|
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. |
On July 30 2012 03:59 Crushinator wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 03:55 stevarius wrote:On July 30 2012 03:25 Holy_AT wrote:On July 30 2012 03:22 stevarius wrote:On July 30 2012 03:20 Holy_AT wrote:On July 30 2012 03:16 stevarius wrote:On July 29 2012 20:27 sereniity wrote:On July 29 2012 10:40 stevarius wrote:
And yeah... pretty sure this article proves you wrong? And I don't see how your nuclear-shit-thingy makes any sense lol.
He could have just as easily killed him with another weapon. I don't recall guns being controlled by Skynet and doing the killing on their own. The responsible party for the death of that salesman is the irresponsible gun owner, NOT the firearm. Do you blame drug overdoses on the drug or on the moron who overdosed? All you have shown is that some batshit crazy man killed an innocent salesman. I don't care what he used to do it or how he did it, just that he murdered another person. Also, bullets are responsible for the damage done to the body if you want to be literal. That's the only fucking argument you pro-gun people seem to have, "u can kill with knife too herp derp" I don't actually think you're that dumb. If you could do the killing just as easily with weapons such as guns, there wouldn't be a need for guns in the first place, can't you grasp that simple fucking fact? Are you pro-drugs too? Because when I see a person has overdosed I think it's fucking sad that people who don't even know how to do the drugs properly (and therefore overdose) are able to get their hands on such dangerous things. You'd be a moron if you blame nobody but the person who overdosed, there's always more to it. What I just showed you is that there are people who are as bathshit crazy as him that can get a hold of weapons without any problem what-so-ever, and people in your country are apparently brainwashed enough to fucking believe that they can shoot things wildly on their property. The bullets do the actual damage? I thought when he pulled the trigger his hand automatically did a lethal pistol whip! I'm lucky you told me that! On July 29 2012 12:36 Millitron wrote:
If alcohol would be banned, you could drink soda, or would that be terribly boring all of a sudden?
If you're not willing to give up your beer-drinking in favor of saving lives then that's sad...
If smoking would be banned, you could chew gum, or would that be terribly boring all of a sudden?
If you're not willing to give up your smoking in favor of saving lives then that's sad...
I can go on like this all day. Yes you could, but that'd be fucking silly since many times it makes no sense to say that. Loads of you people bring up "CARS KILL TOO!" but they're not designed to kill, they're a necessity in the daily life for most people. A gun is no necessity. If alcohol would be banned, people could VERY EASILY make alcohol of their own, it would be much harder (note: impossible) to keep regular civilians from getting their hands on alcohol. If smoking would be banned, I couldn't give two shits, seeing as I think it makes no sense as to why you would smoke other than that you get stuck in it in your earlier teens due to the fact that most teens think it's supercool to smoke. Another point is that if you smoke, you kill yourself and not others, which is the direct purpose of a gun. You seem angry. I am pro-drugs, pro-guns, etc. I don't believe that the government should be responsible for an individuals use of various substances, but that's another thread. The person who did what he did is solely responsible for what happened, regardless of whether it was a crime, an overdose, fucked his best friends girl while drunk. It doesn't matter. The sheer fact that you state a gun is not a necessity shows how little you know about a society full of guns, owned by those legal to do so and by those who are illegally doing so. Without firearms, there would be many who would be easier targets for victimization by those who physically can overpower the individual. Thanks for a rational post that contains no emotion and actually thinking before posting. I'm sorry that you think two news articles represents the majority of gun owners when you seem to be ignoring the fact that there will always be people committing crimes within a society regardless of their methods of doing it. BAN GUNS HUR DUR Firearms will never be banned in the USA. Why? Because it's completely impractical to do so when so many of them are already owned. This isn't a shithole nation in that doesn't care about your rights(mostly). Give me guns and I can kill dozens of people while on my killing spree, give a knife and I hurr durr wont even do it because I afraid. Which is where personal responsibility comes in. Blame the criminal, not the tool. So how come grenades and rpgs or bombs or mines are illegal ? They are also tools, why are they banned or would you allow them as well ? Impractical for self-defense and shooting sports. I'm glad you asked. Blowing up some deer with an RPG would be pretty cool though.
Missing would be half your paycheck down the hole.
The poor trees.
|
On July 30 2012 03:27 DannyJ wrote:
This is 160 pages of the same argument happening every page...
It's not a good idea to argue about that with americans to begin with, it's unfortunately a part of their culture. You can show them a comparison of homicide rates, it doesn't matter to them anyway.
|
On July 30 2012 04:42 a3den wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 03:27 DannyJ wrote:
This is 160 pages of the same argument happening every page... It's not a good idea to argue about that with americans to begin with, it's unfortunately a part of their culture. You can show them a comparison of homicide rates, it doesn't matter to them anyway.
Socioeconomic conditions affect homicide rates far more than guns. Find me a European Detroit, and you will see the same kinds of crime rate.
|
On July 30 2012 04:08 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
BUT. The us has what, 750 million guns (at least) already in circulation and there is no way to stop that. Simply, gun controll is already fucked. Random crasy wants a gun gets a gun. Sweden, not so much.
Which is why gun controll wont work in the us.
Thats why we need to contain them. Dont let anyone cross over to Mexico or Kanada, and close all ports and Airports. Those frightened armed americans are just too dangerous :D
|
On July 30 2012 05:37 Millitron wrote:
Socioeconomic conditions affect homicide rates far more than guns. Find me a European Detroit, and you will see the same kinds of crime rate.
Everyone having a gun seems like a rather bad social condition to me
|
On July 30 2012 05:37 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 04:42 a3den wrote:On July 30 2012 03:27 DannyJ wrote:
This is 160 pages of the same argument happening every page... It's not a good idea to argue about that with americans to begin with, it's unfortunately a part of their culture. You can show them a comparison of homicide rates, it doesn't matter to them anyway. Socioeconomic conditions affect homicide rates far more than guns. Find me a European Detroit, and you will see the same kinds of crime rate.
Don't think such a thing exists, lol
e: for clarity, I lived in metro detroit for 11 years, and I've been around quite a bit to other countries as well.
|
On July 30 2012 04:42 a3den wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 03:27 DannyJ wrote:
This is 160 pages of the same argument happening every page... It's not a good idea to argue about that with americans to begin with, it's unfortunately a part of their culture. You can show them a comparison of homicide rates, it doesn't matter to them anyway.
