Re:Most things not politically correct.
on
What You Can't Say
·
· Score: 0
The only "ethnic cleansing" going on in "Palestine" is in the fantasy life of former Egyptian, Jordanian, and Syrian refugees who want to kill all the Jews. If they would stop their acts of violence there would be peace in Israel.
P.S. pick up a few history books, you might learn something.
Re:"We are not any safer since Sadam was arrested"
on
What You Can't Say
·
· Score: 1
The Secret Service will be knocking on your door any minute now...
Re:Better examples of heresy I can think of
on
What You Can't Say
·
· Score: 1
Arabs and (most) Jews ARE "Caucasians", you moron, as well as Persians, Indians, and Afghans. Perhaps you meant white Europeans? If so, that kind of disproves your point if you are white, since you are so stupid.
If you let the economy be driven by (private) individuals, as the Nazis did...
Oh, really? Here's some points from the National Socialist party platform.
That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished. Hmmm, there goes the stock market.
We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits whether in assets or material. Rich Capitalists control everything? No, the Nazis with the guns control everything.
We demand the nationalization of businesses which have been organized into cartels. Hmmm. I guess that's one way to do anti-trust...
We demand that all the profits from wholesale trade shall be shared out. Commie.
We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle-class, the immediate communalization of department stores which will be rented cheaply to small businessmen... Socialist wet dream...
We demand a land reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to confiscate from the owners without compensation any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land. Some free market.
Your line of thinking reduces everything into anarchism and non-anarchism. That's correct in some sense but for all intensive purposes it is irrelevant. Even capitalism calls for controls to be placed (eg. capitalism requires government to enforce private property. Even the pure capitalists call for minimal goverment that will enforce property rights.).
There is a huge difference between controlling people and defending their natural rights from criminals. But then, I'm sure you don't consider things like private property, freedom of speech, free commerce, and self-defense natural rights. By the way, the phrase is "for all intents and purposes".
You can't have real socialism without totalitarianism (which is the real enemy of the people as you correctly stated).
Explain why.
I did. Read it again. You can't control the market without controlling the people... etc.
You didn't even really read that linked article, much less understand it, that's obvious.
I don't know why I bother arguing, I guess it's for the people who might stumble on this thread. I have an overwhelming urge to counter leftist propaganda.
lol Maybe you should read up on thse systems first. North Korea communist? Cambodia? If those countries are capitalist, Iraq is too (we all know how much USA supported it, don't we?).
Capitalist? I have no idea what you are saying here. The USA supported what? Could you try to make some sense?
Do you need to get your brain examined? How about Nazi Germany which was capitalist?
The Nazis were also known as the National Socialist party. The only difference between the Soviets and the Nazis is that the Nazis were smart enough to let qualified people run the companies. The State still owned them for all practical purposes. The notion that the fascists were the opposite of the communists is an oversimplistic fallacy.
To paraphrase Robert Heinlein, there are only really two types of political thought. Those who think people need to be controlled and those who don't. The natural state of commerce is free markets. To control markets requires controlling people. Controlling people requires force. Force requires disarming the people and making examples of dissidents.
You can't have real socialism without totalitarianism (which is the real enemy of the people as you correctly stated). You can have a centrist mix of free markets with social programs like the U.S. and Europe. All of our economic power depends on the (relatively) free market and capitalism.
Your typically Leftist condescension is repulsive and infantile. You think that anyone who disagrees with you must be an idiot. You know nothing about me. I'm an avid reader of history and political theory, I just happen to disagree with you. Please make some reasoned and supported arguments if you wish to carry this discussion further.
If someone is paying people to write line after line of repetetive garbage I could save them a lot of money by writing some code generators at only $50/hour... Hiring the cheapest programmers isn't always the best bargain. I think the trend of hiring cheap code monkeys is going to backfire.
We give money away instead of taking tribute. That sounds like the opposite of imperialism to me. If we wanted the world we could have had it in 1945. Instead, we went back to our farms and our shops because the rest of the world isn't worth a corner of Nebraska.
Jealousy is the reason they hate us. They think we could just cure all their problems if we wanted to, but the truth is they have to do it themselves. They have to reject the warlords and the priests get up and work 40-80 hours a week, 50 weeks a year like we do. They have to tolerate differences in religion, race, and politics without slaughtering each other like we do.
I don't think it was gloating. It sounds like a realistic warning to me. If we started to get hit with nukes, we would have little choice but to make sure it stops in whatever way is possible.
To the paranoid... get over yourself. Like they're going to track you down and shut down your car and arrest you for the CD full of pirated MP3s in your stereo.
If they know who you are, it's easier to just send the cops to your house. This is useful for hijacked hazmat vehicles and maybe eventually for stopping high-speed chases or tracking fleeing felons. Not for keeping tabs on everyone... not even California has enough state employees for that kind of volume.
Brilliant riposte. I especially like your rapier wit and the way you countered my well-documented facts with perfectly legitimate facts of your own. You are so refreshing after dealing with the emotionally charged yet intellectually vapid rhetoric of the typical anti-gun fanatic.
I applaud you sir. Truly, you deserve the title of "Master Debater".
Historically you may have earned the right to carry a gun, but if you feel this has made the US a safer place to live and have children, you might find it interesting to learn that in the US more children are killed by gunfire than in any other western country. In fact, the amount of people killed by gunfire (%) compares favorably to a country in war.
That's pure propaganda. Here are some facts from Guy Smith
Myth: 13 children are killed each day by guns
Fact: Adults included - This "statistic" includes "children" up to age 19 or 24, depending on
the source. Since most violent crime is committed by males ages 16-24, these numbers include
adult gang members dying during criminal activity (71) (incidentally, 'child' is defined by Webster
as a person between birth and puberty, typically 13-14 years).
Fact: Criminals are included - 70% of these deaths are adults, age 17-20, involved in gang
warfare. Half of the juveniles killed are involved in gang activity at the time of their deaths,
often involved in drug related firefights.
Fact: Suicides and criminals included - These numbers include criminal activities and
suicides.(72) As suicides make up more than 1/2 of all gun deaths, the number drops even further, to
about 1.3 children a day. (73)
When you do all the subtraction, the result is less than one child per day
Fact: The federal government lists the total
firearm related deaths for children were 612,
or 1.7 per day, in 1998. 154 were suicides (74)
Fact: Over 13 teenagers die every day in
automobiles, seven behind the wheel. (75)
Fact: Four children die each day in the U.S.
from parental neglect and abuse. (76)
Fact: For contrast: 1,917 children die each
day from malaria (77) and 15 men,
women, and children per day are murdered
by a convicted felon in government
supervised parole/probation programs. (78)
71 FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1997
72 National Center for Health Statistics, "Rates of Homicide, Suicide, and Firearm-Related Death Among Children --
26 Industrialized Countries", 1997
73 Validated using Center for Disease Control, National Vital Statistics Report - Deaths: Final Data for 1998, July
24, 2000, table 8, page 26
74 CDC WISQARS Injury Mortality Reports, 1981-1998
75 U.S. Department of Transportation's Fatality Analysis Reporting System, 2001
76 National Center on Child Abuse Prevention, 1998 Annual Survey
77 Fact Sheet No 178, U.N. World Health Organization, 1998
78 1998 US Bureau of Justice Statistics
A note about suicides, countries make handguns illegal experience no change in suicide rates... people simply find other ways to kill themselves.
I've lived in the USA all of my life and been all over the country. I've never witnessed a shooting, intentional or accidental. I've never known anyone who was killed by a gun. I do have a single aquaintance that was shot in the face with a.22 revolver during a car-jacking, years before I met him, but he was lucky and barely even has a scar.
Here are some more facts.
Myth: Accidental gun fatalities are a serious problem
Fact: Firearm misuse causes only a small number of accidental deaths in the U.S. (122) For
example, compared to accidental death from firearms, you are:
Twice as likely to suffocate on a swallowed object
Seven times more likely to be poisoned
10 times more likely to die falling
And 31 times more likely to die in an automobile accident
Fact: In 1996, there were only 21 accidental gun deaths for children under age 15. About twice
as many children under the age of ten die from drowning in bathtubs. (123)
Fact: In 1993, there were 1,334 drownings and 528 firearm-related accidental deaths from ages
0-19. Firearms outnumber pools by a factor of over 30:1. Thus, the risk of drowning in a pool is
nearly 100 times higher than from a firearm-related accident for everyone, and
Do you really think you would do that if you owned a gun? How do you trust yourself to drive down the street without mowing down pedestrians in your daily bloodthirsty rage?
Oh, I get it, you must be talking about the mind-control rays that all guns emit, urging their owners to KILL KILL KILL!!!
