SpudFiles

Some of you may have heard this already, but if not, it's definitely something you'd have something to say about.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8041320.stm

I know there are slightly mixed feelings about gun control here, some favouring limitations and control to varying degrees, and some believing that there should be no restriction at all (but please, no getting into arguments about it), but I think we can all agree that this is just plain ridiculous.

I saw this earlier, very disappointing.

It fails to acknowledge that human beings are genetically predisposed to have the capacity for violence and combat, and by removing "harmless" outlets for such primal tendancies to be expressed, in the same way they do in violent video games the problem might actually be exacerbated by pent up rage.

This is rubbish..

As JSR said it's a social hobby for some, and a vent for others.

The reason is unjustifiable and wrong.. Come on how does shooting paint at people constitute shootings.

inonickname wrote:Come on how does shooting paint at people constitute shootings.

Think about that one again. Of course shooting people (even if it's with paint) constitutes shooting people.
You might have wanted to qualify that a little further, perhaps tying it to public shooting? :tongue3:

I'm wondering how far this will go. It's nonsense like this that got Jack Thompson disbarred.

I don't know how many paintballers there are in Germany, but I suspect that the government is going to find a severe voting backlash at some point.

I think they'll also have the same problem as happened in the UK when they brought in a ban. This problem being the requirement to compensate owners for the (soon to be illegal) equipment they're forced to hand in to the police. That hit the treasury quite hard, and it's why the UK is loathe to bring in any more bans, rather than just restrictions on purchasing.

Of course, that assumes Germany has similar laws, but I can't see why it shouldn't have.

Ragnarok wrote:

inonickname wrote:Come on how does shooting paint at people constitute shootings.

Think about that one again. Of course shooting people (even if it's with paint) constitutes shooting people.
You might have wanted to qualify that a little further, perhaps tying it to public shooting? :tongue3:

I'm wondering how far this will go. It's nonsense like this that got Jack Thompson disbarred.

I don't know how many paintballers there are in Germany, but I suspect that the government is going to find a severe voting backlash at some point.

I think they'll also have the same problem as happened in the UK when they brought in a ban. This problem being the requirement to compensate owners for the (soon to be illegal) equipment they're forced to hand in to the police. That hit the treasury quite hard, and it's why the UK is loathe to bring in any more bans, rather than just restrictions on purchasing.

Of course, that assumes Germany has similar laws, but I can't see why it shouldn't have.

You knew what I meant..

So I'm not the full bucket on this, but is this action mainly based on lobbying from victims families?

inonickname wrote:So I'm not the full bucket on this, but is this action mainly based on lobbying from victims families?

Understandably, there are some relatives of victims behind it, but I think a lot of what's going on is other anti-gun campaigners using the event as a fulcrum to give their own views leverage.

And after an event like this, even casual people who couldn't normally be bothered to express their views are likely to be galvanised into saying things.

Ahhh I hate that kind of bull* governments throw out. How many killers have been proven to be inspired by paintball? As far as I know, none!

Politicians don't know what they are deciding about and fight things on the wrong end. Paintball has nothing to do with disrupted people doing a suicide attack on society.
Actually, it is reverse! People with a hobby have something to do in their life and live happy and peaceful. Someone who has nothing, and lives alone, may start to hate the world for being so cruel and decides to do a suicide attack on the world.
So actually, seeing paintball as a recreation event or hobby, it prevents people from becoming like that.

If this crap spreads to my home in the US, I will throw an absolute s@*t fit and defend my rights to the end and they will have to beat my ass down with clubs to stop me.

Only problem is, that once they change the law, your rights are no longer your rights, so you wont even have to ask for the clubs beating you down.

We need to buy our own country to stop all legal crap limiting our hobby! (Just like the pirate bay wanted to buy Sealand)

Well there are so many proud gun owners in the US I doubt I would really have to sacrifice my own hide anyways. If paintball were banned, they would know that their real guns would be next.

Moonbogg wrote:If paintball were banned, they would know that their real guns would be next.

Heck, I suspect it would go in the other direction. You're unlikely to see any controls on paintball without lots of tighter controls on real firearms.

Yeah in the US we have this mighty fine thing called the 2nd amendment to the US constitution. Changing an amendment requires 75% of the states to vote in agreement...basically it ain't going to happen. If an effort were made to somehow circumvent this and attempt a gun grab by declaring national emergency, marshal law, etc., you would essentially see several state secessions and possibly the second civil war in the US.

starman wrote:Yeah in the US we have this mighty fine thing called the 2nd amendment to the US constitution. Changing an amendment requires 75% of the states to vote in agreement...basically it ain't going to happen. If an effort were made to somehow circumvent this and attempt a gun grab by declaring national emergency, marshal law, etc., you would essentially see several state secessions and possibly the second civil war in the US.

Before this get's banned to theopia, let me say to USA residents, it WON'T be a civil war, it will be a revolutionary war... BIG DIFFERENCE....

starman wrote:you would essentially see several state secessions and possibly the second civil war in the US.

I'll be there, spud gun in hand to take care of business. But really, the people of the US don't seem to be the kind to take up arms and start shooting, nevermind the impossibility of a military civil war. Immagine carrier vs carrier, raptor vs raptor!??! I can't see how our modern weapons in all their complexity could ever end up in a north vs south kind of situation. Don't get me wrong, it would be great to watch on CNN.

jeepkahn wrote: Before this get's banned to theopia, let me say to USA residents, it WON'T be a civil war, it will be a revolutionary war... BIG DIFFERENCE....

Umm no

The revolutionary war was fighting independence from Great Britain. As we weren't a country at the time.

dictionary.com wrote:Revolutionary War

The war for American independence from Britain

The civil war was about the union breaking up (secession) because of slavery.

dictionary.com wrote:Civil war

a war between political factions or regions within the same country.

Ie; anti gun v. gun