I am a hunter. I am a diver. I am so buying one of these, and while i do i will thank God, master of all life, including atheists, that I live in the United States of America!

Quit cracking me up man! :lol: You're messing with the Utopia vision now though, so careful! :D

-S

Let me put it into a clearer perspective. Weapons ARE invented. Since the dawn of mankind they have been used to force people to do things they would not normally do. If all weapons disappeared I can assure you that I would invent some kind of a weapon and use it to subjugate everyone else. Eventually I would have to fight with other a$$holes like me.

Consider the other a$$hole owns a private plane. Is that your excuse to station stingers in your household? And if he is a farmer and own a bulldozer, do you field a Milan in your garden?

It's just human nature. There is no eliminating the "weapon" factor. However, if YOU had a weapon as well, I would not attack you because I might lose. I would build a weapon better than yours so I could attack you if I wanted to. But then you see me building a better weapon and make an even better weapon.........blah blah blah

I can'T see this weapon being any better. Only being more barbaric. certainly, there are cultural influences as well. People can learn not fo love violence and weapons. But my impression is, in american culture, medias and real life, both is cult - more cult than in any other western country.

As far as your argument that weapons are to easy to use goes, so are cars. Millions of people worldwide are killed by automobiles and no one cares because no one wants to see them get banned since they rely on them. But for gun-haters it is easy to hate guns because the vast majority of them have never used one. Cars kill more people than guns, why don't we ban them?

I don't know about you, but usually people board cars with the intention not to hit something. when you draw a weapon, that intention reverses to it's opposite. I knew that somebody would make the car compairson - it always pops up in discussions like this. Always, really. Telling by years of multiple-threads-long experience. :)

Clubs are also easy to use; swing at target's head with maximum force. Care to ban blunt objects?

If they carry a short chain with an iron ball with stings at the top, yes.

I will make no argument against the fact that my gun (Walther P38) is for killing people who attack me or another person. Sometimes I shoot cans with it for fun.

And sometimes you stab cushions for fun as well with this gas-knife?

The only thing that would stop me from using a grenade or a machine gun (if they were legal) is the potential for collateral damage. A crimninal would have no such objections, which is why I need a weapon to defend myslef.

Yes, maybe. But you do not need an army, nor military equipment for that. Three years ago I was attacked on open street by a maniac, with a knife. Former training (19 years) and old reflexes helped me to block that stab and suffer only a cut on the hip while taking him out immediately. and I had no weapon at all. The point is, that training went hand in hand with education and training of my character. It changed me. Going into a shop and buying a tool of death - every maniac can do thatcan do that. He wopuld be better served with such a training. consiedet the times of Mus

If anything I would argue only for more training in the use of firearms so that we do not have as many accidental shootings.

Okay, my father is sports shooter himself, air pistol precision shooting, and cal 38. I shot some rounds, but it is not my thing, mine was archery, and swords, and martial arts, and I was good at all. He learned theory for half a year before getting a license. and he does not need dumdum bullets, neither for sports, nor for self defense.

so, why is such a knife needed? and why does it need to hide behind ridiculous claims like being the ideal weapon for self defense against huge land predators?

How about we have a contest where I am armed with an illegal gun and am intent on killing you and stealing all your stuff and you are armed with anti-gun rhetoric.

I bet I can kill you and steal your stuff well before the police ever arrive to protect you. :D

Eventually if the situation favours your options. Else i would not be so sure of that.

As noble and theoretically noble the ban on any kind of weapon may be, reality says that you will regret not having said weapons.

Which does not answer the question: why such a barbaric knife? It even does not free you from the risk to close in to hand-combat range, which always is a risk. you can't even throw the thing, since oyu need to push a button to fire the gas. There is as much need for it than there is for cop-killer ammunition (those flechette rounds that penetrate protection jackets).

weapons are an integral part of american history . i just want to answer to one thing if there aren't any weapons in the streets you don't need to protect yourself from something which doesn't exist . if someday somebody threats me with a weapon to give him my car i'll probably give it to him why taking the risk to kill him or for me to get killed my insurance'll give me a brand new car or its equivalent and the poor guy has ruined its life

Weapons have and will be with us till the end. It started with those damn Chimps in 2001 a Space Idiodicy.:D

Man that thing looks efficient at opening watermelons quickly! Splits them in half automatically withing having to saw through them! Nice!! Could come in handy for watermelon eating contests! I need to get one of those! :p:D

-S

They are just looking for a nitch - but somebody will say - ohhh thats cool! I agree - taking the time to push a button after it is inside is going to never have time to happen! Its a dumb weapon.

And why not just shoot the person instead? Easier. Too much work and too much risk to try stabbing them in the first place. Probably better to run them over with a car! :D

-S

We agree on a ton of stuff I am sure, just not lately.

-S

:nope:
I'm just WAITING for these things to get into the hands of the street gangs.
These things need to be outlawed. There's absolutely NO reason the public should have these.

:up::up:

No doubt, outlawing weapons has proven remarkably effective in keeping them out of the hands of street gangs. Emerging evidence suggests that criminals are unlikely to disobey weapon-control laws because it would make them criminals. I also agree that there is no reason the law-abiding public should have these as they would indubitably fail to use them to kill innocent people in painful ways.

