Open carry firearms.. Our 2nd amendment right!!

[Alvin]

Absolutely not true at all.

The instance of violence and gun violence has far more to do with the varying levels of income in a society than any other factor, whatsoever.

If everyone in the country owned a gun and was middle income, there will be a low amount of violence, including gun violence.
If everyone was rich in a country, and owned a gun, there will also be a low amount of violence, including gun violence.
And if everyone in a country is poor, and owned guns, there would still be a low amount of violence, and gun violence.

It does not freaking MATTER how many people have weapons. EVERYONE has access to weapons.. I can make a Taser out of a disposable camera and a paper clip, for crying out loud.. I have heard of people getting stabbed with a screwdriver. People get SMOTHERED to death with pillows, or bludgeoned with (most recently in my neighborhood) a table leg, or baseball bat, hammer- name your blunt instrument.

We don't need guns to cause violence or deaths.. Guns just expedite the process of killing someone, and cause less bloodshed and effort, so that a person can make a kill with very little effort.

Again, GUNS do not kill people- People kill people.

*Cough* Somalia *cough* Sudan *cough* Chad *Cough* Zimbabwe.

I think you didn't actually mean that...

*cough* Panga *cough* Machete *cough cough*.
Citing events in Africa pretty much proves the point that culture has much mroe to do with violence than the presence or absence of guns.

*Cough* That was after they used the guns.
The same could have been said for Afghanistan, parts of the Phillipines Central America in the 80's etc. It's not a cultural thing as such because under the same conditions with a lack of law, and profusion of firearms this kind of crap happens globally.

 

[JD_2B]

The number of guns in circulation on a national level influence the number of crimes done with the use of guns. They neither rise or lower the crime rate, they simply make things messier. You have a culture of gun ownership, connected with the idea of personal freedom. We have no culture of gun ownership and do not connect personal freedom with the ownership of a gun.


regards
ze germanguy

Absolutely not true at all.

The instance of violence and gun violence has far more to do with the varying levels of income in a society than any other factor, whatsoever.

If everyone in the country owned a gun and was middle income, there will be a low amount of violence, including gun violence.
If everyone was rich in a country, and owned a gun, there will also be a low amount of violence, including gun violence.
And if everyone in a country is poor, and owned guns, there would still be a low amount of violence, and gun violence.

It does not freaking MATTER how many people have weapons. EVERYONE has access to weapons.. I can make a Taser out of a disposable camera and a paper clip, for crying out loud.. I have heard of people getting stabbed with a screwdriver. People get SMOTHERED to death with pillows, or bludgeoned with (most recently in my neighborhood) a table leg, or baseball bat, hammer- name your blunt instrument.

We don't need guns to cause violence or deaths.. Guns just expedite the process of killing someone, and cause less bloodshed and effort, so that a person can make a kill with very little effort.

Again, GUNS do not kill people- People kill people.

*Cough* Somalia *cough* Sudan *cough* Chad *Cough* Zimbabwe.

I think you didn't actually mean that...

All of which are perfect examples of countries in which the income levels vary drastically...

Yes, but guns help! lol

If you are right, a South American Favela would be a place of peace and tranquility.
It is simply far more harder work to kill someone with a pillow, and it looks much less cool when drawn in school or at a fight with your Ex.

Anyway...
But again, if I would live in your neighborhood, I would quickly move to a more quit place.

