Shack X: In Ove We Trust

[Farley1324]

Poor mab.

[Farley1324]

i don't think anyone would argue that if your wife had a gun pointed at a couple of people who were going to attack her then she would have the advantage.

And there you have it.

As for anything else...you obviously do not know WTF you are talking about. But I think we already knew that. I wouldn't be so harsh, but you also obviously have no desire whatsoever to learn anything, either.

[-Lucifer]

Poor mab.

Putting Lencho's name up there was dumb. He never posted in Le Shack. He only made one post long ago, when Le Shack used to be ILO's and J's combined journal. He posted a large picture of a submarine, I recon.

[Farley1324]

To bed I go. I look forward to actual discussion with PM, and probably some more senseless ranting from matt about stuff he doesn't know anything about.

[-Lucifer]

Chuzzle just provided me with this picture:

[matt297]

And there you have it.

As for anything else...you obviously do not know WTF you are talking about. But I think we already knew that. I wouldn't be so harsh, but you also obviously have no desire whatsoever to learn anything, either.

way to pick out what you wanted to hear and ignore the rest you are so very completely butthurt by everything that's going on here.

Its funny how you completely ignore the fact that because there are guns in the first place that to solve the the problem of 'bad people' getting the guns your answer is indeed....more guns! You seem totally oblivious to it. Rather your arguement is based on the need for guns because other people have guns. If you removed guns in the first place you wouldn't have such a problem. get it?

To bed I go. I look forward to actual discussion with PM, and probably some more senseless ranting from matt about stuff he doesn't know anything about.

lol, you are so mad

Its the last defence of the weak when he tries to weaken the opponent rather than his arguement.

[-Lucifer]

lol, you are so mad
Its the last defence of the weak when he tries to weaken the opponent rather than his arguement.

Hay, Matty boi! I'm going to squat and pull in a bit. What are you doing today?

[limelite]

Chill you guys, chill.

Farley, what do you think about Wei Rui lifting shoes? There's this new entry level/low end that's only like $55 (no shipping yet). I feel like Romaleos are way too pricey, and not even sure if the heels would benefit me (I hear there's a certain % of the population that don't do so well on it, lol). Or an Adidas Power Lift ($90) for middle ground?

[-Lucifer]

Chill you guys, chill.

Why? Is it because you say so?

[Ironlife]

Interesting debate, as a country that prohibits gun use i don't really know a great deal of benefits as to why guns are overly useful. Other than the obvious of self defense and protecting ones family and possibly hunting purposes.

Seems in USA, there are numerous shootings at schools etc that could be prevented with tighter restrictions on acquiring weapons. That **** should never occur and cant even recall one case here of unnecessary crap like that happening

[matt297]

Chuzzle just provided me with this picture:


[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/nsDrm.jpg[ /IMG]

such an image is pointless. The latter person obtained his guns legally. If he didn't have that opportunity 12 innocent people would still be alive.

What about other things other than defence which everyone is focusing on?

homicides - I don't think you would even argue that homicide rates haven't increased because of guns. In 2010 there were 12,996 murders in the US. Of those, 8,775 were caused by firearms. There were 600 murders in the UK in 2010 gun related or otherwise. "During the 1980s and early 1990s, homicide rates surged in cities across the United States (see graphs at right).[21] Handgun homicides accounted for nearly all of the overall increase in the homicide rate, from 1985 to 1993, while homicide rates involving other weapons declined during that time frame." and "Gun-related death rates in the United States are eight times higher than they are in countries that are economically and politically similar to it. Higher rates are found in developing countries and those with political instability."
you can say what you like about what other contributing factors there are but the simple fact is this: having guns increase the incidence of death. you wouldn't need a gun if there weren't so many freely available for the 'bad guys' to get a hold of.