All I have to say is.........YEEEEEE HAAWWWWW (pulls out six shooters) BANG!BANG!BANG!
|
I'd be terrified constantly if I lived in the USA, lol.
|
lol.This question is easy. No.
|
On July 30 2012 04:42 a3den wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 03:27 DannyJ wrote:
This is 160 pages of the same argument happening every page... It's not a good idea to argue about that with americans to begin with, it's unfortunately a part of their culture. You can show them a comparison of homicide rates, it doesn't matter to them anyway.
We live how we want, that's how it's been here. It's funny all these people who don't even live here or know anything much of the US really want to make these silly judgements. It's also funny that a lot of you take it personally that we want to be free to own firearms, as if it annoys them in some way. Maybe they're jealous we have more freedoms here in the US than in Europe. We have roughly 300,000,000 million people here and roughly 9,000 gun related deaths a year. If you paranoids think shootings or mass shootings happen often or all the time you are mistaken. Most of them happen in specifically crime ridden cities like Chicago and such.
You're better off being paranoid about this:
Number of deaths for leading causes of death:
Heart disease: 599,413
Cancer: 567,628
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 137,353
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,842
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 118,021
Alzheimer's disease: 79,003
Diabetes: 68,705
Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,692
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,935
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 36,909
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/lcod.htm/
or this:
"Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death among those age 5-34 in the U.S. More than 2.3 million adult drivers and passengers were treated in emergency departments as the result of being injured in motor vehicle crashes in 2009. The economic impact is also notable: the lifetime costs of crash-related deaths and injuries among drivers and passengers were $70 billion in 2005."
http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/
(Gun related deaths aren't even in the top 10 in the US.)
Than dying in a gun related death.
|
On July 30 2012 03:55 stevarius wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 03:25 Holy_AT wrote:On July 30 2012 03:22 stevarius wrote:On July 30 2012 03:20 Holy_AT wrote:On July 30 2012 03:16 stevarius wrote:On July 29 2012 20:27 sereniity wrote:On July 29 2012 10:40 stevarius wrote:
And yeah... pretty sure this article proves you wrong? And I don't see how your nuclear-shit-thingy makes any sense lol.
He could have just as easily killed him with another weapon. I don't recall guns being controlled by Skynet and doing the killing on their own. The responsible party for the death of that salesman is the irresponsible gun owner, NOT the firearm. Do you blame drug overdoses on the drug or on the moron who overdosed? All you have shown is that some batshit crazy man killed an innocent salesman. I don't care what he used to do it or how he did it, just that he murdered another person. Also, bullets are responsible for the damage done to the body if you want to be literal. That's the only fucking argument you pro-gun people seem to have, "u can kill with knife too herp derp" I don't actually think you're that dumb. If you could do the killing just as easily with weapons such as guns, there wouldn't be a need for guns in the first place, can't you grasp that simple fucking fact? Are you pro-drugs too? Because when I see a person has overdosed I think it's fucking sad that people who don't even know how to do the drugs properly (and therefore overdose) are able to get their hands on such dangerous things. You'd be a moron if you blame nobody but the person who overdosed, there's always more to it. What I just showed you is that there are people who are as bathshit crazy as him that can get a hold of weapons without any problem what-so-ever, and people in your country are apparently brainwashed enough to fucking believe that they can shoot things wildly on their property. The bullets do the actual damage? I thought when he pulled the trigger his hand automatically did a lethal pistol whip! I'm lucky you told me that! On July 29 2012 12:36 Millitron wrote:
If alcohol would be banned, you could drink soda, or would that be terribly boring all of a sudden?
If you're not willing to give up your beer-drinking in favor of saving lives then that's sad...
If smoking would be banned, you could chew gum, or would that be terribly boring all of a sudden?
If you're not willing to give up your smoking in favor of saving lives then that's sad...
I can go on like this all day. Yes you could, but that'd be fucking silly since many times it makes no sense to say that. Loads of you people bring up "CARS KILL TOO!" but they're not designed to kill, they're a necessity in the daily life for most people. A gun is no necessity. If alcohol would be banned, people could VERY EASILY make alcohol of their own, it would be much harder (note: impossible) to keep regular civilians from getting their hands on alcohol. If smoking would be banned, I couldn't give two shits, seeing as I think it makes no sense as to why you would smoke other than that you get stuck in it in your earlier teens due to the fact that most teens think it's supercool to smoke. Another point is that if you smoke, you kill yourself and not others, which is the direct purpose of a gun. You seem angry. I am pro-drugs, pro-guns, etc. I don't believe that the government should be responsible for an individuals use of various substances, but that's another thread. The person who did what he did is solely responsible for what happened, regardless of whether it was a crime, an overdose, fucked his best friends girl while drunk. It doesn't matter. The sheer fact that you state a gun is not a necessity shows how little you know about a society full of guns, owned by those legal to do so and by those who are illegally doing so. Without firearms, there would be many who would be easier targets for victimization by those who physically can overpower the individual. Thanks for a rational post that contains no emotion and actually thinking before posting. I'm sorry that you think two news articles represents the majority of gun owners when you seem to be ignoring the fact that there will always be people committing crimes within a society regardless of their methods of doing it. BAN GUNS HUR DUR Firearms will never be banned in the USA. Why? Because it's completely impractical to do so when so many of them are already owned. This isn't a shithole nation in that doesn't care about your rights(mostly). Give me guns and I can kill dozens of people while on my killing spree, give a knife and I hurr durr wont even do it because I afraid. Which is where personal responsibility comes in. Blame the criminal, not the tool. So how come grenades and rpgs or bombs or mines are illegal ? They are also tools, why are they banned or would you allow them as well ? Impractical for self-defense and shooting sports. I'm glad you asked.
Cant you see the difference between drugs that are only dangerous for the ones using them and guns that, except for suicides, always involve someone else that didnt decide anything ?
You're arguing the free will of self destructive drugs and the free will of shooting someone and killing him.
On July 30 2012 11:00 Esk23 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 04:42 a3den wrote:On July 30 2012 03:27 DannyJ wrote:
This is 160 pages of the same argument happening every page... It's not a good idea to argue about that with americans to begin with, it's unfortunately a part of their culture. You can show them a comparison of homicide rates, it doesn't matter to them anyway. We live how we want, that's how it's been here. It's funny all these people who don't even live here or know anything much of the US really want to make these silly judgements. It's also funny that a lot of you take it personally that we want to be free to own firearms, as if it annoys them in some way. Maybe they're jealous we have more freedoms here in the US than in Europe. We have roughly 300,000,000 million people here and roughly 9,000 gun related deaths a year. If you paranoids think shootings or mass shootings happen often or all the time you are mistaken. Most of them happen in specifically crime ridden cities like Chicago and such.
Us, Europeans, are just telling you that you're brainwashed if you think that freedom is about having a gun or not.
In fact, all your "freedom" stuff is bullshit. You dont achieve freedom with less governement, less regulation, less laws.
But I'm glad you can still live in your fantasy world.
And a big LOL to the "roughly 9,000 gun related deaths". ROUGHLY. LOL
|
On July 30 2012 11:01 dafunk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 03:55 stevarius wrote:On July 30 2012 03:25 Holy_AT wrote:On July 30 2012 03:22 stevarius wrote:On July 30 2012 03:20 Holy_AT wrote:On July 30 2012 03:16 stevarius wrote:On July 29 2012 20:27 sereniity wrote:On July 29 2012 10:40 stevarius wrote:
And yeah... pretty sure this article proves you wrong? And I don't see how your nuclear-shit-thingy makes any sense lol.
He could have just as easily killed him with another weapon. I don't recall guns being controlled by Skynet and doing the killing on their own. The responsible party for the death of that salesman is the irresponsible gun owner, NOT the firearm. Do you blame drug overdoses on the drug or on the moron who overdosed? All you have shown is that some batshit crazy man killed an innocent salesman. I don't care what he used to do it or how he did it, just that he murdered another person. Also, bullets are responsible for the damage done to the body if you want to be literal. That's the only fucking argument you pro-gun people seem to have, "u can kill with knife too herp derp" I don't actually think you're that dumb. If you could do the killing just as easily with weapons such as guns, there wouldn't be a need for guns in the first place, can't you grasp that simple fucking fact? Are you pro-drugs too? Because when I see a person has overdosed I think it's fucking sad that people who don't even know how to do the drugs properly (and therefore overdose) are able to get their hands on such dangerous things. You'd be a moron if you blame nobody but the person who overdosed, there's always more to it. What I just showed you is that there are people who are as bathshit crazy as him that can get a hold of weapons without any problem what-so-ever, and people in your country are apparently brainwashed enough to fucking believe that they can shoot things wildly on their property. The bullets do the actual damage? I thought when he pulled the trigger his hand automatically did a lethal pistol whip! I'm lucky you told me that! On July 29 2012 12:36 Millitron wrote:
If alcohol would be banned, you could drink soda, or would that be terribly boring all of a sudden?
If you're not willing to give up your beer-drinking in favor of saving lives then that's sad...
If smoking would be banned, you could chew gum, or would that be terribly boring all of a sudden?
If you're not willing to give up your smoking in favor of saving lives then that's sad...
I can go on like this all day. Yes you could, but that'd be fucking silly since many times it makes no sense to say that. Loads of you people bring up "CARS KILL TOO!" but they're not designed to kill, they're a necessity in the daily life for most people. A gun is no necessity. If alcohol would be banned, people could VERY EASILY make alcohol of their own, it would be much harder (note: impossible) to keep regular civilians from getting their hands on alcohol. If smoking would be banned, I couldn't give two shits, seeing as I think it makes no sense as to why you would smoke other than that you get stuck in it in your earlier teens due to the fact that most teens think it's supercool to smoke. Another point is that if you smoke, you kill yourself and not others, which is the direct purpose of a gun. You seem angry. I am pro-drugs, pro-guns, etc. I don't believe that the government should be responsible for an individuals use of various substances, but that's another thread. The person who did what he did is solely responsible for what happened, regardless of whether it was a crime, an overdose, fucked his best friends girl while drunk. It doesn't matter. The sheer fact that you state a gun is not a necessity shows how little you know about a society full of guns, owned by those legal to do so and by those who are illegally doing so. Without firearms, there would be many who would be easier targets for victimization by those who physically can overpower the individual. Thanks for a rational post that contains no emotion and actually thinking before posting. I'm sorry that you think two news articles represents the majority of gun owners when you seem to be ignoring the fact that there will always be people committing crimes within a society regardless of their methods of doing it. BAN GUNS HUR DUR Firearms will never be banned in the USA. Why? Because it's completely impractical to do so when so many of them are already owned. This isn't a shithole nation in that doesn't care about your rights(mostly). Give me guns and I can kill dozens of people while on my killing spree, give a knife and I hurr durr wont even do it because I afraid. Which is where personal responsibility comes in. Blame the criminal, not the tool. So how come grenades and rpgs or bombs or mines are illegal ? They are also tools, why are they banned or would you allow them as well ? Impractical for self-defense and shooting sports. I'm glad you asked. Cant you see the difference between drugs that are only dangerous for the ones using them and guns that, except for suicides, always involve someone else that didnt decide anything ? You're arguing the free will of self destructive drugs and the free will of shooting someone and killing him.
So people who have dependents, OD on drugs and then those dependents are then fine? Drugs do not only affect those who take them, they can destroy the lives of many others.
|
On July 30 2012 11:01 dafunk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 03:55 stevarius wrote:On July 30 2012 03:25 Holy_AT wrote:On July 30 2012 03:22 stevarius wrote:On July 30 2012 03:20 Holy_AT wrote:On July 30 2012 03:16 stevarius wrote:On July 29 2012 20:27 sereniity wrote:On July 29 2012 10:40 stevarius wrote:
And yeah... pretty sure this article proves you wrong? And I don't see how your nuclear-shit-thingy makes any sense lol.
He could have just as easily killed him with another weapon. I don't recall guns being controlled by Skynet and doing the killing on their own. The responsible party for the death of that salesman is the irresponsible gun owner, NOT the firearm. Do you blame drug overdoses on the drug or on the moron who overdosed? All you have shown is that some batshit crazy man killed an innocent salesman. I don't care what he used to do it or how he did it, just that he murdered another person. Also, bullets are responsible for the damage done to the body if you want to be literal. That's the only fucking argument you pro-gun people seem to have, "u can kill with knife too herp derp" I don't actually think you're that dumb. If you could do the killing just as easily with weapons such as guns, there wouldn't be a need for guns in the first place, can't you grasp that simple fucking fact? Are you pro-drugs too? Because when I see a person has overdosed I think it's fucking sad that people who don't even know how to do the drugs properly (and therefore overdose) are able to get their hands on such dangerous things. You'd be a moron if you blame nobody but the person who overdosed, there's always more to it. What I just showed you is that there are people who are as bathshit crazy as him that can get a hold of weapons without any problem what-so-ever, and people in your country are apparently brainwashed enough to fucking believe that they can shoot things wildly on their property. The bullets do the actual damage? I thought when he pulled the trigger his hand automatically did a lethal pistol whip! I'm lucky you told me that! On July 29 2012 12:36 Millitron wrote:
If alcohol would be banned, you could drink soda, or would that be terribly boring all of a sudden?
