I dont get where this delusion comes from that its even the polices job to protect people from crimes. Ask police officials. Not even they will claim that. The polices job is to clean up after somethings happened.
Massive shooting in Colorado during The Dark Knight, 14 dead
- Thread starter subigo
- Start date
I dont get where this delusion comes from that its even the polices job to protect people from crimes. Ask police officials. Not even they will claim that. The polices job is to clean up after somethings happened.
There is a whole thread filled with arguments. Should be somewhat obvious by page 3.
There are things I also cannot understand. But if you can't understand why it is morally right for people to be able to defend themselves, or politically right to be suspicious of government power, then yes I suppose this conversation will seem alien to you. You do come from a continent ravaged by war, genocide and communism in the last century, so it makes sense that your ideology probably isn't as liberty oriented as say countries like the US where they had to win their freedom with blood and pistol. Past is prologue.
Btw, if not for the US having a gun culture, it's possible that Europe would have fallen to the Nazis.
At one time, most people believed the earth was flat. Or that black men should be slaves. That women were chattel property. That the King had divine bloodlines.
What most people believe, more often than not, is a delusion.
You can't articulate a position that is logical, rational and sound in any detail. Or you're just lazy.
Either way, it's hard to take someone seriously who won't participate in good faith. Feel free to proclaim yourself correct, I don't suspect many people care or are considering that opinion in any depth.
You can't sue the police for not stopping crime because it's not in their mandate. In the US, this is explicit case law. The police have no responsibility, legal or otherwise, to protect anyone.
The problem comes that people believe the opposite. Which is frequently the problem. People believe whatever delusion makes them feel good. They will argue vehemently that their delusion is best.
Most of these conversations go nowhere. The people who argue for gun control usually don't understand causality, and have probably never had to defend themselves.
When they find themselves in the unenviable position of needing to defend themselves, they are going to wish like a motherfucker that they had some small arms with which to do it.
Of course by then, it will be too late.
Guerilla I don't have to explain my last comment in 500 words to make it sound articulate, logical and rational. It just is. If you don't care to see what is written there, what can I do.
Look, when you comment my position on guns, justifying that once people believed the world was flat, all I see is a bit of arrogance on your behalf, assuming you are all right. But guess what, USA is the only country in the world that I know of, that has this kind of Gun control policies. So the US is right and the rest of the world wrong, typical.
"Btw, if not for the US having a gun culture, it's possible that Europe would have fallen to the Nazis."
Sorry to say but, for me at least, this is just nonsense. What was the contribution of privately owned guns to the successful end of the 2nd world war?
Edit:
Been a victim of 2 robbery attempts with police a few hundred meters away and successfully managed to solve both situations without any guns and fyi both times faced knifes. I've done it, believe it or not. This is the typical arguments someone pro guns uses to defend the insanity of owning deadly weapons.
Look, when you comment my position on guns, justifying that once people believed the world was flat, all I see is a bit of arrogance on your behalf, assuming you are all right. But guess what, USA is the only country in the world that I know of, that has this kind of Gun control policies. So the US is right and the rest of the world wrong, typical.
"Btw, if not for the US having a gun culture, it's possible that Europe would have fallen to the Nazis."
Sorry to say but, for me at least, this is just nonsense. What was the contribution of privately owned guns to the successful end of the 2nd world war?
Edit:
Been a victim of 2 robbery attempts with police a few hundred meters away and successfully managed to solve both situations without any guns and fyi both times faced knifes. I've done it, believe it or not. This is the typical arguments someone pro guns uses to defend the insanity of owning deadly weapons.
His point was that had people in those countries been armed, the nazis would have been stopped from within.
When these massacres happen, people like you quit being just ignorant, arrogant assholes. Every single person in that situation wished they could have done something, but they couldnt. You telling them that everything was perfectly fine and that its not their job to save their own asses but to wait for police to clean up whats left of them makes you an amoral clown. Using their death to promote whats led to their death makes you the lowest of the low.
Incidentally, it's not as if Europe's gun control laws have succeeded in preventing massacres.
1995 (France):
CNN- Boy kills eleven in southern France - Sept. 24, 1995
http://www.nytimes.com/1995/09/25/world/teen-age-gunman-kills-himself-and-12-others-in-france.html
2002 (Germany):
18 die in German school massacre - CNN
2009 (Germany):
Germany Reels from Deadly School Shooting - TIME
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/12/world/europe/12germany.html
2010 (England):
Cumbria shootings: gunman Derrick Bird kills 12 then shoots himself - Telegraph
Same with Finland (2007):
A Deadly School Shooting, This Time in Finland - NYTimes.com
*Despite lots of folks in Finland having firearms, there are laws against carrying them loaded in public (gun control obviously doesn't only mean banning firearms).
