1. I probably couldn't

Quite...

1) Can you proove Cows can fly?

Yorks? Is that another word for Brits? It sounds more like it means Yorkshiremen, in which case probably just me, Tom, and Chris qualify... :D

Anyway, Merkin isn't a dialect word, like Boilers seems to be, it's just a contraction of American. More like Brit, really...

Anyway, I agree with everything you said about guns. Just one question: Is Dequibenzo your real name? (I like to know these things...)

1) I doubt that anyone cares.

What Tom meant was, we can see that Cows can't fly, but we have no evidence that Hamsters can't count. Anyway, Deq was only being sarcastic...

Good point Sydney!

Yeah, York is another word for brit, and I do think it comes from Yorkshiremen. Just like Yank comes from Yankee, which refers to Americans from the North during the civil war. It all gets blurried with time to mean more broad things. As for boiler, it refers to the generalization of english cooking just consisting of stuff that's been boiled until it's tasteless and grey, which I know for a fact is untrue, but there you have it anyway.
And, no, that's not my real name. It's the name of a character from a book I'm writing (long, LONG story about that, and nobody wants to hear it right now).
Oh, and, Jacob? Yeah, I admit, that was a little harsh of me. Sorry, I was up really late when I wrote it, and... well, you know how it goes. No hard feelings, I hope.

I agree.

1) But can you proove this?

1) Ok...maybe the Hamsters counting thing was abit of a shit example...how about...ahem.

Can Hamsters fly?

(Im sure to win the argument with that...ha ha)

That depends on whether you mean an unmodified hamster or one that's been modified to be able to fly...

What's your real name?

Hilarious...im sure...*Drips with Sarcasm*

His real name is Albert...

I'll give you a hint, that's not it. Why do you want to know, Danny? Remember, I'm from the states- wer'e raised to be paranoid as all get-out when it comes to the internet.

So, it's looking like the general concensus here is that, no matter what your opinion on gun ownership and use individually, the US as a whole should seriously reconsider it's gun policies overall, because the 2nd ammendment is too often misinterpreted to really be effective anymore. Is that about right, amigos?

I like to know these things. As you may have noticed, I refer to everyone by name (when sober), and you don't want to be left out, do you?

Anyway, what am I going to do to you with your name? It's not like I'm asking for your address, phone number, and credit card number...

Oh, let's save the conspiracy theories for another day, shall we? I'm reminded of my Economics teacher, Mr. S., who would often preach to us how the government was watching our every move using the Onstar auto navigation system, even those of us who don't have Onstar, even when we aren't in our cars. Yeah, that was a fun class.
Well... all right. It's Ian, and the ironic thing here is that after all this discussion about how Brits and Merkins (I can use it too! Whee!) aren't so different after all, people here in the states still can't seem to get my frigging name right, and I'm told it's pretty common in europe.

They can't get Ian right? It's quite common here, I know several people called Ian.
Funnily enough, Dequibenzo isn't very common around here.

I dont like the name Ian...reminds me of Ian Beal that low life worm...Euk!!

I don't actually know anyone called Ian, but it's not exactly an unusual name... Besides, two of my favourite authors are called Iain [not a typo - that's the original Scottish spelling]... :D

Yeh, so n e way...like i sed.

Guns kill ppl, but so do ppl, guns basically make it easier 4 people to kill people. Take guns away then u will have 2 take everything lethal away.

And as Ian said: Most deadly things have some purpose other than killing. Guns do not.

Yes...quite. But most peeps use guns as its easier to kill someone, if you take guns away then they will kill someone in a different way, more ingenius way and the perpatrator will go un-punished. Also, guns can be useful for other things such as:

1) Scaring people.
2) Opening bottles.
3) Knocking people unconcious.
4) Demonstrating the saying 'Its as easy as shooting fish in a barrel' .
5) And...ermmm...juggling with.

I defer to your superior knowledge of the subject... :D

So, Jacob, you are saying that it wouldn't do any good getting rid of the guns, because people would find another way to kill each other?

