|
Post by Umbrafire on Aug 3, 2005 11:54:59 GMT -5
the US consists of many different cultures and religions, whereas another country consisting of of a singular religion would base their laws off of that religion.
|
|
|
Post by Azan on Aug 6, 2005 0:29:28 GMT -5
Let me just say that with gun control springfield wouldnt have been able to double kill the zombies that were trying to take over the town (simpsons episode)
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on Aug 6, 2005 0:49:02 GMT -5
you mean with gun control? (gun control meaning guns are harder to get)
|
|
|
Post by Azan on Aug 6, 2005 10:03:15 GMT -5
Erm, yeah, thanks for pointing that out
*goes and modifies post
|
|
|
Post by chica on Aug 10, 2005 17:33:17 GMT -5
lol I liked that episode but like many of the other simpsons episodes IT'S NOT REAL LIFE. when we have guns in real life people are killed adn so are animals, the little innocent animals that have done nothing but lived.
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on Aug 10, 2005 20:10:14 GMT -5
Guns can also protect people and they make hunting a lot easier.
|
|
|
Post by chica on Aug 11, 2005 10:52:03 GMT -5
yes but we eat cows adn chickens and do we really need the ducks and deer and rabbits to survive? they have their own predators out there we don't need to be adding to their list.
|
|
|
Post by Azan on Aug 11, 2005 11:19:01 GMT -5
They dont have many predators anymore, humans have ruined the balance so now without humans deer and rabits will overpopulate and starve. (and many people like the taste of those meats
|
|
|
Post by chica on Aug 11, 2005 12:36:50 GMT -5
well if it is to eat adn stay healthy I agree it's just I don't like the idea of hunting being a "sport". adn we have messed it up so much I guess that we do need to control the population but when we do that should mean that we also respect them and not jus throw their dead bodies away or hang their heads on our walls.
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on Aug 11, 2005 13:10:43 GMT -5
Well if the animals are already dead, does it really matter that much what we do with them?
|
|
|
Post by GamerMan on Aug 11, 2005 22:51:35 GMT -5
well deer will continue to have no preditors as long as we keep their populations down every year.
and would a wolf respect the deer, no he would eat till he is stuffed, then leave the carcass. I say humans should have to show no more respect/restraint in our killings than any other animal does (but that does mean dont hunt to extintion just for pelts).
|
|
|
Post by chica on Aug 12, 2005 16:54:29 GMT -5
well the wolf ate it to live but that is it's nature. hanging a head on a wall is not our nature! we have more control than that fox does and even andrew agrees that humans are more supperior because we have the mind to do so, so why not use that mind to a good use and not just leave the body but use all of it or dispose of it in a HUMANE way.
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on Aug 12, 2005 21:57:05 GMT -5
Well your definition of humane may be different from others, also they might not agree that they should treat animals that they kill with respect or whatever.
Anyway, I would like to steer clear of the whole animal hunting part of this debate for now. May I remind you all that this is gun control, and hunting may be material for another debate, because there are other ways to limit hunting without controlling guns.
|
|
|
Post by chica on Aug 28, 2005 20:55:42 GMT -5
okay then what about the dads who have guns in their homes and then their 7 year old gets ahold of one and shoots another kid? if we had more gun control the kid wouldn't get the gun
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on Aug 28, 2005 22:04:20 GMT -5
Or people could have the safety on and keep the gun unloaded. How about that, hmm?
|
|