Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
I'm not, nor have I ever, been talking about any specific country since I was talking about systems.
But, I do enjoy how some of you try to contort to the best of your abilities.
Socialism has more of an authoritarian government than a democracy or republic.
I can't help you if you try to apply examples that don't conform to that type of system and then try to blame me for your selection.
I'm not trying to contort anything. The Scandinavian countries - indeed, most of Europe - are often called socialist by people in the US, yet they all have democratically elected government officials. I am quite serious when I ask where they would fall in your opinion. Are they socialist, are they democracies or republics, or are they authoritarian? Are they free countries with certain elements that have been socialized, such as health care? It seems like a legitimate question.
The other countries you mention don't have hundreds of thousands of street gang members. Nor do they have a huge drug cartel war on their border that spills into their own country.
You are comparing apples and oranges.
No? At least one of them has the distinction of being cheek by jowel sharing a border with a neighboring nation that has a firearm problem, is singlehandedly the greatest source of smuggled weapons and drugs into it. Has the distinction of having any and all gang violence originate from it's neighbour ........yet still manages to post far better stats regarding murder rates as a result of either of the two "spilling into their own country" guess which country I'm referring to................
My hell, do you even know anybody who owns guns? Do you think they cheer like they're watching a football game when a new shooting is announced on a news broadcast?
Do you think people doing legal and moral things (no, target shooting and wanting a way to have some self-protection is NOT violence) should be punished because they choose to do them?
Guns are just tools. Just metal, wood and plastic... and very important tools at that. You and I can walk down the street thanks to peace enforced through the barrel of a gun.
Of course I do. My housemate does has one, for starters. I am not anti-gun, I am anti stupidity, and dragging the rape/abortion debate into this discussion was stupid.
I'm not trying to contort anything. The Scandinavian countries - indeed, most of Europe - are often called socialist by people in the US, yet they all have democratically elected government officials. I am quite serious when I ask where they would fall in your opinion. Are they socialist, are they democracies or republics, or are they authoritarian? Are they free countries with certain elements that have been socialized, such as health care? It seems like a legitimate question.
Yeah it is, but you won't get a cognizant and relevant answer.
The gunman who slaughtered 26 people at a Texas church was able to buy weapons because the Air Force failed to report his domestic-violence conviction to the federal database that is used to conduct background checks on would-be gun purchasers, authorities said Monday.
Federal officials said the Air Force didn't submit Devin Patrick's Kelley's criminal history even though it was required to do so by Pentagon rules.
Kelley, 26, was found guilty of assault in an Air Force court-martial in 2012 for abusing his wife and her child and was given 12 months' confinement and a bad-conduct discharge in 2014. That same year, authorities said, he bought the first of four weapons.
Yes, it does because rape is NOT responsible for abortion just like guns are NOT responsible for killing people. Grow a brain and some common sense while you are at it!
If a woman gets pregnant as the result of rape and decides to get an abortion because she doesn't want to carry and deliver the child of her rapist, yes, the rape is responsible.
A gun is an object, and morally neutral. Rape is neither.
As for abortion itself, that is not the issue at hand here.
The point? Three of those objects are not made to kill. You aren't going to get rid of knives, rope and bats. They serve other purposes. Also, killing someone with those instruments is much more personal. A gun makes it much easier.
This type of argument has been used before, and it's really is not a good one.
Why don't we see a lot of shootings at gun ranges?
You must really enjoy being wrong:
The following day, on February 2, Chris Kyle, the most prolific sniper in American military history, arrived with a friend, Chad Littlefield, to take Routh to a shooting range. Jodi’s concerns, it turned out, had been misplaced. Her son did not commit suicide. He did something much worse: He killed the two men.
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 register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
.........