South America is a continent with very diverse incomes. If the favela was isolated, it would have very little crime, yes. If the slum was close to a middle income area (which it usually IS- that is how they tap into the electrical wires) then there will be blood, of course. And this is not a problem for one "type" of neighborhood, in case you think you are some kind of profiler.. White trailer parks that are not isolated from the rest of society also have a great deal of violence. Same with neighborhoods that are primarily black, and are low income as well. The problem is not that they are low income neighborhoods- the problem is that these people are in a state of poverty, and want a better life, like their middle income counterparts.
You take any village in any part of the world with little MUD HUTS, where the people have to march 20 miles to get WATER for their family to drink, give them all guns- and just watch and see- those people are poorer than the poorest slum of the Americas, and they will not find cause to shoot each other. It has NOTHING to do with how much money people have- and everything to do with how many different income levels and the variance in the quality of life for the entire community as a whole.
When was the last time you had a conversation with a janitor, or a garbage collector?? When did you last say "thank you", while looking directly IN the EYES of your hotel's housekeeper or your pizza delivery person? See- people who are middle income tend to look down on low income people, avoid eye contact, and even tip less than low income people actually tip their servers, and pizza guys. The person living in the highrise condo- maybe will give the guy a dollar or two for a pizza tip, while the person in the small house with the peeling paint will be more likely to give them 3 or 4 dollars. This is TRUE. This is WHY there ends up being violence. People don't like it when other people who are CAPABLE of giving them an adequate tip, just turn up their snobby noses, and get stingy or rude, or entitled. There is a LOT to it, man.

Also- people get murdered/ beat up/ shot/ stabbed/ bludgeoned all over the place, and most people just don't hear about it. Honestly, I would rather live in a lively place like this, where everyone knows everyone else's business, than to be kept out of the loop on these things. This is the one thing I like about blue collar crime- it is so much more HONEST and OBVIOUS than white collar crime. I would prefer the ghetto to the highrise any day of the fucking week. People here are REAL. They are GENUINE. You KNOW who your friends are here. They HAVE GUNS, and, like a small army, they have your back!! Think long and hard about that, would ya please.

All of those are punishible offences under child neglect and endangerment statutes aren't they?

No way! How would it be considered child endangerment to have a fire in the fireplace? And while I can see how someone getting drunk can contribute to child neglect, it is not like everyone who gets drunk neglects their kids.. That is ridiculous.

Having a gun is NOT child endangerment, whatsoever. It is a means of protecting your life, and the lives of your offspring against deadly force.

 

[Yukon]

The slaughter of innocent people in the USA is a right guaranteed in the Constipation. Only in America you say ?

 

[Tom Clancy]

The slaughter of innocent people in the USA is a right guaranteed in the Constipation. Only in America you say ?

Constipation?

 

[Yukon]

Yes Tom, I have taken the liberty of renaming the Constitution to the Constipation. The document has bunged up your entire system and will spell the end of the USA as we know it. You pathetic people can't even sing Silent Night in your Public Schools, you've hit rock-bottom old boy.

 

[Father Time]

Jeesh Yukon you could at least be consistent with your trolling.

 

[JD_2B]

The slaughter of innocent people in the USA is a right guaranteed in the Constipation. Only in America you say ?

What a bunch of hyperbole.

"Slaughter"?? "Innocent"??? "People"???

Allow me to shoot all three down-

Slaughter-
Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary

Search Select another dictionary Select another dictionary... --------------------------- Advanced Learner'sLearner'sAmerican EnglishIdiomsPhrasal Verbs Does your English Dictionary give you the help you need? We publish dictionaries for people learning English all over the world.
Find out more...


Definition
slaughter noun

/ˈslɔː.tər/

/ˈslɑː.t ̬ɚ/ n

•
[S or U] the killing of many people cruelly and unfairly, especially in a war
Hardly anyone in the town escaped the slaughter when the rebels were defeated.
We must find ways of reducing the slaughter which takes place on our roads (= death of many people in motor accidents) every year.


•
the killing of animals for meat
The geese are being fattened for slaughter.
See also: slaughterhouse


•
when one team is very easily defeated by the other
Saturday's game was an absolute slaughter.








(Definition of slaughter noun from the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary)

Clearly, this word is a noun, and does not apply in any sense. It does indicate defeat, or death. In no way does anything DIE during an abortion.

