Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Placebo

USA Politics Thread - *No gun debate*

Recommended Posts

So, I heard talks about new secession interest arousing again in the States; how far you think it'll go?

I guess the secessionists don't stand much of a chance in open voting... unless something really out of normality occurs in the near future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not far, but all the other talk about all this talk being nothing is... becoming doubtful. Something will happen soon, probably beginning in our lifetimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it will most likely happen in your country as its so massive the differences in people are a lot, this is what you get with democracy you see.

What most people dont realise is that if they do leave a country they are still "owned" by that country, just in other ways such as trade or technology, so in actual fact they become worse off compared to when they were in the other nation because at least then they had more of a choice in the leader.

I get a gut feeling that there are a large minority (oxymoron) in the USA who just cant handle the decline in capitalism, but I think more has been done in terms of reforms in the USA over the last few years than have happened in the last 30 years, and that capitalism has been growing stronger but in the right directions.

I think overall things are also becoming more connected, therefore before you were voting for a guy you never even met, and the people you were voting against you also never really saw (majority here 40000 at the rallies is not 300 million) but now their opinions come straight to your phone or tablet.

So it seems like theres more people against you, but actually its the same its just now they can tell you what they think without ever leaving their living room, which makes it more accesible to people who usually wouldnt be bothered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reactionarys are funny like that though.

Did anyone see the NRA's twitter message the day of the school shooting by the way? It is the sort of sinister comedy that ices politics in the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The worst part is that until the NRA press conference, which game name was passed around as a possible factor?

.

(Disclosure: The voice acting is much better nowadays, although the mispronunciation of "zhong" still is noticeable whenever I hear it.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, games are killing people while weapons don't. Just put armed guards in schools and allow schoolboys to take weapons in school to defend themselves. More weapons, more money for the lobby. Who cares about the deads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wanna try again or are you incapable of actually putting thought into your political ramblings? I suppose the NRA also sponsored the shooting right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suppose the NRA also sponsored the shooting right?

They already benefit from it, as weapons selling has increased. Back to middle age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh-huh.... so nothing to the anti-gunners who politicized a tragedy to punish the innocent? No, instead you are vilifying a totally uninvolved third party who condemns such events?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@GRS

Do you have any sources that prove that more privately owned weapons increase the security?

Regarding the Sandy Hook tragedy, looking at the shooter, i doubt he would be able to get access to illegal weapons. The psychological profile doesn't fit. But he had access to legal weapons from his mother. If he hadn't access to them, those 20 kids and the other victims would actually decorate the christmas tree. When i heard that NRA actually demands more weapons...well, there isn't any "facepalm" pic out there that comes even close to how i felt.

Face it, the right to have own weapons made sense where the next Marshall could be a week on horse away from you. It is called the 18th and 19th century. Now guess what, we're in the 21st century and the next cop is just a phonecall away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cops are an hour away in many parts of the US. They are great for collecting bodies and solving crimes, but not preventing them.

Or to make an arrest after a crime has been prevented by a kid with a gun.

http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/10/23/12-year-old-girl-shoots-home-intruder/

Ok, i'm curious. Are there any serious studies comparing the numbers in which legal weapons actually prevented a crime with the numbers in which legal weapons were involved for committing a crime? I know pretty well, 100% security isn't possible but somehow i think that less weapons would actually mean less killed people. And there, always aim to reach the lower number.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are studies out there that have found the number of gun crime committed by CHL holders to be astonishingly low. Regardless, relying on a reactionary force (police) for security is plain stupid. Why do these things have a habit of happening in no-gun zones? Do less guns work there? You can think what you want, but with some research would prove yourself wrong. I'll give you the starting points of the Chicago and D.C. bans and let you work from there.

