{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
4/26/2015 5:58:46 PM
74
You know we in the USA are NOT the greatest country
This "better than everyone else" attitude is the reason other countries don't like us
And for real we are not the best in most topics
Unless you are talking gun deaths and number if people in prisons we ARE number one there
I love the USA but really come on people aren't looking at facts or refuse to believe it
English
-
Lol yeah that's actually true. For some reason you guys seem to love them. Other people also say they help with public relations. Again that is debatable though....
-
I would argue they help with debate like the Kennedy's, Clinton's or Bushs help.....not much. But who says America doesn't have royals. Haha. Sad state of affairs my friend. Good day.
-
Lol yeah exactly... Ah well. Maybe one day. Nice talking to you.
-
Well if the freedom to own a gun is interfering with the freedom of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness than sorry first amendment trumps all
-
Also according to the federalist and anti-federalist papers the founders were very clear of the opinion that the only way to ensure the first amendment was through the second amendment.
-
I'm being serious but how is my grandfathers (I don't have one) gun affecting your liberty?
-
Im sure the victims of senseless gun violence would say that their right to life was infringed on
-
What about deaths drunk driving? Should alcohol be banned? What about deaths from collisions? Should vehicles be banned? Vehicle deaths are I believe higher than gun deaths.
-
I didn't say it was Do you feel the same way about gay marriage or legal drugs or prostitution Should it be ok because it doesn't effect you?
-
I think all of those should be legal.
-
Just wondering
-
No I get it. Stereotypes exist for a reason and usually the pro-gun people are against gay-marriage (actually I'm anti any government involvement in marriage. I think hetero and homosexual couples should only be able to file for civil unions. There is historical writings that government "marriage" was instituted for taxation purposes, social security, etc but that's neither here nor their), anti-legalization of a number of things etc. I try to be as consistent as I can on all of these issues. Obviously if a company is conning or poisoning it's customers the state/federal government should step in. Obviously if someone kills someone else non-justifiable the government (city/county/state/federal) should step in. But if someone is smoking marijuana, shooting heroine or huffing paint in their home and falls asleep and then gets up the next day and goes to work safely and no one gets hurt, who cares. Same with prostitution as long as the participants are of legal age and consenting. Gay marriage/union who cares. If State A legalizes it an state B doesn't move to state A. I just think we, all of us, give up way to much freedom to people who go into politics "poor" but come out millionaires. All the while the only thing the citizens get are more restrictions, more taxes and we are more controlled.
-
Edited by shonik09: 4/26/2015 6:27:19 PMThe validity of the statistic that gun crimes/deaths are high in america? There are lots of graphs and means that show direct correlations between the countries that have legal firearms and crimes involving them. This study actually has some pretty shocking statistics: http://www.bu.edu/news/2013/09/13/new-research-shows-link-between-rates-of-gun-ownership-and-homicides/ You can use google to look at stuff in your own time. I guess based on these kinds of studies I believe that no guns equates to less murder/death. Guns and knives are both dangerous. It's not actually legal to walk around the UK with a big knife you know. Lock knives are illegal too. Edit: I'm from the UK.
-
So before the advent of the firearm there were no homicides? Did firearms bring hate and malice into the world?
-
It's about prevention though right. Might as well do what you can to prevent things.
-
Guns aren't the problem. If you want to prevent these situation it's men's hearts you need to reach. If a man hates another and wishes him dead they will find a way. You don't attribute the Mona Lisa's beauty to a brush, why is a weapon to blame for man's malice? It's true guns do make it easy for men to harm others. I am not against gun control. I'm against the inability to open/concealed carry or purchase firearms for mentally stable, responsible, clean background men and women.
-
I guess in my opinion you can't eradicate an entire sect of people. You have to operate based upon the assumption those types of people exist. You know there are people that will abuse the fact they can freely access firearms to harm others. You also have studies proving there are direct correlations between firearm ownership and homicides. Based on that, you do what you can to minimise the risk to upstanding citizens, which for me would be imposing stricter gun ownership laws. Also why do people need to own guns? We don't have gun ownership here in the UK, and as far as I can tell no one cares about it either..... We just don't understand why people in the US seem to want their guns so much.
