Cell Phone Firearms...

[TimberWolf]

I find it ironic that you can get permission from "the State" to kill yourself, but not to defend yourself . . .

Obviously, I'm one of those hard-core "Freedom guys" - I'd rather be a Citizen than a subject.

 

[Amused]

<<

<< If you like living someplace where the elite can tell you what you need or not, fine.

I like deciding that for myself, thank you very much. >>

Hmm.. you're one of those hard-core 'freedom' guys, aren't you?

Freedom is relative. For example, we can choose to get euthanasia and people in the US can not. 'nuff said. >>



Who said I agreed with laws against assisted suicide? If people want to off themselves, I'm all for it.

You know, I CAN disagree with my own government (I do it all the time).

 

[Elledan]

<< Who said I agreed with laws against assisted suicide? If people want to off themselves, I'm all for it. >>

That was not what I meant. I was referring to the fact that many people in the US appear to have trouble with the idea of legal euthanasia.



<< You know, I CAN disagree with my own government (I do it all the time). >>

Luckily disagreement is one of the forces behind progress and innovation.

 

[Elledan]

<< I find it ironic that you can get permission from "the State" to kill yourself, but not to defend yourself . . . >>

Because there's no need to defend ourselves against anything with a firearm. We can have all the knives we want (except certain types ) without license, so enough to defend ourselves with.



<< Obviously, I'm one of those hard-core "Freedom guys" - I'd rather be a Citizen than a subject. >>

What makes you think that people in the Netherlands, or Germany, or any other European countries are no real citizens?

 

[Cyberian]

<< Which gun bans? >>


Oh, I get it now!!
Guns are controlled, and nobody can get one - but there is no ban!
I can be so dense sometimes!

 

[TimberWolf]

Successfully defending yourself with a knife requires physical agility, rigorous specialized training, and a level of mental and physical conditioning that few individuals (outside of the elite law enforcement and spec-ops communities) ever acheive.

You make the frequently fatal assumption that posessing an effective method and ability to defend oneself is dependant upon the presence of an immediate threat. On the global level, that attitude has been a fundamental ingredient in every European war for the past few centuries.

You may think of yourself as a citizen, but virtually every "right" most Europeans claim to posess is merely a priveledge dependant upon the whims and politicol maneuvers of your respective governments. When you must petition government for priveledges, you are a subject. The rights of Citizens supercede the desires of government.

 

[Elledan]

<< Successfully defending yourself with a knife requires physical agility, rigorous specialized training, and a level of mental and physical conditioning that few individuals (outside of the elite law enforcement and spec-ops communities) ever acheive. >>

Sucks to be a criminal then, because it's very hard for a criminal to obtain a firearm, be it legal or illegal.



<< You make the frequently fatal assumption that posessing an effective method and ability to defend oneself is dependant upon the presence of an immediate threat. On the global level, that attitude has been a fundamental ingredient in every European war for the past few centuries. >>

Ah, being "unprepared" thus? Do you really think that some barely trained and unorganized citizens armed with just small guns can do anything against a well-trained army?



<< You may think of yourself as a citizen, but virtually every "right" most Europeans claim to posess is merely a priveledge dependant upon the whims and politicol maneuvers of your respective governments. When you must petition government for priveledges, you are a subject. The rights of Citizens supercede the desires of government. >>

LOL... No European country is a totalitarian country. If one would believe you, then we would have absolutely no rights.

You're dead wrong. We've those fancy laws, called the 'Grondwet', which contains the most basic rights and duties of every citizen. It can not be changed without a lot of trouble, comparable with dropping or modifying an Amandment (sp?) in the US's political system.

 

[Infos]

It would come in handy for all the morons carrying on loud conversations
in theaters and restaurants
I like the name KILTEL better than MOKTEL

 

[Amused]

<< Do you really think that some barely trained and unorganized citizens armed with just small guns can do anything against a well-trained army? >>



Ask the Swiss, North Vietnamese, and Afghanis.

 

[Elledan]

<< It would come in handy for all the morons carrying on loud conversations
in theaters and restaurants
I like the name KILTEL better than MOKTEL >>

Hmm.. how about if that guy with his g/f on the row in front of you just can't stop making noises?

