RE: another take on guns

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: another take on guns

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: another take on guns

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: another take on guns - 11/2/2006 5:39:02 AM

Archer

Posts: 3207
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer

Compliance led them to develop sciences that were well ahead of the West
Compliance led them to great follies (Battan Death March,
Korean Protitution, etc)

It is pleasant taking a night walk when it is too hot to sleep at 3am along the banks of the river in Kyoto and come across a young woman going about her business and exchange pleasantries without her thinking you might be a murderer or a rapist.

As for Japanese compliance leading to crimes against humanity, what about the west and slavery, the genocide of the plaines Indians, the genocide of the Jews and other crimes against humanity? This is a human problem and not a cultural problem per se.

Just gotta do the "but what about the US" thing, LOL I make a pefectly valid statement ballanced with both good and bad that has come from the trait of compliance with working towards the public good. and your best retort is "but what about the bad the US has done?"
weak argument that goes to nothing I said.

I mearly pointed out that we have to look at both the good and the bad the choice of culture addressed was not mine. The core statement applies to almost any culture or country.
When there is a heavy trend towards a trait in a culture rarely is it all for the good.
That includes Western Culture, Eastern Culture, African Culture and South American Culture. I happen to admire much of the cultural contribution Japan has made to the world, I also know that to keep it real we have to look at the good as well as the bad that comes from a culture with a big emphasis on any trait.

It would appear your contention is that I critiqued Japan with the obligatory bash on the US as well. The paragraphs were seperate because I had stopped comparing the cultures at that point.

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Post #: 61

RE: another take on guns - 11/2/2006 5:41:43 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

Slavery and Jewish genocide are a European thing.

(in reply to Archer)

Post #: 62

RE: another take on guns - 11/2/2006 5:44:33 AM

LadyEllen

Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

Slavery and Jewish genocide are a European thing.

Slavery is worldwide ever since forever. Jewish genocide is a Church thing; the Church just happened to find a home in Europe, or rather took a home at the point of a sword. If only we'd had guns then, we'd have kicked those missionaries into touch - so you see the value of gun ownership?

E

_____________________________

In a test against the leading brand, 9 out of 10 participants couldnt tell the difference. Dumbasses.

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Post #: 63

RE: another take on guns - 11/2/2006 6:02:16 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

Slavery and Jewish genocide are a European thing.

Slavery is worldwide ever since forever. Jewish genocide is a Church thing; the Church just happened to find a home in Europe, or rather took a home at the point of a sword. If only we'd had guns then, we'd have kicked those missionaries into touch - so you see the value of gun ownership?

E

It was only in Saxony where Christianity was spread through violence. In the first century AD the European tribes were on the whole won over by Christianity's promise of redemption. It was only after the church gained political power did it become draconian.

While Christianity is responsible for pograms against the Jews, many times Christianity was used as a pre-text, such as the banishment of the Jews in England in 1290. The crown relieved the Jews of their wealth in the process, after all the crown was broke and needed the money badly and many people went along with it so not have to repay debts to Jewish money lenders and merchants.

(in reply to LadyEllen)

Post #: 64

RE: another take on guns - 11/2/2006 6:09:29 AM

LadyEllen

Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

It was only in Saxony where Christianity was spread through violence. In the first century AD the European tribes were on the whole won over by Christianity's promise of redemption. It was only after the church gained political power did it become draconian.

Untrue. Much of eastern Europe and Scandinavia was converted through violence too. And who was it that destroyed paganism by violence throughout the Med? Its a religion with despicable pedigree, wherever its roamed.

While Christianity is responsible for pograms against the Jews, many times Christianity was used as a pre-text, such as the banishment of the Jews in England in 1290. The crown relieved the Jews of their wealth in the process, after all the crown was broke and needed the money badly and many people went along with it so not have to repay debts to Jewish money lenders and merchants.

And why were the Jews money lenders and merchants? Because the Church had them banned from any other way of making a living. As for the idea of Church anti-semitism being a pre-text, thats untrue too; to non-Christians, a Jew is simply a foreigner like any other - its only the Church that made them seem any different and "require" different treatment.

_____________________________

In a test against the leading brand, 9 out of 10 participants couldnt tell the difference. Dumbasses.

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Post #: 65

RE: another take on guns - 11/2/2006 6:10:24 AM

Archer

Posts: 3207
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline

The argument had it'sto be expected effect it shut down the reading and jumped right to defensive mode.
You are correct the foibles of the west were your point. It still didn't need to be pointed out in response since I was not saying"Japan bad West good", I said "Japan as good example, Japan as bad example, you have to look at both." We agree that it is a human condition problem that applies cross culturally, Which was in effect what I was pointing out in this specific case.

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Post #: 66

RE: another take on guns - 11/2/2006 6:19:30 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

I think I ought to apologize. I jumped in without weighing the argument.

(in reply to Archer)

Post #: 67

RE: another take on guns - 11/2/2006 6:22:24 AM

Archer

Posts: 3207
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline

Accepted and returned with one of my own as I said I jumped right to defensive mode myself.

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Post #: 68

RE: another take on guns - 11/2/2006 6:43:51 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

LE. People use ideologies available to them to justify their crimes. Pre-Christian Europe was not a particularly nice place either, plundering was rife.

(in reply to LadyEllen)

Post #: 69

RE: another take on guns - 11/2/2006 6:48:55 AM

LadyEllen

Posts: 10931
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: Stourport-England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

LE. People use ideologies available to them to justify their crimes. Pre-Christian Europe was not a particularly nice place either, plundering was rife.

Absolutely. But when you're being a pagan warband plundering for personal and tribal gain, everyone is fair and equal game and its not done because you think one tribe or another is subhuman and deserves such treatment. Its far more honourable, as violence goes, than picking on another group because they dont share some ideology, or are the "wrong" race or for some other spurious reason.
E

_____________________________

In a test against the leading brand, 9 out of 10 participants couldnt tell the difference. Dumbasses.

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Post #: 70

RE: another take on guns - 11/2/2006 6:51:18 AM

ToGiveDivine

Posts: 650
Status: offline

The definition of Gun Control is being able to hit your target

_____________________________

These are my opinions - which may differ from your opinions. They may be right and just as equally wrong.

Beware, author is often sarcastic in his replies - most often, no sincere offense is intended.

(in reply to MrrPete)

Post #: 71

RE: another take on guns - 11/2/2006 11:08:20 AM

philosophy

Posts: 5284
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline

......regarding the specific point of any correlation between crime and gun ownership. If we look at multiple countries and their attitude to gun ownership (pro, anti or conditional) and then correlate it against gun or violent crime.......there is no correlation. Ergo, guns do not make you any safer, nor does the act of banning them. Guyn ownership seems to me, to be a cultural thing. Some cultures handle the responsibility of gun ownership better than others.
i find the idea of gun ownership as a protection against crime about as good as the UK fox hunters arguing that they acted as an effective form of pest control.... Pure sophistry. However, i used to argue for gun control in the US, but an American some time ago explained to me that it is less a practical thing as a cultural aretefact......as he put it (paraphrased)...." us American males will put up with a lot of things, but fiddle with our guns, beer or football and we'll bite yer arse"......an honest argument i thought and still do.....

(in reply to ToGiveDivine)

Post #: 72

RE: another take on guns - 11/2/2006 8:10:09 PM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

I shouldn't have used the term "gunshy idiots". Mod 11 has pointed this out to me. If anyone took it personally I apologize, I didn't mean it that way. Actually I did search for a better adjective but could not find one. Believe me I have no desire to alienate anyone here, ESPECIALLY those who disagree with me.

Mod 11 is right, but the fact that such an adjective seemed to fit at the time is obvious. I truly believe that people who don't think people should be alowed to carry guns are badly misguided. Idiot is the wrong adjective, because you can put bad data into the most powerful computer in the world and the results will be bad.

Let me tell you gunshy misguided souls this; the partnership between the government, media and big business controls most of what most Americans see on TV or in print. The FCC has a SWAT team ! They feed you lies as they have fed your Parents lies all along, generation after generation. It has gotten worse, three generations ago a mass disarmament of the People might have been very problematic for them, so they use their control, not only over the media, but the textbooks as well, to get you brainwashed into agreeing with it.

What have they done ? Simple logic dictates that if someone else has a gun you need a gun. Self preservation is supposed to be the strongest instanct. Those two previous sentences are fact, unless you are Bruce Li or something they apply.

