Political Crossfire Forums

[britboy]

I've got an interesting question (er .. I think).

Let's say a firearm was developed that was of specific use to criminals but could technically be used by law abiding people for defense -- as in - more use to the bad guys than law-abiding people by far.

Now this may be science-fiction for the sake of the thread .. but let's say a wooden gun was invented that evaded metal-detectors, and could be broken down into innocent looking peices (a pen, a cup holder, a watch, I dunno).

Yes I know, James Bond stuff, but stick with me.

Should this weapon be made illegal? It gives no extra functionality to the average law-abiding Joe (but could still defend their territory adequately), but it's very, very useful to the terrorist that wants to shoot up a passenger jet ...

If you had the capability to legally stop the factory from churning out these wooden guns -- would you stop them -- or should they out of principle be purchasable over the counter as otherwise we're eroding the 2nd ..?

(Thrilla this post is not meant as inflammatory and is not really too anti-gun)

[Boneman]

Hmm, a semi interesting and almost realistic thread for once Britboy. I shall have to say that no, it should not be legal, but if gun manafactureres can make it, im sure that some other guy with semi-decent metal (wood) working skills could.

[thundertaker]

Reminds me of that Clint Eastwood film, "In the line of fire" were a gun pretty much like the one you describe was used in an attempted assasination of the president......

[perdidochas]

britboy wrote: I've got an interesting question (er .. I think).

Let's say a firearm was developed that was of specific use to criminals but could technically be used by law abiding people for defense -- as in - more use to the bad guys than law-abiding people by far.

Now this may be science-fiction for the sake of the thread .. but let's say a wooden gun was invented that evaded metal-detectors, and could be broken down into innocent looking peices (a pen, a cup holder, a watch, I dunno).

Yes I know, James Bond stuff, but stick with me.

Should this weapon be made illegal? It gives no extra functionality to the average law-abiding Joe (but could still defend their territory adequately), but it's very, very useful to the terrorist that wants to shoot up a passenger jet ...

If you had the capability to legally stop the factory from churning out these wooden guns -- would you stop them -- or should they out of principle be purchasable over the counter as otherwise we're eroding the 2nd ..?

(Thrilla this post is not meant as inflammatory and is not really too anti-gun)

Guns designed to look like other items are already illegal.

[lilwolf]

Hmmm! I have one problem with the concept. I do not want guns in the hands of bad guys at all.

[britboy]

lilwolf wrote: Hmmm! I have one problem with the concept. I do not want guns in the hands of bad guys at all.
And you're prepared to compromise the types of guns availble to you to help achieve this?

[britboy]

perdidochas wrote: britboy wrote: I've got an interesting question (er .. I think).

Let's say a firearm was developed that was of specific use to criminals but could technically be used by law abiding people for defense -- as in - more use to the bad guys than law-abiding people by far.

Now this may be science-fiction for the sake of the thread .. but let's say a wooden gun was invented that evaded metal-detectors, and could be broken down into innocent looking peices (a pen, a cup holder, a watch, I dunno).

Yes I know, James Bond stuff, but stick with me.

Should this weapon be made illegal? It gives no extra functionality to the average law-abiding Joe (but could still defend their territory adequately), but it's very, very useful to the terrorist that wants to shoot up a passenger jet ...

If you had the capability to legally stop the factory from churning out these wooden guns -- would you stop them -- or should they out of principle be purchasable over the counter as otherwise we're eroding the 2nd ..?

(Thrilla this post is not meant as inflammatory and is not really too anti-gun)

Guns designed to look like other items are already illegal.
No they're not. Oh -- welll -they might be in the US-- I don't know. But they certainly arn't in, for example, South Africa.

What's your point?

[airo]

britboy wrote: perdidochas wrote: britboy wrote: I've got an interesting question (er .. I think).

Let's say a firearm was developed that was of specific use to criminals but could technically be used by law abiding people for defense -- as in - more use to the bad guys than law-abiding people by far.

Now this may be science-fiction for the sake of the thread .. but let's say a wooden gun was invented that evaded metal-detectors, and could be broken down into innocent looking peices (a pen, a cup holder, a watch, I dunno).

Yes I know, James Bond stuff, but stick with me.

