Mooninites wrote:
Being polarized does not diminish my knowledge of the European Union. You might disagree with my politics, you might think I'm irrational, but that doesn't mean I don't understand how the EU works or why it has the problems it has. I mean you're polarized as hell too, I guess I should discredit everything you say as well?
The other thing, I didn't make this a US vs. EU debate, you did when you made an comment that was entirely unrealted to the topic at hand. I mean, I don't know if you've stepped outside in the past 8 years, but then again you're exactly the type of person to bury his head in the sand and pretend like the European Project is working which is why one would do well to take anything from you with a teaspoon of salt.
I don't always support Mooninites' posts, but when I do, I do support them 100%.
GrandmasterD wrote:
Also, trying to compare the European Union to the United States is really ****ing stupid on its own. I do not think Searz' comment was relevant here, but this comparison screams ignorance.
Kinda like people comparing their lives in a culture w/o guns to living a life in a culture they've never experienced, that happens to see guns as tools, not unlike a common knife, fork, spanner, in stead of this horrible death machine?
You cannot compare the different cultures.
It's like saying: Well why don't we ban acid in the mid east. That way women won't get acid thrown in their faces.
It's stupid and ******ed.
You can't say: Oh well here in xxx-country we have very strict gun control, therefor we have zero school shootings.
The gun control is in no way directly responsible for the lack of school massacres. The culture in xxx-country just doesn't lend itself to such displays of violence.
And even though we have strict gun control, it doesn't mean we don't have shootings.
One could argue that it's largely due to their culture. Regardless of easy access to guns. The sense of patriotism, the sense of superiority. And the unwillingness to suffer the consequences of their actions.
Now in this case in particular, it was mental issues that are visible in every single culture that cause the shooting. You don't have to look very hard to find a similar story in each and every country in the world.
Relationship breaks off, person can't handle it, person does bodily harm to others and kills him-/herself. Well the suicide part is optional tbh.
SkidmarkD wrote:
that happens to see guns as tools, not unlike a common knife, fork, spanner, in stead of this horrible death machine?
So... you use guns to change a light bulb?
Let me make clear that when I think "guns" the next thought won't be "school shooting", though.
********'s a pretty good fertilizer
Mooninites wrote:
I mean you're polarized as hell too
Really? In what regard? I seriously want to know, because I've been trying to be less polarized ever since I realized that I was occasionally far too polarized a few years back and that it hurt discussions.
Quoted:
The other thing, I didn't make this a US vs. EU debate, you did when you made an comment that was entirely unrealted
You blatantly did.
I made no mention of the EU. You were the first one who brought it up.
Quoted:
I don't know if you've stepped outside in the past 8 years, but then again you're exactly the type of person to bury his head in the sand and pretend like the European Project is working which is why one would do well to take anything from you with a teaspoon of salt.
Ahh, I love it when your arguments collapse in on themselves :)
How do you know I even like the EU? Where have I stated such?
Can I not be against the EU and criticize the US at the same time?
Everything is not black and white..
"I saw [Twilight: Eclipse] in theaters with a girl I was dating at the time. I spent more time staring at my toes and wiggling them than I did watching this abomination. When Edward proposed to Blank Face, I finally looked up with a revelation.
I blurted out loud, in a dead silent theater full of teenage girls on opening night "Wait a minute, Edward has no blood flow. How does he get an erection?" I heard several men laughing, and had several girls turn and stare at me.
I did not get laid that night." - Berengier817
I blurted out loud, in a dead silent theater full of teenage girls on opening night "Wait a minute, Edward has no blood flow. How does he get an erection?" I heard several men laughing, and had several girls turn and stare at me.
I did not get laid that night." - Berengier817
I understand how guns are part of the states's culture and the great influence the gun-lobby has on the government but I really want someone to answer me the following: "Does the average American need to have a gun in his possession? Why(not)?"
Because if the answer is yes, we should actually be talking about other more important issues regarding the american society basis.
Because if the answer is yes, we should actually be talking about other more important issues regarding the american society basis.
Yes, for reasons I mentioned before. You can go back and read it.
No, I'm not pro-guns. But the practicality of making legislation to ban guns right now in the US and trying to enforce it simply won't solve anything.
