|
This is a sensitive and complex issue, please do not make comments without first reading the facts, which are cataloged in the OP.
If you make an uninformed post, or one that isn't relevant to the discussion, you will be moderated. If in doubt, don't post. |
+ Show Spoiler +On July 17 2012 23:42 Leporello wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 23:17 Felnarion wrote:On July 17 2012 23:14 HomeWorld wrote:On July 17 2012 22:30 MooseyFate wrote:On July 17 2012 22:19 HomeWorld wrote:
I really don't get it , I read the OP (and all the links, but everything is so fuzzy, no objective view). what's all about anyway ? CBA to parse through all ~ 70 forum pages to find out what the hell happened there.
As far as I've read, a person died and the one involved must justify his actions.
Is there anyone who can shed some light regarding this situation?! Basically you got it but as usual in the US, the race card was played and it became a huge news story. The problem has been with the Media / Rights Groups trying to make it out that Zimmerman was a gun crazy racists and now sexual molester that tracked down and gunned down a poor innocent kid who just wanted to get skittles and ice tea. The boy who was shot, Trayvon Martin, was 17 and black. The man who shot him, George Zimmerman, is mixed hispanic/white. Zimmerman was head of the neighborhood watch and was allowed to carry a firearm. His neighborhood had several recent break-ins and the police rarely made it on scene in time to catch the robbers so he decided to pursue and question Martin, who was walking around in the rain looking into houses and acting "suspicious, like he is on drugs". (Martin was smoking Marijuana) So far, the claim is that when confronted, Martin supposedly attacked Zimmerman, knocking him to the ground and bashing his head into the ground (injuries on Z support this) and Zimmerman then shot and killed Martin in self defense. Right now its up to the court to decide whether Martin attacked Zimmerman, and whether Zimmerman had to right to defend himself with deadly force. The way I see it, no one, but no one should use deadly force unless the victim is on his property or it the police. That neighbor watch is illegitimate if used as a deterrence for "whatever" crimes, mainly their task is to report and assist the law enforcement but not interfere with crimes that takes place (just to avoid this kind of situations) , judging by that , I might consider it as a murder. No fucking way you're serious. If you're being actively beaten by anyone, even ignoring if that's the case here, if you're being actively beaten on the street, for any reason, you're not going to attempt to do anything to get out of it? Gotta be a troll. I don't think so. Why are you getting in a fight in the first place? You say nothing about why you're getting beaten -- and that matters. Getting into an altercation with somebody in public doesn't give you carte blanche to protect yourself by any means necessary. If you're assaulted, then yes, protect yourself. But if its a mutual altercation, or something you yourself started, then "self-defense" is just a cowardly excuse for drastic actions. It's very, very rare that someone assaults somebody in open public for no reason. All I know is it's a real shame that we let people like Zimmerman carry guns and call themselves our protectors.
I know not everyone agrees, but to me, that's what this story has always been about. We encourage people to carry weapons and to protect themselves, and then the ugly side to that is you get people who see the chance to compensate for their shortcomings. "I may be poor and uneducated, but I protect the streets." What drove Zimmerman to follow Martin? The fact that he thought Martin was going to hurt somebody in the neighborhood? I still see zero reason to make that assumption. I'd sooner assume that Zimmerman just really wanted a chance to be a hero.
If you read the reports and listen to the calls, Zimmerman says why he followed Martin. It was raining at night and there was someone he didn't recognize walking around aimlessly (not trying to get out of the rain at all) and looking into people's houses/ acting strangely. In a neighborhood that has had several break-ins recently, that is very suspicious and reason for someone charged with looking after the safety of the residents to investigate. If my family lived nearby and it was my job to lookout for the neighborhood, Id be concerned for their well being and ask the kid where he was headed/what he was doing in the rain too.
|
On July 17 2012 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 23:45 MooseyFate wrote:On July 17 2012 23:30 Zorkmid wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 17 2012 22:30 MooseyFate wrote:
Basically you got it but as usual in the US, the race card was played and it became a huge news story.
The problem has been with the Media / Rights Groups trying to make it out that Zimmerman was a gun crazy racists and now sexual molester that tracked down and gunned down a poor innocent kid who just wanted to get skittles and ice tea.
The boy who was shot, Trayvon Martin, was 17 and black. The man who shot him, George Zimmerman, is mixed hispanic/white. Zimmerman was head of the neighborhood watch and was allowed to carry a firearm. His neighborhood had several recent break-ins and the police rarely made it on scene in time to catch the robbers so he decided to pursue and question Martin, who was walking around in the rain looking into houses and acting "suspicious, like he is on drugs". (Martin was smoking Marijuana)
So far, the claim is that when confronted, Martin supposedly attacked Zimmerman, knocking him to the ground and bashing his head into the ground (injuries on Z support this) and Zimmerman then shot and killed Martin in self defense.
