quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
You may a bright girl, I haven't seen many of your posts so can't say but improved discussion skills would certainly improve the all round package.

I'm just bright enough to realize that discussing with you is futile, because no answer anyone is going to give to any of your 'questions' is going to be good enough for you. [;)]

On you're superiority point, do I feel superior to right-wing Americans? Yes, absolutely. Do I feel superior to right-wing Dutch, British, French, etc? Yes, absolutely. Nationality has no bearing on it, I personally think all of those on the right are fools because of the personal values they hold that lead them to the right and I'll defend my point of view until the cows come home. When I'm wrong I'll hold my hands up and say so.

So, settle down and join in or else I'll have no option but to put up a link of Garth Brooks for a Garth Brooks/Europop dance off for the title of most ridiculous music on the planet and I know you wouldn't want that on your conscience.

NG - why do you think right wing views are all of the same ilk, when you deny that your left wing views bear any relation to socialist principles? Just curious.

I thought you were asking for American's views on guns in this thread, but now it seems to me that what you were actually asking for, was for Americans to justify themselves as opposed to your views.

Its not right wing to hold that the citizens of a country - thats citizens, not enslaved tax generators, should have the right to bear arms. Its a natural position to hold that those who abide by the law and contribute to a common wealth, should be treated as adults, surely? For what reason should they not be allowed the freedom to do what they like under laws which they have all agreed to follow?

Or is it that you prefer a system where citizens are strictly controlled by a central government of apparatchiks, and where citizens are happy to idolise their glorious leaders for the small freedoms they are permitted? This is more of a left wing model, (if we are to concede your point that all right wing views are of the same ilk, then all left wing views must also be so), which holds that the people are all stupid and backwards and can only function under the guidance of those who know whats best for them.

I really would like to understand where you are coming from NG. It could be that you are a genius beyond our comprehension - unlikely though, since every post you make on politics et al seems to be far from unique in its originality.

E

quote:

ORIGINAL: subfever

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

However, it is fair to say that the US Government is also on the take. They're milking it.

Of course they are. Although in this context, I prefer to say "the powers that be and their operatives" ... not the government.

quote:

How will you ever change this by sitting in the house with a gun waiting to defend yourself?

You won't.

quote:

Why would the Government attack you when they have what they want?

They wouldn't. They will only attack you if you're perceived as being a threat.

quote:

i.e. more money than they could ever hope to spend - they'll just sit there and preserve the status quo.

Oh, I wouldn't go that far. You can bet your booty that they are working to expand their power base and agendas.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mistoferin

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
To qualify, you'll see I typed that I do not agree with hunting in the context of personal entertainment. If the context lacked clarity then point taken.

Thank you for the clarification. I must admit I am not too fond of the "sport" hunter myself. Too often on my own hunts I have come across the headless carcasses of deer that were left behind after these folks got their "trophy".

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

If I had said relative raw deal then you would have been right to make a comparison with Western Europe. As I specifically mentioned the British Government and the British people your comment is not relevant here. The average Briton may have a standard of living on a par with the average Western European but neither the average Briton or Western European has a standard of living on a par with their respective Governments and establishments.

OK You believe in material equality. Pray tell us how you are going to make this happen and how you are going to keep it that way? You are intelligent enough to know that one person will squander all their money and another will invest and accummulate money and within one person's life time material equality would be a thing of the past. Would you consistently tax financially prudent people back to equality?

A point aside, roughly 3 weeks ago you were arguing that the Germany is governed for Germans more than Britain governed for the British people. Now you're offering a contradictory point of view. Some consistency would be useful here.

A cultural difference. It is not just a case of the British establishment governing the country but ordinary people allowing the establishment to govern the country and being content with that position on the whole. You always talk of government creating the solution of the problems you claim to see in society so you yourself see the establishment as the answer to any solution. In Germany you will find more grass roots social pressure and more grassroots action on social problems, the same with Holland too.

Also, on this very thread you stated that the Dutch enjoy more rights than the Americans. Now you're saying Western Europeans and Americans have similar rights. Again, consistency would support the strength of your argument.

I said in the post you are quoting, western Europe and American rights are pretty much on par with each other with cultural differences. I could have given a league table as to my personal intepretation as where each country exists in that league table but it would have been rather superfluous. I said about the Dutch that I think they have more rights than Americans and I think that because with many things here, such as drugs and sexual freedom amongst other things are down to the individual responsibilty and don't have puritanical laws restricting behaviour. However, we can split hairs and I can make you that league table of rights according to me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrappyDom

NG,

The weapons owned by civilians in the Revolutionary war were more advanced than the military weapons of the day.  By the same token would you want to equate the First Amendment with only refering to movable type and unamplified voice? 

EVERY state that has passed laws allowing law abiding citizens to carry a firearm concealed has seen a decrease in violent crime with some increase in property crime. 

The commonly sited statistic about having a firearm in the home increases your chance of killing a love one counts "loved ones" as including  abusive husbands with restraining orders for domestic violence who are shot and killed by wifey as well as houses where the kids are gang bangers.

