Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Maybe you ought to try thinking--are you so behind the times that you don't remember the OK City bombing, the Boston marathon bombing? Didn't you pay attention to the skateboard attack on Kyle Rittenhouse? STFU moron.Makes you think, eh? Hmmm.
Poor baby. You should be more "concerned" about yourself.Maybe you ought to try thinking--are you so behind the times that you don't remember the OK City bombing, the Boston marathon bombing? Didn't you pay attention to the skateboard attack on Kyle Rittenhouse? STFU moron.
Got anymore irrelevant pearls of wisdom troll?Poor baby. You should be more "concerned" about yourself.
France and Norway have much lower murder rate then USA.
Most suicides are done by hanging. How will gun control put a stop to that?Those who support guns are complicit in over 10,000 murders and over 20,000 suicides each year in USA.
Most murder and suicide attempts with cutting weapons are unsuccessful.
Not because of Race, but because of Universal Welfare.Yes, because their people are less violent.
Yes, because their people are less violent.
Most suicides are done by hanging. How will gun control put a stop to that?
Good point, and the 2nd most common suicide method is drug overdose.
Here are the suicide methods ranked by how common.
Suicide methods - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Apparently, a plastic bag over the head and car exhaust are the 2 most common forms of suicide.
But do we really want to prevent suicide?
What right to we have to force people to endure unbearable pain?
Not because of Race, but because of Universal Welfare.
These people have been traumatized by war. In USA, Vietnam Veterans of all races brought a rapid rise in violent crimes. They were traumatized by war. They were ordered to commit war crimes.That doesn't appear to be true. The recent influx of third world immigrants from the middle east has brought with it a rapid rise in violent crime of all types, and gun crime, in countries with extreme gun control laws, is exploding.
Stick it up your ass sideways. US troops were never ordered to commit war crimes and very rarely did. The NVA and VC, on the other hand, committed war crimes regularly as a matter of policy.These people have been traumatized by war. In USA, Vietnam Veterans of all races brought a rapid rise in violent crimes. They were traumatized by war. They were ordered to commit war crimes.
In Vietnam War about a million civilians died from US firepower.Stick it up your ass sideways. US troops were never ordered to commit war crimes and very rarely did. The NVA and VC, on the other hand, committed war crimes regularly as a matter of policy.
Words mean nothing to democrats and other leftists....which is why we need to keep them away from all forms of power....
Stick it up your ass sideways. US troops were never ordered to commit war crimes and very rarely did. The NVA and VC, on the other hand, committed war crimes regularly as a matter of policy.
No, US troops are always constantly ordered to commit war crimes, and always did.
Mai Lai massacre was not the one off claimed, but was standard procedure, with "strategic hamlets" and "free fire zones".
The total was 3 million dead actually, and it was always obvious Ho Chi Minh was the hero who defeated the French.
The invasion of Iraq was not only an illegal war crime of an innocent sovereign nation, but done in the most awful and barbaric war crime possible, "Shock and Awe", eliminating food, water, and electricity to a desert region, killing half a million innocent civilians.
Even submarine warfare by the US was an illegal war crime, causing massive illegal starvation in both Germany and Japan.
Do I even have to mention Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
When was guns ever used to defend your freedom? Be specific.Brett Weinstein is still an anti-gunner......he thinks guns are more harm than good......
He is wrong...but that isn't the point of this post....
Even though he still sees guns as more harmful than good.....he sees them as more good than harmful in the long run.......
As a young man I regarded the second amendment as the founders’ biggest blunder. As we head into 2022, my position has flipped — I now believe history may well come to regard it as the most far-sighted thing the founders did, not in spite of its vagueness, but because of it. It’s like a mysterious passage from a sacred text that forces living people to interpret it in a modern context. The founders believed the people needed to be able to defend their free state — with deadly force — whether that refers to a geographical state, or a state of being, or both.
=======
Most of those stocking up on guns and ammo belong to a culture, and like every other culture, it has its beliefs, suppositions and fears. That culture believes that tyranny may descend on us, even here in the freedom-loving United States of America, and that privately held guns are the key to fending it off.
I’m not a member of this culture, but I believe they may well be right about this.
In a country where politicians are increasingly prone to withdraw or stand-down the police to curry favour with confused constituents, it is easy to see how things can quickly escalate as they did in Kenosha, Wisconsin the night Kyle Rittenhouse shot three men in self-defence at a riot. To be clear, I do not believe Rittenhouse, then 17-years-old, should have been there with his AR-15.
But I also don’t believe the streets of American cities should ever be ceded to violent ideological bullies — a now familiar pattern that set the stage for Rittenhouse’s actions
----
To understand why private guns may be decisive in a fight against tyranny, let’s take a moment to revisit what is assuredly the most inscrutable section of the United States Constitution, the Second Amendment: “A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
It’s almost like a deliberate non-sequitur. In fact, after decades of pondering the question, I’m now fairly convinced that that is exactly what the founders gave us: an intentionally vague pronouncement designed to force the question into the future, to ensure it would be repeatedly reevaluated to keep up with changing weaponry and circumstances. Near as I can tell, it’s a place holder for a principle they could not tailor in advance.
They clearly didn’t want to give the legislature or the courts complete latitude. They tied our hands; our representatives are not allowed to disarm the public, even if a majority desires it. And the founders gave us a strong hint about why — something about the need to protect a “free state” from, you know… stuff. But they didn’t tell us how much firepower citizens should be allowed to have. And thank goodness they didn’t, because muzzle-loaded weapons are no better a model of modern weapons than a movable-type printing press is for an algorithmically personalised infinite scroll.
When was guns ever used to defend your freedom? Be specific.
Or cars, or knives, or bathtubsAlso people prone to suicide should not possess guns.