From wiki:
And to repeat a critical point made by guerilla:
Stated differently by Judge Alex Kozinski in a dissenting opinion in Silveira v. Lockyer:
1995 (France):
CNN- Boy kills eleven in southern France - Sept. 24, 1995
http://www.nytimes.com/1995/09/25/world/teen-age-gunman-kills-himself-and-12-others-in-france.html
2002 (Germany):
18 die in German school massacre - CNN
2009 (Germany):
Germany Reels from Deadly School Shooting - TIME
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/12/world/europe/12germany.html
2010 (England):
Cumbria shootings: gunman Derrick Bird kills 12 then shoots himself - Telegraph
Same with Finland (2007):
A Deadly School Shooting, This Time in Finland - NYTimes.com
*Despite lots of folks in Finland having firearms, there are laws against carrying them loaded in public (gun control obviously doesn't only mean banning firearms).
From wiki:
And to repeat a critical point made by guerilla:
Stated differently by Judge Alex Kozinski in a dissenting opinion in Silveira v. Lockyer:
Oh shit when prime minister Julia Gillard and her tyrannical government comes knocking down my door to install energy saving light bulbs I'm gonna wish I had some guns to defend myself with.
I come from a family of heroic firefighters, who oddly enough don't need to carry weapons around and call other people democratic fags for disagreeing with their opinion so they can feel like men. Keep clinging to your gun pal, one day you might get the chance to be a hero too.
You think you should have to carry a weapon to the cinema to watch a batman movie and that's how the world should work? That is terribly sad to hear.
"It just is" isn't an argument. It's an opinion.
You haven't substantiated any of the opinions you've posted. I mean, you could have at least provided some attempt at data, or an analysis of the facts. Nothing. You just keep asserting, "my opinion is right, and therefore it is a good (logical, rational etc) argument".
If you can't see that this is obviously nonsense, then whatever. The world is filled with people like you who confuse belief with reality. I am used to it.
You posted a logical fallacy. You tried to make the point that many people agree with you. That's not an argument, it's an error in debate.
I used the examples to demonstrate to you exactly why any belief held by a large group is not necessarily correct, and thus, invalidating your point. This is proper argumentation.
America was able to raise a massive army in a relatively short period of time, because most young American men learned how to handle firearms at a young age. The Americans didn't just go to war in WWII, they were fucking great at it.
Again, owning a gun isn't exclusively about self-defense against street action.
The argument has been made many times that we own guns to protect ourselves from tyranny. The Americans were able to throw off British tyranny. You guys couldn't throw off Nazi tyranny without guns.
Calling it insane is just trying to be hyperbolic. Firearms are simply a tool. A knife is just as deadly as a gun at close range. You don't see anyone lobbying for knife control.
The fact you have never faced government tyranny, doesn't make all of the genocides and government violence which has claimed 10 of millions of lives in the last century not real.
Consider yourself lucky you haven't had to face what the Jews, Ukrainians, Chinese etc have had to.
It's your choice not to be armed. It is your choice to trust the benevolence of human beings who control life and death in your country. That choice doesn't have to be defended because it is in your favor right now. If it ever changes, you will wish for something to defend it with.
I'm not sure if this is stupid or trolling. Clarify.
If someone had a gun and used it, less people would have gotten hurt, and possibly died.
Sorry to say, but is point was that in some twisted, hard to explain way, american civilians having guns contributed to the successful end of the 2nd world war. Anybody care to explain?
About your particular comment, I would really appreciate the non use of personal attacks and insults, that sure doesn't contribute in any way to this discussion.
Do you really believe armed and untrained civilians stand a chance against police/military forces in any kind of civil unrest? Dream on. There is just one exception I believe: in guerilla wars and civilians would have to have military training and hardcore guns like ak-47's, not pistols or the like.
So what I conclude is: lets all get guns, forget about police and pretend we are still in the 19th century betwen indians and cowboys. Too much video games and movies...
xpath you do realize that governments are the #1 killers of human life historically right? And that genocide is easiest when populations cannot defend themselves? That practically every large genocide has been against unarmed populations? That practically all well armed populations are not the objects of genocide?
You really think your continent is all grown up now, lessons learned, don't need to pay attention to the past?
good luck bro
You really think your continent is all grown up now, lessons learned, don't need to pay attention to the past?
good luck bro
How do you think the Americans threw off the British Empire?
The American old west you refer to is mostly a product of Hollywood movies. There was little recorded violence during that period. Numerous academic studies on this.
Switzerland is a good example of a country with a gun culture which is very peaceful.
This!
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqMlo51U_KQ"]WWII In HD, Episode 1, Darkness Falls (FULL EPISODE) - YouTube[/ame]
False.
Switzerland.
One of the highest gun rates per capita in the world. Higher than the US. Also one of the highest milita gun ownership rates in the world.
One of the lowest gun crime rates in the world. Virtually none.
edit: looks like G beat me to it in mentioning Switzerland but Ill leave these stats if anyone is interested
Fuck you Andrew Scherer. Who the fuck do you think you are substantiating your opinion with facts?
I've always liked Chris Rock's solution.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuX-nFmL0II]Chris Rock on Gun Control - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuX-nFmL0II]Chris Rock on Gun Control - YouTube[/ame]