MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Forum moderation  (Read 28301 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: February 18, 2018, 10:43 »
0

Exactly what I expected. Let's ignore and exclude statistics from places that have higher murder rates. It's okay to kill people and children in those countries. Let's not talk about those countries. It's the USA that's evil.

Which country would you like to talk about with greater number of shooting per capita than the US? or more specifically greater number of school shootings?

You should start a thread about whichever country it is you want to discuss. There could be people on this forum from that country on here that would like to engage with you about the systemic and societal problems that have lead it to that situation.

This thread seems to be mostly discussing the situation in the US. It is the predominant superpower and richest nation in the world at this time, but we could switch to discussing Honduras and its unique problems I guess? I am not sure as many people would have a vested interest though?


PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #51 on: February 18, 2018, 10:50 »
+1
Your killing your own children and you're talking about 'what's fashionable' - What is wrong with you people?

There's no other country where people are killing each other?

I have difficulty finding another country -- especially in the West -- where people slaughter so many children at school so often.

Perhaps you can help?

Oh boy. Sure I can help. Why only focus on the West? Has it become acceptable and mainstream for certain countries to slaughter people so let's just ignore them and exclude them from the statistics? Hardly.

Here are some figures by country per 100,000 people which is a reasonable measurement based on percentage of killings by population.

General homicide by all methods. If you sort by homicides it should be no surprise, maybe except for you, that places like El Salvador and Honduras top the list by rate. Even by total count Brazil and India are at the top. It's reasonable to assume children are part of these figures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Killings by firearms. Again, sorting by homicides places like Honduras and Venezuela top that list which shouldn't be a surprise. It's reasonable to assume children are part of these figures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

School shootings. You'll notice there are countries on this list other than the United States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting

The information is there if you decide to look for it. Or you can blindly follow biased news media groups whose goal is to report information in a way that creates the most turmoil/division, gets them better ratings, and makes them more money. There are atrocities happening globally every day. Murder is horrible, Especially children. To say that United States is the only place where people, or children, are "slaughtered" is really naive.  All countries have their problems. Quit blindly following the news media and focusing on the United States.

Now that I've presented some figures I fully expect to see responses with statistics being ignored, pivoting away from the topic, and more USA loves killing children drivel. Please proceed. I'll grab some popcorn.

Thanks for the information. I notice that there are far more children slaughtered at schools in the United States than in any other country.

And I"m glad you think it's relevant to compare the US to third-world countries -- many of which are far worse than the US -- rather than other developed democracies, whose gun killings, especiallly at schools, are tiny compared to the US.

So killing children is okay in other countries then. It's only a problem in the USA apparently.

So you are happy comparing the USA to a third world dingbat state.
At least we know where America is heading with 'Make America Great Again'.

What happened to moral leadership?

So what you're saying is "oh those countries kill people and children all the time. We're used to that and it's okay. Let's talk about the USA". Wow. And you want to throw around the word "moral"?

Why don't you do something to help those countries reduce their higher rates of murder? Go volunteer. Do something about it.

Oh I see. The underlying purpose of this, just like I said, is to bash the USA. Your "make America great again" comment says it all.

RAW

« Reply #52 on: February 18, 2018, 11:00 »
+2
So the answer is 'Yes" you are happy comparing the USA to a third world dingbat state.

« Reply #53 on: February 18, 2018, 11:01 »
0
Guns for all IS the American system

This actually is not true, at least not according to the constitution.  This idea of "second amendment rights" has now been perverted so thoroughly that even Zero Talent states the idea that people can own firearms at home as a fact.

The actual text of the second amendment is, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed".  The Founding Fathers were concerned about protecting the state from foreign powers, especially after the British had a policy of capturing the magazines of the colonies in 1774 and 1775.  The second amendment, as you can clearly tell by reading what is written, only authorizes the right to bear arms in the context of a well regulated militia.  We can know this with absolute certainty by the key phrase "A well regulated militia".  Not much interpretation required for that.  Random yahoos having guns at home is not well regulated and not a militia (which can only be authorized by Congress), so absolutely, 100% is NOT authorized by the second amendment. 

You could debate about whether "the security of a free state" would include personal weapons, but we can discount that by the first clause about militias and also by understanding the historical context.  In the 1770s the colonies did not have their own armies.  If there were a need for defense, every able-bodied (male, slave-holding in the south) citizen would be mustered into a militia and issued weapons from a communal store.  Most people did not own firearms because they were 1) very expensive and 2) required loading with cartridges of gunpowder and primed with black powder.  Keeping lots of gunpowder lying around in wooden houses that were lighted and heated with open flames is not a great idea.  Instead, gunpowder and weapons were stored in community magazines that were present in most large cities. To prevent the citizens from rebelling, the British removed gunpowder from magazines in Massachusetts in 1774 and Virginia in 1775.  This was fresh on the minds of the framers of the constitution and is likely why the second amendment was deemed so important.