When I carry in public, it makes me feel a little different; a lot more careful about not getting into dangerous situations, and avoiding potential arguments with strangers, because I most certainly do NOT want to shoot anyone... but I will if my life is threatened.
You really should try it some time. Hold a loaded gun at a target range, pointed in a safe direction, of course. Shoot a few melons or water bottles to get an idea of the destructive power at your fingertips, and then deeply consider turning and shooting into the head of the guy standing next to you. If you are a normal human being (e.g. not sociopathic) the very thought will sicken you. You will think of his family, of his lifeless corpse twitching on the ground, and the utter horror of the witnesses around you.
Having a gun is a responsibility, and one that a morally fit adult can handle. To not trust yourself with weapons is to admit that you are nothing more than a small child or a dangerous animal. A free man (or woman) absolutely has the natural right to defend his life, his loved ones, and his property, else the whole concept of freedom and individual worth is a sham, and the State is no longer a representative of its people but a hypocritical tyrant (for the State WILL defend itself with lethal force). Is your government really more wise than you and your neighbors? Is it really more deserving of the right to self-preservation? Or do they just want you to think that the citizens have been disarmed for their own safety?
*Sigh*... there is something of a cultural gap here, as Americans have always been free men with rifles, while the peasants of Continental Europe have only recently been allowed (for a short time) to carry weapons by their "betters" who preside over them. My words will probably not make a difference in your world, so...
Don't worry, the State will take care of you... one way or another. Go back to your business.
...and out comes the leftist euro-weenie anti-semitism. I knew it wouldn't take long.
The Israelis take great pains to avoid injuring bystanders, unlike their opponents who expressly try to injure as many innocents as possible (that's why they're known as terrorists).
The Palestinian terrorists use women and children as human shields for their gunmen because they know the IDF will be reluctant to shoot back. They encourage and glorify their own who strap on nail studded CEMTEX belts and blow up innocent Jews, from babies to old men.
All of you twisted fucks who criticize the only free democracy in a land surrounded by slave-owning, woman-beating, baby-killing, gay-bashing, religiously intolerant, fundamentalist-theocratic / Ba'ath fascist tyrants and murderers really make me sick.
If the ACLU supported the Second Amendment in the same fashion that they do abortion, then they woudl be demanding taxpayer subsidies for poor children to buy guns, without having to notify their parents, so they can shoot the child molestors who prey on them.
Why don't you condescending euro-weenies go round up all the Jews and have another continent-wide bloodbath. Oh wait, the Jews are armed now and ain't going out like that again? Oh well, you can still have fun slaughtering each other for old-times sake.
What's that? Your average population is too old to fight and your welfare states too bankrupt to afford state-of-the-art militaries and citizens don't have guns? That's OK, we're staying out of it this time, so you can just have a good ol' Iron Age melee. I'd stay away from Switzerland though, I hear they are armed to the teeth.
Guns are used every day to deter crime. Most often rapes and muggings. A high capacity semi-automatic weapon (like a 17 round Glock 9mm) is perfectly reasonable, especially since handguns are such poor man-stoppers... a determined assailant can take many shots, even to vital organs before being stopped. Self defense instructors have a saying... "handguns are for fighting your way back to your shotgun or rifle." Sometimes human predators roam in gangs and much firepower is needed.
And shooting at paper targets is fun. I enjoy it. Are you saying that because I'm not killing something (I don't hunt), I'm misusing firearms? A woman carrying to protect herself and "level the playing field" is really no safer? Surely you jest.
Tips the playing field? If making guns illegal doesn't keep them out of the hands of criminals, then making high-capacity guns illegal will just tip the playing field in their favor, to the detriment of law-abiding citizens.
And some of the very worst such neighborhoods are in Chicago and Washington D.C. where handguns are illegal... gun control demonstrably does not work. Have you taken a look at the violent crime rates in Britain since the gun ban there?
Slashdot Mirror
The only "ethnic cleansing" going on in "Palestine" is in the fantasy life of former Egyptian, Jordanian, and Syrian refugees who want to kill all the Jews. If they would stop their acts of violence there would be peace in Israel.
P.S. pick up a few history books, you might learn something.
The Secret Service will be knocking on your door any minute now...
Arabs and (most) Jews ARE "Caucasians", you moron, as well as Persians, Indians, and Afghans. Perhaps you meant white Europeans? If so, that kind of disproves your point if you are white, since you are so stupid.