No, I'm not pro-guns. But the practicality of making legislation to ban guns right now in the US and trying to enforce it simply won't solve anything.
no the average person does not 'need' to have a gun.
does that mean that they should not be allowed to have one? no. i'm not going to claim i know what it takes to be approved a license to have one, but it should remain as an option to people to have them.
and dill, im not saying that laws shouldnt change because technology does, it depends on the law and the technology in question, i'm saying its an irrelevant factor in regards to the second amendment.
does that mean that they should not be allowed to have one? no. i'm not going to claim i know what it takes to be approved a license to have one, but it should remain as an option to people to have them.
and dill, im not saying that laws shouldnt change because technology does, it depends on the law and the technology in question, i'm saying its an irrelevant factor in regards to the second amendment.
I like things that make me feel stupid. - Ken Levine
sirell wrote:
Yes, for reasons I mentioned before. You can go back and read it.
No, I'm not pro-guns. But the practicality of making legislation to ban guns right now in the US and trying to enforce it simply won't solve anything.
No, I'm not pro-guns. But the practicality of making legislation to ban guns right now in the US and trying to enforce it simply won't solve anything.
********'s a pretty good fertilizer
No, you miss the point, actually. I'm not referring to that.
As I said earlier, there are so many unregistered and illegal guns being circulated constantly that to recall the average person's gun only leaves the arms monopoly in the hands of gangs and criminal organisations who have access to unregistered and illegal guns (assuming you can even enforce a recall in the first place). Take the gun away from the average person, they're going to be ****ing terrified just looking out the window near a shady neighbourhood.
And precisely the fact that if I shoot you and you can shoot me back is at least some form of deterrence from me shooting you in the first place. I don't even know why you're bringing bombs or the Cold War into this, that's a completely different story. And you also highlight an extremely specific situation where it doesn't matter WHAT the tool I'm pointing at your head is. I could have a spoon to your head and I could still kill you, trust me. The human mind is ingenious at killing people, if nothing else.
At the very least, the fact that anyone could be walking around with a sidearm will make someone think twice about bringing violence to the table.
It's not even about deterrence or anything like that. The main point is this:
No one in the US who owns a firearm WANTS a recall of their firearms, especially if they're aware that there are so many unregistered and illegal guns floating around. Who the **** would want to give up their sidearms whilst trigger-happy gangs and crime organisations are going around with firearms? For a sense of self=-preservation, I'm pretty sure most, if not all, will want to keep their firearms.
As I said earlier, there are so many unregistered and illegal guns being circulated constantly that to recall the average person's gun only leaves the arms monopoly in the hands of gangs and criminal organisations who have access to unregistered and illegal guns (assuming you can even enforce a recall in the first place). Take the gun away from the average person, they're going to be ****ing terrified just looking out the window near a shady neighbourhood.
And precisely the fact that if I shoot you and you can shoot me back is at least some form of deterrence from me shooting you in the first place. I don't even know why you're bringing bombs or the Cold War into this, that's a completely different story. And you also highlight an extremely specific situation where it doesn't matter WHAT the tool I'm pointing at your head is. I could have a spoon to your head and I could still kill you, trust me. The human mind is ingenious at killing people, if nothing else.
At the very least, the fact that anyone could be walking around with a sidearm will make someone think twice about bringing violence to the table.
It's not even about deterrence or anything like that. The main point is this:
No one in the US who owns a firearm WANTS a recall of their firearms, especially if they're aware that there are so many unregistered and illegal guns floating around. Who the **** would want to give up their sidearms whilst trigger-happy gangs and crime organisations are going around with firearms? For a sense of self=-preservation, I'm pretty sure most, if not all, will want to keep their firearms.
You need to log in before commenting.
You're also polarized as all hell and very much of the black and white creed.
I mean, just the fact that you instantly turned this into a US vs EU discussion when I poked fun at a flaw in the US should be clear evidence.
So one would do well to take anything from you with a tablespoon of salt.
Being polarized does not diminish my knowledge of the European Union. You might disagree with my politics, you might think I'm irrational, but that doesn't mean I don't understand how the EU works or why it has the problems it has. I mean you're polarized as hell too, I guess I should discredit everything you say as well?
The other thing, I didn't make this a US vs. EU debate, you did when you made an comment that was entirely unrealted to the topic at hand. I mean, I don't know if you've stepped outside in the past 8 years, but then again you're exactly the type of person to bury his head in the sand and pretend like the European Project is working which is why one would do well to take anything from you with a teaspoon of salt.