banned. Age restrictions, background checks, safe storage and rather strictly regulated permits, also obligatory shooting courses that you prove yourself capable of handling a gun responsibly. Pretty much how things are in Finland at the moment, and we have plenty of guns per capita, mostly hunting guns.

[Crossbow]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

I don't listen what the medias say, i listen what they don't say.

If this is actually the case,

then I am sure that you and the "medias" have some very long and very interesting conversations.

[The Man]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

I don't listen what the medias say, i listen what they don't say.

You can't know what they don't say unless you have listened to everything they have ever said. So your first claim directly refutes your second. As what you may think they haven't said may have been said somewhere at sometime.

Further the question wasn't about what the media says but about what Putin has written or said. So in order to know what Putin has written or said that the media hasn't reported you would again have to have listened to everything the media has said as well as know everything Putin has written or said. Again, the former already directly refuted by you and the latter clearly impossible.

So the question still stands "Have you not read anything Putin as written or said?". Again the question concerns Putin and not "the medias".

If you just wish to simply assert that you just make up whatever crap you want regardless of what anyone anywhere has actually said or written you could just say that. As it has been demonstrably obvious for years.

[The Man]

Originally Posted by llwyd

I think people should have the right to own guns but that this right should also be quite strictly regulated. Hand guns, hunting guns, various sports guns are fine - any others should largely be banned. Age restrictions, background checks, safe storage and rather strictly regulated permits, also obligatory shooting courses that you prove yourself capable of handling a gun responsibly. Pretty much how things are in Finland at the moment, and we have plenty of guns per capita, mostly hunting guns.

Exactly, while regulating weapons or even more stricter regulation of weapons, was not an option in Gaetan's poll. Getting rid of weapons' would still be regulating them. That such regulation would require enforcement, itself potentially requiring weapons to accomplish, still seems to elude him.

[trustbutverify]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

I don't listen what the medias say, i listen what they don't say.

You transpose Kremlin propaganda into mock broken English, then post it here... is what you do.

[Gaetan]

Originally Posted by llwyd

I think people should have the right to own guns but that this right should also be quite strictly regulated. Hand guns, hunting guns, various sports guns are fine - any others should largely be banned. Age restrictions, background checks, safe storage and rather strictly regulated permits, also obligatory shooting courses that you prove yourself capable of handling a gun responsibly. Pretty much how things are in Finland at the moment, and we have plenty of guns per capita, mostly hunting guns.

If there are guns for good people it means they are a lot for bad people, more stupid comments?

[Foster Zygote]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

More stupid comments?

No thanks. We've seen enough.

Again, it's not that people are arguing that weapons are good. People are arguing that your "solution" is simple-minded and impossible. It's like saying, "they should just arrest all the criminals". It's not really a solution because there's no way to make it actually happen.

[Gaetan]

Originally Posted by Foster Zygote

No thanks. We've seen enough.

Again, it's not that people are arguing that weapons are good. People are arguing that your "solution" is simple-minded and impossible. It's like saying, "they should just arrest all the criminals". It's not really a solution because there's no way to make it actually happen.

The goal of a gun is to kill people, you can't produce such poison.

[Little 10 Toes]

Guns don't have goals.

[8enotto]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

If there are guns for good people it means they are a lot for bad people, more stupid comments?

Just one more from me.
If guns didn't exist we would still have clubs and pointy sticks.

We all know there are more than enough of those for absolutely everyone. I even have one with a steel tip on it. The deluxe model!

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

If there are guns for good people it means they are a lot for bad people, more stupid comments?

We await your next post.

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

I don't listen what the medias say, i listen what they don't say.

You don't pay attention to what Putin says or does because you're a liar and a coward. You know that if you read anything he's written about Ukraine you'd have to face the fact that you support genocide. I can't think of too many things that are more cowardly.

[Dutchman]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

If there are guns for good people it means they are a lot for bad people, more stupid comments?

If there are no more guns for good people, there will still be guns for bad people. They will find a way. They are bad people, after all.

[llwyd]

If human nature remains constant and a society would be completely disarmed (actually a totally impossible thing to happen within these constraints), that society would be shortly rearmed in an appalling frenzy of violence, bloodshed and terror.

[Craig4]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...ae9270e7e62148

Another terrific trade. Ukraine got rid of some of their ammunition and a Russian general left Ukraine. Gaetan is right. Ukraine should draw down it's stores of ammunition while Russia draws down it's soldiers and material.

[Gaetan]

Originally Posted by Dutchman

If there are no more guns for good people, there will still be guns for bad people. They will find a way. They are bad people, after all.

Like what?

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

Like what?

Like Putin. If Ukraine didn't have guns, it would be completely occupied by now. And we know that not having guns didn't protect Ukrainians. You admitted that.

