Internet suicide
Discussion
http://forums.somethingawful.com/show
In summary, some guy posted about getting buckshot for his shotgun for self-defence. He then killed himself with the gun.
>> Edited by Parrot of doom on Friday 4th November 14:46
In summary, some guy posted about getting buckshot for his shotgun for self-defence. He then killed himself with the gun.
>> Edited by Parrot of doom on Friday 4th November 14:46
Link doesn't work, but whats the big deal anyway? So he used buckshot...its not like putting a shotgun loaded with birdshot in your mouth and pulling the trigger is just going to leave you with skin hanging down from the roof of your mouth like after eating a too hot pizza...
Edited now the link works (although only had a very quick look) - if he didn't just kill himself but killed other people too, then I guess it is another matter...
>> Edited by AlexH on Friday 4th November 15:02
Edited now the link works (although only had a very quick look) - if he didn't just kill himself but killed other people too, then I guess it is another matter...
>> Edited by AlexH on Friday 4th November 15:02
ed up. The SA forums are such a cool place too, hope the media doesn't jump on them for this. 
I'm finding it difficult to comprehend the mindset of some of the posters. The thought of being able to stroll into Asda's and pick up some buckshot for my shotgun fills me with horror. From reading the posts it seems like a perfectly reasonable thing to do for people in the US.
No doubt some will argue that it's no different to buying fuel for a ludicrously overpowered sportscar. I know it's a liberty the American people are familiar with but I struggle to understand how it's still permissable. There is no argument for owning a semi-automatic - period. You don't hunt deer with shotguns either. Its a crazy crazy world and it scares me to think that the rest of the 'west' seems so hungry for American 'culture'.
Gruffy
No doubt some will argue that it's no different to buying fuel for a ludicrously overpowered sportscar. I know it's a liberty the American people are familiar with but I struggle to understand how it's still permissable. There is no argument for owning a semi-automatic - period. You don't hunt deer with shotguns either. Its a crazy crazy world and it scares me to think that the rest of the 'west' seems so hungry for American 'culture'.
Gruffy
Gruffy said:
I'm finding it difficult to comprehend the mindset of some of the posters. The thought of being able to stroll into Asda's and pick up some buckshot for my shotgun fills me with horror. From reading the posts it seems like a perfectly reasonable thing to do for people in the US.
No doubt some will argue that it's no different to buying fuel for a ludicrously overpowered sportscar. I know it's a liberty the American people are familiar with but I struggle to understand how it's still permissable. There is no argument for owning a semi-automatic - period. You don't hunt deer with shotguns either. Its a crazy crazy world and it scares me to think that the rest of the 'west' seems so hungry for American 'culture'.
Gruffy
Hunting isn't protected by the 2nd amendment of the US Constitution, self-defence is (or more accurately, the right the keep and bear arms). Self-defence is a perfectly good reason (and a basic human right) for owing a semi-auto; not that we should get fixated on weapon types, and semi-autos are not the root of all evil the anti-gun lobby would have you believe...and you can indeed use a shotgun for deer hunting (again, not that hunting matters, good pastime though it is); a 12 gauge with slugs makes an excellent deer gun for shorter range use.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Because Michael Moore is always 100% accurate and truthful...
AlexH said:
Because Michael Moore is always 100% accurate and truthful...
Have you seen it? Or are you just rolling your eyes because you it is a film made by Michael Moore? I don't think there is anything particularly controversial in it at all.
Fahrenheit 9/11 is a different matter entirely, and I have very little time for it, but "Bowling for Columbine" is a very perceptive and intelligent piece of film-making...
So where in it did you think Moore was being dishonest?
>> Edited by alexkp on Friday 4th November 17:10
I hear what you're saying Alex but I still have issues with it.
I can only relate to my own experiences of self-defence living in the UK, but here's how I think of it. When I was a kid we occassionally got into dust-ups. A few bruises here and there but no serious damage. Things have moved on now and school children are wielding knives and killing each other. We don't have a big gun problem yet, but it seems it's coming.
Granted, it's not the same but the basic principle is. I'm not suggesting we can trust everybody to obey the law and not carry firearms, but it would appear that as a society more people die in the US (with the ability to defend themselves) than in the UK.
This issue has some very deep questions to it regarding individual rights and how we live together as a society (similar to those raised by ID cards). I don't know the answers but I do believe that making punishments more serious and deterring would be a positive start.
Gruffy
I can only relate to my own experiences of self-defence living in the UK, but here's how I think of it. When I was a kid we occassionally got into dust-ups. A few bruises here and there but no serious damage. Things have moved on now and school children are wielding knives and killing each other. We don't have a big gun problem yet, but it seems it's coming.
Granted, it's not the same but the basic principle is. I'm not suggesting we can trust everybody to obey the law and not carry firearms, but it would appear that as a society more people die in the US (with the ability to defend themselves) than in the UK.
This issue has some very deep questions to it regarding individual rights and how we live together as a society (similar to those raised by ID cards). I don't know the answers but I do believe that making punishments more serious and deterring would be a positive start.
Gruffy
alexkp said:
Because Michael Moore is always 100% accurate and truthful...
Have you seen it? Or are you just rolling your eyes because you it is a film made by Michael Moore? I don't think there is anything particularly controversial in it at all.
Fahrenheit 9/11 is a different matter entirely, and I have very little time for it, but "Bowling for Columbine" is a very perceptive and intelligent piece of film-making...
So where in it did you think Moore was being dishonest?
>> Edited by alexkp on Friday 4th November 17:10
Where to start? How about here:
www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html
Late Friday probably not the best time to start this, but will happily continue on Monday...
AlexH said:
Because Michael Moore is always 100% accurate and truthful...
That being said though the two most heavily armed populations in Europe are Switzerland and Sweden. They don't go round killing eachother so it obviously does have something to do with American culture.
I'm not saying Moore is right but he does seem to offer and explaination that isn't along the lines of 'guns cause violence'.
I'm sorry but anyone who says 'guns cause violence'
quite clearly doesn't know what they're talking about.Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff