Screw investing in gold - invest in lead and brass....
The majority of the current party in power want to take that away from you as well. There are a few exceptions (thank you Webb, Tester and friends) but by and large the Democratic Party is opposed to the right to keep and bear arms.
So how about respecting the established bankruptcy code rather than the Executive Branch picking winners and losers? If the bankruptcy code had been followed the union contracts would have been voided and the secured creditors (i.e: bondholders) would have come before them when it came time to split up the remaining assets.
Here, Obama is pretty much giving the finger to his supporters who expected him to respect civil liberties.)
Nobody with half a brain should have expected that Obama would respect civil liberties. This is the guy whose own platform called for the ban of so-called "assault weapons". It was on his campaign webpage and it was on the White House's webpage until they took it down. I don't see how you can claim to support civil liberties while simultaneously seeking to infringe on the 2nd amendment rights of every law abiding American citizen.
Guns aren't your thing? Well, there's always his chickenshit reversal on FISA to consider.
The focus on Rush Limbaugh is absurd. I know why the Democrats are doing it -- it's great for fund-raising and riling up the base -- but it completely misses the point. If you listen to the White House political hacks you'd think that Rush Limbaugh speaks for the entire Republican Party.
Does he now? Rush Limbaugh and his ilk couldn't even keep John McCain from winning the South Carolina primary. If they don't have the power to prevent a candidate that they despise from winning in the reddest of the red states then you'll forgive me for rolling my eyes when the Democrats attempt to link every single Republican to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glen Beck, etc.
Go research the New Deal and how many people the gov't employed in the 30's to ease the depression,
None of which actually worked. The economy didn't really recover until the US entered WW2, pulling millions of men out of the job market and putting them in uniform. The post-war boom owed more to the fact that the rest of the world laid in ruins while the US infrastructure and economy was virtually untouched.
If they're not POWs, then why would they be tried in a military tribunal?
Like it or not there's multipleprecedents for doing exactly that. Enemy combatants are only accorded POW status if they obey the laws of war. When Al Quada starts fighting in uniforms under a flag and taking steps to prevent civilian casualties (rather then setting out to cause them) then we can start treating them as POWs.
yeah, WE are the GOOD guys!... there's nothing better than having a simple world-outlook
I am the good guy. The bad guy is someone attempting to use violence for his own material/sexual/emotional/etc gain. It's really not that complicated.
Iraq might disagree...
Nice redirection there.
like america was some sort of militarized zone
It's not. But to pretend that violent crime doesn't happen here (or anywhere else on Earth for that matter) is to stick your head in the sand and ignore reality.
and your so called "freedom" puts all the weapons and ammo into their hands, that they want... way to go...
So your solution is to take away the freedom of the majority because of the crimes of the minority? Yeah, that's a great idea.
You should change your signature line or at least acknowledge the irony in wanting to line people up against the wall while simultaneously seeking to disarm the citizenry.
for someone from america such a line just exposes paranoia...
What you see as paranoia I see as being pro-active. Roughly half of all people will be a victim of a violent crime at some point in their lives. I'd prefer to never have to experience that -- but should it happen to me I'm going to take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that I'm going home in one piece.
I said that people who belittle the idea of asking for help prevent people from doing so.
Grow a fucking spine. If you are so weak-willed that you can't ask for help because somebody belittled you then I don't have an iota of sympathy for you. We've created a nation of whiners that are unwilling and unable to stand up for themselves. I for one am rather sick of it.
Because you are caucasian, you do not have to worry about being discriminated against
Bullshit. The topic at hand is institutionalized discrimination backed with the full power of the United States Government.
You do not have stereotypes applied to you that would make it difficult to find work
Citation needed. There are stereotypes for every race. Italians get stereotyped because of the mob. Germans get stereotyped because of the Nazis. The Brits are referred to as Limeys. Don't tell me that there aren't stereotypes that apply to Caucasians.
minority groups held seats of power (political and industrial) that represented their population then all would be good
They do hold seats of power. It's acceptable practice for Governments to draw legislative districts with the specific intent of electing minorities. Again with a nice double standard -- if you draw a district designed to elect a white guy it's called racism, but if you draw one designed to elect a black or latino it's called "progressive".