What they have done is taken away part of your natural self preservation instinct, which is to be ready for trouble if it hits. I haven't heard a better definition of brainwashing in a long time. They might even get you to go to these feelgood seminars and join a group saying "we can change the world for the better", maybe even learn some chants or something like a church. A church is a place where millions of people leave with their brains cleansed of any independent thought. I am not saying all churches are this way, but there certainly are some.

Another contingent of the gun control crowd do not have the confidence in their fellow man not to misuse the firearm, and some are hot blooded and think that they themselves might not have enough self control. Dr. Sarah Thompson (phychiatrist) has written a very interesting article on this on jpfo.org .

Now she calls it projection, an almost clinical term for a component of human instinct. I put it alot more simply; people want to believe that others are like them. That is how, occasionally, an honest Man gets screwed.

That is why it is so hard for many to believe just how manipulative and malicious the powers that be really are. Tell you this much, if a trillionaire wants to give up his firearms he probably has something better. Who can be convinced to NOT want self preservation ? Some have. They bombard you for decades to get it done too, even in cartoons. In everything, the TV news, the paper, even in works of fiction. Notice the Turner Diaries would never be published by the big boys, but it always sells out. I do not agree with the book, but it is written very well. Many unsuitable things are no longer making it to the mainstream bookstore shelves.

We've been hearing of books being taken out of libraries, such as Tom Sawyer etc.

Here is fact number three, when someone who wants to take gets into a position to take, he will take more and more and more until he dies or something. He will do anything to stay in the position to take, and cares not for anyone, but his buddies who also take.

And it is never enough. Money and power are their drugs, and they have an escalating addiction to it. It will never stop if We The People have no means to stop it, you think they'll see the light one day ? All the sudden become the humble servants that will use their best intellect and guidance to lead this country to our former greatness ? I have more chance of winning the Gold Medal in women's gymnastics than that happening.

Watch, like in England you need a license for a TV set, they tried that with microwave ovens here. They scrapped the idea, know why ? Even though it said something like "$10,000 fine and ten years imprisonment for failure to comply", absolutely noone complied. See it was an idea who's time had not yet come. It was premature.

Watch them take more and more, and you too will see why we need guns. You cannot hold a country with tanks and air superiority only, proven fact. When they get enough of the People pissed off, they won't really know where it's coming from. They don't like that, would you ? I think we need guns. As many as we can get.

T

(in reply to philosophy)

Post #: 73

RE: another take on guns - 11/3/2006 6:27:29 AM

FangsNfeet

Posts: 3758
Joined: 12/3/2004
Status: offline

If guns kill people, then cars also kill people. I still remember the disney cartoon where cars where put on trial. The cars ended up being proven innocent because there defense laywer showed the drunk and the stupid people who drove the cars.

< Message edited by FangsNfeet -- 11/3/2006 6:28:23 AM >

_____________________________

I'm Godzilla and you're Japan

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Post #: 74

RE: another take on guns - 11/3/2006 6:58:44 AM

LordVelvet

Posts: 311
Joined: 4/25/2006
Status: offline

My opinion is if you don't like them, don't buy them but don't take away the right for the rest of us. I saw this bumper stick once that said, to the affect of, " Guns kill people like food made Roise O'Donnell fat"

(in reply to FangsNfeet)

Post #: 75

RE: another take on guns - 11/3/2006 7:28:12 AM

Tied2Texas

Posts: 11
Joined: 10/31/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LordVelvet

My opinion is if you don't like them, don't buy them but don't take away the right for the rest of us. I saw this bumper stick once that said, to the affect of, " Guns kill people like food made Roise O'Donnell fat"

Yep, and obesity kills more people by several orders of magnitude than guns do... and it's about 8 to 10 times worse than all of the deaths attributed to smoking. Ask a nurse, sometime. If you truly want to protect people, outlaw Twinkies and enforce a sensible diet. Close down the fast-food places that are slowly killing people with arteriosclerosis, and you'll save millions of lives.

Fortunately, I live in the US so it's my choice to commit suicide slowly by living how I choose. I also own a handgun and a rifle. The rifle is for target practice, the handgun is for protection.

Quote one of my favorite old-school politicians: "Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one." http://www.jeffersonianparty.com/ I'm sure TJ would be horribly outraged at what we've allowed our Government to turn into...

