3 Pittsburgh Police Officers Murdered

[Husar]

Link.

Deserves it's own topic though, pretty sad, especially since I don't really see any good reason for it, the police weren't even out to get him, he called them himself because he thought the government was out to get him?! I mean it's fine if you think the new world order is coming to get you but in that case you should not call the new world order and make them come to you, that's just nuts...

Can someone please explain to me why some people think guns are the worst problem ever in a society and must start questioning whether or not we should have the right to own something because the media likes to play only negative eye catching stories.

Perhaps, if you can explain why you should have the right to own something that has the primary purpose of killing people?
Don't say because it's in the constitution, had I made that constitution, it might not be in there.

EDIT: If the police officers had been chopped to death would you be asking why anyone should own knives?

How many police officers are chopped to death and how many are shot to death?
Let's just say there's a reason the military doesn't use only knives even though they are considerably cheaper.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Far more crime is committed with computers than firearms. What right does anyone have to an internet connection? And obviously only the government needs compilers.

Perhaps, if you can explain why you should have the right to own something that has the primary purpose of killing people?

The purpose of firearms is to accelerate projectiles. The far, far, far majority in the US are not used for killing. Are they being misused? (Perhaps that's a good reason to confiscate them from anyone outside of the government.)

[a completely inoffensive name]

Perhaps, if you can explain why you should have the right to own something that has the primary purpose of killing people?
Don't say because it's in the constitution, had I made that constitution, it might not be in there.

Can you explain why you feel that safety is more important then someone else's freedom?

[Husar]

Can you explain why you feel that safety is more important then someone else's freedom?

Yes, because if i die for my freedom I don't exactly have much from that freedom, except if i believe that only death will make me truly free but in that case I can just kill myself right away instead of fighting for my freedom. What good is freedom when you're dead?
Despite that please tell me why firearms are necessary to be free? And just because it's so much fun, do you feel any less free as long as you're not allowed to have nuclear warheads?

Come on, their main purpose is to create a chain reaction of nuclear fission and release energy, everyone needs energy to be truly free!

Next up someone tells me an AK-47 is a hunting rifle.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Yes, because if i die for my freedom I don't exactly have much from that freedom, except if i believe that only death will make me truly free but in that case I can just kill myself right away instead of fighting for my freedom. What good is freedom when you're dead?
Despite that please tell me why firearms are necessary to be free? And just because it's so much fun, do you feel any less free as long as you're not allowed to have nuclear warheads?

Come on, their main purpose is to create a chain reaction of nuclear fission and release energy, everyone needs energy to be truly free!

Next up someone tells me an AK-47 is a hunting rifle.

If you die for your freedom then you are living with a purpose. What good is life without freedom? The idea of "safe" is a pipe dream in the first place. You will never, ever, be safe. There is always at any moment in your life a chance of dieing. So why would you reduce the quality of your life just for a preconceived notion that somehow it will make you safe when you will never be safe anyway?

[Ironside]

If you die for your freedom then you are living with a purpose. What good is life without freedom? The idea of "safe" is a pipe dream in the first place. You will never, ever, be safe. There is always at any moment in your life a chance of dieing. So why would you reduce the quality of your life just for a preconceived notion that somehow it will make you safe when you will never be safe anyway?

You mean by carrying around a consealed firearm all the time?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

To increase the quality of life would be to never bother about the issue in the first place.

[Husar]

If you die for your freedom then you are living with a purpose. What good is life without freedom?

Except I'm not living anymore after I died for my freedom.
How can I live with a purpose after I died for my freedom?
Despite that I thought I live to work for a company and make someone else rich, complete freedom is a pipe dream as well, if it's not I challenge you to spread your wings and come over flying to prove it.

The idea of "safe" is a pipe dream in the first place. You will never, ever, be safe. There is always at any moment in your life a chance of dieing. So why would you reduce the quality of your life just for a preconceived notion that somehow it will make you safe when you will never be safe anyway?