Right now these laws exist because the sins of our fathers have to be corrected
They weren't the sins of my father. Even if they were I seem to recall that the Constitution speaks out against the corruption of blood.
And with racial tensions eased
How do you ease racial tensions by disadvantaging an entire race because of crimes that were committed before most of them were born?
The full version might have something to do with the long and storied
history of racism, sexism, and exploitation throughout human history.
Interesting. So I'm being punished because of the crimes of my fathers.
Actually, scratch that. My family came to the states from Germany in the 1930s and laid down roots in the Northeast. So they had nothing to do with slavery, Jim Crow or the lack of female voting rights. So, I'm actually being punished for the crimes of dead people just because I have roughly the same melanin levels that they did.
In other words the right to regulate chip counterfeiting belongs to your local State government, until you expand the Constitution with an amendment
Wrong. This is actually a proper use of the Interstate Commerce Clause. Now arresting some poor bastard for growing pot for his own personal use on the other hand.......
my parents' reaction to bullying was usually along the lines of "...well kick his ass then - as long as you didn't start it, you won't be in trouble from us for finishing it"
Your attitude is exactly why people don't ask for help when they're in a bad place. The result is school shootings, suicides, and other depressing events.
He wasn't mocking people who ask for help. He was mocking the notion of calling 911 over bullying. The last time I checked 911 is for emergencies. Having your feelings hurt != emergency.
I don't buy your apologism either. School shootings don't happen because people can't get help. Help is readily available in school. You've got teachers, guidance counselors, administrative staff, etc, etc. It seems to me that the student who is debating shooting up the place could have sought help from one of those people if he was inclined to do so.
If for holding up a convenience store with a gun there was NO punishment whatsoever, would you do it? If you really needed the money?
No, I wouldn't. Couple reasons for that:
I don't believe in taking that which doesn't belong to me, no matter how much I think I "need" it.
I would not be capable of pointing a firearm at another human being who wasn't threatening me with bodily harm and/or death.
I believe in the right of self-defense and would fully expect to be shot by the person behind the counter if I was stupid enough to point a gun at him.
In the American federal system almost all violent offenders are prosecuted at the state and local level.
Thanks for stating the blatantly obvious. Had you bothered to click on the link I provided you might have noticed that I was linking to a state level cost figure. The "Club Fed" remark was intended more as a commentary on the conditions that we house prisoners in. "Club New York/California/Alaska/Mississippi/etc" just doesn't have the same ring to it, does it?
Prisoners do not remain prisoners forever. Breaking big ones into little ones does nothing to prepare them - or us - for their eventual release.
Fuck that. We don't need to "prepare" them for release. We need to drill it into them that prison is a horrible horrible place, one that they'd rather not return to.
I'm saying that the vast majority of American gun owners do not see our Government as being oppressive enough to warrant overthrowing and most of those that do would admit that we haven't yet tried 'all other means of redress'.
If you think the American Government is oppressive enough to warrant a revolution then I suggest you start exercising your 1st amendment (there's a reason why that amendment is #1) rights and try to convince your fellow citizens of this fact. Personally I don't think we are anywhere near that point yet.
I'm happy that I live in a country where I can casually engage in a conversation about overthrowing the government without worrying about jack-booted thugs kicking down my door. I'm happy that I live in a country where my freedoms are constantly being expanded, rather than contracted. I'm happy to live in a country that allows me the means to defend myself and my family rather than being hung out to dry while waiting for the police to arrive.
Slashdot Mirror
When did Obama promise to sign the landmine treaty?
Screw investing in gold - invest in lead and brass....
The majority of the current party in power want to take that away from you as well. There are a few exceptions (thank you Webb, Tester and friends) but by and large the Democratic Party is opposed to the right to keep and bear arms.
So how about respecting the established bankruptcy code rather than the Executive Branch picking winners and losers? If the bankruptcy code had been followed the union contracts would have been voided and the secured creditors (i.e: bondholders) would have come before them when it came time to split up the remaining assets.
Here, Obama is pretty much giving the finger to his supporters who expected him to respect civil liberties.)
Nobody with half a brain should have expected that Obama would respect civil liberties. This is the guy whose own platform called for the ban of so-called "assault weapons". It was on his campaign webpage and it was on the White House's webpage until they took it down. I don't see how you can claim to support civil liberties while simultaneously seeking to infringe on the 2nd amendment rights of every law abiding American citizen.
Guns aren't your thing? Well, there's always his chickenshit reversal on FISA to consider.
The focus on Rush Limbaugh is absurd. I know why the Democrats are doing it -- it's great for fund-raising and riling up the base -- but it completely misses the point. If you listen to the White House political hacks you'd think that Rush Limbaugh speaks for the entire Republican Party.
Does he now? Rush Limbaugh and his ilk couldn't even keep John McCain from winning the South Carolina primary. If they don't have the power to prevent a candidate that they despise from winning in the reddest of the red states then you'll forgive me for rolling my eyes when the Democrats attempt to link every single Republican to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glen Beck, etc.
What's more socialist than wanting to "spread the wealth around"? Those are his words, not mine.
Go research the New Deal and how many people the gov't employed in the 30's to ease the depression,
None of which actually worked. The economy didn't really recover until the US entered WW2, pulling millions of men out of the job market and putting them in uniform. The post-war boom owed more to the fact that the rest of the world laid in ruins while the US infrastructure and economy was virtually untouched.
If they're not POWs, then why would they be tried in a military tribunal?
Like it or not there's multiple precedents for doing exactly that. Enemy combatants are only accorded POW status if they obey the laws of war. When Al Quada starts fighting in uniforms under a flag and taking steps to prevent civilian casualties (rather then setting out to cause them) then we can start treating them as POWs.
yeah, WE are the GOOD guys!... there's nothing better than having a simple world-outlook
I am the good guy. The bad guy is someone attempting to use violence for his own material/sexual/emotional/etc gain. It's really not that complicated.
Iraq might disagree...
Nice redirection there.
like america was some sort of militarized zone
It's not. But to pretend that violent crime doesn't happen here (or anywhere else on Earth for that matter) is to stick your head in the sand and ignore reality.
and your so called "freedom" puts all the weapons and ammo into their hands, that they want... way to go...
So your solution is to take away the freedom of the majority because of the crimes of the minority? Yeah, that's a great idea.
You should change your signature line or at least acknowledge the irony in wanting to line people up against the wall while simultaneously seeking to disarm the citizenry.
for someone from america such a line just exposes paranoia...
What you see as paranoia I see as being pro-active. Roughly half of all people will be a victim of a violent crime at some point in their lives. I'd prefer to never have to experience that -- but should it happen to me I'm going to take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that I'm going home in one piece.
I said that people who belittle the idea of asking for help prevent people from doing so.
Grow a fucking spine. If you are so weak-willed that you can't ask for help because somebody belittled you then I don't have an iota of sympathy for you. We've created a nation of whiners that are unwilling and unable to stand up for themselves. I for one am rather sick of it.
Because you are caucasian, you do not have to worry about being discriminated against
Bullshit. The topic at hand is institutionalized discrimination backed with the full power of the United States Government.
You do not have stereotypes applied to you that would make it difficult to find work
Citation needed. There are stereotypes for every race. Italians get stereotyped because of the mob. Germans get stereotyped because of the Nazis. The Brits are referred to as Limeys. Don't tell me that there aren't stereotypes that apply to Caucasians.
minority groups held seats of power (political and industrial) that represented their population then all would be good
They do hold seats of power. It's acceptable practice for Governments to draw legislative districts with the specific intent of electing minorities. Again with a nice double standard -- if you draw a district designed to elect a white guy it's called racism, but if you draw one designed to elect a black or latino it's called "progressive".
