- Sale items. Buy now - stock going fast. Specials
- You must now select Courier Delivery if you wish to receive items before Christmas.
Forums > Social Discussion > Proud to be?
Login/Join to ParticipateGOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
So when I was growing up, there was a lot of talk about being "Proud to Be an American."
I'm not. In fact, I'm ashamed to be an American. I'm ashamed of my country and I'm terrified of my government. I'm not proud of who we are, what we've done, or what we stand for. When I was in England, I kept wanting to apologize. I wanted to wear a button that said "It's not my fault!" And I know a number of Americans feel that way now.
So I wonder? Are you proud of your country? I mean, no country is perfect, and bad leaders come and go (Howard? Blair?), but in general, as a citizen of your country visiting a foreign land, do you feel proud to be an emmissary of your country, or do you feel like hanging your head in shame?
So when I was growing up, there was a lot of talk about being "Proud to Be an American."
I'm not. In fact, I'm ashamed to be an American. I'm ashamed of my country and I'm terrified of my government. I'm not proud of who we are, what we've done, or what we stand for. When I was in England, I kept wanting to apologize. I wanted to wear a button that said "It's not my fault!" And I know a number of Americans feel that way now.
So I wonder? Are you proud of your country? I mean, no country is perfect, and bad leaders come and go (Howard? Blair?), but in general, as a citizen of your country visiting a foreign land, do you feel proud to be an emmissary of your country, or do you feel like hanging your head in shame?
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
GOLD Member
veteran
1,459 posts
Location: Dublin, Ireland
veteran
1,459 posts
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posted:
i know this is
i usually stay out of these discussions, but i feel i have to stand up and say how it shocks and saddens me that anyone would have the gall to post here and state that the killing of almost 300,000 innocent people by nuclear weapons is/was
1. not terror.....
2. done in order to save lives......
3. responsible.....
i certainly hope that this is not the type of thing you plan teaching your children.....
Written by: insaineCRAZY
Yes, the USA has dropped two nukes, however they did not do it as a form of terror, they did it to save lives, not only American, but Japanesse too. Though I doubt that was really part of the plan, the emmence fighting it would have taken to take control of Japan's main island would have cost far more lives than the two nukes took. So in the end lives were saved on both sides.
The US has proven, thought it has used nukes, that they are responsible in the use of them.
i know this is
i usually stay out of these discussions, but i feel i have to stand up and say how it shocks and saddens me that anyone would have the gall to post here and state that the killing of almost 300,000 innocent people by nuclear weapons is/was
1. not terror.....
2. done in order to save lives......
3. responsible.....
i certainly hope that this is not the type of thing you plan teaching your children.....
My mind not only wanders, it sometimes leaves completely 
SILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,899 posts
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,899 posts
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
Posted:
nope - it's just war.
war is terror
war is killing people
war is not particularly known for responsibility either.
doesn't matter what weapons you use really.
nope - it's just war.
war is terror
war is killing people
war is not particularly known for responsibility either.
doesn't matter what weapons you use really.
-v-
Wiederstand ist Zwecklos!
newbie
16 posts
16 posts
Posted:
Umm... Yes, 300,000 lives vs probably the millions it would have taken to invade mainland japan is considerd saving lives. At least in some circles.
Wouldn't you think that the supprise attack on a harbor and naval base an act of terrorisim? The Japanesse went from stressing out about the US sending oil to europe to all out war against the US, China, and even Australia did not escape the Japanesse in WWII.
How about the Batan Death March, was that not an act of terror?
Yes the deaths of 300,000 civilians probably saved the lives of millions of civilians not to mention millions of soldiers on both sides.
It is by far the most calouse way to look at things, but lives were saved that day.
War is ugly
War is cruel
War is terror to the extreem, but not terrorisim (IMO there is a differance)
War is sometimes needed
War is never good, but good things can come from war
Umm... Yes, 300,000 lives vs probably the millions it would have taken to invade mainland japan is considerd saving lives. At least in some circles.
Wouldn't you think that the supprise attack on a harbor and naval base an act of terrorisim? The Japanesse went from stressing out about the US sending oil to europe to all out war against the US, China, and even Australia did not escape the Japanesse in WWII.
How about the Batan Death March, was that not an act of terror?
Yes the deaths of 300,000 civilians probably saved the lives of millions of civilians not to mention millions of soldiers on both sides.
It is by far the most calouse way to look at things, but lives were saved that day.
War is ugly
War is cruel
War is terror to the extreem, but not terrorisim (IMO there is a differance)
War is sometimes needed
War is never good, but good things can come from war
GOLD Member
Poi-tato
183 posts
Location: Iceberg 319, Canada
Poi-tato
183 posts
Location: Iceberg 319, Canada
Posted:
I'm damn proud people were smart enough to invent beer
I'm damn proud people were smart enough to invent beer
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potato's.
GOLD Member
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
Well, insaineCRAZY, this is where we differ. The only conclusion I could make on America’s record with gun responsibility is to ban guns. As the Rifleman’s Association says:
There are many reasons why dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was an act of terrorism, not the least being it was an attack on a civilian population. Now, the whole world was stunned, horrified, in-shock when they watched the 9/11 attack on World Trade Centre; I know I was. Imagine what it would be like to see a city hit by a nuclear weapon. This isn’t all about sides; WMD are immoral and unnecessary.
