I guess that is why they say "opinions are like assholes, everyone has one."Spearhead wrote:
Actually lowing, it's more like the rest of the world has moved on and is miles ahead of us, and only now are some people in this country saying "Hey, we better catch up to them"lowing wrote:
I do agree with you Cam 100%CameronPoe wrote:
All I know is that John McCain will be bad for the rest of the world and what's bad for the rest of the world is bad for America because as much as the rest of the world relies on America, America relies on the rest of the world.
The real reason why however is, The rest of the world wants America to adopt THEIR way of life to make THEIR way of life better, regardless if it is in the best interest of AMERICANS to do so.
Some people have two; one above the neck, and one below.lowing wrote:
I guess that is why they say "opinions are like assholes, everyone has one."Spearhead wrote:
Actually lowing, it's more like the rest of the world has moved on and is miles ahead of us, and only now are some people in this country saying "Hey, we better catch up to them"lowing wrote:
I do agree with you Cam 100%
The real reason why however is, The rest of the world wants America to adopt THEIR way of life to make THEIR way of life better, regardless if it is in the best interest of AMERICANS to do so.
It's all Bush's fault! *runs around waiving arms*
Oh wait ... we're supposed to compare Obama and McCain and Bush isn't running. Whoops.
Oh wait ... we're supposed to compare Obama and McCain and Bush isn't running. Whoops.
Vilham wrote:
WRONGDBBrinson1 wrote:
Wha? Who are you to say how many guns I can own? I thought Senators took and Oath to defend and uphold the Constitution... Not distort ignor it. Actually if you research it, you'll see that you're wrong. When the civilized law abiding populace is armed, there is a drop crime.TrueMusou wrote:
I mean, as a red blooded, beef loving American, I like guns and war movies just as much as the next guy.
But seriously, as regular civilians, we do not need an extensive arsenal sitting under our pillows. The 2nd Amendment was written at a time where local militias were necessary, nowadays the ownership of guns has created more problems than it has solved.
I think it's fair. The argument for most people is that we have guns for self-defense/home-defense. According to what you listed above, it does not exclude shot-guns. For the purpose of self/home-defense shotguns are the most effective anyways. If you're a hunter, you're in the free according the the proposed, just as long as you're not hunting with automatic machine guns.
Man am I glad the gun laws don't reflect your stance.
#8 United States: 80.0645 per 1,000 people
#9 Netherlands: 79.5779 per 1,000 people
#10 South Africa: 77.1862 per 1,000 people
#11 Germany: 75.9996 per 1,000 people
#12 Canada: 75.4921 per 1,000 people
#13 Norway: 71.8639 per 1,000 people
#14 France: 62.1843 per 1,000 people
#15 Seychelles: 52.9265 per 1,000 people
#16 Hungary: 44.9763 per 1,000 people
#17 Estonia: 43.3601 per 1,000 people
#18 Czech Republic: 38.2257 per 1,000 people
#19 Italy: 37.9633 per 1,000 people
#20 Switzerland: 36.1864 per 1,000 people
#21 Portugal: 34.3833 per 1,000 people
#22 Slovenia: 33.6236 per 1,000 people
#23 Poland: 32.8573 per 1,000 people
#24 Korea, South: 31.7267 per 1,000 people
O look, the country with guns is higher than the ones without, even former Soviet Block countries have lower crime and they have shit loads of black market guns.
God it annoys me that people use this "excuse" which is WRONG.
If you just said I want guns fair enough, I can think your a fucking moron, but its your choice, but as soon as you try to justify it with a lie, I know that you also know its wrong which makes you an even bigger moron or that your just damn naive.
Is it bad that I had to quote myself?imortal wrote:
Okay, here is some fun math for you.
City: Dallas, Texas
Gun status; ownership legal, Concealed carry legal.
Population: 1,188,580
Murder/manslaughter: (2005) 202
murder rate: 1 murder per 5,884 people
murder per 10,000 population: 1.70
City: Washington DC
Gun status; ownership illegal, Concealed carry illegal.
Population: 572,059
Murder/manslaughter: (2005) 195
murder rate: 1 murder per 2933 people
murder per 10,000 population: 3.41
City: Kennesaw, Georgia
Gun status; ownership REQUIRED, Concealed carry legal.
Population: 21,675
Murder/manslaughter: (2005) 0
murder rate: unable to determine.
murder per 10,000 population: 0
City: Atlanta, Georgia
Gun status; ownership legal, Concealed carry legal.
Population: 416,474
Murder/manslaughter: (2005) 90
murder rate: 1 murder per 4627 people
murder per 10,000 population: 2.16
Does this tell you anything?
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=70413&p=15
What you will actually find is that when guns and concealed carry is legalized, there is a drop in violent crime, and an increase in property crime (presumably as criminals find a safer way to commit crime).
No. I for one did not see a single veteran on camera during the DNC. The RNC has been 'officially' on for 2 days and I have seen freakin' loads of them. They don't want home until the task is done, ask the soldiers.Mutantsteak wrote:
No shit, their asses wanna come homeGod Save the Queen wrote:
Military donations favor Obama over McCain
Maybe you were not paying attention to the economy before the Democrats took control of Congress. The economy has since went to poo. Must I remind you that the president has little power over the economy, or, that the current Congress has a 19% approval rating? If you should get mad at anyone for the state of the economy, it is the Congress. You didn't know that Congress has more power over the economy than the president?pierro wrote:
-Bush's policies are what got us into this mess.War Man wrote:
Bush's policies to help the economy are working, it is just the stupid democratic congress and the rest of the politicians that are stubborn. And McCain won't go for all of Bush's economic policies.
cold hard facts arent good enough for ya I guess.SoC./Omega wrote:
No. I for one did not see a single veteran on camera during the DNC. The RNC has been 'officially' on for 2 days and I have seen freakin' loads of them. They don't want home until the task is done, ask the soldiers.Mutantsteak wrote:
No shit, their asses wanna come homeGod Save the Queen wrote:
Military donations favor Obama over McCain
There is nothing I can do to disuade you of your disillusion but I will tell you one policy McCain disagrees with Bush on: Ethanol, the stupid shit that raises food and gas prices.pierro wrote:
-Bush's policies are what got us into this mess. He deregulated the finnancial services industry causing them to make poor investment decisions. Now the fed has to bail them out and its caused the problemWar Man wrote:
Bush's policies to help the economy are working, it is just the stupid democratic congress and the rest of the politicians that are stubborn. And McCain won't go for all of Bush's economic policies.
-Bush's tax cuts for the rich (which have cost more then the Iraq war) were supposed to create jobs...they did not work and the job statistics are horrible
-Under Bush americans are worse off economically then when he started due to shifting of the tax burden towards an emerging underclass
-Due to his finnancial mismanagement the US has been running a deficit that can only be compared to the scale of Reagan and poppy bush
He did all of the above with a Republican congress offering him a blank check...oh and name one siginificant policy area he and McCain disagree on now
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
Firstly I said crime in general, secondly your wrong that it lowers violent crime.imortal wrote:
Okay, here is some fun math for you.
City: Dallas, Texas
Gun status; ownership legal, Concealed carry legal.
Population: 1,188,580
Murder/manslaughter: (2005) 202
murder rate: 1 murder per 5,884 people
murder per 10,000 population: 1.70
City: Washington DC
Gun status; ownership illegal, Concealed carry illegal.
Population: 572,059
Murder/manslaughter: (2005) 195
murder rate: 1 murder per 2933 people
murder per 10,000 population: 3.41
City: Kennesaw, Georgia
Gun status; ownership REQUIRED, Concealed carry legal.
Population: 21,675
Murder/manslaughter: (2005) 0
murder rate: unable to determine.
murder per 10,000 population: 0
City: Atlanta, Georgia
Gun status; ownership legal, Concealed carry legal.