Should this weapon be made illegal? It gives no extra functionality to the average law-abiding Joe (but could still defend their territory adequately), but it's very, very useful to the terrorist that wants to shoot up a passenger jet ...

If you had the capability to legally stop the factory from churning out these wooden guns -- would you stop them -- or should they out of principle be purchasable over the counter as otherwise we're eroding the 2nd ..?

(Thrilla this post is not meant as inflammatory and is not really too anti-gun)

Guns designed to look like other items are already illegal.
No they're not. Oh -- welll -they might be in the US-- I don't know. But they certainly arn't in, for example, South Africa.

What's your point?

What do gun laws in South Africa have to do with the price of eggs on Sunday?

If you're willing to go anywhere in the world, you'll always find SOMETHING that's legal.

[britboy]

airo wrote: britboy wrote: perdidochas wrote: britboy wrote: I've got an interesting question (er .. I think).

Let's say a firearm was developed that was of specific use to criminals but could technically be used by law abiding people for defense -- as in - more use to the bad guys than law-abiding people by far.

Now this may be science-fiction for the sake of the thread .. but let's say a wooden gun was invented that evaded metal-detectors, and could be broken down into innocent looking peices (a pen, a cup holder, a watch, I dunno).

Yes I know, James Bond stuff, but stick with me.

Should this weapon be made illegal? It gives no extra functionality to the average law-abiding Joe (but could still defend their territory adequately), but it's very, very useful to the terrorist that wants to shoot up a passenger jet ...

If you had the capability to legally stop the factory from churning out these wooden guns -- would you stop them -- or should they out of principle be purchasable over the counter as otherwise we're eroding the 2nd ..?

(Thrilla this post is not meant as inflammatory and is not really too anti-gun)

Guns designed to look like other items are already illegal.
No they're not. Oh -- welll -they might be in the US-- I don't know. But they certainly arn't in, for example, South Africa.

What's your point?

What do gun laws in South Africa have to do with the price of eggs on Sunday?

If you're willing to go anywhere in the world, you'll always find SOMETHING that's legal.

Precisely. We're agreed. So Airo -- what are your thoughts?

[lilwolf]

britboy wrote: lilwolf wrote: Hmmm! I have one problem with the concept. I do not want guns in the hands of bad guys at all.
And you're prepared to compromise the types of guns availble to you to help achieve this?


No....The reason I say that is because the bad guys are going to get a gun (any gun) if they want it. It is not feasable nor designable

[britboy]

lilwolf wrote: britboy wrote: lilwolf wrote: Hmmm! I have one problem with the concept. I do not want guns in the hands of bad guys at all.
And you're prepared to compromise the types of guns availble to you to help achieve this?


No....The reason I say that is because the bad guys are going to get a gun (any gun) if they want it. It is not feasable nor designable

So are you saying you would let the wooden gun be sold to anyone who can legally currently own a handgun, or you wouldn't?

I still don't know what your opinion is. Would you let the thing legally exist or not?

[perdidochas]

britboy wrote: lilwolf wrote: britboy wrote: lilwolf wrote: Hmmm! I have one problem with the concept. I do not want guns in the hands of bad guys at all.
And you're prepared to compromise the types of guns availble to you to help achieve this?


No....The reason I say that is because the bad guys are going to get a gun (any gun) if they want it. It is not feasable nor designable

So are you saying you would let the wooden gun be sold to anyone who can legally currently own a handgun, or you wouldn't?

I still don't know what your opinion is. Would you let the thing legally exist or not?

Since technically it can't exist, this is a stupid point. If guns could be made out of wood, they would be. They can't. Guns need metal or very dense plastic to contain the pressure involved. Both are easily detectable in x-rays. Bullets set off metal detectors.

[britboy]

perdidochas wrote: britboy wrote: lilwolf wrote: britboy wrote: lilwolf wrote: Hmmm! I have one problem with the concept. I do not want guns in the hands of bad guys at all.
And you're prepared to compromise the types of guns availble to you to help achieve this?


No....The reason I say that is because the bad guys are going to get a gun (any gun) if they want it. It is not feasable nor designable

So are you saying you would let the wooden gun be sold to anyone who can legally currently own a handgun, or you wouldn't?

I still don't know what your opinion is. Would you let the thing legally exist or not?