The US was absolutely NOT set up as a gun state!  The right to bear arms was only in the context of a well organized militia for the security of the state, which we can know with absolute certainty because it was written in clear, plain English.  The modern equivalent of a 1780s militia is the National Guard, and nobody has ever talked about disarming them.  That amendment was written before the age of professional, standing militaries and really should be removed since we no longer use militias for defense.

For over 150 years the Supreme Court interpreted the second amendment as it was written.  It is only during the past 50 years that the NRA, through consistent messaging and buying off of congresspeople, has perverted the public perception of the second amendment so much that even liberals talk about "second amendment rights" as if it means individuals can keep firearms at home.  Yet, this clearly is not what the constitution says, and especially so when you consider the historical context in which it was written.  The second amendment right to bear arms in modern society should only rest with the various state national guard units.  The second amendment only applies to arms in the context of a militia; it is silent about firearms owned by individuals.  This means that individuals owning firearms should be decided and regulated separately by the states.

It is a travesty that one organization has managed to twist the constitution to serve the ends of a single industry.  It is long past time for the power of the NRA to end and the people to read the constitution and interpret it as it was written and intended.

If you read my statements correctly, you will notice that I have a problem with the second amendment: I called it archaic.

The problem is that it can be read in a different way than yours.

The interpretation goes like this:
Because a well regulated militia is necessary, people can have guns, in order to form a well regulated militia, when needed.
Because without arms today, there can be no militia, when needed.
In other words, your "Random yahoos" will form a militia, when the security of the free state will require it.

This is how courts have decided the 2nd amendment must be read.

Read it again, and you will have to agree with its ambiguity.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed

It doesn't say that only well regulated militias can carry arms

Until we find a solution around it, like it or not, it IS the American "system" and the root cause of this evil vicious circle, unfortunately.

In my view, one way to do it is to tax guns very heavily, to make them very expensive.
Taxation is not infringement.

In fact, that's the reason why mass shootings are prevented elsewhere. Such guns can only be bought from the black market. And black market is very expensive.

When an AR-15 is $30k mass shootings are un-affordable.

« Last Edit: February 18, 2018, 11:49 by Zero Talent »

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #54 on: February 18, 2018, 11:05 »
+2
So the answer is 'Yes" you are happy comparing the USA to a third world dingbat state.

So the answer is Yes. It's okay for people and children to be killed in other countries but lets single out the USA.

Wow, third world dingbat state? I wonder how many people here live in one of those countries. Seems similar to the statement made by the USA leader you all criticize so much. But let me guess. It's okay for you to say it.

Shelma1

« Reply #55 on: February 18, 2018, 11:43 »
+2
Let's compare the United States to other wealthy, developed countries. How about that?

niktol

« Reply #56 on: February 18, 2018, 11:44 »
+2

Wow, third world dingbat state? I wonder how many people here live in one of those countries.

For those people, it's just another Tuesday.

farbled

« Reply #57 on: February 18, 2018, 11:54 »
+3
You can get almost any gun (legally) in Canada that you can in the US except fully automatic weapons and a few other restrictions that affect almost nobody. The difference is the number of hoops you need to jump through. You need a course run by the RCMP for basic ownership, a background check, and for "prohibited" weapons like handguns you need further courses, an exam and a list of rules for transport, storage and useage.

Banning would never work (from the outside looking in, I live right on the Can/US border), but I don't see why having some common sense laws are such an issue there. There are pros and cons to our system, like any other, but if even one mass shooting is prevented, then I will happily do the extra paperwork and really that is all it is for people who are not a threat to others.

We had our mass/school shootings and changed the laws. Seemed to work for the most part. A minor inconvenience to law abiding people, and much more difficult for people who really shouldn't have them. And yes, there are always ways to get a gun, but for every one who does, maybe so many more get caught trying.

Finally, the 2nd Amendment issue puzzles me. By definition it is something that has been added to or changed from the original. So it is not carved in stone IMHO. If you look at the 18th Amendment, you can see that when motivated, it is ok to change or even repeal an amendment.

« Reply #58 on: February 18, 2018, 12:37 »
0
You can get almost any gun (legally) in Canada that you can in the US except fully automatic weapons and a few other restrictions that affect almost nobody. The difference is the number of hoops you need to jump through. You need a course run by the RCMP for basic ownership, a background check, and for "prohibited" weapons like handguns you need further courses, an exam and a list of rules for transport, storage and useage.

Banning would never work (from the outside looking in, I live right on the Can/US border), but I don't see why having some common sense laws are such an issue there. There are pros and cons to our system, like any other, but if even one mass shooting is prevented, then I will happily do the extra paperwork and really that is all it is for people who are not a threat to others.

We had our mass/school shootings and changed the laws. Seemed to work for the most part. A minor inconvenience to law abiding people, and much more difficult for people who really shouldn't have them. And yes, there are always ways to get a gun, but for every one who does, maybe so many more get caught trying.

Finally, the 2nd Amendment issue puzzles me. By definition it is something that has been added to or changed from the original. So it is not carved in stone IMHO. If you look at the 18th Amendment, you can see that when motivated, it is ok to change or even repeal an amendment.

Good points, and to some others.

Guns per capita is a false number because I know many people who own no guns or have no pistol and except for a small number, none own automatic weapons of any sort. USA 100 but some of those are collectors or gun hobbyists who own 50 or more. Canada 30 per 100, same but many less of those owners have more than a couple of useful weapons for hunting or hobby or self protection.

Gun murders per 100,000 people, Canada 1.9, .38 homicide, 1.52 suicide, US 10.5, 3.6 homicide, 6.3 suicide. In easy numbers Canada is 80% less, 90% less homicides, with 66% less guns. One big difference is society. We have Detroit right across the border from Windsor. Detroit has gangs, poverty to the max, crime, murders and all kinds of problems. Go across the border bridge and Windsor is a different world. It's not just the guns.

Right we don't need semi-automatic weapons in the US with 20 round clips. For hunting the animals would be long gone, are these guys that terrible of a shot that they have to throw a big clip at some poor little deer? Bump stocks, no need. 5 rounds max for shotguns and big rifles,  more for 22 because that's standard for small game.

The reason gun sales go up after one of these incidents is not because people are buying killing machines. They want more for two general reasons. Protection or because they fear a ban is coming.

You can't ignore these countries just because they are crap holes or third world in your narrow opinion, as some have claimed they don't count. Trump didn't shoot the gun, he didn't make the laws, blame is easy and avoiding the truth is just as simple. If anyone pays attention, the President doesn't write the law or introduce the bills.

Places with higher gun homicides rates than the US, you need to include the whole Earth not just those that fit a liberal agenda.

Honduras    67.18    
Venezuela    59.13    
Swaziland    37.16    
Jamaica    30.72    
Guatemala    34.10    
El Salvador    45.6    
Colombia    25.94    
Brazil    21.2    
Panama    15.11    
Philippines    8.90    
South Africa    8.3    
Mexico    7.64    
Costa Rica    7.50    
Paraguay    7.76    
Uruguay    11.52    
Peru    5.53    
Nicaragua 4.68

State after state with some of the most stringent gun control laws in the nation also having the highest gun crime rates in the nation. Chicago would be an example.

Guns don't kill, people do. Copycat sociopaths seeking attention are a big problem. I'd say keeping the guns out of the hands of criminals and people who are unstable should be first. I own a shotgun, one, don't punish me for what some kid does, when he shouldn't have the guns or that type of gun, in the first place. Enforce the laws we have, before thinking of taking away the right of honest law abiding citizens.

farbled

« Reply #59 on: February 18, 2018, 12:45 »
+2
Unless you have strict border controls between states, State laws are pretty useless unless they are consistently applied across the country, making them federal instead of state. Like having a peeing section in a pool and about as effective.

My argument is that better control and management would help prevent those few people who truly shouldn't have access. It is almost the same argument your president uses about flight bans from certain countries by the way. Strict controls in hopes of preventing that one who is coming to do harm.

The laws were written, amended, modified and in some cases repealed. Search on restrictions on the ATF and how they could eliminate so much gun crime in a day (an exaggeration, but not by much) if they were allowed to enforce simple laws (like arrenting gun shops known to provide weapons to criminals for example) would show that there are some common sense laws, but that enforcement is virtually impossible.

« Reply #60 on: February 18, 2018, 13:01 »
0
Unless you have strict border controls between states, State laws are pretty useless unless they are consistently applied across the country, making them federal instead of state. Like having a peeing section in a pool and about as effective.

My argument is that better control and management would help prevent those few people who truly shouldn't have access. It is almost the same argument your president uses about flight bans from certain countries by the way. Strict controls in hopes of preventing that one who is coming to do harm.