If you're not willing to give up your beer-drinking in favor of saving lives then that's sad...
If smoking would be banned, you could chew gum, or would that be terribly boring all of a sudden?
If you're not willing to give up your smoking in favor of saving lives then that's sad...
I can go on like this all day. Yes you could, but that'd be fucking silly since many times it makes no sense to say that. Loads of you people bring up "CARS KILL TOO!" but they're not designed to kill, they're a necessity in the daily life for most people. A gun is no necessity. If alcohol would be banned, people could VERY EASILY make alcohol of their own, it would be much harder (note: impossible) to keep regular civilians from getting their hands on alcohol. If smoking would be banned, I couldn't give two shits, seeing as I think it makes no sense as to why you would smoke other than that you get stuck in it in your earlier teens due to the fact that most teens think it's supercool to smoke. Another point is that if you smoke, you kill yourself and not others, which is the direct purpose of a gun. You seem angry. I am pro-drugs, pro-guns, etc. I don't believe that the government should be responsible for an individuals use of various substances, but that's another thread. The person who did what he did is solely responsible for what happened, regardless of whether it was a crime, an overdose, fucked his best friends girl while drunk. It doesn't matter. The sheer fact that you state a gun is not a necessity shows how little you know about a society full of guns, owned by those legal to do so and by those who are illegally doing so. Without firearms, there would be many who would be easier targets for victimization by those who physically can overpower the individual. Thanks for a rational post that contains no emotion and actually thinking before posting. I'm sorry that you think two news articles represents the majority of gun owners when you seem to be ignoring the fact that there will always be people committing crimes within a society regardless of their methods of doing it. BAN GUNS HUR DUR Firearms will never be banned in the USA. Why? Because it's completely impractical to do so when so many of them are already owned. This isn't a shithole nation in that doesn't care about your rights(mostly). Give me guns and I can kill dozens of people while on my killing spree, give a knife and I hurr durr wont even do it because I afraid. Which is where personal responsibility comes in. Blame the criminal, not the tool. So how come grenades and rpgs or bombs or mines are illegal ? They are also tools, why are they banned or would you allow them as well ? Impractical for self-defense and shooting sports. I'm glad you asked. Cant you see the difference between drugs that are only dangerous for the ones using them and guns that, except for suicides, always involve someone else that didnt decide anything ? You're arguing the free will of self destructive drugs and the free will of shooting someone and killing him. Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 11:00 Esk23 wrote:On July 30 2012 04:42 a3den wrote:On July 30 2012 03:27 DannyJ wrote:
This is 160 pages of the same argument happening every page... It's not a good idea to argue about that with americans to begin with, it's unfortunately a part of their culture. You can show them a comparison of homicide rates, it doesn't matter to them anyway. We live how we want, that's how it's been here. It's funny all these people who don't even live here or know anything much of the US really want to make these silly judgements. It's also funny that a lot of you take it personally that we want to be free to own firearms, as if it annoys them in some way. Maybe they're jealous we have more freedoms here in the US than in Europe. We have roughly 300,000,000 million people here and roughly 9,000 gun related deaths a year. If you paranoids think shootings or mass shootings happen often or all the time you are mistaken. Most of them happen in specifically crime ridden cities like Chicago and such. Us, Europeans, are just telling you that you're brainwashed if you think that freedom is about having a gun or not. In fact, all your "freedom" stuff is bullshit. You dont achieve freedom with less governement, less regulation, less laws. But I'm glad you can still live in your fantasy world. And a big LOL to the "roughly 9,000 gun related deaths". ROUGHLY. LOL
So much jealously and stupidity in your post, made me crack up laughing. Did you say you have more freedom with bigger government and more government regulation? LOL that's a good one. Quite the opposite.
|
On July 30 2012 11:06 Esk23 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 11:01 dafunk wrote:On July 30 2012 03:55 stevarius wrote:On July 30 2012 03:25 Holy_AT wrote:On July 30 2012 03:22 stevarius wrote:On July 30 2012 03:20 Holy_AT wrote:On July 30 2012 03:16 stevarius wrote:On July 29 2012 20:27 sereniity wrote:On July 29 2012 10:40 stevarius wrote:
And yeah... pretty sure this article proves you wrong? And I don't see how your nuclear-shit-thingy makes any sense lol.
He could have just as easily killed him with another weapon. I don't recall guns being controlled by Skynet and doing the killing on their own. The responsible party for the death of that salesman is the irresponsible gun owner, NOT the firearm. Do you blame drug overdoses on the drug or on the moron who overdosed? All you have shown is that some batshit crazy man killed an innocent salesman. I don't care what he used to do it or how he did it, just that he murdered another person. Also, bullets are responsible for the damage done to the body if you want to be literal. That's the only fucking argument you pro-gun people seem to have, "u can kill with knife too herp derp" I don't actually think you're that dumb. If you could do the killing just as easily with weapons such as guns, there wouldn't be a need for guns in the first place, can't you grasp that simple fucking fact? Are you pro-drugs too? Because when I see a person has overdosed I think it's fucking sad that people who don't even know how to do the drugs properly (and therefore overdose) are able to get their hands on such dangerous things. You'd be a moron if you blame nobody but the person who overdosed, there's always more to it. What I just showed you is that there are people who are as bathshit crazy as him that can get a hold of weapons without any problem what-so-ever, and people in your country are apparently brainwashed enough to fucking believe that they can shoot things wildly on their property. The bullets do the actual damage? I thought when he pulled the trigger his hand automatically did a lethal pistol whip! I'm lucky you told me that! On July 29 2012 12:36 Millitron wrote:
If alcohol would be banned, you could drink soda, or would that be terribly boring all of a sudden?
If you're not willing to give up your beer-drinking in favor of saving lives then that's sad...
If smoking would be banned, you could chew gum, or would that be terribly boring all of a sudden?
If you're not willing to give up your smoking in favor of saving lives then that's sad...
