|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On November 10 2017 02:24 ahswtini wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2017 02:21 Broetchenholer wrote: I am convinced jowelsgrry is actively trying to troll as hard as possible. I can see no other explanation for someone trying soo hard to be polite, while being as condescending as humanly possible and picking the statements that are the most infuriating for the opposition.
If you are not trying to troll, know that your style of arguing is not received (by me) to be civil and polite, but trollish. i find your and Velr's posts equally as infuriating
Fair enough, the difference is, that my position is the correct one and his is not. And i am not trying to upset you, i am trying to make arguments. And while i don't like your position on the matter as well, i am not calling you a troll because i feel you try to make arguments as well.
|
Aww... Now the fun got tempbanned and I had a PM were he told me that i'm nice guy and most of you others aren't for reasons i don't understand :D.
@ashwtini: I also find your posts very "special", redefining an AR15 as a sports-rifle (or hunting, doesn't matter) when it never was designed as one is just dishonest.
|
Calling an AR-15 a sporting or hunting rifle is like calling a naval destroyer a fishing boat.
|
The AR-15 fires smaller rounds than many hunting rifles. The problem with the rifle is that is supports +30 round clips and is designed like a combat rifle. It is a gun designed to dump ammunition and be reloaded quickly, rather than precision shooting.
|
It isn't even good for that stuff. Every hunter or sports-shooter i know in Switzerland isn't using his army weapon for it.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On November 10 2017 02:21 Broetchenholer wrote: I am convinced jowelsgrry is actively trying to troll as hard as possible. I can see no other explanation for someone trying soo hard to be polite, while being as condescending as humanly possible and picking the statements that are the most infuriating for the opposition.
If you are not trying to troll, know that your style of arguing is not received (by me) to be civil and polite, but trollish. No offense, but with me being very new to the site and not knowing who you are, your opinion to me matters very little, especially when it seems you are trying to weaken my persuasion in a gun-debate thread where you would probably hope for me to be banned or my voice to be silenced! The truth is I am very new to the site, having bumped a 10-year old thread, and having had two other users and an admin both agree that overall I seem like a decent guy.
My motive is persuasion and I'm just naturally a very persuasive guy! I have converted several Bernie supporters into Trump voters and I hope to use the same tactics to make people understand my views on the gun debate, which I will let "cool off" for the time being and let you or anyone else who wishes to do "virtue signaling" against me by calling me a troll or other ad hominem attacks have at it. Enjoy dominating this thread for a day or two while I sit back, unaffectedly, and smile in amusement.
Instead, for me, I want to interact on other parts of the TL.net website so I can build up some cred as a enthused broodwar fanboy rather than just some nameless, unfamiliar guy who can make liberals, progressives, and left-leaning moderates re-think their principles and allow them to integrate some of my viewpoints into their belief system. So with that said, I'll let others have the last word!
However, I do always read and respond to PM's... ;-)
|
In that case, you should know that "argument by video" is frowned upon on this site. The reason is rather simple. It takes 5 seconds to post a video, but it takes 30 minutes to watch that video. If you are not willing to invest the time to actually type out your argument in your own words, you are most likely going to be ignored, because you can not expect others to put in the time to understand (and/or guess) what your point is based on a random video.
Furthermore, data is usually required when making bold claims. This runs into a bit of a problem lately in the politics thread, as people don't agree on what constitutes good sources. A bold claim without any sources is even weaker than a bold claim with bad sources.
|
I hve no problem with you using your persuasion in any thread on this forum, feel free to persuade anyone here. I am just giving you my impression on how you are are perceived by someone who doesn't agree with you and if you want to present your opinions to someone that ticks as i do you should consider changing your style of posting. Not that this would help me because it's so much easier to dismiss the other side if you perceive them as a condescending smug guy that plays nice.
|
I mean I've gone hunting with my old AK47 several times, law in my state says something to the effect of you can hunt witha semi automatic weapon which cannot have more than 5 bullets + 1 in chamber at any time though.
Saying weapons that weren't really designed for hunting is stupid too i think. Every time I have gone hunting since i was 19? I believe I've went with a Mosin Nagant(ww2 rifle) which was still made for hunting, albeit a very different species heh. Granted this is still a long rifle/bolt action and hunting ammunition(expanding bullets rather than just FMJ) are made for it but the same principal applies, it was never meant to be used for hunting anything outside of people during war, but several people use them.
AK/AR I can see as being guns you probably shouldn't go hunting with but its still perfectly legal and even though they probably arent the best weapons to do it with you can still down any kind of game using them, which you could do with pistols too impractical but still possible of course.
In the beginning I'd wager no gun was designed for hunting in the first place, 99% of the weapons used then and today were made for one purpose, killing other people(war obviously not just mass shooting etc). Today not as much as sporting(hunting) rifles are made just for this, and while not practical to go on a shooting spree with is entirely possible at any rate.
