Yet Another Way of Life Threatened by Those Who Want To Force Other People How to Live.

BTW, here is an example, of the many, of what happens when a crazy person/criminal doesn't have firearms yet wants to kill people.

The Daegu subway fire was a mass murder on February 18, 2003 which killed at least 198 people and injured at least 147. An arsonist set fire to a train stopped at the Jungangno Station of the Daegu Metropolitan Subway in Daegu, South Korea. The fire then spread to a second train which had entered the station from the opposite direction a few minutes later.
...

en.wikipedia.org...

Criminals and crazy people, will find even worse ways to kill people. i wonder what would have happened if some of those people that this lunatic murdered, were armed... Maybe they could have stopped him from setting on fire the subway?...

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by Logos23
...
Not the UK
That is as far from MY reality than i can even get my head around!

Good for you but you are not the UK...
Millions of British people disagree with you, and know that your government has become more and more of a dictatorship, and in great part it happened because you gave away your natural right to own and bear arms.

The United States should NEVER try to emulate the UK... the country that the founding fathers, native Americans, and settlers fought against because of your BIG BROTHER views, your exuberant taxes, and your tendencies of wannabe dictators which exists to this day.

edit on 16-12-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)

Hey....you totally took my words out of context! You didn't quote my statement prior to "not in the UK" and "that is as far from my reality than I can even get my head round" which put into context what I was actually saying!.....you then used my words out of context to further your own argument!


This is what i actually said....

Originally posted by Logos23


I think it's you who are missing the point.....despite all your arguments it is the US who is having to have discussions like whether teachers should be allowed to be armed with guns to be able to protect their children in class.....
Not the UK
That is as far from MY reality than i can even get my head around!

Which part of that did you not understand? We as a nation don't have to be having discussions about whether teachers should be armed with guns to be able to protect the children in their care....this is FACT! ....so yes that is as far from my reality than I can even get my head around. The point I made was really quite simple...
But you felt led to quote a tiny portion of what i said out of context!
I stand by what I said in my original post above....your argument that followed had absolutely nothing to do with the statement I made....especially when quoted in context.......
But then you know that don't you?

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by jimmyx

 

In case you didn't know it is because of GUNS and the willingness, and courage of the colonists that you have a certain amount of freedom to this day

To be fair, there is a difference between high powered assault rifles and muskets.

This claim that "it is easier to kill with guns" is nothing but an illusion from the leftwinger dictator wannabes.

How is it not easier to kill with guns? Isn't there some saying about bringing a knife to a gun fight?

What amazes me is that for almost two hundred years that Americans have been able to own guns, there were no mass shootings or psychotic killings. I mean really, did we ever really hear about them until maybe the 1960s at the very earliest? Then all of the sudden they start happening, and the solution is to ban guns? Why not find the real cause of the problem? I think is a symptom of a sick society, not a gun problem. Let's ban bad parents. If parents would all own guns and teach their children gun safety and to respect the power of the gun, i bet there would be a lot less shootings. Really, non-gun ownership is a bigger problem to a safe society than gun ownership is. But the anti-gun folk will never understand.

Or ban violent movie scenes that glorify killing in a way that children don't understand instead. (another failure on parents to keep their young b children from seeing violent movies.) But that would be against the 1st amendment, and the liberal anti-gun folk would be upset. With them, it's ok to pick and choose what laws in our bill of rights to follow.

I think the problem is lazy parents. They let their kids do whatever they want, and are surprised when little Johnny takes a gun to school and shoots up his classmates. Solution? Ban guns! Because stepping up and being a good parent is too hard for your typical lazy American parent.

reply to post by Logos23


Obviously you haven't been in the website long enough to know that we are not allowed to excerpt entire posts in our responses... Which is why I only excerpted a small portion of what you wrote...

Not to mention the fact that EVERYTHING I wrote has relevance to what you were saying... Or are you going to claim now that everyone in the UK thinks exactly like you?...

Originally posted by yadda333

To be fair, there is a difference between high powered assault rifles and muskets.

You are kidding right?...

The second amendment of the United States Constitution is there to arm the populace against the government in case the government becomes tyranical. It isn't only about owning firearms to hunt... This is why citizens are allowed to own even assault rifles, not to mention that our second amendment right which is written in Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution is already being broken because Americans can't own FULLY AUTOMATIC rifles...

The so called assault rifles only shoot one bullet at a time, meanwhile the police, the government/soldiers and even CRIMINALS have FULLY AUTOMATIC weapons...

Seriously, if you are going to partake in a discussion you should be informed on the topic you are talking/writing about...

Originally posted by yadda333
How is it not easier to kill with guns? Isn't there some saying about bringing a knife to a gun fight?

How is it not easier to kill with fire using things like molotov cocktails?... All a criminal has to do is lock a building where there are many people and set it on fire...

If you are one of the people locked inside the knife and maybe not even the gun will help you... I guess we must BAN FIRE and ANYTHING that can be used to start a fire...

reply to post by ElectricUniverse

The second amendment of the United States Constitution is there to arm the populace against the government in case the government becomes tyranical. It isn't only about owning firearms to hunt... This is why citizens are allowed to own even assault rifles...
The so called assault rifles only shoot one bullet at a time, meanwhile the police, the government/soldiers and even CRIMINALS have FULLY AUTOMATIC weapons...

So, you believe that assault rifles are necessary for our protection from a tyrannical government. Why? Because they are more powerful and easier to kill with yet.........

This claim that "it is easier to kill with guns" is nothing but an illusion from the leftwinger dictator wannabes.

Interesting that you made the same argument. So why don't we just use molotov cocktails against this tyrannical government--since they are just as dangerous and easy to kill with as guns:

How is it not easier to kill with fire using things like molotov cocktails?

Which is it? Are guns good for killing and protection or are they not?

Originally posted by yadda333
reply to post by ElectricUniverse


So, you believe that assault rifles are necessary for our protection from a tyrannical government. Why? Because they are more powerful and easier to kill with yet.........

You see, people like you are making the claim that this madman who murdered those children would not have done so if he wasn't able to get the weapons his mom had, but the fact is nobody seemed to have known what he was going to do, so even if he wasn't able to get his mother weapons, he would have used something else...

Are molotov cocktails good to fight against a tyraniccal government?... yes... But a molotov cocktail doesn't do much good when soldiers are shooting at people from 50 yards+ away...

Originally posted by yadda333
Interesting that you made the same argument. So why don't we just use molotov cocktails against this tyrannical government--since they are just as dangerous and easy to kill with as guns:

Tell you what, you keep all the vodka, and alcohol bottles you want to have, leave the rest of us who want to continue enjoying our second amendment right with our guns... Or you can't do that and you are too selfish to do this and must FORCE people to do as you will just like most other leftwingers?...

Which is it? Are guns good for killing and protection or are they not?

What you don't seem to comprehend is the fact that CRAZIES and CRIMINALS will continue getting their weapons illegally, they can buy it off the black market like most gangs, and most CRIMINALS do...

You don't seem to comprehend either the fact that this murderer would have killed those children even if he didn't have those weapons he stole from his mom...

Stop using tragedies such as this one to FORCE your political and ideological beliefs on those who don't want them... Thank you very much...

This is a nonsensical argument! Your gun ownership threatens MY way of life. I have the right to walk down the street without fear of being shot by somebody exercising their so-called gun rights while having no clue what they're doing. It's very clear that gun owners are crazy and paranoid. And few have any REAL training in gun safety or marksmanship. We don't need your hero complex to save us from anything.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


I'll give you credit for being completely oblivious in the face of your own contradictions.

I don't have strong feelings on this subject one way or the other (yet), but I do take issue with people using stupid arguments.