I can go on like this all day. Yes you could, but that'd be fucking silly since many times it makes no sense to say that. Loads of you people bring up "CARS KILL TOO!" but they're not designed to kill, they're a necessity in the daily life for most people. A gun is no necessity. If alcohol would be banned, people could VERY EASILY make alcohol of their own, it would be much harder (note: impossible) to keep regular civilians from getting their hands on alcohol. If smoking would be banned, I couldn't give two shits, seeing as I think it makes no sense as to why you would smoke other than that you get stuck in it in your earlier teens due to the fact that most teens think it's supercool to smoke. Another point is that if you smoke, you kill yourself and not others, which is the direct purpose of a gun. You seem angry. I am pro-drugs, pro-guns, etc. I don't believe that the government should be responsible for an individuals use of various substances, but that's another thread. The person who did what he did is solely responsible for what happened, regardless of whether it was a crime, an overdose, fucked his best friends girl while drunk. It doesn't matter. The sheer fact that you state a gun is not a necessity shows how little you know about a society full of guns, owned by those legal to do so and by those who are illegally doing so. Without firearms, there would be many who would be easier targets for victimization by those who physically can overpower the individual. Thanks for a rational post that contains no emotion and actually thinking before posting. I'm sorry that you think two news articles represents the majority of gun owners when you seem to be ignoring the fact that there will always be people committing crimes within a society regardless of their methods of doing it. BAN GUNS HUR DUR Firearms will never be banned in the USA. Why? Because it's completely impractical to do so when so many of them are already owned. This isn't a shithole nation in that doesn't care about your rights(mostly). Give me guns and I can kill dozens of people while on my killing spree, give a knife and I hurr durr wont even do it because I afraid. Which is where personal responsibility comes in. Blame the criminal, not the tool. So how come grenades and rpgs or bombs or mines are illegal ? They are also tools, why are they banned or would you allow them as well ? Impractical for self-defense and shooting sports. I'm glad you asked. Cant you see the difference between drugs that are only dangerous for the ones using them and guns that, except for suicides, always involve someone else that didnt decide anything ? You're arguing the free will of self destructive drugs and the free will of shooting someone and killing him. On July 30 2012 11:00 Esk23 wrote:On July 30 2012 04:42 a3den wrote:On July 30 2012 03:27 DannyJ wrote:
This is 160 pages of the same argument happening every page... It's not a good idea to argue about that with americans to begin with, it's unfortunately a part of their culture. You can show them a comparison of homicide rates, it doesn't matter to them anyway. We live how we want, that's how it's been here. It's funny all these people who don't even live here or know anything much of the US really want to make these silly judgements. It's also funny that a lot of you take it personally that we want to be free to own firearms, as if it annoys them in some way. Maybe they're jealous we have more freedoms here in the US than in Europe. We have roughly 300,000,000 million people here and roughly 9,000 gun related deaths a year. If you paranoids think shootings or mass shootings happen often or all the time you are mistaken. Most of them happen in specifically crime ridden cities like Chicago and such. Us, Europeans, are just telling you that you're brainwashed if you think that freedom is about having a gun or not. In fact, all your "freedom" stuff is bullshit. You dont achieve freedom with less governement, less regulation, less laws. But I'm glad you can still live in your fantasy world. And a big LOL to the "roughly 9,000 gun related deaths". ROUGHLY. LOL So much jealously and stupidity in your post, made me crack up laughing. Did you say you have more freedom with bigger government and more government regulation? LOL that's a good one. Quite the opposite.
You can't be free if you cant heal yourself because of lack of money.
You can't be free if you cant feed yourself because of lack of money.
You can't be free if you cant defend yourself with an attorney because of lack of money.
And it all comes down to sociology. Something that your american dream propaganda, and the "everyone can make it" ideology will never be able to overshadow.
And if you think all of this is not linked, then you dont understand what makes us so different.
In the US laws are seen as agression.
In Europe laws are seen as equity.
Because life isnt fair and the governement is here to help this flaw.
|
On July 30 2012 11:12 dafunk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 11:06 Esk23 wrote:On July 30 2012 11:01 dafunk wrote:On July 30 2012 03:55 stevarius wrote:On July 30 2012 03:25 Holy_AT wrote:On July 30 2012 03:22 stevarius wrote:On July 30 2012 03:20 Holy_AT wrote:On July 30 2012 03:16 stevarius wrote:On July 29 2012 20:27 sereniity wrote:On July 29 2012 10:40 stevarius wrote:
[quote]
He could have just as easily killed him with another weapon. I don't recall guns being controlled by Skynet and doing the killing on their own. The responsible party for the death of that salesman is the irresponsible gun owner, NOT the firearm. Do you blame drug overdoses on the drug or on the moron who overdosed?
All you have shown is that some batshit crazy man killed an innocent salesman. I don't care what he used to do it or how he did it, just that he murdered another person. Also, bullets are responsible for the damage done to the body if you want to be literal. That's the only fucking argument you pro-gun people seem to have, "u can kill with knife too herp derp" I don't actually think you're that dumb. If you could do the killing just as easily with weapons such as guns, there wouldn't be a need for guns in the first place, can't you grasp that simple fucking fact? Are you pro-drugs too? Because when I see a person has overdosed I think it's fucking sad that people who don't even know how to do the drugs properly (and therefore overdose) are able to get their hands on such dangerous things. You'd be a moron if you blame nobody but the person who overdosed, there's always more to it. What I just showed you is that there are people who are as bathshit crazy as him that can get a hold of weapons without any problem what-so-ever, and people in your country are apparently brainwashed enough to fucking believe that they can shoot things wildly on their property. The bullets do the actual damage? I thought when he pulled the trigger his hand automatically did a lethal pistol whip! I'm lucky you told me that! On July 29 2012 12:36 Millitron wrote:
If alcohol would be banned, you could drink soda, or would that be terribly boring all of a sudden?
If you're not willing to give up your beer-drinking in favor of saving lives then that's sad...
If smoking would be banned, you could chew gum, or would that be terribly boring all of a sudden?
If you're not willing to give up your smoking in favor of saving lives then that's sad...
