-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Arnold for President?
Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
jjzelinski
Diamond Member
Ever since I heard him speak at the RNC I've lost any and all respect for the man. When he started bellyaching that Democrats are communists and communists are evil because he feared for his fathers safety under Russian rule my jaw just dropped.
Isn't this the same man who's father was a member of the SS in the Nazi party? Hmm... let's see here, Nazi Germany invades Europe killing over 20 million Russians alone, attempts the extermination of an entire race of humans, pretty much ushers in one of the planet's darkest era's in the last several hundred (if not thousands) of years, and dear old Dad, a card carrying member of the most vicious and horrible aspect of Nazi Germany, supposedly deserves our sympathy for having to live under the thumb of a very pissed off Russia?
Maybe I'm off base here but I would've never guessed that sympathy for ones Nazi father, or anything even remoately associated with that monstosity, would serve as an effective platform by which to convince others of your beliefs and values.
If that's why that man is a Republican, then zieg-friggen-heil that makes him a fascist as far as I'm concerned.
PS
I don't like fascists so he won't get my vote should the opportunity arise 😀
Isn't this the same man who's father was a member of the SS in the Nazi party? Hmm... let's see here, Nazi Germany invades Europe killing over 20 million Russians alone, attempts the extermination of an entire race of humans, pretty much ushers in one of the planet's darkest era's in the last several hundred (if not thousands) of years, and dear old Dad, a card carrying member of the most vicious and horrible aspect of Nazi Germany, supposedly deserves our sympathy for having to live under the thumb of a very pissed off Russia?
Maybe I'm off base here but I would've never guessed that sympathy for ones Nazi father, or anything even remoately associated with that monstosity, would serve as an effective platform by which to convince others of your beliefs and values.
If that's why that man is a Republican, then zieg-friggen-heil that makes him a fascist as far as I'm concerned.
PS
I don't like fascists so he won't get my vote should the opportunity arise 😀
jjzelinski
Diamond Member
So I take that to mean there is a direct correlation between publicly owned assault rifles and a lower crime rate? And here I thought it was that whole silly "Law Enforcement" thing. Btw does NRA know that the average crime rate had dropped during the Clinton administration due to publicly ownd assault rifles? I'm sure they'd really appreciate that tidbit.
I'm guessing you've never been to Canada. You're comparing America to a poor nation where crime is rampant. Why didn't you just go all-out and make a comparison with Rwanda or something?
If people have less access to guns, the murder rate will go down. It only stands to reason.
Here's a link to a decent comparison.
jjzelinski
Diamond Member
Just to feed into this tangent some more and play a bit of the Devils advocate, it's not necessarily inherently problematic for the public to own weapons as pong as everything is impeccably accounted for. Meaning, gun makers, distributors, enthusiasts, everyone who at one point is responsible for the custody of a gun must be held to the highest accountabilty so these weapons cannot simply fall through the cracks, right into the hands of waiting criminals. Problem is, most gun nuts reject that level of tracking as an invasion of privacy.
On a side note, someone really needs to explain to me why it is such a big deal for the government to know about what weapons you own.
On a side note, someone really needs to explain to me why it is such a big deal for the government to know about what weapons you own.
Yeah I?m sure our law enforcement would be real effective without those same weapons that you advocate the rest of America not being able to have.
So are we now the only country in the world that still has an active police force, and when did the rest of the world suddenly give theirs up? I missed the correlation here.
What kills me about the last line is how it illustrates you have no awareness of what the AWB actually enforced. Unless violent crime committed with bayonets decreased during Clinton?s era, I?m afraid I have yet again missed cause and effect. What exactly is an assault weapon in your eyes? Please don?t say automatic weapons either or you?ll really make me fall out of my chair.
Would Switzerland have been a better example for you then?
http://johnrlott.tripod.com/swissgunlaws.html
Sure man. Check this out:
If you made cocaine widely available and made the right to own cocaine part of the US constitution, I can guarantee you that the number of addicts would skyrocket. It's common sense.
jjzelinski
Diamond Member
Whoooooa there trigger, please note that I wrote "publicly owned," meaning people like you and me. I in no way shape or form advocate LE having anything less than the best tools available to them (including assault rifles as needed.)
Now if you read a liiiitle more closely you might pick up on the fact that I was responding to a guy who was suggesting that the reason our streets don't look like Jamaican slums is because our citizens (as opposed to our law enforcement apparatus) are armed with guns. Maybe where you live common citizens armed with guns run around town arresting criminals and send them to jail, but I don't see that very often where I'm at. That's why we have local police around. They're good at that sort of thing.
Lastly, I'm not in favor of changing the constitution regardless of the obselscence of the second ammendment, but to suggest that our crime rate has any significant correlation with whether or not a certain fraction of the population owns guns seems silly at best. You like to shoot guns, hooray. Shoot circles until your little hearts content, but don't pretend you owning a weapon means squat in the way of protecting America.