(in reply to LordVelvet)

Post #: 76

RE: another take on guns - 11/3/2006 7:36:43 AM

candystripper

Posts: 3486
Joined: 11/1/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Quivver

2nd 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.
change this, and what's next???

There is a school of thought that the Constitution should be interpreted by the "intent of the Founders". Generally, this school takes highly conservative viewpoints; e.g., no contitutionally-protected right to privacy exists to support Roe v. Wade or certain other decisions.

However, there is some evidence that the clauses taken from the 2nd Amendment are to be read as a whole sentence. That only when the formation of mitilias is necessary for national defense were the people guaranteed a right to bear arms. This school thinks that time has passed and the 2nd Amendment is now antiquated.

Others read the sentence as having independent clauses and feel the Framers intended to assure that people could bear and hold arms because they wished to prevent the anti-gun environment of the UK. There is some historical evidence on both sides.

IMO, the issues presented by guns must be faced, without guidance from the Framers, in modern-day America. i myself am a moderate; i am not offended by the notions that guns and rifles must be registered; that ownership can be restricted as to minors and felons; that assault weapons and ammunition can be outlawed in their entirety, apart from law enforcement.

The middle is always a fun place to be but doesn't make me right. President Regan's assaination attempt was made with a legally-purchased and possessed weapon. We have a homicide rate that astounds the rest of the world. Should W/we surrender our guns and defend ourselves in other ways? What ways are left?

What of the slogan "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns"? Is it even feasible to try and clamp down on guns in America, if only law-abiding people will adhere to the restrictions?

i'm not absolutely sure how i feel about the question.

candystripper

(in reply to Quivver)

Post #: 77

RE: another take on guns - 11/3/2006 4:44:06 PM

Zensee

Posts: 1564
Joined: 9/4/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LordVelvet

My opinion is if you don't like them, don't buy them but don't take away the right for the rest of us. I saw this bumper stick once that said, to the affect of, " Guns kill people like food made Roise O'Donnell fat"

Sounds good - as long as these are special guns that can only shoot other people who have guns. Otherwise, unarmed people have every right to demand responsibility from gun owners, not just for their own firearms but for the threat their culture and practices pose to society as a whole.
0

_____________________________

"Before enlightenment, chop wood and carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood and carry water." (proverb)

(in reply to LordVelvet)

Post #: 78

RE: another take on guns - 11/3/2006 5:01:43 PM

xxangeltearsxx

Posts: 13
Joined: 10/7/2006
Status: offline

it's easy for them to legislate our rights away, including the right to have a legally obtained and legally permitted gun. because they don't really care about us, just the perks and money they can suck out of us. if you have enough money, as they do, you can always get around the legalities and have whatever you want. and if they can't get a gun, then they can afford to hire bodyguards, off duty cops, and others to protect them. so they play and we pay. but the american people deserve what they get, because most don't take the time to check what our elected officials views are on things that should be very important to us. it's easier just to go down Row A or Row B instead of taking the time to find out more about the candidates. maybe it's time we woke up and started electing honest people with integrity instead of the ones that let the lobbiests make the decisions for them.

(in reply to candystripper)

Post #: 79

RE: another take on guns - 11/3/2006 5:10:31 PM

Sinergy

Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

LE. People use ideologies available to them to justify their crimes. Pre-Christian Europe was not a particularly nice place either, plundering was rife.

I think the human race started to go terribly wrong when the religiously tolerant Romans (circa 200BC) decided to go against type (They had previously never tried to banish a belief system) and wiped out the Druids in England.

This was done because, while the Celtic people and Druids were not really interrelated, the Celts were so frightened of the Druids that they would drop all fighting to do what the Druids asked them to do. What the Romans feared was the Celts being told to go kick Roman butt.

Ultimately, the Druids were chased to the northeast end of England and gratuitously slaughtered by the Romans.

Apparently, the Romans were so impressed by their newfound ability to spread religious intolerance at sword point that two centuries later they decided it was time to pick on the Christians.

Sinergy

p.s. Im not sure I would term the Vikings as being not nice. They lived in an extremely cold part of the world, in large barns, and the only way they could get wealth, women, and cows, was to sail south and liberate them from the people who had their wealth, women, and cows enslaved. Some in the modern world would probably call the Vikings "Terrorists," but I think they were just convinced the coastal lands had WMDs that they had to protect "good people" from.

_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Post #: 80

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: another take on guns

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.094