Forgive the sarcasm but, seriously, criminals get their hands on drugs all the time, despite their illegality, guns, despite being prohibited from owning them, and military grade weapons despite the general public's inability to obtain them.
You might as well say that we should outlaw crime.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyoLuTjguJA

I've posted this link before (possibly twice) but I will post it again. It is a piece by John Stossel about gun control. I'm not asking you to change your views, I'm not asking you to like Stossel, and I'm not asking you to consider it as truth. All I'm asking is that really, really think about the logic behind attempting to control weapons. Yes, some prohibitions on the law-abiding public are good (although I can't think of one right now) some laws are good as well, but gun-control only takes guns away from people who are not a threat whilst failing to remove them fro people who are criminals. Some posit that forbidding weapons production for any but the military is the solution. These same people fail to realize that production of illegal drugs is prohibited as well, but we have no shortage of drug problems. Alcohol was prohibited as well for a time, by sacred constitutional amendment. We all know how that worked out.

I pretty much went over this with skybird already, just a few posts ago. Look at his arguments and look at mine and make your own judgement.

I dsagree with you but I respect your opinion, I have considered yours against my own views and find it lacking in evidence, please consider mine. Maybe we will just have to agree to disagree.

*Yawn*...

Okay...so we now have gas-operated switchblades as opposed to spring-operated switchblades. On the grand scale it doesn't make a big difference.

Do we NEED these things? I don't see any particular NEED for it, but if somebody wants to waste their money on one? Okay I'll sell it to him. It isn't illegal to sell these knives. Criminals will find weapons to use whether it's a firearm procured through illegal means, to switchblades, to an old rusty steel pipe if need be.

But seriously, quit getting your panties in a wad over this thing, it isn't worth a visit to the doctor over.

Good post man! Sums it up well.

-S

some points.

Neither today nor in the past I ever said there is a direct link between gun control and lower crime, but I linked statiostics supporting both views. That was in some diuscussion on gun laws two or three years ago.

This thread is not about forbidding knifes, but one that causes espcially bad harm and horrific wounds and is almost always lethal. I own several knfies and 4 swords myself, two of which are sharp metal ones. However, they do not detonate inside tzhe victims body and make the gore spraying around like in a zombie-B-movie. It is this what I question, this gas-explosion-tissue freezing thing. Like I also question why oridnary citizens think they must defend thgemselves by not using ammunition but maybe dumdum bollets, or cop-killer ammunition. Such things have nothing to do in public stores.

I also question a basic admiration for weapons, the more destructive they are, the better. military weapons, assault rifles, MPs and such things should not have a polace in pi9rvate hpuseholds, and are not needed for self-defense - I do not want anybody starting to wage a freaking war in his garden.

And I would like to point at that gun laws yes or no for themselves do not chnage these attitudes a bit. I want to point at a cultural climate, that glorifies violence in media and public awareness, makes business of using it's inherent excitement and fear-factor to entertain people, but also lowers any inhibitions of individuals to use weapons or brutal force to acchieve what they want. This inhibition treshhold is difefrent in different countries. It becomes an obvious issue at schools in Europe, where foreigners from some war-torn place often have less inhibitions to use physical force, than kids from native families who had been cared for and lived a protected life. I know from social workers in Berlin for example that that became a problem in Berlin schools when a wave of Balkan refugees came to Europe and germany, Bosnians and Serbs alike. When you establish a living way in your nation that makes your kid growing up in a climate of fear, and paranoia, and violence, you should not be surprised if the inhibiion trteshholds to use violence themselves are lower than one generation earlier. Almost every Western police is telling you that the willingness to use violence even over profane things is climbing in almost ever ynation, and huge cities especially, and respect for the law and police is in decline. This sociocultural climate is what makes a general acceptance of weapons dangerous. Seen that way, gun laws can onoly work if seen as having consequences over the long time, and it is possible that we tlak about half or even a full generation here. Othger factors also would need to fall into place then. How many people get killed in traffic, and wounded? More than by crime. But the criome victims get all the attention, and traffic victims not. It is like with sharks, and other causes of swimmers ending up dead. the number of people getting killed by shark is very small, yet shark attacks get incredible attention. the growing loss of life caused by children no longer learning to swim - is almost unreported! that is irrational. It is not that every citizen needs to consider walking on a battlefield when stepping before his house door, but some make it appear they have a need to stockpile sophisticated firearms, semiautomatic weapons and ammunition in quantities huge enough to stop a batallion. and that is simply ridiculous.

My recommendation is if you have children let them learn some martial arts for some years. It will not only train their skills and bodies, but will also imporve their character, if done correctly. It does not create mugglers and street criminals, actually it can prevent them to become that, if training regularly and focussed. Law enforcement and courts sometimes use boxing drill camps to give juveniles an opportunity to earnt he respect they y<earn for, to let off inner pressure and energy in a controlled, safe ambiente, and learn discipline. Lack of all these is what brings many of them into street gangs, and strips them off chances to get a fair job and live by fair perspectives of them having a place in society, and having a future.

In the long run this would be a much superior investement into counter-crime than selling millions of firearms. Because in the end firearms only teach you one thing: how to kill easy and comfortably. If you want to win the fight against street crime and yoluing criminalty, you need to invest into chnaging the cultural climate in nwhich the young ones grow up. selling weapons just adresses rthe symptoms of a violence-drunken society. n the immediate present in some places it may be needed. but in no wa it is an investement into a better future. It just turns a whole people minto paranoids, like michael Moore very correctly ppointed out in his Columbine movie. you can think of him what you want, but when he made that analysis of America being a society driven by paranoic fear of what at the same time they and all their media are totally attracted by, he probably was so very damn right. Amaericans have more reasons to be afraid of cars and traffics. It wounds and kills more people. The death rate by traffic is roughly 2.5 times as high as that from intentional murder.

And since many years, the median age of criminal offenders in categories of violent crime is falling. More weapons a solution...?

a knife that once it has penetrated your body, you will then a second later be blown up. Charming. That would be pretty poor if they were sold in britian, people running when neds chase you with a knife and now knowing once he is stabbed you he is going to blow you up:o i think the inventor should be stabbed with that and then blown up:up: