|
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 April 11 2013 08:46 Fruscainte wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2013 08:43 Rhino85 wrote:
If a police officer can take a course/tests that qualify them for carrying and owning a certain type of weapon, that means logically any citizen should as well without having to quit their job and put on a badge. If the people decide that that means we need to have yearly proficiency tests, by all means. However, in some reasonable way or another, if a police officer has the right to take a test and then walk the streets with a pistol by his side there is absolutely no logical reason that your average citizen should not also have the right to take a similar test and get that same right.
And let me make this clear -- I personally hold the belief carrying a weapon while being over the legal drinking limit should be a major crime. Like, go to jail and a fine the first time and a felony the second time. I honestly think it's that big of a deal. I don't disagree with you at all that intoxication is a major issue with firearm safety.
I just took the concealed handgun license class/test in Texas. The legal limit to drink and carry your firearm in public is 0.00 where as the driving legal limit is .08 Texas has a very strict no drinking while packing heat policy. Exactly. We already have strict laws on this and I in fact think they should be stricter. I think owning a gun should be a very responsible act, but it should be responsibility on the act of the owner. It should be responsibility taught through examination and teaching, not through arbitrary and over-reaching regulations. Show nested quote +On April 11 2013 08:44 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 11 2013 08:39 Fruscainte wrote:On April 11 2013 08:35 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 11 2013 08:31 Fruscainte wrote:On April 11 2013 08:28 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 11 2013 08:05 Millitron wrote:On April 11 2013 07:47 Nachtwind wrote:Why they were invented is completely irrelevant, all that matters is their current state. I think this entire discussion comes down to .... average humans cannot be trusted with the power to take life .... So the purpose of a weapon back then changed to a new purpose for weapons we producing now? The purpose of a weapon is always the same. They are designed for harming, stunnig, killing liveforms. While a weapon can be used for sports or self defense the main purpose of why they were inventend, why they are mainly produced and used is always that of a weapon - imho and you won´t change my opinion on this. If the day comes where guns are only used for sports, hunting, fishing i will hurray. If you want to do this things now as a normal citizen though i demand a deeply psychological and social analisys from a state organisation and a visit from those organisation where you must show them that you´re able to lock away your weapons safty. Arms and ammunition seperated. You´re only allowed to hunt/ do sports in allowed areas. You´re not allowed to go outside armed except you´re moving to/or come from the next allowed area. You must visit a psychologist every year. Every weapon that is oversized in it´s functions for sports/hunting shouldn´t be allowed to aquire except you´re a collector and proofed that your weapons can´t be used anymore. That is my opinion on this for years and no one will change this. I just wanted to share my opinion while i think most US readers here won´t give a fuck about my opinion. Cheers. The problem with your position is that you never really defend it. If normal citizens can't have guns, why should the police? They're just as human, and not trained much better. Even if they were better trained, big whoop. The guards at Auschwitz were all well trained. Training doesn't make someone morally good, it makes them effective. Either you can trust everyone (without a criminal background of course), or you can trust no one. Anything else is hypocrisy. The police are very highly trained and are constantly evaluated. When they fire one shot they go through psychiatric evaluation, and their gun is taken from them just in case to make sure they're okay. There is a lot of oversight to them. Random person on the street doesn't require such regulations. They "could" be trained, or they could be stoned. And if he had a gun, I'd be scared. The police are very trained and constantly evaluated. When they get in one crash they severely punished and constantly have their driving habits monitored by dash cams. There is a lot of oversight on them. Random person on the street doesn't require such regulations. They "could" be trained, or they could be drunk. And if he had a car, I'd be scared. --------------- If a police officer can take a course/tests that qualify them for carrying and owning a certain type of weapon, that means logically any citizen should as well without having to quit their job and put on a badge. If the people decide that that means we need to have yearly proficiency tests, by all means. However, in some reasonable way or another, if a police officer has the right to take a test and then walk the streets with a pistol by his side there is absolutely no logical reason that your average citizen should not also have the right to take a similar test and get that same right. I also trust police cars on the road more so than random drivers on the road. because I know they *should* have oversight. And yet here you are, not petitioning for the banning of cars on the street. I trust people less, because I'm not certain they have oversight. I don't think it means we need to ban cars--but it's not accurate to say that we can't trust cops more than we can trust a random guy on the street. I don't think it's accurate to say we should trust cops more than we trust a random guy on the street. In fact, if