We are a discussion forum dedicated to the towns of Accrington, Oswaldtwistle and the surrounding areas, sometimes referred to as Hyndburn! We are a friendly bunch please feel free to browse or read on for more info. You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, photos, play in the community arcade and use our blog section. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please, join our community today!
I simply expressed an Opinion, something I do from time to time, you decided to take offence and have since been on the attack, without once accepting that firearms are primary designed to kill people.
I am bored with this meaningless debate as it is impossible to reason with a person who will not listen to reason. good night.
__________________
"your mind will find a way to be unkind to you somehow. But all we really have is happening to us right now. Happiness is the road"
The break down of the number of aircraft into the categories of "military" and "non-military" is really irrelevant. The fact that aircraft are used as killing machines is a resul of politics, economics, and, maybe, human psychology. But I do think that the two world wars and the Cold War helped accelerate the development of aeronautics and related technologies. Maybe this would have happened anyway as entrepreneurs competed to take economic advantage of heavier than air flight.
I could not agree more Eric, it generally takes wars to advance things, medicine for example as well. But it also advances the weapons we use to kill each other.
__________________
"your mind will find a way to be unkind to you somehow. But all we really have is happening to us right now. Happiness is the road"
Guns are designed to do one thing and one thing only, KILL someone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boeing Guy
Of course I should have known that having a opinion here would lead to attacks about my career
Archery. Fencing. The javelin. The discus. All Olympic sports, all based on weapons designed to kill.
Shooting at a clay pigeon. Shooting at a paper target. Same thing- a harmless sport or hobby( also Olympic).
Unless you object to all of these sports there is no difference between them
EXCEPT one of the instruments used is still in use by the military( and others with ill intent).
Ah, you say, but guns are more efficient at killing-try telling that to the French at Agincourt! Archery had its day.
I can't see where your career has been attacked-you're a civil aircraft pilot,Retlaw was a target shooter- a career and a hobby, both harmless.
Groove can see Mr.Boeings point of view. But there are such things as sports, albeit played by gentlemen who use the gun as a penis extention.
Quote:
Originally Posted by groove
Groove thinks the discussion between B.G and Retlaw is quite childish.
Groove rarely disappoints! Many mens sports/hobbies could be classed as that-how about driving a fast car fast? I don't think being a shooter would have the intended effect on a woman- my wife hated it, most women do. As an extension-not a good idea, painful!
Discussions about guns tend to get emotional, Boeing Guy and Retlaw are simply expressing strong opinions which they're entitled to but once it becomes emotional it can become illogical(as Mr. Spock would say).
“Hydrogen bombs don’t kill people — people kill people. The bomb is for self-protection and it also has a deterrent effect. If somebody knows you have a nuclear weapon in your house, they’re going to think twice about breaking in.”
Art Buchwald (1925-2007)
Actually, I think they might have helped in Norway recently.
The problem is this, firearms were originally designed to make killing more efficient, now we have taken them and used them for sports, much like other weapons, I would rather watch athletics than archery, javelin etc.
The problem I have with firearms is this: we now live in a society that glamourises firearms, gansta rap, movies, you tube videos of people shooting.
I am not bringing emotions into this, I have no reason to do so.
Simply put, people will kill each other, no matter what we do, but the advent of guns makes it a whole lot easier to do so, as I said earlier 60% of the Worlds Homicides are committed by Firearms, source United Nations
__________________
"your mind will find a way to be unkind to you somehow. But all we really have is happening to us right now. Happiness is the road"
“Hydrogen bombs don’t kill people — people kill people. The bomb is for self-protection and it also has a deterrent effect. If somebody knows you have a nuclear weapon in your house, they’re going to think twice about breaking in.”
Art Buchwald (1925-2007)
Thats actually a reasonable conclusion. Without the threat of Mutually Assured Destruction there would almost certainly have been a Third World War with millions more killed by guns!
It seemed to Groove that as soon as Mr.Boeing expressed a negative view about guns, Mr.Retlaw instantly started speaking negatively about aircraft.....Groove did indeed find the discussion a tad irrational.
Apparently I need to....''get a grip you prat'
I will not lower myself to this persons standards, rather sad really.
I concur, whats your problem, someone shows a video clip that has left myself & probably others astounded & you've to rant on about guns killing people, well thanks for the fasinating fact I didn't know thats what guns did! So what, the guy in the video isn't killing anyone with his gun, why didn't you just accept the video for what it was?