Capitalist? I have no idea what you are saying here. The USA supported what? Could you try to make some sense?
The Nazis were also known as the National Socialist party. The only difference between the Soviets and the Nazis is that the Nazis were smart enough to let qualified people run the companies. The State still owned them for all practical purposes. The notion that the fascists were the opposite of the communists is an oversimplistic fallacy.
To paraphrase Robert Heinlein, there are only really two types of political thought. Those who think people need to be controlled and those who don't. The natural state of commerce is free markets. To control markets requires controlling people. Controlling people requires force. Force requires disarming the people and making examples of dissidents.
You can't have real socialism without totalitarianism (which is the real enemy of the people as you correctly stated). You can have a centrist mix of free markets with social programs like the U.S. and Europe. All of our economic power depends on the (relatively) free market and capitalism.
Your typically Leftist condescension is repulsive and infantile. You think that anyone who disagrees with you must be an idiot. You know nothing about me. I'm an avid reader of history and political theory, I just happen to disagree with you. Please make some reasoned and supported arguments if you wish to carry this discussion further.
It must be nice to be able to rationalize any moral cowardice with "shades of gray" rhetoric.
Yes, damn the capitalists. Communism only killed 100 million innocent people in the 20th century, let's give it another chance.
Given the choice between working for Wal-Mart and working in a Soviet Gulag or shovelling baby skulls for Pol Pot, I'll take Wal-Mart any time.
Socialism kills, free markets feed. Wake up and smell the long pork wafting from North Korea.
If someone is paying people to write line after line of repetetive garbage I could save them a lot of money by writing some code generators at only $50/hour... Hiring the cheapest programmers isn't always the best bargain. I think the trend of hiring cheap code monkeys is going to backfire.
We give money away instead of taking tribute. That sounds like the opposite of imperialism to me. If we wanted the world we could have had it in 1945. Instead, we went back to our farms and our shops because the rest of the world isn't worth a corner of Nebraska.
Jealousy is the reason they hate us. They think we could just cure all their problems if we wanted to, but the truth is they have to do it themselves. They have to reject the warlords and the priests get up and work 40-80 hours a week, 50 weeks a year like we do. They have to tolerate differences in religion, race, and politics without slaughtering each other like we do.
All that link boils down to is that we gave opposition parties 1 million dollars. Chump change.
I don't think it was gloating. It sounds like a realistic warning to me. If we started to get hit with nukes, we would have little choice but to make sure it stops in whatever way is possible.
Telling terrorists that a strike on our cities will result in retaliation is control with an iron fist?! Are you insane?
Hmmm. Not even Marxist historians think that the coup in Chile was CIA-led. What evidence do you have for that tired old myth?
Since when do Freepers spit on black people?
Like California can really afford this.
*eyeroll*
To the paranoid... get over yourself. Like they're going to track you down and shut down your car and arrest you for the CD full of pirated MP3s in your stereo.
If they know who you are, it's easier to just send the cops to your house. This is useful for hijacked hazmat vehicles and maybe eventually for stopping high-speed chases or tracking fleeing felons. Not for keeping tabs on everyone... not even California has enough state employees for that kind of volume.
*shrug*
Facts are facts. Make of them what you will. I just hope I've given you some food for thought.
And I pray that none of us ever need to use a gun to defend ourselves.
Brilliant riposte. I especially like your rapier wit and the way you countered my well-documented facts with perfectly legitimate facts of your own. You are so refreshing after dealing with the emotionally charged yet intellectually vapid rhetoric of the typical anti-gun fanatic.
I applaud you sir. Truly, you deserve the title of "Master Debater".
Historically you may have earned the right to carry a gun, but if you feel this has made the US a safer place to live and have children, you might find it interesting to learn that in the US more children are killed by gunfire than in any other western country. In fact, the amount of people killed by gunfire (%) compares favorably to a country in war.
That's pure propaganda. Here are some facts from Guy Smith
A note about suicides, countries make handguns illegal experience no change in suicide rates... people simply find other ways to kill themselves.
I've lived in the USA all of my life and been all over the country. I've never witnessed a shooting, intentional or accidental. I've never known anyone who was killed by a gun. I do have a single aquaintance that was shot in the face with a .22 revolver during a car-jacking, years before I met him, but he was lucky and barely even has a scar.