Let's go back to this tyrannical government argument:

Are molotov cocktails good to fight against a tyraniccal government?... yes... But a molotov cocktail doesn't do much good when soldiers are shooting at people from 50 yards+ away...

You do realize the military has tanks, jets, nuclear bombs, etc. I think the 'protection from tyrannical government' argument is stupid. What next? Should we all be allowed to have tanks and fully automatic weapons. Ya know--for protection.

And you can't use the founding fathers to support your case because the constitution is designed to change with society. We live in a different world and people need to takes this into consideration.

I think that's all I really want to say. I'm familiar with your posts so I know that you're not going to entertain anything that I've said.

Originally posted by SweetChild
This is a nonsensical argument! Your gun ownership threatens MY way of life. I have the right to walk down the street without fear of being shot by somebody exercising their so-called gun rights while having no clue what they're doing. It's very clear that gun owners are crazy and paranoid. And few have any REAL training in gun safety or marksmanship. We don't need your hero complex to save us from anything.

The nonsensical argument just came out of your fingers. You just wrote the above out of complete IGNORANCE, stupidity, and fear. People don't want to exercise their RIGHT to own and bear arms to save someone like you, but to save their family, themselves and innocents, and MILLIONS of people have been saved by the RIGHT to own and bear arms...

The second amendment RIGHT to own and bears arms is not what killed these children... It is the LEFTWINGERS with their feelings of wanting to give crazy people, and criminals in general more and more opportunities to commit crimes. It is your inability to put personal responsibility on those who commit crimes like this one because a mayority of LEFTWINGERS think that CRIMINALS and CRAZIES deserve more rights than the VICTIMS, and would be victims...

The fault comes from a society that instead of demanding people to pay for the things they have done, instead most of you (leftwingers) want to take away personal responsibility away from the individual, and instead want to blame somebody else, or in this case guns, for what CRIMINALS and CRAZIES do themselves.

The mother of this monster hadn't worked in that school for months. What the mayority of leftwingers can't realize, because most of you lack common sense, is that it's obvious this monster had been thinking about committing this hienous crime FOR MONTHS, and what this means is that even if he didn't have access to firearms that monster would have used other means to murder these children which would have been a lot worse.

The Daegu subway fire was a mass murder on February 18, 2003 which killed at least 198 people and injured at least 147. An arsonist set fire to a train stopped at the Jungangno Station of the Daegu Metropolitan Subway in Daegu, South Korea. The fire then spread to a second train which had entered the station from the opposite direction a few minutes later.
...

en.wikipedia.org...

This monster could have locked down the entire school and set it ablaze, and right now we would be mourning the death of a lot more children.

Even if the mother didn't have firearms in her house, and even if this monster hadn't thought about setting on fire the school he would have gone to the streets to get firearms, and the BLACK MARKET is not, and cannot be controlled by LAWS...

The only way to slow down at least some of the hienous crimes committed by CRIMINALS and CRAZIES like that monster who killed these children, is by puting the blame WHERE IT IS DUE...

The reason these children are dead is because that monster was sick in the head.

This atrocity has NOTHING to do with your stupid belief that "gun owners have no clue of what we are doing"...

CRIMINALS and CRAZIES will continue to exist, and hence they will continue to murder innocent people and innocent children.

Those are the monsters who really threaten your way of life...

You don't want to feel so much fear?... THEN STOP GIVING THESE MONSTERS MORE AND MORE CHANCES... STOP TAKING PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY FROM THEM...

But no...instead of blaming THE MONSTER/CRIMINALS a mayority of leftwingers want to blame his mother, or his brother, or both, and guns...

If this monster hadn't killed himself, and because of the belief of a mayority of LEFTWINGERS, instead of seeking the immediate death penalty for monsters like Lanza, a mayority of leftwingers and the system they have created would have put him in a mental institution, from which this monster could have either escaped or some years from now would have been released to them commit another horrendous crime like the Connecticut shooting...

