INTENSITY²
Politics, Mature and taboo => Political Pundits => Topic started by: Adam on January 10, 2011, 03:54:12 PM
-
I mean I understand that you're all morbidly obese so can't run if someone breaks into your house, but don't you think it's kinda retarded when people can go out and buy a gun and shoot a little kid?
I'm glad I live here, even though it is kinda shitty here too. At least I probably won't get shot, just stabbed maybe :dunno:
-
It's because you shouldn't have to run if someone breaks into your house.
-
I mean I understand that you're all morbidly obese so can't run if someone breaks into your house, but don't you think it's kinda retarded when people can go out and buy a gun and shoot a little kid?
I'm glad I live here, even though it is kinda shitty here too. At least I probably won't get shot, just stabbed maybe :dunno:
Our Constitution gave us the right to bear arms so if one of your Redcoat soldiers dared to come into one of our houses without being invited first, we could shoot the bastard, rather than being forced to run away in fear.
-
It's because you shouldn't have to run if someone breaks into your house.
agreed :thumbup:
-
I mean I understand that you're all morbidly obese so can't run if someone breaks into your house, but don't you think it's kinda retarded when people can go out and buy a gun and shoot a little kid?
I'm glad I live here, even though it is kinda shitty here too. At least I probably won't get shot, just stabbed maybe :dunno:
What is this about?
If there is ONE country on the globe with cunty gun laws, it is any manifest of Britain and all its subjects have come to accept.
You ignorant people turned your arses skyward over a century ago and allowed any amount of plummeting to seem as your normal way of dealing with an attack.
I have a ten year old daughter and an eleven year old son who can both shoot fairly well with a target pistol. Their education will continue as they grow older. My hope is that they will both someday become as "second nature" as I am with my weapons.
-
Admittedly, some types of weapons must be registered with the federal government and some types of weaponry are restricted, but at least Law Abiding Americans can carry our own means of self defense, for the most part.
What are you talking about?
Are you making a reference to the "Arizona shooting" or something?
If so, then you must understand that Arizona Representative Gilfords was a liberal. Arizona is mostly a conservative state, although the voting has not shown this recently. One retard took things into his own hands instead of using his right to vote. This is sad, but it had nothing to do with gun laws.
DO NOT ATTEMPT SPIN THIS TRAGEDY AS BEING ABOUT GUN LAWS< PLEASE>.
Guns do not kill people. People do!
-
I have a ten year old daughter and an eleven year old son who can both shoot fairly well with a target pistol.
That's pretty disgusting to me. Not to mention scary.
I personally feel much safer in a country with stricter gun laws than I would in the US
-
but the "bad guys" will still have guns. I think it is important to be able to defend yourself.
-
I have a ten year old daughter and an eleven year old son who can both shoot fairly well with a target pistol.
That's pretty disgusting to me. Not to mention scary.
I personally feel much safer in a country with stricter gun laws than I would in the US
Do you really feel this strongly about the issue, or are you simply trying to start drama because you feel that the forum is becoming boring?
I'm just curious.
-
:laugh: Honestly? I feel like arguing. Not necessarily drama. Something to post in though. I can't be arsed with just the usual crap much anymore
But I definitely do prefer the gun laws we have in this country though, rather than american ones
but the "bad guys" will still have guns. I think it is important to be able to defend yourself.
Here the "bad guys" almost exclusively use them on each other - it's usually gang related and drugs related. Very unlikely I will ever get shot. If my neighbours all had guns though...
-
I have a ten year old daughter and an eleven year old son who can both shoot fairly well with a target pistol.
That's pretty disgusting to me. Not to mention scary.
I personally feel much safer in a country with stricter gun laws than I would in the US
I think you are scary.
-
:laugh: Honestly? I feel like arguing. Not necessarily drama. Something to post in though. I can't be arsed with just the usual crap much anymore
But I definitely do prefer the gun laws we have in this country though, rather than american ones
but the "bad guys" will still have guns. I think it is important to be able to defend yourself.
Here the "bad guys" almost exclusively use them on each other - it's usually gang related and drugs related. Very unlikely I will ever get shot. If my neighbours all had guns though...
Most of my neighbors even here in liberal Ct have guns and I have never been or feared being shot. I grew up with them too
-
but the "bad guys" will still have guns. I think it is important to be able to defend yourself.
It is important to understand that any law restricting weaponry from law abiding citizens does not apply to those who do not subscribe to the law. Once all the guns are taken from law abiding citizens, then the only people who will have guns are those who do not abide by the law of the land.
In other words, we will be like British subjects. No way to defend our freedoms, nor our own personal ways of life.
-
I have a ten year old daughter and an eleven year old son who can both shoot fairly well with a target pistol.
That's pretty disgusting to me. Not to mention scary.
I personally feel much safer in a country with stricter gun laws than I would in the US
Do you really feel this strongly about the issue, or are you simply trying to start drama because you feel that the forum is becoming boring?
I'm just curious.
Perhaps I should explain. Earlier today you started three new threads on the controversial topics of teen sex, abortion and gun control. Your original posts consist of very brief descriptions of the controversy in question, and you made a polarized statement on the issue on two of the threads. In this thread, you do not even have a coherent argument. You are simply throwing out insults. This is unusual behavior for you, so I believe that you are trying to get some sort of reaction out of your readers. The obvious reaction to an insult is outrage, so it seems logical to believe that you are trying to start an argument.
-
:laugh: Honestly? I feel like arguing. Not necessarily drama. Something to post in though. I can't be arsed with just the usual crap much anymore
But I definitely do prefer the gun laws we have in this country though, rather than american ones
but the "bad guys" will still have guns. I think it is important to be able to defend yourself.
Here the "bad guys" almost exclusively use them on each other - it's usually gang related and drugs related. Very unlikely I will ever get shot. If my neighbours all had guns though...
Most of my neighbors even here in liberal Ct have guns and I have never been or feared being shot. I grew up with them too
If you had need of a weapon tonight, you would knock on his door, right?
I only know of three houses in the extended neighborhood who do not have weapons to defend themselves.
I can not imagine living in an environment where the criminal element had nothing to fear from the average home owner.
-
I'm pretty sure it's much safer living here than most parts of the US
What do I need to protect mself with a gun from? (other than the unlikely event that someone will baek into my house while I am here and threaten me while I have time to get my gun and load it)
-
:laugh: Honestly? I feel like arguing. Not necessarily drama. Something to post in though. I can't be arsed with just the usual crap much anymore
But I definitely do prefer the gun laws we have in this country though, rather than american ones
but the "bad guys" will still have guns. I think it is important to be able to defend yourself.
Here the "bad guys" almost exclusively use them on each other - it's usually gang related and drugs related. Very unlikely I will ever get shot. If my neighbours all had guns though...
Most of my neighbors even here in liberal Ct have guns and I have never been or feared being shot. I grew up with them too
If you had need of a weapon tonight, you would knock on his door, right?
:laugh:
Not likely but I needed to go hunting or something I could manage one with a days notice.. As for other things there are many things just about as dangerous in the confines of a house that are secreted all around my house shed and car. My wife is very anti gun and I at the moment have none but am considering it in the future
-
:laugh: Honestly? I feel like arguing. Not necessarily drama. Something to post in though. I can't be arsed with just the usual crap much anymore
But I definitely do prefer the gun laws we have in this country though, rather than american ones
but the "bad guys" will still have guns. I think it is important to be able to defend yourself.
Here the "bad guys" almost exclusively use them on each other - it's usually gang related and drugs related. Very unlikely I will ever get shot. If my neighbours all had guns though...
What if a gang member or drug addict wanted to rob you ? That isnt unheard of. I got mugged once. I guess you'll say that's cause I'm an American ;) ;D
-
If it isn't guns, people will find other ways to kill others. Remove all dangerous items and they'll use their fists. Humans are extremely inventive when it comes to their killing.
I personally don't see the problem on guns, although there should be strict regulations when it comes to obtaining them like psychriatric evaluation, age limits, extra licenses to use more harmful ammo. If people try to burgle your house etc, you should be able to defend yourself.
-
But muggings usually happen on the street, right? I wouldn't have my gun with me then :P
-
I have a ten year old daughter and an eleven year old son who can both shoot fairly well with a target pistol.
That's pretty disgusting to me. Not to mention scary.
I personally feel much safer in a country with stricter gun laws than I would in the US
Slave! :finger:
-
If it isn't guns, people will find other ways to kill others. Remove all dangerous items and they'll use their fists. Humans are extremely inventive when it comes to their killing.
I personally don't see the problem on guns, although there should be strict regulations when it comes to obtaining them like psychriatric evaluation, age limits, extra licenses to use more harmful ammo. If people try to burgle your house etc, you should be able to defend yourself.
I'd rather take my chances against people with knives and fists than a loaded gun though
-
... extra licenses to use more harmful ammo...
There's no such thing. A FMJ round nose will kill you just as dead as a hollow point.
-
I thought there was ammo that can only immobilise at best, no?
-
... extra licenses to use more harmful ammo...
There's no such thing. A FMJ round nose will kill you just as dead as a hollow point.
Which is why I'd much prefer a fist to the face than a bullet :autism:
EDIT: although I AM incredibly good looking... maybe I should reconsider this...
-
... extra licenses to use more harmful ammo...
There's no such thing. A FMJ round nose will kill you just as dead as a hollow point.
A cannon round is deadlier than either. ;)
-
I'm pretty sure it's much safer living here than most parts of the US
What do I need to protect mself with a gun from? (other than the unlikely event that someone will baek into my house while I am here and threaten me while I have time to get my gun and load it)
Fair enough.
At least now, I can see how useless and asinine this topic is and was from the moment of its creation.
I hope that trouble never comes your way, because you will be completely helpless to defend yourself from severe harm.
Now you know a bit more about me and I know a bit more about you.
Simply put, do not try to break into my house, if you want to celebrate another birthday. In fact you would be wise to steer clear of this entire division of the city.
-
But muggings usually happen on the street, right? I wouldn't have my gun with me then :P
... exactly, cunty gun laws and such. :lol:
-
But muggings usually happen on the street, right? I wouldn't have my gun with me then :P
... exactly, cunty gun laws and such. :lol:
What do you mean? I was assuming that even if we did allow guns here, we wouldn't allow them on the streets
-
But muggings usually happen on the street, right? I wouldn't have my gun with me then :P
... exactly, cunty gun laws and such. :lol:
What do you mean? I was assuming that even if we did allow guns here, we wouldn't allow them on the streets
As I stated, earlier, you lot have turned your arses skyward over a century ago.
Why THE FUCK would you NOT be allowed to CARRY your weapons with you, FFS!!!
-
But muggings usually happen on the street, right? I wouldn't have my gun with me then :P
... exactly, cunty gun laws and such. :lol:
What do you mean? I was assuming that even if we did allow guns here, we wouldn't allow them on the streets
As I stated, earlier, you lot have turned your arses skyward over a century ago.
Why THE FUCK would you NOT be allowed to CARRY your weapons with you, FFS!!!
Everyone walking round the street with a loaded gun on them? Yeah... sounds like a really safe place to raise your kids :snowman:
-
I thought there was ammo that can only immobilise at best, no?
Not that I've ever heard of.
A .22 air rifle to the temple, through the eye socket or straight into the aorta will kill you just as dead as a blast from a 12ga. shotgun. The shotgun simply requires less skill to kill.
-
If it isn't guns, people will find other ways to kill others. Remove all dangerous items and they'll use their fists. Humans are extremely inventive when it comes to their killing.
I personally don't see the problem on guns, although there should be strict regulations when it comes to obtaining them like psychriatric evaluation, age limits, extra licenses to use more harmful ammo. If people try to burgle your house etc, you should be able to defend yourself.
I'd rather take my chances against people with knives and fists than a loaded gun though
That's just the point. You are assuming that if you can't get a gun then neither can the criminals, but drug dealers and other criminals can find ways to get illegal guns, while law-abiding citizens like yourself don't. What's to keep a person with a gun from breaking into your house?
-
Gun laws are pretty much non existant over here, not even the police force can have guns (except special branch in certain areas). The only way you can obtain one is to get a hunting license, and even then the regulations on what gun, ammo etc. to use is strict.
Gun crime is thankfuly very low. :zoinks:
-
You are assuming that if you can't get a gun then neither can the criminals,
Wrong. I said the exact opposite in an earlier post. Of course criminals get guns here. But they mostly use them on each other. Gun violence here is predominantly gang-related and usually to do with drugs.
If a guy with a gun broke into my house, would I even have TIME to find my gun and load it before they got to me?
-
But muggings usually happen on the street, right? I wouldn't have my gun with me then :P
... exactly, cunty gun laws and such. :lol:
What do you mean? I was assuming that even if we did allow guns here, we wouldn't allow them on the streets
As I stated, earlier, you lot have turned your arses skyward over a century ago.
Why THE FUCK would you NOT be allowed to CARRY your weapons with you, FFS!!!
Everyone walking round the street with a loaded gun on them? Yeah... sounds like a really safe place to raise your kids :snowman:
I suspect that you are so far removed from reality that you have no concept of the difference between a defensive weapon and an offensive one.
-
GO DUCKS!!!
(http://www.bustedcoverage.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/oregon-ducks-bikini.jpg)
-
I suspect that you are so far removed from reality that you have no concept of the difference between a defensive weapon and an offensive one.
So in America you have guns that only fire when you're under attack? Cool
-
GO DUCKS!!!
(http://www.bustedcoverage.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/oregon-ducks-bikini.jpg)
-
She has nice tits
-
She does have nice tits. I live in a big city and the gun crime is really really high. It is very likely that these horrible things could happen, and maybe you just live in a nicer world where people dont need to worry about such things as much.
I dont have a gun right now, but I live alone, so I kinda wish i did have one.
And sure you can carry them with you...why not ? And you can have a plan of someone breaks into your house as well.
-
But how do you know where you are gonna be when someone breaks in? You'd need to be nearer to the gun than to them. Then you need to load it.
I do live in a fairly good area crime-wise, you have a point there. I think even if I lived in the city though I wouldn't want a gun.
Seems weird to let any random person walk around the street with a gun. We have a binge-drinking problem in this country. There's a lot of violence associated with that. If they had guns on them then I reckon it'd be a lot worse
-
I know you cant be sure you can get to it, but I still think it is worth having. And having a gun is a big responsibility and I agree there should be strict laws regulating gun ownership, but banning guns outright is suicide.
What would you do if the dead came back to life and wanted to eat our brains ? :P
and here is a serious question: what about places outside of the westen world ? I think if I lived in Somalia or Columbia or some place like that I think it would be almost a matter of survival to have a gun
-
Yeah definitely. I would want a gun if I lived in a really fucked up place
like the United States of America :LOL:
-
:lol:
-
I remember about 2 years ago this happened not too far from where I live
Some lady called the cops on her son, and when the cops came to to door he shot all thee of them in the head and killed then
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/04/police-several-pa-officer_n_183130.html
"Richard Poplawski, 23, met officers at the doorway and shot two of them in the head immediately, Harper said. An officer who tried to help the two also was killed.
Poplawski, armed with an assault rifle and two other guns, then held police at bay for four hours as the fallen officers were left bleeding nearby, their colleagues unable to reach them, according to police and witnesses. More than 100 rounds were fired by the SWAT teams and Poplawski, Harper said"
If he gets a gun, I want one too.
-
Fucked up.
If someone's got a gun, then you can be dead like that. Whereas if they're only armed with a knife you've got more of a chance imo
There was also that american politician in the news this week. I saw a 9 year old girl was killed there? Whatever people think about gun laws, I really think something like that is a LOT less likely to happen in the UK
-
I'd happily get a gun if I had the chance, mostly because I will go ballistic if I my place was being burgled. I simply don't see letting them get away with it as an option.
-
I suspect that you are so far removed from reality that you have no concept of the difference between a defensive weapon and an offensive one.
So in America you have guns that only fire when you're under attack? Cool
Do not be a twit.
Mine do.
-
I'd happily get a gun if I had the chance, mostly because I will go ballistic if I my place was being burgled. I simply don't see letting them get away with it as an option.
You would make a decent sort of neighbor.
We may need fences, but we could subsist near one another, maybe.
:laugh:
Hope you do not mind loud rock music. :headbang2:
-
GO DUCKS!!!
(http://www.bustedcoverage.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/oregon-ducks-bikini.jpg)
I think my first gun is losing some pre-cum.
I prefer this subject, actually.
-
Didn't read the whole thread, but people who live without guns don't understand those who do. Kids getting shot? A few months ago, heard about a baby getting killed by being tossed out the window of a moving car on the freeway. People are sick.
-
Didn't read the whole thread, but people who live without guns don't understand those who do. Kids getting shot? A few months ago, heard about a baby getting killed by being tossed out the window of a moving car on the freeway. People are sick.
Very true!
Hey, when I was a teen, one of my best friends was beaten to death with a baseball bat. Do we outlaw baseball?
... or do we find a way to not hate?
My carrying a weapon with me at all times has nothing to do with whether or not I hate people. I DO hate people, but I choose to live with them. I can not do otherwise in this life. It is just that, some of the people in this world, I do not trust to do the right thing, without some encouragement.
-
some of the people in this world, I do not trust to do the right thing, without some encouragement.
So you give them a gun... nice logic there
-
some of the people in this world, I do not trust to do the right thing, without some encouragement.
So you give them a gun... nice logic there
No, dumbass!
I make sure that I know more about handling a gun than they do.
Very simple!
-
I think the point is that we arent giving bad people guns - they already have guns, we're protecting ourselves from the people that will have guns no matter what
-
I do like playing with guns, but surely the easier it is to get hold of guns, and the more guns there are in circulation, the more chance there is of gun related incedents. It's OK saying that it's a good idea to have them for self-defence if someone breaks into your house, but that just means that the burglar is more likely to carry a gun. Therefore the people who choose not to keep a gun are in more danger.
Also, what happens when someone who has a gun for self-defence has a breakdown? It is so much easier for him to go on a rampage and kill lots of people.
-
Didn't read the whole thread, but people who live without guns don't understand those who do. Kids getting shot? A few months ago, heard about a baby getting killed by being tossed out the window of a moving car on the freeway. People are sick.
Very true!
Hey, when I was a teen, one of my best friends was beaten to death with a baseball bat. Do we outlaw baseball?
... or do we find a way to not hate?
My carrying a weapon with me at all times has nothing to do with whether or not I hate people. I DO hate people, but I choose to live with them. I can not do otherwise in this life. It is just that, some of the people in this world, I do not trust to do the right thing, without some encouragement.
For me that is one reason why it is not a good idea to let people carry guns.
-
I do like playing with guns, but surely the easier it is to get hold of guns, and the more guns there are in circulation, the more chance there is of gun related incedents. It's OK saying that it's a good idea to have them for self-defence if someone breaks into your house, but that just means that the burglar is more likely to carry a gun. Therefore the people who choose not to keep a gun are in more danger.
Also, what happens when someone who has a gun for self-defence has a breakdown? It is so much easier for him to go on a rampage and kill lots of people.
^^ Everything you just said is basically true, but it's impossible to fight it. Having morals is fine, but the world is going to be harsh .
especially this part
"Therefore the people who choose not to keep a gun are in more danger"
-
Also, what happens when someone who has a gun for self-defence has a breakdown? It is so much easier for him to go on a rampage and kill lots of people.
Exactly. How many people flip out and punch someone or attack someone in another way? Usually it doesn't result in death. If that person had a gun, it's more likely that it would/. There was a guy here who had a gun (hunting) and he had a breakdown and shot a load of people. That's an isolated incident in this country, but if we all had guns then I reckon it would be much more common.
Look at the school shootings. We don't get those here
-
I do like playing with guns, but surely the easier it is to get hold of guns, and the more guns there are in circulation, the more chance there is of gun related incedents. It's OK saying that it's a good idea to have them for self-defence if someone breaks into your house, but that just means that the burglar is more likely to carry a gun. Therefore the people who choose not to keep a gun are in more danger.
Also, what happens when someone who has a gun for self-defence has a breakdown? It is so much easier for him to go on a rampage and kill lots of people.
^^ Everything you just said is basically true, but it's impossible to fight it. Having morals is fine, but the world is going to be harsh .
especially this part
"Therefore the people who choose not to keep a gun are in more danger"
It's not a moral issue for me. I think society is safer without guns being readily available. I'm no expert on gun culture, but over here few housebreakers carry guns. They know the homeowner is unlikely to be armed, and it's not worth the extra time in jail that carrying a gun brings.
Yes, criminals over here can get hold of guns, but they tend to use them against other people who are likely to have guns.
We do have a problem with knives. A lot of people carry knives. A lot of them say they carry them for protection.
In a way this whole arrgument reminds me of an arms race, with guns=nuclear weapons. Some people think the world is a safer place with the deterrent that nuclear weapons bring. Others think the world would e a better place if all nuclear weapons were scrapped.
-
butterflies is right
And I'm not just saying that so she'll have sex with me
-
If no one had guns, that would make sense. It guns were totally outlawed no one would have to worry about them.
It is like you guys are arguing that we should have a safe society, and Im saying that society isnt safe so be prepared.
And I dont get the nuclear arms comparison. Cause no guns in the whole world anywhere would solve the problem as would no nukes. But there are some hiding, everywhere.
-
Abstract, "Crime, Deterrence, and Right-To-Carry Concealed Handguns". JSTOR, Volume 26, Number 1.
Using cross‐sectional time‐series data for U.S. counties from 1977 to 1992, we find that allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons deters violent crimes, without increasing accidental deaths. If those states without right‐to‐carry concealed gun provisions had adopted them in 1992, county‐ and state‐level data indicate that approximately 1,500 murders would have been avoided yearly. Similarly, we predict that rapes would have declined by over 4,000, robbery by over 11,000, and aggravated assaults by over 60,000. We also find criminals substituting into property crimes involving stealth, where the probability of contact between the criminal and the victim is minimal. Further, higher arrest and conviction rates consistently reduce crime. The estimated annual gain from all remaining states adopting these laws was at least $5.74 billion in 1992. The annual social benefit from an additional concealed handgun permit is as high as $5,000.
Source (http://www.jstor.org/stable/724720)
-
Also, what happens when someone who has a gun for self-defence has a breakdown? It is so much easier for him to go on a rampage and kill lots of people.
Exactly. How many people flip out and punch someone or attack someone in another way? Usually it doesn't result in death. If that person had a gun, it's more likely that it would/. There was a guy here who had a gun (hunting) and he had a breakdown and shot a load of people. That's an isolated incident in this country, but if we all had guns then I reckon it would be much more common.
Look at the school shootings. We don't get those here
There's no way to effectively control it in the US. There's too many and no one knows who has what. . It doesn't make sense to compare the US to a country that's the size of one of our states. There's about six times as many guns in the US as people in the UK. Not questioning your morality, it's honorable and likey works well there.
-
If no one had guns, that would make sense. It guns were totally outlawed no one would have to worry about them.
It is like you guys are arguing that we should have a safe society, and Im saying that society isnt safe so be prepared.
And I dont get the nuclear arms comparison. Cause no guns in the whole world anywhere would solve the problem as would no nukes. But there are some hiding, everywhere.
Guns will always exist. If they are illegal for most people to own though surely only a minority of people will have them. In Britain if a person wants to go out in a blaze of glory they would have a hard job getting a gun. In America if someone wants to go out in a blaze of glory they only have to raid their dads gun cabinet.
The analogy with the arms race is that more people carry guns because they know that other people have guns. If I was a housebreaker in America I doubt if I would go breaking into houses without a gun. Not because I wanted to kill the person I was robbing, but to protect myself against the person I was robbing.
-
Butterflies is right AGAIN
surely this means sex with her AND her hot friend ? :autism:
-
Butterflies is right AGAIN
surely this means sex with her AND her hot friend ? :autism:
You're more than welcome to have sex with my friend. In fact, I would love to see that :green:
-
If no one had guns, that would make sense. It guns were totally outlawed no one would have to worry about them.
It is like you guys are arguing that we should have a safe society, and Im saying that society isnt safe so be prepared.
And I dont get the nuclear arms comparison. Cause no guns in the whole world anywhere would solve the problem as would no nukes. But there are some hiding, everywhere.
Guns will always exist. If they are illegal for most people to own though surely only a minority of people will have them. In Britain if a person wants to go out in a blaze of glory they would have a hard job getting a gun. In America if someone wants to go out in a blaze of glory they only have to raid their dads gun cabinet.
The analogy with the arms race is that more people carry guns because they know that other people have guns. If I was a housebreaker in America I doubt if I would go breaking into houses without a gun. Not because I wanted to kill the person I was robbing, but to protect myself against the person I was robbing.
Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that your analogy is correct. Have you considered the logical conclusion of your analogy? Let's say that guns are like nuclear weapons in regards to the arms race between hostile parties. Look at the history of nuclear weapons. When the US was the only country in the world to have nuclear bombs, we used them. During the Cold War, when any nuclear move by either the USSR or the US would have resulted in the destruction of both parties, no nuclear missiles were launched. If all parties to a dispute are equally well armed and all would risk a significant chance of death by beginning hostilities, there is a strong incentive to keep the peace. If anything, your analogy would lead to an idealized state where all people are equally well armed with very lethal guns. No one would dare use one to commit a crime, because of the high risk of death.
-
If no one had guns, that would make sense. It guns were totally outlawed no one would have to worry about them.
It is like you guys are arguing that we should have a safe society, and Im saying that society isnt safe so be prepared.
And I dont get the nuclear arms comparison. Cause no guns in the whole world anywhere would solve the problem as would no nukes. But there are some hiding, everywhere.
Guns will always exist. If they are illegal for most people to own though surely only a minority of people will have them. In Britain if a person wants to go out in a blaze of glory they would have a hard job getting a gun. In America if someone wants to go out in a blaze of glory they only have to raid their dads gun cabinet.
The analogy with the arms race is that more people carry guns because they know that other people have guns. If I was a housebreaker in America I doubt if I would go breaking into houses without a gun. Not because I wanted to kill the person I was robbing, but to protect myself against the person I was robbing.
Then what happens if war breaks out ? What happens if society collapses ?
Im not talking about Ideals, it is just reality. I live in a city with millions of people and many of them have guns. I dont want to be roadkill.
I would love to continue this discussion, dear, but I have to go meet a man about some rope. Ill reply later. :thumbup:
-
But the US didn't nuke Sweden. It nuked badass Japan
-
But the US didn't nuke Sweden. It nuked badass Japan
???
-
As in criminals killing EACH OTHER. not random innocent people
-
A big part of the issue is also Americans don't care for the government telling them what to do. Even some non gun owners here can get that, although yet another thing people from other countries don't understand.
-
A big part of the issue is also Americans don't care for the government telling them what to do. Even some non gun owners here can get that, although yet another thing people from other countries don't understand.
Why do you think people from other countries don;t understand not wanting the govt telling them what to do? Plenty of Americans want the govt telling them what to do on issues such as abortion and gay marriage.
-
That's why libertarians don't really fit into either political party.
-
This is not an American thing though. British people dont want the government telling them what to do anymore than american people
-
Then you think the British should be allowed to own guns if they wish?
-
As in criminals killing EACH OTHER. not random inocent people
Your analogy does not work. There are significant costs involved in acts of warfare. It must be strongly in the interests of a certain country for that country to commit warfare. Even so, civilian casualties are a certainty in warfare. Innocent people often die because of the actions of others.
The majority of the people who died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were civilians. The cities were industrial targets, but the human cost of dropping nuclear bombs cannot be overlooked. To extend your analogy, yes, the criminals shot at each other, but around 200,000 innocent people (Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki)) were caught in the crossfire.
-
Those who beat their guns into plowshares, will plow for those who didn't.
When you are unarmed, you are a victim waiting to happen.
If a criminal doesn't victimize you then the government will, because those 2 are largely the same thing.
-
Then you think the British should be allowed to own guns if they wish?
Do you think American should be able to rape children if they wish?
semicolon - it wasn't my analogy. It was one already being used by you and butterflies. Taking the countries as individual people, only Japan was fucked over
(and yes I know the actual even is not as simple as that - I've nearly finished a degree in history so I know Hirosh/Nag were more complex than one person being killed)
-
Those who beat their guns into plowshares, will plow for those who didn't.
When you are unarmed, you are a victim waiting to happen.
If a criminal doesn't victimize you then the government will, because those 2 are largely the same thing.
And how is having a gun gonna protect me from the govt/? Should I go shoot up Parliament? :tinfoil:
-
If no one had guns, that would make sense. It guns were totally outlawed no one would have to worry about them.
It is like you guys are arguing that we should have a safe society, and Im saying that society isnt safe so be prepared.
And I dont get the nuclear arms comparison. Cause no guns in the whole world anywhere would solve the problem as would no nukes. But there are some hiding, everywhere.
Guns will always exist. If they are illegal for most people to own though surely only a minority of people will have them. In Britain if a person wants to go out in a blaze of glory they would have a hard job getting a gun. In America if someone wants to go out in a blaze of glory they only have to raid their dads gun cabinet.
The analogy with the arms race is that more people carry guns because they know that other people have guns. If I was a housebreaker in America I doubt if I would go breaking into houses without a gun. Not because I wanted to kill the person I was robbing, but to protect myself against the person I was robbing.
Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that your analogy is correct. Have you considered the logical conclusion of your analogy? Let's say that guns are like nuclear weapons in regards to the arms race between hostile parties. Look at the history of nuclear weapons. When the US was the only country in the world to have nuclear bombs, we used them. During the Cold War, when any nuclear move by either the USSR or the US would have resulted in the destruction of both parties, no nuclear missiles were launched. If all parties to a dispute are equally well armed and all have a significant chance of death from beginning hostilities, there is a strong incentive to keep the peace. If anything, your analogy would lead to an idealized state where all people are equally well armed with very lethal guns. No one would dare use one to commit a crime, because of the high risk of death.
If no one had guns, that would make sense. It guns were totally outlawed no one would have to worry about them.
It is like you guys are arguing that we should have a safe society, and Im saying that society isnt safe so be prepared.
And I dont get the nuclear arms comparison. Cause no guns in the whole world anywhere would solve the problem as would no nukes. But there are some hiding, everywhere.
Guns will always exist. If they are illegal for most people to own though surely only a minority of people will have them. In Britain if a person wants to go out in a blaze of glory they would have a hard job getting a gun. In America if someone wants to go out in a blaze of glory they only have to raid their dads gun cabinet.
The analogy with the arms race is that more people carry guns because they know that other people have guns. If I was a housebreaker in America I doubt if I would go breaking into houses without a gun. Not because I wanted to kill the person I was robbing, but to protect myself against the person I was robbing.
Then what happens if war breaks out ? What happens if society collapses ?
Im not talking about Ideals, it is just reality. I live in a city with millions of people and many of them have guns. I dont want to be roadkill.
I would love to continue this discussion, dear, but I have to go meet a man about some rope. Ill reply later. :thumbup:
You guys are smart and make a better case than I could. I do think you are wrong though.
OK. If society breaks down, then I don't have the answers. I haven't thought of that, although I would hope it's not likely. Even if it did happen I'm not sure I'd feel any safer with a gun.
If all parties to a dispute are equally well armed and all have a significant chance of death from beginning hostilities, there is a strong incentive to keep the peace.
There is truth in that. But it would require everyone, or at least one in every household to be as proficient with a gun as the people who would seek to do them harm. I would not want to live in a society where my life depended upon my skills with a gun.
Assuming that what you say is 100% right it still leaves the problem of people going on rampages. People kill themselves here, and people hate their peers. Going and getting your gun and blowing their brains out is not an option.
I do accept guns have a purpose, butif everyone is armed how on earth do you stop people who have decided they want to die, from using them to cause maximum damage before they kill themaselves? That does seem to be a big problem in America, or at least it is portrayed as a big problem in our media.
-
Then you think the British should be allowed to own guns if they wish?
Do you think American should be able to rape children if they wish?
That's out of line. Maybe you should look up libertarian views. I'm done.
-
It'ws unlikely society's gonna break down any time soon. So it makes more sense to be concerned with genuine threats, ie protecting your family, rather than worrying about something unrealistic. Obviously if society descended into anarchy, I would want a gun. But as that's unlikely toi happen in the near future, I'm much happier with my brothers living on a street where it's unlikely any of the neighbours have access to a gun
-
Then you think the British should be allowed to own guns if they wish?
Do you think American should be able to rape children if they wish?
That's out of line. Maybe you should look up libertarian views. I'm done.
How? Point is just because I think the govt shouldn't dictate what people do doesnt mean I think people should be able to do anything and everything they want. Obviously I'm not saying owning a gun is as bad as child rape. I'musing an extreme example
-
Those who beat their guns into plowshares, will plow for those who didn't.
When you are unarmed, you are a victim waiting to happen.
If a criminal doesn't victimize you then the government will, because those 2 are largely the same thing.
And how is having a gun gonna protect me from the govt/? Should I go shoot up Parliament? :tinfoil:
FUCK YEAH!!! :2thumbsup: :2thumbsup: :2thumbsup: :2thumbsup: :2thumbsup:
(http://images.fanpop.com/images/image_uploads/Cool-V-Action-Figure-v-for-vendetta-524720_467_550.jpg)
-
Maybe I'd get a day named after me with fireworks then :zoinks:
-
Maybe I'd get a day named after me with fireworks then :zoinks:
I'll drink beer in your honor!! :2thumbsup:
:party: :party: :party: :party: :party: :party: :party: :party:
-
How? Point is just because I think the govt shouldn't dictate what people do doesnt mean I think people should be able to do anything and everything they want.
If it doesn't hurt anyone else, then yes they should.
-
How? Point is just because I think the govt shouldn't dictate what people do doesnt mean I think people should be able to do anything and everything they want.
If it doesn't hurt anyone else, then yes they should.
Guns are designed for that purpose
-
How? Point is just because I think the govt shouldn't dictate what people do doesnt mean I think people should be able to do anything and everything they want.
If it doesn't hurt anyone else, then yes they should.
Guns are designed for that purpose
Owning a gun is morally different than using a gun.
-
How? Point is just because I think the govt shouldn't dictate what people do doesnt mean I think people should be able to do anything and everything they want.
If it doesn't hurt anyone else, then yes they should.
Guns are designed for that purpose
In most self defense cases in the US, the gun is never fired. The mere presence of a gun deters crime.
-
OK, everyone can have guns... no bullets though , coz you're not gonna use it :zoinks:
-
How? Point is just because I think the govt shouldn't dictate what people do doesnt mean I think people should be able to do anything and everything they want.
If it doesn't hurt anyone else, then yes they should.
Guns are designed for that purpose
Now we're just back to talk of knives and such. Meh.
-
Sole purpose of knives is to kill?
Here in England we mostly use them for cutting up food
-
Sole purpose of knives is to kill?
Here in England we mostly use them for cutting up food
Guns can be used to feed your family too. ::)
-
What I'd like to know is, what about all these school shootings. It's not criminals who would have guns anyway even if they were illegal that are doing it. It's kids who are using guns because they are so easy to get hold of.
Is that alone not a good enough reason to stop everyone owning guns?
-
Sole purpose of knives is to kill?
Here in England we mostly use them for cutting up food
Guns can be used to feed your family too. ::)
I don't think I'd feed my kids their dinner off a pistol
But then agagin, I'm not an inbred, degenerate american :snowman:
-
What I'd like to know is, what about all these school shootings. It's not criminals who would have guns anyway even if they were illegal that are doing it. It's kids who are using guns because they are so easy to get hold of.
Is that alone not a good enough reason to stop everyone owning guns?
No.
-
Sole purpose of knives is to kill?
No, to cut. I'm not saying guns are great, or proper in every hand, but neither are knives or cars with babies on the freeway for that matter. I don't even own one, but it's my liberty to have one if I wish. Like I said, I know others don't understand and don't expect them to, you most likely shouldn't expect it either.
-
Knives and cars all serve an obvious (non-violent ) purpose. Guns don;t. If guns were used as inhalers for athsmatic people, cool. But they're not. They're used TO shoot people
And why do school shootings not provide a good enough reason to end your ridiculous gun laws? Kids killing each other sure seems like something I'd wanna stop if it was goign on like that in my countrty
-
Impeding on the civil liberties of every law abiding citizen because of a criminals? No.
-
So why do so many Americans who support owning guns want to impede the civil rights of other people when it comes to abortion and gay marriage?
-
I don't know, I'm not one of them. Though you'd make a fine democrat.
-
To me it seems that the costs of being a gun-totting society far outway the benefits. If I am right guns should be illegal. If I am wrong then obviously they should be legal. I've yet to see a cinvincing argument that American society benefits from it's gun laws.
-
So why do so many Americans who support owning guns want to impede the civil rights of other people when it comes to abortion and gay marriage?
Actually. Whatever peoples views on guns. Soph makes a very good point.
-
Knives and cars all serve an obvious (non-violent ) purpose. Guns don;t. If guns were used as inhalers for athsmatic people, cool. But they're not. They're used TO shoot people
And why do school shootings not provide a good enough reason to end your ridiculous gun laws? Kids killing each other sure seems like something I'd wanna stop if it was goign on like that in my countrty
Let's say we ended the Second amendment. Do you know what would happen??
Guns would start pouring ascoss the border with Mexico. Fuck, we can't keep 12,000,000 beaners out of our country, how could we stop the flow of illegal guns??
TRUMP CARD!!! Check and mate.
:respect:
-
So why do so many Americans who support owning guns want to impede the civil rights of other people when it comes to abortion and gay marriage?
Actually. Whatever peoples views on guns. Soph makes a very good point.
The point is entirely irrelevant, unless you believe that the political views of gun owners somehow influence the circumstances in which they use their guns.
-
Soph makes a very good point.
:sex?:
I don't know, I'm not one of them. Though you'd make a fine democrat.
lol I'll take that as a compliment
-
So why do so many Americans who support owning guns want to impede the civil rights of other people when it comes to abortion and gay marriage?
Actually. Whatever peoples views on guns. Soph makes a very good point.
The point is entirely irrelevant, unless you believe that the political views of gun owners somehow influence the circumstances in which they use their guns.
I was referring to the whole "let people do whatever they want as long as it hurts no one" in general. Not just the gun laws. And a LOT of people who support gun ownership are often against the two thigns I mentioned. Slightly off topic yes, but this is I2
-
To me it seems that the costs of being a gun-totting society far outway the benefits. If I am right guns should be illegal. If I am wrong then obviously they should be legal. I've yet to see a cinvincing argument that American society benefits from it's gun laws.
:O_o:
I posted the abstract of an actual scientific study earlier in this thread. The study concluded that guns do, in fact, benefit American society.
-
So why do so many Americans who support owning guns want to impede the civil rights of other people when it comes to abortion and gay marriage?
Actually. Whatever peoples views on guns. Soph makes a very good point.
The point is entirely irrelevant, unless you believe that the political views of gun owners somehow influence the circumstances in which they use their guns.
It is an irrelevant point in the context of the gun law debate. It is a very valid point in the context of American society however.
-
Since the 80s, Australia has had even stricter laws than the UK. Guns can only be kept if they are used for pest control, hunting, target shooting, or collecting (though I bet a lot of people say they are collectors yet keep the guns in case of using them for self defence). There are even restrictions on owning antique firearms, in some states a licence is not required though, but the firearm has to be registered.
Another example of the UK Australia difference is the ownership of silencers, these are legal in the UK but only a few government agencies in Australia are allowed to have them.
So yeah, imagine trying to own a gun here, the typical person in suburbia would never be allowed.
-
Knives and cars all serve an obvious (non-violent ) purpose. Guns don;t. If guns were used as inhalers for athsmatic people, cool. But they're not. They're used TO shoot people
And why do school shootings not provide a good enough reason to end your ridiculous gun laws? Kids killing each other sure seems like something I'd wanna stop if it was goign on like that in my countrty
Let's say we ended the Second amendment. Do you know what would happen??
Guns would start pouring ascoss the border with Mexico. Fuck, we can't keep 12,000,000 beaners out of our country, how could we stop the flow of illegal guns??
TRUMP CARD!!! Check and mate.
Right. Nothing like a little cold reality. There's no way to control it, as said before. Only the law abiding would give up their guns, leaving them to the criminals. As well as making the law abiding who refuse to give them up, criminals by default.
-
To me it seems that the costs of being a gun-totting society far outway the benefits. If I am right guns should be illegal. If I am wrong then obviously they should be legal. I've yet to see a cinvincing argument that American society benefits from it's gun laws.
:O_o:
I posted the abstract of an actual scientific study earlier in this thread. The study concluded that guns do, in fact, benefit American society.
It's the middle of the night here. We likely can't be arsed reading it. Can you summarise it in one or two points?
-
Hello peoples, I just threw the trump card. I won the debate. This thread is over.
-
Since the 80s, Australia has had even stricter laws than the UK. Guns can only be kept if they are used for pest control, hunting, target shooting, or collecting (though I bet a lot of people say they are collectors yet keep the guns in case of using them for self defence). There are even restrictions on owning antique firearms, in some states a licence is not required though, but the firearm has to be registered.
Another example of the UK Australia difference is the ownership of silencers, these are legal in the UK but only a few government agencies in Australia are allowed to have them.
So yeah, imagine trying to own a gun here, the typical person in suburbia would never be allowed.
Of course guns are illegal in Australia. Almost all societies that widely allow guns still bar criminals from owning them. :P
-
Knives and cars all serve an obvious (non-violent ) purpose. Guns don;t. If guns were used as inhalers for athsmatic people, cool. But they're not. They're used TO shoot people
And why do school shootings not provide a good enough reason to end your ridiculous gun laws? Kids killing each other sure seems like something I'd wanna stop if it was goign on like that in my countrty
Let's say we ended the Second amendment. Do you know what would happen??
Guns would start pouring ascoss the border with Mexico. Fuck, we can't keep 12,000,000 beaners out of our country, how could we stop the flow of illegal guns??
TRUMP CARD!!! Check and mate.
Right. Nothing like a little cold reality. There's no way to control it, as said before. Only the law abiding would give up their guns, leaving them to the criminals. As well as making the law abiding who refuse to give them up, criminals by default.
Which is why you change it gradually. By making them stricter slowly. Harder for psychos and young people to get hold of etc etc
You need cultural changess, which obviously wouldn't happen overnight. I don't think anyone would suggest one law banning guns just like that
-
To me it seems that the costs of being a gun-totting society far outway the benefits. If I am right guns should be illegal. If I am wrong then obviously they should be legal. I've yet to see a cinvincing argument that American society benefits from it's gun laws.
:O_o:
I posted the abstract of an actual scientific study earlier in this thread. The study concluded that guns do, in fact, benefit American society.
It's the middle of the night here. We likely can't be arsed reading it. Can you summarise it in one or two points?
The study was performed in the US. It concluded that:
1. Guns do not significantly increase accidental death rates.
2. 1,500 murders, 4,000 rapes, 11,000 robberies and 60,000 aggravated assaults were avoided yearly due to the availability of guns to the population.
3. The proliferation of guns saved society a net amount of $5.74 billion dollars annually.
This is very much simplified. The original post is here (http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,16278.msg697865.html#msg697865).
-
thanks, I'll have a proper look at it tomorrow
-
Knives and cars all serve an obvious (non-violent ) purpose. Guns don;t. If guns were used as inhalers for athsmatic people, cool. But they're not. They're used TO shoot people
And why do school shootings not provide a good enough reason to end your ridiculous gun laws? Kids killing each other sure seems like something I'd wanna stop if it was goign on like that in my countrty
Let's say we ended the Second amendment. Do you know what would happen??
Guns would start pouring ascoss the border with Mexico. Fuck, we can't keep 12,000,000 beaners out of our country, how could we stop the flow of illegal guns??
TRUMP CARD!!! Check and mate.
:respect:
Illegal guns are possibly not the problem. Most of the gun problems that we hear about in America come from guns that are owned legally. If guns are illegal it won't stop gun crime, but it might help to keep it away from law abiding citizens.
-
To me it seems that the costs of being a gun-totting society far outway the benefits. If I am right guns should be illegal. If I am wrong then obviously they should be legal. I've yet to see a cinvincing argument that American society benefits from it's gun laws.
:O_o:
I posted the abstract of an actual scientific study earlier in this thread. The study concluded that guns do, in fact, benefit American society.
It's the middle of the night here. We likely can't be arsed reading it. Can you summarise it in one or two points?
The study was performed in the US. It concluded that:
1. Guns do not significantly increase accidental death rates.
2. 1,500 murders, 4,000 rapes, 11,000 robberies and 60,000 aggravated assaults were avoided yearly due to the availability of guns to the population.
3. The proliferation of guns saved society a net amount of $5.74 billion dollars annually.
This is very much simplified. The original post is here (http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,16278.msg697865.html#msg697865).
If guns stop crime, then why does America have the highest incarceration rate in the world?
-
why does America have the highest incarceration rate in the world?
Because we have faggoty drug laws.
-
why does America have the highest incarceration rate in the world?
Because we have faggoty drug laws.
What do you find faggoty about your drug laws?
-
why does America have the highest incarceration rate in the world?
Because we have faggoty drug laws.
.
What do you find faggoty about your drug laws?
That was a bit of a joke because of the title of this thread. Over 20 percent of prisoners in the US are non violent drug offenders. I'm not a drug user either, but do think the current ways aren't working, but that's another can of worms.
-
why does America have the highest incarceration rate in the world?
Because we have faggoty drug laws.
.
What do you find faggoty about your drug laws?
That was a bit of a joke because of the title of this thread. Over 20 percent of prisoners in the US are non violent drug offenders
Yeah. Locking up non violent drug offenders is not cool.
It's easy for the rest of the world to look at America and see how bad it is. Truth is, our country, and probably most others are pretty screwed up aswell.
For instance, over here I hate the way a group of people can kick an innocent person to death for lulz and be out of jail within 5 years. America is too right-wing in my eyes, but we should be dfar tougher on serious violent crime.
-
Agreed. There's something fishy in the water no matter where one is. I think most people anywhere just want to be able to pay their bills and live their lives with as little crap from others as possible. Sucky people and sucky systems will always be out there though.
-
Knives and cars all serve an obvious (non-violent ) purpose. Guns don;t. If guns were used as inhalers for athsmatic people, cool. But they're not. They're used TO shoot people
And why do school shootings not provide a good enough reason to end your ridiculous gun laws? Kids killing each other sure seems like something I'd wanna stop if it was goign on like that in my countrty
Some people like my brother use guns to hunt for food.
He has a large piece of land where he and his children can hunt deer. Both of the kids killed a deer last hunting season.
-
Knives and cars all serve an obvious (non-violent ) purpose. Guns don;t. If guns were used as inhalers for athsmatic people, cool. But they're not. They're used TO shoot people
And why do school shootings not provide a good enough reason to end your ridiculous gun laws? Kids killing each other sure seems like something I'd wanna stop if it was goign on like that in my countrty
Some people like my brother use guns to hunt for food.
He has a large piece of land where he and his children can hunt deer. Both of the kids killed a deer last hunting season.
My brother got back today from duck hunting in RI though more of a sport though for him
-
Knives and cars all serve an obvious (non-violent ) purpose. Guns don;t. If guns were used as inhalers for athsmatic people, cool. But they're not. They're used TO shoot people
And why do school shootings not provide a good enough reason to end your ridiculous gun laws? Kids killing each other sure seems like something I'd wanna stop if it was goign on like that in my countrty
Some people like my brother use guns to hunt for food.
He has a large piece of land where he and his children can hunt deer. Both of the kids killed a deer last hunting season.
I suppose that is one big difference between Britain and America. You seem to have more people who live offf the land in America, who need to use guns. We have plenty of farmers here who need touse guns. I think they need a license to own a gun. Same with game-keepers and anybody else who needs a gun.
-
Admittedly, some types of weapons must be registered with the federal government and some types of weaponry are restricted, but at least Law Abiding Americans can carry our own means of self defense, for the most part.
What are you talking about?
Are you making a reference to the "Arizona shooting" or something?
If so, then you must understand that Arizona Representative Gilfords was a liberal. Arizona is mostly a conservative state, although the voting has not shown this recently. One retard took things into his own hands instead of using his right to vote. This is sad, but it had nothing to do with gun laws.
DO NOT ATTEMPT SPIN THIS TRAGEDY AS BEING ABOUT GUN LAWS< PLEASE>.
Guns do not kill people. People do!
Arizona Representative Gilfords is a conservative democrat. In fact she is a Blue Dog.
The guy that shot her was just nutz.
-
Admittedly, some types of weapons must be registered with the federal government and some types of weaponry are restricted, but at least Law Abiding Americans can carry our own means of self defense, for the most part.
What are you talking about?
Are you making a reference to the "Arizona shooting" or something?
If so, then you must understand that Arizona Representative Gilfords was a liberal. Arizona is mostly a conservative state, although the voting has not shown this recently. One retard took things into his own hands instead of using his right to vote. This is sad, but it had nothing to do with gun laws.
DO NOT ATTEMPT SPIN THIS TRAGEDY AS BEING ABOUT GUN LAWS< PLEASE>.
Guns do not kill people. People do!
Arizona Representative Gilfords is a conservative democrat. In fact she is a Blue Dog.
The guy that shot her was just nutz.
I do agree with your stating that the guy who shot her was nutz. Obviously, in a land of laws there can be no accounting for expressing oneself outside the law.
In opposition to this position there can be no question worthy of response.
-
Those who beat their guns into plowshares, will plow for those who didn't.
When you are unarmed, you are a victim waiting to happen.
If a criminal doesn't victimize you then the government will, because those 2 are largely the same thing.
Except for the wellfare-state side of it (which is financed by the taxes of the working people and not by the ones in charge, by the way) the goverment is worse. The mafia just wants some 10-20% of your money. The government doesn't just want much more than that in money but literally wants to control 10000 details in your life, out of which about 9990 is absolutely none of their business.
-
And how is having a gun gonna protect me from the govt/? Should I go shoot up Parliament? :tinfoil:
Yes.
Why do you think the US, Switzerland and the Czech Republic have the most liberal gun laws in the world, while private guns are totally banned in China and North Korea and you get capital punishment for illegal (i.e. all) possession of one? Because the governments in China and North Korea want to prevent school shootings? Or might it be that the leaders of China and North Korea are very aware of the fact that the people would slaughter them like the tyrants and waste of oxygen that they are, if they just got a fair chance to do it?
-
Good to see you back Lit!!! :thumbup:
-
Good to see you back Lit!!! :thumbup:
Very much :agreed: :agreed: :agreed:
-
Oh, thank you! :)
-
So what have you been up to, Lit? :arrr:
-
I have been :viking:
Not much, really. Just vegetating.
-
I have been :viking:
Not much, really. Just vegetating.
Just don't turn into a vegitarian on us. ;) ;D
-
I have been :viking:
Not much, really. Just vegetating.
Just don't turn into a vegitarian on us. ;) ;D
Or worse, a vagin vegan. :thumbup:
-
Yes very good to see you :thumbup:
-
but the "bad guys" will still have guns. I think it is important to be able to defend yourself.
It is important to understand that any law restricting weaponry from law abiding citizens does not apply to those who do not subscribe to the law. Once all the guns are taken from law abiding citizens, then the only people who will have guns are those who do not abide by the law of the land.
In other words, we will be like British subjects. No way to defend our freedoms, nor our own personal ways of life.
the british are fine tho.
no offense, but americans make these kind of weird arguments way too often
"If we had gun restrictions, it would be hell on earth! Look at iceland! Death death death!!!"
"if we had free healthcare, it would be mayhem and chaos! look at norway! dead bodies everywhere!!!"
no.
we're fine :I
-
but the "bad guys" will still have guns. I think it is important to be able to defend yourself.
It is important to understand that any law restricting weaponry from law abiding citizens does not apply to those who do not subscribe to the law. Once all the guns are taken from law abiding citizens, then the only people who will have guns are those who do not abide by the law of the land.
In other words, we will be like British subjects. No way to defend our freedoms, nor our own personal ways of life.
the british are fine tho.
no offense, but americans make these kind of weird arguments way too often
"If we had gun restrictions, it would be hell on earth! Look at iceland! Death death death!!!"
"if we had free healthcare, it would be mayhem and chaos! look at norway! dead bodies everywhere!!!"
no.
we're fine :I
Though what most Americans don't understand is that their biggest enemy is the American government, not burglars or foreigners.
Henry David Thoreau complained already more than 150 years ago that most Americans thought that the right to keep and bear arms was there to kill Indians, highwaymen or people you held a grudge against in duels, not to kill tyrants, which is the real reason that it's there.
-
but the "bad guys" will still have guns. I think it is important to be able to defend yourself.
It is important to understand that any law restricting weaponry from law abiding citizens does not apply to those who do not subscribe to the law. Once all the guns are taken from law abiding citizens, then the only people who will have guns are those who do not abide by the law of the land.
In other words, we will be like British subjects. No way to defend our freedoms, nor our own personal ways of life.
the british are fine tho.
no offense, but americans make these kind of weird arguments way too often
"If we had gun restrictions, it would be hell on earth! Look at iceland! Death death death!!!"
"if we had free healthcare, it would be mayhem and chaos! look at norway! dead bodies everywhere!!!"
no.
we're fine :I
Though what most Americans don't understand is that their biggest enemy is the American government, not burglars or foreigners.
Henry David Thoreau complained already more than 150 years ago that most Americans thought that the right to keep and bear arms was there to kill Indians, highwaymen or people you held a grudge against in duels, not to kill tyrants, which is the real reason that it's there.
that is a point.
if we've learned anything the past few decades is that the american gvt IS more "sinister" than, say, the icelandic government.
the icelandic government never prepared gigantic prison camps, just in case, for example.
-
but the "bad guys" will still have guns. I think it is important to be able to defend yourself.
It is important to understand that any law restricting weaponry from law abiding citizens does not apply to those who do not subscribe to the law. Once all the guns are taken from law abiding citizens, then the only people who will have guns are those who do not abide by the law of the land.
In other words, we will be like British subjects. No way to defend our freedoms, nor our own personal ways of life.
the british are fine tho.
no offense, but americans make these kind of weird arguments way too often
"If we had gun restrictions, it would be hell on earth! Look at iceland! Death death death!!!"
"if we had free healthcare, it would be mayhem and chaos! look at norway! dead bodies everywhere!!!"
no.
we're fine :I
Though what most Americans don't understand is that their biggest enemy is the American government, not burglars or foreigners.
Henry David Thoreau complained already more than 150 years ago that most Americans thought that the right to keep and bear arms was there to kill Indians, highwaymen or people you held a grudge against in duels, not to kill tyrants, which is the real reason that it's there.
that is a point.
if we've learned anything the past few decades is that the american gvt IS more "sinister" than, say, the icelandic government.
the icelandic government never prepared gigantic prison camps, just in case, for example.
Mark this date on your calendar! Zegh made an argument against the US, that was accurate and not just stupid You'reapeein US bashing. :zoinks:
-
but the "bad guys" will still have guns. I think it is important to be able to defend yourself.
It is important to understand that any law restricting weaponry from law abiding citizens does not apply to those who do not subscribe to the law. Once all the guns are taken from law abiding citizens, then the only people who will have guns are those who do not abide by the law of the land.
In other words, we will be like British subjects. No way to defend our freedoms, nor our own personal ways of life.
the british are fine tho.
no offense, but americans make these kind of weird arguments way too often
"If we had gun restrictions, it would be hell on earth! Look at iceland! Death death death!!!"
"if we had free healthcare, it would be mayhem and chaos! look at norway! dead bodies everywhere!!!"
no.
we're fine :I
What does that mean?
Are you saying that, since you have never had guns and keeping it that way is the same as always having guns and suddenly deciding that no one can have guns? :hair:
There are already millions of privately owned guns in this country (some of which can take out moving vehicles and lay down multitudes of well armed infantry). Making a law that says "NO MORE GUNS," will never work, here.
I for one will never give up my guns and I am mostly a law abiding citizen.
-
but the "bad guys" will still have guns. I think it is important to be able to defend yourself.
It is important to understand that any law restricting weaponry from law abiding citizens does not apply to those who do not subscribe to the law. Once all the guns are taken from law abiding citizens, then the only people who will have guns are those who do not abide by the law of the land.
In other words, we will be like British subjects. No way to defend our freedoms, nor our own personal ways of life.
the british are fine tho.
no offense, but americans make these kind of weird arguments way too often
"If we had gun restrictions, it would be hell on earth! Look at iceland! Death death death!!!"
"if we had free healthcare, it would be mayhem and chaos! look at norway! dead bodies everywhere!!!"
no.
we're fine :I
Though what most Americans don't understand is that their biggest enemy is the American government, not burglars or foreigners.
Henry David Thoreau complained already more than 150 years ago that most Americans thought that the right to keep and bear arms was there to kill Indians, highwaymen or people you held a grudge against in duels, not to kill tyrants, which is the real reason that it's there.
HOLY SHIT!!!!!
TIG, YOU ARE BACK!!!!!!!!!
LIFE IS INDEED GOOD TODAY!!!!!
-
Let us argue about something.
-
Let us argue about something.
Be careful what you wish for.
-
Let us argue about something.
Be careful what you wish for.
Are you kidding me?
Tig is awesome!
-
Oh, I'm so tired. But more on this topic:
Guns are not totally banned in any European country, but gun ownership is not a right in any European country, maybe except for Switzerland. In every European country except for Switzerland you need a license for every real firearm, and in Switzerland you must now buy guns from other private citizens to get through the loophole in their gun law. Then it's still legal to have it without a license.
In most European countries you must "justify" why you want to own a gun. In many or even most countries self-defense is usually a reason to deny a person a license, how twisted that might sound from an American point of view.
There is no right to carry a loaded gun in public in most European countries, so even with a legal gun, the law is against you. You are allowed to hunt and shoot on targets of paper but not defend yourself. And the worst thing is that even among gun owners that view is usually looked upon as correct(!) So the whole European view on guns is twisted in several dimensions. Most Europeans have some kind of "subject mentality" instead of a "citizen mentality", I think.
But unfortunately I doubt that the American people could defeat a tyrannical government anyway. Maybe succesful guerilla warfare in a few very rural areas but not to win a war. But the principle of the 2nd Amendment is of course 100% correct.
-
In many or even most countries self-defense is usually a reason to deny a person a license, how twisted that might sound from an American point of view.
Actually, it makes perfect sense. Goverments always declare a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence.
By protecting yourself, you threaten that monopoly. It isn't about right or wrong, it's about who's "allowed" to have power. ::)
-
In many or even most countries self-defense is usually a reason to deny a person a license, how twisted that might sound from an American point of view.
Actually, it makes perfect sense. Goverments always declare a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence.
By protecting yourself, you threaten that monopoly. It isn't about right or wrong, it's about who's "allowed" to have power. ::)
Well, I know that. A few other Swedes know that too. But most people here say that you are insane and probably a presumtive mass-murderer if you tell it to them. The brainwash has gone on for decades here by now.
-
Licensing, carrying buying and such in the US is somewhat confusing as all the states have different laws. Me in Ct could with little trouble get a concealed carry permit for a handgun but the bordering states NY and Mass are very strict in their laws and you can be arrested for just having in in your luggage in the trunk of your car
-
Licensing, carrying buying and such in the US is somewhat confusing as all the states have different laws. Me in Ct could with little trouble get a concealed carry permit for a handgun but the bordering states NY and Mass are very strict in their laws and you can be arrested for just having in in your luggage in the trunk of your car
In Europe you can be sure that firearms must be licensed in every country except for Switzerland. The only non-licensed guns allowed are tasers, blank cartridge guns and teargas, and only in a few countries like Germany, Austria and a few states in Eastern Europe. In countries like Sweden and the UK even pepper-spray is illegal without a license, but you won't get a license for it anyway, since you still aren't allowed to have a gun of any kind for self-defense. :facepalm2:
-
You need no license for long guns in CT or any other state as far as I know. I drove part of my brothers extensive collection to NY when he moved Pistols are the ones that are more regulated. My brothers are both big hunters and I know one has several shotguns in his car right now as it is duck season for when he goes hunting almost every weekend
-
In many or even most countries self-defense is usually a reason to deny a person a license, how twisted that might sound from an American point of view.
Actually, it makes perfect sense. Goverments always declare a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence.
By protecting yourself, you threaten that monopoly. It isn't about right or wrong, it's about who's "allowed" to have power. ::)
Well, I know that. A few other Swedes know that too. But most people here say that you are insane and probably a presumtive mass-murderer if you tell it to them. The brainwash has gone on for decades here by now.
Self Defense is agression
War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strenght. ::)
-
Yes.
An example. A conversation between me and an anti-gunner (upper middle-age narrow-minded female on top of all) on a Swedish board:
She: "Guns are evil".
I: "Good. Let's ban them all then. We should start with the cops and military, since they have killed hundreds of millions of people just during the last 100 years."
She: "The police should have guns, of course. They must fight the criminals."
I: "So why don't you want law-abiding people to be able to defend themselves? If you admit there are dangerous criminals, decent, law-abiding people should have the right to protect their lives and property, don't you think? It's fully understandable if you don't want criminals to be armed, but why don't you want law-abiding persons to have guns?"
She: "I think the gun law should be harder than it already is. A strict gun law prevents crimes. Private citizens should not be allowed to own a gun if they aren't hunters."
:facepalm2: :facepalm2: :facepalm2: :facepalm2: :facepalm2: :facepalm2: :facepalm2: :facepalm2: :facepalm2: :facepalm2:
-
Yes.
An example. A conversation between me and an anti-gunner (upper middle-age narrow-minded female on top of all) on a Swedish board:
She: "Guns are evil".
I: "Good. Let's ban them all then. We should start with the cops and military, since they have killed hundreds of millions of people just during the last 100 years."
She: "The police should have guns, of course. They must fight the criminals."
I: "So why don't you want law-abiding people to be able to defend themselves? If you admit there are dangerous criminals, decent, law-abiding people should have the right to protect their lives and property, don't you think? It's fully understandable if you don't want criminals to be armed, but why don't you want law-abiding persons to have guns?"
She: "I think the gun law should be harder than it already is. A strict gun law prevents crimes. Private citizens should not be allowed to own a gun if they aren't hunters."
:facepalm2: :facepalm2: :facepalm2: :facepalm2: :facepalm2: :facepalm2: :facepalm2: :facepalm2: :facepalm2: :facepalm2:
That sounds like the gun debate that was going on here when I first joined. I was debating someone from Europe (Kiss_my_AS) and she tried to make the same "point". ::)
I think she used the term "legal protectors". :duh: :duh: :duh: :duh: :duh:
-
Yes, legal protectors like NKVD, KGB, Gestapo, STASI, SS. Very legal and very protective indeed.
You simply can't argue with someone who is brainwashed to believe that the state impossibly can do anything wrong, even if history again and again and again shows the opposite.
-
Oh, I'm so tired. But more on this topic:
Guns are not totally banned in any European country, but gun ownership is not a right in any European country, maybe except for Switzerland. In every European country except for Switzerland you need a license for every real firearm, and in Switzerland you must now buy guns from other private citizens to get through the loophole in their gun law. Then it's still legal to have it without a license.
In most European countries you must "justify" why you want to own a gun. In many or even most countries self-defense is usually a reason to deny a person a license, how twisted that might sound from an American point of view.
There is no right to carry a loaded gun in public in most European countries, so even with a legal gun, the law is against you. You are allowed to hunt and shoot on targets of paper but not defend yourself. And the worst thing is that even among gun owners that view is usually looked upon as correct(!) So the whole European view on guns is twisted in several dimensions. Most Europeans have some kind of "subject mentality" instead of a "citizen mentality", I think.
But unfortunately I doubt that the American people could defeat a tyrannical government anyway. Maybe succesful guerilla warfare in a few very rural areas but not to win a war. But the principle of the 2nd Amendment is of course 100% correct.
Thank you.
Obviously, as private citizens, we could no longer conceive of the defeat of a modern government (most particularly our own, for fucks sake - no other country on the planet could either, for that matter.) determined to stamp out freedoms, but a troubled governmental leadership that is experiencing turmoil within its own ranks and just needs to confirm support from local militia?
Again, there is not another country on the globe populated with citizenry who can begin to think in terms of protecting personal freedoms on a moment by moment basis.
America Rocks!!
-
Yes, legal protectors like NKVD, KGB, Gestapo, STASI, SS. Very legal and very protective indeed.
You simply can't argue with someone who is brainwashed to believe that the state impossibly can do anything wrong, even if history again and again and again shows the opposite.
I can't see that happening here any time soon though
Gestapo/KGB types I mean
I know you will say I should know better and that it will happen soon, but I just can't see it myself
-
Yes, legal protectors like NKVD, KGB, Gestapo, STASI, SS. Very legal and very protective indeed.
You simply can't argue with someone who is brainwashed to believe that the state impossibly can do anything wrong, even if history again and again and again shows the opposite.
I can't see that happening here any time soon though
Gestapo/KGB types I mean
I know you will say I should know better and that it will happen soon, but I just can't see it myself
So get another pet.
I will seek out more efficient ways of readying ordinance.
-
Yes, legal protectors like NKVD, KGB, Gestapo, STASI, SS. Very legal and very protective indeed.
You simply can't argue with someone who is brainwashed to believe that the state impossibly can do anything wrong, even if history again and again and again shows the opposite.
I can't see that happening here any time soon though
Gestapo/KGB types I mean
I know you will say I should know better and that it will happen soon, but I just can't see it myself
I don't think they thought the Gestapo/KGB was coming anytime soon when they appeared either
-
I think the weimar republic was very diffferent to 21st century britain
-
The whole world was a different place but people are the same and fall into the same traps.
-
I still can't see it happening. I am 99% sure we could have this conversation in 25 years and my government will not have been a threat to me in that way whatsoever
They are shit, yes. I can't stand my government. But gonna kill me? I really doubt it
-
Yes, legal protectors like NKVD, KGB, Gestapo, STASI, SS. Very legal and very protective indeed.
You simply can't argue with someone who is brainwashed to believe that the state impossibly can do anything wrong, even if history again and again and again shows the opposite.
I can't see that happening here any time soon though
Gestapo/KGB types I mean
I know you will say I should know better and that it will happen soon, but I just can't see it myself
I don't think they thought the Gestapo/KGB was coming anytime soon when they appeared either
... no one expected the Spanish Inquisition.
Absolute hilarity!
-
I still can't see it happening. I am 99% sure we could have this conversation in 25 years and my government will not have been a threat to me in that way whatsoever
They are shit, yes. I can't stand my government. But gonna kill me? I really doubt it
@ 9.1% Muslim population in Manchester "youth" riots are not out of the question in your neck of the woods. It happened in Paris not long ago.
-
Riots yeah we have had riots in some areas not far from here
That's not the govt trying to kill me though
-
I still can't see it happening. I am 99% sure we could have this conversation in 25 years and my government will not have been a threat to me in that way whatsoever
They are shit, yes. I can't stand my government. But gonna kill me? I really doubt it
@ 9.1% Muslim population in Manchester "youth" riots are not out of the question in your neck of the woods. It happened in Paris not long ago.
And, like it or not, you can't just go about blowing Muslims brains out because they riot.
-
The rioting immigrants are obviously responsible
I don't get what point you'#re trying to make
I don't like my government, no. How would guns help me though?
Apologies, seem to be on a different track; not talkinga bout guns. Often not clear enough on these things. No worries. My conversation with you began with this statement, it that makes it make any sense.
Riots yeah we have had riots in some areas not far from here
That's not the govt trying to kill me though
-
I still can't see it happening. I am 99% sure we could have this conversation in 25 years and my government will not have been a threat to me in that way whatsoever
They are shit, yes. I can't stand my government. But gonna kill me? I really doubt it
@ 9.1% Muslim population in Manchester "youth" riots are not out of the question in your neck of the woods. It happened in Paris not long ago.
