IT.COM

discuss .Ca versus .Com (Maple Girls)

NameSilo
Watch

Want2learn

Top Member
Impact
2,455
I was thinking about Maple. I probably saw @MapleDots and the logo he has! Anyways I had thought of the tree and syrup when thinking about Maple. So I thought some more Maple. I thought Maple in a sense is like saying Canadian. I was curious about Canadian Girls. Anyways so I decided to give the Maple Girls a run for their money. Seems plenty brand able to me!

Any thoughts?
 
0
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
In Norway, you better have a very (capitalize that and draw a big red circle around it) good reason to have a weapon in your home.

I've had a semi-automated rifle + ammo in my home as well, but that was related to my time in the military.

The more guns, the more violence. I don't understand how anyone can argue against that statement.
 
Last edited:
2
•••
1
•••
This problem is a complex problem. Things are a bit out of control with gun violence. One of the problems is we are trying to solve the problem with only one solution. So how do we rectify these seemingly unrelated ideas: When a gun store is robbed, it is usually after hours. And yet places that people do not typically carry guns are prime targets, like schools, churches, and banks.
 
0
•••
This problem is a complex problem. Things are a bit out of control with gun violence. One of the problems is we are trying to solve the problem with only one solution. So how do we rectify these seemingly unrelated ideas: When a gun store is robbed, it is usually after hours. And yet places that people do not typically carry guns are prime targets, like schools, churches, and banks.

Only 2% of gun related deaths occur from those. Why not focus on solving the 98%?

10.6 gun death per 100,000 in the US. Compare that with Switzerland’s rate of 2.8, Canada’s 2.1, Germany’s 0.9, the United Kingdom’s 0.3, and Japan’s 0.2 (source: the link above). That is 8-9 lives per 100K lost over most other developed countries. In other words, every year over 30,000 Americans lose their lives because of bad gun laws.

US has comparable cases of violence with the rest of developed world. It is just that in the US lots of that violence ends up in deaths, because of the availability of guns.
 
2
•••
This problem is a complex problem. Things are a bit out of control with gun violence. One of the problems is we are trying to solve the problem with only one solution. So how do we rectify these seemingly unrelated ideas: When a gun store is robbed, it is usually after hours. And yet places that people do not typically carry guns are prime targets, like schools, churches, and banks.
It's not complex at all. More guns, more shooting. Less guns, less shooting.
 
1
•••
It's not complex at all. More guns, more shooting. Less guns, less shooting.
Well actually it could also be argued as... More guns = less shootings, and less guns = more shootings... Imagine this.. I have changed countless peoples minds with this hypothetical situation..

You have a gun, and you want to shoot people. The people that shoot people, 99% of the time are picking their targets, because their victims will be vulnerable, packed together, and chances are they will not experience return fire...

Now you have a gun, and you want to shoot people, but now everyone in that school, theater, or church also has a gun, and will return fire.. That shooter, is many many many times less likely to choose to go shoot up anywhere, because they are cowards...

Ask yourself, pick any shooter, do you think that shooter is going to walk into a police station to do his shooting? How about a military base, or a room full of guns pointed at him.. No he is picking a no gun zone like a school..

So obviously their are shooters that yes would still go shoot up a room full of people aiming guns at him.. I am talking about the 90%+ of shooters that would actually think twice now that he or she knows their will 100% be return fire since everyone else has a gun..
 
0
•••
Well actually it could also be argued as... More guns = less shootings, and less guns = more shootings... Imagine this.. I have changed countless peoples minds with this hypothetical situation..

You have a gun, and you want to shoot people. The people that shoot people, 99% of the time are picking their targets, because their victims will be vulnerable, packed together, and chances are they will not experience return fire...

Now you have a gun, and you want to shoot people, but now everyone in that school, theater, or church also has a gun, and will return fire.. That shooter, is many many many times less likely to choose to go shoot up anywhere, because they are cowards...

Ask yourself, pick any shooter, do you think that shooter is going to walk into a police station to do his shooting? How about a military base, or a room full of guns pointed at him.. No he is picking a no gun zone like a school..