I will now point out the definition of abort to you, to further illustrate this:

Definition
abort verb (STOP)

/əˈbɔːt/

/-ˈbɔːrt/ v

[T] to cause something to stop or fail before it begins or before it is complete
The plan/flight had to be aborted at the last minute.








(Definition of abort verb (STOP) from the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary)

As you can see- aborting a pregnancy is not killing anything. It is STOPPING the pregnancy from continuing to the point of birth. One might say that aborting a pregnancy is stopping the fetus or embryo from continued growth, also, but that is irrelevant, IMHO. That is like saying that removing polyps from the colon is murder, and is heartless as well- why? Because you are destroying HUMAN DNA for the purpose of relieving a little constipation, or irritation.
I say kids can be a royal pain in the ass, and they know how to do it many times a day- far more often than the average person shits. So don't have your fucking polyps removed, when you get them.. it is KILLING, lol...
/sarcasm

OK on to the next issue- "innocent". Well, who defines innocence anyways? Oh that's right. GOD. And guess what? God said that ALL of the children of Adam and Eve will be stuck with the sin of those two.. So it goes to figure that, scientifically speaking- if we are discussing blood being some kind of life force- then the blood of the fetus actually happens to be the blood of the mother AND father. And, we all know- genetic issues aside, even- that blood can't possibly not be tainted already. LMAO!!! Where "sin" is concerned, we apparently ALL have some.

And lastly- "people".. When does personhood begin? Well, we could always start with the biblical stance that once someone takes a breath of air, then they are alive. That is mentioned very frequently in the bible. Soldiers are brought back by God breathing the "breath of life" into their lungs and resuscitating them back to being alive.
We could go on and say that personhood does not start until the person has sentience. This is the common understanding that neurologists have. No cerebral cortex- no person. Fortunately, fetuses do not develop a cerebral cortex until sometime late in the second trimester, I believe. Even still, I personally think that we have a lack of adequate perceptive ability to know whether our current "measuring" instruments can give us any absolute answers right now, to the question of whether the fetus can intelligently process and understand pain, in spite of them indeed having a pain reaction-type of a response. Just because they have a working nervous system does not mean that they feel or understand pain. Plenty of times, even a person who is brain dead will still have spasms of the extremities... so I really don't see how a reaction or physical response is necessarily indicative of a fetus being sentient.

Sooooo.. Yeah!! Have a nice day!! =)

 

[Missourian]

Actually it is rather stupid what you say.

What I meant was, that the possession of a firearm was not a prerequisite of any resistance.

An armed jew was a nuisance, an organized and armed jew was a danger.
There were many examples of Jews resisting to the german army, Warzaw is only a very memorable example. Most of them joined Soviet partisans.
Still, you will need organization more than weapons. These you can steal from your killed oppressors at least. But using them in an organized way makes the difference.

But I suppose you have a very naive and simple view how any dictatorship works.
Do you really think the Nazis came to power or the Shoah happened because of the lack of personal handguns ? Things are a little more complicated than that.

Regards
ze germanguy

P.S.

Here is where your argument falls apart.

If we take your theory as fact "An armed jew was a nuisance, an organized and armed jew was a danger."

If you remove the firearm from either the lone man or the organized group, they were less than zero threat without arms.

It's the firearm that makes resistance possible.

Ever seen "V for Vendetta"?

Dominic: What do you think will happen?
Finch: What usually happens when people without guns stand up to people *with* guns.

​

An one armed civilian may be a nothing nuisances to a giant occupying army, just like a mosquito is nothing but a tiny nuisance to a man.

But standing against a million tiny nuisanses, even the mighty fall.

On Stephen Perry's ranch near Galveston, Texas, a black cloud of insects settles on a herd of grazing cattle. The cows frantically swish their tails, trying ineffectively to brush off the bugs. One by one the cows drop dead—40 in all. Scientists at Texas A. & M. veterinary laboratories determine that as much as 5 gal. of blood has been sucked from some of the animals, more than half of a cow's normal blood supply.