The laws were written, amended, modified and in some cases repealed. Search on restrictions on the ATF and how they could eliminate so much gun crime in a day (an exaggeration, but not by much) if they were allowed to enforce simple laws (like arrenting gun shops known to provide weapons to criminals for example) would show that there are some common sense laws, but that enforcement is virtually impossible.


Very common sense but we're dealing with politicians and lawyers which throws all logic out the window.

I need to add one more for the subject.

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-15824831

There are bomb attacks almost daily, shootouts between police and militants, tales of torture and of people going missing. But what's everyone doing? Calling the US a bunch of killers because they have guns. Caracas, Venezuela has held on to its spot as the world's most dangerous city with a murder rate of 130.35. This staggering number is followed by Acapulco, Mexico with 113.24 per 100,000 inhabitants and San Pedro Sula, Honduras with 112.09 homicides per 100,000 inhabitants.

Yes, just across the bridge of war, Canada has peace, and Cuban cigars!

farbled

« Reply #61 on: February 18, 2018, 13:14 »
+1
Yup, agreed. But from the outside looking in, the USA very (internationally) publicly holds itself up as a beacon of peace and prosperity to the world and as a model for what democracy should be. The news you get inside your borders is vastly different from the news the rest of the world sees.

So yes, your country has a problem and because of the propensity of media to always fixate on your country, we will all get a front row seat.

Shelma1

« Reply #62 on: February 18, 2018, 13:18 »
+1
Yup, agreed. But from the outside looking in, the USA very (internationally) publicly holds itself up as a beacon of peace and prosperity to the world and as a model for what democracy should be. The news you get inside your borders is vastly different from the news the rest of the world sees.

So yes, your country has a problem and because of the propensity of media to always fixate on your country, we will all get a front row seat.

Yada lives in Canada, not the USA, despite his proclivity for saying "we" and "us" when discussing issues in a country other than his own.

Shelma1

« Reply #63 on: February 18, 2018, 13:26 »
+2
You can get almost any gun (legally) in Canada that you can in the US except fully automatic weapons and a few other restrictions that affect almost nobody. The difference is the number of hoops you need to jump through. You need a course run by the RCMP for basic ownership, a background check, and for "prohibited" weapons like handguns you need further courses, an exam and a list of rules for transport, storage and useage.

Banning would never work (from the outside looking in, I live right on the Can/US border), but I don't see why having some common sense laws are such an issue there. There are pros and cons to our system, like any other, but if even one mass shooting is prevented, then I will happily do the extra paperwork and really that is all it is for people who are not a threat to others.

We had our mass/school shootings and changed the laws. Seemed to work for the most part. A minor inconvenience to law abiding people, and much more difficult for people who really shouldn't have them. And yes, there are always ways to get a gun, but for every one who does, maybe so many more get caught trying.

Finally, the 2nd Amendment issue puzzles me. By definition it is something that has been added to or changed from the original. So it is not carved in stone IMHO. If you look at the 18th Amendment, you can see that when motivated, it is ok to change or even repeal an amendment.

Good points, and to some others.

Guns per capita is a false number because I know many people who own no guns or have no pistol and except for a small number, none own automatic weapons of any sort. USA 100 but some of those are collectors or gun hobbyists who own 50 or more. Canada 30 per 100, same but many less of those owners have more than a couple of useful weapons for hunting or hobby or self protection.

Gun murders per 100,000 people, Canada 1.9, .38 homicide, 1.52 suicide, US 10.5, 3.6 homicide, 6.3 suicide. In easy numbers Canada is 80% less, 90% less homicides, with 66% less guns. One big difference is society. We have Detroit right across the border from Windsor. Detroit has gangs, poverty to the max, crime, murders and all kinds of problems. Go across the border bridge and Windsor is a different world. It's not just the guns.

Right we don't need semi-automatic weapons in the US with 20 round clips. For hunting the animals would be long gone, are these guys that terrible of a shot that they have to throw a big clip at some poor little deer? Bump stocks, no need. 5 rounds max for shotguns and big rifles,  more for 22 because that's standard for small game.

The reason gun sales go up after one of these incidents is not because people are buying killing machines. They want more for two general reasons. Protection or because they fear a ban is coming.

You can't ignore these countries just because they are crap holes or third world in your narrow opinion, as some have claimed they don't count. Trump didn't shoot the gun, he didn't make the laws, blame is easy and avoiding the truth is just as simple. If anyone pays attention, the President doesn't write the law or introduce the bills.

Places with higher gun homicides rates than the US, you need to include the whole Earth not just those that fit a liberal agenda.

