 | First of all, I love guns. I own several and love to go shooting. For me, gun control is a nice tight pattern on the target. Or, my right index finger. I have always respected guns and never in a million years thought of turning one on an unarmed civilian population. I think that is the very definition of cowardice.
I am however interested in hearing everyone's opinion on the matter. Specifically, as it pertains to these mass shootings that keep happening. I don't see gun control or background checks stopping these from happening. It may help to some degree but that is not the end all solve.
In my opinion, and this is not meant to make light of the situation at all, is we have a country full of pussies. To make that sound more professional, I think this country is full of entitled people who think they deserve everything and don't want to work for anything. It is full of politically correct bullshit and kids who don't get graded in school and everyone gets a trophy. Well, that is not how the real world works. We all know this to be true, good bad or indifferent. It just isn't real.
These kids attend college etc and live in this bubble. When they enter the real world the smallest of offenses or setbacks sends them off on a rampage. We have failed to set boundaries and realistic expectations.
Again, just my opinion. You can post anything you want here. |
And it DOES matter for the military. Always has...
An 'Assault Rifle' is a select-fire weapon, capable of fully automatic fire!! THESE HAVE BEEN ****, for Civilian ownership, since 1934, with VERY few exceptions!! Don't believe the 'hype' and perpetuate the 'myth' that the weapons are the problem!! It is the CRAZY FCKS, that use these, to kill, that is the problem!!
Here in the real world we say assault weapon. This refers to a firearm that is either semi-automatic or fully-automatic. And means absolutely nothing else. And you'd have to be awfully confused to use any other terms.
And I agree, guns aren't the problem the people your country creates are the problem. And that's why the United States needs heavy gun restrictions to keep those problematic people from acquiring firearms, and so l-a-w e-n-f-o-r-c-e-m-e-n-t can halt the trafficking of i-l-l-e-g-a-l firearms.
You are incorrect, grouping the full-auto, MILITARY WEAPONS, with the semi-auto, CIVILIAN versions!!
"Assault Weapons" are MILITARY, and **** for civilians in the US, except under special licenses!! DO NOT PERPETUATE THE HYPE that 'Semi-automatics' are the same in ANY WAY, to 'ASSAULT WEAPONS!!'
Just because the weapon is Black, or has a magazine, does not make it an 'ASSAULT WEAPON!!'
Restricting law-abiding citizens from LEGALLY owning weapons, to defend themselves does nothing to stop crime!! I almost ALL of the jurisdictions that allow concealed weapon carry, buy licensed, trained citizens, violent crime has dropped!! It is only in the most RESTRICTIVE places, that violent crime escalates, because the law-abiding citizen has no means to defend or deter the criminals, that DON'T OBEY THE LAWS, and get guns, illegally, and commit crimes!!
Heavy gun restrictions, like in Germany, when the Nazis took the guns from the Jews? Or In Poland, in Cambodia, in China?
It is CRAZY FCKS and Criminals that make crime, murder, etc!! It is armed citizens, defending themselves, and keeping the Crazies and Criminals from having them, that is the answer!
And BTW--- those same people and countries that don't respect America you say... Those would be the same ones with their hands out begging for $$ and going at great lengths to live here....
And your last statement is contrary to the facts. When I say "developed nation" I mean those nations that have a living standard equal to or better then that of the United States. I mean: Canada, The United Kingdom, Germany, Australia, New Zealand, Chile, Argentina, Scandinavian countries, Baltic countries, France, Spain, Japan, etc. None of these developed nations turn to the United States for monetary aide, their economies are sustainable as is. In fact when you correct for magnitude there are a handful of these economies that preform far more effectively then the US. I mean really you guys haven't run a budget surplus since Bill Clinton was in office, and Barrack Obama has had to use both his terms correcting the shit storm Bush produced. I said it before, Reaching, you aren't equipped to discuss economics.
And to say something like these people wish to live in your country, is nothing less then to spit in their faces. No established person in any of the worlds developed nations would even bother to entertain the idea of moving their life to the United States. You're just baring that classic American trait of unfounded pride again. Baring it for all the world to scoff at.
It seems you've confused those countries that have less then you with those countries that have more then you. This failed bolstering doesn't speak well of your understanding of the realities of the world.
Now here it comes Reaching, the real insult... You don't know what the fuck your talking about. And it shows. It reflects poorly on you.
The First Amendment gives you the right to say what you think, but then there is slander, and liable, and going too far, which I think you did.
I can agree, to disagree with you, honorably, as gentlemen in a civilized way, but most of what you replied is unfounded and your perception, reading TOO MUCH into what I posted.