robberies - There were 41.67 per 100,000 armed robberies in the US in 2010 and 44.78 per 100,000 armed assaults. Sorry i couldn't find accurate figures in the UK for comparison but there were 9,608 gun crimes in 2007. More guns = more chance of armed robbery.

suicide - something like 50% of suicides are gun related. Without easy access to guns its a fact that more of these people would be alive. A gun is an easy and quick method and one that can be used in an emotionally charged 'snap decision'. Chances are without such a method people would still be alive and may seek help. To provide some relevant stats the US suicide rate is 36,909 (2009) compared to ~5,600 (2010) in the UK . That works out to be something like 1 in every 7,700 people in the US and 1 in every 120,000 in the UK.

edit: Moral of the story = having guns so widely available increases the likelihood and incidence of gun related crime/death! obvious no?

[matt297]

Hay, Matty boi! I'm going to squat and pull in a bit. What are you doing today?

Hi luby Its sunny today so I went for a dander in the park then ill go out for a bit and read a book in the sunshine (no homo). squat proudly young lubs.

Chill you guys, chill.

I am chilled thank you I like to debate things. Its fun.

Interesting debate, as a country that prohibits gun use i don't really know a great deal of benefits as to why guns are overly useful. Other than the obvious of self defense and protecting ones family and possibly hunting purposes.

Seems in USA, there are numerous shootings at schools etc that could be prevented with tighter restrictions on acquiring weapons. That **** should never occur and cant even recall one case here of unnecessary crap like that happening

hello young CHristopher. How are things?

The trouble with restrictions on people buying guns is that there are people that go out and rob/kill without any prior convictions or relevant mental health concerns. IIRC that guy who shot the people in Denver is an example.

[-Lucifer]

The latter person obtained his guns legally. If he didn't have that opportunity 12 innocent people would still be alive.

Lolwut? You're saying the shooter couldn't have acquired those guns illegally? What if one person in that theatre had a concealed firearm? Maybe the fatalities would have been much lower. Sure, the guy was wearing body armour, but a head shot may have saved lives that day. I want to believe that people who own guns are pretty good at using them.

homicides - I don't think you would even argue that homicide rates haven't increased because of guns. In 2010 there were 12,996 murders in the US. Of those, 8,775 were caused by firearms. There were 600 murders in the UK in 2010 gun related or otherwise. "During the 1980s and early 1990s, homicide rates surged in cities across the United States (see graphs at right).[21] Handgun homicides accounted for nearly all of the overall increase in the homicide rate, from 1985 to 1993, while homicide rates involving other weapons declined during that time frame." and "Gun-related death rates in the United States are eight times higher than they are in countries that are economically and politically similar to it. Higher rates are found in developing countries and those with political instability."
you can say what you like about what other contributing factors there are but the simple fact is this: having guns increase the incidence of death. you wouldn't need a gun if there weren't so many freely available for the 'bad guys' to get a hold of.

robberies - There were 41.67 per 100,000 armed robberies in the US in 2010 and 44.78 per 100,000 armed assaults. Sorry i couldn't find accurate figures in the UK for comparison but there were 9,608 gun crimes in 2007. More guns = more chance of armed robbery.

suicide - something like 50% of suicides are gun related. Without easy access to guns its a fact that more of these people would be alive. A gun is an easy and quick method and one that can be used in an emotionally charged 'snap decision'. Chances are without such a method people would still be alive and may seek help. To provide some relevant stats the US suicide rate is 36,909 (2009) compared to ~5,600 (2010) in the UK . That works out to be something like 1 in every 7,700 people in the US and 1 in every 120,000 in the UK.

edit: Moral of the story = having guns so widely available increases the likelihood and incidence of gun related crime/death! obvious no?

Where did you get those numbers from? The media is retarded and they tend to fabricate a lot. Remember that Swine Flu outbreak? The local news and papers said that there was more than one death, but that was never really confirmed. They just want to induce panic; it's their job.