And, like it or not, you can't just go about blowing Muslims brains out because they riot.
No but if enough riot they will start passing more restrictive laws that apply to everyone
-
Riots yeah we have had riots in some areas not far from here
That's not the govt trying to kill me though
Local police generally like to let riots burn themselves out due to fear of "community activist" criticism. If I get in another riot sticks and bricks are not going to be my preferred response.
I still can't see it happening. I am 99% sure we could have this conversation in 25 years and my government will not have been a threat to me in that way whatsoever
They are shit, yes. I can't stand my government. But gonna kill me? I really doubt it
@ 9.1% Muslim population in Manchester "youth" riots are not out of the question in your neck of the woods. It happened in Paris not long ago.
And, like it or not, you can't just go about blowing Muslims brains out because they riot.
We have a saying here, "Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6". Make your choice and I'll make mine.
-
Riots yeah we have had riots in some areas not far from here
That's not the govt trying to kill me though
Local police generally like to let riots burn themselves out due to fear of "community activist" criticism. If I get in another riot sticks and bricks are not going to be my preferred response.
I still can't see it happening. I am 99% sure we could have this conversation in 25 years and my government will not have been a threat to me in that way whatsoever
They are shit, yes. I can't stand my government. But gonna kill me? I really doubt it
@ 9.1% Muslim population in Manchester "youth" riots are not out of the question in your neck of the woods. It happened in Paris not long ago.
And, like it or not, you can't just go about blowing Muslims brains out because they riot.
We have a saying here, "Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6". Make your choice and I'll make mine.
But if you were to use a gun to shoot rioters here, you would be looking at serious jail time :-\ There were major riots in N.Ireland a few months ago. Regardless of what I thought of the rioters I obviously would not have the right to shoot them.
If I get in another riot sticks and bricks are not going to be my preferred response.
You're not seriously saying you would ever use your gun in anything other than self-defence, are you?
-
I'm saying rioters and other scum would do well to stay clear of me. I have been stabbed in the thigh, had two ribs broken and had a bottle broken on my head in 3 different fights. I would rather shoot 3 or 4 scumbags then allow them to stomp me when I'm down. If you feel different then feel free to be a victim if that makes you feel better.
-
I'm saying rioters and other scum would do well to stay clear of me. I have been stabbed in the thigh, had two ribs broken and had a bottle broken on my head in 3 different fights. I would rather shoot 3 or 4 scumbags then allow them to stomp me when I'm down. If you feel different then feel free to be a victim if that makes you feel better.
That almost sounds like you're having a bit of a go at me :-\
Try and remember I live in Britain. Shooting people is not an option here. If I got caught in a riot and shot at people, I would spend a sizeable portion of my life in jail. That is not a good way to avoid being a victim :-\
-
I'm saying rioters and other scum would do well to stay clear of me. I have been stabbed in the thigh, had two ribs broken and had a bottle broken on my head in 3 different fights. I would rather shoot 3 or 4 scumbags then allow them to stomp me when I'm down. If you feel different then feel free to be a victim if that makes you feel better.
That almost sounds like you're having a bit of a go at me :-\
Try and remember I live in Britain. Shooting people is not an option here. If I got caught in a riot and shot at people, I would spend a sizeable portion of my life in jail. That is not a good way to avoid being a victim :-\
I'm not, but I do take shit serious when it comes to scum thinking I'm a soft target. Several have learned better over the years.
Edit: I don't want you to be a victim Butterflies, but avoiding arrest at all costs is not a priority to me.
-
I'm saying rioters and other scum would do well to stay clear of me. I have been stabbed in the thigh, had two ribs broken and had a bottle broken on my head in 3 different fights. I would rather shoot 3 or 4 scumbags then allow them to stomp me when I'm down. If you feel different then feel free to be a victim if that makes you feel better.
That almost sounds like you're having a bit of a go at me :-\
Try and remember I live in Britain. Shooting people is not an option here. If I got caught in a riot and shot at people, I would spend a sizeable portion of my life in jail. That is not a good way to avoid being a victim :-\
I'm not, but I do take shit serious when it comes to scum thinking I'm a soft target. Several have learned better over the years.
Well, I've never said you're a soft target, because I know next to nothing about you.
What I am interested in knowing though, is would you shoot someone if it wasn't in self-defence? and if you did, what would be the punishment?
-
Riots yeah we have had riots in some areas not far from here
That's not the govt trying to kill me though
Who's allowing them in?
British / EU immigration is the same as the Gestapo/KGB?
-
I was not referring to you as scum Butterflies. I hope that is cleared up now and I am sorry that I did not express that better. If you have not been seriously injured in a fight, or seen it happen to others, then that may explain the apparent disconnect here. People who don't give cops or DAs office the rope to hang them with are less likely to get convicted of anything.
-
Riots yeah we have had riots in some areas not far from here
That's not the govt trying to kill me though
Who's allowing them in?
British / EU immigration is the same as the Gestapo/KGB?
Are there life altering problems pouring into Europe or not?
-
There are always gonna be life altering problems, and it's definitely not specific to aurope
I don't see how this in any way comparible to the Gestapo though, or any reason for me to shoot up Parliament. My govt is shit, yes, but I'm fucking glad I live here and not most other parts of the world
-
I was not referring to you as scum Butterflies. I hope that is cleared up now and I am sorry that I did not express that better. If you have not been seriously injured in a fight, or seen it happen to others, then that may explain the apparent disconnect here. People who don't give cops or DAs office the rope to hang them with are less likely to get convicted of anything.
Yeah. I re-read your post and realized it wasn't me you meant :laugh: .
I think you kind of have the wrong idea of me. I don't have a problm with guns. They are fun. I would have no moral problem with using one in self-defence. The problem I would have in a gun-owning culture is the fact that other people have guns. Some of them severely mentally unstable. I can think of one person on this site who I know has a gun, that I would be pretty terrified to live near, knowing that he was armed. If he did decide to go postal I would have no way to protect myself, even if I had a gun, he would certainly be a lot better at using one than me.
-
I hope the person you are referring to is not me although I have done a ridiculous amount of chest thumping in this thread.
-
I hope the person you are referring to is not me although I have done a ridiculous amount of chest thumping in this thread.
It certainly isn't you. You seem nice, and I doubt you would ever have reason to dislike me enough to want to blow my brains out. Although, I would fear for the safety of anyone stupid enoughto break into your house :laugh: :laugh:
-
I was not referring to you as scum Butterflies. I hope that is cleared up now and I am sorry that I did not express that better. If you have not been seriously injured in a fight, or seen it happen to others, then that may explain the apparent disconnect here. People who don't give cops or DAs office the rope to hang them with are less likely to get convicted of anything.
Yeah. I re-read your post and realized it wasn't me you meant :laugh: .
I think you kind of have the wrong idea of me. I don't have a problm with guns. They are fun. I would have no moral problem with using one in self-defence. The problem I would have in a gun-owning culture is the fact that other people have guns. Some of them severely mentally unstable. I can think of one person on this site who I know has a gun, that I would be pretty terrified to live near, knowing that he was armed. If he did decide to go postal I would have no way to protect myself, even if I had a gun, he would certainly be a lot better at using one than me.
I agree with everything above ^
btw do you mean richard? :P
-
I was not referring to you as scum Butterflies. I hope that is cleared up now and I am sorry that I did not express that better. If you have not been seriously injured in a fight, or seen it happen to others, then that may explain the apparent disconnect here. People who don't give cops or DAs office the rope to hang them with are less likely to get convicted of anything.
Yeah. I re-read your post and realized it wasn't me you meant :laugh: .
I think you kind of have the wrong idea of me. I don't have a problm with guns. They are fun. I would have no moral problem with using one in self-defence. The problem I would have in a gun-owning culture is the fact that other people have guns. Some of them severely mentally unstable. I can think of one person on this site who I know has a gun, that I would be pretty terrified to live near, knowing that he was armed. If he did decide to go postal I would have no way to protect myself, even if I had a gun, he would certainly be a lot better at using one than me.
All the more reason to buy one and practice with it. :thumbup:
-
I don't get how having a gun can protect you from someone else with a gun though
I mean they're not like swords or fists. If someone shoots you, you're either dead or likely unable to get your gun out and shoot them back accurately
I also would never have a loaded gun in my house if I had kids living there too, and would you have time to load it first in that casE?
-
I don't get how having a gun can protect you from someone else with a gun though
I mean they're not like swords or fists. If someone shoots you, you're either dead or likely unable to get your gun out and shoot them back accurately
That's why you use a semi-auto shotgun. 8)
I also would never have a loaded gun in my house if I had kids living there too, and would you have time to load it first in that casE?
I keep mine loaded at all times. >:D
-
I was not referring to you as scum Butterflies. I hope that is cleared up now and I am sorry that I did not express that better. If you have not been seriously injured in a fight, or seen it happen to others, then that may explain the apparent disconnect here. People who don't give cops or DAs office the rope to hang them with are less likely to get convicted of anything.
Yeah. I re-read your post and realized it wasn't me you meant :laugh: .
I think you kind of have the wrong idea of me. I don't have a problm with guns. They are fun. I would have no moral problem with using one in self-defence. The problem I would have in a gun-owning culture is the fact that other people have guns. Some of them severely mentally unstable. I can think of one person on this site who I know has a gun, that I would be pretty terrified to live near, knowing that he was armed. If he did decide to go postal I would have no way to protect myself, even if I had a gun, he would certainly be a lot better at using one than me.
I agree with everything above ^
btw do you mean richard? :P
No, not Richard. I had no idea he owned a gun. Now, that is one of the problems with allowing anybody to own a gun. He is a severely major retard. I could imagine him shooting somebody if they mocked his very average penis. At least Richard SEEMS pretty harmless though.
TBH somebody like Richard probably shouldn't be trusted with anything that could cause danger to others. I don't think I'd trust him to drive a car. Fuck, I don't think I'd trust him to own a pair of scissors :laugh:
-
who do you mean? give us a clue if you don't wanna say :P
-
There are always gonna be life altering problems, and it's definitely not specific to aurope
I don't see how this in any way comparible to the Gestapo though, or any reason for me to shoot up Parliament. My govt is shit, yes, but I'm fucking glad I live here and not most other parts of the world
Didn't mean you should shoot anyone or even your govenrment's out to kill you, but they are responsible for immigration and the results of such. Can agree on the not wanting to live anywhere else point.
-
who do you mean? give us a clue if you don't wanna say :P
I'm amazed you really don't know who I mean. Who seems the most unstable person on this site?
-
There are always gonna be life altering problems, and it's definitely not specific to aurope
I don't see how this in any way comparible to the Gestapo though, or any reason for me to shoot up Parliament. My govt is shit, yes, but I'm fucking glad I live here and not most other parts of the world
Didn't mean you should shoot anyone or even your govenrment's out to kill you, but they are responsible for immigration and the results of such. Can agree on the not wanting to live anywhere else point.
Funny. this is not where I would choose to live if I really had a choice. N.Ireland is one of the last places I'd choose to live. If I wasn't so attached to my family I'd be living somewhere nice now :( :( :(
-
Who seems the most unstable person on this site?
That's a really hard question.
-
I would never deny govt is the cause of immigration
buttterflies, do you mean DD?
-
I would never deny govt is the cause of immigration
buttterflies, do you mean DD?
No comment.
Who seems the most unstable person on this site?
That's a really hard question.
Fair point :laugh:
-
I''ll take that as a yes :P
-
Actually what about Pwntagram? Does he have a gun?
I doubt DD would ever shoot anyone unless to defend himself or his family, but Pentagram seems like the kinda aspie who might go off on one of them shootings in revenge for his shitty life lol
-
Actually what about Pwntagram? Does he have a gun?
I doubt DD would ever shoot anyone unless to defend himself or his family, but Pentagram seems like the kinda aspie who might go off on one of them shootings in revenge for his shitty life lol
Not sure. I sense a lot of anger in both of them. I choose to think that Duke is totally harmless, but maybe that's just wishfull thinking. TBH I don't think I'd be happy living in a street where either of them owned guns.
-
I would never deny govt is the cause of immigration
So do you think they're responsible for the results; do you see their intent as pure? If you have no problem with it, that's okay too.
-
I would never deny govt is the cause of immigration
So do you think they're responsible for the results; do you see their intent as pure? If you have no problem with it, that's okay too.
I don't think immigration is necessarily a bad thing, although it is handled badly here. In N.Ireland I think it is a very good thing. The attitudes of the locals is terrible, and bringing in new blood, who have no interest in the troubles is very good. Also the country feels a bit underpopulated, as in a lot of empty houses, and businesses closing from lack of business.
-
I don't get how having a gun can protect you from someone else with a gun though
I mean they're not like swords or fists. If someone shoots you, you're either dead or likely unable to get your gun out and shoot them back accurately
I also would never have a loaded gun in my house if I had kids living there too, and would you have time to load it first in that casE?
Guns are not magic death machines. Contrary to how they are portrayed in movies, it can take a person a while to die of a gunshot wound. There is usually enough time for retaliation.
-
I don't get how having a gun can protect you from someone else with a gun though
I mean they're not like swords or fists. If someone shoots you, you're either dead or likely unable to get your gun out and shoot them back accurately
I also would never have a loaded gun in my house if I had kids living there too, and would you have time to load it first in that casE?
Guns are not magic death machines. Contrary to how they are portrayed in movies, it can take a person a while to die of a gunshot wound. There is usually enough time for retaliation.
Good point, Michael Platt kept firing at FBI Agents for a while after sustaining a fatal wound. From a technical point of view his Army Ranger training really paid off.
-
I would never deny govt is the cause of immigration
So do you think they're responsible for the results; do you see their intent as pure? If you have no problem with it, that's okay too.
Of course I don't see their intent as pure. As I've said before, I don't like or trust my govt at all. I'm just not paranoid about them trying to kill me
-
Yes, legal protectors like NKVD, KGB, Gestapo, STASI, SS. Very legal and very protective indeed.
You simply can't argue with someone who is brainwashed to believe that the state impossibly can do anything wrong, even if history again and again and again shows the opposite.
I can't see that happening here any time soon though
Gestapo/KGB types I mean
I know you will say I should know better and that it will happen soon, but I just can't see it myself
Hm, let's see. In the US they have the "Patriot Act" and you have something similar in the UK, don't you? Do you know that the Third Reich didn't have a constitution of its own but that they founded its "legality" on a paragraph in The Weimar Republic Constitution called "The Law of Removal of Distress of the People and Reich" (Gesetz zur Behebung der Not von Volk und Reich)?
They say it's a war against terror going on, and no-one could be more happy than I, if the Islamist dipshits were wiped off the face of the Earth, but unfortunately it seems more than obvious that it's at least partly also a way to found a global police-state, not like the Third Reich or the Soviet Union but some hybride between Fahrenheit 451 Degrees, Brave New World and "1984".
-
I think the weimar republic was very diffferent to 21st century britain
And in the Weimar Republic they thought that the Weimar Republic was very different to Soviet Russia or revolutionary France...it was Germany, the land that embodied law and order. Of course nothing disastrous could happen there.
-
I still can't see it happening. I am 99% sure we could have this conversation in 25 years and my government will not have been a threat to me in that way whatsoever
They are shit, yes. I can't stand my government. But gonna kill me? I really doubt it
@ 9.1% Muslim population in Manchester "youth" riots are not out of the question in your neck of the woods. It happened in Paris not long ago.
And, like it or not, you can't just go about blowing Muslims brains out because they riot.
That's very interesting, because if white English youngsters were rioting like the Muslims do, they'd probably send in the military. But Muslims have a carte blanche to do almost anything, because they're so "oppressed" by getting a haven in a Western country... ::)
-
Riots yeah we have had riots in some areas not far from here
That's not the govt trying to kill me though
Who's allowing them in?
The government, of course. In September last year the Sweden Democrats (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden_Democrats) finally made their way into the parliament here, and the Muslim-loving parties both to the left and right are very "confused" and "upset" that over 300000 Swedes were "xenofobic" and "anti-democratic" enough to vote for them, because democracy is only democracy if it's politically correct in this country. :wanker:
-
Riots yeah we have had riots in some areas not far from here
That's not the govt trying to kill me though
Who's allowing them in?
British / EU immigration is the same as the Gestapo/KGB?
No the Gestapo or KGB at least wouldn't had let Muslims riot the streets in Germany or Russia.
-
I would never deny govt is the cause of immigration
So do you think they're responsible for the results; do you see their intent as pure? If you have no problem with it, that's okay too.
Of course I don't see their intent as pure. As I've said before, I don't like or trust my govt at all. I'm just not paranoid about them trying to kill me
Your government isn't out to kill you Soph, they're out to make you OBEY. It's when you fail to OBEY that you're at risk of being killed.
-
I would never deny govt is the cause of immigration
I'm just not paranoid about them trying to kill me
Not paranoid of their intent maybe, but are they putting your interest first? Who's responsible if you're killed by rioting immigrants?
-
The rioting immigrants are obviously responsible
I don't get what point you'#re trying to make
I don't like my government, no. How would guns help me though?
