Which make me come back to my original point.... Where is Michael Moore lying?
It seems he's perfectly right no?
And I'm seeing a HUGE problem with the fact that more or less anyone can sell firearms and bullets to more or less anybody Oo
What is the huge problem other than you knee jerk conditioning to associate guns with violence? Do you think that way every time you see a knife or do you think ham sandwich? Just because you have never had a ham sandwich doesn't make the knife only for violence. I'm no longer arguing with you dude, you're just ignoring the parts of my speech that are troublesome for you. Wanna know what I think is a problem? I think there is a huge correlation between gun freedom and the incredible high violent crimes rate of your country. And I see no really good point in gun liberty as you're not protected from anything, neither banks nor rapes. Again I brought to you stats making those points. You were never debating me, you were just stringing together a bunch of logical fallacies and opinions. You are just mad because I dissected each and every one of them and proved how full of shit you are using the science of language - logic. You should learn it. Who the fuck are you some cheese munching Frenchman thousands of miles away in his own personal French Caliphate to tell Americans that they get no protection from guns just because you object to them? BTW the premise behind "your stats" was flawed, and I explained in detail why in previous posts even if you are too willfully ignorant to read it. Damn how can I be more precise than that... My claim was that gun control helps to prevent violent crimes and that gun freedom doesn't help to fight crimes. My evidence is that 28/28 EU nation have less violent crimes than USA, and the vast majority (26/28) have less rapes. Show me the "logical fallacy" here. And I'm trying to debate with you but you don't give a fuck about my arguments and don't explain yours. I'm still waiting for your evidence that USA is "incredibly has more diversity than EU". Who am I? Well, I don't know, maybe just a Bitcointalk user who came on a thread called "what's your OPINION on gun control" and who decided to share his OPINION on gun control and is supporting his claim with statistical proofs that EU countries are less violents than USA and BELIEVE it's linked to gun control. You want an absolute proof? That's impossible! The only way to actually prove it would be to instaure gun control in half of the USA and to see if it changes anything... Does gun control help prevent violent crimes or doesn't it? Make up your mind. You don't sound very precise at all. I already emboldened and numbered your logical fallacies and linked descriptions, I am not sure how much more clear I could make that part. If your premise that guns do not prevent violence is true then Australia, Belgium, and Sweden wouldn't have higher rape stats considering their strict gun control no? These countries crumble your premise that guns do not prevent violence. Additionally people tend to not report ATTEMPTED crimes that failed due to simply brandishing a firearm in self defense, so it is quite likely the statistics of defensive use of firearms are very underestimated. Just because I expect you to follow the rules of logic and support your opinion s with fact doesn't mean I am demanding "absolute proof", this is just more of your extremism showing. If its not your way it must be the exact polar opposite extreme! Merde! It seems rather obvious that gun control helps the society to be safer. Otherwise why would the whole EU have much less violent crimes?
On the other hand, from a personnal perspective, I like to have the right to defend myself. Not sure I would give my guns, even if I understand that it would make the whole society a bit safer. It's all a question of what you're ready to do for the others ^^
Not obvious at all. Gun statistics are notoriously manipulated at every opportunity. Methods of collection and definitions of crimes are not universal internationally. So those stats mean a lot less than you think, furthermore if you check the latest US stats the overall crime rates continue to fall as the gun ownership rate goes up. Interesting how that works isn't it? If you want to be disarmed and risk your own personal safety to preserve the safety of others, you are perfectly free to do so. No one will ever make you use a gun unless you want a job as a cop, or in the military. You have the right to do so for yourself, but to force other people to risk their own safety for some lofty poorly calculated statistically increased concept of safety is fundamentally against their human rights to self defense. Forcing other people to actually be vulnerable so you can feel safe is fundamentally sick. If you are afraid of gun owners committing crimes you too have the right to own a gun to defend yourself, but no one is making you. Why does every one else need to be less free to make you feel safe? |
|
|
|
|
Why is no one discussing the fact that a Canadian national is now the republican front runner for president? So what is it the democrats had a Kenyan so the republicans get a Canadian?
|
|
|
|
Which make me come back to my original point.... Where is Michael Moore lying?
It seems he's perfectly right no?