Population: 416,474
Murder/manslaughter: (2005) 90
murder rate: 1 murder per 4627 people
murder per 10,000 population: 2.16
Does this tell you anything?
Is it bad that I had to quote myself?
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=70413&p=15
What you will actually find is that when guns and concealed carry is legalized, there is a drop in violent crime, and an increase in property crime (presumably as criminals find a safer way to commit crime).
Wow, 3 cases where this is true. Try looking outside of your country. Guns do NOT lower crime. There is ZERO scientific evidence for it. Your entire country has access to guns with no checks crossing form one state to another. The fact that DC has high crime is because other states allow gun ownership with vast numbers being stolen all the time which then pass easily through the country.
Your claim that guns and concealed carry is legalized there is a drop of violent crime is WRONG. For the simple reason that what has actually happened is:
When guns and concealed carry is legalized WHERE THERE ARE ALREADY AREAS OF THE COUNTRY THAT ITS LEGAL there is a drop in violent crime.
Please explain how your Atlanta rate is still higher than all of England where guns are Illegal, or how your Atlanta rate is higher than most countries in Europe, even former soviet block countries with mass black market for guns.
Just please. Please. Please, stop with the bullshit excuses that are plain WRONG.
I wouldn't care if you said I want a gun. I can think your a douche, but again its your choice, but please just stop trying to justify it beyond you being gun ho and trying to be cool, because there is no reason beyond that.
K anyway, lets get this back on track, you have given your opinion I have given mine, we aren't going to agree.
Last edited by Vilham (2008-09-04 08:38:10)
City: London, EnglandVilham wrote:
Firstly I said crime in general, secondly your wrong that it lowers violent crime.
Wow, 3 cases where this is true. Try looking outside of your country. Guns do NOT lower crime. There is ZERO scientific evidence for it. Your entire country has access to guns with no checks crossing form one state to another. The fact that DC has high crime is because other states allow gun ownership with vast numbers being stolen all the time which then pass easily through the country.
Your claim that guns and concealed carry is legalized there is a drop of violent crime is WRONG. For the simple reason that what has actually happened is:
When guns and concealed carry is legalized WHERE THERE ARE ALREADY AREAS OF THE COUNTRY THAT ITS LEGAL there is a drop in violent crime.
Please explain how your Atlanta rate is still higher than all of England where guns are Illegal, or how your Atlanta rate is higher than most countries in Europe, even former soviet block countries with mass black market for guns.
Just please. Please. Please, stop with the bullshit excuses that are plain WRONG.
I wouldn't care if you said I want a gun. I can think your a douche, but again its your choice, but please just stop trying to justify it beyond you being gun ho and trying to be cool, because there is no reason beyond that.
K anyway, lets get this back on track, you have given your opinion I have given mine, we aren't going to agree.
Gun status; ownership illegal, Concealed carry illegal.
Population: 7,456,100
Murder/manslaughter: (2005) 134
murder rate: 1 murder per 55642 people
murder per 10,000 population: 0.18
You are correct when it comes to murder or manslaughter alone. However, while there were only 134 murders in 2005, there 6131 "Offensive Weapon" reports.
Having guns illegal does not make crime dissapear. People do not suddenly become more friendly and law abiding. Guns are simply a tool. Yes, Crime is higher here in the US. A lot of the reasons are sociological reasons, as well as the way our society is set up and regulated. If you just want to look at crime in general, I suggest you look at drug use and drug related crimes.
Yes, I concentrated my look at the US. The thread I orignally posted that on was mainly a US argument; I simply recycled it. The US is usually the target of all of these 'gun rants,' and, to be perfectly honest, is the only nation I really care about. I only pay attention to other countries in the world when they affect me directly (i.e. getting deployed to them), or in how they impact my nation. At least I am honest about it.