As I've said before there should be a stricter more in depth background check done for people buying guns, felons afaik arent allowed to buy them, same with dishonorably discharged service members. But regardless of the laws we put into place if someone wants a gun they will get one same as anything else for that matter
|
what's more effective for hunting for a person with "equal" training -- bow and arrow or handgun?
|
On November 10 2017 15:54 IgnE wrote: what's more effective for hunting for a person with "equal" training -- bow and arrow or handgun? I mean realistically outside of mercy killing a deer you've shot the legs off or gutshot I don't see anyone going hunting with a handgun period, so bow definitely. Most people I know actually prefer bow season to muzzleloader/rifle season and will hunt with a bow during the last period of open season also
|
Sure, it's possible, it's just not needed. In Germany you have to take a really long course to get your hunting license and then there are rules to hunt to make sure you don't needlessly torture the animal. It doesn't need to be as unregulated as it is in the US.
|
On November 10 2017 15:54 IgnE wrote: what's more effective for hunting for a person with "equal" training -- bow and arrow or handgun? Having grown up surrounded by folks who hunt regularly, many say that bowhunting is both more challenging and more rewarding.
|
On November 10 2017 20:28 Broetchenholer wrote: Sure, it's possible, it's just not needed. In Germany you have to take a really long course to get your hunting license and then there are rules to hunt to make sure you don't needlessly torture the animal. It doesn't need to be as unregulated as it is in the US. Yeah, Austria too.
US people talking about hunting is really meh. Assault rifles and co shouldnt really not considered hunting weapons.
e: It really sucks that there is no real solution to the mass weapon problem in the US. Most people i know from there are pretty alright
|
Well the funny part is that hunting is significantly more regulated than the guns that are used, which is part of why any pro-gun mention of the sport doesn't really make sense. Most US states have rigorous licensing regimes, complicated season schedules, and pretty thorough kill process rules. Waste or an off-season kill leads to high fines and even jail in some cases.
|
On November 10 2017 04:51 jowelsgrry wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2017 02:21 Broetchenholer wrote: I am convinced jowelsgrry is actively trying to troll as hard as possible. I can see no other explanation for someone trying soo hard to be polite, while being as condescending as humanly possible and picking the statements that are the most infuriating for the opposition.
If you are not trying to troll, know that your style of arguing is not received (by me) to be civil and polite, but trollish. No offense, but with me being very new to the site and not knowing who you are, your opinion to me matters very little, especially when it seems you are trying to weaken my persuasion in a gun-debate thread where you would probably hope for me to be banned or my voice to be silenced! The truth is I am very new to the site, having bumped a 10-year old thread, and having had two other users and an admin both agree that overall I seem like a decent guy. My motive is persuasion and I'm just naturally a very persuasive guy! I have converted several Bernie supporters into Trump voters and I hope to use the same tactics to make people understand my views on the gun debate, which I will let "cool off" for the time being and let you or anyone else who wishes to do "virtue signaling" against me by calling me a troll or other ad hominem attacks have at it. Enjoy dominating this thread for a day or two while I sit back, unaffectedly, and smile in amusement. Instead, for me, I want to interact on other parts of the TL.net website so I can build up some cred as a enthused broodwar fanboy rather than just some nameless, unfamiliar guy who can make liberals, progressives, and left-leaning moderates re-think their principles and allow them to integrate some of my viewpoints into their belief system. So with that said, I'll let others have the last word!However, I do always read and respond to PM's... ;-) Good luck. And probably less videos.
|
On November 10 2017 15:54 IgnE wrote: what's more effective for hunting for a person with "equal" training -- bow and arrow or handgun? As someone who knows people who do both and haveing done handgun I can pretty much say for certin that handgun is much much easier and effective would be a judgement call on what exactly you're hunting. Certinly the meat does't spoil around the gunshot wound but there is much more likelyhood of not putting your taret down with an arrow. A turkey or pheasant would probably go down easier with an arrow but I wouldn't go hunting a pig or deer like something that can threaten me with a bow.
Feral pig hunting might be becoming much more popular with how they're spreading in america.
On November 10 2017 20:40 farvacola wrote: Well the funny part is that hunting is significantly more regulated than the guns that are used, which is part of why any pro-gun mention of the sport doesn't really make sense. Most US states have rigorous licensing regimes, complicated season schedules, and pretty thorough kill process rules. Waste or an off-season kill leads to high fines and even jail in some cases. I mean not really but the kind of guns you're looking for serious hunting with arn't ar-15's they're more WW1 or midwar era long rifles. Shotguns for others but you're not looking for new guns or anything pone to spree killing if thats you're argument.
|
Well
I read all 10 last page my head hurts
Here what I think about whty do us ppl carry guns. American ppl feel fear. Everytime everywhere.just Always. They are always scared that something may happen This is mainly because we educated them like that. & because this is business ofc So they are prepared for everything including buying guns for absolute no reason. "Just in case" > in case of what ? ww3 ? Invasion? x)
Same shit with religion. But religion does not use fear but thy use guiltyness. (off topic )
|
On November 14 2017 01:00 VelJa wrote: Well
I read all 10 last page my head hurts
Here what I think about whty do us ppl carry guns. American ppl feel fear. Everytime everywhere.just Always. They are always scared that something may happen This is mainly because we educated them like that. & because this is business ofc So they are prepared for everything including buying guns for absolute no reason. "Just in case" > in case of what ? ww3 ? Invasion? x)
Same shit with religion. But religion does not use fear but thy use guiltyness. (off topic ) I think you may have misunderstood what was said on the last 10 pages here
|
Regardless, his paragraph started by 'Here what I think'. It doesn't have to be in agreement with the last 10 pages.
|
|
|
|