And I'm seeing a HUGE problem with the fact that more or less anyone can sell firearms and bullets to more or less anybody Oo
What is the huge problem other than you knee jerk conditioning to associate guns with violence? Do you think that way every time you see a knife or do you think ham sandwich? Just because you have never had a ham sandwich doesn't make the knife only for violence. I'm no longer arguing with you dude, you're just ignoring the parts of my speech that are troublesome for you. Wanna know what I think is a problem? I think there is a huge correlation between gun freedom and the incredible high violent crimes rate of your country. And I see no really good point in gun liberty as you're not protected from anything, neither banks nor rapes. Again I brought to you stats making those points. You were never debating me, you were just stringing together a bunch of logical fallacies and opinions. You are just mad because I dissected each and every one of them and proved how full of shit you are using the science of language - logic. You should learn it. Who the fuck are you some cheese munching Frenchman thousands of miles away in his own personal French Caliphate to tell Americans that they get no protection from guns just because you object to them? BTW the premise behind "your stats" was flawed, and I explained in detail why in previous posts even if you are too willfully ignorant to read it. If you are normal,stable person you won't mind if police have in their record that you own a gun. But all people that spits on gun control probably have their own reasons for that which are not with good intentions
WRONG Law abiding legal gun owners have plenty of reason to oppose a gun registry. First and foremost it is a risk to public safety. Gun registries historically have always lead to gun confiscations. Also what danger would be posed by a military group knowing the address of every home owner in the US? What would then be stopping them from rounding up or neutralizing every gun owner systematically? What if a criminal organization got a hold of that list? What is then stopping criminals from going door to door targeting the homes which have guns, putting even more illegal guns on the black market? Good plan -_- This is just another case of ignorant Europeans who have never seen a gun in their life let alone shot one displaying knee jerk reactions conditioned into them by their royal over-class, to what amounts to a tool. After seeing what happened Oregon, I believe that If there were a gun control in the US, this would not happen.
When guns are available easily to anyone to buy, this cause high amounts of crimes
Funny, no one protesting so far has fired a shot, only the FBI murdering one and injuring another. Under gun control police still have guns. How would gun control have prevented this situation again? Of course you are too thick to understand this protest was hijacked to push gun control while trying to cast Average white Americans as terrorists to further justify disarmament. #yallqeda #vanilla isis |
|
|
|
Which make me come back to my original point.... Where is Michael Moore lying?
It seems he's perfectly right no?
And I'm seeing a HUGE problem with the fact that more or less anyone can sell firearms and bullets to more or less anybody Oo
What is the huge problem other than you knee jerk conditioning to associate guns with violence? Do you think that way every time you see a knife or do you think ham sandwich? Just because you have never had a ham sandwich doesn't make the knife only for violence. |
|
|
|
No, why? its not a muslim country, i respect muslims, but their laws should stay on their home country
No no no no no no no no, a thousand times no. I agree, their laws should stay in their homeland. My personal view is that any religious law is silly and superstition-based and has no part in a modern society. So I would vigorously oppose Sharia law in the US. Technically all law is based on religion. If you research the history of law it all goes back to religious texts, some of which are still in use word for word today in modern law. There is some debatable value to some of these laws as most people agree murder, theft, rape, and other forms of crime are in opposition to the foundation of a civil society even though the laws have a religious origin. Most people misunderstand the concept of separation of church and state. Many people assume that it means all concepts of faith and God should be removed from law and government. In reality it means that the government is not allowed to infringe on any individual's right to practice their religion as long as it does not bring direct harm to others. This was a direct reference to Britain's hybridization with the church, and meant to prohibit such an arrangement between any church and the US government.i rather remember this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_statehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state Secular states do not have a state religion (established religion) or equivalent, although the absence of a state religion does not necessarily mean that a state is fully secular; however, a true secular state should steadfastly maintain national governance without influence from religious factions; i.e. Separation of church and state.[2] Way to read. Here is more stuff for you not to read. http://www.forbes.com/sites/billflax/2011/07/09/the-true-meaning-of-separation-of-church-and-state/print/ |
|
|
|
|
Looking for a small amount of Gymnema sylvestre seeds. Please PM to discuss if you have a local source. Will pay in Bitcoin of course. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Apparently socialism is the most looked up word of 2015. I don't know whether to laugh or cry. i know what for the reason it is , people replace democracy with a better political system.. the answer is socialism.. You are right but socialism will never be widespread political system.. democracy will be replaced a racist political system. So the choices are socialism or racism? Please. Pat yourself on the back some more commies. |
|
|
|
|
BREAKING NEWS: Today A Bear Took A Shit In The Woods!
|
|
|
|
You were trying to argue that gun ownership has no effect on the rate of rape, and you left out Australia because it doesn't fit with your argument. No one but you claimed this is just about Europe or the US. You are the one who brought up the claim about which country "having superior rape rate" in regard to gun ownership, I simply refuted your claim based on your cherry picked stats.
No you're the one taking the EU vs USA part into the debate.(1)(4) Allowing people to defend themselves would be madness, but allowing your wives, mothers, daughters, and sisters to be raped then executing the attacker isn't? Funny, aren't these things Europeans have been criticizing Americans about for years (ie the death penalty)?
Having the right to own guns doesn't really make anything against rapes you know? Otherwise USA wouldn't have a higher rape rate than most UE countries (except for Belgium and Sweden). http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Rape-rateThis is me pointing out to ANOTHER PERSON from Europe that is ironic he is claiming the death penalty will stop rapes when Europeans have been critical of the death penalty in the USA for many years. Then shortly after you follow, making the original comparison between US and EU rates of rape statistics. Allowing people to defend themselves would be madness, but allowing your wives, mothers, daughters, and sisters to be raped then executing the attacker isn't? Funny, aren't these things Europeans have been criticizing Americans about for years (ie the death penalty)?