This is not a scene from a 1950s sci-fi film, but a bizarre aftermath of Hurricane Allen, which early in August inundated coastal areas that were bone-dry because of drought, causing salt-marsh mosquito eggs to hatch. Suddenly the mosquito, slightly larger at ¼ in. long than the common backyard variety, became a major plague. So far, the insects have killed at least 49 cows and horses but no humans, though several Texans have been chased indoors or into cars by the voracious bugs.

Read more: Americana: The Killer Mosquitoes - TIME
​

 

[germanguy]

Actually it is rather stupid what you say.

What I meant was, that the possession of a firearm was not a prerequisite of any resistance.

An armed jew was a nuisance, an organized and armed jew was a danger.
There were many examples of Jews resisting to the german army, Warzaw is only a very memorable example. Most of them joined Soviet partisans.
Still, you will need organization more than weapons. These you can steal from your killed oppressors at least. But using them in an organized way makes the difference.

But I suppose you have a very naive and simple view how any dictatorship works.
Do you really think the Nazis came to power or the Shoah happened because of the lack of personal handguns ? Things are a little more complicated than that.

Regards
ze germanguy

P.S.

Here is where your argument falls apart.

If we take your theory as fact "An armed jew was a nuisance, an organized and armed jew was a danger."

If you remove the firearm from either the lone man or the organized group, they were less than zero threat without arms.

It's the firearm that makes resistance possible.

Ever seen "V for Vendetta"?

Dominic: What do you think will happen?
Finch: What usually happens when people without guns stand up to people *with* guns.

​

An one armed civilian may be a nothing nuisances to a giant occupying army, just like a mosquito is nothing but a tiny nuisance to a man.

But standing against a million tiny nuisanses, even the mighty fall.

On Stephen Perry's ranch near Galveston, Texas, a black cloud of insects settles on a herd of grazing cattle. The cows frantically swish their tails, trying ineffectively to brush off the bugs. One by one the cows drop dead—40 in all. Scientists at Texas A. & M. veterinary laboratories determine that as much as 5 gal. of blood has been sucked from some of the animals, more than half of a cow's normal blood supply.


This is not a scene from a 1950s sci-fi film, but a bizarre aftermath of Hurricane Allen, which early in August inundated coastal areas that were bone-dry because of drought, causing salt-marsh mosquito eggs to hatch. Suddenly the mosquito, slightly larger at ¼ in. long than the common backyard variety, became a major plague. So far, the insects have killed at least 49 cows and horses but no humans, though several Texans have been chased indoors or into cars by the voracious bugs.

Read more: Americana: The Killer Mosquitoes - TIME
​

Well, if I remember "V as Vendetta" right, the military backs off when the mass of people in Guy Fawkes masks is closing.
This you must realize:
Once you have the people on the street in tens of thousands, every military will start to think twice: How many can we shoot, how long it will take until they rip us apart with bare hands ?
A large mass of people is a very impressive picture and even if they are unarmed you realize very quickly, what the potential of these mass is.
So, the very moment an unarmed mass of people is out on the street, they form a threat you might get under control with police tactics, but quite unlikely with military tactics.

A large armed resistance group, let´s they the French Resistance in occupied France in WWII had to operate under different conditions.
They were unable to take over the control of France, because the German Army, the Gestapo and their french cronies effectively controlled the country.
The use of terrorist tactics then made the life of the Germans harder there, but it still took the military power of the UK, the US and the UdSSR to change this. The Resistance in France helped, was a perhaps locally a deadly threat, but they virtually were unable to kick the Wehrmacht out of France alone.
Same applies for the Jews in Warzaw and wherever they picked up arms: it was brave and honorable, but futile in the end.

So, in case an occupation army will occupy the US, I dare to say, that millions will pick up their weapons. But if they only do this unorganized or only organized locally, their resistance will easily be quelled.
On the other hand, you see today, how difficult it is for a modern army to control a 3rd World country, if there is organized resistance.