I ask in return: are there any serious studies in which it was determined that guns cause crime or that guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens do more harm than good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I don't think the entire problem here is weapons. I mean, let's face it, over the last years the amount of gun owners has decreased. The remaining gun owners hav certainly started buying even more weapons, but seeing as how the average school shooter brings like 2-3 fire arms, I don't think that's the problem. I'd say it might have more to do with culture regarding medication and mental illnesses. In Switzerland you can find a fully automatic military issue assault rifle in most homes, and how many school shootings have they had?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is only a real record kept of justifiable homicides, any real numbers of defensive wounding aren't tracked. Plus you've got any instance of someone merely having a gun being enough to stop a crime, without pulling the trigger. Those are basically unrecorded and sometimes unreported. Overall your chances of being killed in a random shooting are slim to none, and this despite a huge amount of guns in the US. Most homicides are targeted victims and often because of their activities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myke;2267526']@GRS

Do you have any sources that prove that more privately owned weapons increase the security?

Regarding the Sandy Hook tragedy' date=' looking at the shooter, i doubt he would be able to get access to illegal weapons. The psychological profile doesn't fit. But he had access to legal weapons from his mother. If he hadn't access to them, those 20 kids and the other victims would actually decorate the christmas tree. When i heard that NRA actually demands more weapons...well, there isn't any "facepalm" pic out there that comes even close to how i felt.

Face it, the right to have own weapons made sense where the next Marshall could be a week on horse away from you. It is called the 18th and 19th century. Now guess what, we're in the 21st century and the next cop is just a phonecall away.[/quote']

Funny, I faced a home invasion two years ago and the police took a good ten minutes to arrive. In the meantime I "persuaded" the intruder to leave. It's called the 21st century, and the police are still not capable of responding to immediate dangers. You argument that they can is simply absurd. A "phone-call away" is not a measurement of time. And you forgot about the part were they have to actually physically travel to the scene. Whether you like it or not, the police are a reactionary, not preventative force. Putting security in place before an event is a preventative measure. People that live in this fantasy world were the police magically teleport to the scene and stop the bad guy like they are some sort of super-hero need to wake up.

And no, that shooter did not have legal access to those weapons. You need to read up on your laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myke;2267526']Face it' date=' the right to have own weapons made sense where the next Marshall could be a week on horse away from you. It is called the 18th and 19th century. Now guess what, we're in the 21st century and the next cop is just a phonecall away.[/quote']

"Hold on intruder, let me call the police real quick..." :j:

That is a wonderful plan, but no thanks, I would rather have the option of defending myself. I'll call the cops to dispose of a deceased intruder.

Tragedies like the one that happened last week are horrible. But reading people's comments about our freedoms, especially from other countries where rights have always been more limited, just makes me roll my eyes. The answer is not to limit freedoms of a society based on the actions of a few deranged individuals.

But at the end of the day, thankfully, your feelings on the matter mean nothing over here in my country. You all have your opinion and I have mine. I have no argument with any of you... you are all entitled to think for yourselves (most of you still have that freedom I hope).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every country is free to choose his own laws, and that's fine. But having almost free access to weapons is the exact contrary of freedom. That's where the flaw is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not the weapons. We have whole states, and cities, whose murder rate is lower than or equal to European rates, despite much higher gun ownership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not the weapons. We have whole states, and cities, whose murder rate is lower than or equal to European rates, despite much higher gun ownership.

We already had this discussion here and this is untrue. More firearms means more death by firearms. If you ever travelled in Europe, you know that the feeling of overall violence is extremely low compared to what one can feel in the USA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically what you say, criminal rate isn't tied to the numbers of weapons but to the attitude of the people living in said country? Aye, this sheds much better light on the U.S., the country that leads almost every criminal statistic.

And i wasn't trying to be sarcastic when i asked for studies, i would really like to see any study that covers the matter of number of firearms related to committed/defeated crimes. It's one thing what i think and as you say, everyone is entitled to his opinion. So to get away from opinions i would love to see some facts. Yet i didn't

In Switzerland you can find a fully automatic military issue assault rifle in most homes, and how many school shootings have they had?

I live in Switzerland, i have such a rifle (SIG550 is it's official model number IIRC, we know it as "STGW '90") in my basement but you wont find any ammo for it. It's not that i wanted to have this piece of sh*t in my house, we simply had no other choice than take it home. It is probably so rusty, actually shooting with it would be more dangerous for the shooter himself. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×