-
The rioting immigrants are obviously responsible
Who allowed them to come into the country to begin with??
Governments allow imigrations of working/underclass people because the know they'll fight with eachother. This keeps the working class from rising up against their masters.
I don't like my government, no. How would guns help me though?
If every citizen was to shoot 2 cops, the gov. would run out of cops pretty quick.
-
And I personally think that would be a bad thing. I don't view the police in the same way that a lot of you here seem to. Sure many of them are dicks and some of them are corrupt, but I'd feel a HELL of a lot worse in a society WITHOUT police
-
And I personally think that would be a bad thing. I don't view the police in the same way that a lot of you here seem to. Sure many of them are dicks and some of them are corrupt, but I'd feel a HELL of a lot worse in a society WITHOUT police
Society wouldn't be "without" police, society would become the police. Or there would be a new de-militarized police.
-
I don't see the police as being very militarised here
-
Who allowed them to come into the country to begin with??
Governments allow imigrations of working/underclass people because the know they'll fight with eachother. This keeps the working class from rising up against their masters.
:agreed: :plus:
If every citizen was to shoot 2 cops, the gov. would run out of cops pretty quick.
:agreed: x2
There are about 25000 cops in Sweden. Despite the gun law, there are about 750000 gun owners in Sweden. That means private gun owners outnumber the cops with 30:1 If most of those gun owners weren't such total submissive cunts, it would be a piece of cake to get rid of every fucking cop in this country.
-
I don't see the police as being very militarised here
They have guns, you, like most Brits, don't. Ergo: they can shoot you like any game, if they want to.
-
1. Police usually don't carry guns here
2. why would they kill me?
-
Wow, responded to this thread and it ended up on page 12; weird.
The rioting immigrants are obviously responsible
I don't get what point you'#re trying to make
I don't like my government, no. How would guns help me though?
Apologies, seem to be on a different track; not talking about guns. Often not clear enough on these things. No worries. My conversation with you began with this statement, it that helps it make any sense.
Riots yeah we have had riots in some areas not far from here
That's not the govt trying to kill me though
-
1. Police usually don't carry guns here
They don't carry, but they have them. That's kind of the point, although I find it slightly more sympathetic than Sweden, where patrolling cops always carry a 9mm Sig Sauer.
2. why would they kill me?
Why would the Nazis kill the Jews? Why would the NKVD kill people just on suspicion? Why would the Chinese military run over totally unarmed peaceful demonstrators with tanks? Why do they kill gay people in Iran? Why did Saddam gas the Kurds?
-
I don't see the police as being very militarised here
The two Brit cops I talked to in Canterbury were very nice people. I'll go out on a limb and say I don't believe they deserved to be murdered.
-
I don't see the police as being very militarised here
The two Brit cops I talked to in Canterbury were very nice people. I'll go out on a limb and say I don't believe they deserved to be murdered.
British cops are probably among the nicest ones in Europe. I've mostly heard good things of them. And like I said in a previous post I find it sympathetic that they usually patrol unarmed. If a country has such an anti-gun policy as the UK, it's a nice thing that the authorities as much as possible don't have double standards.
-
Look I just can't make myself get worked up worrying I'm gonna end up in somewhere like Nazi germany or something. If I had no other problems and things to worry about then maybe I would, but there are a milliopn other things that concern me more
-
Look I just can't make myself get worked up worrying I'm gonna end up in somewhere like Nazi germany or something. If I had no other problems and things to worry about then maybe I would, but there are a milliopn other things that concern me more
Those who remember the past are condemned to watch others repeat it. :hahaha:
-
OK let's all come back here in 25 years and we'll see if britain has descended into another nazi germany
-
I don't see the police as being very militarised here
The two Brit cops I talked to in Canterbury were very nice people. I'll go out on a limb and say I don't believe they deserved to be murdered.
British cops are probably among the nicest ones in Europe. I've mostly heard good things of them. And like I said in a previous post I find it sympathetic that they usually patrol unarmed. If a country has such an anti-gun policy as the UK, it's a nice thing that the authorities as much as possible don't have double standards.
You have to ask yourself if, in war, there is any such thing as murder.
sorry: had to edit a bit.
(I could be convinced that the faggot British cops are not the problem, however. It is the notion within the citizenry of being owed a specific lifestyle by a monarchy that must be shot to death)
-
I have often wondered if I could come to love a Sig. I shot one recently over at my new "friend's" acreage/homestead.
I have about twelve thousand dollars in my funny money account that I use for projects. A Sig would barely dent it.
I may have to go through the process and get one for myself.
-
I have often wondered if I could come to love a Sig. I shot one recently over at my new "friend's" acreage/homestead.
I have about twelve thousand dollars in my funny money account that I use for projects. A Sig would barely dent it.
I may have to go through the process and get one for myself.
I have pretty small hands, so if I ever moved to the US, I'd rather get myself a Beretta or a CZ 45.
-
I have often wondered if I could come to love a Sig. I shot one recently over at my new "friend's" acreage/homestead.
I have about twelve thousand dollars in my funny money account that I use for projects. A Sig would barely dent it.
I may have to go through the process and get one for myself.
They are great guns. Here are my P229s, the Tutone is 9mm, black is 40/357.
(http://i40.tinypic.com/2yvjhjs.jpg)
Here are my P239s. Top is 9mm, bottom is 357/40.
(http://i55.tinypic.com/1z56rn8.jpg)
-
I don't see the police as being very militarised here
The two Brit cops I talked to in Canterbury were very nice people. I'll go out on a limb and say I don't believe they deserved to be murdered.
British cops are probably among the nicest ones in Europe. I've mostly heard good things of them. And like I said in a previous post I find it sympathetic that they usually patrol unarmed. If a country has such an anti-gun policy as the UK, it's a nice thing that the authorities as much as possible don't have double standards.
You have to ask yourself if, in war, there is any such thing as murder.
sorry: had to edit a bit.
(I could be convinced that the faggot British cops are not the problem, however. It is the notion within the citizenry of being owed a specific lifestyle by a monarchy that must be shot to death)
Ive no problem with removing the monarchy. Killing them seems a bit extreme though.
-
Ive no problem with removing the monarchy. Killing them seems a bit extreme though.
At this point in time I agree. During the French Revolution it was the right thing to do. A Tale Of Two Cities is a beautiful story, The Scarlett Pimpernel is wannabe faggotry. He should not have been shun ting the guilty out of France. :thumbdn:
-
I have often wondered if I could come to love a Sig. I shot one recently over at my new "friend's" acreage/homestead.
I have about twelve thousand dollars in my funny money account that I use for projects. A Sig would barely dent it.
I may have to go through the process and get one for myself.
They are great guns. Here are my P229s, the Tutone is 9mm, black is 40/357.
(http://i40.tinypic.com/2yvjhjs.jpg)
Here are my P239s. Top is 9mm, bottom is 357/40.
(http://i55.tinypic.com/1z56rn8.jpg)
I am actually considering a few military, parkerized ones that a "friend" already owns. He needs money for things (like protecting his truck from bank foreclosure), but has not yet consented to part with the two Sigs I have my eyes on.
It would help him if I took them off his hands.
-
Ive no problem with removing the monarchy. Killing them seems a bit extreme though.
At this point in time I agree. During the French Revolution it was the right thing to do. A Tale Of Two Cities is a beautiful story, The Scarlett Pimpernel is wannabe faggotry. He should not have been shun ting the guilty out of France. :thumbdn:
If anyone deserves getting killed today it's not the kings and queens but corrupt and power-abusing politicians. Monarchs in Europe today are only figureheads.
-
Ive no problem with removing the monarchy. Killing them seems a bit extreme though.
At this point in time I agree. During the French Revolution it was the right thing to do. A Tale Of Two Cities is a beautiful story, The Scarlett Pimpernel is wannabe faggotry. He should not have been shun ting the guilty out of France. :thumbdn:
If anyone deserves getting killed today it's not the kings and queens but corrupt and power-abusing politicians. Monarchs in Europe today are only figureheads.
But you would have been right there for the French Revolution right?
-
Ive no problem with removing the monarchy. Killing them seems a bit extreme though.
At this point in time I agree. During the French Revolution it was the right thing to do. A Tale Of Two Cities is a beautiful story, The Scarlett Pimpernel is wannabe faggotry. He should not have been shun ting the guilty out of France. :thumbdn:
If anyone deserves getting killed today it's not the kings and queens but corrupt and power-abusing politicians. Monarchs in Europe today are only figureheads.
But you would have been right there for the French Revolution right?
I can picture Lit using the best available 18th-century explosives to blow the doors off the Bastille! :arrr:
-
(I could be convinced that the faggot British cops are not the problem, however. It is the notion within the citizenry of being owed a specific lifestyle by a monarchy that must be shot to death)
???
-
Ive no problem with removing the monarchy. Killing them seems a bit extreme though.
At this point in time I agree. During the French Revolution it was the right thing to do. A Tale Of Two Cities is a beautiful story, The Scarlett Pimpernel is wannabe faggotry. He should not have been shun ting the guilty out of France. :thumbdn:
If anyone deserves getting killed today it's not the kings and queens but corrupt and power-abusing politicians. Monarchs in Europe today are only figureheads.
But you would have been right there for the French Revolution right?
:indeed:
-
That's the spirit! :thumbup:
-
(I could be convinced that the faggot British cops are not the problem, however. It is the notion within the citizenry of being owed a specific lifestyle by a monarchy that must be shot to death)
???
I'm not sure what he means by that. Perhaps he'll see fit to tell us :-\
-
maybe we're just too dumb to understand :emosad:
-
We stand for freedom of expression, combative debate, and the generation of ideas. There are no boundaries here over what may be said, save for one rule - be prepared to back up your words. Or face the wrath of the community.
I really think it would be better for DD to be more prepared to back up his words. I would certainly have more respect for him, and I think it might help some of the people who don't really get him, to understand him a bit better.
-
I think he means that Europeans don't love freedom as much as Americans do, since we have monarchies or have been used to have monarchies for about a 1000 years or so. I think he's partly right, even if that's not the only reason for the twisted view on guns etc that many or most Europeans have.
-
I think he means that Europeans don't love freedom as much as Americans do, since we have monarchies or have been used to have monarchies for about a 1000 years or so. I think he's partly right, even if that's not the only reason for the twisted view on guns etc that many or most Europeans have.
But our monarchy doesn't do anything. I don't think anybody believes that the monarchy owes us any lifestyle.
-
I think he means that Europeans don't love freedom as much as Americans do, since we have monarchies or have been used to have monarchies for about a 1000 years or so. I think he's partly right, even if that's not the only reason for the twisted view on guns etc that many or most Europeans have.
Read it as a personal assessment of British citizens who live off the state but want to do away with their government, though could have misread.
-
Ive no problem with removing the monarchy. Killing them seems a bit extreme though.
At this point in time I agree. During the French Revolution it was the right thing to do. A Tale Of Two Cities is a beautiful story, The Scarlett Pimpernel is wannabe faggotry. He should not have been shun ting the guilty out of France. :thumbdn:
If anyone deserves getting killed today it's not the kings and queens but corrupt and power-abusing politicians. Monarchs in Europe today are only figureheads.
But you would have been right there for the French Revolution right?
:indeed:
Fuck the French Revolution, lets have a second American one!!! :headbang2: :headbang2: :headbang2: :viking: :arrr:
:pirateship:
-
I think he means that Europeans don't love freedom as much as Americans do, since we have monarchies or have been used to have monarchies for about a 1000 years or so. I think he's partly right, even if that's not the only reason for the twisted view on guns etc that many or most Europeans have.
Read it as a personal assessment of British citizens who live off the state but want to do away with their government, though could have misread.
You and Lits ideas are totally sound, and could well be right. I just think that if someone posts something they should be prepared to back up their words. Only the OP knows what he really meant, but he seems to have a problem with backing up his words on any topic. It's a policy I believe in trying to stick to. Even if that means coming out and admitting I'm wrong, or that I can't back up what I've said.
-
Ive no problem with removing the monarchy. Killing them seems a bit extreme though.
At this point in time I agree. During the French Revolution it was the right thing to do. A Tale Of Two Cities is a beautiful story, The Scarlett Pimpernel is wannabe faggotry. He should not have been shun ting the guilty out of France. :thumbdn:
If anyone deserves getting killed today it's not the kings and queens but corrupt and power-abusing politicians. Monarchs in Europe today are only figureheads.
But you would have been right there for the French Revolution right?
:indeed:
Fuck the French Revolution, lets have a second American one!!! :headbang2: :headbang2: :headbang2: :viking: :arrr:
:pirateship:
Good judges don't grow on trees, they have to be put there by someone who cares. :viking:
-
You and Lits ideas are totally sound, and could well be right. I just think that if someone posts something they should be prepared to back up their words. Only the OP knows what he really meant, but he seems to have a problem with backing up his words on any topic. It's a policy I believe in trying to stick to. Even if that means coming out and admitting I'm wrong, or that I can't back up what I've said.
Reads like an opinion though, and some opinions can't be backed up. Don't mind if Dirt is hard to understand.
-
You and Lits ideas are totally sound, and could well be right. I just think that if someone posts something they should be prepared to back up their words. Only the OP knows what he really meant, but he seems to have a problem with backing up his words on any topic. It's a policy I believe in trying to stick to. Even if that means coming out and admitting I'm wrong, or that I can't back up what I've said.
Reads like an opinion though, and some opinions can't be backed up. Don't mind if Dirt is hard to understand.
I don't mind if he's hard to understand. I think it would be cool if he would make some effort to explain some of the stuff he says though. You, and Lit who both appear very smart people both seem to have different ideas of what he meant. I initially took it to mean something else.
It does seem to be a common theme in his posting style . He says stuff that is not very clear, and then refuses to clarify, or expand on it even though he's asked. I think it's a shame because I'm sure he has plenty of very good points to make.
-
You seemed to be saying he should feel required to back up his words, when what you really want is clarification; just saying he might not feel required to clarify.
-
You seemed to be saying he should feel required to back up his words, when what you really want is clarification; just saying he might not feel required to clarify.
That's pretty much true. Sometimes I might want him to back up his words, but most of the time I'm just asking for clarification. I suppose he is not required to clarify his words. I just have respect for people that are prepared to do so, and in the time I've been on this site he's the first person I've come across that seems unprepared to do so.
-
For me it's about my own view. Have almost a compulsion to clarify myself if seeming misunderstood. It's hard to imagine others might not feel that way, but easy enough to accept that some might not care what meaning I assign their words. Frustrating, yes, but what's a girl to do?
-
For me it's about my own view. Have almost a compulsion to clarify myself if seeming misunderstood. It's hard to imagine others might not feel that way, but easy enough to accept that some might not care what meaning I assign their words. Frustrating, yes, but what's a girl to do?
I know! Let's go to the mall and buy shoes! :cheer:
-
Please, not the mall.
-
For me it's about my own view. Have almost a compulsion to clarify myself if seeming misunderstood. It's hard to imagine others might not feel that way, but easy enough to accept that some might not care what meaning I assign their words. Frustrating, yes, but what's a girl to do?
Perhaps you're right, in fact, of course you're right. I just hate the thought of being misunderstood though, and I hate the thought of basing my opinion of someone on something that I may have misunderstood.
And as an aspie, I do more than my fair share of both misunderstanding, and being misunderstood :laugh:
-
Wow, responded to this thread and it ended up on page 12; weird.
The rioting immigrants are obviously responsible
I don't get what point you'#re trying to make
I don't like my government, no. How would guns help me though?
Apologies, seem to be on a different track; not talking about guns. Often not clear enough on these things. No worries. My conversation with you began with this statement, it that helps it make any sense.
Riots yeah we have had riots in some areas not far from here
That's not the govt trying to kill me though
What seems to have happened is you edited a post you made on page 12 instead of making a new one the first time:
http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,16278.msg705110.html#msg705110
It says that it was edited by you today at 12:06:01 PM.
-
Wow, responded to this thread and it ended up on page 12; weird.
The rioting immigrants are obviously responsible
I don't get what point you'#re trying to make
I don't like my government, no. How would guns help me though?
Apologies, seem to be on a different track; not talking about guns. Often not clear enough on these things. No worries. My conversation with you began with this statement, it that helps it make any sense.
Riots yeah we have had riots in some areas not far from here
That's not the govt trying to kill me though
What seems to have happened is you edited a post you made on page 12 instead of making a new one the first time:
http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,16278.msg705110.html#msg705110
It says that it was edited by you today at 12:06:01 PM.
Quit lying Callaway, you moved that post as a malishus prank to piss off Osensitive1.
;-) X-D
-
Wow, responded to this thread and it ended up on page 12; weird.
The rioting immigrants are obviously responsible
I don't get what point you'#re trying to make
I don't like my government, no. How would guns help me though?
Apologies, seem to be on a different track; not talking about guns. Often not clear enough on these things. No worries. My conversation with you began with this statement, it that helps it make any sense.
Riots yeah we have had riots in some areas not far from here
That's not the govt trying to kill me though
What seems to have happened is you edited a post you made on page 12 instead of making a new one the first time:
http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,16278.msg705110.html#msg705110
It says that it was edited by you today at 12:06:01 PM.