Yes. I for one dont have any guns and yet i could get my hands on stuff that would kill/maim peeps. Humans will jus evolve new ways to harm each other...especially the men...the straight men...cos straight men are bastards.

Ignoring the last part of that sentence, at least banning guns would make it more difficult for the killers, and would make murders easier to trace.

Anyway, if you're going to kill someone, at least have some class and do it with a sword...

Or a very big bang!

It'd make it harder to trace actually, but harder to kill someone aswell. When i was planning my 1st murder i found plants that could kill/hurt people, i found their route home, their address, decent knives, good places to attack and some other household poisons. If u take guns away it jus' makes the murderer think more about the plan and how not to get caught...i didn't have any guns/projectile weapons and thus was forced to think ahead...well ahead.

it would make almost all murders premeditated (1st degree) thus bring the total down drasticly and also more people would personally know the person who they were killing again would bring down murders.

I would have bet from your sunny attitude as exhibited on the forums that you would be in jail someday . . . now I'm absolutely certain of it.

Nahhh...im faaaar 2 clever. Also waaaay to cautious.

No, think about it. It's hard to trace bullets, and guns make a murder quick and easy, and mean that the killer doesn't have to leave loads of evidence around the place. For example, most other killing methods involve getting close to the murder, at some point at least, whereas guns can be fired from quite a distance, and so are harder to trace.

Its actually easier to trace.

1) You can determine the gun type.
2) You can determine what gun it came out of.

Things that make it harder are:

1) You need a suspect.
2) You need to find the gun.

1) Sound.
2) Blood spray.
3) Type of gun you use.
4) Fingerprints.
5) Alibi.

Nuff sed.

I dont think the killer wants to leave evidence around the place anyway unless he/she is framing sumbody.

1) Depends what gun you have.
2) Depends on how powerful the bullet is.
3) I got close to my "Victim" easily, lunchtime was the best time, PE, home time, Assembly. Also Rat Poison is considered accidental death and thus not alot of investigation would go into it. Also the fact that if you use a plant maybe not alot of investigation will go into that.

Guns do make it easier though, one single shot and you have done it...however it makes it more dangerous.

I didn't say it was impossible to trace what gun the bullet came from, but it's harder to trace than tracing, say, a knife, or a batch of poison.

No, not nuff said. You will get a lot less sound, blood spray and fingerprints from using a gun than you would with most other killing methods, and you don't generally need as long for your alibi either. As for type of gun, that doesn't matter as much, whereas if you didn't have guns, you'd have to a much harder job deciding how to kill the person...

... Exactly... That's what I said...

It's a lot harder to kill someone on impulse if you don't have a gun. As Doug said, almost all murders would then be premeditated...

doug? it's nice to see I'm being noticed.

It's surprising he would make that mistake seeing as you still haven't found the -Shift- key on your keyboard yet. Your posts are so distinctive. ;)

Really, the only way to tell whether or not stricter gun restrictions would actually decrease the number of murders would be to conduct an expreriment. Which we have done. It's called England. After imposing stricter gun codes completely illegalizing guns over a certain calibur for civilians and heavily restricting guns under it, the homicide rate dropped to about 1/10th of that in the states. Now, you can parade out crap about cultural differences all you like, but a 90% difference is pretty hard to argue with. Hypothetical situations about waves of inventive homicides just don't hold up in the light of reason.

Pure and simple- the people in the US love guns, no matter how bad an idea they are. One of my favorite Kids In the Hall lines- Dave Foley's character gets asked if he's an American, his response is "No, Canadian. It's like an American, but without the gun."

The sad part is, that's pretty accurate.

Just out of interest, Chris, did you succesfully murder this person? How many murders have you planned and how many murders have you comitted?

1) Gun goes bang.
2) Poison is soundless...person dies in front of people you are not around.
3) Knife to the throat...no sound.

1) A lot of blood spray from a gun, possibly impact spray in which it would spray forwards and also the minute lead shrapnels which will spray back onto your clothes when you fire the gun. Also, the gun will carry your finger prints (Can be wiped off th0).
2) Poison...no fingerprints, knife...fingerprints can be wiped off as can blood.

