water cannon

[Hood]

Originally Posted by Hunden

Sternjaeger II I wouldn't put to much more energy into this, there isn't much more you can say to convince people who have their minds made up.

That goes both ways doesn't it.

[Pudfark]

Originally Posted by Hood

You take responsibility? I presume you have a cape to twirl whilst you dish out punishment in your vigilante alter ego?

I presume that you know that the "right to bear arms" has different interpretations, and that it was formulated in the late 18th century? By people who had to support the idea of armed insurrection as that is what they had just done?

I don't have to defend my nation as my government does that on my behalf, and I trust them to do so. Owning a gun wouldn't help me defuse an IED in Afghanistan, or stop a terrorist attack. How do you defend your nation by owning a gun? Owning a gun doesn't empower you to do anything at all; that's what the rule of law does.

It really doesn't bother me that the USA allows the right to bear arms. It's your country and your politicians and if you vote for them and they let you have what you want then that's fine. If you disagree with your government by all means form a militia and march on Washington. It'll make great TV whilst it lasts.

However, don't criticise another country's peoples and laws just because you do not agree with them. If you're not a citizen then it's really none of your business. That goes for the whole guns are great/bad argument.

Giggle away.

Roger Wilco on the giggling....

[ATAG_Doc]

Originally Posted by Pudfark

Well stated ElAurens....

It is amusing to me that the U.S. took the exact opposite approach to gun ownership/possession two hundred plus years ago....

The very folks that founded the U.S. government, chose to empower the people and not themselves....

The very rights mentioned in the posts made in this thread....were earned, with an armed populace...be it an army, militia or a mob. The future retention of those rights? Will be retained with the same.... It seems to be a bit late for the Brits and others... I have a right to a ballot and a bullet. Either way, I get to vote... One way is by permission...the other by right.

This was amazing. Great read. You blog any where? It's a great study because its polar opposites. Regardless n which side you're on it is a very interesting position how throughout the world we have these very different views of things.

The internet has made the meetings of these ideas so easy where just a hundred years ago the world was a very different place.

[drewpee]

Ok, two men with guns. One who cares for his community, having a good time with friends and family without violence, the other who doesn't give a toss about anyone but himself and doesn't give a dam who has to suffer for his actions.
Who is going to pull the trigger first?

[ATAG_Doc]

Originally Posted by drewpee

Ok, two men with guns. One who cares for his community, having a good time with friends and family without violence, the other who doesn't give a toss about anyone but himself and doesn't give a dam who has to suffer for his actions.
Who is going to pull the trigger first?

The fastest draw? I guess we'll know whose the fastest draw in town is wont we.

[Hunden]

Originally Posted by Hood

That goes both ways doesn't it.

I'm sorry I thought you said you go both ways when I first read it.

[Pudfark]

Originally Posted by drewpee

Ok, two men with guns. One who cares for his community, having a good time with friends and family without violence, the other who doesn't give a toss about anyone but himself and doesn't give a dam who has to suffer for his actions.
Who is going to pull the trigger first?

History indicates?
The one who cares...
Why?
Caring people are more intolerant of the reckless...
Than the reckless are intolerant of the caring...

[Hood]

Originally Posted by Hunden

I'm sorry I thought you said you go both ways when I first read it.

Put your banjo down before reading then.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by Hood

You take responsibility? I presume you have a cape to twirl whilst you dish out punishment in your vigilante alter ego?

I presume that you know that the "right to bear arms" has different interpretations, and that it was formulated in the late 18th century? By people who had to support the idea of armed insurrection as that is what they had just done?

yeah, there's the right way to interpret it, then there's your way

I don't have to defend my nation as my government does that on my behalf, and I trust them to do so. Owning a gun wouldn't help me defuse an IED in Afghanistan, or stop a terrorist attack. How do you defend your nation by owning a gun? Owning a gun doesn't empower you to do anything at all; that's what the rule of law does.

aaawwwww bless, so you can vouch for the fact that we (in the UK) live in a society that is safe cos the government and police do a good job at protecting us? I take it you're also implying that all the Swiss citizens are crazy? As for the rule of laws, it might come as news to you, but criminals normally are tagged as such because they break the law.. so you play by the rules, they don't, they might get you killed and then, maybe arrested. But in the end who won? In Italy we say "it's better to have a bad trial than a nice funeral".

It really doesn't bother me that the USA allows the right to bear arms. It's your country and your politicians and if you vote for them and they let you have what you want then that's fine. If you disagree with your government by all means form a militia and march on Washington. It'll make great TV whilst it lasts.

it's different, the American presidentialism offers more possibilities than our constitutional monarchy (another thing that leaves me well puzzled..I respect it of course, but regardless of what you say it's a waste of money, period).
If an American disagrees at least he has the option to get on the road with his militia (which hasn't really happened so far), if you disagree cos your government is shafting you, you do what "keep calm and carry on"?

However, don't criticise another country's peoples and laws just because you do not agree with them. If you're not a citizen then it's really none of your business. That goes for the whole guns are great/bad argument.

Giggle away.

this is valid for your as well, you criticise the American system and then ask others to respect the UK one..
I wish I could giggle about this, but men that can't even take the ultimate responsibility of defending their own country and/or neighbourhood are men anymore? You probably never had to deal with a public disorder/crime situation here, where what really comes out is how helpless and useless policing is here. Besides, if your government and police are so efficient, why do you think we have things like "neighbourhood watch" in place? Are they all crazy?

Originally Posted by Hood

Put your banjo down before reading then.

..and this is yet another example of your provocative nature.

[Hood]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

yeah, there's the right way to interpret it, then there's your way



aaawwwww bless, so you can vouch for the fact that we (in the UK) live in a society that is safe cos the government and police do a good job at protecting us? I take it you're also implying that all the Swiss citizens are crazy? As for the rule of laws, it might come as news to you, but criminals normally are tagged as such because they break the law.. so you play by the rules, they don't, they might get you killed and then, maybe arrested. But in the end who won? In Italy we say "it's better to have a bad trial than a nice funeral".


it's different, the American presidentialism offers more possibilities than our constitutional monarchy (another thing that leaves me well puzzled..I respect it of course, but regardless of what you say it's a waste of money, period).
If an American disagrees at least he has the option to get on the road with his militia (which hasn't really happened so far), if you disagree cos your government is shafting you, you do what "keep calm and carry on"?



this is valid for your as well, you criticise the American system and then ask others to respect the UK one..
I wish I could giggle about this, but men that can't even take the ultimate responsibility of defending their own country and/or neighbourhood are men anymore? You probably never had to deal with a public disorder/crime situation here, where what really comes out is how helpless and useless policing is here. Besides, if your government and police are so efficient, why do you think we have things like "neighbourhood watch" in place? Are they all crazy?



..and this is yet another example of your provocative nature.

Yes we are safe, as safe as anyone can be.

Nope haven't criticised the American system - it's their system to do with as they will, so is neither good nor bad, just different. I disagree with it, but that's not criticism. I'm not sure where the assumption comes from that I'm implying the Swiss are crazy, so I won't even touch on that further. Crazy costs of living yes.

Lots of people in the UK don't understand the monarchy either. I happen to be in favour for a number of reasons but that's a different subject.

What really gets me is that all the pro-gun crowd seem to be equating gun = ability to defend. A gun is needed because the other guy has one. In the UK the vast majority don't have guns to use, so we don't need one. I can defend myself if I have to, but that doesn't help me defend my country. What kind of skewed thinking is that.

As for my provocative nature, what a sweeping assumption to make based on my caustic response to a provocative comment. I wonder what the other examples are?