Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Topic closed!!!
Subject: »NEWS AROUND THE WORLD
But I am aware of the fact that you consider facts dumb
Depends of what you call facts.
The fact is that guns are made to kill and it's pretty easy to use them for that purpose, and to many people also use them for that purpose looking at the number of (innocent) people killed by gun violence. Guns, and specially modern guns, are dangerous and deadly weapons and there is no need normal people have to own them. You can even ask yourself the question how normal someone is if he/she wants to own one or more.
And another fact is, the fewer people owning guns, the fewer people will be killed by guns. Maybe more people will be killed with other weapons when guns are not available anymore, but that will be another completely new discussion then.
Guns kill, spoons eat, computers surf the net, beds sleep, glasses drink, what else?
No, guns are made for killing, spoons for eating, beds for sleeping, glasses for drinking etc etc. Ofcourse you can use all items for other purposes but that doesn't change the main purpose it is made for.
edit typo
(edited)
Depends of what you call facts.
The fact is that guns are made to kill and it's pretty easy to use them for that purpose, and to many people also use them for that purpose looking at the number of (innocent) people killed by gun violence. Guns, and specially modern guns, are dangerous and deadly weapons and there is no need normal people have to own them. You can even ask yourself the question how normal someone is if he/she wants to own one or more.
And another fact is, the fewer people owning guns, the fewer people will be killed by guns. Maybe more people will be killed with other weapons when guns are not available anymore, but that will be another completely new discussion then.
Guns kill, spoons eat, computers surf the net, beds sleep, glasses drink, what else?
No, guns are made for killing, spoons for eating, beds for sleeping, glasses for drinking etc etc. Ofcourse you can use all items for other purposes but that doesn't change the main purpose it is made for.
edit typo
(edited)
Because there are no classical liberal / libertarian parents? Oh wait.
You can even ask yourself the question how normal someone is if he/she wants to own one or more.
That's a good question. My answer is that those people are not normal. They are totally nuts.
And another fact is, the fewer people owning guns, the fewer people will be killed by guns.
This is the problem I have with you. You're just making this up.
Ofcourse you can use all items for other purposes but that doesn't change the main purpose it is made for.
This is another problem I have with you. You simply don't read what I write. Of course guns are made to kill. Of course they are, I've never denied that.
You say it yourself, guns are made for killing, spoons are made for eating, glasses are made for drinking. But glasses don't drink, spoons don't eat and guess what, guns don't kill.
That's a good question. My answer is that those people are not normal. They are totally nuts.
And another fact is, the fewer people owning guns, the fewer people will be killed by guns.
This is the problem I have with you. You're just making this up.
Ofcourse you can use all items for other purposes but that doesn't change the main purpose it is made for.
This is another problem I have with you. You simply don't read what I write. Of course guns are made to kill. Of course they are, I've never denied that.
You say it yourself, guns are made for killing, spoons are made for eating, glasses are made for drinking. But glasses don't drink, spoons don't eat and guess what, guns don't kill.
No, because you are too theoretical and reality and real life will open you eyes. We just need wait for that times :)
I dont agree with Charles that often, but if there would be less guns it's also likely there will be less people killed by guns.
It's true that guns don't kill themself but they are made for killing. So if the main purpose is killing people why should we let many people own them in the States. People make wrong decisions when they
go mad, better not have an easy accesble gun around then.
really I am all for freedom and shit, but not when other peoples freedom can hurt my freedom in a blink of an eye, no thank you sir.
It's true that guns don't kill themself but they are made for killing. So if the main purpose is killing people why should we let many people own them in the States. People make wrong decisions when they
go mad, better not have an easy accesble gun around then.
really I am all for freedom and shit, but not when other peoples freedom can hurt my freedom in a blink of an eye, no thank you sir.
No, because you are too theoretical and reality and real life will open you eyes. We just need wait for that times :)
There are no adults with kids who share my ideas. None whatsoever. None at all.