Honduras    67.18    
Venezuela    59.13    
Swaziland    37.16    
Jamaica    30.72    
Guatemala    34.10    
El Salvador    45.6    
Colombia    25.94    
Brazil    21.2    
Panama    15.11    
Philippines    8.90    
South Africa    8.3    
Mexico    7.64    
Costa Rica    7.50    
Paraguay    7.76    
Uruguay    11.52    
Peru    5.53    
Nicaragua 4.68

State after state with some of the most stringent gun control laws in the nation also having the highest gun crime rates in the nation. Chicago would be an example.

Chicago is not the most murderous city in the U.S., not by a long shot, despite Illinois having a very long border with a neighboring state with very lax gun laws. So please stop using that false example.

Trump blames the Democrats for not acting on gun control when they held power, but he and his fellow Republicans have all the power now, so what's stopping them from acting (other than being owned by the NRA)? Instead he's loosening gun laws while pointing blame elsewhere. Nice trick.

Who cares how many people you know who don't own guns? Do you know everyone in the U.S. and Canada? Because only then would your personal experience be relevant.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #64 on: February 18, 2018, 13:35 »
0
When especially Europeans have nothing to do. Lets bash America!! its simple Europe with Germany and France in the lead is turning into a crap-hole. In Europe they dont use guns but trucks, busses, knifes, dynamite just about anything that is at hand.

The simple answer is Europeans have an inferiority complex and they are dead jealous of America! and oh btw we have now also traded our cultures for weird cultures that are sort of stoning women and marrying 9 year olds!....yep we are very happy in Europe!

RAW

« Reply #65 on: February 18, 2018, 13:42 »
0
So the answer is 'Yes" you are happy comparing the USA to a third world dingbat state.

So the answer is Yes. It's okay for people and children to be killed in other countries but lets single out the USA.

Wow, third world dingbat state? I wonder how many people here live in one of those countries. Seems similar to the statement made by the USA leader you all criticize so much. But let me guess. It's okay for you to say it.

There you go comparing apples to grapefruits again.
I'm not the president of the usa + I'm not trying to stop immigration (even from dingbat states).

JimP

« Reply #66 on: February 18, 2018, 14:04 »
+1
Yup, agreed. But from the outside looking in, the USA very (internationally) publicly holds itself up as a beacon of peace and prosperity to the world and as a model for what democracy should be. The news you get inside your borders is vastly different from the news the rest of the world sees.

So yes, your country has a problem and because of the propensity of media to always fixate on your country, we will all get a front row seat.


Yada lives in Canada, not the USA, despite his proclivity for saying "we" and "us" when discussing issues in a country other than his own.


Ignore the subject and attack him with false claims. Blame Trump, not the party in power the last 8 years.

Look at this, Churches are a common target for Islamic militants in Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation. Police in Indonesia shot a sword-wielding man who attacked a church congregation during Sunday Mass, injuring four people, including a German priest. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/02/11/police-shoot-man-during-sword-attack-on-indonesian-church.html

The region has also seen a large number of people join Islamic State terror group, according to Reuters.

Dagestan is a predominantly Muslim region between Chechnya and the Caspian Sea. Following two separatist wars in neighboring Chechnya, an Islamist insurgency spread to Dagestan. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/02/18/russia-church-shooting-leaves-5-dead-after-gunman-opens-fire-on-people-leaving-service.html

Why don't you stop defending the terrorists, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamist_terrorist_attacks liberals like you love diversity but miss the truth.

Or these people who you want to take over the country, they can't read or write English. Illegal Alien Crime Accounts for over 30% of Murders in Many States. http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/08/08/illegal-alien-crime-accounts-for-over-30-of-murders-in-some-states/ Then blame Trump for pointing out the elephant in the room. These facts are not attacking hispanic people, just the illegals that are criminals. Same as others have said, don't punish the innocent for what the criminals do. Guns or illegals.


derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #67 on: February 18, 2018, 14:12 »
0
Yup, agreed. But from the outside looking in, the USA very (internationally) publicly holds itself up as a beacon of peace and prosperity to the world and as a model for what democracy should be. The news you get inside your borders is vastly different from the news the rest of the world sees.

So yes, your country has a problem and because of the propensity of media to always fixate on your country, we will all get a front row seat.


Yada lives in Canada, not the USA, despite his proclivity for saying "we" and "us" when discussing issues in a country other than his own.


Ignore the subject and attack him with false claims. Blame Trump, not the party in power the last 8 years.