So, we might see a watershed here, as it proves more and more difficult for armies to effectively an occupied territory (I.e. Israel, Chechnya, Afghanistan and Iraq). But only if the resistance there gets it´s stuff together.

Leaves the individual right to possess a firearm.
Is it necessary ? Depends upon what you consider safe.

Statistically you are as a german citizen rather safe to become victim of a crime (left out the regional differences and differences between city and countryside).
Still you might feel better when owning a gun.

Americans will be not much different, as I suppose not everybody feels the need to have a gun.

Additionally a lot of Americans seem to have a deep felt distrust against their government.
Militias which organize armed resistance against the federal government are - correct me here - rather a typical American thing.
Again, as the federal government rather seldom clashes with it´s citizens in force, one might endlessly debate the necessity of this.

So, I think your picture is compelling, but leads not in the right direction.
Mosquitos do not worry about families, about their life, about anything else. They attack and nothing else. This you can not beat if coming in masses.

Anyway, I personally do not believe that a firearm will make me safer than not having it.
So, as said before, I will die as a victim of crime and oppression.

Regards
ze germanguy

 

[Dr Grump]

The "rights of an Englishman" apparently no longer includes the most basic human right, the right to self defense. Britons that defend their homes with firearms are feeling the full weight of the law come down on their heads and these fine folks were once "law abiding" but since the laws are restrictive that claim can no longer be made. Austrailia and New Zealand are also expericing similiar conditions. Canada is experiencing an increase in drug related gun crimes. Is Mexico heterogeneous? Has restricting lawfull gun ownership paid dividends in Mexico?

New Zealand has always had restrictive firearms laws. Rightly so too...There has been the odd incident where a farmer has used a firearm to protect themselves. In both cases the police charged the farmer and the jury acquitted them.

The last bolded part - are you saying the comparatively unrestricted US take on guns has paid dividends vis-a-vis the violent crime rate in that country?

 

[Citizen]

The Constitution does not grant rights. You, I, and others understand that simple fact. It prevents the federal government from infringing the right of the people to bear arms. It does not prevent the state government from restricting as they will.

I have come across the premise before that the Constitution does not grant rights, I disagree with that. Simply because the word GRANT or a synonym is not used, some say it is not a grant to the people.

WHY was it called the Bill of RIGHTS? If it did not grant rights to not be abridged, then it should have been called the Bill of Prohibitions, as Hamilton suggested.

It may be called the Bill of Rights because they were spelling out some of our existing rights that the government could not infringe upon, along with the 9th Amendment which states that just because a right was not included in the Constitution does not mean that the people do not hold that right.

In other words, if the Constitution does not state that the people do not have a specific right, then they do hold that right, as long as it does not infringe upon the individual right of another.

 

[Yukon]

The lies of the JEW are the danger.

 

[Diuretic]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzxXvVJSMoc[/ame]

Saw this film as a young child, never forgot it.

 

[Yukon]

Please Herr GermanGuy we don't need comments about Jews or anything to do with WWII or WWI from you.

 

[germanguy]

Please Herr GermanGuy we don't need comments about Jews or anything to do with WWII or WWI from you.

Why ?

ze germanguy

 

[Diuretic]

Please Herr GermanGuy we don't need comments about Jews or anything to do with WWII or WWI from you.

Why ?

ze germanguy

Yukon doesn't like competition GG - besides you might say something rational.


But given that the Jews (more accurately Hebrews) are extremely important to the development of western civilisation and are now demonised due to the policies of the Israeli government it could get a bit intricate and people's pre-conceived prejudices might get a battering.

 

[Yukon]

Jews are demonized maybe because they are demons? They did murder our Lord Jesus.

 

[germanguy]

Jews are demonized maybe because they are demons? They did murder our Lord Jesus.

ROFL - He was a Jew as well, so what does this tells us ?
A demon demonized by demons ? Or is our Lord a Demon ?
I start getting confused.....

regards

ze germanguy