Right now its up to the court to decide whether Martin attacked Zimmerman, and whether Zimmerman had to right to defend himself with deadly force.
Zimmerman was head of the neighborhood watch and was allowed to carry a firearm.
Is completely false and misleading. He's allowed to carry a firearm, sure. But this has got NOTHING to do with the neighborhood watch.Those who are part of a Neighborhood watch program are the eyes and ears of law enforcement. But that is all. Mr. Martin decided to directly engage with someone who he thought could be a criminal. This is something that all responsible Neighborhood Watch programs do not condone. Please tell me you are a troll. Was he not appointed to head up the neighborhood watch by the gated community in which he lived? As head of the neighborhood watch, is he not suppose to keep an eye out for suspicious persons in his neighborhood and contact the police? Didn't Zimmerman do exactly that? So what I said is neither false or misleading. Stick to the facts please, not your "opinion". If you just want to ramble out your opinion and ignore facts, go to Yahoo comment section. Every word I said was a fact.
Haha, you're a fucking joke dude. You called ME a liar and I asked you to point our where I was lying. This is your response? Fucking troll
User was temp banned for this post.
|
It may sound silly, but I'm quite fond of the current policy regarding firearms in my country. Not many ppl can wear firearms without a good reason and it shows, there are close to none incidents so far.
Maybe US should get over the "wild wild west era" and start banning firearms. Keep in mind, main weapons use is for killing not for defending .. :S
|
On July 17 2012 23:58 HomeWorld wrote:
It may sound silly, but I'm quite fond of the current policy regarding firearms in my country. Not many ppl can wear firearms without a good reason and it shows, there are close to none incidents so far.
Maybe US should get over the "wild wild west era" and start banning firearms. Keep in mind, main weapons use is for killing not for defending .. :S
Every European will agree with you and most Americans will disagree with you.
Different countries, different priorities. I doubt you understand why we allow gun use in any meaningful way.
|
On July 18 2012 00:02 Lightwip wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 23:58 HomeWorld wrote:
It may sound silly, but I'm quite fond of the current policy regarding firearms in my country. Not many ppl can wear firearms without a good reason and it shows, there are close to none incidents so far.
Maybe US should get over the "wild wild west era" and start banning firearms. Keep in mind, main weapons use is for killing not for defending .. :S Every European will agree with you and most Americans will disagree with you. Different countries, different priorities. I doubt you understand why we allow gun use in any meaningful way.
I can understand a light-gauge hunting rifle - but there is little reason for any civilian to have a large-caliber automatic weapon - which they sell in the US for hunting purposes. In general - I think US citizens are quick to think a gun will make them strong. Unfortuantely - they are not as quick to think about the consequences and responsibility of firing that weapon. If you fire your gun - you need to be aware that you are reponsible for every bullet and everything said bullet(s) does.
|
On July 18 2012 00:02 Lightwip wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 23:58 HomeWorld wrote:
It may sound silly, but I'm quite fond of the current policy regarding firearms in my country. Not many ppl can wear firearms without a good reason and it shows, there are close to none incidents so far.
Maybe US should get over the "wild wild west era" and start banning firearms. Keep in mind, main weapons use is for killing not for defending .. :S Every European will agree with you and most Americans will disagree with you. Different countries, different priorities. I doubt you understand why we allow gun use in any meaningful way.
Please do make me understand. I cannot understand why some tools that are designed by default to kill humans (mainly) are meaningful for an advanced society like US, and not that important for an equally or even more evolved society like Europe in its entirety.
What's the difference ?! We are all the same ..
|
On July 18 2012 00:08 Arghmyliver wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 00:02 Lightwip wrote:On July 17 2012 23:58 HomeWorld wrote:
It may sound silly, but I'm quite fond of the current policy regarding firearms in my country. Not many ppl can wear firearms without a good reason and it shows, there are close to none incidents so far.
Maybe US should get over the "wild wild west era" and start banning firearms. Keep in mind, main weapons use is for killing not for defending .. :S Every European will agree with you and most Americans will disagree with you. Different countries, different priorities. I doubt you understand why we allow gun use in any meaningful way. I can understand a light-gauge hunting rifle - but there is little reason for any civilian to have a large-caliber automatic weapon - which they sell in the US for hunting purposes. In general - I think US citizens are quick to think a gun will make them strong. Unfortuantely - they are not as quick to think about the consequences and responsibility of firing that weapon. If you fire your gun - you need to be aware that you are reponsible for every bullet and everything said bullet(s) does.
