Guns, Guns Guns

smr wrote:Take the 20th century, 4x's guns have outlawed in countries and bad actions happened within each country. China, Russia, Cambodia, and Germany stripped their citizens of firearms. Ahmm...did not bad actions occur within all these countries. That's just off the top of the old noggin! By the same token their a few countries that successfully disarmed!

You're incapable of reading statistics.
Let's see here, Germany has an intentional murder rate (regardless of means used to kill someone) hovering at about 0.8 per 100.000 citizens. The US, by comparison, shows a rate of 3.8. Even taking in the usual inaccuracies such comparisons include, this is a substantial difference.

The question isn't whether or not crime happens in countries where firearms are banned or highly restricted. The question is how much the presence of guns does to make crime more lethal, and based on the available evidence, crime in the US is far more likely to end up with someone dead than it is anywhere else in the western world.

Secondly, the US has an impressively high level of domestic terrorism (that is, if we're counting the weekly mass shootings as terrorism). Germany's most high-profile terrorism act in recent years was a killing spree done by a small cell of neonazis using an illegal firearm to murder a dozen or so kebab shop owners. Which was done over close to a decade.

If you're going to tell me that the average US citizen is safer than the average German because the american can own and carry guns while the german has to procure a proper license and isn't allowed to carry his piece, I will call your sanity into question.

Smr regarding -
"Daryl correct me if I am wrong, did or did not you say that you and your wife would never visit America because of the gun laws...(it could have been a forum poster from New Zealand?!? Sorry my recollection is poor on this question.)"

I do recall saying that my wife doesn't want to visit the USA for a number of reasons, and I regret that as I'd like to see many of your natural wonders, but won't travel without her. Her reasons include - the gun culture and risks associated with that, the death penalty, overt religion, and the prohibitive travel insurance because of your health system. There are other countries that she won't visit also for similar reasons, but all these others are second or third world. We have traveled on several US based cruise ships and enjoyed the company of many US citizens, so it is not the people that she has problems with. Although we do laugh at how naïve many US first time tourists are.
I regret that this could come across as insulting, but she is strong willed and I doubt that I can change her views.

thinkstoomuch wrote:
While I can feel for a country that used to export people now importing people. [edit] Expecting the US to stand by an ally is questionable at best. We have often thrown them under the bus. Not a proud fact but a fact.

Instead of expecting others to bail you out what should you do to help your country?

I really am curious.

Thanks in Advance,
T2M

What would you do if your country was getting 15-25 MILLION refugees in a year?

After more than a decade of already accepting more refugees per capita than most other nations.
After USAs invasion of Iraq, one single city in Sweden took in more Iraqi refugees by itself than the whole USA in total.

You haven´t the faintest clue about the scale this problem is now reaching.

And there´s bloody well nothing i can do about it.

Instead of expecting others to bail you out

You very very stupid or something?
If USA ever stops relying on others to clean up after it, i might try to take such an idiotic question seriously.

Except of course the fact that if you actually bothered to look, Sweden has tended to be the one bailing out others, and not expecting anything, for a long time.

Tenshinai wrote:...snipped rant...

Well I wish I had phrased that question at the end better.

Well what the my federal government did, right or wrong, was if fact set up an immigration control system, quite a while ago. Just like it set up a refugee system long ago.

Thought that was obvious. For which we are lambasted regularly. Could have sworn you were one who did question our policies but I could be wrong.

Notice that the US is actually exporting more illegal immigrants from Mexico than it is importing now. Making it up from China and other places but ...

Did I not point out that counting on my Federal Government for anything is questionable. I also pointed that out.

T2M

Tenshinai wrote:

Imaginos1892 wrote:That's in your country.

No, that is true in ALL countries, regardless if you comprehend it or not.

Either there is a country, with some sort of basic law, constitution or similar.

Those basic laws sets up a frame that can provide rights, or provide rights directly.
It also provides the groundwork for government of the same country.

If you want those rights, then you can have them only if you have a declaration of rights, as part of the above, but if you reject government, then there´s noone to enforce that declaration of rights, and the paper is about as valuable as toilet paper with grafitti on it.

Seriously, start using your brain before it atrophies.

A declaration of rights is only worth anything at all as long as there is something that enforces it.

A national declaration of rights is just so much garbage if you do not have a national government or administration or SOMETHING whatever that is capable of making it stick.

Got it yet? I expect not.