Which is why I let Australia out (and the fact that I don't know much about Australia gun control policy). (3) And cherry picked stats... Really? (4) So the fact that 26 countries out of 28 in the EU have lower rape rate is not a proof that gun ownership is not an effective way to reduce rape rate? (6) I never claimed I could prove gun ownership reduced the rate of rapes, you did. He who claims proves. All I claimed is Sweden, Belgium, and Australia all are counter to your premise that gun ownership does not prevent rapes. Here is my exact quote below: Yes, lets just ignore the fact that Sweden, Belgium, and Australia all have higher rates of rape in spite of having smaller populations and much stricter gun control laws or outright bans on gun ownership. I love that you still can't find your own sources as well and are still parroting the very statistics site I sourced to you previously when I attempted to debate gun control with you as you spouted your opinions over and over as if they were fact. BTW don't expect those rape stats to stay low for most of Europe this year and many following.
Can we talk how you're cherry picking the debate as a whole? You keep avoiding the difficult question and you don't prove your claims either (4): He who claims proves, and your proof is not very compelling, especially considering how large and diverse the US is compared to these other countries.
EU has twice the population of USA, 28 times the legislation complexity, numerous different cultures and etcnics groups, dense history, more or less 25 different languages, and you just come here and caim that it's "not so much diversified, especially compared to the US".
Unfortunately all of Europe is not a country. Europe is a collection of countries all with different policies, laws, cultures, ethnic groups, population densities, taxes, and national budgets. Europe is subdivided into many smaller nations. The USA is ONE SINGLE NATION composed of more than 300 million people, all of them from different places all over the globe. In France there are native French who all share a common culture. In Spain there are native Spanish that all share a common culture. In Sweden there are Swedish who all share a common culture. This provides for more cooperation and understanding within local communities that the USA does not share because it consists of one single, very large nation upon which it is illogical to impose laws which might otherwise be effective for your otherwise tiny and more culturally homogeneous nations. Of course this whole side topic itself is a strawman argument, but this time I actually did make this claim, so I felt I should defend it regardless of your fallacious diversionary tactics. (1) https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman(2) https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon(3) https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white(4) https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque(5) https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/personal-incredulity(6) https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof |
|
|
|
Maybe you don't debate like this in the USA, but here when two persons are engaged in a debate, we take care of everything said, which means that the arguments I presented and you just ignored are still important. It's not because you don't want to talk about it that it doesn't exist ^^
It's cute how you imitate me like a little monkey never understanding the words you think are "random" repeating them back at me as if that proves something. Your refractory bullshit is not an argument, an argument requires a premise, which you consistently avoid by bringing up red herring diversions, straw man arguments, and by simply accusing me of the logical fallacies I accuse you of. None of these things are considered logical forms of debate regardless of your ignorance of this fact. I'm currently saying that banks are the first ennemies... So yes it crossed my mind thank you! Banks are responsible for more or less anything that is currently ruining the ideal of socialism which is, here I agree with you (which is not so common) totally corrupted by our shitty leaders.
I'm not asking everyone else to be over generous, I'm saying we don't have really the choice concerning the migrants. Cause we just can't close the borders. That's not physicaly possible considering the size of European borders in fact.
You over interpret my thoughts I believe... And Marxism has not much to do with generosity but with fairness. Rather different trust me.
You are so concerned with the protection of your precious ideals of socialism you don't realize your unrelenting blind belief in your ideology is the very thing exposing you and others around you to harm by those bankers. Trust me bankers know how to abuse socialism just as well or better than capitalism. You are asking everyone else around you to be "over generous". You are asking them to risk their personal safety, the financial resources drained by the presence of the mass influx of "refugees", and potentially the breakup of the EU Schengen treaty agreement destroying Europe as we know it. All of this so you can protect your precious infallible ideology that will some how magically just workout if we just keep trying it even though history documents the mountains of bodies left behind socialism marxism and communism. The borders can and will be closed. You are too simple minded to realize that was the entire purpose of letting the mass immigration to happen to begin with. Now all of Europe can be locked down by the military and they can start a civil war in Europe! Socialism FTW! P.S. I don't trust you, trust me.