Quit lying Callaway, you moved that post as a malishus prank to piss off Osensitive1.
;-) X-D
No, I didn't.
O:-)
-
Wow, responded to this thread and it ended up on page 12; weird.
The rioting immigrants are obviously responsible
I don't get what point you'#re trying to make
I don't like my government, no. How would guns help me though?
Apologies, seem to be on a different track; not talking about guns. Often not clear enough on these things. No worries. My conversation with you began with this statement, it that helps it make any sense.
Riots yeah we have had riots in some areas not far from here
That's not the govt trying to kill me though
What seems to have happened is you edited a post you made on page 12 instead of making a new one the first time:
http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,16278.msg705110.html#msg705110
It says that it was edited by you today at 12:06:01 PM.
Thanks, Callaway. That's the page where I was trying to quote, must have hit the wrong button.
-
For me it's about my own view. Have almost a compulsion to clarify myself if seeming misunderstood. It's hard to imagine others might not feel that way, but easy enough to accept that some might not care what meaning I assign their words. Frustrating, yes, but what's a girl to do?
I know! Let's go to the mall and buy shoes! :cheer:
:lol: Funniest post in this thread.
-
I wonder if Lit has sent a :heart: letter to Jared Loughner yet?
-
I wonder if Lit has sent a :heart: letter to Jared Loughner yet?
No, he kind of shot the wrong person.
-
I wonder if Lit has sent a :heart: letter to Jared Loughner yet?
No, he kind of shot the wrong person.
:indeed:
If you're going to do this kind of thing, you just absolutely can NOT kill kids.
It ruins the political message.
-
I wonder if Lit has sent a :heart: letter to Jared Loughner yet?
No, he kind of shot the wrong person.
:indeed:
If you're going to do this kind of thing, you just absolutely can NOT kill kids.
It ruins the political message.
Can we eat them instead then? :autism:
-
I wonder if Lit has sent a :heart: letter to Jared Loughner yet?
No, he kind of shot the wrong person.
:indeed:
If you're going to do this kind of thing, you just absolutely can NOT kill kids.
It ruins the political message.
Can we eat them instead then? :autism:
Well, of course you can. You just can't get caught. ;)
-
I wonder if Lit has sent a :heart: letter to Jared Loughner yet?
No, he kind of shot the wrong person.
:indeed:
If you're going to do this kind of thing, you just absolutely can NOT kill kids.
It ruins the political message.
Can we eat them instead then? :autism:
Well, of course you can. You just can't get caught. ;)
:lol:
-
someone should drop-kick kids, as a political statement
theres a nice panel in the akira comic, where this weird kid is drop-kicked.
its so cool 8)
-
someone should drop-kick kids, as a political statement
theres a nice panel in the akira comic, where this weird kid is drop-kicked.
its so cool 8)
Akira, as in the (anime) movie Akira??
-
someone should drop-kick kids, as a political statement
theres a nice panel in the akira comic, where this weird kid is drop-kicked.
its so cool 8)
Akira, as in the (anime) movie Akira??
the graphic novel*, that the anime is based on.
* the fanatics prefer "manga"
about 2000 pages or something insane :I
6 volumes. obviously its much more epic than the movie, and the movie was pretty epic
-
Anyway, how could freedom ever be "fagotty"? Freedom is paid for with blood. That's not what I call a fagotty thing.
-
If people were using it honourably I would agree. A revolution for example :arrr:
But as it stands, it's just people randomly owning guns and shooting individuals as the need arises
I am all for guns and violence for a real cause. People are too apathetic these days though as they have it too easy
-
someone should drop-kick kids, as a political statement
theres a nice panel in the akira comic, where this weird kid is drop-kicked.
its so cool 8)
Akira, as in the (anime) movie Akira??
the graphic novel*, that the anime is based on.
* the fanatics prefer "manga"
about 2000 pages or something insane :I
6 volumes. obviously its much more epic than the movie, and the movie was pretty epic
The first time I saw Akira, I was tripping balls on mushrooms. :mushie: :baked:
-
If people were using it honourably I would agree. A revolution for example :arrr:
But as it stands, it's just people randomly owning guns and shooting individuals as the need arises
I am all for guns and violence for a real cause. People are too apathetic these days though as they have it too easy
:agreed: What the hell is up with people having computers, tellies, running water, air conditioning, heated homes and automobiles? Things were better when people rode horses and left horse pollution laying in the road. As for the internet, pffft what kind of crap is that? Writing letters and sending them through the mail via coach or pony express was better. :zoinks:
What specific conveniences that make your life easier are you planning on giving up in the near future Soph? How about the running water you use to shower after every time you pee?
-
Anyway, how could freedom ever be "fagotty"? Freedom is paid for with blood. That's not what I call a fagotty thing.
You have to first understand from whence this nonsense arrived.
This retardo thinks that because we, as law abiding American citizens, are legally allowed to responsibly own most personal weaponry, we are somehow faggoty.
While we, as a nation, probably have more faggots, as a nation of individuals, than most countries (they are allowed to be faggots here, if they choose), I can tell you for a fact (personal knowledge) there are plenty of faggots who carry guns to defend themselves.
OH! Shit, does that mean we are all fags? I do not think so. The math is inside out for one thing.
The blood is not dione paying for our freedoms, either.
These days there seems to be a deflation in the economical exchange of blood worth.
-
If people were using it honourably I would agree. A revolution for example :arrr:
But as it stands, it's just people randomly owning guns and shooting individuals as the need arises
I am all for guns and violence for a real cause. People are too apathetic these days though as they have it too easy
:agreed: What the hell is up with people having computers, tellies, running water, air conditioning, heated homes and automobiles? Things were better when people rode horses and left horse pollution laying in the road. As for the internet, pffft what kind of crap is that? Writing letters and sending them through the mail via coach or pony express was better. :zoinks:
What specific conveniences that make your life easier are you planning on giving up in the near future Soph? How about the running water you use to shower after every time you pee?
Huh? What did I say about giving up anything that makes life easier?
-
someone should drop-kick kids, as a political statement
theres a nice panel in the akira comic, where this weird kid is drop-kicked.
its so cool 8)
Akira, as in the (anime) movie Akira??
the graphic novel*, that the anime is based on.
* the fanatics prefer "manga"
about 2000 pages or something insane :I
6 volumes. obviously its much more epic than the movie, and the movie was pretty epic
The first time I saw Akira, I was tripping balls on mushrooms. :mushie: :baked:
first time i saw it i was like 10, and got decently traumatized by mega tetsuo ::)
the manga is absolutely worth the read-through:
(http://www.pauljorion.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/comic_tetsuo_34_small.JPG)
the artwork is breath-taking-non-stop
-
Huh? What did I say about giving up anything that makes life easier?
I inferred from the post quoted below that you were thinking that people have things too easy. I must have read that wrong. What are you trying to get at with that post?
People are too apathetic these days though as they have it too easy
-
That people have it too easy to want to risk all that to make the world a better place
I never meant the fact that we have it easy now is a bad thing. I meant that it has its downsides, as everything does. Nothing is 100% good or bad. The fact that most people in the west have things easy means we are more likely to sit on our ass on the internet or reading about and discussing things without actually doing anything
I never once suggested we should give up central heating and cars
-
I mean I understand that you're all morbidly obese so can't run if someone breaks into your house, but don't you think it's kinda retarded when people can go out and buy a gun and shoot a little kid?
I'm glad I live here, even though it is kinda shitty here too. At least I probably won't get shot, just stabbed maybe :dunno:
It's in the american constitution that they can bear arms. :/
-
(http://www.hyscience.com/guncontrolworks2tv7.jpg)
-
:plus:
-
One detail, though: Nazi Germany had a more liberal gun law for "reliable" German citizens than any European country has 70 years later.
-
(http://www.hyscience.com/guncontrolworks2tv7.jpg)
I hate it when an important post ends up on the bottom of the past page.
Everyone needs to see this!
Are you American?
-
I am American. Born and raised in West Virginia but I live in Pennsylvania now. I leaned the importance of gun ownership when I was kid, and also the responsibility. I dont think anyone wants kids to accidentally get shot. Accidents and what if's should not stop people from protecting themselves. What people dont realize is, what would happen if your country was invaded ? What would happen if the economy collapsed, or civil war breaks out, or martial law takes over ? People need to be able to protect themselves, especially FROM the government.
this is just my opinion
-
I am American. Born and raised in West Virginia but I live in Pennsylvania now. I leaned the importance of gun ownership when I was kid, and also the responsibility. I dont think anyone wants kids to accidentally get shot. Accidents and what if's should not stop people from protecting themselves. What people dont realize is, what would happen if your country was invaded ? What would happen if the economy collapsed, or civil war breaks out, or martial law takes over ? People need to be able to protect themselves, especially FROM the government.
this is just my opinion
gotta agree with that
-
I am American. Born and raised in West Virginia but I live in Pennsylvania now. I leaned the importance of gun ownership when I was kid, and also the responsibility. I dont think anyone wants kids to accidentally get shot. Accidents and what if's should not stop people from protecting themselves. What people dont realize is, what would happen if your country was invaded ? What would happen if the economy collapsed, or civil war breaks out, or martial law takes over ? People need to be able to protect themselves, especially FROM the government.
this is just my opinion
I honestly cannot form an opinion on this.
I can see your point eris , but on the otherhand .... I just *hate* guns , I see them almost as the root of all evil , I can't see them in a positive light at all.
Black and white thinking is a bitch sometimes.
-
but the "bad" guys will have guns no matter what the laws are, and if the laws say the people cannot have guns then they are just sitting ducks.
-
I am American. Born and raised in West Virginia but I live in Pennsylvania now. I leaned the importance of gun ownership when I was kid, and also the responsibility. I dont think anyone wants kids to accidentally get shot. Accidents and what if's should not stop people from protecting themselves. What people dont realize is, what would happen if your country was invaded ? What would happen if the economy collapsed, or civil war breaks out, or martial law takes over ? People need to be able to protect themselves, especially FROM the government.
this is just my opinion
Your opinion is similar to some of mine.
My twelve year old can shoot a twenty two caliber handgun and a twenty two caliber rifle. I have not tried him with any larger calibers, yet, but there is plenty of time for learning about more powerful weaponry.
We live in different times, these days.
When I was twelve, I was allowed to carry a shotgun into the wild and hunt with my cousins of my own age. We already had enough experience to bring home rabbits or quail to cook for ourselves on a fire. Oddly, getting my son ready to make a fire on his own (on his own is not yet completely accomplished and still being managed, BTW) was a great challenge, as was pushing the lawn mower for his first time.
We make progress as we can.
Hi, I am 'Dawg. :laugh:
I am glad to "meet" another effective American mind.
-
Before I came to this site, I assumed gun ownership for all was clearly a bad idea. Everywhere.
Having listened to some of the Americans, I'm not sure if gun ownership in America is good or bad. Obviously, allowing everyone in Britain to own guns would be insane, but that doesn't mean that we should try and impose our view on America, and other places.
America seems to be totally different type of society, and in my opinion, far more of an "every man for himself" type of society. Maybe banning guns in Ammerica would be great for them. Maybe it wouldn't. I just don't know.
The only thing that I know for sure is, that our own gun laws should remain.
-
but the "bad" guys will have guns no matter what the laws are, and if the laws say the people cannot have guns then they are just sitting ducks.
That is the one point that makes me wonder if banning guns in America really is sensible. Your "bad guys" do have guns.
-
but the "bad" guys will have guns no matter what the laws are, and if the laws say the people cannot have guns then they are just sitting ducks.
Seems obvious.
Do not take any of this crap from anyone.
You are well within your rights to protect yourself from all threats, foreign and domestic, so says our own constitution (paraphrasing, not quoting, mind you).
-
There is also the fact that illegal guns can easily be brought in across the Mexican border, making any kind of "law" banning guns leave only the naive and innocent vulnerable.
Hi, I am 'Dawg. :laugh:
I am glad to "meet" another effective American mind.
:thumbup:
-
The only thing that I know for sure is, that our own gun laws should remain.
This is possibly the very first sensible thing you have ever posted.
I have to agree regarding our own gun laws.
They (the laws regarding ownership, etc) should remain or better yet, be set back to The Second Amendment of our own constitution, thus removing all later restrictions.
I applaud the possibility of dualism in your thinking, but ask you to think this through and maybe tell us why one set of FREEDOM laws is good for one set of people and NOT good for all people.
I am not convinced that I have ever met a person that does not have a right to defend his/her own life and further his/her own freedom.
I have also met quite a few of you "islanders" and I may have underlying hate for what this country had to get past to make ourselves free from your style of monarchy, slavery, etc. but once you accept our ways you are welcome to be as American as the rest of us. I insist that the average citizen of Britannia at large has as much right to defend him/herself as any other beating heart on the planet.
-
Didn't really think she was saying one law is good for one and bad for another, but has realized banning just might not work here.
-
Didn't really think she was saying one law is good for one and bad for another, but has realized banning just might not work here.
Banning personal weaponry never works anywhere.
Do you think for an instant that there are not criminal elements within the borders of literally EVERY "gun banned" society who do not keep guns for their own interests?
Seriously?
Of course not. There are no criminal elements who think that they should either.
-
Guess that kind of thinking makes me a Faggot ...
:lol:
-
Banning personal weaponry never works anywhere.
You already know my views on gunlaws in the US are much the same as yours, but yes, it does seem to work there. It's cultural, like Butterflies said. Guns are bad is programmed into views of their socity. That's why I said very early on in this thread that someone who has been raised without guns will never understand those who were raised with them; but as for banning them, the sheer number of unregistered guns in the US makes the idea absurd.
-
The only thing that I know for sure is, that our own gun laws should remain.
This is possibly the very first sensible thing you have ever posted.
I have to agree regarding our own gun laws.
They (the laws regarding ownership, etc) should remain or better yet, be set back to The Second Amendment of our own constitution, thus removing all later restrictions.
I applaud the possibility of dualism in your thinking, but ask you to think this through and maybe tell us why one set of FREEDOM laws is good for one set of people and NOT good for all people.
I am not convinced that I have ever met a person that does not have a right to defend his/her own life and further his/her own freedom.
Firstly, you do know I'm British? Scottish, now living in N.Ireland. I meant that our gun laws should stay as they are. I honestly don't don't know whether your gun laws should stay as they are, or not.
For me, guns are not a freedom issue. They are a public safety issue. I can understand that in your country gun crime is out of control, and many of you feel that the only way to keep yourselves and your family safe is to own a gun. Basically to fight fire with fire. I can understand that if America banned guns tomorrow, the criminals would keep their guns, and possibly find it easy to replace those guns as they broke. American criminals probably have such a culture of gun ownership that there would be no way of removing guns from the criminal element. If you ban guns, then you would possibly only be removing them from the law abiders. It may create a system where the bad guys have weapons and the good guys don't. This would not be good.
Britain is a completely different situation though. We do not have a culture of gun ownership. Our criminals don't have a culture of gun ownership. If you allow people to own guns, then you obviously allow criminals to own guns. If someone breaks into my home, I know I'll lose some stuff. The insurance will pay up, and nobody is likely to get hurt. If the homeowner has a gun, and the intruder has a gun, then one of us is likely to die. I would much rather nobody had guns, than everyone have guns. There is no way of ensuring that good people have guns and bad people don't. I am certain that allowing gun ownership would only create a more violent society.
Also, and possibly most importantly, we both live in a democracy. In my country, the vast majority do not want to introduce guns to our society. This should be respected. As far as I know, the majority of Americans want to be allowed guns. This also should be respected.
Didn't really think she was saying one law is good for one and bad for another, but has realized banning just might not work here.
Yup. That's pretty much what I mean.
And I post plenty of sensible stuff. You just don't read it ;)
-
Didn't really think she was saying one law is good for one and bad for another, but has realized banning just might not work here.
Banning personal weaponry never works anywhere.
Do you think for an instant that there are not criminal elements within the borders of literally EVERY "gun banned" society who do not keep guns for their own interests?
Seriously?
Of course not. There are no criminal elements who think that they should either.
Yes. There are people in Britain that own guns. They tend not to be the type of people who break into peoples houses though.
OK, the part of Britain I currently live in is a slightly different matter. Guns are used here by the paramilitaries. However, legalizing guns in a place that is never more than one step away from civil war would only make things worse.
-
As far as I know, the majority of Americans want to be allowed guns. This also should be respected.
I do think it is a majority, but only a slight majority.
Well, when you talk about "majority" that really only applies to people that vote. Most people DONT.
So, I think the country is about 70% Democrat - usually meaning gun control. BUT, Democrats (and poor people) dont vote.
So. who knows.
-
The only thing that I know for sure is, that our own gun laws should remain.
This is possibly the very first sensible thing you have ever posted.
I have to agree regarding our own gun laws.
They (the laws regarding ownership, etc) should remain or better yet, be set back to The Second Amendment of our own constitution, thus removing all later restrictions.
I applaud the possibility of dualism in your thinking, but ask you to think this through and maybe tell us why one set of FREEDOM laws is good for one set of people and NOT good for all people.
I am not convinced that I have ever met a person that does not have a right to defend his/her own life and further his/her own freedom.
Firstly, you do know I'm British? Scottish, now living in N.Ireland. I meant that our gun laws should stay as they are. I honestly don't don't know whether your gun laws should stay as they are, or not.
For me, guns are not a freedom issue. They are a public safety issue. I can understand that in your country gun crime is out of control, and many of you feel that the only way to keep yourselves and your family safe is to own a gun. Basically to fight fire with fire. I can understand that if America banned guns tomorrow, the criminals would keep their guns, and possibly find it easy to replace those guns as they broke. American criminals probably have such a culture of gun ownership that there would be no way of removing guns from the criminal element. If you ban guns, then you would possibly only be removing them from the law abiders. It may create a system where the bad guys have weapons and the good guys don't. This would not be good.
Britain is a completely different situation though. We do not have a culture of gun ownership. Our criminals don't have a culture of gun ownership. If you allow people to own guns, then you obviously allow criminals to own guns. If someone breaks into my home, I know I'll lose some stuff. The insurance will pay up, and nobody is likely to get hurt. If the homeowner has a gun, and the intruder has a gun, then one of us is likely to die. I would much rather nobody had guns, than everyone have guns. There is no way of ensuring that good people have guns and bad people don't. I am certain that allowing gun ownership would only create a more violent society.
Also, and possibly most importantly, we both live in a democracy. In my country, the vast majority do not want to introduce guns to our society. This should be respected. As far as I know, the majority of Americans want to be allowed guns. This also should be respected.
Not quite. I, as a person, have a right to not have criminals break into my house. In Britain, the police and the courts enforce this right. In America, the police and the courts enforce this, but citizens also enforce their rights. I do not have to tolerate someone trying to take my stuff, just because the police desire a monopoly on violence. I can stand up for myself, and I can use force to do so. This also works against governments: I have a right to protect myself from government oppression. This right includes free speech, the right to vote, the right to petition, etc. In my view, the government of Great Britain is oppressive. You do not have the same rights that I have, as an American citizen. If the British government decided to become an oppressive dictatorship and ignore the rights of its citizens, British citizens would have a greatly reduced ability to do anything about it.
-
As far as I know, the majority of Americans want to be allowed guns. This also should be respected.
I do think it is a majority, but only a slight majority.
Well, when you talk about "majority" that really only applies to people that vote. Most people DONT.
So, I think the country is about 70% Democrat - usually meaning gun control. BUT, Democrats (and poor people) dont vote.
So. who knows.
I always assumed gun laws differed depending on what state you were in, with the predominantly Republican states having little or no gun control, and the states that favour the Democrats favouring tighter gun control.
-
As far as I know, the majority of Americans want to be allowed guns. This also should be respected.
I do think it is a majority, but only a slight majority.
Well, when you talk about "majority" that really only applies to people that vote. Most people DONT.
So, I think the country is about 70% Democrat - usually meaning gun control. BUT, Democrats (and poor people) dont vote.
So. who knows.
I always assumed gun laws differed depending on what state you were in, with the predominantly Republican states having little or no gun control, and the states that favour the Democrats favouring tighter gun control.
yes the laws vary from state to state, but there are certain "federal" laws, banning things like automatic weapons and such thing. It is still a debate on a national level.
Often when I have voted, I have been poll'ed about gun control ( or gay marriage , etc)
-
The only thing that I know for sure is, that our own gun laws should remain.
This is possibly the very first sensible thing you have ever posted.
I have to agree regarding our own gun laws.
They (the laws regarding ownership, etc) should remain or better yet, be set back to The Second Amendment of our own constitution, thus removing all later restrictions.
I applaud the possibility of dualism in your thinking, but ask you to think this through and maybe tell us why one set of FREEDOM laws is good for one set of people and NOT good for all people.
I am not convinced that I have ever met a person that does not have a right to defend his/her own life and further his/her own freedom.
Firstly, you do know I'm British? Scottish, now living in N.Ireland. I meant that our gun laws should stay as they are. I honestly don't don't know whether your gun laws should stay as they are, or not.
For me, guns are not a freedom issue. They are a public safety issue. I can understand that in your country gun crime is out of control, and many of you feel that the only way to keep yourselves and your family safe is to own a gun. Basically to fight fire with fire. I can understand that if America banned guns tomorrow, the criminals would keep their guns, and possibly find it easy to replace those guns as they broke. American criminals probably have such a culture of gun ownership that there would be no way of removing guns from the criminal element. If you ban guns, then you would possibly only be removing them from the law abiders. It may create a system where the bad guys have weapons and the good guys don't. This would not be good.
Britain is a completely different situation though. We do not have a culture of gun ownership. Our criminals don't have a culture of gun ownership. If you allow people to own guns, then you obviously allow criminals to own guns. If someone breaks into my home, I know I'll lose some stuff. The insurance will pay up, and nobody is likely to get hurt. If the homeowner has a gun, and the intruder has a gun, then one of us is likely to die. I would much rather nobody had guns, than everyone have guns. There is no way of ensuring that good people have guns and bad people don't. I am certain that allowing gun ownership would only create a more violent society.
Also, and possibly most importantly, we both live in a democracy. In my country, the vast majority do not want to introduce guns to our society. This should be respected. As far as I know, the majority of Americans want to be allowed guns. This also should be respected.
Not quite. I, as a person, have a right to not have criminals break into my house. In Britain, the police and the courts enforce this right. In America, the police and the courts enforce this, but citizens also enforce their rights. I do not have to tolerate someone trying to take my stuff, just because the police desire a monopoly on violence. I can stand up for myself, and I can use force to do so. This also works against governments: I have a right to protect myself from government oppression. This right includes free speech, the right to vote, the right to petition, etc. In my view, the government of Great Britain is oppressive. You do not have the same rights that I have, as an American citizen. If the British government decided to become an oppressive dictatorship and ignore the rights of its citizens, British citizens would have a greatly reduced ability to do anything about it.
The idea of rising up against an oppressive government seems to be something I hear a lot of Americans talking about. It's an idea that seems to be ingrained in the American psyche. We don't seem to have that idea in our country. If we don't like our government, we can elect a different one. Even if we were allowed guns, and our government did become oppressive, I don't think we would rise up.
You are right about Amercan freedom, you guys do seem to have a different type of government. You may have more freedom, but at a cost, it seems easier to totally fail in your society. We have safety nets, we have welfare for the poor, although it is getting constantly eroded. We have the NHS, although it too is being constantly eroded.
However, I've never been able to fully reconcile the fact that America locks up so many minor criminals, with the idea of America being such a free country.
-
Banning personal weaponry never works anywhere.
You already know my views on gunlaws in the US are much the same as yours, but yes, it does seem to work there. It's cultural, like Butterflies said. Guns are bad is programmed into views of their socity. That's why I said very early on in this thread that someone who has been raised without guns will never understand those who were raised with them; but as for banning them, the sheer number of unregistered guns in the US makes the idea absurd.
Sorry, Jack. I do not know who you are.
If I know you by another screenname, then I am a bit out of date and it would follow that being here more often (as I once was) would help.
I am glad to find another ally, at any rate.
-
Yes, apologies, was Osensitive1 before. Forgot you've been away a bit.
-
Yes, apologies, was Osensitive1 before. Forgot you've been away a bit.
So Jack is Osensitive1? okay
-
Yes, apologies, was Osensitive1 before. Forgot you've been away a bit.
So Jack is Osensitive1? okay
yeah. and I recently changed my name too. I used to be General Razorbeard.
-
:laugh:
-
Yes, apologies, was Osensitive1 before. Forgot you've been away a bit.
So Jack is Osensitive1? okay
And I was Temple Grandin :green:
-
The only thing that I know for sure is, that our own gun laws should remain.
This is possibly the very first sensible thing you have ever posted.
I have to agree regarding our own gun laws.
They (the laws regarding ownership, etc) should remain or better yet, be set back to The Second Amendment of our own constitution, thus removing all later restrictions.
I applaud the possibility of dualism in your thinking, but ask you to think this through and maybe tell us why one set of FREEDOM laws is good for one set of people and NOT good for all people.
I am not convinced that I have ever met a person that does not have a right to defend his/her own life and further his/her own freedom.
Firstly, you do know I'm British? Scottish, now living in N.Ireland. I meant that our gun laws should stay as they are. I honestly don't don't know whether your gun laws should stay as they are, or not.
For me, guns are not a freedom issue. They are a public safety issue. I can understand that in your country gun crime is out of control, and many of you feel that the only way to keep yourselves and your family safe is to own a gun. Basically to fight fire with fire. I can understand that if America banned guns tomorrow, the criminals would keep their guns, and possibly find it easy to replace those guns as they broke. American criminals probably have such a culture of gun ownership that there would be no way of removing guns from the criminal element. If you ban guns, then you would possibly only be removing them from the law abiders. It may create a system where the bad guys have weapons and the good guys don't. This would not be good.
Britain is a completely different situation though. We do not have a culture of gun ownership. Our criminals don't have a culture of gun ownership. If you allow people to own guns, then you obviously allow criminals to own guns. If someone breaks into my home, I know I'll lose some stuff. The insurance will pay up, and nobody is likely to get hurt. If the homeowner has a gun, and the intruder has a gun, then one of us is likely to die. I would much rather nobody had guns, than everyone have guns. There is no way of ensuring that good people have guns and bad people don't. I am certain that allowing gun ownership would only create a more violent society.
Also, and possibly most importantly, we both live in a democracy. In my country, the vast majority do not want to introduce guns to our society. This should be respected. As far as I know, the majority of Americans want to be allowed guns. This also should be respected.
Not quite. I, as a person, have a right to not have criminals break into my house. In Britain, the police and the courts enforce this right. In America, the police and the courts enforce this, but citizens also enforce their rights. I do not have to tolerate someone trying to take my stuff, just because the police desire a monopoly on violence. I can stand up for myself, and I can use force to do so. This also works against governments: I have a right to protect myself from government oppression. This right includes free speech, the right to vote, the right to petition, etc. In my view, the government of Great Britain is oppressive. You do not have the same rights that I have, as an American citizen. If the British government decided to become an oppressive dictatorship and ignore the rights of its citizens, British citizens would have a greatly reduced ability to do anything about it.
The idea of rising up against an oppressive government seems to be something I hear a lot of Americans talking about. It's an idea that seems to be ingrained in the American psyche. We don't seem to have that idea in our country. If we don't like our government, we can elect a different one. Even if we were allowed guns, and our government did become oppressive, I don't think we would rise up.
You are right about Amercan freedom, you guys do seem to have a different type of government. You may have more freedom, but at a cost, it seems easier to totally fail in your society. We have safety nets, we have welfare for the poor, although it is getting constantly eroded. We have the NHS, although it too is being constantly eroded.
However, I've never been able to fully reconcile the fact that America locks up so many minor criminals, with the idea of America being such a free country.
Scots aren't naturally suspicious of the British government? I've heard about independence movements in Scotland, and the country has a history of warfare against England. You also seem to have a lot of national pride.
America was born of revolution, and the Constitution is based on the principles of the Enlightenment. Every schoolchild (at least where I live) learns about the injustices that the colonial Americans suffered at the hands of the British government. It's in our past to be suspicious of any government asserting control over us, because we know what can happen when a government is allowed to rule without having to answer to the people.
-
Yes, apologies, was Osensitive1 before. Forgot you've been away a bit.
So Jack is Osensitive1? okay
yeah. and I recently changed my name too. I used to be General Razorbeard.
:rofl: :plus:
-
The only thing that I know for sure is, that our own gun laws should remain.
This is possibly the very first sensible thing you have ever posted.
I have to agree regarding our own gun laws.
They (the laws regarding ownership, etc) should remain or better yet, be set back to The Second Amendment of our own constitution, thus removing all later restrictions.
I applaud the possibility of dualism in your thinking, but ask you to think this through and maybe tell us why one set of FREEDOM laws is good for one set of people and NOT good for all people.
I am not convinced that I have ever met a person that does not have a right to defend his/her own life and further his/her own freedom.
Firstly, you do know I'm British? Scottish, now living in N.Ireland. I meant that our gun laws should stay as they are. I honestly don't don't know whether your gun laws should stay as they are, or not.
For me, guns are not a freedom issue. They are a public safety issue. I can understand that in your country gun crime is out of control, and many of you feel that the only way to keep yourselves and your family safe is to own a gun. Basically to fight fire with fire. I can understand that if America banned guns tomorrow, the criminals would keep their guns, and possibly find it easy to replace those guns as they broke. American criminals probably have such a culture of gun ownership that there would be no way of removing guns from the criminal element. If you ban guns, then you would possibly only be removing them from the law abiders. It may create a system where the bad guys have weapons and the good guys don't. This would not be good.
Britain is a completely different situation though. We do not have a culture of gun ownership. Our criminals don't have a culture of gun ownership. If you allow people to own guns, then you obviously allow criminals to own guns. If someone breaks into my home, I know I'll lose some stuff. The insurance will pay up, and nobody is likely to get hurt. If the homeowner has a gun, and the intruder has a gun, then one of us is likely to die. I would much rather nobody had guns, than everyone have guns. There is no way of ensuring that good people have guns and bad people don't. I am certain that allowing gun ownership would only create a more violent society.
Also, and possibly most importantly, we both live in a democracy. In my country, the vast majority do not want to introduce guns to our society. This should be respected. As far as I know, the majority of Americans want to be allowed guns. This also should be respected.
Not quite. I, as a person, have a right to not have criminals break into my house. In Britain, the police and the courts enforce this right. In America, the police and the courts enforce this, but citizens also enforce their rights. I do not have to tolerate someone trying to take my stuff, just because the police desire a monopoly on violence. I can stand up for myself, and I can use force to do so. This also works against governments: I have a right to protect myself from government oppression. This right includes free speech, the right to vote, the right to petition, etc. In my view, the government of Great Britain is oppressive. You do not have the same rights that I have, as an American citizen. If the British government decided to become an oppressive dictatorship and ignore the rights of its citizens, British citizens would have a greatly reduced ability to do anything about it.
The idea of rising up against an oppressive government seems to be something I hear a lot of Americans talking about. It's an idea that seems to be ingrained in the American psyche. We don't seem to have that idea in our country. If we don't like our government, we can elect a different one. Even if we were allowed guns, and our government did become oppressive, I don't think we would rise up.
You are right about Amercan freedom, you guys do seem to have a different type of government. You may have more freedom, but at a cost, it seems easier to totally fail in your society. We have safety nets, we have welfare for the poor, although it is getting constantly eroded. We have the NHS, although it too is being constantly eroded.
However, I've never been able to fully reconcile the fact that America locks up so many minor criminals, with the idea of America being such a free country.
Scots aren't naturally suspicious of the British government? I've heard about independence movements in Scotland, and the country has a history of warfare against England. You also seem to have a lot of national pride.
America was born of revolution, and the Constitution is based on the principles of the Enlightenment. Every schoolchild (at least where I live) learns about the injustices that the colonial Americans suffered at the hands of the British government. It's in our past to be suspicious of any government asserting control over us, because we know what can happen when a government is allowed to rule without having to answer to the people.
Some Scots want independence, some don't. The split seems to be fairly even. It is a totally non violent movement though. The warfare between Scotland and England was a long time ago, and is well in the past. I do want independence, but never at the cost of lives. Virtually no Scots have any interest in fighting England. Those of us that want independence want a close and friendly relationship with our cliosest neighbour.
At the moment the Conservatives, our equivalent of your Republican party are in power in Britain. They are hated in Scotland. Scotland is traditionally signifigantly to the left of England politicaly.
-
The idea of rising up against an oppressive government seems to be something I hear a lot of Americans talking about. It's an idea that seems to be ingrained in the American psyche. We don't seem to have that idea in our country. If we don't like our government, we can elect a different one. Even if we were allowed guns, and our government did become oppressive, I don't think we would rise up.
You are right about Amercan freedom, you guys do seem to have a different type of government. You may have more freedom, but at a cost, it seems easier to totally fail in your society. We have safety nets, we have welfare for the poor, although it is getting constantly eroded. We have the NHS, although it too is being constantly eroded.
However, I've never been able to fully reconcile the fact that America locks up so many minor criminals, with the idea of America being such a free country.
That's were most Europeans think wrong. I almost get a stroke when discussing this with other Swedes too, then 99% of them, including the gun owners, couldn't dream of an uprising, no matter what. Freedom isn't for free, unless everyone becomes an angel. In the real world freedom costs, and the currcency is blood. It depends on people themselves whether it should be their blood or the oppressor's blood. If you're a coward, you for sure will have to pay the bill sooner or later. But if you are brave and stand up for your rights, it might be the oppressor who has to pay.
-
Since most governments have oppressed people since the beginning of history, I find it 100% unrealistic to believe in anything else than that a government is something (neccesarily?) evil, that should have as little power as ever possible.
-
:viking:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_qX_C6pKTUwY/TT5eTUfrXcI/AAAAAAAADiI/4zjX6wrbOQE/s640/washington-shot-them.jpg)