Imaginos1892 wrote:Here in the USA, our rights are those that the government does not take away. By default, citizens have all the rights and the government has none. Our constitution grants the government certain limited powers, and prohibits it from taking rights not explicitly given to it.

Just like in pretty much all other nations, yes. Are you having fun making yourself look ignorant?

Imaginos1892 wrote:The US Constitution does not grant us our rights

That´s a "novel" interpretation. Pure redneck style.

All right, that's it. I have had enough of you.

This may come as a terrible shock, but you don't know everything. It is entirely possible for intelligent and well-informed people to have opinions that are different from yours. Calling everybody who disagrees with you a bunch of idiots is rude and childish, and makes you look extremely insecure.

I don't care what age you are, you have a lot of growing up to do.

Yup. I believe this also explains this election cycle favors the outsiders and the sustained rise of the TEA Party.

thinkstoomuch wrote:

Tenshinai wrote:...snipped rant...

Well I wish I had phrased that question at the end better.

Well what the my federal government did, right or wrong, was if fact set up an immigration control system, quite a while ago. Just like it set up a refugee system long ago.

Thought that was obvious. For which we are lambasted regularly. Could have sworn you were one who did question our policies but I could be wrong.

Notice that the US is actually exporting more illegal immigrants from Mexico than it is importing now. Making it up from China and other places but ...

Did I not point out that counting on my Federal Government for anything is questionable. I also pointed that out.

T2M

History Lesson: Hitler seized the weapons in Germany...need I belabor a point. Stalin...the purges and the starvation of millions of farmers.

The E wrote:

smr wrote:Take the 20th century, 4x's guns have outlawed in countries and bad actions happened within each country. China, Russia, Cambodia, and Germany stripped their citizens of firearms. Ahmm...did not bad actions occur within all these countries. That's just off the top of the old noggin! By the same token their a few countries that successfully disarmed!

You're incapable of reading statistics.
Let's see here, Germany has an intentional murder rate (regardless of means used to kill someone) hovering at about 0.8 per 100.000 citizens. The US, by comparison, shows a rate of 3.8. Even taking in the usual inaccuracies such comparisons include, this is a substantial difference.

The question isn't whether or not crime happens in countries where firearms are banned or highly restricted. The question is how much the presence of guns does to make crime more lethal, and based on the available evidence, crime in the US is far more likely to end up with someone dead than it is anywhere else in the western world.

Secondly, the US has an impressively high level of domestic terrorism (that is, if we're counting the weekly mass shootings as terrorism). Germany's most high-profile terrorism act in recent years was a killing spree done by a small cell of neonazis using an illegal firearm to murder a dozen or so kebab shop owners. Which was done over close to a decade.

If you're going to tell me that the average US citizen is safer than the average German because the american can own and carry guns while the german has to procure a proper license and isn't allowed to carry his piece, I will call your sanity into question.

That was 80 years ago. Please tell me how that has any impact on contemporary crime statistics.

See, you can drag out this "the Nazis could have been stopped if only everyone had guns!" dogwhistle as much as you like, but it doesn't change the fact that right now, firearms are very much not a factor in German crime.

It also doesn't change the fact that this sentiment is unsupported by historical evidence

smr, History Lesson: Hitler RELAXED gun ownership laws in Germany.
Later that year he started the first of the progroms against the Jews, killing hundreds.
THEN he banned Jews from owning guns. (Like the next day)

He didn't try to take guns from the Jews in order to start killing them in job lots, but because he'd started killing them in job lots.

Similar with Stalin. The purges came first.

Banning guns was just part of the attrocity, NOT a cause of it.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Now the reason to wait before jumping to conclusions.

http://ktul.com/news/local/chambers-blo ... -threshold

The document filed by defense attorney Tony Coleman in Payne County District Court indicates Chambers had a blood alcohol content of 0.01.

Does this count toward domestic terrorism, If we are counting mass shootings it would seem to. Me, just another nut job with a lethal weapon.

Something to ponder,
T2M

thinkstoomuch wrote:Yet another reason to check your sources. Read the story not go by the headline:

http://forums.macrumors.com/threads/ano ... d.1932245/

headline “Shooter kills 4, injures 30.”

First line of the story, "Woman arrested for drunk driving ..."

Their retraction from their website the next day. "Because of a page designer's error, a misleading headline appeared on page 3A in Sunday's Record-Eagle accompanying a story about a driver who struck and killed four people at the Oklahoma State University homecoming parade on Saturday."



Huh "page designer" "misleading",
T2M