You're saying that I should let my idealogy go because it's what will kill me. What a nice way of living. I'd rather die proud of what I've fought for. (1)
No we don't want guns. No we don't want liberalism. Keep it in the USA thank you very much. And we will welcome the refugees untill they're proven guilty of any crime. (2) You keep saying I ask people to be generous, I don't. That's what we call democracy, as long as more than half of the population will support gun control, and the concept of being innocent until proven guilty, it will be applied. (2) It has nothing to do with me personnally. "You are so concerned with the protection of your precious ideals of socialism you don't realize your unrelenting blind belief in your ideology is the very thing exposing you and others around you to harm by those bankers." Because you are not? Do you consider the USA as being protected? Cause there is only few country with less socialism than the USA... And I don't feel like banks do less damage here! (4) In fact the only country protected from bankers is probably Iceland, and that's one hell of socialism country! P.S. could you at least try to answer correctly? You keep avoiding the subject, if you don't want to debate don't come here... You still don't know how to define debate, let alone actually debate, and you accuse me of not wanting debate? I would laugh, but your redundancy is getting kind of boring. By the way do I "over interpret ... thoughts" or do I "just ignored" your points? Make up your mind. I have emboldened your logical fallacies and numbered them so you can learn how logic works and understand these links aren't "random". (1) https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman(2) https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon(3) https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white(4) https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque(5) https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/personal-incredulityI'm not asking everyone else to be over generous, I'm saying we don't have really the choice concerning the migrants. (3) Cause we just can't close the borders. That's not physicaly possible considering the size of European borders in fact. (5)
Yes, but you are. You are making choices for other people in your country who may or may not agree with you. You are claiming there is "no choice" but in reality choice is all anyone ever has. You most certainly do have a choice. You can screen and control the influx of economic migrants. Claiming you physically can not secure your borders at all is just ignorant. You keep saying I ask people to be generous, I don't. That's what we call democracy, as long as more than half of the population will support gun control, and the concept of being innocent until proven guilty, it will be applied. (2) It has nothing to do with me personnally. Again, you are making choices for others when your government forces everyone to risk their safety and what little fruit of their labor they have left via more taxes as a direct result of allowing an uncontrolled mass influx of migration. As a result you are asking other people to sacrifice so that you can have your illusion of collective generosity, and tell yourself you did good, when in reality you are harming all involved. Taxes fund your "generosity". Taxes are taken by force. Your "generosity" is taken by force. That is not generosity that is theft and redistribution of wealth. Also here is the definition of democracy: 1. a system of government in which all the people of a country can vote to elect their representatives parliamentary democracy the principles of democracy 2. a country which has this system of government Western democracies I thought we were supposed to be living in a democracy. 3. fair and equal treatment of everyone in an organization, etc., and their right to take part in making decisions https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/learner/democracy"as more than half of the population will support gun control, and the concept of being innocent until proven guilty, it will be applied." France is a republic by the way, not a democracy. Even if you did live in a democracy, there are still issues of representative government, otherwise your so called "democracy" is nothing more than mob rule. The population is free to decide on their own to defend themselves and their country if they need to. You however are attempting to deny people that choice by claiming to speak for everyone with populist rule and imposing penalties upon people for taking steps to do so. Additionally democracies are a flawed form of government, because all it takes is one intelligent individual to fool most of the people, and the masses can be lead around to any place the oligarchical class desire. Göring: "Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship." Gilbert: "There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars." Göring: "Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country." https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Hermann_G%C3%B6ringPretty soon your countrymen will be denouncing the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger, and by then it will be too late. You have a right to enforce your national borders. This is not racism. This is the protection of the human rights of your nation's population. Your nation does not owe anything to people just because they wander into your national borders. You are literally stealing from people within your country by force to accommodate people who most likely seek the destruction of your "generous" ideologies. Europe is being baited into accepting an untenable situation using appeals to emotion and collective cultural guilt. This will serve no one but the bankers you claim to oppose, yet actively serve. |
|
|
|
You are so concerned with the protection of your precious ideals of socialism you don't realize your unrelenting blind belief in your ideology is the very thing exposing you and others around you to harm by those bankers. Trust me bankers know how to abuse socialism just as well or better than capitalism. You are asking everyone else around you to be "over generous". You are asking them to risk their personal safety, the financial resources drained by the presence of the mass influx of "refugees", and potentially the breakup of the EU Schengen treaty agreement destroying Europe as we know it. All of this so you can protect your precious infallible ideology that will some how magically just workout if we just keep trying it even though history documents the mountains of bodies left behind socialism marxism and communism. The borders can and will be closed. You are too simple minded to realize that was the entire purpose of letting the mass immigration to happen to begin with. Now all of Europe can be locked down by the military and they can start a civil war in Europe! Socialism FTW!
P.S. I don't trust you, trust me.
