US 160 / UK 0 The score for murdered police officers last year.

@McTag,

Lollipops are banned in the UK and there ain't no sunshine...

@H2O MAN,

My grandfather came from there, in the 1800s,
from a place called "Devon Shire"

England was a free country until around 1920.
Historically, thay used to pride themselves in their "English liberties." O, well.

David

1 Reply

@fresco,

fresco wrote:

How does the US gun lobby have the nerve to open their mouths ?

1 thing is guns which is righfully to blame, but also the more suble things like arrogance and harsh procedures towards suspects, usually a more gentel behaviour can solve many problems and prevent things from escelating.

0 Replies

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Quote:
In US v. CRUIKSHANK 92 US 542 (1875)
the USSC held that the rights of the 1st and 2nd Amendments long antedated the Constitution,
such that when created, the US government found them in being. Accordingly, these rights are older
than the Constitution, which neither created nor granted them to the citizenry
any more than the Constitution created the moon nor granted the stars.

Hmmm, 1875. Would these be the same assholes who decided Dred Scott? Might these be the same champions of human liberty who were working their way up to 'separate but equal" in Plessy v Ferguson [1896??]

Has there ever been a country as hypocritical as the USA?

you critizxiz but you don't know US history 1875 if decades after dred scott

except for you and al sharpton nobodyt believes that

1 Reply

@ABE5177,

Abe, focus. Your concern about the dates is a major red herring. The record shows that all this propaganda about these freedoms was a crock. Therein lies the hypocrisy.

0 Replies

@wayne,

Quote:

Colonialism didn't work in the long run.

I ask you to explain a glib statement and you respond with that. Very clever.

Quote:

If you want to blame the US for that at least get the place time right, America 1776.

So you think it is blame being attributed to the USA supporting independence in colonial countries ?

Quote:

The rest of your post seems to be mere profiling

And with the wave of the hand another problem is solved. You solve a lot of problems with glib pronouncements and hand waving, dont you ?

The main thing is you have avoided being called a racist and the world can go to hell. Well done.

0 Replies

@Ionus,

Ionus wrote:

If it isnt gun laws, then why do USA citizens kill so many of themselves ?

By this do you mean suicides or homicides?

Why do the citizens of all of the countries that come before the US in the lists below "kill so many of themselves?"

Homicide rates

Suicide rates

Do you think it has anything to do with their gun laws?

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

By this do you mean suicides or homicides?

I mean homicides.

Quote:

Why do the citizens of all of the countries that come before the US in the lists below "kill so many of themselves?"

I wouldnt take any pleasure in comparing a country like the USA with all those poorer countries if I were you.

Quote:

Do you think it has anything to do with their gun laws?

I think it is crazy to arm citizens so they can protect themselves against other citizens because they have arms.

2 Replies

@Ionus,

Ionus wrote:

I think it is crazy to arm citizens so they can protect themselves
against other citizens because they have arms.

Government does not distribute free guns. We buy or make our own.
It is only that when government was brought into existence,
it was upon the condition that some things were beyond its reach.
Among these were a citizen 's right to buy newspapers and guns.
Among the reasons for buying newspapers and guns
were overthrowing (i.e., firing) the government
that the citizens hired, like a private security force.
The Founders (ALL successful Revolutionaries)
knew that the same as the citizens had the right
to hire a government, thay also had the right
to remove that government,
whether that government liked it or not.

The citizens created and own the government.
It does not own THEM.

Every predatory event
is a contest of POWER.
Your gun control philosophy woud concede
a MONOPOLY of power to the predator, against the victim.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

"My grandfather came from there, in the 1800s,
from a place called "Devon Shire"

UK Disclaimer :

Although it is alleged that Grandpa Omsig originated from the UK, Her Brittanic Majesty's Government takes no responsibility for the seemingly obsessive nonsense regularly being ladled out by any of his offspring from across the pond.
A full apology will only be provided upon irrefutable evidence being furnished that he was indeed British.

0 Replies

Upon checking the National Archive, it would seem that one Theobald Omsig was indeed hastily shipped off to the Americas after suffering repeated involuntary orgasm whilst loading Prince Albert's shotgun at a pheasant shoot in Devon on the 18th September 1848.

Therefore, a formal apology would seem to be in order.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Your argument is circular. You need guns either :
1. Because people have guns, people need guns
OR
2. You have a need to feel important and only gun ownership will provide that (now see 1.).

Your argument to protect against predators is offset by guns making predators more powerful and by the number of gun incidents that would not occur, obviously, if guns were restricted.

1 Reply

@Old Goat,

Old Goat wrote:

Upon checking the National Archive, it would seem that one Theobald Omsig was indeed hastily shipped off to the Americas after suffering repeated involuntary orgasm whilst loading Prince Albert's shotgun at a pheasant shoot in Devon on the 18th September 1848.
Therefore, a formal apology would seem to be in order.

Life is just one long orgasm.

David

0 Replies

@Ionus,

Ionus wrote:

Your argument is circular. You need guns either :
1. Because people have guns, people need guns
OR
2. You have a need to feel important and only gun ownership will provide that (now see 1.).

Your argument to protect against predators is offset by guns making predators more powerful and by the number of gun incidents that would not occur, obviously, if guns were restricted.

Ionus: your post is false and deceptive, but not true.
I never asserted what u allege to be my arguments.