I'm not disagreeing that more guns could cause more violent crimes, but think about what would happen if they decided to ban guns - the bad guys would still have them. Isn't that scary?

I am fortunate enough to live in a city where the crime rate is not high. The worst I've heard of was chain-snatching/purse grabbing etc. This is off topic, but I'll say it anyway: there was a notorious 'gang' here responsible for a few robberies around my area. They'd wear nothing but underwear and they'd cover their bodies with oil, so grabbing them would be close to impossible. I don't know wtf happened to them, but they're not around anymore.

[PeterGibbons316]

such an image is pointless. The latter person obtained his guns legally. If he didn't have that opportunity 12 innocent people would still be alive.

It's more likely that he would have taken one of his homemade bombs that he used to boobytrap his apartment into the theater, or just obtained the guns illegally.

homicides - I don't think you would even argue that homicide rates haven't increased because of guns. In 2010 there were 12,996 murders in the US. Of those, 8,775 were caused by firearms. There were 600 murders in the UK in 2010 gun related or otherwise. "During the 1980s and early 1990s, homicide rates surged in cities across the United States (see graphs at right).[21] Handgun homicides accounted for nearly all of the overall increase in the homicide rate, from 1985 to 1993, while homicide rates involving other weapons declined during that time frame." and "Gun-related death rates in the United States are eight times higher than they are in countries that are economically and politically similar to it. Higher rates are found in developing countries and those with political instability."
you can say what you like about what other contributing factors there are but the simple fact is this: having guns increase the incidence of death. you wouldn't need a gun if there weren't so many freely available for the 'bad guys' to get a hold of.

What article are you quoting? Link?

Guns exist. You can't get rid of them. Forcing people to give them up only takes them out of the hands of those who refuse to break the law. The people willing to use guns to commit crimes will also be willing to keep guns illegally.

robberies - There were 41.67 per 100,000 armed robberies in the US in 2010 and 44.78 per 100,000 armed assaults. Sorry i couldn't find accurate figures in the UK for comparison but there were 9,608 gun crimes in 2007. More guns = more chance of armed robbery.

suicide - something like 50% of suicides are gun related. Without easy access to guns its a fact that more of these people would be alive. A gun is an easy and quick method and one that can be used in an emotionally charged 'snap decision'. Chances are without such a method people would still be alive and may seek help. To provide some relevant stats the US suicide rate is 36,909 (2009) compared to ~5,600 (2010) in the UK . That works out to be something like 1 in every 7,700 people in the US and 1 in every 120,000 in the UK.

edit: Moral of the story = having guns so widely available increases the likelihood and incidence of gun related crime/death! obvious no?

The gun is just the tool used to commit the crime. If the gun is unavailable, some other tool will be used.

Also, a very good case can be made that more guns = less crime. Someone even wrote a book about it:


http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less...uns+less+crime

[matt297]

Lolwut? You're saying the shooter couldn't have acquired those guns illegally? What if one person in that theatre had a concealed firearm? Maybe the fatalities would have been much lower. Sure, the guy was wearing body armour, but a head shot may have saved lives that day. I want to believe that people who own guns are pretty good at using them.

Of course he could have acquired illegally, as many bad guys do, but that would not have been so easy if they weren't so easily accessible in the first place! How many of these kinds of atrocities do you see in America compared to other non-gun economies? For that second part of your question: you're talking about defence again. My point here is with access to weaponry. But lets imagine. Perhaps in another time a member of the audience could have a concealed weapon. Maybe they all could have. That would be fun wouldn't it? 50 people all shooting at dark figures in a dark smokey room. . Some people will be good at using them and others not so good. There have been many people accidently killed by firearms.

Where did you get those numbers from? The media is retarded and they tend to fabricate a lot. Remember that Swine Flu outbreak? The local news and papers said that there was more than one death, but that was never really confirmed. They just want to induce panic; it's their job.

I'm not disagreeing that more guns could cause more violent crimes, but think about what would happen if they decided to ban guns - the bad guys would still have them. Isn't that scary?

