EPTIf you're seeing this topic then another mass shooting hap…
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
TommyP
United States6231 Posts
| ||
|
sc2superfan101
3583 Posts
On July 22 2012 04:33 kollin wrote: No reason not to own guns? Let me quote you some statistics "In one year, guns murdered 35 in Australia, 39 in England and Wales, 194 in Germany, 200 in Canada and 9,484 in the United States" Yep. No reason not to own guns. Not...at...all. where are those statistics quoted from? you also understand the inherent problems with comparing nation-wide statistics from countries like England with the US, right? and no... people doing stupid things is not a reason to disallow the vast majority of responsible gun owners their right to own and use guns. | ||
|
SayGen
United States1209 Posts
On July 22 2012 04:36 Defacer wrote: A few 4-star generals have said that if Iran is America's greatest enemy, than America has nothing to worry about. They are least a decade or more from successfully making a nuclear bomb, have no launch capability, and have a small, poorly trained, army with an outdated arsenal. All this includes crippling sanctions on their country by the US and a long list of allies. Iran wasn't a dedcade away till Israel and the US launched Cyber warfare on the Iranian nuclear plants and put their centerfuges on override ruining years worth of uranianium enrichment. Also I'd point out, Iran wouldn't try to beat America in a stnad up fight they wouldn't ever launch a nuke. They would put it in a box and put it in a small cargo ship and sail it to the American coast and go boom. America doesn't check every boat in international waters. They don't even check every boat that drops off cargo. We odn't have enough inspectors to do that. It's hard enough to check every person getting on a plane. | ||
|
TommyP
United States6231 Posts
On July 22 2012 04:32 Kahlgar wrote: The idea that Japan was scared of invading the US because of the gun carrying laws is hilarious. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the US having a much better navy and infinitely more production capablities. And believe it or not there were not 300m people in the USA at the times. I guess it's only fitting that such an ignorant post features a "check ur facts" advice. Well to be fair, at certain times in the war, japan had the superior navy and basically owned the pacific. | ||
|
SiroKO
France721 Posts
I don't want an asepticized new world order where all manly cultural identities have been destroid, which is where we're heading to. In Europe, stuff like the Corrida are threatened too. The parents don't even have the right to touch their misbeheaving and insulting children. | ||
|
Goozen
Israel701 Posts
On July 22 2012 04:38 TommyP wrote: I dont know how hard it is to get guns in america, but we need to make it harder. I thinking having guns in your house is fine and hunting is fine, but gun violence is getting out of control. Agreed, the main issue is the ease people can have guns and so many. The problem is people see it black and white that any attempt to change the 2nd amendment as canceling it. It is way too easy for people who have no need to have guns and lack the mental stability can get hold of them. On July 22 2012 04:40 SayGen wrote: Iran wasn't a dedcade away till Israel and the US launched Cyber warfare on the Iranian nuclear plants and put their centerfuges on override ruining years worth of uranianium enrichment. Also I'd point out, Iran wouldn't try to beat America in a stnad up fight they wouldn't ever launch a nuke. They would put it in a box and put it in a small cargo ship and sail it to the American coast and go boom. America doesn't check every boat in international waters. They don't even check every boat that drops off cargo. We odn't have enough inspectors to do that. It's hard enough to check every person getting on a plane. And owning guns will help you how....? | ||
|
SayGen
United States1209 Posts
| ||
|
Goozen
Israel701 Posts
On July 22 2012 04:42 SayGen wrote: Those stastics are stupid there are more ameircans in those groups so of course America would have a higher murder count. A more fair data spread would be murder per ratio. (though to be fair I'd say that America would still lose but it wouldn't be as bad as that bias fact posted makes it out to me.) This was done 2 pages ago: One final calculation for fun: Comparing UK vs US death rates on a UK-sized country: 63 mil x 1.2 / 100k = 756 (UK RATES) 63 mil x 4.8 / 100k = 3024 (US RATES) Comparing UK vs US death rates on a US-size country: 314 mil x 1.2 / 100k = 3768 (UK RATES) 314 mil x 4.8 / 100k = 15072 (US RATES) I don't want to go into why it's like this but saying "only 3 difference per 100k isn't a big deal" is not logical. | ||
|
SayGen
United States1209 Posts