 

[Elledan]

<<

<< Do you really think that some barely trained and unorganized citizens armed with just small guns can do anything against a well-trained army? >>



Ask the Swiss, North Vietnamese, and Afghanis. >>

I don't know about the Swiss, but the North-Vietnamese and Afghanis weren't overweighted, untrained guys and gals who couldn't even march a couple of kilometers through forests, deserts and streams if their life would depend on it.

 

[Amused]

<<

<<

<< Do you really think that some barely trained and unorganized citizens armed with just small guns can do anything against a well-trained army? >>



Ask the Swiss, North Vietnamese, and Afghanis. >>

I don't know about the Swiss, but the North-Vietnamese and Afghanis weren't overweighted, untrained guys and gals who couldn't even march a couple of kilometers through forests, deserts and streams if their life would depend on it. >>



They were common citizens with small, privately owned arms.

Before the wars, the NV and Afghanis were untrained "guys and gals" too.

And contrary to your spoon fed view of the US, not all of us are overweight.

So now you admit a previously unorganized citizen militia IS effective, just not a US one because we're too fat? Am I reading you right?

Sheesh, Elledan, talk about a stretch...

 

[TimberWolf]

<< Sucks to be a criminal then, because it's very hard for a criminal to obtain a firearm, be it legal or illegal. >>


The only requirement for obtaining a firearm anywhere in the world is desire - you cannot "un-invent" the technology. Making a servicable firearm requires little more than some commonly available metal products, a file, and a few hours labor. Buying a firearm is obviously more expedient.



<< Ah, being "unprepared" thus? Do you really think that some barely trained and unorganized citizens armed with just small guns can do anything against a well-trained army? >>



The failed efforts of France and the US in Viet Nam; and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan come readily to mind. And with regard to the Afghani rebels, many villages devoted their non-combatant populations - children, women, and the elderly - to the manufacture of firearms. The products of their efforts ranged from bolt-action rifles to copies of some of the most sophisticated fully-automatic assault rifles, and with remarkably good quality.



<< LOL... No European country is a totalitarian country. If one would believe you, then we would have absolutely no rights. You're dead wrong. We've those fancy laws, called the 'Grondwet', which contains the most basic rights and duties of every citizen. It can not be changed without a lot of trouble, comparable with dropping or modifying an Amandment (sp?) in the US's political system. >>



One could make the same arguement at the beginning of the 1930's - too bad the Nazi occupation a few years later made those "rights" somewhat irrelevent.

The Swiss take a rather different view of things, and they've managed to avoid any invasions for about 500 years - especially during the numerous occasions when surrounding Europe was in flames. No surprise that our Constitutional founders looked to their example for guidence.

A fundamental problem with these dialogs is that I, among many other US citizens, view our Constitutional Rights as more than a collection of "fancy laws".
*************************************

Started to reply before AmusedOne, but my typing skills suck . . . :disgust:

 

[Amused]

<< Started to reply before AmusedOne, but my typing skills suck . . . :disgust: >>



Heh, I'm a two finger typer. You must really suck

 

[Elledan]

Okay, so the next time Germany starts a World War, we'll be overrun (again)? Too bad they'll be part of the EU then.

Two more things:

- I know that about 60% of all Americans are overweight, thus not all of them

- an untrained 'army' consisting out of common citizens can only be effective in a guerilla war, not with direct assaults. During the time this 'army' will have made the necessary mistakes and lost a couple of (hundred) men, they can be considered to be trained. The hard way, that is.

On a sidenote, most wars are now fought mostly from a distance, with missiles. Especially with a country like the US, it's much more tempting to destroy all important infrastructure and buildings and maybe even drop a few neutron-bombs, which would wipe out the populations of a few medium-sized cities within a few seconds.

So, what will then be left to defend? And rather: who would stay to die in a hopeless batle, which would drag on for years?

 

[Elledan]

<< << LOL... No European country is a totalitarian country. If one would believe you, then we would have absolutely no rights. You're dead wrong. We've those fancy laws, called the 'Grondwet', which contains the most basic rights and duties of every citizen. It can not be changed without a lot of trouble, comparable with dropping or modifying an Amandment (sp?) in the US's political system. >>



One could make the same arguement at the beginning of the 1930's - too bad the Nazi occupation a few years later made those "rights" somewhat irrelevent. >>

And you want to say that this would be impossible in the US? You must be kidding.