Look at the figures again. Guns are banned in the UK but some bad guys will still get their hands on them. It's inevitable. HAving fewer guns around means getting them is more difficult. It reduces the number of them that bad guys will attain. It will be easier to track the guns if found as well as their source and distribution. It would be easier to link guns to crimes and so on. There are always going to be bad guys and there are always going to be some guns floating around. But another gun isn't the answer. Do you see what I mean? A gun is useful in a gun fight but without guns in the first place you reduce the chances of a gun fight (amongst other things).

I got the figures from various sources not just news media.

I am fortunate enough to live in a city where the crime rate is not high. The worst I've heard of was chain-snatching/purse grabbing etc. This is off topic, but I'll say it anyway: there was a notorious 'gang' here responsible for a few robberies around my area. They'd wear nothing but underwear and they'd cover their bodies with oil, so grabbing them would be close to impossible. I don't know wtf happened to them, but they're not around anymore.

hahaha. they slipped away.

[im2manly]

I think one thing we can all agree on is that guns make the world safer. How about those gymnastic girls? Dayummm (the ones 18 or over of course)

[-Lucifer]

...But another gun isn't the answer. Do you see what I mean? A gun is useful in a gun fight but without guns in the first place you reduce the chances of a gun fight (amongst other things)...

"The problem with an eye for an eye is that everyone ends up blind."

^ Isn't that right? I say, if you want peace, prepare for war. Also, Gandhi was a *******.

P.S. You are not going to change my mind about guns and I am not going to be able to change your way of thinking either, so let us stop this debate and make ove. Yes, let's all make ove.

[matt297]

It's more likely that he would have taken one of his homemade bombs that he used to boobytrap his apartment into the theater, or just obtained the guns illegally.

why didn't he do that in the first place? could have killed even more with a few bombs. This action is less likely in other countries of equivalent political and economic status.

What article are you quoting? Link?

sorry I wrote that earlier and closed all the pages down. they are easily available on the net. At least one was from wikipedia (inb4itsallliesandBScuzitwasonwikipedia).

Guns exist. You can't get rid of them. Forcing people to give them up only takes them out of the hands of those who refuse to break the law. The people willing to use guns to commit crimes will also be willing to keep guns illegally.

The gun is just the tool used to commit the crime. If the gun is unavailable, some other tool will be used.

I never said you could get rid of them. I've said several times that getting rid of them reduces the risk. It doesn't bring the figure to zero. Not all people who own guns have a criminal record or plan to commit a crime yet they might. They may not be lawbreakers...yet. But you are potentially arming future criminals.

Also, a very good case can be made that more guns = less crime. Someone even wrote a book about it:


[url]http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less-Crime-Understanding/dp/0226493660/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1344439151&sr=8-1&keywords=more+guns+less+crime[ /url]

I should note that I dont think banning guns should stop there. There would obviously be a lot more work to do. You guys have already had guns floating around for years and years. Its still going to be a problem and a massive clean up operation. Like in the UK people can be stopped and searched. If you have a knife then you get an automatic sentence. Actions similar to these could also be taken.

[matt297]

"The problem with an eye for an eye is that everyone ends up blind."

^ Isn't that right? I say, if you want peace, prepare for war. Also, Gandhi was a *******.

P.S. You are not going to change my mind about guns and I am not going to be able to change your way of thinking either, so let us stop this debate and make ove. Yes, let's all make ove.

lulz. All you need is ove. Even the beatles said it.

imho humans need to change the way they think about thinking in order to survive as a species. guns and stuff is just scratching the surface.

[-Lucifer]

imho humans need to change the way they think about thinking in order to survive as a species. guns and stuff is just scratching the surface.

"It is in your nature to destroy yourselves." -- Big Arnie (T2)

[-Lucifer]

Do any of you good men know what Pavel Tsatsouline's best lifts are? A quick Google search revealed nothing. I recon I'm just curious.