I’ll just add that “probably” in your suggestion that “the deaths of 300,000 civilians probably saved the lives of millions of civilians not to mention millions of soldiers on both sides” says it all.
Apart from the 300,000 people who died as a direct result of the bombs. The radiation generated by the bombs caused long-term problems, and many people suffered from radiation exposure. Some people still have genetic problems and malformed babies.
EDITED_BY: Stone (1097301884)
Well, insaineCRAZY, this is where we differ. The only conclusion I could make on America’s record with gun responsibility is to ban guns. As the Rifleman’s Association says:
Written by:
Written by:
Firearms are the second leading cause of traumatic death related to a consumer product in the United States and are the second most frequent cause of death overall for Americans ages 15 to 24. Since 1960, more than a million Americans have died in firearm suicides, homicides, and unintentional injuries. In 2001 alone, 29,573 Americans died by gunfire: 16,869 in firearm suicides, 11,671 in firearm homicides, 802 in unintentional shootings, and 231 in firearm deaths of unknown intent, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Nearly three times that number are treated in emergency rooms each year for nonfatal firearm injuries (NRA).
There are many reasons why dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was an act of terrorism, not the least being it was an attack on a civilian population. Now, the whole world was stunned, horrified, in-shock when they watched the 9/11 attack on World Trade Centre; I know I was. Imagine what it would be like to see a city hit by a nuclear weapon. This isn’t all about sides; WMD are immoral and unnecessary.
I’ll just add that “probably” in your suggestion that “the deaths of 300,000 civilians probably saved the lives of millions of civilians not to mention millions of soldiers on both sides” says it all.
Apart from the 300,000 people who died as a direct result of the bombs. The radiation generated by the bombs caused long-term problems, and many people suffered from radiation exposure. Some people still have genetic problems and malformed babies.
EDITED_BY: Stone (1097301884)
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
newbie
16 posts
16 posts
Posted:
We all have differnt ideas of what is moral and what isn't. Why is yours right, or perhaps wrong? I am curious to see if you could answer both sides of that question. I'll make you a deal, if you make a post on the pros and cons of owning WMDs I will do the same and we will see how our thoughts vary.
Well... you are talking to someone who has been to Hiroshima, it is a very alive and vibrant city. I have been to Peace Park and stood next to the orb that represents the altitude and location that the bomb exploded. Many people did suffer, many people had serious health problems, however it is unarguable that the the lives lost and effected are far less than a full scale invasion of the Japanesse mainland.
I am not trying to downplay any of the lives lost, the fact that they died saved others from the fate of death before their time. It may have been an unwilling sacrifice but if you stop and look at the bigger picture, lives were saved.
That is all I am saying.
About the NRA's statement, millions of unexpected pregnancys and cases of STDs around the world have spawned an unrelenting need for safe sex education, not a need to ban sex. The same approach can be used with firearms. Are they the same? No, I am not saying that firearms and sex are interchangable nor am I making any sort of comparison except to say that the proper education of a weapon like sex will lead to less deaths and injuries just like safe sex education should lead to less enexpected pregnancys and STDs.
We all have differnt ideas of what is moral and what isn't. Why is yours right, or perhaps wrong? I am curious to see if you could answer both sides of that question. I'll make you a deal, if you make a post on the pros and cons of owning WMDs I will do the same and we will see how our thoughts vary.
Well... you are talking to someone who has been to Hiroshima, it is a very alive and vibrant city. I have been to Peace Park and stood next to the orb that represents the altitude and location that the bomb exploded. Many people did suffer, many people had serious health problems, however it is unarguable that the the lives lost and effected are far less than a full scale invasion of the Japanesse mainland.
I am not trying to downplay any of the lives lost, the fact that they died saved others from the fate of death before their time. It may have been an unwilling sacrifice but if you stop and look at the bigger picture, lives were saved.
That is all I am saying.
About the NRA's statement, millions of unexpected pregnancys and cases of STDs around the world have spawned an unrelenting need for safe sex education, not a need to ban sex. The same approach can be used with firearms. Are they the same? No, I am not saying that firearms and sex are interchangable nor am I making any sort of comparison except to say that the proper education of a weapon like sex will lead to less deaths and injuries just like safe sex education should lead to less enexpected pregnancys and STDs.
GOLD Member
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
insaineCRAZY said:
That's absolute rubbish insaineCRAZY, and pure speculation. There never was a full scale invasion so how would you know? Many would argue that there were other solutions. I think that most of the people involved in the atomic bomb program severely regretted what they did for the rest of their lives.
Perhaps you should look at the "bigger picture" as you seem to be the one locked in the guns and WMD solve all problems mentality.
WMD don’t act as a deterrent. More likely they encourage other countries to build bigger weapons. They are indiscriminate, and often result in the deaths of large numbers of civilians. They cause irreversible damage to the world’s ecology, and have the potential to destroy the planet.
There have been mixed successes with education programs. But it would take many generations before a gun education program did any good in American. As Americans have been exposed to too many Hollywood “gun and glory” movies and second rate cop shows for that to happen. Plus there is this assertion that Americans have a God given right to own and use a gun.
No, the best solution there is to ban guns altogether and remove them from society. After all, apart from a few farmers, how many people would have a legitimist need for a gun? I certainly don’t buy that self-defence story, as most people in that situation get hurt with their own gun.
insaineCRAZY said:
Written by:
however it is unarguable that the the lives lost and effected are far less than a full scale invasion of the Japanesse mainland.
That's absolute rubbish insaineCRAZY, and pure speculation. There never was a full scale invasion so how would you know? Many would argue that there were other solutions. I think that most of the people involved in the atomic bomb program severely regretted what they did for the rest of their lives.
Perhaps you should look at the "bigger picture" as you seem to be the one locked in the guns and WMD solve all problems mentality.
WMD don’t act as a deterrent. More likely they encourage other countries to build bigger weapons. They are indiscriminate, and often result in the deaths of large numbers of civilians. They cause irreversible damage to the world’s ecology, and have the potential to destroy the planet.
There have been mixed successes with education programs. But it would take many generations before a gun education program did any good in American. As Americans have been exposed to too many Hollywood “gun and glory” movies and second rate cop shows for that to happen. Plus there is this assertion that Americans have a God given right to own and use a gun.
No, the best solution there is to ban guns altogether and remove them from society. After all, apart from a few farmers, how many people would have a legitimist need for a gun? I certainly don’t buy that self-defence story, as most people in that situation get hurt with their own gun.
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
newbie
16 posts
16 posts
Posted:
Stone, have you ever been to the US?
I will assume that you havn't and just live with the risk of being wrong. However if you have, feel free to tell me, but lets play like you havn't.
Guns, we have a right to own them. It is in the same document that lays out all of our rights. End of story, Americans have the right to own guns.
Banning guns won't solve crimes, it won't stop gun related crimes, in fact it will only make gun related crimes more and worse.
How can you say for sure that you have gotten every gun off the streets and destroyed? You can't. That means that only law abiding citizens will be getting rid of their guns and the criminals will have them. That means that the ciminals now have one huge advantage over the rest of the population. This is a bad thing.
I have three guns, all lagitimally owned, all registerd. I love to shoot. I go to the in-door ranges every weekend, it actually is a decent date spot too. Those who treat guns with respect will NEVER hurt themselves. Let me rephrase because that statment isn't entirely true, but thats another story that didn't invole bullets. Those who treat guns with respect will NEVER shoot themselves.
There are three simple steps to avoid harming yourself with a gun. Safty, Source, Chaimber. Put the gun on SAFE, it can't fire, if you remove the bullets from the gun IE source, it has only the chance of having one bullet in the chaimber. Then you clear the chaimber visually and physically inspecting the weapon to ensure that it is clear.
If you do this every time you pick up a gun and before you set it down it is impossible to accidently shoot yourself.
"What if you want the gun to be loaded?" you ask. Simple, four rules:
1 Treat every weapon as if it were loaded
2 Do not point your weapon at anything you do not intend to shoot
3 Keep the weapon on safe untill you are ready to fire
4 Keep your finger strait and off the trigger untill you are prepared to fire
Follow these rules and even a loaded gun is a safe thing.
If everyone follows trafic laws driving is a safe thing, if everyone follows weapon rules, guns are a safe thing.
Guns do not kill people, people kill people. If you follow seven simple rules you can not physically harm yourself or anyone around you.
Now, now that I have proven that only breaking simple gun handleing rules is the cause of anyone getting hurt by guns, just like violating simple trafic laws is the usual cause for people getting hurt or killed, we can move on.
NO, NO, NO, NO, guns do not solve problems, WMDs do not solve all problems, never in my life have I said or implied that.
Also, there is no way in hades that a full scale attack on Japan would cost less than a million lives in total. Look at Iwo Jima, Guam, Sipan, and every other battle in the Island hopping campaigne of WWII, they all cost thousands of lives. Look at history! Yes it is speculation, but if you can speculate that GWB is lieing, then I can speculate that a mainland attack on Japan would cost millions of lives. However what I have is speculation based upon previous battles. Mainland Japan, being many times the size of any of the other islands being far more populated, prooves that the death toll would be extreemly high.
You can not disagree with that. Actually you can, you can not disagree and (A) be serious, (B) have actually thought things out.
However it does not change the fact that it was terrible and you are right, the men who made those two atom bombs probably had some serious regrets, but I am right in saying that in comparison to a full scale invaision those two bombs saved lives.
It would be nice if we could have gone back in time and changed things, or even to see if things could have worked out differntly, but we can't. Hind sight is 20/20. It would have been nice if the Japan wouldn't have attacked the US, it would have been nice if Nazi Germany hadn't killed over a million jews. But they did. It would be nice if I was 6'3" and 220lbs of rock hard muscle, but I'm 5'5" and a buck 40, we can wish for things all day long but you cant change the past.
Stone, have you ever been to the US?
I will assume that you havn't and just live with the risk of being wrong. However if you have, feel free to tell me, but lets play like you havn't.
Guns, we have a right to own them. It is in the same document that lays out all of our rights. End of story, Americans have the right to own guns.
Banning guns won't solve crimes, it won't stop gun related crimes, in fact it will only make gun related crimes more and worse.
How can you say for sure that you have gotten every gun off the streets and destroyed? You can't. That means that only law abiding citizens will be getting rid of their guns and the criminals will have them. That means that the ciminals now have one huge advantage over the rest of the population. This is a bad thing.