Since technically it can't exist, this is a stupid point. If guns could be made out of wood, they would be. They can't. Guns need metal or very dense plastic to contain the pressure involved. Both are easily detectable in x-rays. Bullets set off metal detectors.

Cheap and cheerful avoiding of the question.

Can't you say 'I don't know'? In fact so far Airo, Lilwolf and Perd has avoided the question completely.

Sorry - but if you don't know your own gun control policy, honestly, why are you here?

What we need here is 1 pro-gun person to state some kind of reasonable answer -- then everyone else can fall in line behind him ... reply with little pictures of 'thumbs up' etc. Someone ... anyone ... please?

[perdidochas]

britboy wrote: perdidochas wrote: britboy wrote: lilwolf wrote: britboy wrote: lilwolf wrote: Hmmm! I have one problem with the concept. I do not want guns in the hands of bad guys at all.
And you're prepared to compromise the types of guns availble to you to help achieve this?


No....The reason I say that is because the bad guys are going to get a gun (any gun) if they want it. It is not feasable nor designable

So are you saying you would let the wooden gun be sold to anyone who can legally currently own a handgun, or you wouldn't?

I still don't know what your opinion is. Would you let the thing legally exist or not?

Since technically it can't exist, this is a stupid point. If guns could be made out of wood, they would be. They can't. Guns need metal or very dense plastic to contain the pressure involved. Both are easily detectable in x-rays. Bullets set off metal detectors.

Cheap and cheerful avoiding of the question.

Can't you say 'I don't know'? In fact so far Airo, Lilwolf and Perd has avoided the question completely.

Sorry - but if you don't know your own gun control policy, honestly, why are you here?

What we need here is 1 pro-gun person to state some kind of reasonable answer -- then everyone else can fall in line behind him ... reply with little pictures of 'thumbs up' etc. Someone ... anyone ... please?

Stupid questions require stupid answers.

[lilwolf]

britboy wrote: perdidochas wrote: britboy wrote: lilwolf wrote: britboy wrote: lilwolf wrote: Hmmm! I have one problem with the concept. I do not want guns in the hands of bad guys at all.
And you're prepared to compromise the types of guns availble to you to help achieve this?


No....The reason I say that is because the bad guys are going to get a gun (any gun) if they want it. It is not feasable nor designable

So are you saying you would let the wooden gun be sold to anyone who can legally currently own a handgun, or you wouldn't?

I still don't know what your opinion is. Would you let the thing legally exist or not?

Since technically it can't exist, this is a stupid point. If guns could be made out of wood, they would be. They can't. Guns need metal or very dense plastic to contain the pressure involved. Both are easily detectable in x-rays. Bullets set off metal detectors.

Cheap and cheerful avoiding of the question.

Can't you say 'I don't know'? In fact so far Airo, Lilwolf and Perd has avoided the question completely.

Sorry - but if you don't know your own gun control policy, honestly, why are you here?

What we need here is 1 pro-gun person to state some kind of reasonable answer -- then everyone else can fall in line behind him ... reply with little pictures of 'thumbs up' etc. Someone ... anyone ... please?


I avoided nothing... A wooden gun is not feasable and it will not work. Period!!!!! It is mechanically impossible to make a gun from wood that will work with a bullet.... It's called mechanics and engineering.
There are a thousand variables that you would have to come up with and not one is feasable.. If you want to blow your ass up and injure yourself...go ahead, but if (big if) you figured out how,,,, the second you pull the trigger you are done.... it's called explosive reaction.

Next...you are not going to convince any gun owner that a wood gun is safe let alone practical or feasable. :roll:

[britboy]

lilwolf wrote: britboy wrote: perdidochas wrote: britboy wrote: lilwolf wrote: britboy wrote: lilwolf wrote: Hmmm! I have one problem with the concept. I do not want guns in the hands of bad guys at all.
And you're prepared to compromise the types of guns availble to you to help achieve this?


No....The reason I say that is because the bad guys are going to get a gun (any gun) if they want it. It is not feasable nor designable

So are you saying you would let the wooden gun be sold to anyone who can legally currently own a handgun, or you wouldn't?

I still don't know what your opinion is. Would you let the thing legally exist or not?

Since technically it can't exist, this is a stupid point. If guns could be made out of wood, they would be. They can't. Guns need metal or very dense plastic to contain the pressure involved. Both are easily detectable in x-rays. Bullets set off metal detectors.