Reasonable position to hold; there's plenty of reason to want to limit the more dangerous guns. Not doing so would be considered a radical position on the issue. So would be absolutely banning weapons.
Not that radical necessarily means wrong.
|
On July 18 2012 00:11 HomeWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 00:02 Lightwip wrote:On July 17 2012 23:58 HomeWorld wrote:
It may sound silly, but I'm quite fond of the current policy regarding firearms in my country. Not many ppl can wear firearms without a good reason and it shows, there are close to none incidents so far.
Maybe US should get over the "wild wild west era" and start banning firearms. Keep in mind, main weapons use is for killing not for defending .. :S Every European will agree with you and most Americans will disagree with you. Different countries, different priorities. I doubt you understand why we allow gun use in any meaningful way. Please do make me understand. I cannot understand why some tools that are designed by default to kill humans (mainly) are meaningful for an advanced society like US, and not that important for an equally or even more evolved society like Europe in its entirety. What's the difference ?! We are all the same ..
It's a cultural matter dating back to the American Revolution. One of the fundamental rights of our Constitution is the right to defend ourselves from tyranny (and other threats).
Probably not a good reason to most Europeans, but as I said, it's a cultural thing.
|
On July 17 2012 23:30 HomeWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 23:17 Felnarion wrote:On July 17 2012 23:14 HomeWorld wrote:On July 17 2012 22:30 MooseyFate wrote:On July 17 2012 22:19 HomeWorld wrote:
I really don't get it , I read the OP (and all the links, but everything is so fuzzy, no objective view). what's all about anyway ? CBA to parse through all ~ 70 forum pages to find out what the hell happened there.
As far as I've read, a person died and the one involved must justify his actions.
Is there anyone who can shed some light regarding this situation?! Basically you got it but as usual in the US, the race card was played and it became a huge news story. The problem has been with the Media / Rights Groups trying to make it out that Zimmerman was a gun crazy racists and now sexual molester that tracked down and gunned down a poor innocent kid who just wanted to get skittles and ice tea. The boy who was shot, Trayvon Martin, was 17 and black. The man who shot him, George Zimmerman, is mixed hispanic/white. Zimmerman was head of the neighborhood watch and was allowed to carry a firearm. His neighborhood had several recent break-ins and the police rarely made it on scene in time to catch the robbers so he decided to pursue and question Martin, who was walking around in the rain looking into houses and acting "suspicious, like he is on drugs". (Martin was smoking Marijuana) So far, the claim is that when confronted, Martin supposedly attacked Zimmerman, knocking him to the ground and bashing his head into the ground (injuries on Z support this) and Zimmerman then shot and killed Martin in self defense. Right now its up to the court to decide whether Martin attacked Zimmerman, and whether Zimmerman had to right to defend himself with deadly force. The way I see it, no one, but no one should use deadly force unless the victim is on his property or it the police. That neighbor watch is illegitimate if used as a deterrence for "whatever" crimes, mainly their task is to report and assist the law enforcement but not interfere with crimes that takes place (just to avoid this kind of situations) , judging by that , I might consider it as a murder. No fucking way you're serious. If you're being actively beaten by anyone, even ignoring if that's the case here, if you're being actively beaten on the street, for any reason, you're not going to attempt to do anything to get out of it? Gotta be a troll. That's a different fact, ofc I will try to defend myself if I'm put in that kind of situation that you've told (if it's totally unprovoked by me, I can use anything to defend myself), but regarding the subject, I have a feeling that that guy (Zimmerman) put himself in that situation (basically asking it for it) and the result , we know it already. Also Zimmerman's history doesn't help him too much regarding this case ...
Totally unprovoked is a ridiculous standard. If I'm at a bar and I call someone an asshole and he charges me with a knife should I not be allowed to shoot him if I have gun?
There is no law against asking someone a question or what they are doing there if they don't belong in a particular place. I don't care if you are a civilian or a cop. Following someone is also not illegal. He was following the guy which is ill-advised, but not illegal. Trayvon then approached him and attacked him. Is it a morally gray area? I'd say yes, I think Zimmerman's an idiot but to say he's a murderer is extreme. Legally however I think this is farely black and white.
The pun there was not intended.
|
On July 18 2012 00:18 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 23:30 HomeWorld wrote:On July 17 2012 23:17 Felnarion wrote:On July 17 2012 23:14 HomeWorld wrote:On July 17 2012 22:30 MooseyFate wrote:On July 17 2012 22:19 HomeWorld wrote:
I really don't get it , I read the OP (and all the links, but everything is so fuzzy, no objective view). what's all about anyway ? CBA to parse through all ~ 70 forum pages to find out what the hell happened there.