So obviously their are shooters that yes would still go shoot up a room full of people aiming guns at him.. I am talking about the 90%+ of shooters that would actually think twice now that he or she knows their will 100% be return fire since everyone else has a gun..
It's funny that pro-gun folks focus so much on these rare instances. Suucides and accidental gun deaths are far more common.

And even then... no, your hypothetical situation is way more dangerous.
 
0
•••
It's funny that pro-gun folks focus so much on these rare instances. Suucides and accidental gun deaths are far more common.

And even then... no, your hypothetical situation is way more dangerous.

I hear you in terms of collateral damage from returning fire, miss-fires, suicides, and accidental gun deaths ... Here's the thing, the people that want to kill themselves, will still do it.. now you take the number of people killed accidentally by guns, compare that to the number of deaths by shooter, theirs no comparison over the years the people that have guns kill more people than the accidental gun deaths.. So if by having more guns, we can prevent future shootings, than those lives saved exceeds the number of people that will die from increased accidental deaths, and suicides. Thats an easy equation to solve if you look at the current stats.

This makes sense if you take into account the number of shootings in the future that will be prevented simply by having more guns out in the good peoples hands..
 
0
•••
I can understand people who are pro gun ownership but never get how they seem to neglect the data.

I get the sentiment. Owning guns to defend your property, loved ones, against the government even.

But let's face it. Any place in the world where strict gun laws are in place is a safer place to live. I don't judge you if you think the downside of more violent deaths doesn't weight up against the freedom of owning a gun. Good for you. But don't deny easily checkable facts.

As for political correctness, it's a tough one. Sometime it's better to avoid these sensitive subjects like @MapleDots . Some mistake it for weakness when most of the time it's just a matter of picking your battles wisely.
 
1
•••
It's not complex at all. More guns, more shooting. Less guns, less shooting.

Im not sure why I am about to attempt to do this . . .

What do less guns less shooting have to do with the price of tea in China?

I do not actually agree that less guns is less shooting. People will become better shooters, or at least could do so.


if you really want to get rid of guns,
It's funny that pro-gun folks focus so much on these rare instances. Suucides and accidental gun deaths are far more common.

And even then... no, your hypothetical situation is way more dangerous.
I want to set the record straight for me anyways . . .

I am quite skittish with guns. I purchased one, and have yet to fire it. I will take a class for it before I begin to carry. I will get my conceal permit as well.

I'm pro human! I am ProJoints.com as well, shameless plug! I am pro civil rights. I am pro you as a law abiding citizen deciding if you want or need a gun. I am pro choice, if you choose not to carry or to carry . . . its your choice!

Where I go extremely "GRAY" or is it "GREY" . . . gray it is!
I am not sure I see a need for citizens to have access to assault rifles, for example! I know there are limits on rounds and there are ways around those limits.

I believe that if there are 100,000,000 guns out there in society . . . and guns were outlawed Monday . . . whatever the number of gun related deaths were last year, would NOT see a significant decrease in next year's total! Thats my opinion. Now Joe, over a few years, possibly a decade, we would see a significant reduction in gun related deaths. What would the tradeoff be?


What I would like to see actually happen is a way to minimize the number of casualties at one location.If any one of us, and I mean that in a humanity sense, wanted to kill another person, I believe we could do so without a gun. It is in my opinion much more difficult to kill MANY people at one time without a gun . . . AND WITH A GUN with whatever the clip limit is. Maybe the shooter reloads his pistols with preloaded mags . . . I think he still kills less people than the guys with high capacity refiles.
 
1
•••
Well actually it could also be argued as... More guns = less shootings, and less guns = more shootings... Imagine this.. I have changed countless peoples minds with this hypothetical situation..

You have a gun, and you want to shoot people. The people that shoot people, 99% of the time are picking their targets, because their victims will be vulnerable, packed together, and chances are they will not experience return fire...

Now you have a gun, and you want to shoot people, but now everyone in that school, theater, or church also has a gun, and will return fire.. That shooter, is many many many times less likely to choose to go shoot up anywhere, because they are cowards...