I can go on like this all day. Yes you could, but that'd be fucking silly since many times it makes no sense to say that. Loads of you people bring up "CARS KILL TOO!" but they're not designed to kill, they're a necessity in the daily life for most people. A gun is no necessity. If alcohol would be banned, people could VERY EASILY make alcohol of their own, it would be much harder (note: impossible) to keep regular civilians from getting their hands on alcohol. If smoking would be banned, I couldn't give two shits, seeing as I think it makes no sense as to why you would smoke other than that you get stuck in it in your earlier teens due to the fact that most teens think it's supercool to smoke. Another point is that if you smoke, you kill yourself and not others, which is the direct purpose of a gun. You seem angry. I am pro-drugs, pro-guns, etc. I don't believe that the government should be responsible for an individuals use of various substances, but that's another thread. The person who did what he did is solely responsible for what happened, regardless of whether it was a crime, an overdose, fucked his best friends girl while drunk. It doesn't matter. The sheer fact that you state a gun is not a necessity shows how little you know about a society full of guns, owned by those legal to do so and by those who are illegally doing so. Without firearms, there would be many who would be easier targets for victimization by those who physically can overpower the individual. Thanks for a rational post that contains no emotion and actually thinking before posting. I'm sorry that you think two news articles represents the majority of gun owners when you seem to be ignoring the fact that there will always be people committing crimes within a society regardless of their methods of doing it. BAN GUNS HUR DUR Firearms will never be banned in the USA. Why? Because it's completely impractical to do so when so many of them are already owned. This isn't a shithole nation in that doesn't care about your rights(mostly). Give me guns and I can kill dozens of people while on my killing spree, give a knife and I hurr durr wont even do it because I afraid. Which is where personal responsibility comes in. Blame the criminal, not the tool. So how come grenades and rpgs or bombs or mines are illegal ? They are also tools, why are they banned or would you allow them as well ? Impractical for self-defense and shooting sports. I'm glad you asked. Cant you see the difference between drugs that are only dangerous for the ones using them and guns that, except for suicides, always involve someone else that didnt decide anything ? You're arguing the free will of self destructive drugs and the free will of shooting someone and killing him. On July 30 2012 11:00 Esk23 wrote:On July 30 2012 04:42 a3den wrote:On July 30 2012 03:27 DannyJ wrote:
This is 160 pages of the same argument happening every page... It's not a good idea to argue about that with americans to begin with, it's unfortunately a part of their culture. You can show them a comparison of homicide rates, it doesn't matter to them anyway. We live how we want, that's how it's been here. It's funny all these people who don't even live here or know anything much of the US really want to make these silly judgements. It's also funny that a lot of you take it personally that we want to be free to own firearms, as if it annoys them in some way. Maybe they're jealous we have more freedoms here in the US than in Europe. We have roughly 300,000,000 million people here and roughly 9,000 gun related deaths a year. If you paranoids think shootings or mass shootings happen often or all the time you are mistaken. Most of them happen in specifically crime ridden cities like Chicago and such. Us, Europeans, are just telling you that you're brainwashed if you think that freedom is about having a gun or not. In fact, all your "freedom" stuff is bullshit. You dont achieve freedom with less governement, less regulation, less laws. But I'm glad you can still live in your fantasy world. And a big LOL to the "roughly 9,000 gun related deaths". ROUGHLY. LOL So much jealously and stupidity in your post, made me crack up laughing. Did you say you have more freedom with bigger government and more government regulation? LOL that's a good one. Quite the opposite. You can't be free if you cant heal yourself because of lack of money. You can't be free if you cant feed yourself because of lack of money. You can't be free if you cant defend yourself with an attorney because of lack of money. And it all comes down to sociology. Something that your american dream propaganda, and the "everyone can make it" ideology will never be able to overshadow. And if you think all of this is not linked, then you dont understand what makes us so different. In the US laws are seen as agression. In Europe laws are seen as equity. Because life isnt fair and the governement is here to help this flaw.
And where do you get the money to pay for all these things? That's right, the people who get off their asses and work hard. Do you believe in welfare and government hand outs? What's free about one group of people who work having to pay for some people who don't. That's not freedom. "Because life isn't fair and the government is here to help this flaw." Oh god, lol. You mean they are here to take your money and give it to someone else who didn't work as hard as you or work at all to make their own money. Sounds fair. Let's not go off-topic on who's more free or who has a better government structure. Believe what you want.
|
On July 30 2012 10:14 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 05:37 Millitron wrote:On July 30 2012 04:42 a3den wrote:On July 30 2012 03:27 DannyJ wrote:
This is 160 pages of the same argument happening every page... It's not a good idea to argue about that with americans to begin with, it's unfortunately a part of their culture. You can show them a comparison of homicide rates, it doesn't matter to them anyway. Socioeconomic conditions affect homicide rates far more than guns. Find me a European Detroit, and you will see the same kinds of crime rate. Don't think such a thing exists, lol e: for clarity, I lived in metro detroit for 11 years, and I've been around quite a bit to other countries as well.
That's kinda my point. The people (especially Europeans) citing our gun-related death stats seem to think the average represents the whole, when it completely doesn't. There's a few dystopian hellscapes that severely skew the stats.
On July 30 2012 10:41 Starshaped wrote:
I'd be terrified constantly if I lived in the USA, lol.
On July 30 2012 10:53 Release wrote:
lol.This question is easy. No.
Can we all please agree to stop making one-liner's that don't actually add anything to the discussion?
|
|
|
On July 30 2012 11:23 Esk23 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 11:12 dafunk wrote:On July 30 2012 11:06 Esk23 wrote:On July 30 2012 11:01 dafunk wrote:On July 30 2012 03:55 stevarius wrote:On July 30 2012 03:25 Holy_AT wrote:On July 30 2012 03:22 stevarius wrote:On July 30 2012 03:20 Holy_AT wrote:On July 30 2012 03:16 stevarius wrote:On July 29 2012 20:27 sereniity wrote:
[quote]
That's the only fucking argument you pro-gun people seem to have, "u can kill with knife too herp derp" I don't actually think you're that dumb. If you could do the killing just as easily with weapons such as guns, there wouldn't be a need for guns in the first place, can't you grasp that simple fucking fact?
Are you pro-drugs too? Because when I see a person has overdosed I think it's fucking sad that people who don't even know how to do the drugs properly (and therefore overdose) are able to get their hands on such dangerous things. You'd be a moron if you blame nobody but the person who overdosed, there's always more to it.
What I just showed you is that there are people who are as bathshit crazy as him that can get a hold of weapons without any problem what-so-ever, and people in your country are apparently brainwashed enough to fucking believe that they can shoot things wildly on their property. The bullets do the actual damage? I thought when he pulled the trigger his hand automatically did a lethal pistol whip! I'm lucky you told me that!
[quote]
Yes you could, but that'd be fucking silly since many times it makes no sense to say that. Loads of you people bring up "CARS KILL TOO!" but they're not designed to kill, they're a necessity in the daily life for most people. A gun is no necessity.