As far as I've read, a person died and the one involved must justify his actions.
Is there anyone who can shed some light regarding this situation?! Basically you got it but as usual in the US, the race card was played and it became a huge news story. The problem has been with the Media / Rights Groups trying to make it out that Zimmerman was a gun crazy racists and now sexual molester that tracked down and gunned down a poor innocent kid who just wanted to get skittles and ice tea. The boy who was shot, Trayvon Martin, was 17 and black. The man who shot him, George Zimmerman, is mixed hispanic/white. Zimmerman was head of the neighborhood watch and was allowed to carry a firearm. His neighborhood had several recent break-ins and the police rarely made it on scene in time to catch the robbers so he decided to pursue and question Martin, who was walking around in the rain looking into houses and acting "suspicious, like he is on drugs". (Martin was smoking Marijuana) So far, the claim is that when confronted, Martin supposedly attacked Zimmerman, knocking him to the ground and bashing his head into the ground (injuries on Z support this) and Zimmerman then shot and killed Martin in self defense. Right now its up to the court to decide whether Martin attacked Zimmerman, and whether Zimmerman had to right to defend himself with deadly force. The way I see it, no one, but no one should use deadly force unless the victim is on his property or it the police. That neighbor watch is illegitimate if used as a deterrence for "whatever" crimes, mainly their task is to report and assist the law enforcement but not interfere with crimes that takes place (just to avoid this kind of situations) , judging by that , I might consider it as a murder. No fucking way you're serious. If you're being actively beaten by anyone, even ignoring if that's the case here, if you're being actively beaten on the street, for any reason, you're not going to attempt to do anything to get out of it? Gotta be a troll. That's a different fact, ofc I will try to defend myself if I'm put in that kind of situation that you've told (if it's totally unprovoked by me, I can use anything to defend myself), but regarding the subject, I have a feeling that that guy (Zimmerman) put himself in that situation (basically asking it for it) and the result , we know it already. Also Zimmerman's history doesn't help him too much regarding this case ... Totally unprovoked is a ridiculous standard. If I'm at a bar and I call someone an asshole and he charges me with a knife should I not be allowed to shoot him if I have gun?
If you call the guy an asshole and he charges you with a knife, he's in the wrong.
If you're being physically threatening to him and he tries to defend himself, and then you pull out a gun, you're the one who's committing assault by "causing a victim to apprehend violence".
|
On July 18 2012 00:18 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
Totally unprovoked is a ridiculous standard. If I'm at a bar and I call someone an asshole and he charges me with a knife should I not be allowed to shoot him if I have gun?
Sure, but that not the correct comparison.
If you punch that guy, is he allowed to kill you?
|
On July 18 2012 00:12 Lightwip wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 00:08 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 18 2012 00:02 Lightwip wrote:On July 17 2012 23:58 HomeWorld wrote:
It may sound silly, but I'm quite fond of the current policy regarding firearms in my country. Not many ppl can wear firearms without a good reason and it shows, there are close to none incidents so far.
Maybe US should get over the "wild wild west era" and start banning firearms. Keep in mind, main weapons use is for killing not for defending .. :S Every European will agree with you and most Americans will disagree with you. Different countries, different priorities. I doubt you understand why we allow gun use in any meaningful way. I can understand a light-gauge hunting rifle - but there is little reason for any civilian to have a large-caliber automatic weapon - which they sell in the US for hunting purposes. In general - I think US citizens are quick to think a gun will make them strong. Unfortuantely - they are not as quick to think about the consequences and responsibility of firing that weapon. If you fire your gun - you need to be aware that you are reponsible for every bullet and everything said bullet(s) does. Reasonable position to hold; there's plenty of reason to want to limit the more dangerous guns. Not doing so would be considered a radical position on the issue. So would be absolutely banning weapons. Not that radical necessarily means wrong.
Call me a troll, but US should start banning firearms. It may look as the " pre WW2 GREATEST PROHIBITION" but in fact , no one needs guns/ pistolz/lazersaberz, guns aren't drugs (alcohol) so you cannot justigy living a life without it, "we" do not need them. The sad story is the whole thing is out of control when speaking about US. More than fifteen years ago I wanted to have a life in US, luckily for me after so many years and getting close to middle age I see that I was wrong, US is the last place to be speaking in terms of basic opportunities, being secure, and not get shot in the middle of the street (pun intended)
|
On July 18 2012 00:31 HomeWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 00:12 Lightwip wrote:On July 18 2012 00:08 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 18 2012 00:02 Lightwip wrote:On July 17 2012 23:58 HomeWorld wrote:
It may sound silly, but I'm quite fond of the current policy regarding firearms in my country. Not many ppl can wear firearms without a good reason and it shows, there are close to none incidents so far.
