Sarah Palin is an idiot. If McCain got voted in he's so old that he'd kick the bucket pretty quickly... leaving her in charge?!
She doesn't believe in global warming... as if to say the existance and/or the human contribution to of global warming is a matter of opinion? Anyone who blurts out shit like that instantly loses my respect. Problems like this are to be assessed by qualified scientists who can perform a proper quantitative study of the situation, not some brain dead bint of a politician.
Stuckboy
JC Denton: "I know your UNATCO killphrase: Laputan Machine."
Gunther Hermann: "I - am - not - a - machi --"
JC Denton: "Sticks and stones..."
It's all to do with the American constitution and the so-called American values which conservatives and those in the South hold dearer than anything (I'm talking Conservative Christians, Intelligent Design arguments, the right to bear arms, complete and utter belief in everything that's USA). Americans wouldn't give up their arms because it's all part of being an American.
Now I now this doesn't hold for all Americans, in a country with 250 million people at least some have to be capable of independent thought, but a large amount will vote Republican simply to keep things as they are, America is scared of change.
Maybe if America had had a proper war on its soil like most developed places in the world they would be more cynical of its own government and less nationalistic, like in Britain, Germany, France etc.
Originally Posted by Dr. James It's Tuesday, has Obama (officially) won yet?
Originally Posted by Pixelthief guns kill people. If guns were banned, criminals would still have guns. Deaths might be halved; after all, you're much much much more likely to die to a gun in your household than to stop a criminal with it. But the criminals would still have guns, and you wouldn't. Of course, after a few years, nobody would have guns. Kind of how like the USA has 1000x or so times the gun deaths per capita that Japan does, where they are banned. But those criminals would still have their guns. A lot less of them. And your toddler wouldn't accidently blast his face off with a shotgun. But the criminals would still have their guns, and you wouldn't. Two boys who get into an argument might settle it with their fists instead of their pieces, and live to tell the story, but the criminals would still have their guns.
@Wolf; Guns don't have anything to do with crime rate. Crimes are done by people. They have something to do with mortality rate, violent crime rate. Its a lot easier to kill someone with a gun than a knife. And thats why Detroit has the same homicide rate as Sierra Leone.
Gun crime per capita is much higher in the US than the UK, where possession of any firearm without a license gets you royally buggered with an automatic 5-7 years in prison.
So yes unless you have a license (I only know 1 person that has one) you can't have a gun and if any miscreants are caught with them they will be sent down. In the US (state and weapon depending) they'd be let go to commit their planned crime.
Some people do slip through the net here but gun crimes are so very few and far between that by allowing more people with guns we'd be increasing that number.
Personally I think the law needs to be tougher. 10-15 years for possession of a firearm would be such a powerful, and fitting deterrent. Miscreants will always go around the law. It's what they do. It's just having the proper laws in place to put them in gaol for a very long time that reassures me.*
*And it does. There was an idiot around here who tried attacking me and a friend when we were back in secondary school, but he was a drunk buffoon and didn't do very well. He evaded the law for years but recently took a picture of himself with a sawn off shotgun, then was found acting suspicious outside a big posh house so the police did a quick search of the area and found his gun. Thankfully he got sent down.
Edited by the Author.
what you don't seem to get is that most people in the US who has a gun only uses it for self-defense.
If you were a house robber in the UK, your only worry would be the cops, in the US you'd probably worry about the house owners too, because chances are they have a gun too, and they know the house better than you do.
Also notice the fact that most criminals already have at least one gun (most likely to be illegal), either they're from the us or the uk, so in the uk the common civilian is usually in disadvantage when facing a criminal.
Originally Posted by Dr. James It's Tuesday, has Obama (officially) won yet?
Originally Posted by Pixelthief guns kill people. If guns were banned, criminals would still have guns. Deaths might be halved; after all, you're much much much more likely to die to a gun in your household than to stop a criminal with it. But the criminals would still have guns, and you wouldn't. Of course, after a few years, nobody would have guns. Kind of how like the USA has 1000x or so times the gun deaths per capita that Japan does, where they are banned. But those criminals would still have their guns. A lot less of them. And your toddler wouldn't accidently blast his face off with a shotgun. But the criminals would still have their guns, and you wouldn't. Two boys who get into an argument might settle it with their fists instead of their pieces, and live to tell the story, but the criminals would still have their guns.