If alcohol would be banned, people could VERY EASILY make alcohol of their own, it would be much harder (note: impossible) to keep regular civilians from getting their hands on alcohol.
If smoking would be banned, I couldn't give two shits, seeing as I think it makes no sense as to why you would smoke other than that you get stuck in it in your earlier teens due to the fact that most teens think it's supercool to smoke. Another point is that if you smoke, you kill yourself and not others, which is the direct purpose of a gun. You seem angry. I am pro-drugs, pro-guns, etc. I don't believe that the government should be responsible for an individuals use of various substances, but that's another thread. The person who did what he did is solely responsible for what happened, regardless of whether it was a crime, an overdose, fucked his best friends girl while drunk. It doesn't matter. The sheer fact that you state a gun is not a necessity shows how little you know about a society full of guns, owned by those legal to do so and by those who are illegally doing so. Without firearms, there would be many who would be easier targets for victimization by those who physically can overpower the individual. Thanks for a rational post that contains no emotion and actually thinking before posting. I'm sorry that you think two news articles represents the majority of gun owners when you seem to be ignoring the fact that there will always be people committing crimes within a society regardless of their methods of doing it. BAN GUNS HUR DUR Firearms will never be banned in the USA. Why? Because it's completely impractical to do so when so many of them are already owned. This isn't a shithole nation in that doesn't care about your rights(mostly). Give me guns and I can kill dozens of people while on my killing spree, give a knife and I hurr durr wont even do it because I afraid. Which is where personal responsibility comes in. Blame the criminal, not the tool. So how come grenades and rpgs or bombs or mines are illegal ? They are also tools, why are they banned or would you allow them as well ? Impractical for self-defense and shooting sports. I'm glad you asked. Cant you see the difference between drugs that are only dangerous for the ones using them and guns that, except for suicides, always involve someone else that didnt decide anything ? You're arguing the free will of self destructive drugs and the free will of shooting someone and killing him. On July 30 2012 11:00 Esk23 wrote:On July 30 2012 04:42 a3den wrote:On July 30 2012 03:27 DannyJ wrote:
This is 160 pages of the same argument happening every page... It's not a good idea to argue about that with americans to begin with, it's unfortunately a part of their culture. You can show them a comparison of homicide rates, it doesn't matter to them anyway. We live how we want, that's how it's been here. It's funny all these people who don't even live here or know anything much of the US really want to make these silly judgements. It's also funny that a lot of you take it personally that we want to be free to own firearms, as if it annoys them in some way. Maybe they're jealous we have more freedoms here in the US than in Europe. We have roughly 300,000,000 million people here and roughly 9,000 gun related deaths a year. If you paranoids think shootings or mass shootings happen often or all the time you are mistaken. Most of them happen in specifically crime ridden cities like Chicago and such. Us, Europeans, are just telling you that you're brainwashed if you think that freedom is about having a gun or not. In fact, all your "freedom" stuff is bullshit. You dont achieve freedom with less governement, less regulation, less laws. But I'm glad you can still live in your fantasy world. And a big LOL to the "roughly 9,000 gun related deaths". ROUGHLY. LOL So much jealously and stupidity in your post, made me crack up laughing. Did you say you have more freedom with bigger government and more government regulation? LOL that's a good one. Quite the opposite. You can't be free if you cant heal yourself because of lack of money. You can't be free if you cant feed yourself because of lack of money. You can't be free if you cant defend yourself with an attorney because of lack of money. And it all comes down to sociology. Something that your american dream propaganda, and the "everyone can make it" ideology will never be able to overshadow. And if you think all of this is not linked, then you dont understand what makes us so different. In the US laws are seen as agression. In Europe laws are seen as equity. Because life isnt fair and the governement is here to help this flaw. And where do you get the money to pay for all these things? That's right, the people who get off their asses and work hard. Do you believe in welfare and government hand outs? What's free about one group of people who work having to pay for some people who don't. That's not freedom. "Because life isn't fair and the government is here to help this flaw." Oh god, lol. You mean they are here to take your money and give it to someone else who didn't work as hard as you or work at all to make their own money. Sounds fair. Let's not go off-topic on who's more free or who has a better government structure. Believe what you want.
I hate your argument about effort=income. It is so wrong in so many ways. I dont believe I need to list the reasons why, I am hoping you are capable of understanding the flaw in that logic. The way Canada and Europe structure our government and our laws, are to protect everyone equally, by making everyone put in their equal share, relative to their income. Everyone gives up close to an equal portion of their wages, for the betterment of society. We favour the little guy, where in your country, the rich are favoured. The fact of the matter is, the rich benefit off the system, and the poor are held down. This also is not off topic, because it directly relates to the amount of crime and violence perpetrated by people in your country. This is one of the major socioeconomic issues, that affects your crime rate.
It is disingenuous to state socioeconomic issues as the reason for crime, and that those need to be fixed, and not gun laws, and then support a system that allows the rich to flourish, and the poor to sink by scapegoating all of them as lazy slobs that dont deserve your support.
I never understood the lack of care for fellow country mates many americans have. It is strange seeing how "patriotic" everyone is, when really, most people only care about themselves. A nation is about unity, teamwork, etc... Everyone puts their share into the system, and everyone shares in the benefits. We care for the little guy, the sick person, the poor person, the struggling single mother, the aspiring young child in a terrible neighbourhood. We dont mind giving a portion of our earnings, to help these people, and in turn, help ourselves and our society grow. Your argument is one of greed, selfishness, and a lack of care for your fellow man.
You call us jealous, meanwhile we look at posters like yours words, and are stunned and amazed at how afraid, how selfish, how individualistic you are, while flying an American flag proudly. Its not jealousy, its shock and confusion.
|
Hahah i love the surge in gun and ammo sales after 2008. Gotta defend ourselves against the Obama brownshirts I guess.
Also interesting how low the % of Americans wanting more stricter control is. I'm sure it's higher now after Colorado but in time it will just fall again since in general I guess the nation as a whole can't get too upset over guns when it's so ingrained in the culture and violence in general is falling anyway despite having more guns than ever.
|
On July 30 2012 13:10 Focuspants wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 11:23 Esk23 wrote:On July 30 2012 11:12 dafunk wrote:On July 30 2012 11:06 Esk23 wrote:On July 30 2012 11:01 dafunk wrote:On July 30 2012 03:55 stevarius wrote:On July 30 2012 03:25 Holy_AT wrote:On July 30 2012 03:22 stevarius wrote:On July 30 2012 03:20 Holy_AT wrote:On July 30 2012 03:16 stevarius wrote:
[quote]
You seem angry.