Since u bring it up,
lemme point out that even if no criminal had any gun,
the decent people still need defensive guns.
For instance, after my first abdominal surgery,
I became so enfeebled as not to be able to walk.
When I got out of the hospital, it was a big deal
just to stand erect. I remember thinking as I
approached my car: "I better not get into any fights."
If robbers armed knives or armed with flowers
had set upon me, I 'd have been overmatched,
but yet rightfully entitled to retain my property.

U have also ignored the fact that criminals
can arm themselves, to their own satisfaction.
Neither society, nor its henchman, government
can prevent criminals from arming themselves,
including guns, the same way that it can not
and it has not prevented them from getting
marijuana, nor from getting alcohol in the 1920s.
Prohibitions r FUTILE.

The actual weapon is THE HUMAN MIND.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

U have also ignored the fact that criminals can arm themselves, to their own satisfaction.

That was my point 1. Because people have guns, people need guns

Quote:

I became so enfeebled as not to be able to walk.

That was my point 2. You have a need to feel important and only gun ownership will provide that .

On the sliding scale of feeling important, I would place feeling vulnerable at one end. Same thing. The need to feel important comes from weakness.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

You are making a common mistake found in this forum.

I take no pleasure in any comparison you might draw from the linked lists.

You and others have clearly made the claim the US gun laws are the cause of US gun death rates.

It would seem sensible, in an attempt to prove your point, to determine what the similarities are among the countries in the world with the highest murder and sucide rates.

America's positions on this list may be the result of something far darker than a love for guns, and far less easily corrected than by simply banning all firearms.

Or maybe not, but until such research is done, your claim about gun laws is facile.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

David wrote:

U have also ignored the fact that criminals can arm themselves, to their own satisfaction.

Ionus wrote:

That was my point 1. Because people have guns, people need guns

No; as I pointed out in my last post,
criminals have been armed with other weapons also,
maybe just a roll of nickels or a garrot
or a sock with a padlock in it.
The victims need competent defensive firepower.
Q.E.D.: your argument is disproven.

David wrote:

I became so enfeebled as not to be able to walk.

Ionus wrote:

That was my point 2. You have a need to feel important [ ?? ]
and only gun ownership will provide that .

That is arrogant, officious and presumptuous foolishness,
in furtherance of your fantasy.

When people carry holstered guns,
after the first few minutes, u just forget about it
and u consider more pressing concerns,
like finding a parking space.
Carrying a gun never made me feel "important"
(Important to WHAT?? By what criteria was I more "important"??)
Indeed, years ago, when I held an important, powerful public office
for the State of New York, I did not "feel" important in doing it.
I just felt like I was putting in a day 's work,
but to the people involved,
the results were very important indeed.

Ionus wrote:

On the sliding scale of feeling important, I would place feeling vulnerable at one end.
Same thing. The need to feel important comes from weakness.

Your logic is very, very flawed today.
Abraham Lincoln was "vulnerable" to J.W. Booth.
Was Lincoln devoid of importance?
Was Lincoln weak, while he was watching his play?
Feeling better defended (like possessing a fire extinguisher) does not make u "feel important".

How dare u presume to know what I am thinking ??
Do u claim to be a telepath? or a psychopath?

David

2 Replies

South Africa - 110 cops killed in 2009/10

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/110-police-killed-in-200910-20100909

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

David when I am carrying a firearm I go far out of my way to avoid getting into conflicts of any kind to a far greater degree then when I am not arm.

One time that did amused me greatly happen when I was in a Home Depot parking lot and my shopping cart hit a car and this young lady then jumped out and went off on me.

In my face stating that she was going to kill me hell follow me home and kill me as a matter of fact.

I just stood there calmly with my hand in my pocket on my 38 just in case she would pull out some deadly weapon and allow her go on and on.

Without the burden of being arm I would had told her off but being arm I needed to act where no one could made the argument that I did not act as a reasonable person if she had pull a weapon.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

David when I am carrying a firearm I go far out of my way
to avoid getting into conflicts of any kind to a far greater degree
then when I am not arm.

That is a very, very popular philosophy, Bill.

BillRM wrote:

One time that did amused me greatly happen when I was in a Home Depot parking lot
and my shopping cart hit a car and this young lady then jumped out and went off on me.

In my face stating that she was going to kill me hell follow me home and kill me as a matter of fact.

I just stood there calmly with my hand in my pocket on my 38 just in case she would pull out
some deadly weapon and allow her go on and on.

Yes; something very similar happened to me in 1986.
I got sideswiped by a meat truck, in the lane to my left.
Its driver, a drunken immigrant from Eastern Europe,
emerged from said meat truck, with a scythe (meat hook?)
slung over his shoulder, while we exchanged information.
I am, by nature, calm anyway in such situations,
but I got a chuckle out of that.

Bill, I imagine that a .38 IS sufficient stopping power for a lady,
but IMHO, u need better stopping power, in general than a .38 provides.
With all respect, I suggest that (in the interest of self-preservation)
u consider upgrading to a .44 special revolver
for the requisite stopping power (ideally loaded with hollowpointed slugs, for optimal energy dump).
Next time, it might not be a girl.

For years, I carried a .38 revolver (Smith & Wesson Model 36)
until I found out about its futility during the Phillipine Insurrection of 1899.
A word to the wise is sufficient.

BillRM wrote:

Without the burden of being arm I would had told her off but being arm
I needed to act where no one could made the argument that I did
not act as a reasonable person if she had pull a weapon.

That is prudent, but being innocent will not necessarily prevent u
from being falsely accused.
U woud not be the first.

David

0 Replies

US 160 / UK 0 The score for murdered police officers last year.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know