Maybe US should get over the "wild wild west era" and start banning firearms. Keep in mind, main weapons use is for killing not for defending .. :S Every European will agree with you and most Americans will disagree with you. Different countries, different priorities. I doubt you understand why we allow gun use in any meaningful way. I can understand a light-gauge hunting rifle - but there is little reason for any civilian to have a large-caliber automatic weapon - which they sell in the US for hunting purposes. In general - I think US citizens are quick to think a gun will make them strong. Unfortuantely - they are not as quick to think about the consequences and responsibility of firing that weapon. If you fire your gun - you need to be aware that you are reponsible for every bullet and everything said bullet(s) does. Reasonable position to hold; there's plenty of reason to want to limit the more dangerous guns. Not doing so would be considered a radical position on the issue. So would be absolutely banning weapons. Not that radical necessarily means wrong. Call me a troll, but US should start banning firearms. It may look as the " pre WW2 GREATEST PROHIBITION" but in fact , no one needs guns/ pistolz/lazersaberz, guns aren't drugs (alcohol) so you cannot justigy living a life without it, "we" do not need them. The sad story is the whole thing is out of control when speaking about US. More than fifteen years ago I wanted to have a life in US, luckily for me after so many years and getting close to middle age I see that I was wrong, US is the last place to be speaking in terms of basic opportunities, being secure, and not get shot in the middle of the street (pun intended)
You are actually pretty clueless about guns and their place in the lives of people in the US.
It's like me saying that your country is just a bunch of ungrateful whiners who never could appreciate the good graces of the USSR.
|
On July 18 2012 00:36 Lightwip wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 00:31 HomeWorld wrote:On July 18 2012 00:12 Lightwip wrote:On July 18 2012 00:08 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 18 2012 00:02 Lightwip wrote:On July 17 2012 23:58 HomeWorld wrote:
It may sound silly, but I'm quite fond of the current policy regarding firearms in my country. Not many ppl can wear firearms without a good reason and it shows, there are close to none incidents so far.
Maybe US should get over the "wild wild west era" and start banning firearms. Keep in mind, main weapons use is for killing not for defending .. :S Every European will agree with you and most Americans will disagree with you. Different countries, different priorities. I doubt you understand why we allow gun use in any meaningful way. I can understand a light-gauge hunting rifle - but there is little reason for any civilian to have a large-caliber automatic weapon - which they sell in the US for hunting purposes. In general - I think US citizens are quick to think a gun will make them strong. Unfortuantely - they are not as quick to think about the consequences and responsibility of firing that weapon. If you fire your gun - you need to be aware that you are reponsible for every bullet and everything said bullet(s) does. Reasonable position to hold; there's plenty of reason to want to limit the more dangerous guns. Not doing so would be considered a radical position on the issue. So would be absolutely banning weapons. Not that radical necessarily means wrong. Call me a troll, but US should start banning firearms. It may look as the " pre WW2 GREATEST PROHIBITION" but in fact , no one needs guns/ pistolz/lazersaberz, guns aren't drugs (alcohol) so you cannot justigy living a life without it, "we" do not need them. The sad story is the whole thing is out of control when speaking about US. More than fifteen years ago I wanted to have a life in US, luckily for me after so many years and getting close to middle age I see that I was wrong, US is the last place to be speaking in terms of basic opportunities, being secure, and not get shot in the middle of the street (pun intended) You are actually pretty clueless about guns and their place in the lives of people in the US. It's like me saying that your country is just a bunch of ungrateful whiners who never could appreciate the good graces of the USSR.
I beg to differ, I would not try to live in a society that makes use of guns on their whim (hope I spelled it correctly).
That's not sane, also I feel more secure in Europe, just because of USSR  , now seriously, things designed to kill peoples should be outright banned, I hope you agree with me.
|
On July 18 2012 00:47 HomeWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 00:36 Lightwip wrote:On July 18 2012 00:31 HomeWorld wrote:On July 18 2012 00:12 Lightwip wrote:On July 18 2012 00:08 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 18 2012 00:02 Lightwip wrote:On July 17 2012 23:58 HomeWorld wrote:
It may sound silly, but I'm quite fond of the current policy regarding firearms in my country. Not many ppl can wear firearms without a good reason and it shows, there are close to none incidents so far.
