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.
If guns protected women from being raped, the US would have one of the lowest rape rates in the world, because American women are armed to the hilt (or at least they have the right to be so).
But alas, your right-wing fantasy isn't working out, because the US has one of the highest rape rates in the developed world.
Are you saying a large amount of female rape victims had a gun and just didn't use it? I think the problem is NOT ENOUGH are armed. Being armed and being allowed to be armed are not the same thing.
The depths of right-wing paranoia are clearly evident in this thread.
In Canada, most of Western Europe, Australia and a whole bunch of other places, gun ownership is much more restrictive than in the US, and they are not "back to the primitive days" you fear. If anything, those places are more civilized than the US.
One doesn't have to look back too far to see the authoritarian hellholes that Canada and Australia became during the Covid pandemic. Who could have imagined having your source of employment taken away and incarcerated for up to 22 months to deal with something on the order of the seasonal flu. If they dared protest, the police used beatings and tear gas. Hardly 'civilized'.
Are you saying a large amount of female rape victims had a gun and just didn't use it? I think the problem is NOT ENOUGH are armed. Being armed and being allowed to be armed are not the same thing.
Yup. If you live in a society where the people are like mice, scared to death by guns then you end up with them not being able to defend themselves when they really need to.
Guns are why we as people no longer live in mud huts. They are why Canada isn't worried about China or Russia (The USA's guns). They are why we live in freedom both as a nation and as individuals.
These people with their statist, subservient mindsets obviously have been lulled into naivete.
Yup. If you live in a society where the people are like mice, scared to death by guns then you end up with them not being able to defend themselves when they really need to.
Guns are why we as people no longer live in mud huts. They are why Canada isn't worried about China or Russia (The USA's guns). They are why we live in freedom both as a nation and as individuals.
These people with their statist, subservient mindsets obviously have been lulled into naivete.
Give it up will you! Your initial post was, lets be honest, pretty ridiculous! You're just making it even worse!
Are you saying a large amount of female rape victims had a gun and just didn't use it? I think the problem is NOT ENOUGH are armed. Being armed and being allowed to be armed are not the same thing.
If "NOT ENOUGH" women are armed, then the rape rate in the countries I've been mentioning should be higher, because proportionately even fewer women there are armed compared to the US. But ... they are lower.
You all are basically saying, "More guns = less rapes." The problem with that claim is that the statistics do not bear out your claim.
They are why Canada isn't worried about China or Russia (The USA's guns).
LOL, this is hilarious. The OP cannot explain why the relative lack of personal guns in places like Canada and western Europe has not led to more rapes and more crime, so he has to change the subject to ... the military.
Quote:
Guns are why we as people no longer live in mud huts.
Breaking news: Civilization existed long, long before guns were invented. By, like, thousands of years.
The depths of right-wing paranoia are clearly evident in this thread.
In Canada, most of Western Europe, Australia and a whole bunch of other places, gun ownership is much more restrictive than in the US, and they are not "back to the primitive days" you fear. If anything, those places are more civilized than the US.
You clearly skipped the part of American history that includes slavery, Jim Crow, Japanese internment camps, assassination of the Black Panther leadership, Native American land stolen, and Kent State shootings.
Why don’t you ask the survivors of those interment camps how fast their rights were taken.
Yes, these were all the actions of Democrats, so it’s no wonder they favor legislation to further stop the protection of Americans.
You clearly skipped the part of American history that includes slavery, Jim Crow, Japanese internment camps, and Kent State shootings.
Yes, these were the actions of Democrats, so it’s no wonder they favor legislation to further stop the protection of Americans.
Kent State happened under Nixon.
Slavery was allowed by the Founding Fathers.
The Japanese internment camps did happen under the democrat Roosevelt, but that was during a war, and Roosevelt did not kill hundreds of them in an effort to stifle free speech, which is what the OP claimed.
Jim Crow occurred under conservative democrats. Democrats in the north were opposed to it.
The Japanese internment camps did happen under the democrat Roosevelt, but that was during a war, and Roosevelt did not kill hundreds of them in an effort to stifle free speech, which is what the OP claimed.
Jim Crow occurred under conservative democrats. Democrats in the north were opposed to it.
Spoken like a man who clearly skipped history.
These were all state sanctioned atrocities by Democrats.
Why don’t you ask the family of dead Native Americans and Black Panther party leaders how fast their rights were taken.
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.