They aren't saying "other people" but instead are saying everyone including themselves should be disarmed. There's nothing hypocritical about that. It's just saying "If you put down your weapon, I'll put down mine."
Wait, so the people delegate powers to the gov't, and then the gov't spells out the rights the people are given. Do I understand that correctly? Tell me again how you get out of this circular argument?
Me? Taking shit out of context? You copied & pasted from the same article and deliberately left the first sentence out because it proved my point and not yours. Also, this ridiculous over-emotional stance your taking is a great example of why people like you shouldn't be allowed to have deadly weapons.
I wholeheartedly agree with you. The gov't is likely to spend it in a more responsible manner. Well, I take that back. We sure have wasted a lot of cash outside our borders on wars and rebuilding the places we've destroyed, so I guess that money doesn't help our economy at all.
Nevertheless, I do think if the rich guy is going to sit on his money, the gov't taking some of it and putting it back into the economy is a good thing for all of us besides that rich guy. Fair? No, but useful anyway.
I know it's been said a dozen times in response to you, but you described exactly what is necessary for trickle-down to work. If the rich guys are spending money, then that money is circulating and doing our economy good. If the rich guys are sitting on a pile of cash in the bank and not spending it (or investing, or anything else to keep it moving) then that is when it actually hurts the economy. Having them spend metric buttloads of cash on crazy inventions is not only good for the economy and the lower-class folks in it, but it's also good for society because, heaven forbid, they might actually discover something useful -- even if it's not quite what they were trying to do.
That's because it's really hard, if not impossible, to figure out why people snap like this. Often times the people that knew them think they were normal and the person himself is often dead due to suicide or the police gunning him down during the event. Even if he were still alive, he'd have all the reason in the world to keep it to himself (5th amendment) and leave us to read whatever other clues may or may not exist. If we're lucky, this guy left a note or a video or something explaining why he's done this. Doubtful.
The punishment for mugging and robbery is death? What country do you live in? Martial arts would be a far more useful and appropriate self defense weapon than any gun.
Slashdot Mirror
If that's how you talk around them, no wonder they don't think you should be allowed a weapon.
They aren't saying "other people" but instead are saying everyone including themselves should be disarmed. There's nothing hypocritical about that. It's just saying "If you put down your weapon, I'll put down mine."
Who is going to act on this "hit list"? Are all the folks who don't have guns going to assault the people who do have guns?
And what do you call the response they got from those gun owners?
Not without external diplomatic pressure and weapons. Who do you suppose is going to provide that to America?
Please mod parent down, as several other responses have indicated, Hitler was NOT elected Chancellor.
Wait, so the people delegate powers to the gov't, and then the gov't spells out the rights the people are given. Do I understand that correctly? Tell me again how you get out of this circular argument?
It also hit prices similar to what we have now, under "Presedent" Bush.
Could you please try explaining that again in a way that makes sense? I have no idea what you're trying to say here.
Also, how about military ships patrolling trade routes to deter pirates?
Greece is a perfect example. Also, take a look at the French revolution. Why did that happen? Because the peasants had no bread.
...that there was any easy way to learn Linux. Must be buried in the man pages somewhere.
You must have short arms. Mine have to bend at the elbow to reach there.
Me? Taking shit out of context? You copied & pasted from the same article and deliberately left the first sentence out because it proved my point and not yours. Also, this ridiculous over-emotional stance your taking is a great example of why people like you shouldn't be allowed to have deadly weapons.
I think you just showed a great reason why over-emotional people like you shouldn't be allowed to own any weapon, let alone an assault rifle.
Wikipedia may not be perfect, but I have a lot more faith in it than I do in you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15
We already have laws about knives and I've never heard of a nail gun or bottle of booze that was specifically designed to kill people.
Why would the police print their own weapons?
The AR-15 was designed for military use. What on earth do you think the military planned to do with it -- go deer hunting?
I wholeheartedly agree with you. The gov't is likely to spend it in a more responsible manner. Well, I take that back. We sure have wasted a lot of cash outside our borders on wars and rebuilding the places we've destroyed, so I guess that money doesn't help our economy at all.
Nevertheless, I do think if the rich guy is going to sit on his money, the gov't taking some of it and putting it back into the economy is a good thing for all of us besides that rich guy. Fair? No, but useful anyway.
I know it's been said a dozen times in response to you, but you described exactly what is necessary for trickle-down to work. If the rich guys are spending money, then that money is circulating and doing our economy good. If the rich guys are sitting on a pile of cash in the bank and not spending it (or investing, or anything else to keep it moving) then that is when it actually hurts the economy. Having them spend metric buttloads of cash on crazy inventions is not only good for the economy and the lower-class folks in it, but it's also good for society because, heaven forbid, they might actually discover something useful -- even if it's not quite what they were trying to do.
Isn't that exactly what the GP said?
Everybody back to the pile! ( http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s08e06-goobacks )
That's because it's really hard, if not impossible, to figure out why people snap like this. Often times the people that knew them think they were normal and the person himself is often dead due to suicide or the police gunning him down during the event. Even if he were still alive, he'd have all the reason in the world to keep it to himself (5th amendment) and leave us to read whatever other clues may or may not exist. If we're lucky, this guy left a note or a video or something explaining why he's done this. Doubtful.
The punishment for mugging and robbery is death? What country do you live in? Martial arts would be a far more useful and appropriate self defense weapon than any gun.