Here are some more facts.
Do you really think you would do that if you owned a gun? How do you trust yourself to drive down the street without mowing down pedestrians in your daily bloodthirsty rage?
Oh, I get it, you must be talking about the mind-control rays that all guns emit, urging their owners to KILL KILL KILL!!!
When I carry in public, it makes me feel a little different; a lot more careful about not getting into dangerous situations, and avoiding potential arguments with strangers, because I most certainly do NOT want to shoot anyone... but I will if my life is threatened.
You really should try it some time. Hold a loaded gun at a target range, pointed in a safe direction, of course. Shoot a few melons or water bottles to get an idea of the destructive power at your fingertips, and then deeply consider turning and shooting into the head of the guy standing next to you. If you are a normal human being (e.g. not sociopathic) the very thought will sicken you. You will think of his family, of his lifeless corpse twitching on the ground, and the utter horror of the witnesses around you.
Having a gun is a responsibility, and one that a morally fit adult can handle. To not trust yourself with weapons is to admit that you are nothing more than a small child or a dangerous animal. A free man (or woman) absolutely has the natural right to defend his life, his loved ones, and his property, else the whole concept of freedom and individual worth is a sham, and the State is no longer a representative of its people but a hypocritical tyrant (for the State WILL defend itself with lethal force). Is your government really more wise than you and your neighbors? Is it really more deserving of the right to self-preservation? Or do they just want you to think that the citizens have been disarmed for their own safety?
*Sigh*... there is something of a cultural gap here, as Americans have always been free men with rifles, while the peasants of Continental Europe have only recently been allowed (for a short time) to carry weapons by their "betters" who preside over them. My words will probably not make a difference in your world, so...
Don't worry, the State will take care of you... one way or another. Go back to your business.
...and out comes the leftist euro-weenie anti-semitism. I knew it wouldn't take long.
The Israelis take great pains to avoid injuring bystanders, unlike their opponents who expressly try to injure as many innocents as possible (that's why they're known as terrorists).
The Palestinian terrorists use women and children as human shields for their gunmen because they know the IDF will be reluctant to shoot back. They encourage and glorify their own who strap on nail studded CEMTEX belts and blow up innocent Jews, from babies to old men.
All of you twisted fucks who criticize the only free democracy in a land surrounded by slave-owning, woman-beating, baby-killing, gay-bashing, religiously intolerant, fundamentalist-theocratic / Ba'ath fascist tyrants and murderers really make me sick.
If the ACLU supported the Second Amendment in the same fashion that they do abortion, then they woudl be demanding taxpayer subsidies for poor children to buy guns, without having to notify their parents, so they can shoot the child molestors who prey on them.
That is brilliant. Can I use that?
Why don't you condescending euro-weenies go round up all the Jews and have another continent-wide bloodbath. Oh wait, the Jews are armed now and ain't going out like that again? Oh well, you can still have fun slaughtering each other for old-times sake.
What's that? Your average population is too old to fight and your welfare states too bankrupt to afford state-of-the-art militaries and citizens don't have guns? That's OK, we're staying out of it this time, so you can just have a good ol' Iron Age melee. I'd stay away from Switzerland though, I hear they are armed to the teeth.
Run along now.
Guns are used every day to deter crime. Most often rapes and muggings. A high capacity semi-automatic weapon (like a 17 round Glock 9mm) is perfectly reasonable, especially since handguns are such poor man-stoppers... a determined assailant can take many shots, even to vital organs before being stopped. Self defense instructors have a saying... "handguns are for fighting your way back to your shotgun or rifle." Sometimes human predators roam in gangs and much firepower is needed.
And shooting at paper targets is fun. I enjoy it. Are you saying that because I'm not killing something (I don't hunt), I'm misusing firearms? A woman carrying to protect herself and "level the playing field" is really no safer? Surely you jest.
Tips the playing field? If making guns illegal doesn't keep them out of the hands of criminals, then making high-capacity guns illegal will just tip the playing field in their favor, to the detriment of law-abiding citizens.
And some of the very worst such neighborhoods are in Chicago and Washington D.C. where handguns are illegal... gun control demonstrably does not work. Have you taken a look at the violent crime rates in Britain since the gun ban there?
I'm glad to hear that they're working on RPG armor. If the vehicle is vulnerable to the inexpensive and ubiquitous RPG, it's worse than useless.