Mij wrote:
Joe Biden ia politician. Like all politicians, he'll say one thing one day and the contrary the other day. He's not THE champion in lying. Remember Bush ? The all-time low-down dirty rat.
The point here is Biden knows that stricter gun laws aren't going to make a major difference.
Mij wrote:
And, like it or not, less guns = less mass killings. A simple math. Christ, why is so hard to get for some peoples ?
Like less cold virus = less cold, less junk food = less cholesterol, less money = less buying power, etc....
A simple matter of substraction.
There's very little truth to that. In some very small countries like Australia that appears to be true but it's certainly not true in the vast majority of them. Re-read the stats pedro2 and I have posted regarding this issue...
Mij wrote:
You love your guns too much, it's your new mommy. You used it to protect you from fear of dictatorship, and all your other fears.
And you need it to protect you from fellows who have guns. I'm sure you don't get the irony.
As a society, you painted yourself in a corner. There are many countries in this world that live without that gun craziness.
We don't hear them often in the news for mass shooting, not as often as USA for sure.
You face your fears with a gun.
Tell me, when you go to crowded places, do you bring it with you ? Do you have your AK47 by your side, or a small hand gun in your pocket ? Do you look into everybody's eyes to see if you can find something you don't trust ? Are you nervous ? Do you sweat ? Do you analyse peoples reactions as they pass by ? Are you always ready to shoot when hearing unsuspected loud noises ? Do you think you'll have time to react when pointed by a gun ? Are you tempted to leave the children in the car just in case ? Are you happy to live in such a paranoid state of mind ? Wouldn't you prefer to go to crowded places without all that crap ?
Only in America !

I don't own or use guns, nor do I like them. But I do believe you should have the right to protect yourself if you choose to. Pay attention.
duchamp wrote:
Disco Boy wrote:
Where did I say that owning firearms was strictly out of fear of protecting yourself from Government?!
I was using the Government as a scenario of how helpless society would be without the 2nd Amendment in place. Utilizing firearms as protection against dictatorship, in this case, is only ONE example. Other examples include, criminals, wild animals, the mentally-ill, etc. And you still would be able to protect yourself against Government/authority forces if anarchy developed, regardless of the results.
And that's the point here: that your rights are protected.
But if you don't like rights or having them protected, then go move to a Socialist/Communist country and see how you'd fit in...
Please show me where I claimed that you said that "owning firearms was
strictly out of fear of protecting yourself from Government?!". I am very confused where you got that idea from. Sounds like you pulled it out of nowhere. What I did say was "to claim that owning guns does anything to protect our freedom from the government is naive at best."
Then why did you make a big deal about it in the bulk of your last post in response to what I had said?
duchamp wrote:
It's sad you missed the part where Puerto Rico is part of the US, as most people do. In 2011, Puerto Rico broke its own record by logging 1,135 homicides — 30 killings per 100,000 residents.
Read more here:
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/12/11/3 ... urder.htmlUh, thanks...but that report is referring to 2011. According to that article, however, Puerto Rico's murder rate by late 2012, which is more relevant to this topic, was nearly 900. And it's arguable whether or not Puerto Rico is really part of the US. But since you think so, you'd better inform mainstream media they are.
duchamp wrote:
However, I'll take it a step further. It's plain stupid. Any citizen's storehouse of guns will not protect them from the government. I reiterate that I am NOT anti-gun, but I also am not willing to use any silly excuse to justify owning one.
As for your "if you don't like rights or having them protected, then go move to a Socialist/Communist country and see how you'd fit in..." having a few guns is NOT going to protect your rights. You are JUST as helpless with or without your guns, and thinking your not only means they control you and you don't even realize it.
Finally, your claim of "you still would be able to protect yourself against Government/authority forces if anarchy developed, regardless of the results" is just confusing. Since the very definition of anarchy refers to a society without a publicly enforced government or violently enforced political authority, who would your little gun protect you from?
Well, I disagree. I think you would still be
able to protect yourself against Government/authority forces
or ANYBODY who poses a threat to you or your family, if anarchy developed, regardless of the results.
Is that better? I certainly hope so. Because I think you would've gotten my point by now. But I guess not. Anyway, since we're getting semantical, let's look at the definition of "anarchy", shall we?...
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/anarchyan·ar·chy (nr-k)
n. pl. an·ar·chies
1. Absence of any form of political authority.
2. Political disorder and confusion.
3. Absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose.
Synonyms:
noun
lawlessness, revolution, riot, disorder, confusion, chaos, rebellion, misrule, disorganization, misgovernment Their liberal traditions were slipping into anarchy.
You may want to read #3 and the additional synonyms towards the bottom of the link.
The point is: your rights should be protected. And again, that's just an example of utilizing protection of your rights...
just plain doug wrote:
People who own firearms don't say " Gee, I have a gun...think I'll mass murder a bunch of people".
It's people who decide to spree-kill who say "I can get a gun, so I'll use that. If I can't get a gun, I'll make a fertilizer bomb. If I can't do that, I'll drive a car into a crowd of people."
There may be 100 people in the USA who want to kill, kill, kill...but why fuck up the the fun of the other 43-55 million gun owners just to make those 100 nutters use a different method to kill?
I don't own a gun for self-defense or protection. I own one because it's fun to make it go BANG!, and because of the satisfaction of mastering the skill to hit that wee cross down at the other end of the rifle range.
You can take away weapons (auto or otherwise), ban fertilizer, and prohibit cars...but a guy who needs to kill will find a way.
Don't ruin my fun, just because of a handful of people who you won't stop anyway!
I wish more people would realize this...
_________________
ONE NATION UNDER SOCIALISM
Because of Obamination's spending & socialist BS, America and much of the world will endure one of the worst depressions in history in
5...4...3...2...