But you can imagine my frustration when I have to sit around and watch the bass ackwards approach to firearms that your country's partisan system takes. I live in a country where more people per capita use guns as tools and for recreation then our southern counterparts. But we recognize that something that shoots projectiles isnt useful for defence. We don't try to carry them with our selves everywhere we go because we understand the dangers of firearms. We don't walk down the street just to incite fear in the public, because we now that places an unnecessary burden on the local police department. Instead gun clubs here do public outreach to make the public more educated and less afraid. And they understand that telling someone they need a gun to protect themselves is just a way to incite fear.
My anger may have unrightfully been directed at you. But I am only privy to what you have said to me. And what you've disclosed so far drops you into the camp I described. But in consideration for you, imagine I directed my argument at the abhorrent people that steep themselves in the culture surrounding guns in your country. And formulate a counter argument from that since you have yet to do so.
Can we 'Meet in Geneva' and discuss, rationally, without bias, and stereotypes, judgments, but talk, as Honorable men, that disagree?
I don't need to change you, and you have every right to your belief, but I can't know what you know, and think, and feel, unless we talk, rationally, without judging, just open-minded.
I don't think either of us is 'Right' or 'Wrong' and there are Cultural issues, Historical issues, and so on.
I think that you are probably from another country, than the US, based on some things you said.
I like meeting, and 'talking' to others, from other nations, so I can better understand how they see the US, and our leaders, whether all of us support their ideals, or not!!
I would be willing to continue this, openly, here, but if you prefer, you can message me, privately.
A table, in Geneva, Switzerland, calling a 'Truce'? I hear they have great Chocolates!!
Some ground rules: 1. No, caps lock 2. An acceptable use of grammar and punctuation. So that no one is misunderstood. 3. No, mindless appeals to rhetoric, to either left or right wing sympathy's. 4. Provide references when possible or when asked.
Feel free to object to any of these rules and to put forth your own.
Also a helpful tip from one site user to another if you click on a persons user name, it will take you to there page, at the top of the page you'll see details on that person (age, sexuality, gender, where they claim to live, etc). And of course you'll see that I'm your neighbour to the North.
You believe what you do, and I choose a contrary opinion.
I don't need to debate, or try to 'change' your perspective! You have every right to what you believe, and in America, every right to say it!! I like that!
I don't agree, but we are not going to change each other's position, and I don't expect you to change, so what is left to discuss?
I think that it is important, with the example of our interchange, that people understand that it is OK to think differently, but be respectful of other's beliefs, accepting their right to believe what they do, even though we don't agree.
Nobody should be afraid to say what they think, out of fear of being opposed!
The Great Founders of the United States argued, and debated, and had opposing ideals, but somehow, they made our Great Nation, where all have the RIGHT to be heard, and say what they believe!
I think that is a good thing. . .
I would interject that the those ideas were more Voltaire's nom de guerre then they were the slogan of your countries founders. I'm not attempting to criticize your countries founding fathers, after all they did lay the ground work for one of the most powerful countries in the world. I'm simply trying to impart that they stood atop the shoulders of giants.
As for our exchange. In my experience it is necessary to respect the person that sits across from me. Because empathy demands it of me, I recognize that no matter how our ideals clash, we each know what it is to be human, we share that. But a persons opinions and ideas are something I will not respect, those things in their nature do not garner respect. Ideas stand and fall by there own merits. I will always respect peoples rights to have beliefs and act upon ideals. But if I don't see those ideals as something that does good, or if I see those beliefs as the reason people do bad. And if those ideas can't be presented in a way that will persuade my mind. I will take every opportunity to tear those ideals down and watch them be trampled under the foot of progress. That being said I don't pretend to know right from wrong all the time.
As you said nobody should be afraid to speak their mind, however if somebody is prepared to make claims, if they want to spew mindless rhetoric, shouldn't they be expected to back up their shit?
Should someone shoot up another school, in the US, it will be because it is a GUN FREE ZONE, and they have no expectation of opposition, pressing their BAT-SHT CRAZY AGENDA!!
You cannot stop 'CRAZY', and there are plenty, around!!
The VAST MAJOPRITY, of major shootings in the US were by people that were deranged, mentally ill, or just psychopathic! The majority stole the weapons they used, or acquired them illegally!
There are an estimated 320 million weapons in the US, and the VAST MAJORITY, NEVER, EVER harm people!!!
Crazy people are the problem, and them getting guns, illegally is the problem!
FOR FCK'S SAKE, why are we debating this on a site dedicated to dicks and sex???
Maybe both of us are part of he problem, here!!
I concede, and you 'win'. I don't need to explain, or defend anything. You believe what you do, and I DON'T NEED TO, OR WANT TO CHANGE YOU!!
Go in peace. . .
It seems you've given up on that no caps lock rule. But um... There's no such thing as "biased facts." It's a complete lack of bias that makes facts, just that facts. So I suppose you meant that I carry biases like anybody else. And I'd agree, but most of my opinions are informed by evidence.