1) With a gun you will have to have people say you dont have a gun, say you were with them at a certain time etc.
2) With a knife the same thing so that doesn't really hold my case.
3) Poison would be good as when the poison starts taking effect you will be away from the body etc etc.

I decided how to kill my 1st in a day.

Thats true.

No...in the end i realised that the person wasn't worth it. I have planned 3 and have still got them to commit. One of them i am still thinking of doing if the person piss' me off. The other 2 i am satisfied with not doing. The one i am still thinking of is the one that i went through tedious planning over...And i know i have issues, so u dont have to tell me.

Oops, sorry about that, Steve...

It's good to know you hold us in such high esteem... ;)

Chris, let's go through this one thing at a time.

Sound:
Gun - one shot.
Knife - person is alive for longer to make a noise.
Poison - I'll give you this one, but see later.

Blood:
Gun - blood spray, in varying amounts depending on where you shoot the person.
Knife - shitloads of blood, on the victim, on you, and on the knife. Blood is actually extremely difficult to clean totally from the knife, and probably impossible with the resources you and I have.
Poison - depends on the poison.

Fingerprints:
Gun - on gun.
Knife - on knife, most likely also on victim and victim's surroundings, since you will have to get close to the victim to conduct the killing. Also, there is a high risk of planting a sample of your own DNA on or near to the victim.
Poison - depends on the method, but you could have prints on the plate/cup/etc, or you could leave prints anywhere near where you laced the food/drink with poison.

Alibi:
Gun - need someone to say you were with them for the short period of time it takes to shoot someone.
Knife - need someone to say you were with them for the long period of time it takes to get close enough, get the person alone, knife them, and get out of there.
Poison - varies considerably with the situation.

Tracing:
Gun - bullet can be traced to gun. Difficult to trace you personally, and difficult to prove it was you even if you are traced.
Knife - type of knife can be deduced. Blood traces on knife will be quite easy to detect if they get hold of you, even if you've cleaned it thoroughly.
Poison - type of poison is very easy to trace. You could be traced as being someone who had access to that poison.

Looking over all this, killing with poison may be an option, but it is also more difficult, and involves much more planning. It's not that kind of thing you can use (for example) to murder your husband and his mistress in a moment of anger.

Having said this, swords look cool. Let's all kill each other with swords, okay?

I cant be bothered to explain. I am correct about certain things though. You have mis-understood some details. I wud go through it all...with the entire plan...for all weapons...but it'd take too much room up...and you dont like been proved wrong. :D. Unless u want me 2 that is...

You can't prove me wrong here, because I haven't said anything that can be proven wrong. Everything I've said is true, if you think about it. You may have come up with an elaborate way of killing someone without a gun, but the fact that you were planning it for so long proves my point - it is a lot harder to make a killing on impulse when you don't have an easy weapon, e.g. a gun...

I dunno about the rest of the world, but most of the people I'm acquanted with find cooking macaroni and cheese on the stove for 10 minutes instead of in the microwave for 2 to be a chore, so it's pretty rediculous sounding that they would spend the days and weeks required to plan such an elaborate scheme as posioning somebody and making it look like an accident. And, while we're on the subject of accidental deaths, it's easy to slip up and shoot yourself or someone else with a gun, but you don't hear about too many accidental multiple-stabbings, or accidental hemlock posionings. We're not talking about Batman villains, here, we're talking about normal people who usually aren't that smart to begin with. Killing someone and getting away scott free takes a hell of a lot more skill, time, and luck than you might think.

Like i said before...Rat poison can be considered accidental. Plants can be considered Natural. Stabbings...well...yeh, i give u that. But u can make it look like a 'Mobile Robbery' or sumat. Also Dan, if u slash sum 1'z throat they cant scream or stuff. It took me 2 dayz 2 plan it...and even if u had a gun u wud have to find a decent place to commit the crime and a decent escape route.