Maybe US should get over the "wild wild west era" and start banning firearms. Keep in mind, main weapons use is for killing not for defending .. :S Every European will agree with you and most Americans will disagree with you. Different countries, different priorities. I doubt you understand why we allow gun use in any meaningful way. I can understand a light-gauge hunting rifle - but there is little reason for any civilian to have a large-caliber automatic weapon - which they sell in the US for hunting purposes. In general - I think US citizens are quick to think a gun will make them strong. Unfortuantely - they are not as quick to think about the consequences and responsibility of firing that weapon. If you fire your gun - you need to be aware that you are reponsible for every bullet and everything said bullet(s) does. Reasonable position to hold; there's plenty of reason to want to limit the more dangerous guns. Not doing so would be considered a radical position on the issue. So would be absolutely banning weapons. Not that radical necessarily means wrong. Call me a troll, but US should start banning firearms. It may look as the " pre WW2 GREATEST PROHIBITION" but in fact , no one needs guns/ pistolz/lazersaberz, guns aren't drugs (alcohol) so you cannot justigy living a life without it, "we" do not need them. The sad story is the whole thing is out of control when speaking about US. More than fifteen years ago I wanted to have a life in US, luckily for me after so many years and getting close to middle age I see that I was wrong, US is the last place to be speaking in terms of basic opportunities, being secure, and not get shot in the middle of the street (pun intended) You are actually pretty clueless about guns and their place in the lives of people in the US. It's like me saying that your country is just a bunch of ungrateful whiners who never could appreciate the good graces of the USSR. I beg to differ, I would not try to live in a society that makes use of guns on their whim (hope I spelled it correctly). That's not sane, also I feel more secure in Europe, just because of USSR , now seriously, things designed to kill peoples should be outright banned, I hope you agree with me.
As I said, you are extremely clueless as to how guns are used in the US. You don't know very much about American culture nor about gun use other than what you hear from news stories.
Don't pretend you know anything about US culture when your experience is only biased second-hand accounts.
|
On July 18 2012 00:51 Lightwip wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 00:47 HomeWorld wrote:On July 18 2012 00:36 Lightwip wrote:On July 18 2012 00:31 HomeWorld wrote:On July 18 2012 00:12 Lightwip wrote:On July 18 2012 00:08 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 18 2012 00:02 Lightwip wrote:On July 17 2012 23:58 HomeWorld wrote:
It may sound silly, but I'm quite fond of the current policy regarding firearms in my country. Not many ppl can wear firearms without a good reason and it shows, there are close to none incidents so far.
Maybe US should get over the "wild wild west era" and start banning firearms. Keep in mind, main weapons use is for killing not for defending .. :S Every European will agree with you and most Americans will disagree with you. Different countries, different priorities. I doubt you understand why we allow gun use in any meaningful way. I can understand a light-gauge hunting rifle - but there is little reason for any civilian to have a large-caliber automatic weapon - which they sell in the US for hunting purposes. In general - I think US citizens are quick to think a gun will make them strong. Unfortuantely - they are not as quick to think about the consequences and responsibility of firing that weapon. If you fire your gun - you need to be aware that you are reponsible for every bullet and everything said bullet(s) does. Reasonable position to hold; there's plenty of reason to want to limit the more dangerous guns. Not doing so would be considered a radical position on the issue. So would be absolutely banning weapons. Not that radical necessarily means wrong. Call me a troll, but US should start banning firearms. It may look as the " pre WW2 GREATEST PROHIBITION" but in fact , no one needs guns/ pistolz/lazersaberz, guns aren't drugs (alcohol) so you cannot justigy living a life without it, "we" do not need them. The sad story is the whole thing is out of control when speaking about US. More than fifteen years ago I wanted to have a life in US, luckily for me after so many years and getting close to middle age I see that I was wrong, US is the last place to be speaking in terms of basic opportunities, being secure, and not get shot in the middle of the street (pun intended) You are actually pretty clueless about guns and their place in the lives of people in the US. It's like me saying that your country is just a bunch of ungrateful whiners who never could appreciate the good graces of the USSR. I beg to differ, I would not try to live in a society that makes use of guns on their whim (hope I spelled it correctly). That's not sane, also I feel more secure in Europe, just because of USSR , now seriously, things designed to kill peoples should be outright banned, I hope you agree with me. As I said, you are extremely clueless as to how guns are used in the US. You don't know very much about American culture nor about gun use other than what you hear from news stories. Don't pretend you know anything about US culture when your experience is only biased second-hand accounts.