There are no adults with kids who share my ideas. None whatsoever. None at all.
but if there would be less guns it's also likely there will be less people killed by guns
That is your assumption. Not scientifically proven though.
It's true that guns don't kill themself but they are made for killing. So if the main purpose is killing people why should we let many people own them in the States. People make wrong decisions when they
go mad, better not have an easy accesble gun around then.
To protect themselves against criminals (who don't follow the law) and against the government (who can make the law to suit themselves against the interests of the citizens).
really I am all for freedom and shit, but not when other peoples freedom can hurt my freedom in a blink of an eye
I really like Italian spaghetti. Apart from the spaghetti itself. And I don't like tomato sauce.
That is your assumption. Not scientifically proven though.
It's true that guns don't kill themself but they are made for killing. So if the main purpose is killing people why should we let many people own them in the States. People make wrong decisions when they
go mad, better not have an easy accesble gun around then.
To protect themselves against criminals (who don't follow the law) and against the government (who can make the law to suit themselves against the interests of the citizens).
really I am all for freedom and shit, but not when other peoples freedom can hurt my freedom in a blink of an eye
I really like Italian spaghetti. Apart from the spaghetti itself. And I don't like tomato sauce.
I didnt know spaghetti could kill, you must be a terible cook then.
Don't you see the difference ? You can eat spaghetti all you want I dont care you cant hurt me with that.
But you could hurt me with ur gun because you think your entitled to your freedom.
Really I understand that in the states people maybe need guns to protect themselves, and I dont wanna forbid that. But they should really make some rules/laws that it's not so easy for every one who isnt in a mental state to handle one.
And c'mon Levitate there's no scientific prove because everyone will understand that if you lower guns with 90% of total there also will be less people who died becasue of a gun, yo can deny that but thats rather foolish.
Don't you see the difference ? You can eat spaghetti all you want I dont care you cant hurt me with that.
But you could hurt me with ur gun because you think your entitled to your freedom.
Really I understand that in the states people maybe need guns to protect themselves, and I dont wanna forbid that. But they should really make some rules/laws that it's not so easy for every one who isnt in a mental state to handle one.
And c'mon Levitate there's no scientific prove because everyone will understand that if you lower guns with 90% of total there also will be less people who died becasue of a gun, yo can deny that but thats rather foolish.
I didnt know spaghetti could kill, you must be a terible cook then.
You misinterpreted. I just wanted to say that when somebody starts a sentence with "I love liberty but", the sentence ends with narrowing liberty. It's like "I like spaghetti, but".
But they should really make some rules/laws that it's not so easy for every one who isnt in a mental state to handle one.
I wish you all the luck without touching the fundamental basis of the American society.
And c'mon Levitate there's no scientific prove because everyone will understand that if you lower guns with 90% of total there also will be less people who died becasue of a gun, yo can deny that but thats rather foolish.
You should take all murders into account, not only those with a gun.
You misinterpreted. I just wanted to say that when somebody starts a sentence with "I love liberty but", the sentence ends with narrowing liberty. It's like "I like spaghetti, but".
But they should really make some rules/laws that it's not so easy for every one who isnt in a mental state to handle one.
I wish you all the luck without touching the fundamental basis of the American society.
And c'mon Levitate there's no scientific prove because everyone will understand that if you lower guns with 90% of total there also will be less people who died becasue of a gun, yo can deny that but thats rather foolish.
You should take all murders into account, not only those with a gun.
I just wanted to say that when somebody starts a sentence with "I love liberty but", the sentence ends with narrowing liberty. It's like "I like spaghetti, but".
Liberty must be narrowed somewhat, or else society would descend into kaos and anarchy. That's why every civilized nations have laws. Laws are narrowing liberty, but we need them.
Here's an example how to finish your sentence: "I like spaghetti, but I can't eat tons of it under half an hour.
Liberty must be narrowed somewhat, or else society would descend into kaos and anarchy. That's why every civilized nations have laws. Laws are narrowing liberty, but we need them.
Here's an example how to finish your sentence: "I like spaghetti, but I can't eat tons of it under half an hour.
Yes, laws that permit to create a society.
Attempted murder on a Turkish-Bulgarian (pro-Turkish minority rights) liberal politician. Of course terrible, no doubt. An attack on democracy. But the reaction after they caught him is sick too. An attack on the rule of law.
Attempted murder on a Turkish-Bulgarian (pro-Turkish minority rights) liberal politician. Of course terrible, no doubt. An attack on democracy. But the reaction after they caught him is sick too. An attack on the rule of law.
Bulgarians probably know better what happened there. As I've read, Dogan the victim had some corruption matters, and the attacker's nationality was also Turkish. Maybe it's an attack on democracy, but corrupt politicians themselves are an attack on democracy too. But I don't know anything about that part.
And when they beat up the assassin, it just shows that normal people can get mad, when someone tries to kill their pal. And when they're mad they do stuff, they normally wouldn't do. Fortunately, the rights to wield guns are limited. If those guys would have guns, then the assassin would be killed, and it would be much harder to figure out who is him, who sent him, etc.
(edited)
And when they beat up the assassin, it just shows that normal people can get mad, when someone tries to kill their pal. And when they're mad they do stuff, they normally wouldn't do. Fortunately, the rights to wield guns are limited. If those guys would have guns, then the assassin would be killed, and it would be much harder to figure out who is him, who sent him, etc.
(edited)
Bulgarians probably know better what happened there.
The circumstances really don't matter.
And when they beat up the assassin, it just shows that normal people can get mad
True. But the use of violence after the threat has been neutralized is inappropriate and unjustified.
The circumstances really don't matter.
And when they beat up the assassin, it just shows that normal people can get mad
True. But the use of violence after the threat has been neutralized is inappropriate and unjustified.
The circumstances really do matter. If the murder was attempted/committed because of Dogans political ideas, it is an attack on democracy. Suppose that Dogan had an affair with the wife of the assassin (or that indeed Dogan was corrupt and that that is the reason), and that is the reason that he tried to kill Dogan, then it is just a romantic drama, which involves purely by accident a politician. Would it also have been an attack on democracy in case it was a civil servant of a butcher being killed for this reason? I don't think so.
My point is:
People are not robots. Basically they are animals with a complex brain. --> They get mad, when such thing happens. --> Their emotions and instincts take over. --> They don't think about anything. Not even about what is appropriate or justified. --> Sometimes they do stupid things.
You can say it's sick, but it's human behaviour. Libertarian ideology is based on the assumption, that people are rational, so the individuals should decide about everything. But in reality they are basically irrational. That video shows an example of this.
That's why the possession of guns shall be limited. That's not against freedom rights or democracy. The usage of cars is also quite limited. You can't just drive a car anywhere, where you want. And if you don't have a license, you can't drive at all. Everybody accepts that, and noone says, that it's the oppression of freedom rights.
People are not robots. Basically they are animals with a complex brain. --> They get mad, when such thing happens. --> Their emotions and instincts take over. --> They don't think about anything. Not even about what is appropriate or justified. --> Sometimes they do stupid things.
You can say it's sick, but it's human behaviour. Libertarian ideology is based on the assumption, that people are rational, so the individuals should decide about everything. But in reality they are basically irrational. That video shows an example of this.
That's why the possession of guns shall be limited. That's not against freedom rights or democracy. The usage of cars is also quite limited. You can't just drive a car anywhere, where you want. And if you don't have a license, you can't drive at all. Everybody accepts that, and noone says, that it's the oppression of freedom rights.
I see it right now in TV, reaction is not sick, they should give him much more, at least broke both hands. I don't think that people have to be polite when such a pig want kill you during meeting and also online.