Here in the United States, every single time a state passed a concealed-carry law, the violent crime in the state dropped. In nearly every instance, there was also a rise in property crime, but the overall crime rate was still lower. Here in Texas, we have not only a concealed carry law, but an additional law making a crime more severe if a firearm was carried by the subject in commision of the crime.
But yes, lets get back on topic.
The bailing out people is what made the housing market suck and made the economy worse, but people don't understand consequences anymore which is sad.pierro wrote:
That is a minor energy policy issue, not a major economic one...although you are right (for corn based ethanol at least) and it is something I dislike about Obama...but in the context of McCain's tax policy and regulatory policy...the MAJOR economic issues where he disagrees with Bush I don't see a difference and I've seen where that's got usWar Man wrote:
There is nothing I can do to disuade you of your disillusion but I will tell you one policy McCain disagrees with Bush on: Ethanol, the stupid shit that raises food and gas prices.
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
Pot calling the kettle black.God Save the Queen wrote:
cold hard facts arent good enough for ya I guess.SoC./Omega wrote:
No. I for one did not see a single veteran on camera during the DNC. The RNC has been 'officially' on for 2 days and I have seen freakin' loads of them. They don't want home until the task is done, ask the soldiers.Mutantsteak wrote:
No shit, their asses wanna come home
Maybe it's the other way around? Because the facts are, that there are tons of veterans at the RNC, and there were few at the DNC. Sorry.
Yes and no.pierro wrote:
Bush's economic policies caused what we are in today and McCain will continue them, not believing they have the magical ability to stare into peoples' souls isn't especially relevantWar Man wrote:
Guy that got us here? It isn't all Bushes fault as you liberals like to say, part of it is the democrats fault too(even more than Bush). And McCain isn't another Bush, because for one thing(there are more but I can't remember at the moment) unlike Bush, McCain saw Putin as a KGB while Bush saw him as a friend.
It was not Bush that deregulated the banks, but Reagan. It is not W. Bush that signed NAFTA into law but his predecesor.
The Bush economic crime is to not reregulate the banks, and mainly not counting the iraq war into the regular budget.
I'm all for the Bush lower tax plan, but without also lowering spending you get debt.
Much of the economic misery is being created by a media hellbent on getting Barrack elected. If they say we are imploding enough times people start to believe it, and it creates a reality.
The fact is, technically we are not in a recession but it doesn't matter; the press has convinced everybody we are fucked and they have stopped spending money which is putting an extreme hurt on small businesses making us feel like the economy is imploding.
I've heard it said that we all agree our paper money has a certain value. When we are told our paper is worth less than it was, we just believe it. When we are told our houses are worth 35% less than they were we believe it.
If the press gets its way they will then tell us things are recoverying and booming, thanks to our New Mesiah BArrack Obama.
If McCain gets elected look for more Great Depression Redux stories.
I hate the press. Hatehatehate.
Obama would do more than McCain, making people pay even more money. So stfu.pierro wrote:
You HAVE to bail out the companies the most deeply involved in this because not doing so would cause the market to collapse...this has been an understanding since the great depression. Firms like bear sterns see this and decide to take risks because they won't be the ones who have to pay if they're wrong...its you and me. Now, I don't like this anymore then you do and I don't think we should have privatized gains and socialized losses...but that's what Bush allowed when he had the market deregulated and allowed them to take these risks...not only do we now have to pay for their mistakes but the economy's also hitting a recession because of it...I don't want that to happen again and a President McCain would stay the course on that issue of the economyWar Man wrote:
The bailing out people is what made the housing market suck and made the economy worse, but people don't understand consequences anymore which is sad.
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
How about we both have dillusions?pierro wrote:
Sure thing...I'd say something about dissuading you from your dillusions, but that would be presumptuous and arrogantWar Man wrote:
Obama would do more than McCain, making people pay even more money. So stfu.
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
Wheres the pic of McBush?