Right now these laws exist because the sins of our fathers have to be corrected
They weren't the sins of my father. Even if they were I seem to recall that the Constitution speaks out against the corruption of blood.
And with racial tensions eased
How do you ease racial tensions by disadvantaging an entire race because of crimes that were committed before most of them were born?
The full version might have something to do with the long and storied history of racism, sexism, and exploitation throughout human history.
Interesting. So I'm being punished because of the crimes of my fathers.
Actually, scratch that. My family came to the states from Germany in the 1930s and laid down roots in the Northeast. So they had nothing to do with slavery, Jim Crow or the lack of female voting rights. So, I'm actually being punished for the crimes of dead people just because I have roughly the same melanin levels that they did.
Yeah, that's totally fair and just.
I suggest you start a small business owned by a woman who is a minority.
Why is it (properly, IMHO) called racism and/or sexism if someone gives favoritism to a white male but doing the inverse is just fine and dandy?
In other words the right to regulate chip counterfeiting belongs to your local State government, until you expand the Constitution with an amendment
Wrong. This is actually a proper use of the Interstate Commerce Clause. Now arresting some poor bastard for growing pot for his own personal use on the other hand.......
That sucks ;)
Of course i can't pick up a PC and use it to fire deadly metal pellets at you
No, but you can easily bash someone over the head with it. The danger is in the wielder of the object, not the object itself.
GUNS KILL PEOPLE. GET OVER IT.
I hate to break it to you, but you are on the losing side of this issue in the United States. GET OVER IT.
my parents' reaction to bullying was usually along the lines of "...well kick his ass then - as long as you didn't start it, you won't be in trouble from us for finishing it"
Never start a fight, but always finish it.
Your attitude is exactly why people don't ask for help when they're in a bad place. The result is school shootings, suicides, and other depressing events.
He wasn't mocking people who ask for help. He was mocking the notion of calling 911 over bullying. The last time I checked 911 is for emergencies. Having your feelings hurt != emergency.
I don't buy your apologism either. School shootings don't happen because people can't get help. Help is readily available in school. You've got teachers, guidance counselors, administrative staff, etc, etc. It seems to me that the student who is debating shooting up the place could have sought help from one of those people if he was inclined to do so.
I'm a racist for pointing out that Morgan Freeman is a black American? That's rich.
I thought he was a black American? Now I'm all confused.....
If for holding up a convenience store with a gun there was NO punishment whatsoever, would you do it? If you really needed the money?
No, I wouldn't. Couple reasons for that:
In the American federal system almost all violent offenders are prosecuted at the state and local level.
Thanks for stating the blatantly obvious. Had you bothered to click on the link I provided you might have noticed that I was linking to a state level cost figure. The "Club Fed" remark was intended more as a commentary on the conditions that we house prisoners in. "Club New York/California/Alaska/Mississippi/etc" just doesn't have the same ring to it, does it?
Prisoners do not remain prisoners forever. Breaking big ones into little ones does nothing to prepare them - or us - for their eventual release.
Fuck that. We don't need to "prepare" them for release. We need to drill it into them that prison is a horrible horrible place, one that they'd rather not return to.
I'm saying that the vast majority of American gun owners do not see our Government as being oppressive enough to warrant overthrowing and most of those that do would admit that we haven't yet tried 'all other means of redress'.
If you think the American Government is oppressive enough to warrant a revolution then I suggest you start exercising your 1st amendment (there's a reason why that amendment is #1) rights and try to convince your fellow citizens of this fact. Personally I don't think we are anywhere near that point yet.
I'm happy that I live in a country where I can casually engage in a conversation about overthrowing the government without worrying about jack-booted thugs kicking down my door. I'm happy that I live in a country where my freedoms are constantly being expanded, rather than contracted. I'm happy to live in a country that allows me the means to defend myself and my family rather than being hung out to dry while waiting for the police to arrive.
I'm not sure I understand what point you are trying to make.