The mayority of criminals don't get their guns LEGALLY, hence NO LAW will stop them from getting the weapons they use in their CRIMES...

By restricting the second amendment all you are doing is taking away the right of innocent and good people TO DEFEND THEMSELVES...

YOU give MORE POWER to MONSTERS/CRIMINALS with your belief that you can take away the RIGHT of millions of people to own and bear arms...

For those LEFTWINGERS that don't know it, and/or just want to ignore the MILLIONS of people who have been saved because of their RIGHT to own and bear arms, here is what happens to CRIMINALS/MONSTERS when this RIGTH is exercised by citizens, and when the government DEFENDS THOSE RIGHTS...

Crime
92-Year-Old WWII Vet Shoots and Kills Home Intruder: ‘As Soon as He Got Inside, It Was All Over’

A 92-year-old World War II veteran shot and killed a suspected robber who attempted to break into his Kentucky home Monday morning. Two other men believed to be involved in the botched home invasion are lucky to have escaped with their lives and are now behind bars, WLWT reports.

According to police, 24-year-old Lloyd Maxwell broke into the elderly man’s basement after 2 a.m. and tried to enter the first floor of the home in Verona, Ky. The homeowner, identified as Earl Jones, said he was startled awake by the noise coming from his basement and grabbed his .22 caliber rifle and steadied his aim on the basement door as he heard the sound of footsteps creeping up the basement stairs.
...
By the time police arrived, the burglary suspect had gotten away. However, soon after arriving at Jones’ home, law enforcement in a nearby county received a call about a man who had been shot close by. Kenton County police responded to the call and found Maxwell dead inside a 2011 Chevrolet Impala with two other unharmed men.
...

www.theblaze.com...

If that old man didn't have that weapon he would have more certainly killed by the three young CRIMINALS since he was home...

These criminals did not even try to hide from the home owner, which clearly shows they had their mind set on hurting/killing whoever they found inside the home. In another news article it states how one of the CRIMINALS broke into the home by kicking on the door to the basement which is what let the 92 year old war vet know that something was wrong.

...
Jones he heard a noise in his basement around 2 a.m. on Monday and grabbed his .22-caliber rifle. He said the , 24-year-old Lloyd Maxwell, came up the stairs and kicked open the basement door to his home in northern Kentucky's Boone County.
...

www.cbsnews.com... port-says/

Note also that the police got there LATE, and only after the other two suspects had gotten away...

We have seen many cases in which people have defended themselves in their homes by shooting CRIMINALS and LEFTWINGERS and THEIR SYSTEM has put in prison those people who were DEFENDING THEMSELVES because of your irrational fear on guns...

Originally posted by yadda333
...
And you can't use the founding fathers to support your case because the constitution is designed to change with society. We live in a different world and people need to takes this into consideration.
...

It is OBVIOUS that you are against the right of citizens to own and bear arms despite your lie that you are neither in favor or against it...

History is full of examples of governments becoming tyrannical after taking away the right of people to bear arms...

That fact has NEVER CHANGED...

As to your claim that because the government has tanks, fighter aircraft ect, and because of this it should be alright to give away the RIGHT to own and bear arms, that is what is the real stupid, and ignorant argument...

There are MANY within our military that will not stand with a tyrannical government and instead will stand with the people...

Because the government has other weapons doesn't mean it is alright to take away, or heavily restrict people's right to bear arms...

Originally posted by yadda333
...
And you can't use the founding fathers to support your case because the constitution is designed to change with society. We live in a different world and people need to takes this into consideration.
...

Obviously you don't know anything at all about the U.S. Constitution and the RIGHTS enumerated within the Bill of Rights...

Do you even know what INALIENABLE RIGHTS means?...

Let me TRY to bring some light to your ignorance...

Main Entry:

inalienable right

Part of Speech: n

Definition: a right according to natural law, a right that cannot be taken away, denied, or transferred

dictionary.reference.com...