[matt297]

"It is in your nature to destroy yourselves." -- Big Arnie (T2)

I believe it has to get like this before an evolutionary shift can occur.

how did your squatting go?

[-Lucifer]

I believe it has to get like this before an evolutionary shift can occur.

When I was little (6-7 years old), I believed that we will destroy ourselves one day and then go back to the stone age.

how did your squatting go?

T'was hard as hell. I am getting on a new routine next week (barbell complexes) onwards because these M.E. days are killing me (very low carb diet + high temperature + high humidity and no a/c). I wanted to quit right after set #2 today. Strength has pretty much stalled, so I figured I'll do something that's not so hard on me. So, Friday will be my last M.E. day (will be benching, which is 1000x easier than squatting).

[im2manly]

Just signed up to do crossfit, it was nice SFW and GFH wit you guise.

[matt297]

When I was little (6-7 years old), I believed that we will destroy ourselves one day and then go back to the stone age.



T'was hard as hell. I am getting on a new routine next week (barbell complexes) onwards because these M.E. days are killing me (very low carb diet + high temperature + high humidity and no a/c). I wanted to quit right after set #2 today. Strength has pretty much stalled, so I figured I'll do something that's not so hard on me. So, Friday will be my last M.E. day (will be benching, which is 1000x easier than squatting).

you stuck through it, thats good. dont go to hard too often tho. I learned by lesson the hard way. are you losing weight then?

[im2manly]

When I was little (6-7 years old), I believed that we will destroy ourselves one day and then go back to the stone age.



T'was hard as hell. I am getting on a new routine next week (barbell complexes) onwards because these M.E. days are killing me (very low carb diet + high temperature + high humidity and no a/c). I wanted to quit right after set #2 today. Strength has pretty much stalled, so I figured I'll do something that's not so hard on me. So, Friday will be my last M.E. day (will be benching, which is 1000x easier than squatting).

I know this feel bro. Which is why I am really focusing on cardio. If I increase my endurance and cardiovascular health, besides helping me lose weight, I believe it will also help me on my lifts when I am cutting and lu-carbing.

[-Lucifer]

@El Cid
Here, tell me what you think of this complex I came up with.

Power clean
Front squat
Press
Good morning
BTN push press
Bentover row

Will do 5 reps, for 5-7 rounds. For the unaware, 1 rep = all those exercises done back-to-back, without letting go of the bar. 5 reps = 1 round.

you stuck through it, thats good. dont go to hard too often tho. I learned by lesson the hard way.

I'm just glad I didn't decide to use my deadlift 3RM's. I'd have to change my computer setup, so I could post while lying down.

are you losing weight then?

Oh, yes! I just noticed today that my arms have become much more defined. I noticed this when I was doing forearm and biceps curls. FeelsGoodMan. I won't lie, I still think my gut looks big, but I don't look that bad in a tshirt. I haven't met anyone yet because if I do, they're going to compliment me. I've been dieting since the 9th of last month, by the way.

[im2manly]

complex looks good Lu! Also I see you are still green.

[-Lucifer]

complex looks good Lu!

Yeah, I'll also be doing some isolation stuff at the end of my sessions. DB extensions, curls, hammer curls, wrist flexion and some delt stuff (front/side/rear delt raises).

Also I see you are still green.

I think F_A must have thought it is another one of Josh's pranks, so I'm going to wait for a few days before messaging him myself.

[im2manly]

Yeah, I'll also be doing some isolation stuff at the end of my sessions. DB extensions, curls, hammer curls, wrist flexion and some delt stuff (front/side/rear delt raises).



I think F_A must have thought it is another one of Josh's pranks, so I'm going to wait for a few days before messaging him myself.

Lu does it depress you that I may be posting significantly less when I start my career in 3 weeks and go on my cruise in 2 weeks?