EPTRepublican nominations - Page 296
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
v3chr0
United States856 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10719 Posts
| ||
Falling
Canada11354 Posts
Back to the campaign. It seems there is a downside to user generated content in that there is no way to verify who is actually creating the content. So the control of the message can be sabotoged by others posing to be part of the campaign. Ron Paul Campaign sues Video-makers Anti-Paul group to discredit | ||
|
zobz
Canada2175 Posts
On January 18 2012 17:54 Velr wrote: It is not your Job to defend against the bad guys. You get the (goverment controlled) police for that. Stuff like this is one of the main reasons to actually have a goverment.... A government police force is particularly useful for going after people who have already committed a crime and are presently hiding, as there is no need, then, to respond immediately; and for people who need help but are unable to help themselves. Basically, police are a positive value when they are the more convenient method for people to deal with criminals. However they are not always quick enough to arrive on the scene, and it should be obvious that doing it yourself is sometimes preferable, and to remove that option of well armed self defense is plain unfair. | ||
|
acker
United States2958 Posts
On January 18 2012 17:28 Falling wrote: @acker. Well granted (need infantry to hold ground and portions of the army would probably rebel.) But if there is a line drawn, that the argument can't simply be that people are fighting against gun control because they need to protect themselves from the government at all costs. There appears to be a limit (although I find it odd that you can purchase tanks and the like- can they still fire?) There is some notion that private citizens cannot have unlimited access to modern military grade weapons. And it just seems ease of access to weapons that can mow down weapons is a bad and overkill for self-defence purposes (for home invasion for instance.) First and foremost: yes, you can own tanks, and yes, if you register the gun and fulfill the requirement, you can keep (or, more likely, refit) the gun and live ammo as long as its registered as a destructive device and you pay $200 in taxes on top of ammo costs per shell or something. I personally haven't tried purchasing a tank, so I wouldn't know the specifics. Who on earth is saying that there is no line? Of course there is a line. No one is saying that private citizens should have "unlimited access to modern military grade weapons"; to take it to an extreme, no one has proposed that private citizens should be able to own nuclear ICBMs. People must be capable of violent overthrow of the government, if the worst comes to worst. This does not mean that people must necessarily be as well-armed as the military. Just that people must be capable of giving the military a hard time if they're willing to die in droves. As far as I can tell, weapons do not mow down weapons. I assume you mean "mow down people", in which case 90% of the fatalities comes from...handguns. Not automatic weapons or grenade launchers or other fancy, expensive weapons that require extensive background checks and massive government scrutiny. Fatalities come from concealable, portable weapons easy to obtain illicitly or, more often than not, easy to be stupid with. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10719 Posts
Or to say it diffrent: Most people here rather get robbed than shoot someone. | ||
|
acker
United States2958 Posts
On January 18 2012 18:43 Velr wrote: I think that’s just a huge cultural difference... Most people I know don't even think "Gun" when thinking about self defense/defending their family... Well, it's also about never necessary... Except if you want to murder the in 99% of cases unarmed burglar... Which I would call a dramatic overreaction to say the least... Or to say it diffrent: Most people here rather get robbed than shoot someone. Just putting this out there, but Switzerland almost certainly has a higher number of households with military-grade weapons than the United States due to the whole "store military assault rifle in your house" thing. In fact, almost no households in the United States possess military-grade weapons, for the simple fact that automatic firearms must have been purchased before 1984. And the Swiss aren't exactly known for killing one another. Something tells me that it isn't the weapons involved, but the system. Maybe American firearms laws are broken. Maybe we need longer handgun wait times, or maybe we should tax pistols more and long guns less. Maybe we should take out the automatic weapons bill. Maybe all firearms should be regulated more. This whole issue requires a study. The whole issue requires many, many, many studies. But some idiot gun group keeps blocking the studies from happening over here. Or perhaps the geography or culture or economics is different. Or something. | ||
|
zalz
Netherlands3704 Posts
If there is someone in my house and i call the police the response time is 5 minutes. A year ago when my house had been broken into (i caught them in the act and they ran) i called the cops and they had someone over here in 3 minutes. With a response time like that you can argue that the police can take care of this. But when the response time is 30+ minutes i don't think it's unfair to have a means to defend yourself with. The size of America just makes it impossible to guarentee a 5 minute response time for everyone. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10719 Posts