Look at this, Churches are a common target for Islamic militants in Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation. Police in Indonesia shot a sword-wielding man who attacked a church congregation during Sunday Mass, injuring four people, including a German priest. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/02/11/police-shoot-man-during-sword-attack-on-indonesian-church.html

The region has also seen a large number of people join Islamic State terror group, according to Reuters.

Dagestan is a predominantly Muslim region between Chechnya and the Caspian Sea. Following two separatist wars in neighboring Chechnya, an Islamist insurgency spread to Dagestan. http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/02/18/russia-church-shooting-leaves-5-dead-after-gunman-opens-fire-on-people-leaving-service.html

Why don't you stop defending the terrorists, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamist_terrorist_attacks liberals like you love diversity but miss the truth.

Or these people who you want to take over the country, they can't read or write English. Illegal Alien Crime Accounts for over 30% of Murders in Many States. http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/08/08/illegal-alien-crime-accounts-for-over-30-of-murders-in-some-states/ Then blame Trump for pointing out the elephant in the room. These facts are not attacking hispanic people, just the illegals that are criminals. Same as others have said, don't punish the innocent for what the criminals do. Guns or illegals.


Yes but it dont matter Jim! like my post above! bashing Trump is a must. A guy is having toothache in Djakarta, its Trumps fault!...the leftie/Lib crap never give up they make themselves look so stupid they dont even realize it and it all boils down to jealousy and especially in Europe where the IQ is so low among politicians they are close to surrender their culture, values and laws to that of the Islamic state!....never mind lets see who gets the last laugh?? hahaha!

« Reply #68 on: February 18, 2018, 15:39 »
0
What exactly have School shootings in the US got to do with Europe being a dump and taken over by Islamists? Is the argument that actually that school shootings isn't really a problem in the US?
My roof is leaking but never mind cos the guy down the road's walls are falling in.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #69 on: February 18, 2018, 15:42 »
0
Oh paws! havent you read all other posts as usual, its turned into a bashing Trump thread. been asleep have we? ::) ::) ::)

« Reply #70 on: February 18, 2018, 15:51 »
0
Oh paws! havent you read all other posts as usual, its turned into a bashing Trump thread. been asleep have we? ::) ::) ::)
I'm just trying to turn it back into something more interesting as its very easy to nod off reading the same predictable evidence free posts over and over. Trump is President now...whats his plan? Apart from bashing the FBI.

« Reply #71 on: February 18, 2018, 17:07 »
0
Guns for all IS the American system

This actually is not true, at least not according to the constitution.  This idea of "second amendment rights" has now been perverted so thoroughly that even Zero Talent states the idea that people can own firearms at home as a fact.

The actual text of the second amendment is, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed".  The Founding Fathers were concerned about protecting the state from foreign powers, especially after the British had a policy of capturing the magazines of the colonies in 1774 and 1775.  The second amendment, as you can clearly tell by reading what is written, only authorizes the right to bear arms in the context of a well regulated militia.  We can know this with absolute certainty by the key phrase "A well regulated militia".  Not much interpretation required for that.  Random yahoos having guns at home is not well regulated and not a militia (which can only be authorized by Congress), so absolutely, 100% is NOT authorized by the second amendment. 

You could debate about whether "the security of a free state" would include personal weapons, but we can discount that by the first clause about militias and also by understanding the historical context.  In the 1770s the colonies did not have their own armies.  If there were a need for defense, every able-bodied (male, slave-holding in the south) citizen would be mustered into a militia and issued weapons from a communal store.  Most people did not own firearms because they were 1) very expensive and 2) required loading with cartridges of gunpowder and primed with black powder.  Keeping lots of gunpowder lying around in wooden houses that were lighted and heated with open flames is not a great idea.  Instead, gunpowder and weapons were stored in community magazines that were present in most large cities. To prevent the citizens from rebelling, the British removed gunpowder from magazines in Massachusetts in 1774 and Virginia in 1775.  This was fresh on the minds of the framers of the constitution and is likely why the second amendment was deemed so important.

The US was absolutely NOT set up as a gun state!  The right to bear arms was only in the context of a well organized militia for the security of the state, which we can know with absolute certainty because it was written in clear, plain English.  The modern equivalent of a 1780s militia is the National Guard, and nobody has ever talked about disarming them.  That amendment was written before the age of professional, standing militaries and really should be removed since we no longer use militias for defense.

For over 150 years the Supreme Court interpreted the second amendment as it was written.  It is only during the past 50 years that the NRA, through consistent messaging and buying off of congresspeople, has perverted the public perception of the second amendment so much that even liberals talk about "second amendment rights" as if it means individuals can keep firearms at home.  Yet, this clearly is not what the constitution says, and especially so when you consider the historical context in which it was written.  The second amendment right to bear arms in modern society should only rest with the various state national guard units.  The second amendment only applies to arms in the context of a militia; it is silent about firearms owned by individuals.  This means that individuals owning firearms should be decided and regulated separately by the states.