I have three guns, all lagitimally owned, all registerd. I love to shoot. I go to the in-door ranges every weekend, it actually is a decent date spot too. Those who treat guns with respect will NEVER hurt themselves. Let me rephrase because that statment isn't entirely true, but thats another story that didn't invole bullets. Those who treat guns with respect will NEVER shoot themselves.
There are three simple steps to avoid harming yourself with a gun. Safty, Source, Chaimber. Put the gun on SAFE, it can't fire, if you remove the bullets from the gun IE source, it has only the chance of having one bullet in the chaimber. Then you clear the chaimber visually and physically inspecting the weapon to ensure that it is clear.
If you do this every time you pick up a gun and before you set it down it is impossible to accidently shoot yourself.
"What if you want the gun to be loaded?" you ask. Simple, four rules:
1 Treat every weapon as if it were loaded
2 Do not point your weapon at anything you do not intend to shoot
3 Keep the weapon on safe untill you are ready to fire
4 Keep your finger strait and off the trigger untill you are prepared to fire
Follow these rules and even a loaded gun is a safe thing.
If everyone follows trafic laws driving is a safe thing, if everyone follows weapon rules, guns are a safe thing.
Guns do not kill people, people kill people. If you follow seven simple rules you can not physically harm yourself or anyone around you.
Now, now that I have proven that only breaking simple gun handleing rules is the cause of anyone getting hurt by guns, just like violating simple trafic laws is the usual cause for people getting hurt or killed, we can move on.
NO, NO, NO, NO, guns do not solve problems, WMDs do not solve all problems, never in my life have I said or implied that.
Also, there is no way in hades that a full scale attack on Japan would cost less than a million lives in total. Look at Iwo Jima, Guam, Sipan, and every other battle in the Island hopping campaigne of WWII, they all cost thousands of lives. Look at history! Yes it is speculation, but if you can speculate that GWB is lieing, then I can speculate that a mainland attack on Japan would cost millions of lives. However what I have is speculation based upon previous battles. Mainland Japan, being many times the size of any of the other islands being far more populated, prooves that the death toll would be extreemly high.
You can not disagree with that. Actually you can, you can not disagree and (A) be serious, (B) have actually thought things out.
However it does not change the fact that it was terrible and you are right, the men who made those two atom bombs probably had some serious regrets, but I am right in saying that in comparison to a full scale invaision those two bombs saved lives.
It would be nice if we could have gone back in time and changed things, or even to see if things could have worked out differntly, but we can't. Hind sight is 20/20. It would have been nice if the Japan wouldn't have attacked the US, it would have been nice if Nazi Germany hadn't killed over a million jews. But they did. It would be nice if I was 6'3" and 220lbs of rock hard muscle, but I'm 5'5" and a buck 40, we can wish for things all day long but you cant change the past.
GOLD Member
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
insaineCRAZY,
Actually, there is a high correlation rate between guns and crime; the higher the number of guns in a population, the higher the crime rate. So banning guns would reduce crime, but I don’t think that legalisation would be very popular in the US
You can get most of the guns off the streets. We did it in Australia with a buy-back scheme. IMO, criminals will always have access to guns, but it’s not just criminals we are talking about either. What about the suicide rate and the youth suicide rate in particular?
I have nothing against the safe use of guns in clubs, and I’m sure you are very safe with guns, but unfortunately gun safety seems to be a rare thing. Like you say with traffic rules, if everyone followed the rules there would be no accidents. But the road toll keeps climbing each year, despite education programs and hard hitting advertising campaigns.
I've seen that “Guns don’t kill people, People kill people” on so many bumpers, but I don’t agree. And, if you think about it, guns do kill people.
I was taught one rule with guns: It’s always the unloaded gun that does the most damage.
No we can’t go back in time and change the past, but what I’m saying is that we don’t have to keep making the same mistakes over and over again. We can learn from the past, to improve the future. And hey, I wish I had a six pack too.
Cheers
insaineCRAZY,
Actually, there is a high correlation rate between guns and crime; the higher the number of guns in a population, the higher the crime rate. So banning guns would reduce crime, but I don’t think that legalisation would be very popular in the US
You can get most of the guns off the streets. We did it in Australia with a buy-back scheme. IMO, criminals will always have access to guns, but it’s not just criminals we are talking about either. What about the suicide rate and the youth suicide rate in particular?
I have nothing against the safe use of guns in clubs, and I’m sure you are very safe with guns, but unfortunately gun safety seems to be a rare thing. Like you say with traffic rules, if everyone followed the rules there would be no accidents. But the road toll keeps climbing each year, despite education programs and hard hitting advertising campaigns.
I've seen that “Guns don’t kill people, People kill people” on so many bumpers, but I don’t agree. And, if you think about it, guns do kill people.
I was taught one rule with guns: It’s always the unloaded gun that does the most damage.
No we can’t go back in time and change the past, but what I’m saying is that we don’t have to keep making the same mistakes over and over again. We can learn from the past, to improve the future. And hey, I wish I had a six pack too.