On July 22 2012 04:43 Goozen wrote: This was done 2 pages ago: One final calculation for fun: Comparing UK vs US death rates on a UK-sized country: 63 mil x 1.2 / 100k = 756 (UK RATES) 63 mil x 4.8 / 100k = 3024 (US RATES) Comparing UK vs US death rates on a US-size country: 314 mil x 1.2 / 100k = 3768 (UK RATES) 314 mil x 4.8 / 100k = 15072 (US RATES) I don't want to go into why it's like this but saying "only 3 difference per 100k isn't a big deal" is not logical. 3000 much better then 9000. Just saying. | ||
|
Kahlgar
411 Posts
On July 22 2012 04:36 SayGen wrote: 1) It was found in post war documents among Japan military brass files. Check ur facts. 2) Ur right we didn't have 300m at the time that is the current number, I was mistaken. though the fact we had more civilians then the entire standing army of the Japanese forces is still important even if I was wrong on the 300m figure. (again my mistake). 3) At least I can admit when I'm wrong, and work to fix the record. Almost everything you said was dead wrong- so I state again, read a history book and check ur facts. Oh i'm sure that Japan viewed it as a negative but that was not exactly the tipping point, they had no realistic intentions to ever invade the US main land nor did the US military consider it a legit threat (for obvious logistical reasons). | ||
|
Kahlgar
411 Posts
On July 22 2012 04:40 TommyP wrote: Well to be fair, at certain times in the war, japan had the superior navy and basically owned the pacific. yeah but the production capacity of the US turned that around pretty damn fast | ||
zatic
Zurich15313 Posts
| ||
|
InoyouS2
1005 Posts
| ||
|
SayGen
United States1209 Posts
On July 22 2012 04:47 zatic wrote: SayGen can you please be less aggressive with your posting. Also you can't just claim stuff, not source it, and then just tell people to "go read a history book". If I say something, I don't want to have to use some random website on the intetnet to prove it factual. The intent is full of lies and bias, so it's hard to tkae sources form the interweb seriously. As far as aggressiveness goes I can't apologise for that. It's life and death for me. It's what I do for a living. I cna't stand people who want to be ruled and controled. We are HUMANs we are INDIVISUALS. If they accept their chains, then how can I fight mine? You need mass people, not just splinter groups. I could never fight alone. The fact that people have no clue how vunerbale they are to oppression is mind boggleing. I STRONGLY urge people to educate via REAL books and REAL research. I learned alot in War College, and also did outside education in a private university (WKU). I also take a serious intrest in Strategy of all sorts (beyond the obvious SC2/RTS/Video Game). I own numerious copies of The 5 Rings, and Art of War that I would recoemnd for anyone who wants to earn a basic, and simply understanding of Human strategy. | ||
|
SayGen
United States1209 Posts
On July 22 2012 04:53 InoyouS2 wrote: The people who say things like "The USA is a free country and according to blah blah we should be allowed to own and use firearms" are hard to take seriously... Why. Let me ask you this. How do you stop oppresison witohut guns? Please explain. I would love to hear ur insights. | ||
|
kollin
United Kingdom8380 Posts
On July 22 2012 05:00 SayGen wrote: Why. Let me ask you this. How do you stop oppresison witohut guns? Please explain. I would love to hear ur insights. Well assuming the military aren't all on the side of the oppressor you could use guerilla forces and try and steal weapons/supplies, then give them to people who want to fight. | ||
|
SayGen
United States1209 Posts
Google a list or map of US military installations and you will see LARGE gaps. What would be easier and more successful. A group with guns stealing more weapons/Ammo supplies or a group of unarmed people stealing guns weapons supplies? I pick group A. In guerilla warfare the minority forces have to avoid causalities since humans are the most precious resource. | ||
|
Smoot
United States128 Posts
My answer is yes. My proof is Vietnam, Afghanistan/Iraq (Taliban), the Philippans (WWII), Germany's invasion of Russia, the American Revolution... etc etc. It is called guerrilla warfare. | ||
|
Smoot
United States128 Posts
On July 22 2012 05:02 kollin wrote: Well assuming the military aren't all on the side of the oppressor you could use guerilla forces and try and steal weapons/supplies, then give them to people who want to fight. How does that not involve guns? | ||
|
SayGen
United States1209 Posts
On July 22 2012 05:05 Smoot wrote: A few pages back I read this "Do people seriously believe that a portion of the citizenry armed with handguns and rifles will be able to fight the most powerful military in the world?" My answer is yes. My proof is Vietnam, Afghanistan/Iraq (Taliban), the Philippans (WWII), Germany's invasion of Russia, the American Revolution... etc etc. It is called guerrilla warfare. Nice to see someone who knows his history. If only we had more people like you. | ||
| ||