It is a travesty that one organization has managed to twist the constitution to serve the ends of a single industry.  It is long past time for the power of the NRA to end and the people to read the constitution and interpret it as it was written and intended.


Excellent post! That is one of the first things said after a mass shooting...its my second amendment right to own a gun. So buy yourself or your kid a musket and teach him/her to shoot with that, because that is what they had when the second amendment was written, NOT Ar-15s or uzis or whatever other weapon of mass destruction people think they should be allowed to own because its their right.  ::)

namussi

« Reply #72 on: February 18, 2018, 19:45 »
0

Yes there is such a logic We use it everyday.

Ha, ha, there is no logic because your assumptions are false as well as your induction process.
Your are the turkey who got his head chopped in November.  ;D

If only 1 (one) American is an exception, then your induction fails, because your statement was about ALL Americans.
Bigots, racists, xenophobes use your induction every day to "prove" that Muslim are terrorists, Mexicans are rapists, Gypsies are thieves, etc

Your "perfect logic" is also called stereotyping.

And it is very wrong, even if people like you use it every day.

No, the "perfect logic" was about the deductive reasoning from the information you supplied earlier. Deductive logic is different to inductive and probabilistic logic.

Secondly, you claimed there was "no logic" in labelling people. I showed you there was: inductive logic and probabilistic logic. You were wrong

Thirdly, we use  labels for groups of people who share similar characteristics all the time: liberals, conservatives, sports fans, artists.

Fourthly, you obviously missed the point of the inductive turkey. You're the turkey, because you deny the value of induction and probabilistic logic.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2018, 19:48 by namussi »

namussi

« Reply #73 on: February 18, 2018, 19:54 »
0
Your killing your own children and you're talking about 'what's fashionable' - What is wrong with you people?

There's no other country where people are killing each other?

I have difficulty finding another country -- especially in the West -- where people slaughter so many children at school so often.

Perhaps you can help?

Oh boy. Sure I can help. Why only focus on the West? Has it become acceptable and mainstream for certain countries to slaughter people so let's just ignore them and exclude them from the statistics? Hardly.

Here are some figures by country per 100,000 people which is a reasonable measurement based on percentage of killings by population.

General homicide by all methods. If you sort by homicides it should be no surprise, maybe except for you, that places like El Salvador and Honduras top the list by rate. Even by total count Brazil and India are at the top. It's reasonable to assume children are part of these figures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Killings by firearms. Again, sorting by homicides places like Honduras and Venezuela top that list which shouldn't be a surprise. It's reasonable to assume children are part of these figures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

School shootings. You'll notice there are countries on this list other than the United States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting

The information is there if you decide to look for it. Or you can blindly follow biased news media groups whose goal is to report information in a way that creates the most turmoil/division, gets them better ratings, and makes them more money. There are atrocities happening globally every day. Murder is horrible, Especially children. To say that United States is the only place where people, or children, are "slaughtered" is really naive.  All countries have their problems. Quit blindly following the news media and focusing on the United States.

Now that I've presented some figures I fully expect to see responses with statistics being ignored, pivoting away from the topic, and more USA loves killing children drivel. Please proceed. I'll grab some popcorn.

Thanks for the information. I notice that there are far more children slaughtered at schools in the United States than in any other country.

And I"m glad you think it's relevant to compare the US to third-world countries -- many of which are far worse than the US -- rather than other developed democracies, whose gun killings, especiallly at schools, are tiny compared to the US.

So killing children is okay in other countries then. It's only a problem in the USA apparently.

So you are happy comparing the USA to a third world dingbat state.
At least we know where America is heading with 'Make America Great Again'.

What happened to moral leadership?

So what you're saying is "oh those countries kill people and children all the time. We're used to that and it's okay. Let's talk about the USA". Wow. And you want to throw around the word "moral"?

Why don't you do something to help those countries reduce their higher rates of murder? Go volunteer. Do something about it.

Oh I see. The underlying purpose of this, just like I said, is to bash the USA. Your "make America great again" comment says it all.

And what are you doing in your own country about the high rate of slaughter in US schools?

If it's nothing, then I presume you think it's OK.


« Reply #74 on: February 18, 2018, 20:19 »
0
You can get almost any gun (legally) in Canada that you can in the US except fully automatic weapons and a few other restrictions that affect almost nobody. The difference is the number of hoops you need to jump through. You need a course run by the RCMP for basic ownership, a background check, and for "prohibited" weapons like handguns you need further courses, an exam and a list of rules for transport, storage and useage.