I guess?.neither the prohibition, nor the war on drugs, has really emphasized that theory, but I guess its still an on going belief for some people.
The main thing I find to be so non-comparable about Canada?s gun statistics to America?s has to do with the land vs. population aspect.
Canada is one of the worlds largest countries?.second if I remember correctly and yet it has the population total of California.
It?s difficult to compare countries when most Canadians would have to travel a few hundred of miles to shoot someone. 🙂
All kidding aside, there are major socio economic factors that also need to be considered in this, just as there is with Jamaica, etc....
So let's see...first you cite Jamaica as an example (small island nation, very poor in comparison to the US). I then refute that and cite Canada as an example (probably the closest nation to the US in terms of culture and geography, and is very comparable where wealth is concerned). That wasn't good enough for you, so you cited Switzerland as an example (the standard example given by the NRA-folk). The thing is, Switzerland is right up there with the US when it comes to handgun deaths. Not only that, but the US has *more* handguns per capita than Switzerland does, despite the fact that in Switzerland gun ownership is mandatory among military-aged males.
The United States has six times the number of handguns per capita as Canada (despite what Michael Moore says). If I lived down there, that fact would trouble me.
What about Japan?. They have a population of ~125 million, but only 60(!) handgun deaths per year.
To say that your family is safer because you own a gun is a fallacy. What are the chances that your child could gain access to it and accidentally kill someone? How likely is it that your wife and yourself get into a heated arguement, and one of you decides to do something drastic with the gun?
Your house would be far better defended by a surveillance system and some good security.
To say that your family is safer because you own a gun is a fallacy. What are the chances that your child could gain access to it and accidentally kill someone? How likely is it that your wife and yourself get into a heated arguement, and one of you decides to do something drastic with the gun?
Your house would be far better defended by a surveillance system and some good security.
If I were you I?d be more concerned with your own countries concerning statistics with rape, burglary, and battery?..because the last I checked they rivaled and in some ways even exceeded that of the U.S.( per capita).
But what can you really expect from a nation that has gone as far as to outlaw crossbows and samurai swords as a form of protection.
I personally wouldn't put that much faith in the "Mounties" to protect me or my family, but whatever floats your boat.
Sorry, but you?ll have to spill that case to someone hasn?t been through a real life situation to know better.
I?ve actually had my home broken into by a person under the influence of drugs. Being forty plus minutes away from our local police department, and watching him actively crawl through my front door window with a knife, while I was on the phone with them, I knew then and there that my faith in our local LE wasn?t going to be enough to protect us.
Lucky for me I had other precautions at my disposal. (BTW: he didn?t die)
If you ever get into that type of a situation you will understand where I am coming from?that is if hindsight is so gracious to give you that ability.
I'm glad you have made your choice on this issue, but for you to make this choice for me is never going to happen.
RabidMongoose
Lifer
I think comparing Canada and the US in this regard is a different situation, IMO. Canada is almost insignificant in the world while the US is the most powerful and significant country in the world.
If your "options" include giving guns to myself and all of my neighbours, thanks but I'll pass. The risk of someone trying to shoot me far outweighs some maniac breaking into my house and killing my family. You're comparing death to monetary possessions. 99% of the time when someone breaks into a house, it's because they want money or property. Guns kill. Possessions can be replaced.
Nobody here has made a movie about our huge crime problem. You said it yourself, the crime rate in Canada matches or exceeds that of the US in some areas. If we use your logic, seeing as there are more guns in the US, the crime rate should be lower. The simple fact that Canada has equal crime rates (for certain things) should tell you that your logic is flawed.
yeah, that sounds legit?..after all, there are 220 m guns in America, and people are always trying to shoot at me. Just yesterday I recall ducking at least thirty or forty rounds on the way to my mail box.
Dangerous to be an America?let me tell you.
?and if my family happens to be in the way of said possession, at the time he wants them, they?ll be entirely at his mercy.
Nice plan?but no thanks. I like it better when I am in the position of dictating what the tweaker with a knife is going to do in my house, with my family.
who da thought that it would be our nations most renown propagandist that would create such a film. All this came from the guy who was also against America dissolving the Taliban. Go figure
I never said it should be lower?.I said that correlations between these things can?t be as easily established as you try to make them. We are not Jamaica, we are not Canada, Japan, or Switzerland?..there are major sociological and cultural difference that need to be established before any such comparison can be valid.
Or that your conclusion that less guns = safer world is flawed. I guess it depends on your agenda.
I think the best resolve for this problem is to let every individual make up there own minds on this issue. After all, I?m not trying to enforce any type of policy on anyone else, so a little consideration should be in order for those people to do the same.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