Cheap and cheerful avoiding of the question.

Can't you say 'I don't know'? In fact so far Airo, Lilwolf and Perd has avoided the question completely.

Sorry - but if you don't know your own gun control policy, honestly, why are you here?

What we need here is 1 pro-gun person to state some kind of reasonable answer -- then everyone else can fall in line behind him ... reply with little pictures of 'thumbs up' etc. Someone ... anyone ... please?


I avoided nothing... A wooden gun is not feasable and it will not work. Period!!!!! It is mechanically impossible to make a gun from wood that will work with a bullet.... It's called mechanics and engineering.
There are a thousand variables that you would have to come up with and not one is feasable.. If you want to blow your ass up and injure yourself...go ahead, but if (big if) you figured out how,,,, the second you pull the trigger you are done.... it's called explosive reaction.

Next...you are not going to convince any gun owner that a wood gun is safe let alone practical or feasable. :roll:

Quote:
Stupid questions require stupid answers.

Bwahahaaha! A firm victory for the anti-gun crew there. Absolutely stunning!

OK guys I'll spare you any further embarrassment. We both know you can't answer the question without admittedly the policies you ply are unworkable (haha all of you! 1 vs how many?) .. don't worry .. let's gently move on to the next thread. Promise I won't mention it again .. this thread's debate is officially closed.

:rotf:

I recommend someone quickly starts a thread called .. er .. 'Shall we ban the constitution' to try and move this down the page and out of sight ASAP.

:rotf:

[lilwolf]

What ever.....you obviously cannot see the stupidity of your idea and your concept....so with that I will await to see what other silly aspects of a wooden gun you can come up with. :lol: :lol:

[Snake]

You mean like a zip gun made out of one of those metal pens that packs a .22, and you'd never know just by looking ay it? Yeah, those are illegal, but shouldn't be. Just imagine the look on a muggers face when he realizes he just got shot with a Monte Blanc :lol:

[airo]

britboy wrote: perdidochas wrote: britboy wrote: lilwolf wrote: britboy wrote: lilwolf wrote: Hmmm! I have one problem with the concept. I do not want guns in the hands of bad guys at all.
And you're prepared to compromise the types of guns availble to you to help achieve this?


No....The reason I say that is because the bad guys are going to get a gun (any gun) if they want it. It is not feasable nor designable

So are you saying you would let the wooden gun be sold to anyone who can legally currently own a handgun, or you wouldn't?

I still don't know what your opinion is. Would you let the thing legally exist or not?

Since technically it can't exist, this is a stupid point. If guns could be made out of wood, they would be. They can't. Guns need metal or very dense plastic to contain the pressure involved. Both are easily detectable in x-rays. Bullets set off metal detectors.

Cheap and cheerful avoiding of the question.

Can't you say 'I don't know'? In fact so far Airo, Lilwolf and Perd has avoided the question completely.

Sorry - but if you don't know your own gun control policy, honestly, why are you here?

What we need here is 1 pro-gun person to state some kind of reasonable answer -- then everyone else can fall in line behind him ... reply with little pictures of 'thumbs up' etc. Someone ... anyone ... please?

Actually, i didn't avoid you question. I just didn't answer it, as it doesn't warrant an answer.

Since you've decided to call me out, i'll respond. I'm tired of your astronomical hypotheticals that obviously serve no purpose but to attempt to troll the pro-gun community. Since you can't actually make a logical, real-world argument for your cause, you've retreated back into the sanctity of the hypothetical and hyperbole to try and combat us. Well, i'm tired of it.

This thread, and posts like this, don't even warrant a well reasoned response, because you, and posters like you, aren't interested in debating: you're interested solely in winning. I've seen you, and countless other anti-gunners pull the same s**t. If we answer the hypothetical, and you don't like the answer, you change it. If we answer the NEW hypothetical, you change it AGAIN. Even though the original situation posed has no hold in reality whatsoever--hell, in this case it even breaks the rules of physics--and neither do any of the subsequent resulting situations, you still feel a need to pose them. Well, i'm tired of these games. So, i'm not going to answer this question.

My original post was in regards to a statement you made in this thread, which was idiotic. I did not pretend like i was here to answer the OT.

[lilwolf]

Very well put and very well explained for him.... :clap: