[quote]Unaware wrote:
doc_man_101 wrote:
Gregus wrote:
I didn’t mean to insult you. But ask your self, why would someone want you to be disarmed? Where is the trust? Why be denied that power? Don’t you see how that diminishes you as a human being? Guns are the ultimate equalizers. If you think of them as an EQUALIZER and you’ll perhaps see that its good for the society. Fact is all statistics prove that crime is DIRECTLY proportional to gun prohibition. Gun prohibition give power and shifts the balance of power away from the people.
And I don’t mean to insult you: but is this for real? If you feel the need of a weapon to be whole, or to make you feel truly free, some would say that perhaps you need therapy.
The guarantees of freedom that we have - a free press, free association, free elections, an independent judiciary, a system of checks and balances, a succession of human rights legislation spanning about a thousand years - are ultimately much more valuable and more durable than a pile of weapons. At least, I think that would be the perspective of the overwhelming majority of Europeans: your mileage may vary.
Guarantee? What makes it a guarantee? You can point to pieces of paper if you wish, but theres only a gauruntee if theres the sense that violating what the pieces of paper say comes with consequences.
Some of the “guaranteed freedoms” that aren’t so gaurunteed in the UK:
Besides the obvious the article about the loss of trial by jury is a perfect example of the consequences of Britains gun control laws. They took away the defendents right to a jury trial on fire arms charges because they were afraid of jury intimidation.
Thanks to gun control witness intimidation is a huge problem in Britain that has made the entire justice system less effective in combatting crime. People are afraid to go to the police because they can’t protect themsleves from reprisals.
But you cannot tell the British any of this, because they refuse to accept that rendering citizens defenseless can have undesirable consequences.
[quote]doc_man_101 wrote:
Gregus wrote:
I didn’t mean to insult you. But ask your self, why would someone want you to be disarmed? Where is the trust? Why be denied that power? Don’t you see how that diminishes you as a human being? Guns are the ultimate equalizers. If you think of them as an EQUALIZER and you’ll perhaps see that its good for the society. Fact is all statistics prove that crime is DIRECTLY proportional to gun prohibition. Gun prohibition give power and shifts the balance of power away from the people.
And I don’t mean to insult you: but is this for real? If you feel the need of a weapon to be whole, or to make you feel truly free, some would say that perhaps you need therapy.
The guarantees of freedom that we have - a free press, free association, free elections, an independent judiciary, a system of checks and balances, a succession of human rights legislation spanning about a thousand years - are ultimately much more valuable and more durable than a pile of weapons. At least, I think that would be the perspective of the overwhelming majority of Europeans: your mileage may vary.
[/quote]
Yes you;re correct. America was FOUNDED by people needing therapy. You’re right.
America is a land of Alpha Males. Betas will never understand the constitution and accept it as a whole.
[quote]NinjaTreeFrog wrote:
doc_man_101 wrote:
And I don’t mean to insult you: but is this for real? If you feel the need of a weapon to be whole, or to make you feel truly free, some would say that perhaps you need therapy.
The guarantees of freedom that we have - a free press, free association, free elections, an independent judiciary, a system of checks and balances, a succession of human rights legislation spanning about a thousand years - are ultimately much more valuable and more durable than a pile of weapons. At least, I think that would be the perspective of the overwhelming majority of Europeans: your mileage may vary.
As a Canadian living in Texas I totally get where you’re coming from. Personally, I feel much more free knowing that if I go to a pub back home and get into an argument with someone they probably won’t go to their car to grab their handgun out of their glovebox. But I guess you’re only really free if you have the tools at your disposal to blow someone’s head off on a whim.[/quote]
That Never happens. It’s pure BS like this that drive fear politics by the plant eaters.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
If you like to go around arguing with people in bars you are an idiot who is asking for trouble. It is people like you that we need to be able to protect ourselves from. Having spent most of my life living less than 20 miles from Canada I am well aware of just how uninhibited about assaulting people you Canadians are. Personally I think that if you Canadians had to worry about someone shooting you, you would be more civil.[/quote]
I like to have religious and political discussions with fellow human beings, some of whom I don’t always see eye to eye with. When you say that “it’s people like you that we need to be able to protect ourselves from”, are you referring to us violent Canadians (?) or just people who don’t share your particular worldview. In my experience, most Canadians I’ve disagreed with on a topic are capable of civil discourse, even without the threat of a bullet in the head. If that’s all that holds you back from being civil then it speaks volumes to your character.
The BNP (British National Party) will restore sanity to the troubled isle.
“Labour Communities Secretary John Denham has raised the spectre of a return to 1930â??s Fascism, and in one respect, he is absolutely right. It is perfectly true that a sinister new Fascism is on the march in Britain but, of course, it does not come from the British National Party or the nationalist movement.”
As a Canadian living in Texas I totally get where you’re coming from. Personally, I feel much more free knowing that if I go to a pub back home and get into an argument with someone they probably won’t go to their car to grab their handgun out of their glovebox. But I guess you’re only really free if you have the tools at your disposal to blow someone’s head off on a whim.
You’re free to hit the dusty trail and follow the compass back home to true “freedom”. Honest to God, we really don’t care to have you here.[/quote]
I see that you are unable to hear other perspectives without that defense mechanism kicking in.
My experience in Texas has been very positive, for the most part, and I’m very appreciative to the American people for allowing me to be a guest in their country. Canadians and Americans have much in common, but this is an issue where our opinions differ. Even though I can’t vote or affect policy regarding gun control here, which I wouldn’t want to do anyway, my opinion is always seen as a threat by people like yourself. Is it not possible to simply have a civil and respectful discussion without resorting to statements like this? Are you really so juvenile that you can’t stand to hear different perspectives than your own without telling me to go back home where I belong?
[quote]NinjaTreeFrog wrote:
Gregus wrote:
That Never happens. It’s pure BS like this that drive fear politics by the plant eaters.
Really? Never happens? There was a story on the news here in Houston about that very scenario just a few weeks ago. [/quote]
Yeah there are also cases in Texas where a crazy person starts shooting people and executes people in a restaurant and helpless victims watch. Their Guns in their cars, safely away from violence.
There are also cases of Students in Virginia tech Being shot and executed because they were disarmed after a long tradition of conceal carry. Part of a “safe campus” program. People’s kids paid for that political move with their lives.
Im all for discussing ideals and such. Fact is weapons are part of our society, always have been and always will be. They’ll NEVER go away. That being said, we need to be realistic as to the world at large. There are bad people in it.
But I guess you’re only really free if you have the tools at your disposal to blow someone’s head off on a whim.
and
Is it not possible to simply have a civil and respectful discussion …
Hmmm…
Is the first what you Canadians consider an example of the second?
[/quote]
I think it’s quite a bit more civil and respectful than telling someone to go back to where they came from. In fact, from the daily news reports here in Houston this seems to be a very fair judgement of what easy access to handguns results in. Look up shooting in Houston and see how many seperate news stories pop up. Not a week goes in this City where someone isn’t killed or wounded by gunfire. Is it disrespectful to bring facts into the discussion? Perhaps my choice of words offended you, but I think it’s a fair and accurate statement considering the overwhelming cases of gun violence over trivial disagreements that are reported in the news. Road rage shootings. Nightclub shooting. Domestic disputes resulting in shootings. Car jackings resulting in shooting. Shootings at schools. Shootings in the workplace. The list goes on.
[quote]NinjaTreeFrog wrote:
But I guess you’re only really free if you have the tools at your disposal to blow someone’s head off on a whim.[/quote]
That isn’t the definition of freedom I know.
However, self defense is an inseparable part of being free which does require certain means. If one has to rely on someone else for his protection he can never be free.
But I guess you’re only really free if you have the tools at your disposal to blow someone’s head off on a whim.
and
Is it not possible to simply have a civil and respectful discussion …
Hmmm…
Is the first what you Canadians consider an example of the second?
I think it’s quite a bit more civil and respectful than telling someone to go back to where they came from. In fact, from the daily news reports here in Houston this seems to be a very fair judgement of what easy access to handguns results in. Look up shooting in Houston and see how many seperate news stories pop up. Not a week goes in this City where someone isn’t killed or wounded by gunfire. Is it disrespectful to bring facts into the discussion? Perhaps my choice of words offended you, but I think it’s a fair and accurate statement considering the overwhelming cases of gun violence over trivial disagreements that are reported in the news. Road rage shootings. Nightclub shooting. Domestic disputes resulting in shootings. Car jackings resulting in shooting. Shootings at schools. Shootings in the workplace. The list goes on.[/quote]
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
NinjaTreeFrog wrote:
But I guess you’re only really free if you have the tools at your disposal to blow someone’s head off on a whim.
That isn’t the definition of freedom I know.
However, self defense is an inseparable part of being free which does require certain means. If one has to rely on someone else for his protection he can never be free.
What you describe is mere thuggery.[/quote]
Interesting post. My question for you is - where do you draw the line? I could protect myself better if I had grenades and landmines at my disposal as well. Or a tank. Or some surface to air missles. Maybe a couple of ICBMs.
In any society there’s some limit to the tools that are available for self defense. Where the limit is depends on where your right to defend yourself becomes a safety risk to the public. Some, like myself, think that handguns and assult rifles are proven risks to society as a whole if they are not regulated. To be more specific, because handguns and assault rifles are designed for the sole purpose of killing another human being, I beleive there is no merit in permitting ownership of these weapons to any person not in law enforcement.
The other argument that I’ve heard is that it makes governments accountable to the people. If you’re permitted to carry a handgun, and the government is permitted to operate fighter planes, assault helocopters, tanks and missles, what accountability is there really on the government? They still have the upper hand. Meanwhile the citizens are killing each other in record numbers.
So… where do YOU draw the line?
The Eagle Scout part of me weeps like the Indian having garbage thrown at his feet. What’s next? Are they going to take away matches? For fucks sake I joined the Boy Scouts to shoot, cut, fire, and canoe my way to excellence.
[quote]NinjaTreeFrog wrote:
Sifu wrote:
If you like to go around arguing with people in bars you are an idiot who is asking for trouble. It is people like you that we need to be able to protect ourselves from. Having spent most of my life living less than 20 miles from Canada I am well aware of just how uninhibited about assaulting people you Canadians are. Personally I think that if you Canadians had to worry about someone shooting you, you would be more civil.
I like to have religious and political discussions with fellow human beings, some of whom I don’t always see eye to eye with. When you say that “it’s people like you that we need to be able to protect ourselves from”, are you referring to us violent Canadians (?) or just people who don’t share your particular worldview. In my experience, most Canadians I’ve disagreed with on a topic are capable of civil discourse, even without the threat of a bullet in the head. If that’s all that holds you back from being civil then it speaks volumes to your character.[/quote]
Something my mother taught me is that in polite company you don’t discuss politics or religion. The reason why is because people usually have deeply felt views about both and they may not be the same as yours. So it is a real good way to start a heated arguement. Doing it in a place where alcohol is consumed is begging for trouble. It’s no wonder why you are paranoid about someone getting a gun and shooting you.
What I meant by people like you is you sound like a person who looks for trouble or tries to instigate it. I’ve seen your type before, you’re a selfish drama queen who isn’t happy until you have drama going on and you don’t give a damn about how it affects anyone else.
In my experience Windsor Ontario on a Friday or Saturday night is like a giant hockey rink where you can be assaulted by absolute strangers just walking down the sidewalk. Canadians on that side of the river are nowhere as civil as they are when they are in Detroit!
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Cockney Blue wrote:
Gregus wrote:
The table has been set. The British have now been thoroughly disarmed. Panic tactics worked nicely. Fools.
Now the only people with weapons are the criminals and those in charge of the British sheep. LoL. Good for them.
Here’s a snot rocket for Britain.
Erm, did any of you actually read the post showing that the original post is BS?
I looked over the second post, it more or less much confirmed the first.[/quote]
You might want to work on your reading comprehension then:
[i]The Daily Mail is, as usual, misrepresentating people. This time it has picked on the Scout Movement and is â??reportingâ??
as the fight against Britainâ??s growing blade culture intensifies, Scouts have been told not to take penknives on camping trips.
Except that itâ??s a load of rubbish. If they had actually read the section on knives, they would know that it is actually only a reminder of the laws around knife use and guidance about safety.
What the article in Scouting magazine says is that
knives of any sort should not be carried by anybody to a Scout meeting or camp, unless there is likely to be a specific need for one. [Emphasis added]
If there is a need for a penknife, such as on a backwoods camp, then obviously Scouts would be allowed to carry them. But on a normal Scout evening or an activities-based camp, penknives should be left at home because theyâ??re not needed.
[/i]
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Chum, you want to stand on our soil and make stupid, inflammatory remarks alluding to you having a civil discussion in a Texas bar that is likely to lead to your antagonist heading out to his car and returning with a gun to blow your head off? And I am the one whose defense mechanism kicks in?
[/quote]
I think you could chill out a bit. No one is taking your guns away. So what if I offended you. You’re obviously much too sensitive to have a discussion with, so whatever. I was expressing an OPINION on the fact that is more senseless gun violence here in Texas than at home.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Your “opinion is always seen a threat by people like” myself because your opinion is baseless when it comes to the facts and is entirely emotional driven.
[/quote]
There are plenty of sources where you could educate yourself on the high rates of gun violence here in the US. Perhaps you are the one who can’t face facts.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
You say, “I’m very appreciative to the American people for allowing me to be a guest in their country,” and then express contempt for those same American people with, “But I guess you’re only really free if you have the tools at your disposal to blow someone’s head off on a whim.” And now you’re offended that I suggest you leave? What an arrogant, contradictory Canuck.[/quote]
I’ve had this very same discussion with American friends who don’t consider this opinion to be arrogant or contradictory. Get over it.