Gun-free zones, I'll be honest. It's just the newest mythic buzz word the pro-gun lobby has decided to rally behind. I believe this one started after Aurora. Ironically enough the FBI claimed the Aurora shooters planning had a lot to do with where he should park and absolutely nothing to do with the idea of meeting resistance. The evidence that more firearms means less crime just doesn't exist. And the fake evidence that that's the case has come nearly entirely from one man, John Lott. Take John Lott's book for example, nearly nothing in "More Guns, Less Crime" is correct. He purposely misinterpreted all the data he had in order to make the study look like it favored the position of his funders. The NRA. Lott was then disgraced by many, many statisticians and mathematicians that were far more qualified then him. They then exposed how he purposely misinterpreted the data.
To go even further, in Oregon, there were three men in the same complex as the killer. All three choose not to intervene. They decided that the minute the swat team stormed in anybody they saw holding a firearm was a goner.
only registered users can see external links
I don't know the statistics for mental illness and mass shootings in your country, it would be great if you could provide articles or studies regarding that. But I do know that your country has been constantly lacking in funding for mental health programs. Even though every time a shooting happens, your republicans roll out the, "guns aren't the problem, mentally ill people are the problem," shtick. They then turn their backs and do exactly fucking nothing. They control congress but can't be bothered to bolster the meager mental healthcare system in your country.
only registered users can see external links
No, these people do not acquire most of their guns illegally or by stealing. It's incredibly easy to buy firearms in the United States. Even if you have a criminal record. Because the background checks that are in place are often just pushed through without proper information because the FBI has trouble getting their hands on police reports, given the current channels available to them.
only registered users can see external links
I cannot respect what you believe, and it's not just because you're wrong. It's because what you've told me you believe, is damaging to your country. What you believe allows these horrible mass shootings to happen again and again, without anybody doing a thing to stop it. I don't really give a damn where we talk about it. Because I'll take what I can get. If I can change one mind by being a Keyboard Hero, fine. I'll make an ass of myself if that's what it takes.
Really dude? Really? “Law enforcement can halt the trafficking of illegal firearms.” Please tell me that you’re being sarcastic. If so then my bad for not finding and reading your earlier post where you made it clear that government intervention is NEVER the solution to ANY problem… EVER! I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.
Even if we did change the 2nd, it opens up a slippery slope for everything.
Also this as an honest question, being that I have no formal education on the history of the United States, other then on your civil war and the war of 1812. Doesn't your 2nd Amendment imply that you shouldn't have a military or instead should have a skeleton military that should be supplemented by the public only when your nation is under attack?
only registered users can see external links
Here's the thing. The boy didn't have a gun. If he had one, he would have used it and probably kill the cop. The boy's parents are irresponsible for not having taught their son to carry a gun at all times. A gun could have saved his life. Pity.
--------------------------------------- added after 2 minutes
Here's a good site only registered users can see external links that proves that guns save lives.
Why don't people read it?
It's plain English.
A Taurus 9 mm pistol was recovered about 40 feet from Siderio's body, Krasner said.
So he had threatened the cops prior to the chase.
BUT the direction of the boys body,would indicate he was not a threat to the officer at the moment of the 3rd shot,so yea, this cop shit his bed.
BUT on the other hand,had the teen could have waited until the cop came close and turned around with yet another gun,you know they make some that are small and can be carried in a pocket.
Still this is a bad case here of a cop going to far.
Texans can carry handguns without a license or training starting Sept. 1, after Gov. Greg Abbott signs permitless carry bill into law.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
That's great. The first totally free place in the US.
only registered users can see external links
about his masculinity while, in the evening, he secretly
sucks dick and gets fucked in the ass.
The gun serves as evidence of how manly he is.
It helps him postpone revealing his gay nature because,
in his and his buddies' mind this is a sin that goes
against the bible that he carries in his pocket.
or, "I love both pussy and dick", and forget about
the gun. He'd even save money this way.
Or they scream "help". That fellow ,whatever his bedroom activity's entail, is prepared to draw and fire if threatened or sees another person being threatened. You just have never been in a situation where it was necessary to be armed or have someone around that was.
More than likely Leo,I hate to say it but you are more apt to be the victim in a situation more so than the survivor based on the ideas you have in regards to protecting yourself..
And if he does suck cock, what's wrong with that?
I was only replying to Twowarmtts3!'s comment that he's a "real man", imterpreting it in the traditional sense.
By the way, I KNOW it's a real jungle there, I've been taking about it. I have friends all over the US. Many of them wouldn't even dream of having a gun 10 years ago. But they've convinced me how unsafe the feel now. My Arizona friend are really scared actually. That's why I keep saying that if I lived threre I'd probably be forced to have a gun. I have a journalist friend who went to Afghanistan and Iraq for a newspaper. He did have a gun. Likewise, I wouldn't even dream of living i a "jungle" without a gun. I just still can't believe that someone would have to carry his/her gun in the Capitol. But I'm still trying to comprehend how unsafe and violent some areas in the US can be these days. This is SAD. The leader of the free world is being destroyed from inside and it seems that a peaceful society isn't possible any longer. It's sad because it affects the whole world too.