Banning would never work (from the outside looking in, I live right on the Can/US border), but I don't see why having some common sense laws are such an issue there. There are pros and cons to our system, like any other, but if even one mass shooting is prevented, then I will happily do the extra paperwork and really that is all it is for people who are not a threat to others.

We had our mass/school shootings and changed the laws. Seemed to work for the most part. A minor inconvenience to law abiding people, and much more difficult for people who really shouldn't have them. And yes, there are always ways to get a gun, but for every one who does, maybe so many more get caught trying.

Finally, the 2nd Amendment issue puzzles me. By definition it is something that has been added to or changed from the original. So it is not carved in stone IMHO. If you look at the 18th Amendment, you can see that when motivated, it is ok to change or even repeal an amendment.

Good points, and to some others.

Guns per capita is a false number because I know many people who own no guns or have no pistol and except for a small number, none own automatic weapons of any sort. USA 100 but some of those are collectors or gun hobbyists who own 50 or more. Canada 30 per 100, same but many less of those owners have more than a couple of useful weapons for hunting or hobby or self protection.

Gun murders per 100,000 people, Canada 1.9, .38 homicide, 1.52 suicide, US 10.5, 3.6 homicide, 6.3 suicide. In easy numbers Canada is 80% less, 90% less homicides, with 66% less guns. One big difference is society. We have Detroit right across the border from Windsor. Detroit has gangs, poverty to the max, crime, murders and all kinds of problems. Go across the border bridge and Windsor is a different world. It's not just the guns.

Right we don't need semi-automatic weapons in the US with 20 round clips. For hunting the animals would be long gone, are these guys that terrible of a shot that they have to throw a big clip at some poor little deer? Bump stocks, no need. 5 rounds max for shotguns and big rifles,  more for 22 because that's standard for small game.

The reason gun sales go up after one of these incidents is not because people are buying killing machines. They want more for two general reasons. Protection or because they fear a ban is coming.

You can't ignore these countries just because they are crap holes or third world in your narrow opinion, as some have claimed they don't count. Trump didn't shoot the gun, he didn't make the laws, blame is easy and avoiding the truth is just as simple. If anyone pays attention, the President doesn't write the law or introduce the bills.

Places with higher gun homicides rates than the US, you need to include the whole Earth not just those that fit a liberal agenda.

Honduras    67.18    
Venezuela    59.13    
Swaziland    37.16    
Jamaica    30.72    
Guatemala    34.10    
El Salvador    45.6    
Colombia    25.94    
Brazil    21.2    
Panama    15.11    
Philippines    8.90    
South Africa    8.3    
Mexico    7.64    
Costa Rica    7.50    
Paraguay    7.76    
Uruguay    11.52    
Peru    5.53    
Nicaragua 4.68

State after state with some of the most stringent gun control laws in the nation also having the highest gun crime rates in the nation. Chicago would be an example.

Chicago is not the most murderous city in the U.S., not by a long shot, despite Illinois having a very long border with a neighboring state with very lax gun laws. So please stop using that false example.

Trump blames the Democrats for not acting on gun control when they held power, but he and his fellow Republicans have all the power now, so what's stopping them from acting (other than being owned by the NRA)? Instead he's loosening gun laws while pointing blame elsewhere. Nice trick.

Who cares how many people you know who don't own guns? Do you know everyone in the U.S. and Canada? Because only then would your personal experience be relevant.

How about the people you know? How many are gun owners, how many have many guns and stockpiles of ammo. How many are against guns and won't have one in their home. I know more people who are not only against the violence but don't want a gun at home. Tell me about your friends.

Nice pass, Obama had power for eight years now you blame Trump for doing nothing. The question is why didn't all you know it all people who want to tell us how to live and think, do something? Maybe it's not as easy as just blaming Trump for everything that's wrong that you left behind.

Chicago is ridden with crime and you want to blame the states next to IL. Lets blame the countries next to the US for the gun and crime problems in the US. Start with Mexico? That's your plan.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
7 Replies
3019 Views
Last post January 06, 2012, 14:27
by mtilghma
3 Replies
2389 Views
Last post February 26, 2012, 06:08
by gostwyck
6 Replies
2697 Views
Last post November 24, 2012, 19:19
by OM
2 Replies
1998 Views
Last post October 28, 2015, 03:48
by Dodie
16 Replies
5562 Views
Last post March 06, 2016, 12:21
by AlessandraRC

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results