 

[TimberWolf]

<< And you want to say that this would be impossible in the US? You must be kidding. >>



Arguements in support of any form of weapons control perpetrated by governments throughout recorded history have always been justified in the name of "Public Safety". The actual intent has always been to maintain an offensive advantage for agents acting on behalf of that government; and the ultimate results of implementing laws to that effect have never had any short or long-term benefit for the peoples affected by them. The purpose of "weapon control" has always been "people control".

The Romans sought to limit the use of the broadsword to their Centurions; the English attempted to do the same for their knights with chainmail, plate armor, the broadsword, and in succession, the longbow and crossbow. The invention of firearms was heralded by similar efforts throughout the world.

In the US, the history of gun control starts with the aftermath of the Civil War, and the efforts to restrict access to firearms from the former victims of slavery. Court transcripts up to, and including the US Supreme Court, document the clear understanding of the relevent judges that these laws pertained solely to freed slaves and their decendants, with the intent of protecting those who formerly oppressed them. Those who claim a public benefit for gun control are, in reality, argueing on behalf of perpetuating the racist's preferred legislative tool.

With over 80 million gun owners in the US, and over 270 million legal firearms in circulation - Yes, I think it gives most politicians pause for thought.

 

[MikeO]

<< The purpose of "weapon control" has always been "people control". >>



Oh jesus fscking christ c'mon! If you're saying that Europe is worse than US because of the strict gun control IMHO you couldnt be more wrong. That is one right that should be extremely limited.

The strict gun law is *THE* best thing living in Europe (Finland) - when you're wandering on the streets at night, alone, the possibility to become shot is non-existant, because basically no one has a gun. Even the possibility to become stabbed is extremely low because it's a serious crime and propably gets you in prison.

If you have bad luck, you can get into a fist fight at it's worst. Usually it's just shouting obscenities and "damnnn I'm gonna kick yer asss!!!" type of stuff.

That's just my honest opinion, disagree all you want... the strict gun law is one of the biggest reasons I rather live in Europe than in US.

 

[Amused]

<<

<< The purpose of "weapon control" has always been "people control". >>



Oh jesus fscking christ c'mon! If you're saying that Europe is worse than US because of the strict gun control IMHO you couldnt be more wrong. That is one right that should be extremely limited.

The strict gun law is *THE* best thing living in Europe (Finland) - when you're wandering on the streets at night, alone, the possibility to become shot is non-existant, because basically no one has a gun. Even the possibility to become stabbed is extremely low because it's a serious crime and propably gets you in prison.

If you have bad luck, you can get into a fist fight at it's worst. Usually it's just shouting obscenities and "damnnn I'm gonna kick yer asss!!!" type of stuff.

That's just my honest opinion, disagree all you want... the strict gun law is one of the biggest reasons I rather live in Europe than in US. >>



MTO, please explain why our murder and assault rate with knives is so much higher than your country's rate.

By your logic, the very existence of guns is making Americans stab each other at an alarming rate.

The violence in America is a people problem, not a hardware problem. To compare your violent crime rate to ours, and credit only gun control is so simplistic, it's not even funny. It does nothing to explain why every other means of murder occurs at a higher rate here than it does there.

Meanwhile, explain why Israel and Switzerland are, per capita, more heavily armed than the US, yet have as low, if not lower crime rates than your country???

 

[PCResources]

<< MTO, please explain why our murder and assault rate with knives is so much higher than your country's rate. >>



Ehhh, could it be because the murder rate is much higher in the US???



<< Meanwhile, explain why Israel and Switzerland are, per capita, more heavily armed than the US, yet have as low, if not lower crime rates than your country??? >>



In Switzerland the guns are military assault rifles, legally owned and kept at home by the Swiss army members, if you want to compare you would have to include all military weapons of the US...

Patrick

 

[MikeO]

<< MTO, please explain why our murder and assault rate with knives is so much higher than your country's rate. >>



Dunno



<< The violence in America is a people problem, not a hardware problem. >>



You're propably right. But it's always easier to kill a man with a gun, that it is with a knife or fists. When one has a knife, you can still defend yourself.



<< To compare your violent crime rate to ours, and credit only gun control is so simplistic, it's not even funny. >>



Of course gun control cannot be solely credited.... but are you saying that the gun control has no meaning whatsoever in here, if people would be allowed to carry guns the crime rate wouldnt increase or the nature of crimes wouldnt change? While I cannot prove it, I think you are wrong.


Damn spelling... getting tired thank goodness I dont have to work tomorrow

 

[WhiteWonder]

crazy, i heard they cause cancer, but this is just bad