Devon Posted November 3, 2002 Share Posted November 3, 2002 i think that all that is going on today is rediculous. i mean why do people do these kind of things??? but what i was wondering was do you think that the people they caugh were the real snipers? i dont think they are. no reason. just have tyis gut feeling... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Asphyxia Posted November 3, 2002 Share Posted November 3, 2002 [color=darkred]Well...there is a thread on [url=http://www.otakuboards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16574]this subject[/url], on the second page, however... Not many people [i]know[/i] why people do these things...shrinks probably don't either. The only time the government will arrest someone is when they have proof...or when they are desperate. However...the shootings have stopped now, haven't they? [/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom Posted November 3, 2002 Share Posted November 3, 2002 ...Because they are sick sociopathic men with nothign better to do. Simple as that. They are expert marksman playing in a dangerous city for terrorists...maybe it was a game, maybe it was a statement..maybe they were sleeper agents maybe they were power hungry money sucking dumbshit retards who think they can pilfer money through killing unsuspecting victims. All in all at first, i would instantly have said it was not the sniper/(s) ..why? ... the real sniper would never sleep near his gun.. the real sniper would not be caught dead in a suspicous place sleeping..the cars trunk that was aparntly fitted to be shot from had only enough room to shoot..but not see from..thus eliminating the ability to fire from effectively...all in all..i was rather skeptical about it.. now.. i could care less... Yeh...thats what i think.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cloricus Posted November 3, 2002 Share Posted November 3, 2002 And just who's society made them love weapons and taught them how to do this. America stop blaming every problem you have on terrorists and do some thing about your own problems. A good starting one (even tho it would be nearly impossible) would be to get rid of handguns and high-powered rifles. Don't come back with "but our constitution" because I will just say go read it you idiot, it no were says you may carry a gun. What it says is in relation to a militia, which you have no use for these days's any way. Hay and maybe you should be more scared about that other 40 handgun murders that happened in Washington while this was happing? And to conclude, those guy's were damn good shots, you have to admit! -Lord Epssy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Asphyxia Posted November 3, 2002 Share Posted November 3, 2002 [color=darkred]Yes, Cloricus, we realise you intensely dislike America, and yes, we also realise there is some truth to what you're saying. The American Constitution as I know it(which isn't very well) basically says if we have no army, then you can carry guns. (I admit I don't know it very well, so correct me [nicely] if I'm wrong) But America [i]has[/i] an army...[/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Matt Posted November 3, 2002 Share Posted November 3, 2002 [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by cloricus [/i] [B] would be to get rid of handguns and high-powered rifles.[/B][/QUOTE] [color=red][b]If you outlaw guns only the outlaws will have them.[/b][/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enigma Posted November 3, 2002 Share Posted November 3, 2002 Hmm, if we get rid of all our guns, then some one is going to still have one and everyone will be defenseless against it. If we keep all the guns, then we still keep all the problems. Sooo, what they should do is make guns illegal to the public, and only legal for the army and police. It won't do that much I guess, but it's a start by reducing the number of armed people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cloricus Posted November 3, 2002 Share Posted November 3, 2002 Matt if the person you are going to get has no weapon you are less likely to use one as well. If you want proof have a look at most other countries in the world. Lady Asphyxia that isn't word for word but it's good enough, have a read of their constitution one day it's really interesting. -Lord Epssy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent Posted November 3, 2002 Share Posted November 3, 2002 Matt, hell yea! if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have them. The snipers got their gun illeagally. Also, when one person in millions commits a crime like this, is it really the fault of the society. For each one of these bastards, there are millions of gun owners who dont commit crimes and dont go around selling them. I also want to mention that the constitution says you can have a gun no matter what... this is a direct copy of the second amendment from the back of the federalist papers, published by bantam books... "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." take it as you will, it was written with the idea that interpretation would come into play. but for my money, I take it to mean that the people can organize a militia and own arms if they wish. To me, it says that there is one way to ensure our federal gov. doesnt become the true big brother the wackos act like. I mean, the one of the first actions of the nazis was the systimatic dis-armorment of the jewish people. I also want to mention that I believe the first amendment, and all the others are worth nothing if the second is totally disregarded. We cant pick and choose which rules we like, it just doesnt work that way. And in final support, a quote from a bad bumper sticker... "criminals prefer un-armed victims" thats the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cloricus Posted November 3, 2002 Share Posted November 3, 2002 Well it's not a militia, and even tho there will be some you must admit it is defiantly not a well-regulated militia. I have no problem with rifles. I love rifles! The only rifle's I don't like are some of the American and some of the Middle East?s rifles because they are made to look modern and "cool". That's just me tho. I dislike handguns for a few reasons. Hey and it's your problem if you keep getting shot dead. I don't care. -Lord Epssy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kent Posted November 3, 2002 Share Posted November 3, 2002 Yes, I would have to say there should be limits. Like an m-82a barret. the rifle is a 50. caliber that is effective up to and past 2,000 meters. more over, the worst part is that its not even really for use against people as much as tanks and other light armored vehicles. guns like that dont need to be in a wacky militia mans hands. but, if I ever wanted one, I would want one, and if I was to think I could have one... I couldnt rightfully say another person shouldnt have one. As for hand guns, I dont think the problem with them are the legal people owning them, but the illegals on the street. lets worry about enforcing the rules we already have before we try to make new ones we woulnt be able to up hold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Matt Posted November 3, 2002 Share Posted November 3, 2002 [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by cloricus [/i] [B]Matt if the person you are going to get has no weapon you are less likely to use one as well. If you want proof have a look at most other countries in the world.[/B][/QUOTE] [color=red][b]I choose to look at Iraq, Israel, Pakistan, andAfganistan. :rolleyes: Also, if the person you are trying to "get" has no weapon, you would want to use one so they couldn't physically overpower you. If I am gonna mug some guy on the street, whether he has a weapon or not, I'm going to have one.[/b][/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cloricus Posted November 3, 2002 Share Posted November 3, 2002 Lol, you choose to look at " Iraq, Israel, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. " You sad, sad person, have you ever been to those places? Do you know what they are like, their laws on this subject? NO, you are an idiot if you use a crap typical response like that. Example's that would be good to look at would be New Zealand and Australia. As far as I know Israel and Pakistan have better laws and social common sense on the subject, they have some thing called respect for other people. Don't sell out a people who have been around a few thousand years. Oh and if you are going to put down a country, spell it right. -Lord Epssy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted November 3, 2002 Share Posted November 3, 2002 [color=royalblue]It's really simple. If someone tries to mug you with a gun, you have a hell of a lot less chance of getting away than if they have a knife. I always hear this dumbass argument that "people will still use other weapons". Of course they will. But why encourage more deadly weapons to exist? As mentioned, Australia is a great example. We have very tight gun laws...and new sets of laws are going to make them even tighter. And that's a good thing. It's why we have among the lost per-capita violent crime rate on Earth. People don't need to carry guns. If you do, then you have much more serious problems to consider. Anyway, we've already had no less than two threads related to these sniper shootings. I think we need to give the topic a rest for a while. [/color] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts