U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 12-07-2008, 01:58 PM
 
Location: Northglenn, Colorado
3,689 posts, read 6,925,891 times
Reputation: 915

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastern Roamer View Post
I don't understand how the D.C. gun law can even be enforced. If the police show up to my house after I've called them to report the intruder I've shot, are they going to be concerned with whether or not my gun was unloaded and disassembled as the law demands when there's a dead guy laying in a pool of blood? How could they ever prove it was not? I can put a gun together pretty fast, they're quite simple.

And the "gun" ban that some gunophiles are fearing - what will it be, you can only have 10 rounds instead of 15? I carry a compact .40 cal so I can't even get 10 to fit anyway. Assault rifles can't have flash suppressors or pistol grips - really, this is a drastic infringement on our rights that the NRA cannot allow? Regardless, I think it's silly to think these "bans" makes much difference and gun owners should be willing to compromise with our fellow citizens expressing concern for public safety. No one can prove whether gun control is effective or not. For every study that says it is I can find one that says it's not, and there are myriad reasons that can attribute for the rise and decline of crime.

I don't think Obama's coming to take our guns away.
as I have said earlier, I am wiling to compromise on my privileges, but I do NOT compromise on my RIGHTS. Give an inch, and they will take a foot
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-07-2008, 03:21 PM
 
27,654 posts, read 22,990,546 times
Reputation: 7726
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noahma View Post
as I have said earlier, I am wiling to compromise on my privileges, but I do NOT compromise on my RIGHTS. Give an inch, and they will take a foot
Understandable. Sadly, this nation has a history of taking rights away. Think of the Japanese-Americans and many of them being put into "internment camps" after something that happened 67 years ago today(Pearl Harbor). Rights were taken away. It wasn't right, but it was done. I just hope the right to gun ownership isn't taken away either.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2008, 05:26 PM
 
Location: In a house
5,227 posts, read 5,047,533 times
Reputation: 2479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tricky D View Post
Originally Posted by stycotl My point has always been that people generally are 'idiots' who act like 2-year olds, but we can't outlaw these kinda idiots (read: people) now can we?
Are you serious? You are projecting again.
Most people are quite capable of dealing with the ability to own a gun. Our country is a great example. Over 300 million people ALL free to own a gun, about 80 million that choose to do so & yet the vast majority of us will never be a victim of gun violence or have a single bad experience.

You are just convinced that you are incapable of self control.
Counceling might help.

Quote:
Nobody is twisting your arm to keep continuing.
No, you are right. But I thought the mods were going to hold these discussions to a higher standard of ethics, than the second grade drivel that drips from your lips.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2008, 08:36 PM
 
Location: NY
2,007 posts, read 2,385,567 times
Reputation: 887
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday View Post
Interior Dept. OKs loaded weapons in national parks

WASHINGTON - Some visitors to the nation's parks and wildlife refuges will be allowed to carry loaded weapons beginning in January under a plan given final approval Friday by the Bush administration.

As expected, the Interior Department decided to scrap its longtime ban on loaded weapons

Interior Dept. OKs loaded weapons in national parks
And it's about time. Let's hope Obama has too much on his plate for a while to try and reverse this.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2008, 10:14 PM
 
Location: The Netherlands
8,532 posts, read 10,611,233 times
Reputation: 1540
Originally Posted by Greatday
Quote:
In the United States, the use of deadly force is justified when defending ones own life or the life of another. In such cases, the person will not be "brought to trial".
Ahuh, right.
Exactly the same way the US refuses to let an International War Tribunal rule if an American soldier has committed a war crime or not*.
I find that cowardly behaviour.
Americans have no more or less rights than any other human on Earth, but I guess Americans think differently on this matter.
Whether America 'wants' to commit war crimes on their own soil or abroad, they should still be held responsible for their actions in front of an International War Crime Tribunal.
In other words if America plays vigilante because it finds it necessary to invade other countries because these nations commit crimes against humanity, America itself reasons that they should be free to do so, but if America itself is committing crimes against humanity (see Guantanamo bay or the unlawful imprisonment of their American citizens of Japanese descent during WWII) no one else has the right to invade America and set them straight?
I find this the height of hypocrisy.
The only reason why America believes it can act like a bully (armed with a gun) is because they believe themselves to be 'untouchable' (because of their guns).

Quote:
*Terror in America Friday, May 10, 2002

House panel votes to bar U.S from war crimes tribunal

Critics say the new permanent court would be threat to military

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Originally published Friday, May 10, 2002

WASHINGTON -- A House panel voted Thursday to bar U.S. cooperation with the new international war crimes tribunal, heeding critics of the court who said it would imperil American troops.
(...)
President Bush has made no secret of his opposition to the tribunal, which is to go into business on July 1. Opponents of the court said other countries could use it to try American soldiers for war crimes, in effect threatening U.S. sovereignty.

"The notion that people would want to put American soldiers ... at the whims of the international community ... is just more than I can stand," DeLay said.

Human rights groups and other supporters of the tribunal have said American renouncement of the treaty would call into question U.S. commitment to international justice and strain relations with America's allies.

"We are a nation of laws," said Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., who said the amendment "demeans" the United States.
Source: House panel votes to bar U.S from war crimes tribunal: Critics say the new permanent court would be threat to military
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2008, 10:30 PM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,100 posts, read 24,561,092 times
Reputation: 4813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tricky D View Post
Ahuh, right.
Exactly the same way the US refuses to let an International War Tribunal rule if an American soldier has committed a war crime or not*.
I find that cowardly behaviour.
Americans have no more or less rights than any other human on Earth, but I guess Americans think differently on this matter.
Whether America 'wants' to commit war crimes on their own soil or abroad, they should still be held responsible for their actions in front of an International War Crime Tribunal.
In other words if America plays vigilante because it finds it necessary to invade other countries because these nations commit crimes against humanity, America itself reasons that they should be free to do so, but if America itself is committing crimes against humanity (see Guantanamo bay or the unlawful imprisonment of their American citizens of Japanese descent during WWII) no one else has the right to invade America and set them straight?
I find this the height of hypocrisy.
The only reason why America believes it can act like a bully (armed with a gun) is because they believe themselves to be 'untouchable' (because of their guns).
The above has absolutely nothing to do with the topic - absolutely nothing

Not surprising - coming from you
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-08-2008, 04:39 AM
 
Location: In a house
5,227 posts, read 5,047,533 times
Reputation: 2479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday View Post
The above has absolutely nothing to do with the topic - absolutely nothing

Not surprising - coming from you
Aint it funny how every subject comes around to America's foreign policy with this person?

The rights we enjoy have no bearing whatsoever on foreign relations & foreign relations have nothing to do with this subject, no wonder his gov't cant trust him to act responsibly.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-08-2008, 06:43 AM
 
Location: The Netherlands
8,532 posts, read 10,611,233 times
Reputation: 1540
Originally Posted by Greatday
Quote:
The above has absolutely nothing to do with the topic - absolutely nothing
That is just your opinion.
Fact is that the rest of the world thinks differently.


Originally Posted by Tin Knocker
Quote:
The rights we enjoy have no bearing whatsoever on foreign relations & foreign relations have nothing to do with this subject, no wonder his gov't cant trust him to act responsibly.
My government trusts me more than the regular American, since I have no criminal record and have been in the Dutch Army.
Our army would never accept questionable characters (read: individuals with a criminal record) in their rank.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-08-2008, 08:43 AM
 
Location: Northglenn, Colorado
3,689 posts, read 6,925,891 times
Reputation: 915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tricky D View Post
Originally Posted by GreatdayThat is just your opinion.
Fact is that the rest of the world thinks differently.


Originally Posted by Tin KnockerMy government trusts me more than the regular American, since I have no criminal record and have been in the Dutch Army.
Our army would never accept questionable characters (read: individuals with a criminal record) in their rank.
apparently not, since you cannot own your own firearms, and your government at any time can change your constitution based on what They feel like doing. Every single one of your rights outlined in the constitution of your country is changeable by your parlement on a whim.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-08-2008, 08:46 AM
 
Location: 80904 West siiiiiide!
2,757 posts, read 4,768,100 times
Reputation: 1229
[quote=Tricky D;6469591]
Fact is that the rest of the world thinks differently.




Do they even give you a firearm? If so, I can't beleive that stance you have on guns.

You might as well give it up, G.I. Joke. Americans have guns ingraned in their DNA. It will NEVER go away, regardless of the opinion of the rest of the world. Especially the dutch.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top