Ask yourself, pick any shooter, do you think that shooter is going to walk into a police station to do his shooting? How about a military base, or a room full of guns pointed at him.. No he is picking a no gun zone like a school..

So obviously their are shooters that yes would still go shoot up a room full of people aiming guns at him.. I am talking about the 90%+ of shooters that would actually think twice now that he or she knows their will 100% be return fire since everyone else has a gun..

The guy that gets crazy idea to walk into public place and shoot, shouldn't have access to guns and his fantasies should remain fantasies.

Your imaginary situation is just that, imaginary. And reality is that there is hard direct correlation between the number of guns per capita and the number of gun deaths. It is partially because of the accidental deaths and suicides, but even for homicides more guns lead to more killings.
 
0
•••
The guy that gets crazy idea to walk into public place and shoot, shouldn't have access to guns and his fantasies should remain fantasies.

Your imaginary situation is just that, imaginary. And reality is that there is hard direct correlation between the number of guns per capita and the number of gun deaths. It is partially because of the accidental deaths and suicides, but even for homicides more guns lead to more killings.

Its really simple actually, I found the simpler words for you.

That crazy guy, with the crazy idea honestly didnt just wake up and decide hes going to shoot up a theater (OBVIOUSLY SOME DO) ... that crazy person is pre-meditating, weighing his risks, and considering how many people he can kill...

Very simple, so simple, your that crazy guy, your selecting where you want to shoot up... are you going to shoot-up a church if I told you everyone in that church had a gun, or are you going to the gun-free zone where you can do insane insane damage... The answer is obvious...

So from that, we just realized, that yeah, more guns, equal less killings, and less shootings..

Your only rebuttal to this is to bring up some specific situation... or disregard the number of PREVENTED shootings, PREVENTED deaths that happened from each separate shooting...

Also, I am selling gunentry.com for wherever they want their population to submit their firearms for data entry to be listed legally from their iphones by sending pictures of their guns.. I dont know lol.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Thread reallly off topic..this gun talk should have a thread of it's own.
 
0
•••
As for political correctness, it's a tough one. Sometime it's better to avoid these sensitive subjects like @MapleDots . Some mistake it for weakness when most of the time it's just a matter of picking your battles wisely.

Epik and Rob Monster is a good example when one mixes personal views with business. The best thing is to stay neutral focus on the task at hand and that is to conduct business. If I want to give my personal opinion on a sensitive subject then I will make an alter ego and do it outside of my business.
 
Last edited:
2
•••
Okay were back on topic starting now...
 
1
•••
Its really simple actually, I found the simpler words for you.

That crazy guy, with the crazy idea honestly didnt just wake up and decide hes going to shoot up a theater (OBVIOUSLY SOME DO) ... that crazy person is pre-meditating, weighing his risks, and considering how many people he can kill...

Very simple, so simple, your that crazy guy, your selecting where you want to shoot up... are you going to shoot-up a church if I told you everyone in that church had a gun, or are you going to the gun-free zone where you can do insane insane damage... The answer is obvious...

So from that, we just realized, that yeah, more guns, equal less killings, and less shootings..

Your only rebuttal to this is to bring up some specific situation... or disregard the number of PREVENTED shootings, PREVENTED deaths that happened from each separate shooting...

Also, I am selling gunentry.com for wherever they want their population to submit their firearms for data entry to be listed legally from their iphones by sending pictures of their guns.. I dont know lol.

My only rebuttal to that are FACTS.

Don't confuse those with ALTERNATIVE FACTS.

Facts, as in hard numbers, stats and research, show direct STRONG correlation between the number of guns and the number of gun deaths.

A 19 year old in another developed country can pre-meditate all he wants, but he won't be able get a gun without raising suspicion and getting arrested before doing a damage. While in the US, those idiots can just go and borrow few from the gun arsenal of a daddy or a mommy or just go and buy from unregistered seller for $xxx to $xxxx.
 
0
•••
1
•••
Back