Cheers
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
SILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,899 posts
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,899 posts
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
Posted:
Not really meaning to get in to the debate or give anyone any fodder to fuel it, but actually I don't think there is much real (as opposed to percieved) correlation between crime and number of guns. I lived in South Africa for a while, which has one of the world's highest crime rates, but has very few guns. Knives are the main tool there. Guns are not unknown in crime there, but the fact remains that most criminals do not have guns there.
Another point is that America's crime rate is not particularly high. There are a helluvalotta guns there though.
These two fact do not mean that there is an inverse correlation between crime rate and number of guns though - I don't think that exists either. Where you are going to find a statistically significant correlation is probably between poverty and crime, regardless of how many guns are around.
I was raised in America, but do not care for guns at all. The constitution protects the right for people to own guns and that will not change even though the reason for it being in the bill of rights is now hopelessly outdated (it was written at a time when the most advanced military weapon was a long barrelled muzzle loading sniper musket and public militias could concievably overthough a corrupt government try that with a hunting rifle or hangun when the government has F-16s and chemicle weapons)
Anyway, I'll probably regret having said anything, but I did so....
Written by: Stone
Actually, there is a high correlation rate between guns and crime; the higher the number of guns in a population, the higher the crime rate. So banning guns would reduce crime, but I don’t think that legalisation would be very popular in the US
Not really meaning to get in to the debate or give anyone any fodder to fuel it, but actually I don't think there is much real (as opposed to percieved) correlation between crime and number of guns. I lived in South Africa for a while, which has one of the world's highest crime rates, but has very few guns. Knives are the main tool there. Guns are not unknown in crime there, but the fact remains that most criminals do not have guns there.
Another point is that America's crime rate is not particularly high. There are a helluvalotta guns there though.
These two fact do not mean that there is an inverse correlation between crime rate and number of guns though - I don't think that exists either. Where you are going to find a statistically significant correlation is probably between poverty and crime, regardless of how many guns are around.
I was raised in America, but do not care for guns at all. The constitution protects the right for people to own guns and that will not change even though the reason for it being in the bill of rights is now hopelessly outdated (it was written at a time when the most advanced military weapon was a long barrelled muzzle loading sniper musket and public militias could concievably overthough a corrupt government try that with a hunting rifle or hangun when the government has F-16s and chemicle weapons)
Anyway, I'll probably regret having said anything, but I did so....
-v-
Wiederstand ist Zwecklos!
Pooh-Bah
1,662 posts
Location: Bristol
1,662 posts
Location: Bristol
Posted:
so what you['re saying is that americans have the right to own guns because americans have given themselves the right to own guns.
sounds a bit like, bush is going to war in iraq because he's given himself permission to go to war in iraq doesn't it? (ok, and blair too if i'm going to be picky..)
Just because some people say it's ok for them to do something doesn't actaually automatically give them the right.
I know a few americans and (one in particular..
) i love them to bits, but the fact that guns are legal over makes it very very very VERY unlikely that i will ever visit america - you see theres just a lot less chance that i will get shot here - guns being illegal and all.
Written by: insaineCRAZY
Guns, we have a right to own them. It is in the same document that lays out all of our rights. End of story, Americans have the right to own guns.
so what you['re saying is that americans have the right to own guns because americans have given themselves the right to own guns.
sounds a bit like, bush is going to war in iraq because he's given himself permission to go to war in iraq doesn't it? (ok, and blair too if i'm going to be picky..)
Just because some people say it's ok for them to do something doesn't actaually automatically give them the right.
I know a few americans and (one in particular..
) i love them to bits, but the fact that guns are legal over makes it very very very VERY unlikely that i will ever visit america - you see theres just a lot less chance that i will get shot here - guns being illegal and all. I had a dream that my friend had a
strong-bad pop up book,
it was the book of my dreams.
GOLD Member
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
fair points vanize, I knew the correlation stuff was a bit vague, but I think you will find it is accurate. America's crime rate may not be particularly high in comparison to South Africa, but I’m sure it’s high in comparison to other countries. I will get back when I’ve had enough time to substantiate the claims. I'm flat out today.
fair points vanize, I knew the correlation stuff was a bit vague, but I think you will find it is accurate. America's crime rate may not be particularly high in comparison to South Africa, but I’m sure it’s high in comparison to other countries. I will get back when I’ve had enough time to substantiate the claims. I'm flat out today.
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
Internet Hate Machine
10,530 posts
Location: They seek him here, they seek him there...
10,530 posts
Location: They seek him here, they seek him there...
Posted:
Nope, sorry. I dont agree. Guns are never safe. Period. Even with the saftey on, i have seen guns go off, from being dropped or from an iontenral malfunction. Guns are never, ever safe. They are designed to kill and hurt, and in the case of the new britishe rifle, even dismember. Guns are unpleasant.
However, wot he said about not reducing gun crimes is kinda true. The criminals will still have wapons. BUt if u made it really hard to get weapons in the first palce,reduce the crime a little bit, which is better than no change at all.
I am proud to be british, but im not proud ogf the people in it. Bloody racists, and football thugs really piss me off.
Written by: insaineCRAZY
If everyone follows trafic laws driving is a safe thing, if everyone follows weapon rules, guns are a safe thing.
Nope, sorry. I dont agree. Guns are never safe. Period. Even with the saftey on, i have seen guns go off, from being dropped or from an iontenral malfunction. Guns are never, ever safe. They are designed to kill and hurt, and in the case of the new britishe rifle, even dismember. Guns are unpleasant.
However, wot he said about not reducing gun crimes is kinda true. The criminals will still have wapons. BUt if u made it really hard to get weapons in the first palce,reduce the crime a little bit, which is better than no change at all.
I am proud to be british, but im not proud ogf the people in it. Bloody racists, and football thugs really piss me off.
The existance of flamethrowers says that someone, somewhere, at sometime said "I need to set that thing on fire, but it's too far away."
SILVER Member
Scientist!
578 posts
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Scientist!
578 posts
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Posted:
I thought I'd float in and finally voice my opinion on this, although it's been said by others before, just thought that I'd add my personal bit to this.
I live in Canada. I am happy to live here. We leave our doors locked all year round (makes it easy for me to get in after late night parties ^.^'), we don't have to worry about locking them or someone breaking in all the time.
I am not so happy with my town, as it is one of the main organization centers for the KKK in Southern Ontario, and we have had times where the KKK had rallies, or tried to recruit in our high schools etc... but that's stupid people being stupid more than anything else.
And to anyone who thinks Guns are a good thing, I know (or rather, knew) 3 people who have died in accidents with 'safe' guns. They were registered, they were supposed to be unloaded with the ammo locked up. If this was all supposed to be so safe, why are my 3 school mates dead?
Why is it possible to buy ammunition at a WalMart? I can go to my local Walmart and buy shotgun shells and shot for them. All I need is to find a gun to shoot it with and I'm set for my killing spree, just like all those things on TV. I don't agree with everything my country does, but I'd rather live here, and only know 3 people dead, then have to live in some places in the US and know a dozen, or live in a war torn or third world country where I know more dead people than alive.
I thought I'd float in and finally voice my opinion on this, although it's been said by others before, just thought that I'd add my personal bit to this.
I live in Canada. I am happy to live here. We leave our doors locked all year round (makes it easy for me to get in after late night parties ^.^'), we don't have to worry about locking them or someone breaking in all the time.
I am not so happy with my town, as it is one of the main organization centers for the KKK in Southern Ontario, and we have had times where the KKK had rallies, or tried to recruit in our high schools etc... but that's stupid people being stupid more than anything else.
And to anyone who thinks Guns are a good thing, I know (or rather, knew) 3 people who have died in accidents with 'safe' guns. They were registered, they were supposed to be unloaded with the ammo locked up. If this was all supposed to be so safe, why are my 3 school mates dead?
Why is it possible to buy ammunition at a WalMart? I can go to my local Walmart and buy shotgun shells and shot for them. All I need is to find a gun to shoot it with and I'm set for my killing spree, just like all those things on TV. I don't agree with everything my country does, but I'd rather live here, and only know 3 people dead, then have to live in some places in the US and know a dozen, or live in a war torn or third world country where I know more dead people than alive.
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> STAY SAFE! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/hug.gif" alt="" />
newbie
1 post
Location: I LIVE IN MELBURNE!
1 post
Location: I LIVE IN MELBURNE!
Posted:
are you serious! wow gwb must be a reall bad bad person! im trying not to sware about him i hate him so much! is he really that bad? have fun!
are you serious! wow gwb must be a reall bad bad person! im trying not to sware about him i hate him so much! is he really that bad? have fun!
hey all! im tom and im a dancer! :P:P:P:P and yeh! have fun firetwirling and talk talk talk!
Master of the Munchkins
246 posts
246 posts
Posted:
gwb is bad neway, u dont have to see wat hes sed, although most of it is really stupid, just look at wat he does, war here there and everywhere, and for no valid reason, WMD's my ass
gwb is bad neway, u dont have to see wat hes sed, although most of it is really stupid, just look at wat he does, war here there and everywhere, and for no valid reason, WMD's my ass
Are you that clever that you smile forever? 
What's from the Earth is of the greatest worth
Internet Hate Machine
10,530 posts
Location: They seek him here, they seek him there...
10,530 posts
Location: They seek him here, they seek him there...
Posted:
ur ass isnt that bad
Bush is a war mongering money grabbing weener... i still cant understand how he was re-elected
Written by: Stainless Munchkin
WMD's my ass
ur ass isnt that bad
Bush is a war mongering money grabbing weener... i still cant understand how he was re-elected
The existance of flamethrowers says that someone, somewhere, at sometime said "I need to set that thing on fire, but it's too far away."
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
I hate guns. But I support gun rights.
Here's why: It's unfortunate, but the right to bear arms was put into the Bill of Rights. Those ten amendments are fundamental to our government.
I support gun rights ONLY because if we can play with Amendment 2, then why not 1? Or 5? Or 4? Or 3? Or 9?
I hate guns. But I support gun rights.
Here's why: It's unfortunate, but the right to bear arms was put into the Bill of Rights. Those ten amendments are fundamental to our government.
I support gun rights ONLY because if we can play with Amendment 2, then why not 1? Or 5? Or 4? Or 3? Or 9?
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
Internet Hate Machine
10,530 posts
Location: They seek him here, they seek him there...
10,530 posts
Location: They seek him here, they seek him there...