anything, I trust someone with that kind of authority even less. But again, it has NOTHING to do with trust. It's this fucking simple: Cops are just the same as you and me. They masturbate, they got in arguments with their parents, they have fetishes, some are fucked up, some are great people, some are average, some are white, some are black, some are introverted and some are extroverted. They are HUMANS, just like us. And if those HUMANS can take a test that makes them morally and logically qualified to carry and own a certain type of weapon, then any citizen should also have the ability to take a similar test of intelligence, mental stability, and weapon proficiency to have that same right without having to quit their job and become a police officer. If every citizen was required to have a psych evaluation everytime they fired their gun in public then I'd be okay with that too. Especially if them getting their gun back was decided by the results of the evaluation and not simply going through the evaluation. If they were required to have to practice regularly and to have the necessary paperwork in public record so as to keep track of them. Yeah, I'd trust the random guys in the street. I guess I feel that police officers have more tests than non-officers. I don't want anything banned, but there's a reason we trust cops with guns and its not because they're humans. I never said it wasn't unreasonable that a citizen shouldn't be given a (free) psych evaluation if they shoot someone in self defense. I think slippery slope isn't a fallacy here though, and we really need to be safe with what we do. I am not against at all increased proficiency testing for certain types of weapons and psych evaluations in events of legal self defense, not any whatsoever. What we need to make sure is that we do not give any side any real preferential treatment. Cops aren't forced to go through psych evaluations on regular basis' to make sure they're mentally stable. At least I don't believe they do, someone may correct me there. I would not be against at all a law that stated that every two or three years you had to go in and renew your license by taking a gun safety course of some kind for a day. I think that's perfectly reasonable. However, we need to draw a very clear line between what is helpful education for the betterment of the people and their safety, and overreaching regulation that treats gun owners like psychotic criminals.
Understandably so. I wouldn't want to need a knife license to eat steak. Although I do need a licence to drive.
|
On April 11 2013 06:09 Fruscainte wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2013 06:00 Nachtwind wrote:On April 11 2013 05:49 Fruscainte wrote:
The primary function of a firearm is to project a small object at high velocities in a specific, targeted direction. Nothing more. This has many uses ranging from target shooting, sport shooting, hunting, fishing, and self defense. Touché. Not that it delude me but it´s a tricky argumentation. Hm. Why people invented firearms? Why they were invented is completely irrelevant, all that matters is their current state. I think this entire discussion comes down to this, and I'm just going to copy paste what I posted plenty pages back: If average humans cannot be trusted with the power to take life, it cannot be adequately proven that anyone does and therefore if you do not believe in civilian ownership you should not believe in ownership full stop, government or otherwise. It is a proven fact that POLICE AND MILITARY are in fact regular humans and are psychologically just like us, they are not safer in government hands. If there are certain people in society, eg; cops, army, government who are considered safe to carry any given type of firearm, then there should logically be an ability, no matter how difficult, to acquire anything the government can acquire provided they can prove they are equally trustworthy EDIT: Cut down to be more concise.
Even though is an awful argument, I'll bite the bullet (heh) and say sure: nobody should be allowed to use guns. I don't trust police with guns anyway. I don't trust soldiers with guns. And I certainly don't trust the average human being with guns.
|
On April 11 2013 09:08 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2013 06:09 Fruscainte wrote:On April 11 2013 06:00 Nachtwind wrote:On April 11 2013 05:49 Fruscainte wrote:
The primary function of a firearm is to project a small object at high velocities in a specific, targeted direction. Nothing more. This has many uses ranging from target shooting, sport shooting, hunting, fishing, and self defense. Touché. Not that it delude me but it´s a tricky argumentation. Hm. Why people invented firearms? Why they were invented is completely irrelevant, all that matters is their current state. I think this entire discussion comes down to this, and I'm just going to copy paste what I posted plenty pages back: If average humans cannot be trusted with the power to take life, it cannot be adequately proven that anyone does and therefore if you do not believe in civilian ownership you should not believe in ownership full stop, government or otherwise. It is a proven fact that POLICE AND MILITARY are in fact regular humans and are psychologically just like us, they are not safer in government hands. If there are certain people in society, eg; cops, army, government who are considered safe to carry any given type of firearm, then there should logically be an ability, no matter how difficult, to acquire anything the government can acquire provided they can prove they are equally trustworthy EDIT: Cut down to be more concise. Even though is an awful argument, I'll bite the bullet (heh) and say sure: nobody should be allowed to use guns. I don't trust police with guns anyway. I don't trust soldiers with guns. And I certainly don't trust the average human being with guns.
Hue.
And if someone were to say that in earnest, I say good for them for being honest with me and themselves and despite me respectfully disagreeing with them, they still have the underlying issue of crime to deal with. And that is horrible inner city conditions and horrible mental health programs.
|
On April 11 2013 08:17 Kickboxer wrote:
Wtf? You must somehow trust sociopathic, depressed, manic, crackhead, drugged and similarly unstable persons to the same extent as the police now? Are things THAT bad in the US? Who would you rather trust your kid with, Klebold or the average policeman? Is that even a serious argument lol? Normal citizens can't have guns because many of them are astoundingly fucked up. If you have policemen over there as fucked up as the batman movie shooter you need to change the police.
fine, I'll add that mentally ill or those on drugs shouldn't have guns. But sober, sane, non-criminal citizens are fine. Remember, police are just humans. Remember the shooting in Times Square? The gunman shot 1 person, the police shot 9. Remember Chris Dorner? He shot 7 people, the police shot 3. Remember Waco? Remember Ruby Ridge? Remember Kent State?
Just because someone is in uniform doesn't make them infallible, or even less fallible than your average person.
|
You people in the us must fear your goverment, your institutions, your police and even your neighbors? How come?
|
United States24578 Posts
On April 11 2013 09:24 Nachtwind wrote:
You people in the us must fear your goverment, your institutions, your police and even your neighbors? How come?
Living in fear is not a good way to live, but blissful ignorance is no good either. The USA was founded on the idea of a government for the people, and citizens today need to make an active effort to ensure the government remains for the people, etc. I wouldn't blindly trust the institutions where I live no matter what country it was in, including yours.
|
On April 11 2013 09:24 Nachtwind wrote:
You people in the us must fear your goverment, your institutions, your police and even your neighbors? How come?
I believe the answer lies in the constant exposure to the media essentially saying "be afraid" - reporting so much violent crime and little else.
|
By the way, I just read an interesting perspective on background checks. I'm unsure if I agree necessarily, but it seems like a really interesting perspective and warrants discussion:
Heres the problem with background checks: In order to have a mandatory background check system you first need to register all the guns out there. If there is no registry then anyone could say: I sold the gun before the background check law took effect. In1968 the Supreme Court ruled that felons do not have to register guns as it's protected via the 5th amendment. Haynes VS US 1968http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/cramer.haynes.htmlThis isnt my interpretation of what happened. SCOTUS says felons dont have to register guns. Felons dont buy from gun shows. they steal them. Think about that for a minute. This law only affects law abiding citizens. Law abiding citizens account for 0% of all crimes. How much crime is this going to curb?? The government knows this. The government isnt stupid. It shows me there is an ulterior motive to the background checks. Maybe so they can be in compliance with the UN gun treaty? Makes you wonder.
|
On April 11 2013 09:24 Nachtwind wrote:
You people in the us must fear your goverment, your institutions, your police and even your neighbors? How come?
Didn't Germany have a period there where the government, institutions, and police couldn't be trusted?
|
On April 11 2013 09:45 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2013 09:24 Nachtwind wrote:
You people in the us must fear your goverment, your institutions, your police and even your neighbors? How come? Didn't Germany have a period there where the government, institutions, and police couldn't be trusted?
Are you saying you have a period of time now in the US that´s compareable to our situation in the past?
On April 11 2013 09:26 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2013 09:24 Nachtwind wrote:
You people in the us must fear your goverment, your institutions, your police and even your neighbors? How come? Living in fear is not a good way to live, but blissful ignorance is no good either. The USA was founded on the idea of a government for the people, and citizens today need to make an active effort to ensure the government remains for the people, etc. I wouldn't blindly trust the institutions where I live no matter what country it was in, including yours.
Well in some but not all matters i can trust many organs of my country. That includes how lethal force is used here. That´s also my personal experience living in a urban center in the middle of the Ruhrgebiet. May it be on how criminality is handled here or how i feel when i have a nice evening in downtown. I don´t believe some institutions that regulates economics here though. ^^
And every citizen here is allowed to use guns for sports/hunting after he prooved he´s no threat for the society and then in very regulated usage. And sports shooting is our third biggest sports organisation with 1,5 mil people.
But nontheless it seems sometimes that US people have a distroust against their goverment that i can´t understand. =)
|
On April 11 2013 10:00 Nachtwind wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2013 09:45 Millitron wrote:On April 11 2013 09:24 Nachtwind wrote:
You people in the us must fear your goverment, your institutions, your police and even your neighbors? How come? Didn't Germany have a period there where the government, institutions, and police couldn't be trusted? Are you saying you have a period of time now in the US that´s compareable to our situation in the past?
Uh, I believe he's saying that you never know what can happen with governments going batshit insane in small amounts of time and you of all people should know that. Not that our political climate is like nazi germany.
|
On April 11 2013 10:06 Fruscainte wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2013 10:00 Nachtwind wrote:On April 11 2013 09:45 Millitron wrote:On April 11 2013 09:24 Nachtwind wrote:
You people in the us must fear your goverment, your institutions, your police and even your neighbors? How come? Didn't Germany have a period there where the government, institutions, and police couldn't be trusted? Are you saying you have a period of time now in the US that´s compareable to our situation in the past? Uh, I believe he's saying that you never know what can happen with governments going batshit insane in small amounts of time and you of all people should know that. Not that our political climate is like nazi germany.
Ya, well i think the next hitler won´t rise in our land because we learned like you said "we of all people should know". Nontheless the question is indicating that you guys are thinking you are overtaken by a hitler like person in the next time. Cause of that impression i requestioned.
|
On April 11 2013 10:09 Nachtwind wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2013 10:06 Fruscainte wrote:On April 11 2013 10:00 Nachtwind wrote:On April 11 2013 09:45 Millitron wrote:On April 11 2013 09:24 Nachtwind wrote:
You people in the us must fear your goverment, your institutions, your police and even your neighbors? How come? Didn't Germany have a period there where the government, institutions, and police couldn't be trusted? Are you saying you have a period of time now in the US that´s compareable to our situation in the past? Uh, I believe he's saying that you never know what can happen with governments going batshit insane in small amounts of time and you of all people should know that. Not that our political climate is like nazi germany. Ya, well i think the next hitler won´t rise in our land because we learned like you said "we of all people should know". Nontheless the question is indicating that you guys are thinking you are overtaken by a hitler like person in the next time. Cause of that impression i requestioned.
Doesn't matter if or when I think it will happen. The problem is that it could happen some time in the future, and we should always be able to deal with it in the event that it happens. They have oxygen masks for every seat in airliners in case of depressurization, even though its extremely unlikely that they'll ever be used.
I'm not some paranoid psycho who thinks Obama is the anti-christ, and wants to take all our freedoms away, but I'm also not naive enough to think its impossible for a dictator to rise in the US.
|
On April 11 2013 10:14 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2013 10:09 Nachtwind wrote:On April 11 2013 10:06 Fruscainte wrote:On April 11 2013 10:00 Nachtwind wrote:On April 11 2013 09:45 Millitron wrote:On April 11 2013 09:24 Nachtwind wrote:
You people in the us must fear your goverment, your institutions, your police and even your neighbors? How come? Didn't Germany have a period there where the government, institutions, and police couldn't be trusted? Are you saying you have a period of time now in the US that´s compareable to our situation in the past? Uh, I believe he's saying that you never know what can happen with governments going batshit insane in small amounts of time and you of all people should know that. Not that our political climate is like nazi germany. Ya, well i think the next hitler won´t rise in our land because we learned like you said "we of all people should know". Nontheless the question is indicating that you guys are thinking you are overtaken by a hitler like person in the next time. Cause of that impression i requestioned. Doesn't matter if or when I think it will happen. The problem is that it could happen some time in the future, and we should always be able to deal with it in the event that it happens. They have oxygen masks for every seat in airliners in case of depressurization, even though its extremely unlikely that they'll ever be used. I'm not some paranoid psycho who thinks Obama is the anti-christ, and wants to take all our freedoms away, but I'm also not naive enough to think its impossible for a dictator to rise in the US.