-
Edited by premo253: 4/26/2015 6:14:50 PMI've been to Europe (France and Germany) and believe me, Americas arrogance is equally matched by those two countries better than everyone else attitude.
-
Yeah I guess it is everywhere lol. I hate it tbh, but I guess it's how the world is. I'm not gonna agree with your comment on guns though, I can't understand how they are legal in the US in the way they are. At least here a toddler can't shoot his own mum....
-
Well I can tell you the history behind why guns are legal. In summation it's because the founders knew that the only way to keep a government from "ruling" it's citizens was to keep them afraid of them (ie American Revolution). The reality of this today is not as applicable as it once was since the Government has access to a lot more weaponry that the populous does, but that isn't to say that their original argument isn't valid. A dictator or military oppression would theoretically have to kill millions (gun owners) in America to gain "control." In countries where there is no true means of resistance the numbers would be much less. But to your comment about a toddler let me ask you this. A toddler who gets into their parents car and puts the vehicle in neutral thereby having the car roll over their sibling, should we ban cars? Of course not. It was irresponsible parenting that let to this event. Or a chef who had a myriad of knives leaves them out and his child gets one and stabs their sibling. Should knives be banned? Of course not. It was due I irresponsible parenting. I believe that gun death specifically due to negligence is ignored and used as a talking point for taking away guns rather than what it should be. WHY ARE WE NOT HOLDING PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS? (Sorry pet peve). Seriously though, if a parent left out their gun, knife, lighter, ammonia, etc why it is the items fault an not the parents? Rather than taking away things I believe we should be holding people more responsible for their actions. Look at Switzerland. They have the highest gun ownership per capita probably of every country (maybe not US though). And you don't hear about their staggering gun death rate. Why? Well I have some theories as to that, but more to the point gun ownership doesn't seem to be a problem there.
-
There's so many problems with Americas gun laws though, you can buy them at god dam Walmart, but they can't ban them now because everyone already owns one criminals can easily steal a gun get someone else to buy it for them, get one at a gun show ect who the hell do civilians need to shoot at ? Arming them just promotes criminals to shoot first and ask questions later aswell as ensure the second they pull that gun out there shooting everyone they don't wanna risk getting shot. in England we have brutal murders in America schools/malls/offices get massacred ever wonder why? Your entire nation is desensitised to guns which is a bad thing in England if your seen with anything reassembleing a gun armed police are phoned and if they see your armed you'll be shot , if guns where regulated it'd also make your polices job far easier and countless young black guys would be alive today your police expect everyone to be armed and will shoot to kill if people flinch while being questioned. America really needs to sort it's gun laws out it's an atrocity that there gun crime is comparable to Jamaica, Nigeria , Honduras and Sierra Leon
-
I've actually lived in switzerland so know about their customs. The gun laws are not as lenient there as people think. Higher gun ownership than other European countries is likely down to the fact they still have mandatory subscription. Additionally the number of guns per 100 people in switzerland is less than 50% (according to this article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21379912) that in the US. Yeah I've heard the argument about the founders, but I was gonna say what you just said in that today the population has no chance against the army. About the toddler - that is a far more contrived way for the kid to kill his parents than pulling a trigger. It's about how easy it is. Yes holding people responsible for their actions, but really why all this fuss when having gun regulation would solve a lot of these issues. As you've said the original argument for having them is now unfounded, why not just get rid of them? What do you gain by having them?
-
The loss of freedom. It boils down to the more we are controlled and the less we can do/have the less free we are. I do not believe anyone is better than anyone and that no one has the right to tell anyone else how to live. If you are not committing a crime against another and taking away their liberty what right does anyone have to tell someone what they can or cannot have. Regarding the founders. It's not the fact of having weaponry to match the government. At this point it's the fact that the government would willingly and knowingly have to kill millions of people who are armed in order to gain compliance. If America did not have any means of defense there would barely be thousands killed to force compliance. Again I ask. Are we free? Do you feel free? I may not feel as free as those who lived in 1776 but I know one thing. I want to be free. And the only way to help the citizenry is to arm them. Look at all the "great" empires of the world that span time, the one constant is they did not allow their populous to be armed. That way the government had nothing to fear.
-
[quote]I've been to Europe (France and Germany) and believe me, Americas arrogance is equally matched by those two countries better than everyone else attitude.[/quote]