You're saying that I should let my idealogy go because it's what will kill me. What a nice way of living. I'd rather die proud of what I've fought for. No we don't want guns. No we don't want liberalism. Keep it in the USA thank you very much. And we will welcome the refugees untill they're proven guilty of any crime. You keep saying I ask people to be generous, I don't. That's what we call democracy, as long as more than half of the population will support gun control, and the concept of being innocent until proven guilty, it will be applied. It has nothing to do with me personnally. "You are so concerned with the protection of your precious ideals of socialism you don't realize your unrelenting blind belief in your ideology is the very thing exposing you and others around you to harm by those bankers." Because you are not? Do you consider the USA as being protected? Cause there is only few country with less socialism than the USA... And I don't feel like banks do less damage here! In fact the only country protected from bankers is probably Iceland, and that's one hell of socialism country! P.S. could you at least try to answer correctly? You keep avoiding the subject, if you don't want to debate don't come here... You don't get it. I am not telling you to give up your ideals. You always immediately fall into a pattern of extremes rather than using logic to examine the situation. You do whatever you want in your own country. You have your ideals, just remember that in the next few years when people start paying the price for your ideals. You are what Marx called "a useful idiot", some one who is easily lead around by the most base instincts of humanity used to push political and economic agendas. You have whatever beliefs you want. I am sure in your mind you think this is something about racism, but this is just another tactic to guilt your nations people into welcoming its own destruction blindly in the name of "multiculturalism". These "refugees" that are flooding into Europe en mass don't give a fuck about you or your culture. They come from parts of the world that have been at constant war for thousands of years, and you think they will walk on European soil and magically they will become nonviolent? If the people of Europe are unwilling to defend themselves with force, Europe will just be absorbed and disintegrate. I am not telling you how to live, but I am telling you that your reasoning is seriously lacking in logic, and you and your countrymen will pay the price as a result. You: "you should take care and defend yourself again the flood of migrants who will systematically take down your country and your culture by force" My ideal: "We should never consider guilty someone until proven guilty, which means after he broke the law" Your statement automatically makes the assumption that they will. You're based on the fear of being conquered. Which is against everything I believe in. Which means you're asking me to give up on my ideals. And again you answer only to the part you want to. I'll ask again then: "You are so concerned with the protection of your precious ideals of socialism you don't realize your unrelenting blind belief in your ideology is the very thing exposing you and others around you to harm by those bankers."
Because you are not? Do you consider the USA as being protected? Cause there is only few country with less socialism than the USA... And I don't feel like banks do less damage here! In fact the only country protected from bankers is probably Iceland, and that's one hell of socialism country!
You always immediately fall into a pattern of extremes rather than using logic to examine the situation.
You mean how you selectively chose which part of my claims you're taking care of? Or how you over interpret everything I say? Maybe you call this logic in the USA that would explain lots of things, but that's not how we call it here ^^ |
|
|
|
Everyone who is in favor of gun control in the United States need to see this. This is what happens when you allow the liberals to take away your guns. First they will take away your guns. Then they will take away your kitchen knife. After that they will ban you from carrying pepper spray or any other substance, which could be useful in defending yourself. The left-wing loonies want to make you defenseless against the rapists and murderers. If the law system works great there won't be rapists and murderers other than psychopats. Give 25 to life to rapists and murderers in bad conditions and see how many people dare this again. doesn't matter if you're sarcastic with this but i somehow find it very doable for the government to implement such. its always fear that will make these low life back off. its death that will always make them back off. and putting it in thier minds that they will surely find death if they commit such crime so long as they are caught with evidence and a witness itself, the criminals would be dead before they'd have their day on court. Allowing people to defend themselves would be madness, but allowing your wives, mothers, daughters, and sisters to be raped then executing the attacker isn't? Funny, aren't these things Europeans have been criticizing Americans about for years (ie the death penalty)? Having the right to own guns doesn't really make anything against rapes you know? Otherwise USA wouldn't have a higher rape rate than most UE countries (except for Belgium and Sweden). http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Rape-rateIt's always a question of pros and cons. And seeing the violent crimes in countries with right to own guns, and those with guns control, I know where my choice is. Yes, lets just ignore the fact that Sweden, Belgium, and Australia all have higher rates of rape in spite of having smaller populations and much stricter gun control laws or outright bans on gun ownership. I love that you still can't find your own sources as well and are still parroting the very statistics site I sourced to you previously when I attempted to debate gun control with you as you spouted your opinions over and over as if they were fact. BTW don't expect those rape stats to stay low for most of Europe this year and many following. Hum... I didn't say anything about Australia because... You know... It's not in Europe and you were just spitting on European legislation. I can find my own sources thanks but this site