France allows gun ownership if you are rich and in Switzerland, every male between 18 and 60 has a machinegun and ammo in the home, Isreal is quite similar.  It isn't guns that cause violence it is economic conditions.

As for my interest in guns, it is many fold.  I enjoy the challenge of target shooting.  Historically, many guns have long storied histories.  I have a rifle built by Westinghouse in WWI for the Russian Czar that was used by the Russians when they invaded Finland and was caputured by the Finns and rebuilt by SAKO a world class factory and put in war reserve by Finland for decades and outshoots almost every other gun I own.  Kind a cool eh?

I like the mechanical aspect of firearms as well, I find machineguns to be as interesting as a single shot rifle, one is the most complicated, the other is the most simple.

Lastly, and in my opinion,most important, is that the First Amendment is the best protection for our freedoms until the day Bush puts a tank in front of the NYT and then the Second Amendment becomes the best protection.  It is a final desperate measure but this is after all a country By and for the people!

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

If I had said relative raw deal then you would have been right to make a comparison with Western Europe. As I specifically mentioned the British Government and the British people your comment is not relevant here. The average Briton may have a standard of living on a par with the average Western European but neither the average Briton or Western European has a standard of living on a par with their respective Governments and establishments.

OK You believe in material equality. Pray tell us how you are going to make this happen and how you are going to keep it that way? You are intelligent enough to know that one person will squander all their money and another will invest and accummulate money and within one person's life time material equality would be a thing of the past. Would you consistently tax financially prudent people back to equality?

A point aside, roughly 3 weeks ago you were arguing that the Germany is governed for Germans more than Britain governed for the British people. Now you're offering a contradictory point of view. Some consistency would be useful here.

A cultural difference. It is not just a case of the British establishment governing the country but ordinary people allowing the establishment to govern the country and being content with that position on the whole. You always talk of government creating the solution of the problems you claim to see in society so you yourself see the establishment as the answer to any solution. In Germany you will find more grass roots social pressure and more grassroots action on social problems, the same with Holland too.

Also, on this very thread you stated that the Dutch enjoy more rights than the Americans. Now you're saying Western Europeans and Americans have similar rights. Again, consistency would support the strength of your argument.

I said in the post you are quoting, western Europe and American rights are pretty much on par with each other with cultural differences. I could have given a league table as to my personal intepretation as where each country exists in that league table but it would have been rather superfluous. I said about the Dutch that I think they have more rights than Americans and I think that because with many things here, such as drugs and sexual freedom amongst other things are down to the individual responsibilty and don't have puritanical laws restricting behaviour. However, we can split hairs and I can make you that league table of rights according to me.

I don't have the will to go through the rest of it but a point of order that may help you to understand where I'm coming from.

You always talk of government creating the solution of the problems you claim to see in society so you yourself see the establishment as the answer to any solution.
 
No I don't. If there is a genuine misunderstanding here then fair enough I'll explain for you.

The current and former British Governments and establishments have no interest in seeing a Britain ran for everyone - this will not change with an establishment based around the monarchy, hereditary wealth and private education i.e. they are all exclusive to a section of society. Exclusive values are contradictory to a country ran for all of the people.

Having said this, I fully believe in the priniciples of Government but one that governs for all of society. In terms of valuing the principles of Government, I doubt I am alone on this board because I don't see many anarchists floating around so I'm not sure where you're going with your "you always see the Government as the solution" line - it is not exclusively my view by any stretch of the imagination.

In a nutshell, I want to see a Government and establishment in Britain that serves the interests of all Britons.

Hope this helps for future discussions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver


OK You believe in material equality. Pray tell us how you are going to make this happen and how you are going to keep it that way?

quote:

ORIGINAL: RiotGirl

are you people argueing about guns?  They're fun, pretty, full of power, are security and well fun!

If guns killed people

then i can blame my bad spelling on this keyboard

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

NG - Yes, I would like to debate with you.

Well, stating that I want "people to step forward and prove they're Nazis" is hardly going to make me interested in a debate"

A while back I said as much - and I also said it was unfair that you are the one who starts threads, positing ideas to improve life (not so much with this one, but certainly with others), which everyone else then critiques, so I would put forward my own ideas.

I did this a few days ago now "Blueprint for Britain;1 Voting Reform (Casual banter - Off Topic discussion). You have not posted one reply to it, though several others have. The ideas I put forward there, are IMO, practical ways to reform the election process so that we can have a representative government, which runs the country for all of the people - which is one of the things you would like to see, according to your comments above.

Given this, can I ask why you have not commented on my thread, which was started as a means of showing greater fairness to you, specifically?

E

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrappyDom

Rule,

I wholeheatedly agree with your assessment of NG, I am going to give it one last shot and then block him as well.

NG,

Lets flip the discussion, if your country slipped into fascism is there ANY point at which you would take up arms or once you lost the ability to vote would you just give up?