I am pro-drugs, pro-guns, etc. I don't believe that the government should be responsible for an individuals use of various substances, but that's another thread. The person who did what he did is solely responsible for what happened, regardless of whether it was a crime, an overdose, fucked his best friends girl while drunk. It doesn't matter.
The sheer fact that you state a gun is not a necessity shows how little you know about a society full of guns, owned by those legal to do so and by those who are illegally doing so. Without firearms, there would be many who would be easier targets for victimization by those who physically can overpower the individual.
Thanks for a rational post that contains no emotion and actually thinking before posting. I'm sorry that you think two news articles represents the majority of gun owners when you seem to be ignoring the fact that there will always be people committing crimes within a society regardless of their methods of doing it.
BAN GUNS HUR DUR
Firearms will never be banned in the USA. Why? Because it's completely impractical to do so when so many of them are already owned. This isn't a shithole nation in that doesn't care about your rights(mostly). Give me guns and I can kill dozens of people while on my killing spree, give a knife and I hurr durr wont even do it because I afraid. Which is where personal responsibility comes in. Blame the criminal, not the tool. So how come grenades and rpgs or bombs or mines are illegal ? They are also tools, why are they banned or would you allow them as well ? Impractical for self-defense and shooting sports. I'm glad you asked. Cant you see the difference between drugs that are only dangerous for the ones using them and guns that, except for suicides, always involve someone else that didnt decide anything ? You're arguing the free will of self destructive drugs and the free will of shooting someone and killing him. On July 30 2012 11:00 Esk23 wrote:On July 30 2012 04:42 a3den wrote:On July 30 2012 03:27 DannyJ wrote:
This is 160 pages of the same argument happening every page... It's not a good idea to argue about that with americans to begin with, it's unfortunately a part of their culture. You can show them a comparison of homicide rates, it doesn't matter to them anyway. We live how we want, that's how it's been here. It's funny all these people who don't even live here or know anything much of the US really want to make these silly judgements. It's also funny that a lot of you take it personally that we want to be free to own firearms, as if it annoys them in some way. Maybe they're jealous we have more freedoms here in the US than in Europe. We have roughly 300,000,000 million people here and roughly 9,000 gun related deaths a year. If you paranoids think shootings or mass shootings happen often or all the time you are mistaken. Most of them happen in specifically crime ridden cities like Chicago and such. Us, Europeans, are just telling you that you're brainwashed if you think that freedom is about having a gun or not. In fact, all your "freedom" stuff is bullshit. You dont achieve freedom with less governement, less regulation, less laws. But I'm glad you can still live in your fantasy world. And a big LOL to the "roughly 9,000 gun related deaths". ROUGHLY. LOL So much jealously and stupidity in your post, made me crack up laughing. Did you say you have more freedom with bigger government and more government regulation? LOL that's a good one. Quite the opposite. You can't be free if you cant heal yourself because of lack of money. You can't be free if you cant feed yourself because of lack of money. You can't be free if you cant defend yourself with an attorney because of lack of money. And it all comes down to sociology. Something that your american dream propaganda, and the "everyone can make it" ideology will never be able to overshadow. And if you think all of this is not linked, then you dont understand what makes us so different. In the US laws are seen as agression. In Europe laws are seen as equity. Because life isnt fair and the governement is here to help this flaw. And where do you get the money to pay for all these things? That's right, the people who get off their asses and work hard. Do you believe in welfare and government hand outs? What's free about one group of people who work having to pay for some people who don't. That's not freedom. "Because life isn't fair and the government is here to help this flaw." Oh god, lol. You mean they are here to take your money and give it to someone else who didn't work as hard as you or work at all to make their own money. Sounds fair. Let's not go off-topic on who's more free or who has a better government structure. Believe what you want. I hate your argument about effort=income. It is so wrong in so many ways. I dont believe I need to list the reasons why, I am hoping you are capable of understanding the flaw in that logic. The way Canada and Europe structure our government and our laws, are to protect everyone equally, by making everyone put in their equal share, relative to their income. Everyone gives up close to an equal portion of their wages, for the betterment of society. We favour the little guy, where in your country, the rich are favoured. The fact of the matter is, the rich benefit off the system, and the poor are held down. This also is not off topic, because it directly relates to the amount of crime and violence perpetrated by people in your country. This is one of the major socioeconomic issues, that affects your crime rate. It is disingenuous to state socioeconomic issues as the reason for crime, and that those need to be fixed, and not gun laws, and then support a system that allows the rich to flourish, and the poor to sink by scapegoating all of them as lazy slobs that dont deserve your support. I never understood the lack of care for fellow country mates many americans have. It is strange seeing how "patriotic" everyone is, when really, most people only care about themselves. A nation is about unity, teamwork, etc... Everyone puts their share into the system, and everyone shares in the benefits. We care for the little guy, the sick person, the poor person, the struggling single mother, the aspiring young child in a terrible neighbourhood. We dont mind giving a portion of our earnings, to help these people, and in turn, help ourselves and our society grow. Your argument is one of greed, selfishness, and a lack of care for your fellow man. You call us jealous, meanwhile we look at posters like yours words, and are stunned and amazed at how afraid, how selfish, how individualistic you are, while flying an American flag proudly. Its not jealousy, its shock and confusion.
"We favor the little guy." What on earth are you even talking about. You favor people who don't want to work and want to get government aid to live? Do you know what Welfare is? What you're basically saying is you support a system where people who work are punished and people who don't want to work are rewarded? That's basically what Welfare is. So let me get this straight, you favor a system where people who work for their money have to give it away to people who want to be lazy and not work so they can live right? That's probably the reason they don't work in the first place, if they had to they would. "Your argument is one of greed, selfishness and lack of care for your fellow man". Why? Because I wouldn't want to pay for your lazy ass who doesn't want to work and pay their own bills? What? Do you think giving money to people who don't want to work helps them? It doesn't, just makes them lazy and handout dependent. You think giving money to people like that motivates them or work and find work? Who's the lazy, selfish one here? Do you have a job? Do you work or are you on government aid? I'm just curious so I can see where you are coming from. Take your little self-righteous attitude and stick it up you know where. How much money do you give personally to homeless people. What charity work have you done? What's your contribution to your fellow man? I'd like to know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