was on the first results and as you gave it once I thought it would be easier for you to admit your wrong. Seems it will not. And yes let's ignore the fact that only 2 of the 28 EU countries have higher rape rate which means that 26 of 28 countries have a lower one.... What do you need to see that 26 > 2 ? BTW, funny how when it's you, it's fact, when it's me, it's opinion no? You didn't say anything about Australia because it doesn't fit your narrative of gun ownership having no effect on preventing rape. I responded to your claim and used your own source to show that you ignored other instances which refute your claims in order to yes, push your opinion. He who claims proves, and your proof is not very compelling, especially considering how large and diverse the US is compared to these other countries. You can tell me about per-capita if you want, I assure you I know how to interpret statistics. I am not sure you are able, but the per-capita rate does not account for the disparities in different classes, cultures, religions, races, etc that lead to higher crime rates which would lead to a greater need for gun ownership for self defense. Lets discuss the rate of rapes in Europe one year from now (2016 stats) and compare it to the US rates shall we? Its easy to claim superiority when the wave of destruction is just starting to crash against you and you have nothing to defend yourselves with. The current crime rates are not reflected in years old statistics. Just because Europe enjoyed a short period of superior quality of life doesn't mean you are guaranteed that future, and marxists and socialists such as yourself will ensure Europe's speedy decline. Well I'll let you by your words. As you said, he who claims must prove. Then prove that " marxists and socialists such as yourself will ensure Europe's speedy decline.". I didn't say anything about Australia because it was not related to YOUR claim and YOUR statement about European legislation. I like how you consider that "considering how large and diverse the US is compared to these other countries.". Well I'll go with your way of debating, just prove that claim. Cause as you kept saying, that's just an opinion. EU has twice the population of USA, 28 times the legislation complexity, numerous different cultures and etcnics groups, dense history, more or less 25 different languages, and you just come here and caim that it's "not so much diversified, especially compared to the US". Well. When it's you it's just fact no? But when I don't take one non European country because YOU were talking about European legislation, you say that I try to push my opinion. Double standards no? If we go this way, shall we also consider the dozen of gun non control country having superior rape rate or would it be out of debate because it doesn't suit you? At least I have the honnesty to apologize when I misinterprete a stat. And ok let's discuss Europe rape rate at the end of 2016, I'm pretty sure it won't ashame our continent. But as for anything else, you know better of course. P.S. Oh and of course let's totally forget about the fact that 26 out of 28 nations have a lower rape rate than US. It doesn't prove ANYTHING. Now you are just using red herrings and straw man arguments again, sorry you don't get to make statements for me then tell me to defend them. The premise under debate is the right to use force as self defense and its efficacy in preventing violence, not your twisted Marxist ideologies. Just because you believe you are making a logical argument does not make it fact, so no, it is not a double standard. You were trying to argue that gun ownership has no effect on the rate of rape, and you left out Australia because it doesn't fit with your argument. No one but you claimed this is just about Europe or the US. You are the one who brought up the claim about which country "having superior rape rate" in regard to gun ownership, I simply refuted your claim based on your cherry picked stats. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawmanhttps://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoquehttps://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proofhttps://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-texas-sharpshooter |
|
|
|
You are so concerned with the protection of your precious ideals of socialism you don't realize your unrelenting blind belief in your ideology is the very thing exposing you and others around you to harm by those bankers. Trust me bankers know how to abuse socialism just as well or better than capitalism. You are asking everyone else around you to be "over generous". You are asking them to risk their personal safety, the financial resources drained by the presence of the mass influx of "refugees", and potentially the breakup of the EU Schengen treaty agreement destroying Europe as we know it. All of this so you can protect your precious infallible ideology that will some how magically just workout if we just keep trying it even though history documents the mountains of bodies left behind socialism marxism and communism. The borders can and will be closed. You are too simple minded to realize that was the entire purpose of letting the mass immigration to happen to begin with. Now all of Europe can be locked down by the military and they can start a civil war in Europe! Socialism FTW!
P.S. I don't trust you, trust me.
You're saying that I should let my idealogy go because it's what will kill me. What a nice way of living. I'd rather die proud of what I've fought for. No we don't want guns. No we don't want liberalism. Keep it in the USA thank you very much. And we will welcome the refugees untill they're proven guilty of any crime. You keep saying I ask people to be generous, I don't. That's what we call democracy, as long as more than half of the population will support gun control, and the concept of being innocent until proven guilty, it will be applied. It has nothing to do with me personnally. "You are so concerned with the protection of your precious ideals of socialism you don't realize your unrelenting blind belief in your ideology is the very thing exposing you and others around you to harm by those bankers." Because you are not? Do you consider the USA as being protected? Cause there is only few country with less socialism than the USA... And I don't feel like banks do less damage here! In fact the only