The founding fathers were a lot smarter than people like you, and they knew people like you would try to take away our NATURAL RIGHTS...

Even the editors of wikipedia, a leftwinger source, know the difference between inalienable rights, and legal rights.

Natural and legal rights


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Natural and legal rights are two types of rights theoretically distinct according to philosophers and political scientists. Natural rights are rights not contingent upon the laws, customs, or beliefs of any particular culture or government, and therefore universal and inalienable. In contrast, legal rights are those bestowed onto a person by the law of a particular political and legal system, and therefore relative to specific cultures and governments.
...

en.wikipedia.org...

These rights are inalienable because they are natural/God given, hence not contingent upon the laws, customs, or beliefs of any particular culture or government...

What this means, in case you still can't understand it, is that just because more than 200 years have passed since the Constitution and Bill of Rights were written it doesn't mean it is ok to take away these rights...

The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
...

www.archives.gov...

Like I wrote earlier, if you want to discuss a topic, you really should inform yourself before making false claims out of sheer ignorance.

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by Logos23

 

Obviously you haven't been in the website long enough to know that we are not allowed to excerpt entire posts in our responses... Which is why I only excerpted a small portion of what you wrote...

Not to mention the fact that EVERYTHING I wrote has relevance to what you were saying... Or are you going to claim now that everyone in the UK thinks exactly like you?...

That's a load of old crap if ever I heard it....you took it out of context and knew what you were doing.....insult my intelligence if you will.....but you can be damned sure it wont stick!
What you wrote after you quoted me out of context had absolutely nothing to do with the conversation from which you quoted me from.
and naaahhh I don't claim that everyone in the UK thinks like me on any given subject.....but I am better qualified to know what the majority feelings are.
No more replies fro me.....you can make it as personal as you like but I refuse to do the same.

That's why I think they should form a new country or something.

If they want a Dystopian government to determine everything for them and live perfectly safe, go do that somewhere else.

reply to post by Logos23


And you keep doing nothing more than write/talk trash...

Tell you what, you stay in your UK, and do what you want there, leave us in the U.S. alone and to our business. Thank you very much...

Originally posted by yourmaker
That's why I think they should form a new country or something.

If they want a Dystopian government to determine everything for them and live perfectly safe, go do that somewhere else.

edit on 18-12-2012 by yourmaker because: (no reason given)

But you see, these people think they have a right to tell, and have the right to force everyone else how to live...

They think they are the only adults and only their opinion matters...

A mayority of leftwingers don't know what individual rights means, or they don't care. When they are the minority is the only time when they care about minority rights, but when they are a mayority they claim this gives them a right to take away other people's rights/the right of the minority.

This is what they call "democracy" which is nothing more than mob rule. Examples of such "democracies" could be found for example under Saddam Hussein's Iraq, where the mayority had more rights and the rights of individuals, such as the Kurds, didn't matter... The Kurds were killed for "the greater good of the mayority in Saddam's Iraq"...

Same thing can be said of Hitler's democracy... the rights of individuals, such as Jewish people and other minorities didn't matter. The right of these individual/minorities to own and bear arms were taken away, and this is part of what allowed for the massacre that we know as the holocaust to happen...

That's the sort of "democracy" that a mayority of leftwingers defend, even if they don't want to accept this fact...

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


You should be careful about throwing the word ignorant around--we've all read your posts.

While I enjoy your ability to use external links to portray dictionary definitions, I fail to see how anything that you have posted matters. I am not wrong in my assertions.

Again though, I applaud this uncanny ability you seem to have in being able to continually make gigantic, nonsensical posts with no regard for....well....anything. You are frighteningly uninhibited. Bravo!

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Request noted......in the same vain do you think America can stop having opinion's on and being vocal about our Royal's when they don't have to live with them and it's really none of their business???.......errrrm I'm thinking not! But what's good for the goose and all that......
That really was my final reply.......feel free to have the last word.