Posted:
thta is aa good point. Screw with one rule, u give sum1 else an excuse(/right, depending how u look at it) to screw with others.. which cud cause anarchy.. or sumthing...
thta is aa good point. Screw with one rule, u give sum1 else an excuse(/right, depending how u look at it) to screw with others.. which cud cause anarchy.. or sumthing...
The existance of flamethrowers says that someone, somewhere, at sometime said "I need to set that thing on fire, but it's too far away."
Master of the Munchkins
246 posts
246 posts
Posted:
i dont know about amendments, cos im british, im proud of bein british, and i think recreational gun use can be very fun, e.g. clay pigeon. here in brit we arent allowed hand guns nemore, and I think that there is a lot less fear than in america, for instance we can play with cap guns & bb guns in the street, but i think (correct me if im wrong) people would freak in america if there was a sound that was similiar to a gunshot
i dont know about amendments, cos im british, im proud of bein british, and i think recreational gun use can be very fun, e.g. clay pigeon. here in brit we arent allowed hand guns nemore, and I think that there is a lot less fear than in america, for instance we can play with cap guns & bb guns in the street, but i think (correct me if im wrong) people would freak in america if there was a sound that was similiar to a gunshot
Are you that clever that you smile forever?
What's from the Earth is of the greatest worth
Internet Hate Machine
10,530 posts
Location: They seek him here, they seek him there...
10,530 posts
Location: They seek him here, they seek him there...
Posted:
A guy in Ireland was shot dead by an off duty policmen when he tried to rob a petrol station with a replica Glock 45 BB gun.
Silly sod.
A guy in Ireland was shot dead by an off duty policmen when he tried to rob a petrol station with a replica Glock 45 BB gun.
Silly sod.
The existance of flamethrowers says that someone, somewhere, at sometime said "I need to set that thing on fire, but it's too far away."
BRONZE Member
Member
97 posts
Location: Kamloops BC, Canada
Member
97 posts
Location: Kamloops BC, Canada
Posted:
i'm proud to be canadian, i've lived here my whole life. i'm proud of the friends it has given me and proud of the gifts canada has given me. i've got a roof over my head, a good job that lets me save for a rainy day. what the rest of the world thinks of canada is beyond my control. so i tend not to let that bother me. as far as the government goes, they're in power because we put them there. i vote in every election because it is my only real control over our government. honest truth i'm optimistic of the current government. with the liberal minority working well with the conservative opposition, i feel the majority of canada's people are being looked after. a balanced budget that both sides agreed on, you can't argue with that. and for sure we are america's little brother, but what else can you expect from our geographical location. i am canadian and will forever be canadian. and i refuse to be be ashamed of who i am.
and yes fellow canadians i am aware i sound like a beer commercial.
i'm proud to be canadian, i've lived here my whole life. i'm proud of the friends it has given me and proud of the gifts canada has given me. i've got a roof over my head, a good job that lets me save for a rainy day. what the rest of the world thinks of canada is beyond my control. so i tend not to let that bother me. as far as the government goes, they're in power because we put them there. i vote in every election because it is my only real control over our government. honest truth i'm optimistic of the current government. with the liberal minority working well with the conservative opposition, i feel the majority of canada's people are being looked after. a balanced budget that both sides agreed on, you can't argue with that. and for sure we are america's little brother, but what else can you expect from our geographical location. i am canadian and will forever be canadian. and i refuse to be be ashamed of who i am.
and yes fellow canadians i am aware i sound like a beer commercial.
"Not all who wander are lost. "
J.R.R. Tolkien
SILVER Member
Scientist!
578 posts
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Scientist!
578 posts
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Posted:
You clearly don't have to look at Dalton McGuinty everyday when you turn on your tv -.-
But I agree about the government issues, I'm hoping they do manage to get somewhere together, and put the bloody sponsorship scandal bit behind them -.-' Every day I hear more 'break news' about it on the radio.
And Yex, I AM CANADIAN
For anyone non-Canadian people out there,
https://www.coolcanuckaward.ca/joe_canadian.htm
Check it out
You clearly don't have to look at Dalton McGuinty everyday when you turn on your tv -.-
But I agree about the government issues, I'm hoping they do manage to get somewhere together, and put the bloody sponsorship scandal bit behind them -.-' Every day I hear more 'break news' about it on the radio.And Yex, I AM CANADIAN
For anyone non-Canadian people out there,
https://www.coolcanuckaward.ca/joe_canadian.htm
Check it out
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> STAY SAFE! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/hug.gif" alt="" />
BRONZE Member
Member
97 posts
Location: Kamloops BC, Canada
Member
97 posts
Location: Kamloops BC, Canada
Posted:
"Not all who wander are lost. "
J.R.R. Tolkien
BRONZE Member
member
82 posts
Location: Clapham, London, United Kingdom
member
82 posts
Location: Clapham, London, United Kingdom
Posted:
So do Canadians right but their gun crime levels are much lower aren't they?
America get too hung up on their rights and don't thik about the fact that often these rights conflict with others rights, it's a very selfish culture. You have the right to own a gun, but i have the right not to be shot. But even if I break into your house? Not anymore...right!
It's the same irony as with this lady and her feeding tube. Bush said " it is always right to err on the side of life" That apparently just holds true until you do something to get the death penalty. How can these two things exist as being right in the same mind?