country protected from bankers is probably Iceland, and that's one hell of socialism country! P.S. could you at least try to answer correctly? You keep avoiding the subject, if you don't want to debate don't come here... You don't get it. I am not telling you to give up your ideals. You always immediately fall into a pattern of extremes rather than using logic to examine the situation. You do whatever you want in your own country. You have your ideals, just remember that in the next few years when people start paying the price for your ideals. You are what Marx called "a useful idiot", some one who is easily lead around by the most base instincts of humanity used to push political and economic agendas. You have whatever beliefs you want. I am sure in your mind you think this is something about racism, but this is just another tactic to guilt your nations people into welcoming its own destruction blindly in the name of "multiculturalism". These "refugees" that are flooding into Europe en mass don't give a fuck about you or your culture. They come from parts of the world that have been at constant war for thousands of years, and you think they will walk on European soil and magically they will become nonviolent? If the people of Europe are unwilling to defend themselves with force, Europe will just be absorbed and disintegrate. I am not telling you how to live, but I am telling you that your reasoning is seriously lacking in logic, and you and your countrymen will pay the price as a result. |
|
|
|
Everyone who is in favor of gun control in the United States need to see this. This is what happens when you allow the liberals to take away your guns. First they will take away your guns. Then they will take away your kitchen knife. After that they will ban you from carrying pepper spray or any other substance, which could be useful in defending yourself. The left-wing loonies want to make you defenseless against the rapists and murderers. If the law system works great there won't be rapists and murderers other than psychopats. Give 25 to life to rapists and murderers in bad conditions and see how many people dare this again. doesn't matter if you're sarcastic with this but i somehow find it very doable for the government to implement such. its always fear that will make these low life back off. its death that will always make them back off. and putting it in thier minds that they will surely find death if they commit such crime so long as they are caught with evidence and a witness itself, the criminals would be dead before they'd have their day on court. Allowing people to defend themselves would be madness, but allowing your wives, mothers, daughters, and sisters to be raped then executing the attacker isn't? Funny, aren't these things Europeans have been criticizing Americans about for years (ie the death penalty)? Having the right to own guns doesn't really make anything against rapes you know? Otherwise USA wouldn't have a higher rape rate than most UE countries (except for Belgium and Sweden). http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Rape-rateIt's always a question of pros and cons. And seeing the violent crimes in countries with right to own guns, and those with guns control, I know where my choice is. Yes, lets just ignore the fact that Sweden, Belgium, and Australia all have higher rates of rape in spite of having smaller populations and much stricter gun control laws or outright bans on gun ownership. I love that you still can't find your own sources as well and are still parroting the very statistics site I sourced to you previously when I attempted to debate gun control with you as you spouted your opinions over and over as if they were fact. BTW don't expect those rape stats to stay low for most of Europe this year and many following. Hum... I didn't say anything about Australia because... You know... It's not in Europe and you were just spitting on European legislation. I can find my own sources thanks but this site was on the first results and as you gave it once I thought it would be easier for you to admit your wrong. Seems it will not. And yes let's ignore the fact that only 2 of the 28 EU countries have higher rape rate which means that 26 of 28 countries have a lower one.... What do you need to see that 26 > 2 ? BTW, funny how when it's you, it's fact, when it's me, it's opinion no? You didn't say anything about Australia because it doesn't fit your narrative of gun ownership having no effect on preventing rape. I responded to your claim and used your own source to show that you ignored other instances which refute your claims in order to yes, push your opinion. He who claims proves, and your proof is not very compelling, especially considering how large and diverse the US is compared to these other countries. You can tell me about per-capita if you want, I assure you I know how to interpret statistics. I am not sure you are able, but the per-capita rate does not account for the disparities in different classes, cultures, religions, races, etc that lead to higher crime rates which would lead to a greater need for gun ownership for self defense. Lets discuss the rate of rapes in Europe one year from now (2016 stats) and compare it to the US rates shall we? Its easy to claim superiority when the wave of destruction is just starting to crash against you and you have nothing to defend yourselves with. The current crime rates are not reflected in years old statistics. Just because Europe enjoyed a short period of superior quality of life doesn't mean you are guaranteed that future, and marxists and socialists such as yourself will ensure Europe's speedy decline. |
|
|
|
I'm reading papers and (as every other day) news about a girl being stabbed and killed by a 15 year old boy in the centre for immigrant kids without parents. Then right below an article about migrants in Austria, where they we're not following the rules of the pool, breaking the inventory and were going into women dressing rooms, and of course the leftist party and socialist are critisizing them... Who's insane here? I was saying this from the start, what to do with them, we kill them and skin them. Dress the cold, feed the hungry.. Joke, It's a joke, but seriously, what's going on with Europe? What do you think, will something happen after Angela Merkel leaves and someone new, with different views replaces her?