Or WarPiero Lol..Sup wrote:
Wheres the pic of McBush?
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
The TRUTH hurts. Of course, you won't believe us until you have $0 in the bank.pierro wrote:
Sure thing...I'd say something about dissuading you from your dillusions, but that would be presumptuous and arrogantWar Man wrote:
Obama would do more than McCain, making people pay even more money. So stfu.
Well you probably werent watching very much, I saw lots of them.SoC./Omega wrote:
No. I for one did not see a single veteran on camera during the DNC. The RNC has been 'officially' on for 2 days and I have seen freakin' loads of them. They don't want home until the task is done, ask the soldiers.
Wanna know the demographics for the RNC?
93 % white
68 % male
and Sarah Palin says she wants to do away with the good ol' boys.... lol
Also I only saw one or two black people at the RNC. Arent you guys saying every other day the Democrats hate the military? Well by that logic the GOP is racist.
And gs's link is stating facts.... and you're disputing them because you saw more of them at a convention on TV Ever consider the ones donating to McCain are younger and are in active duty? Being a delegate is no walk through the park you know.
Last edited by Spearhead (2008-09-04 15:10:00)
what is the demographics of the democrats in congress?Spearhead wrote:
Well you probably werent watching very much, I saw lots of them.SoC./Omega wrote:
No. I for one did not see a single veteran on camera during the DNC. The RNC has been 'officially' on for 2 days and I have seen freakin' loads of them. They don't want home until the task is done, ask the soldiers.
Wanna know the demographics for the RNC?
93 % white
68 % male
and Sarah Palin says she wants to do away with the good ol' boys.... lol
Also I only saw one or two black people at the RNC. Arent you guys saying every other day the Democrats hate the military? Well by that logic the GOP is racist.
And gs's link is stating facts.... and you're disputing them because you saw more of them at a convention on TV Ever consider the ones donating to McCain are younger and are in active duty? Being a delegate is no walk through the park you know.
Is that even relevant? lol, it's still America you know. Black people have a hard time getting elected to DC. You need money and connections and the state can't be racist.lowing wrote:
what is the demographics of the democrats in congress?
The regular delegates are a much better representative of the average voter than Congressmen.
A better comparison (or more obejctive, maybe you've never heard of that word), lowing, would be to compare the demographics of the GOP in Congress and then the Dems in Congress. Otherwise stop this cheap ass method of debate, its kinda sad now.
Last edited by Spearhead (2008-09-04 15:17:23)
You didn't know Democrats do better with the young voters? I have a reason for that, but you wouldn't like it...God Save the Queen wrote:
cold hard facts arent good enough for ya I guess.SoC./Omega wrote:
No. I for one did not see a single veteran on camera during the DNC. The RNC has been 'officially' on for 2 days and I have seen freakin' loads of them. They don't want home until the task is done, ask the soldiers.Mutantsteak wrote:
No shit, their asses wanna come home
You are the one who mentioned demographics, now are saying it is irrelevant......OK. I got it.Spearhead wrote:
Is that even relevant? lol, it's still America you know. Black people have a hard time getting elected to DC. You need money and connections and the state can't be racist.lowing wrote:
what is the demographics of the democrats in congress?
The regular delegates are a much better representative of the average voter than Congressmen.
A better comparison (or more obejctive, maybe you've never heard of that word), lowing, would be to compare the demographics of the GOP in Congress and then the Dems in Congress. Otherwise stop this cheap ass method of debate, its kinda sad now.
they also do better with veterans of modern wars like me that have donated more to obama than have mccain.SoC./Omega wrote:
You didn't know Democrats do better with the young voters? I have a reason for that, but you wouldn't like it...God Save the Queen wrote:
cold hard facts arent good enough for ya I guess.SoC./Omega wrote:
No. I for one did not see a single veteran on camera during the DNC. The RNC has been 'officially' on for 2 days and I have seen freakin' loads of them. They don't want home until the task is done, ask the soldiers.