I do not need to experience the US culture first hand when everyone knows that you are not that safe in US, pretty much anyone can acquire a firearm and use it without much hustle, that's a clear sign for me to stay away, tho I wish things in US were more civil.
|
On July 18 2012 00:47 HomeWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 00:36 Lightwip wrote:On July 18 2012 00:31 HomeWorld wrote:On July 18 2012 00:12 Lightwip wrote:On July 18 2012 00:08 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 18 2012 00:02 Lightwip wrote:On July 17 2012 23:58 HomeWorld wrote:
It may sound silly, but I'm quite fond of the current policy regarding firearms in my country. Not many ppl can wear firearms without a good reason and it shows, there are close to none incidents so far.
Maybe US should get over the "wild wild west era" and start banning firearms. Keep in mind, main weapons use is for killing not for defending .. :S Every European will agree with you and most Americans will disagree with you. Different countries, different priorities. I doubt you understand why we allow gun use in any meaningful way. I can understand a light-gauge hunting rifle - but there is little reason for any civilian to have a large-caliber automatic weapon - which they sell in the US for hunting purposes. In general - I think US citizens are quick to think a gun will make them strong. Unfortuantely - they are not as quick to think about the consequences and responsibility of firing that weapon. If you fire your gun - you need to be aware that you are reponsible for every bullet and everything said bullet(s) does. Reasonable position to hold; there's plenty of reason to want to limit the more dangerous guns. Not doing so would be considered a radical position on the issue. So would be absolutely banning weapons. Not that radical necessarily means wrong. Call me a troll, but US should start banning firearms. It may look as the " pre WW2 GREATEST PROHIBITION" but in fact , no one needs guns/ pistolz/lazersaberz, guns aren't drugs (alcohol) so you cannot justigy living a life without it, "we" do not need them. The sad story is the whole thing is out of control when speaking about US. More than fifteen years ago I wanted to have a life in US, luckily for me after so many years and getting close to middle age I see that I was wrong, US is the last place to be speaking in terms of basic opportunities, being secure, and not get shot in the middle of the street (pun intended) You are actually pretty clueless about guns and their place in the lives of people in the US. It's like me saying that your country is just a bunch of ungrateful whiners who never could appreciate the good graces of the USSR. I beg to differ, I would not try to live in a society that makes use of guns on their whim (hope I spelled it correctly). That's not sane, also I feel more secure in Europe, just because of USSR , now seriously, things designed to kill peoples should be outright banned, I hope you agree with me.
So we should ban things that kill people when numerous criminals have already attained said items that kill people?
There is a lot of sport in taking firearms to the range and competing with others. People look at guns as nothing more than a tool for killing other people when in fact there is a HUGE element of culture built into it in addition to the element of use as a form of self-defense. You seem to want a Utopia free from firearms so that you're safe. Isn't going to happen as it's completely unattainable. You're also discounting the fact that a firearm-free environment is more dangerous to those unable to defend themselves when they're at a physical disadvantage to their aggressor. If you're not comfortable in a society full of guns that has a low crime rate in relation to the amount of firearms it's populace owns, I pity you.
|
On July 18 2012 00:56 HomeWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 00:51 Lightwip wrote:On July 18 2012 00:47 HomeWorld wrote:On July 18 2012 00:36 Lightwip wrote:On July 18 2012 00:31 HomeWorld wrote:On July 18 2012 00:12 Lightwip wrote:On July 18 2012 00:08 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 18 2012 00:02 Lightwip wrote:On July 17 2012 23:58 HomeWorld wrote:
It may sound silly, but I'm quite fond of the current policy regarding firearms in my country. Not many ppl can wear firearms without a good reason and it shows, there are close to none incidents so far.