@Wolf; Guns don't have anything to do with crime rate. Crimes are done by people. They have something to do with mortality rate, violent crime rate. Its a lot easier to kill someone with a gun than a knife. And thats why Detroit has the same homicide rate as Sierra Leone.
Gun crime per capita is much higher in the US than the UK, where possession of any firearm without a license gets you royally buggered with an automatic 5-7 years in prison.
So yes unless you have a license (I only know 1 person that has one) you can't have a gun and if any miscreants are caught with them they will be sent down. In the US (state and weapon depending) they'd be let go to commit their planned crime.
Some people do slip through the net here but gun crimes are so very few and far between that by allowing more people with guns we'd be increasing that number.
Personally I think the law needs to be tougher. 10-15 years for possession of a firearm would be such a powerful, and fitting deterrent. Miscreants will always go around the law. It's what they do. It's just having the proper laws in place to put them in gaol for a very long time that reassures me.*
*And it does. There was an idiot around here who tried attacking me and a friend when we were back in secondary school, but he was a drunk buffoon and didn't do very well. He evaded the law for years but recently took a picture of himself with a sawn off shotgun, then was found acting suspicious outside a big posh house so the police did a quick search of the area and found his gun. Thankfully he got sent down.
Edited by the Author.
what you don't seem to get is that most people in the US who has a gun only uses it for self-defense.
If you were a house robber in the UK, your only worry would be the cops, in the US you'd probably worry about the house owners too, because chances are they have a gun too, and they know the house better than you do.
Also notice the fact that most criminals already have at least one gun (most likely to be illegal), either they're from the us or the uk, so in the uk the common civilian is usually in disadvantage when facing a criminal.
And the proper way to protect citizens is to make it even easier to get a gun! In fact, it should be so easy that a person in a state of affect can just buy a gun and solve his problem without having to think things through! That would make things even better. Yeah!
It's plain stupid to promote firearms. Why do you insist on solving the problem in the wrong end? The problem is that criminals have guns in the first place, resources should be put to stop that, not to promote the use of guns even more!
So we let anyone possess a gun and just sit back and watch as the firearm homocide figures rise and rise but at least we can say "we're better protected for it!"
lol smartass don't talk about something you don't know a thing about.
Do you think anyone could go out at a supermarket and buy a gun ?
Not everyone can buy a gun, contrary to what you might think. There's something called the the firearm owners protection act, and it disallows some people to buy guns, and that's why most criminals in the US only have illegal fire weapons.
Also if preventing people from having guns would be that easy so why would people ever need guns ?
It's just impossible to prevent bad people from getting guns, if they don't get them legally, they would get them illegally anyway.
Nobody ever said guns are a good thing, nor I remember promoting firearms, I think you should calm down a bit and learn how to read properly.
Perhaps you could be a little less aggressive? It doesn't look good when you attack someone as peaceful as Eternal Man, he was never personally offensive towards you.
It's plain stupid to promote firearms. Why do you insist on solving the problem in the wrong end? The problem is that criminals have guns in the first place, resources should be put to stop that, not to promote the use of guns even more!
Exactly. The problem is bad guys with guns, so arming the good guys is just a way to continue the violence.
Off topic but I remember watching one of them daytime US talk shows on ITV7 or something. Some woman said their neighbours were 'terrorizing' her, smashing up garden ornaments, windows and breaking in. Only rather than moving house the woman armed herself and instead of calling the police she shot and killed one of her unarmed neighbours whilst breaking in. The crowd broke into cheers and applause, celebrating what amounted to as a murderer.
Now. I know how shows and their studio audiences are manipulated and such but to show that it was okay to kill someone was just... As a Brit it's beyond me and I'm very surprised the TV execs let them do that as it sends the wrong message to viewers.
Well I'm glad I just got done voting for Obama, who will in turn not have the guts to stand up to NRA and impose actual gun control in America, even though he would obviously want to, if he were in control.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by the Author.
Unlike the ones in UK.