Does many americans share your opinion?
|
On April 11 2013 10:21 Nachtwind wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2013 10:14 Millitron wrote:On April 11 2013 10:09 Nachtwind wrote:On April 11 2013 10:06 Fruscainte wrote:On April 11 2013 10:00 Nachtwind wrote:On April 11 2013 09:45 Millitron wrote:On April 11 2013 09:24 Nachtwind wrote:
You people in the us must fear your goverment, your institutions, your police and even your neighbors? How come? Didn't Germany have a period there where the government, institutions, and police couldn't be trusted? Are you saying you have a period of time now in the US that´s compareable to our situation in the past? Uh, I believe he's saying that you never know what can happen with governments going batshit insane in small amounts of time and you of all people should know that. Not that our political climate is like nazi germany. Ya, well i think the next hitler won´t rise in our land because we learned like you said "we of all people should know". Nontheless the question is indicating that you guys are thinking you are overtaken by a hitler like person in the next time. Cause of that impression i requestioned. Doesn't matter if or when I think it will happen. The problem is that it could happen some time in the future, and we should always be able to deal with it in the event that it happens. They have oxygen masks for every seat in airliners in case of depressurization, even though its extremely unlikely that they'll ever be used. I'm not some paranoid psycho who thinks Obama is the anti-christ, and wants to take all our freedoms away, but I'm also not naive enough to think its impossible for a dictator to rise in the US. Does many americans share your opinion?
Why are you so obsessed with lumping americans together as some group of psychos?
The 2nd Amendment was put specifically in place to prevent government tyranny. When you ask the purpose of it, we're going to say "to stop government tyranny". It doesn't mean we think that Obama is the anti-christ or a dictator is going to rise up anytime soon or ever. It means it's a deterrent. Because at the end of the day, jets can not stand on the corner of a street and a battleship can not kick down your door at 3AM.
Police are needed for a police state, and there will always be exponentially more people than the police. The only way for a police state to work is for the police to have automatic weapons and for the people to have nothing but their limp dicks, but enforcing a police state is a lot more risky when every citizen could have a glock in their coat pocket and a shotgun in their home.
A Government for the people by the people. The only way for that statement to be true is if the people have the same ability to fight back as the government they elect.
|
On April 11 2013 10:21 Nachtwind wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2013 10:14 Millitron wrote:On April 11 2013 10:09 Nachtwind wrote:On April 11 2013 10:06 Fruscainte wrote:On April 11 2013 10:00 Nachtwind wrote:On April 11 2013 09:45 Millitron wrote:On April 11 2013 09:24 Nachtwind wrote:
You people in the us must fear your goverment, your institutions, your police and even your neighbors? How come? Didn't Germany have a period there where the government, institutions, and police couldn't be trusted? Are you saying you have a period of time now in the US that´s compareable to our situation in the past? Uh, I believe he's saying that you never know what can happen with governments going batshit insane in small amounts of time and you of all people should know that. Not that our political climate is like nazi germany. Ya, well i think the next hitler won´t rise in our land because we learned like you said "we of all people should know". Nontheless the question is indicating that you guys are thinking you are overtaken by a hitler like person in the next time. Cause of that impression i requestioned. Doesn't matter if or when I think it will happen. The problem is that it could happen some time in the future, and we should always be able to deal with it in the event that it happens. They have oxygen masks for every seat in airliners in case of depressurization, even though its extremely unlikely that they'll ever be used. I'm not some paranoid psycho who thinks Obama is the anti-christ, and wants to take all our freedoms away, but I'm also not naive enough to think its impossible for a dictator to rise in the US. Does many americans share your opinion?
Yes. You don't hear about us sane people because we're not as "fun". Sane people don't generate good ratings, Alex Jones and La Pierre do.
|
+ Show Spoiler +Why are you so obsessed with lumping americans together as some group of psychos?