I must admit America makes me sad, and yes I have been there, I don't understand how you can be proud of a country where your own people are left to strve and die of treatable illnesses if they can't afford to pay.
And It looks like we are going the same way... Time to move to Mars...
Written by: insaineCRAZY
Guns, we have a right to own them. It is in the same document that lays out all of our rights. End of story, Americans have the right to own guns
So do Canadians right but their gun crime levels are much lower aren't they?
America get too hung up on their rights and don't thik about the fact that often these rights conflict with others rights, it's a very selfish culture. You have the right to own a gun, but i have the right not to be shot. But even if I break into your house? Not anymore...right!
It's the same irony as with this lady and her feeding tube. Bush said " it is always right to err on the side of life" That apparently just holds true until you do something to get the death penalty. How can these two things exist as being right in the same mind?
I must admit America makes me sad, and yes I have been there, I don't understand how you can be proud of a country where your own people are left to strve and die of treatable illnesses if they can't afford to pay.
And It looks like we are going the same way... Time to move to Mars...
SILVER Member
coming to a country near you
4,696 posts
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear, Australia
coming to a country near you
4,696 posts
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear, Australia
Posted:
I'm from Australia, i live about two hours drive away from Port Aurthur, where the worst gun related murder took place in Australia. One unstable man was able to Aquire Automatic Rifles and suddenly over 30 innocent people are dead. Since then Australia overhauled its gun laws.
the question InsaineCRAZY needs to ask is do i really have any practical use for a fully automatic assault rifle when i live in the middle of a city?(not saying you own one, but you could if you want right?) while i understand that you may be a law obiding citizen is it really neccisary for a law obiding citizen to be armed with automatic rifles? no. that is why refrom is needed as the declaration is way outdated. Feel free to enjoy your gun club, but i just dont get why americans feel any need to be so arsenal inclined. If such weapons are not allowed, the criminals who obtain them will be put away even longer, would'nt that help that situation?
arg, mixed up rant, basically there is no need for people in a structured western counrty to be so heavily armed, it just makes it more dangerous for everybody.
p.s. when i was 9 i went to america and i tell you, seeing people walking around with hunting knifes strapped to their belts wasn't making me feel safe!
--paranoid--
I'm from Australia, i live about two hours drive away from Port Aurthur, where the worst gun related murder took place in Australia. One unstable man was able to Aquire Automatic Rifles and suddenly over 30 innocent people are dead. Since then Australia overhauled its gun laws.
the question InsaineCRAZY needs to ask is do i really have any practical use for a fully automatic assault rifle when i live in the middle of a city?(not saying you own one, but you could if you want right?) while i understand that you may be a law obiding citizen is it really neccisary for a law obiding citizen to be armed with automatic rifles? no. that is why refrom is needed as the declaration is way outdated. Feel free to enjoy your gun club, but i just dont get why americans feel any need to be so arsenal inclined. If such weapons are not allowed, the criminals who obtain them will be put away even longer, would'nt that help that situation?
arg, mixed up rant, basically there is no need for people in a structured western counrty to be so heavily armed, it just makes it more dangerous for everybody.
p.s. when i was 9 i went to america and i tell you, seeing people walking around with hunting knifes strapped to their belts wasn't making me feel safe!
--paranoid--
"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"
jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley
eating apples with chopsticks can be rather difficult
167 posts
Location: Perth, Western Australia
167 posts
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posted:
i am very non partiotic. im not sure why - (well i dont support the current government) but neither does my friend, and she is very proud to be australian. i just dont understand it! but i guess thats just me and how i was brought up.
i guess i AM glad that i was born and live in australia, it is a great country to live in, but pride for it? *confused* maybe i am and just havent realised it.. i dunno..
i am very non partiotic. im not sure why - (well i dont support the current government) but neither does my friend, and she is very proud to be australian. i just dont understand it! but i guess thats just me and how i was brought up.
i guess i AM glad that i was born and live in australia, it is a great country to live in, but pride for it? *confused* maybe i am and just havent realised it.. i dunno..
newbie
9 posts
9 posts
Posted:
From the rest of your post I assume you meant to see that we leave our doors unlocked.
Come on, Canada is a great place, but does the average Canadian really leave their door unlocked in Toronto? I know they do if you ask Michael Moore, but that is not the Canada I know. The Canada I know is full of raving nationalists that spend all their time talking about how bad the States is but can not see the problems that exist here.
EDITED_BY: dirty little rat (1111727415)
Written by: ImmortalAngel
I live in Canada. I am happy to live here. We leave our doors locked all year round
From the rest of your post I assume you meant to see that we leave our doors unlocked.
Come on, Canada is a great place, but does the average Canadian really leave their door unlocked in Toronto? I know they do if you ask Michael Moore, but that is not the Canada I know. The Canada I know is full of raving nationalists that spend all their time talking about how bad the States is but can not see the problems that exist here.
EDITED_BY: dirty little rat (1111727415)
Similar Topics
Using the keywords [proud] we found the following existing topics.
- Forums > Pungent Poi [14 replies]
- Forums > injury [1 reply]
- Forums > First Injury [3 replies]
- Forums > fun times [2 replies]
- Forums > HOW LONG HAVE WE ALL BEEN SWINGING FOR [31 replies]
Show more..
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com