Maybe US should get over the "wild wild west era" and start banning firearms. Keep in mind, main weapons use is for killing not for defending .. :S Every European will agree with you and most Americans will disagree with you. Different countries, different priorities. I doubt you understand why we allow gun use in any meaningful way. I can understand a light-gauge hunting rifle - but there is little reason for any civilian to have a large-caliber automatic weapon - which they sell in the US for hunting purposes. In general - I think US citizens are quick to think a gun will make them strong. Unfortuantely - they are not as quick to think about the consequences and responsibility of firing that weapon. If you fire your gun - you need to be aware that you are reponsible for every bullet and everything said bullet(s) does. Reasonable position to hold; there's plenty of reason to want to limit the more dangerous guns. Not doing so would be considered a radical position on the issue. So would be absolutely banning weapons. Not that radical necessarily means wrong. Call me a troll, but US should start banning firearms. It may look as the " pre WW2 GREATEST PROHIBITION" but in fact , no one needs guns/ pistolz/lazersaberz, guns aren't drugs (alcohol) so you cannot justigy living a life without it, "we" do not need them. The sad story is the whole thing is out of control when speaking about US. More than fifteen years ago I wanted to have a life in US, luckily for me after so many years and getting close to middle age I see that I was wrong, US is the last place to be speaking in terms of basic opportunities, being secure, and not get shot in the middle of the street (pun intended) You are actually pretty clueless about guns and their place in the lives of people in the US. It's like me saying that your country is just a bunch of ungrateful whiners who never could appreciate the good graces of the USSR. I beg to differ, I would not try to live in a society that makes use of guns on their whim (hope I spelled it correctly). That's not sane, also I feel more secure in Europe, just because of USSR , now seriously, things designed to kill peoples should be outright banned, I hope you agree with me. As I said, you are extremely clueless as to how guns are used in the US. You don't know very much about American culture nor about gun use other than what you hear from news stories. Don't pretend you know anything about US culture when your experience is only biased second-hand accounts. I do not need to experience the US culture first hand when everyone knows that you are not that safe in US, pretty much anyone can acquire a firearm and use it without much hustle, that's a clear sign for me to stay away, tho I wish things in US were more civil.
Case in point. You know nothing.
The only truth about that is that it is easy to acquire firearms. Everything else you said is absolutely wrong.
|
Pick the state with the most liberal (fewest) gun laws :
A) Texas
B) Alaska
C) Vermont
If you don't know the answer, then you really miss the big picture about guns & the US.
|
On July 18 2012 00:59 Lightwip wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 00:56 HomeWorld wrote:On July 18 2012 00:51 Lightwip wrote:On July 18 2012 00:47 HomeWorld wrote:On July 18 2012 00:36 Lightwip wrote:On July 18 2012 00:31 HomeWorld wrote:On July 18 2012 00:12 Lightwip wrote:On July 18 2012 00:08 Arghmyliver wrote:On July 18 2012 00:02 Lightwip wrote:On July 17 2012 23:58 HomeWorld wrote:
It may sound silly, but I'm quite fond of the current policy regarding firearms in my country. Not many ppl can wear firearms without a good reason and it shows, there are close to none incidents so far.
Maybe US should get over the "wild wild west era" and start banning firearms. Keep in mind, main weapons use is for killing not for defending .. :S Every European will agree with you and most Americans will disagree with you. Different countries, different priorities. I doubt you understand why we allow gun use in any meaningful way. I can understand a light-gauge hunting rifle - but there is little reason for any civilian to have a large-caliber automatic weapon - which they sell in the US for hunting purposes. In general - I think US citizens are quick to think a gun will make them strong. Unfortuantely - they are not as quick to think about the consequences and responsibility of firing that weapon. If you fire your gun - you need to be aware that you are reponsible for every bullet and everything said bullet(s) does. Reasonable position to hold; there's plenty of reason to want to limit the more dangerous guns. Not doing so would be considered a radical position on the issue. So would be absolutely banning weapons. Not that radical necessarily means wrong. Call me a troll, but US should start banning firearms. It may look as the " pre WW2 GREATEST PROHIBITION" but in fact , no one needs guns/ pistolz/lazersaberz, guns aren't drugs (alcohol) so you cannot justigy living a life without it, "we" do not need them. The sad story is the whole thing is out of control when speaking about US. More than fifteen years ago I wanted to have a life in US, luckily for me after so many years and getting close to middle age I see that I was wrong, US is the last place to be speaking in terms of basic opportunities, being secure, and not get shot in the middle of the street (pun intended) You are actually pretty clueless about guns and their place in the lives of people in the US. It's like me saying that your country is just a bunch of ungrateful whiners who never could appreciate the good graces of the USSR. I beg to differ, I would not try to live in a society that makes use of guns on their whim (hope I spelled it correctly). That's not sane, also I feel more secure in Europe, just because of USSR , now seriously, things designed to kill peoples should be outright banned, I hope you agree with me. As I said, you are extremely clueless as to how guns are used in the US. You don't know very much about American culture nor about gun use other than what you hear from news stories. Don't pretend you know anything about US culture when your experience is only biased second-hand accounts. I do not need to experience the US culture first hand when everyone knows that you are not that safe in US, pretty much anyone can acquire a firearm and use it without much hustle, that's a clear sign for me to stay away, tho I wish things in US were more civil. Case in point. You know nothing. The only truth about that is that it is easy to acquire firearms. Everything else you said is absolutely wrong.
Just don't, please don't , don't try to lie to yourself, sometimes a person outside the box have a clear wide view of the box compared to the one inside it 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