That is not my intention. I´m just curious of how you think about this Oo
I mean you was raised with this tradition and those laws and everything i was not. But it would have never come to my mind that we would endure a time in our land we need to fear a dictator again and therefor we need to arm ourselves because we could need to fight our goverment anytime. So to comprehend what you guys are telling me here is a bit hard.
|
On April 11 2013 10:31 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2013 10:21 Nachtwind wrote:On April 11 2013 10:14 Millitron wrote:On April 11 2013 10:09 Nachtwind wrote:On April 11 2013 10:06 Fruscainte wrote:On April 11 2013 10:00 Nachtwind wrote:On April 11 2013 09:45 Millitron wrote:On April 11 2013 09:24 Nachtwind wrote:
You people in the us must fear your goverment, your institutions, your police and even your neighbors? How come? Didn't Germany have a period there where the government, institutions, and police couldn't be trusted? Are you saying you have a period of time now in the US that´s compareable to our situation in the past? Uh, I believe he's saying that you never know what can happen with governments going batshit insane in small amounts of time and you of all people should know that. Not that our political climate is like nazi germany. Ya, well i think the next hitler won´t rise in our land because we learned like you said "we of all people should know". Nontheless the question is indicating that you guys are thinking you are overtaken by a hitler like person in the next time. Cause of that impression i requestioned. Doesn't matter if or when I think it will happen. The problem is that it could happen some time in the future, and we should always be able to deal with it in the event that it happens. They have oxygen masks for every seat in airliners in case of depressurization, even though its extremely unlikely that they'll ever be used. I'm not some paranoid psycho who thinks Obama is the anti-christ, and wants to take all our freedoms away, but I'm also not naive enough to think its impossible for a dictator to rise in the US. Does many americans share your opinion? Yes. You don't hear about us sane people because we're not as "fun". Sane people don't generate good ratings, Alex Jones and La Pierre do.
La Pierre is pretty sane.
|
On April 11 2013 10:36 Nachtwind wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Why are you so obsessed with lumping americans together as some group of psychos? That is not my intention. I´m just curious of how you think about this Oo I mean you was raised with this tradition and those laws and everything i was not. But it would have never come to my mind that we would endure a time in our land we need to fear a dictator again and therefor we need to arm ourselves because we could need to fight our goverment anytime. So to comprehend what you guys are telling me here is a bit hard.
You need to understand that we are a country that wasn't, like Germany, formed out of mutual agreement of independent states to come together for mutual good. We are a country formed out of revolution, revolution from a government whose executive, we believed, was overstepping his bounds. So it's only natural we have an entire section of our Constitution based around the theme of the people being able to protect themselves from overreaching executives in the future.
|
On April 11 2013 10:36 Nachtwind wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Why are you so obsessed with lumping americans together as some group of psychos? That is not my intention. I´m just curious of how you think about this Oo I mean you was raised with this tradition and those laws and everything i was not. But it would have never come to my mind that we would endure a time in our land we need to fear a dictator again and therefor we need to arm ourselves because we could need to fight our goverment anytime. So to comprehend what you guys are telling me here is a bit hard.
If it happened once, it can happen again. People haven't really changed in the 70 years or so since Hitler. Most of us are still just as easily swayed by fancy speeches and media. And now, the media is more pervasive than ever, and few people realize just how powerful it can be. CNN and Fox News claim to be journalists, but they're not. They're storytellers. They pick and choose what facts to tell people based on what gets the best ratings, or sometimes, based on what their corporate handler wants. Thats why they always talk about the 30,000 gun deaths every year, but ignore the facts that:
A. Alcohol kills twice as many
B. Only 11,000 of those deaths are murders, the rest are suicides, and
C. That number is about 1/3 what it was 15 years ago.
Remember when the media freaked out about that charity organization ACORN, because it looked like they were supporting child prostitution? The video they cited as evidence was completely staged by the "journalist" writing the story.
Remember when Iraq had weapons of mass destruction? Oh wait, they didn't.
We are just as susceptible to malice now as we were 70 years ago. Only now, the malice isn't quite as overt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