On January 18 2012 18:57 zalz wrote: The size of the USA makes the police argument somewhat difficult to swallow. If there is someone in my house and i call the police the response time is 5 minutes. A year ago when my house had been broken into (i caught them in the act and they ran) i called the cops and they had someone over here in 3 minutes. With a response time like that you can argue that the police can take care of this. But when the response time is 30+ minutes i don't think it's unfair to have a means to defend yourself with. The size of America just makes it impossible to guarentee a 5 minute response time for everyone. Lol. Clearly Switzerland is a single big city with no remote villages at all, also ALL of our villages got police posts (lol) and the area of the Alpes is not inhabitated at all and our Police is just fucking lightspeed fast and therefore we don't have to shoot intruders... In fact the moment we call the police they order an orbital strike and kill the intruder -.- Size is just no argument except when your comparing a citystate to a "normal" state with cities and remote villages/houses... I also doubt that most of the people that think the gun is really necessary come from places where the "response" time is actually an issue... These places also sport less criminals/intruders and people that don't belong there actually get spotted quickly... I'm not actually against the guns, i'm against the ideology that you need them to defend yourself. I'm all for hunting and that stuff... Btw: Swiss households may have tons of Rifles. But most of the households don't own ammo because it is not issued by the military/with the gun (and taking Ammo home is illegal, iirc). So it basically is/was mandatory to keep the gun at your home but it wasn't allowed to take ammo for it with you  . I don't even know how exactly it is atm (but i think it's not obligatory anymore to keep the gun at home, which is still done because it's annoying to take it up/drop it after the obl. shoting range visits)... Well, i don't know exactly, i'm finished with that BS  ). | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9390 Posts
On January 18 2012 17:54 Velr wrote: It is not your Job to defend against the bad guys. You get the (goverment controlled) police for that. Stuff like this is one of the main reasons to actually have a goverment.... Wow. Would you also have throught that jews were worse humans and should be killed if you were born in germany in 1930? Are you that easily brainswashed by government propaganda? User was warned for this post | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10719 Posts
Therefore i would probably have believed what my parents told me. Are you really that bad at making absolutely retarded examples? Oh, and in 193X a big part of all the german grown ups actually beleived that or at least did not oppose it.. I guess they were all just stupid morons that believed everythign the goverment told them. SERIOUSLY? | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9390 Posts
On January 18 2012 19:19 Velr wrote: If i would have been born in 1930 i would have been ~10 around the time that the holocaust actually happened. Therefore i would probably have believed what my parents told me. Are you really that bad at making absolutely retarded examples? Oh, and in 1930 a big part of all the german grown ups actually beleived that or at least did not opposed it.. I guess they were alle just stupid morons that believe everythign the goverment told them. SERIOUSLY? Government is kinda creating the culture (unfortunately), which impact your raising. What your hear in school or from your parents is just an end product of heavy manipulation through centuries. When you think your not supposed to defend your self its almost as bad as thinking jews deserve to die. Of course your allowed to defend your self. If you optimize your probablity of surviving by having a gun, then its a good idea, and your allowed to do it. Sure if you have the possiblity of calling the police and letting them defend you would be a good option if there was time for that. But some times that is not an option. The reason you ahve been getting this manipulated is probably that you have been taugh through the years that governemnt is supposed to take care of all your needs. | ||
|
acker
United States2958 Posts
On January 18 2012 19:10 Velr wrote: Btw: Swiss households may have tons of Rifles. But most of the households don't own ammo because it is not issued by the military/with the gun (and taking Ammo home is illegal, iirc). So it basically is/was mandatory to keep the gun at your home but it wasn't allowed to take ammo for it with you . I don't even know how exactly it is atm (but i think it's not obligatory anymore to keep the gun at home, which is still done because it's annoying to take it up/drop it after the obl. shoting range visits)... Well, i don't know exactly, i'm finished with that BS ).Wait, wiki says you're allowed to buy military-grade ammunition at stores...but you're saying you're not allowed to keep it at home? How does this work? Is there some sort of special area you put 5.56mm ammunition you purchase for private use? And what about issued sidearms? Something tells me 9mm ammunition has to be allowed at home, it's super common for even civilian guns. Last edit, I swear: apparently the no mandatory ammo thing was implemented in 2007. Something tells me homicide rates weren't exactly high before 2007. I guess there's too little data to do a comparison before and after, yet... | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10719 Posts
All I know is, that the military is not issuing ammo with the rifle and I think you need some kind of permit to actually buy ammo (but I could be wrong). It never phased me or anyone close to me so i'm really pretty clueless about anything that goes beyond the obligatory stuff. All this is way too OT and i'm in no way an expert . Sorry. | ||
|
kaisen
United States601 Posts
Bachmann is not even in the race anymore. | ||
|
True_Soldier
United States9 Posts
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvinco.html Just little something on guns england did already have very low rates before they enacted their laws. so idk how you could use those stats to show that the laws lowered their rates. I personally have lived in 5 different towns/cities in the US and the Police response time is no where near 5 minutes closer to 10-15 mins unless there is an officer patroling close by which is just by chance. Just this week a 44 year old ladys house was broken into and she was shot and killed then robbed afterwards. The police caught the suspect days later. So to say that the police is all you need to defend yourself is just crazy. In some situations yes the police can get their on time. Personally if a guy broke in my house and was pointing a gun at my son and/or wifes head my first reaction isnt going to be hey robber can you please hold on until the police get here. I will defend them if it cost