I personally am glad I don't live in such a jungle. However, I do understand your concerns Sherryann and wish you could escape and live here,or somewhere equivalent too. Therr are still safe places in the world.
No one in the Capitol used their gun except for a black Capitol police officer who killed a white unarmed woman. I am still trying to comprehend why that is memory holed.
Joe Biden’s America.
The price of gas is expensive and a whole bunch of people invaded the US Capitol building on January 6, 2020. It wasn’t even Joe Biden’s America.
Explain why Antifa would try to stop the election process for their preferred President and risk getting a fascist like Trump again?
Trump supporters went to the Capitol to force Mike Pence to overturn the election.
Those 2 groups are not trying to do anything. Like stop a president from being elected or stop violence. They want to create mayhem and disruption. .Nothing else. They want chaos.
However, the claim was that the violence was committed by Antifa or BLM members and the Trump supporters were peaceful. That we can check, because many violent protesters were arrested. They have checked the social media activity of those suspects and it shows them as active Trump supporters and radicalizing over time.
If they were Antifa or BLM members their social media would show completely different ideologies. They could still radicalize, off course, but about completely different subjects.
Why do you always paint your opposition as having the only goal of creating mayhem and disruption? Even if they are disruptive, at least understand it is the method not the goal. Do I claim that Trump supporters only went to the Capital to destroy, fight and kill? I understand they were angry about a fraudulent election. If I believed that happened and the opposition got away with it, I would also be very angry and probably did the same. It would have been the biggest crime in your Democracy.
That doesn't mean it's true or people who believe it are right to believe it.
There we 80 lawsuits about the claims of fraud and all (but one irrelevant one)
had lost or not even deemed worthy of the court's time (moot). The 'evidence' that was presented was ridiculous (my opinion) and the 'real proof' was never presented. Claiming you have 'real proof' is not really proving anything. If there was 'real proof', the whole world would have known about it.
SrCums says there is proof without showing any or he says he doesn't need proof and others are idiots to believe there was no fraud. That's an opinion, but I don't think it's a good one. I think opinions should be based in facts and logic.
You could change my mind with actual proof, immediately. But do understand what 'proof' means. That 'evidence' obviously did not convince the (Trump appointed) judges, so it wouldn't convince me.
MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell claims Trump will be reinstated on August 13th. That's not enough time to present your perfect proof, win the court cases, hold a new election and get Trump back into office. That is only possible with a coup d'état.
Remember that it is the responsibility of the military to fight-off coups.
HAHAHA. OK. If that’s what you want us to believe, so be it. Don’t forget to testify in front of Congress. I’m sure they would like to know that.
You think I really care what you do to my Twowarmtts3! page? That is my fighting page. The other page Twowarmtts3 stays clean. It’s the one I chat with the good people and you can’t get in. It belongs to Charlie and he lets me use it. So, knock yourself out. Waste your points on my gift banner. Sooner or later they disappear.
2nd question, what makes you think I’m wasting my time? You assume too much
You will never eventually clean up all the shit on your page because the entire site is chipping in. Soon or later like quicksand you will be over your head in shit.. Fucking unbelievable..
BTW, you just called yourself stupid.
Who gives a flying fuck if you decide to ban me? First I can read all your posts. Second, no loss
There’s only 7 spaces to put a shit pile on my page and like I’ve said, who cares.
You can't win with lies and spin. You will never ever show any sound statement as long as you stick with plan A
You believe what you just posted about Trump. What if I don’t agree? If you were me, would you just accept it quietly?
Out of all your spits of bullshit the only thing I have seen so far is Political Correctness and hate.. You do have a heart and its here but being your own worst enemy has given you an eternity of isolation from your own stupidity..
Like I said,, stop playing the circle game with me.. Be humble and what is true. All comes down to that.. You want to hate Trump and democracy, then just say it but don't play the circle game... It wastes time and development.. Namely your development.
I will never give you credit because you have no clue on ethics, morals, doing what's right, Justice,,,, nothing.
Out of all your spits of bullshit the only thing I have seen so far is Political Correctness and hate.. You do have a heart and its here but being your own worst enemy has given you an eternity of isolation from your own stupidity..
This is all bs. Sop playing the circle game with you? Be humble and what is true?
Did you also want me to stay on my pijamas and cook dinner? Yeah, right.
Twowarmtts3! crapped out on me. I scared her off. She blacklisted me. Old Fart, I need a break from you I hope your “I don’t need you to agree with me, but, I will hate you for ever and accuse you of petty crap” attitude continues. Good life if I don’t reappear.
New Comment Go to top