[bruto]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

We never know what creasy people have in their mind, if they have arms it makes it easy to kill people.

Speaking of creasy people, though, one might do well to stand in front of a mirror and count how many folds of principle are required to defend Putin.

[erwinl]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

Like what?

Machetes for instance.
An example you’ve ignored before and most likely will again.

[Gaetan]

Originally Posted by erwinl

Machetes for instance.
An example you’ve ignored before and most likely will again.

It is easier to kill a person and more with a machine gun than a knife.

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

It is easier to kill a person and more with a machine gun than a knife.

Yes, a lot of unarmed Ukrainians figured that out right before they died at the hands of Russian invaders.

[Gaetan]

Originally Posted by Craig4

Like Putin. If Ukraine didn't have guns, it would be completely occupied by now. And we know that not having guns didn't protect Ukrainians. You admitted that.

What does Russian is self-defense, US would do the samething.

[bruto]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

It is easier to kill a person and more with a machine gun than a knife.

Faster, probably easier, not necessarily more. If you have the machete and the other people do not, you can kill them all, even if the batches are smaller. A machete is a knife, but it is aa very big knife indeed. This is something the mau mau and the Rwandan assassins figured out, along with the millions of other killers who did their dirty work before the invention of machine guns, which is among the many simple concepts that have eluded you.

It is trivially true that guns kill people from a distance, and make such things easier, just as it is trivially true that weapons of mass destruction make mass destruction easier. And it is a truth shared by many that the world would be better off without such things. It is not true that evil and murder will somehow fade away in their absence, as history so abundantly demonstrates.

And, of course, it is also obviously and demonstrably true that as long as the Russians have arms, those who have fewer, or none at all, will be their victims, another truth to which you appear oblivious.

[erwinl]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

It is easier to kill a person and more with a machine gun than a knife.

Half a million Tutsis dead in three months time, does not sound difficult to me.

Admit. You didn’t read the link, did you?

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

What does Russian is self-defense, US would do the samething.

You support genocide. How is genocide self defense?

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

What does Russian is self-defense

Maybe Britain should invade Ireland in self defence. Maybe France should invade Tunisia in self defence. Maybe Portugal should invade Brazil. Maybe Spain should invade the Philippines. Maybe the US should invade the Philippines.

There's a difference between "we used to rule that land so we're seizing it back again" and "self defence". Countries who have been on the receiving end of that behaviour seem more sensitive about it for some reason.

[bruto]

Originally Posted by Craig4

You support genocide. How is genocide self defense?

It is if you are a true believer in the great replacement theory or similar nonsense and lies. And without explicitly pointing fingers or anything, it is probably also true if one is...ummm....be still o typing fingers...now behave...let us just say as Click and Clack used to, "unencumbered by the thought process."

[Crossbow]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

What does Russian is self-defense, US would do the samething.

You are wrong again.

[Craig4]

This person was found murdered in Bucha with the Russian gangsters fled. Satellite images establish that the body was there when the Russians still controlled the town.

What were the Russians who tied this person's hands and shot him/her in the back of the head defending themselves against?

[Gaetan]

Originally Posted by Craig4

This person was found murdered in Bucha with the Russian gangsters fled. Satellite images establish that the body was there when the Russians still controlled the town.

What were the Russians who tied this person's hands and shot him/her in the back of the head defending themselves against?

It is because of the corruption of your leaders that this appened, you shouldn't vote for Biden, The son of Castro, Johnson, Macron and Zelinski. These hypocrites don't deserve a vote. The son of Castro wants to stop the sale of firearm but he is one of the top of arm seller in the world, he even give them for free.

[trustbutverify]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

What does Russian is self-defense, US would do the samething.

You just can't get anything right, can you?

On a lighter note, could you maybe cut out the fake broken English... it's getting really annoying.

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by Gaetan

It is because of the corruption of your leaders that this appened, you shouldn't vote for Biden, The son of Castro, Johnson, Macron and Zelinski. These hypocrites don't deserve a vote. The son of Castro wants to stop the sale of firearm but he is one of the top of arm seller in the world, he even give them for free.

No, it's because Russia is engaging in genocide in Ukraine and they murdered the two people in that picture. None of those people tied the hands of the person in the foreground of the picture. Russian soldiers did. Then Russians soldiers shot them in the back of the head. No one in the West forced them to murder those people. You support Genocide. You don't get to make moral judgments.

It's good Canada gives weapons to Ukraine. It's important that Ukraine continue to kill Russian soldiers. The only good Russian soldier is a dead Russian soldier.

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by trustbutverify

You just can't get anything right, can you?

On a lighter note, could you maybe cut out the fake broken English... it's getting really annoying.

That would require integrity. Being as he supports genocide, expecting honesty from him is probably optimistic. Once someone is this morally untethered, it's all over.