me my own life as i'm sure 90% of you would. There are mean people in this world that will kill you first ask questions later for w/e reason. That is just the way the world is now its sad but it is and it makes me sad for my son to have to grow up in such a world. The constitution gives you the right to bear arms and defend yourself period. The constitution is what our country was built on and stands for. Its those core values that made our country great yet we as a country have strayed so far from our core values and if you can't see that the US is not what it used to be then your sadly blinded by all the smoke and mirrors the politicians and corrupt world has thrown at you. What happens if our government becomes so corrupt they take away all your rights. If they enact marshall law to completely control you and everything you do. Do just sit their as citizens and say oh well life was great while it lasted? No you take arms and fight for your freedom, your rights, and YOUR country not the governments. The people make the United States not a governing body. That is the main purpose for that law defend yourself and your freedom. With that said I do believe their should be very strict regulations, background checks, and any other process deemed necessary to put the guns in responsible hands. Which most states do have very thorough procedures for this. I do believe it should also be a requirement to attend classes on gun laws and safety. I am not sure if this is already a requirement in most states it isn't in mine. I think most people have forgotten that we were not given freedom on a silver platter. Our freedom was earned through millions of peoples bloodshed. Our forefathers fought countless wars to give us the freedom that our government has slowly taken away. They killed their own brothers just because they believed in something; that something was our rights and freedom. Whether your white black yellow blue orange your still a person and everyone on earth should be born a free man/woman or at least given the chance to fight for their freedom! (On a side note sorry for the long post. I rarely post just browse and read but a lot of things talked about here really hit my heart and I felt obligated to speak from my heart) I voted for Ron Paul for several reasons. One big one is the US should not be the world police. We get so much hatred and ill feelings towards us for trying to help all these other countries when their are millions upon millions of homeless starving people in the US right now. We need to take care of ourselves before we help others just as each and everyone of you should do. If you can not take care of yourself how are you supposed to help others. We fought for our freedom and rights. Who are we to take away the right of other countries to do the same. Let the people stand up for what they believe and fight for it specifically pertaining to the middle east. No I do not agree with everything Ron Paul says; who does anybody? Probably not but thats what makes him real. When you got politicians who say everything you want to hear does that seem real genuine to you. I sure hope not because I would love to see the two people in this world that agree on 100% everything. Thats all again sorry for the long post  <3 | ||
|
bOneSeven
Romania685 Posts
On January 18 2012 17:54 Velr wrote: It is not your Job to defend against the bad guys. You get the (goverment controlled) police for that. Stuff like this is one of the main reasons to actually have a goverment.... You live in a world of faeries and elves ( well you live in Switzerland so it's understandable, tell me again what is the crime rate there!?I would guess it's a gazillion times smaller than in any other crowded place ) . The police job is to serve and protect but can you tell me how many times the police stopped a robbery or an assault on an individual ? The answer would be probably 1 in 1000 cases . From where I leave, I haven't heard ONCE that the police helped prevent such an assault . I don't live in the best place in the world but still, here you have no safety from the police. So if you leave in Eastern Europe ( in this is a rather good place compared to other places ), the police never stop assaults on individuals, even when the assault is taking place near them ( I have personally witnessed to such cases, where in one case a man was stabbed with a fucking sword - sounds like its from a movie, but its not ) In America let's say it's a bit better, but still if a patrol is not near you, you are dead or robbed without any chance. You should think in the context of the world, where for example 2 billion people don't have electricity. Just assuming that things should be in a way just because culture has such an amazing grip on your ideologies is completely retarded. | ||
|
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On January 18 2012 11:04 koreasilver wrote: When will people start to realize that the Anglo-New Atheist method of broken logic and polemic rhetoric is little different from the fundamentalism that plagues the same nations? but more on topic, I find it incredibly interesting how Santorum has suddenly surged recently just because of how desperately anti-Romney so much of the Republican base is. What is Anglo-New Atheist and how are they using broken logic ? And considering that I suspect England would belong to them, where is the fundamentalism plaguing it ? | ||
|
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On January 18 2012 11:07 MichaelDonovan wrote: Being a strict constitutionalist isn't extreme. It's actually the opposite of extreme. The constitution is at the center, and our actual policies have been stretched in different directions from that center. Ron Paul wants to bring things back to the way they should be. Does that make sense? Why would you equate what constitution says with what should be ? US constitution is a product of 18th century and is far from perfect or even highly relevant. I can just as easily ask you why not change the constitution ? And you would have to use some other basis to argue that. Legalism is nonsensical moral philosophy. | ||
|
KaasZerg
Netherlands927 Posts
If there are a lot of guns around it would take a lot of time for a constricting gunlaw to have much effect. Meh digressing away drom the topic. | ||
| ||