And how does perceived "freedom" improve the quality of your life? There is no absolute freedom either, this is all about degrees.
And I certainly don't feel any less free here just because we cannot own guns, in fact, when no guns are involved one can feel more relaxed and thus even freer because there are less objects of physical violence around. I can ring the neighbor's doorbell to ask for some salt without having to fear that I might look down a barrel or something like that, certainly for me that means I have more freedom while in the US those NIMBY guys might shoot me just for accidentally touching their property.

I still don't see how owning guns is essential for being free.

The freedom to own an automobile works the same way. Heck, you're far more likely to die in an auto accident than be shot with an AK-47. We accept the thousands of deaths in auto accidents for... a little convenience. Certainly a far smaller price should be payed for a far greater value - liberty.

I don't like automobiles a lot and enjoy the freedom of taking the train or subway, that argument falls on infertile ground in my ears. As a free human I also have feet to move around, cars are also not really a symbol of freedom as people become dependant on them for their jobs etc. That's like saying a heroin addict has a free mind.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Except I'm not living anymore after I died for my freedom.
How can I live with a purpose after I died for my freedom?
Despite that I thought I live to work for a company and make someone else rich, complete freedom is a pipe dream as well, if it's not I challenge you to spread your wings and come over flying to prove it.

You're not living in the first place if you're not free.

And how does perceived "freedom" improve the quality of your life? There is no absolute freedom either, this is all about degrees.
And I certainly don't feel any less free here just because we cannot own guns, in fact, when no guns are involved one can feel more relaxed and thus even freer because there are less objects of physical violence around. I can ring the neighbor's doorbell to ask for some salt without having to fear that I might look down a barrel or something like that, certainly for me that means I have more freedom while in the US those NIMBY guys might shoot me just for accidentally touching their property.

I still don't see how owning guns is essential for being free.

I know some guys who go around with guns on their hips at their apartment most of the time. But I don't feel the slightest hesitation to knock on their door and ask to burrow a pan of some sort. It's pretty obvious you're just making this up.

As for being essential to being free-
Guns are a tool that provide a person with greater force. This means that such an empowered person can't be forced around by an armed government like an unarmed person can be. Why do you think so many authoritarian governments banned guns?

I don't like automobiles a lot and enjoy the freedom of taking the train or subway, that argument falls on infertile ground in my ears. As a free human I also have feet to move around, cars are also not really a symbol of freedom as people become dependant on them for their jobs etc. That's like saying a heroin addict has a free mind.

That, sir, is quite a stretch. "Freedom" of using a form of transportation that had its own schedule and doesn't wait for you? People become dependent on cars but not, say, subways? It must be because all the European countries are so small (relatively).

CR

[rory_20_uk]

You're not living in the first place if you're not free.
As for being essential to being free
Guns are a tool that provide a person with greater force. This means that such an empowered person can't be forced around by an armed government like an unarmed person can be. Why do you think so many authoritarian governments banned guns?

You're not free. There are constraints on everything you do. Many are so ingrained you're not even aware of them any more.

Odd the number of people in America who are shot as "they had a gun" (or phone / sandwich - depending on skin colour). I never hear that groups of armed men have any more latitude with the law than anyone else. There is no evidence that guns help curtail the state.

[Husar]

You're not living in the first place if you're not free.

So basically if you own a dog, then that dog is not a living being?
What you say there sounds just like some overblown heroic propaganda to me and has absolutely no relation to reality.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Yes, because if i die for my freedom I don't exactly have much from that freedom, except if i believe that only death will make me truly free but in that case I can just kill myself right away instead of fighting for my freedom. What good is freedom when you're dead?
Despite that please tell me why firearms are necessary to be free? And just because it's so much fun, do you feel any less free as long as you're not allowed to have nuclear warheads?

Come on, their main purpose is to create a chain reaction of nuclear fission and release energy, everyone needs energy to be truly free!

Next up someone tells me an AK-47 is a hunting rifle.

The freedom to own an automobile works the same way. Heck, you're far more likely to die in an auto accident than be shot with an AK-47. We accept the thousands of deaths in auto accidents for... a little convenience. Certainly a far smaller price should be payed for a far greater value - liberty.