Roel; Not true. I usually vote for independents and third party (Libertarians) when possible. It is my personal opinion that the two major political parties are ruining the country.
Sadly not, this was just an ordinary interview with the BBC, if it had been with some one who had known something about firearms then Mr. Brown ould have been in serious trouble with his statement.
I stand corrected, however, would you consider the Libertarians to be progressive or conservative, left or right?
Libertarians are both left and right. They are for smaller government and less government control. They want everything as privatized as possible, decentralized government, and the ability to do anything as long as it dosent infringe on the rights of anyone else. So, less business regulations and tax, less income tax or income tax abolishment, gay rights, less censorship, etc etc
like Ron Paul, he runs as a republican democrats don't make up half the population. they sit on their blogs and just trash talk O'Rielly,Hannity and Limbaugh. most democrats (not all) arnt interested in history as well and could care less about tanks of world war II.
No JC, Both will get you killed just for possessing them. No one in the right mind will want to own them.It's true that drugs are available here too.However,it's just not as prevalent as other countries. As for guns, my country hasn't had a gun crime for decades. and my country is just 46 years old. : )
Yes but to be fair, Singapore is just one city... Administration is much easier in a smaller jurisdiction, especially when comparing to a country of 300 million
Right Smeg.haha. But i do think our adminstration can be given a try.But of course many free-spirited americans will protest. :kill:
notice how people from places with very strong gun controlls and hence very few guns think it is insane for ordinary people to own guns ,for roel ricky and kaiser ,it seems perfectly sensible that guns are something seen on movies or in museums ..the usa is only 240 years old ,our founders came from a society where the frontier and the dark lawless woods were not very faraway ,greenfield a small town in conneticut was completely rubbed out by raids on three seperate occations over a hundred year period .the woods contained red skinned masters of stealth and ambush who on occasion sprang forth to do great harm and terrifieing atrocity ,our thunder sticks were OUR edge over these wiley hatchet bearing viet cong natives in buckskin , as we pushed west into places where there was no police or courts to protect us ,we had at least , a body of men and boys who could turn out quickly with powder and shot in case of trouble ,the founders knew all americans were armed and considered it not only natural but in fact helpful in controlling a new experimental govt should it get out of hand . americans had always had guns and this seemed to us perfectly normal and right ..to us , the thought of someone telling us to surrender our guns would seem a preposterous as if they wanted us to surrender our wives and daughters and the result of ether action would much flash , smoke and loud noises followed by massive shock and tissue damage to the claimant were they so foolhardy as to press the issue . . to us yang-kees ( white faces ) it seems insane that you guys would allow someone to tell you that you are not competent or trustworthy enough to own a firearm ..to you guys ,it seems insane that any private citizen would even want or need to posses a gun when you have your govt and police to protect you , and depending on where we each live... we are both right...you have the right to be unarmed and where you live it makes sense , here we have the right to be armed or not as we choose ,which to us ,also makes perfect sense ...does this make sense ?
As we have found before, nobody's opinion is ever changed by these debates. Kaiser; How often do folks with guns get executed in your country? If it were totally impossible to get a gun in your country you wouldn't need to have the death penalty as punishment.
Well, you do know the word,"deterrent"? Given that i am 21 years of age. I would say the only time i've heard was 2 years ago.And he got his gun from across the border and he had to smuggle it himself.It was impressive how he got through our customs though. Other than that, no i don't suppose i've heard of any executions because of gun ownership except for this crime watch show when i was still in kindergarten that depicted a gun crime that's decades old.
All this is exemplary of Liberalism, which is right from centre. Hence, Libertarians are right-wing too. Revere, of course, has the reason why Democratic-leaning people don't frequent these forums: they are not as interested in weapons as right-leaning people, or the other way around, people who are interested in weapons tend to want to keep them, which means they'll lean to the right. Woody: given that the threat of Indians dissipated more than a hundred years ago, don't you think the argument you're providing has lost all value in the present-day debate about guns? It's not like downtown Washington is about to be raided by Indian tribes...
Kaiser; So does your country execute people simply for having a gun or only if it is used in a violent crime? Roel; We have guns because we can, we like them. As I said before, there is no way anyone here is going to change the way someone else thinks about guns. Besides, downtown Washington is one of the most dangerous places in America. D.C. also has the most strictess gun control and yet crime is always going up.
US history lesson we have the first ten amendments of our constitution which we refer to as the bill of rights. between them they list the rights of citizens and delineate the powers of the states and the federal government. the second is one of the shortest and basically states that an armed population is a necessity to ensure freedom and forbids the government from abridging the right of the people to keep and bear arms. in effect the second amendment provides the teeth to all the others. it and it alone provides the people the means to resist if it becomes necessary. in other words the right to own a gun has nothing to do with duck hunting & target shooting. a gun is the only device that allows a small weak person the means to defend himself from the larger, stronger, and more dangerous whether the danger comes from a crook or from his government. its been interesting to watch as more and more states grant the right of concealed carry. without exception every time the libs warn of shootouts in the streets and every time the violent crime rate drops. legal guns are used only very rarely for crime and legal gun owners are overwhelming law abiding. even dumb crooks are smart enough to figure out that that little old lady that they would have otherwise mugged might have a gun and know how to use it. instead they go on to safer crimes. one last note. there are almost no news media types that have the knowledge or the interest in accurately reporting on any aspect of the subject. you can believe nothing reported by the major media when it comes to guns. some of it is just lack of interest and knowledge but there is also a large dose of deliberate misinformation up to and including outright lies and fabrications. in short most of you members that insist on reforming us need to educate yourselves as the truth instead of just mouthing the lies that pass for news.
If AIM (American Indian Movement) has its way that would be interesting to watch a raid on capital hill. There are tens of millions of American who have guns but dont abuse them, why should they be punished because 1 person does something?
Well,if i was in their shoes,i would use the gun.Because even if i do not,i would either be hanged or serve life.
roel ,i know we havent had to shoot at indians , brits ,spaniards or frenchmen for a long time , i was trying to demonstrate how our frontier beginings formed the basis for the 2nd amendment , and yes downtown washinghton dc is much more dangerous now then when it was forrest and swamp occupied by tomahawk wielding indians ...in DC as with most large urban areas of the eastern seaboard , gun laws are very strict which has the effect of insureing that only citizens of the dangerous crimminal persuasion are armed with deadly force ...
I guess you could put it that way. They generally allign themselves with the right, allthough they usually clash with the social conservatives, who they believe are using government power to enforce a particular belief/lifestyle on people, which goes again their belief of personal freedom and choice in such matters. I believe many have formed their own parties, but have had only minor success on a large scale
actually democrats and libertarians are not very much alike .libertarians are closer to repulicans than they are dems . liberts sre anti big government ,the less the better. libertarians are pro gun ownership and pro private property rights and against any infringement on us sovergnty.liberts are anti social engineering , ie activist government .liberts are also anti foriegn interventionist , no wars or police actions anywhere that does not directly involve amrerican intrests .ie no korea ,viet nam ,grenada ,iraq ...in this they are opposed to republicans .liberts are also anti tax and very fiscally conservative .so libertarians have more in common with republicans than with dems . roel , i guess you are right about demjocrats not haveing much intrest in military history .forums like this seem to bear to have very few liberal minded members .ergo , i would argue that democrats ie liberals , because of their lack of understanding military matters are not qualified to run the largest military force in the free world ...