Sigh...  Ok let's do this again. Seems like the flow of people yelling "wtf is happening in Europe?" will never stop. 1- what do you want to do? Kill/refuse every immigrants coming? (not sarcastically judging you. Real question here) 2- Don't you have the impression that the immigrants are like a very tiny little problem compared to how banks and great capital is fucking us? Did it ever cross your mind that maybe banks are the ones that caused the wars to begin with, and that the banks are fucking you all via this mass influx of immigration abusing your well intended but misguided socialist ideas as your own downfall? No of course you haven't. Like every Socialist/Marxist, you demand everyone be else be generous with their own resources and risk their own safety to satisfy your own ideals of justice. If the "refugees" are so important to you why don't you invite them into your own home instead of demanding everyone else do so? It is so much easier to just demand everyone else be generous with their collective resources isn't it? It is like being generous without all the pesky personal sacrifices of doing so. I'm currently saying that banks are the first ennemies... So yes it crossed my mind thank you! Banks are responsible for more or less anything that is currently ruining the ideal of socialism which is, here I agree with you (which is not so common) totally corrupted by our shitty leaders. I'm not asking everyone else to be over generous, I'm saying we don't have really the choice concerning the migrants. Cause we just can't close the borders. That's not physicaly possible considering the size of European borders in fact. You over interpret my thoughts I believe... And Marxism has not much to do with generosity but with fairness. Rather different trust me. You are so concerned with the protection of your precious ideals of socialism you don't realize your unrelenting blind belief in your ideology is the very thing exposing you and others around you to harm by those bankers. Trust me bankers know how to abuse socialism just as well or better than capitalism. You are asking everyone else around you to be "over generous". You are asking them to risk their personal safety, the financial resources drained by the presence of the mass influx of "refugees", and potentially the breakup of the EU Schengen treaty agreement destroying Europe as we know it. All of this so you can protect your precious infallible ideology that will some how magically just workout if we just keep trying it even though history documents the mountains of bodies left behind socialism marxism and communism. The borders can and will be closed. You are too simple minded to realize that was the entire purpose of letting the mass immigration to happen to begin with. Now all of Europe can be locked down by the military and they can start a civil war in Europe! Socialism FTW! P.S. I don't trust you, trust me. |
|
|
|
Everyone who is in favor of gun control in the United States need to see this. This is what happens when you allow the liberals to take away your guns. First they will take away your guns. Then they will take away your kitchen knife. After that they will ban you from carrying pepper spray or any other substance, which could be useful in defending yourself. The left-wing loonies want to make you defenseless against the rapists and murderers. If the law system works great there won't be rapists and murderers other than psychopats. Give 25 to life to rapists and murderers in bad conditions and see how many people dare this again. doesn't matter if you're sarcastic with this but i somehow find it very doable for the government to implement such. its always fear that will make these low life back off. its death that will always make them back off. and putting it in thier minds that they will surely find death if they commit such crime so long as they are caught with evidence and a witness itself, the criminals would be dead before they'd have their day on court. Allowing people to defend themselves would be madness, but allowing your wives, mothers, daughters, and sisters to be raped then executing the attacker isn't? Funny, aren't these things Europeans have been criticizing Americans about for years (ie the death penalty)? Having the right to own guns doesn't really make anything against rapes you know? Otherwise USA wouldn't have a higher rape rate than most UE countries (except for Belgium and Sweden). http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Rape-rateIt's always a question of pros and cons. And seeing the violent crimes in countries with right to own guns, and those with guns control, I know where my choice is. Yes, lets just ignore the fact that Sweden, Belgium, and Australia all have higher rates of rape in spite of having smaller populations and much stricter gun control laws or outright bans on gun ownership. I love that you still can't find your own sources as well and are still parroting the very statistics site I sourced to you previously when I attempted to debate gun control with you as you spouted your opinions over and over as if they were fact. BTW don't expect those rape stats to stay low for most of Europe this year and many following. |
|
|
|
I'm reading papers and (as every other day) news about a girl being stabbed and killed by a 15 year old boy in the centre for immigrant kids without parents. Then right below an article about migrants in Austria, where they we're not following the rules of the pool, breaking the inventory and were going into women dressing rooms, and of course the leftist party and socialist are critisizing them... Who's insane here? I was saying this from the start, what to do with them, we kill them and skin them. Dress the cold, feed the hungry.. Joke, It's a joke, but seriously, what's going on with Europe? What do you think, will something happen after Angela Merkel leaves and someone new, with different views replaces her?
Sigh... Ok let's do this again. Seems like the flow of people yelling "wtf is happening in Europe?" will never stop. 1- what do you want to do? Kill/refuse every immigrants coming? (not sarcastically judging you. Real question here) 2- Don't you have the impression that the immigrants are like a very tiny little problem compared to how banks and great capital is fucking us? Did it ever cross your mind that maybe banks are the ones that caused the wars to begin with, and that the banks are fucking you all via this mass influx of immigration abusing your well intended but misguided socialist ideas as your own downfall? No of course you haven't. Like every Socialist/Marxist, you demand everyone be else be generous with their own resources and risk their own safety to satisfy your own ideals of justice. If the "refugees" are so important to you why don't you invite them into your own home instead of demanding everyone else do so? It is so much easier to just demand everyone else be generous with their collective resources isn't it? It is like being generous without all the pesky personal sacrifices of doing so. |
|
|
|
Technically all law is based on religion...
Indeed, but some law and religions have developed a lot, some other religions and law systems are still there were they were fifteen hundred years ago. Perpetuality and sticking to old traditions are nice things in many areas but not that great in law. Way to ignore everything I just posted and fall to your previously held belief of "religion bad!" I think you misunderstood what I wrote. I never said that "religion is bad" I said some religions are bad. I think Christianity, Buddhism Hinduism, and a lot of other religions never been "designed" to be oppressive and (originally) were not aimed for world domination. Of course nearly off of these religions were used as tools for oppression and domination by some ambitious people, but on their own these religions were targeting improvement of individuals and communities. On the other hand there are some other religions like Islam and mesoamerican religions what were especially "designed" for conquest, domination and enslaving others. These are what I consider bad for a multi-ethnic, multi-religion society. None of this has anything to do with what I just explained about religion and government. This isn't a reply to my comment but a statement after it with no consideration for the premise whatsoever. Like I said, just bias bleeding out in the guise of a response. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
