|
|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
Where did Septic Tanks Yanks[quote]
so call them tanks but he or she can't see anything rhyming with septics[quote]
It's old rhyming slang to refer to yanks as Septics not an insult wink
Unless you say it to a southerner who take offence at being called a Yankee? |
|
|
|
|
Skids
Quitting drinking will be one of the best choices you make in your life.
Joined: 11 Sep 2007 Location: Joined 3/6/02 . Member #175
|
Post subject: | |
|
stui magpie wrote: | A perspective.
Quote: | IN THE past week Islamist terrorists have launched deadly attacks against civilians in places as disparate as the United States, Syria, Israel, France and the Philippines.
Youd expect this carnage would prompt a careful examination of the ideology motivating these attacks but our leaders, and much of the commentariat, steadfastly refuse to acknowledge let alone discuss Islams role in acts of terror around the world.
Instead they indulge in the most cowardly moral equivocation imaginable, one that gives cover to extremists. Worse, they attempt to intimidate and silence those who dare acknowledge the proverbial elephant in the room. Anyone who admits the undeniable link between Islam and Islamist acts of terror is accused of Islamophobia. |
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/rita-panahi/rita-panahi-we-must-call-out-this-bigotry/news-story/a414108363d446a1d8157b7b6cbbc274
Not a bad read IMHO. |
It's so obvious..... the people are awakening, at last!
The last week???!!! Try the last few decades! _________________ Don't count the days, make the days count. |
|
|
|
|
regan is true fullback
Joined: 27 Dec 2002 Location: Granville. nsw
|
Post subject: | |
|
Quote: | A Labour MP who has been campaigning for a "remain" vote in the Brexit referendum has died after being shot in a northern England street.
Jo Cox, 41, was attacked by a man who then walked calmly away from the scene outside the library in Birstall, West Yorkshire, leaving his victim lying bleeding on the pavement. At least one witness heard the suspect shout "Britain first" before the shooting and during the arrest, Sky News and the Guardian reported. Police were understood to be investigating the claim. age 17.6.16 |
perhaps we should be looking for terrorists, not in the mosques, but in the Family Court and mum's basement... |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
good point!!
they are all just criminals! with an excuse (or so they think!!)
this is a pretty fair take on it.
http://usuncut.com/politics/powerful-explanation-orlando-shooting/
(except the last line!! there is plenty of normal everyday humans in the States, they aint all crazy, just like we are not all Martin Bryants!) _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010 Location: Ponsford End
|
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
Morrigu wrote: | I don't think his actions have much to do with Islam at all. He obviously had significant mental health issues long long before he decided to murder.
He had very fleeting and superficial associations with radical Islam - e.g. looked at a website or two, made a comment or two - I think he rang the police during his murderous spree claiming allegiance to not only daesh but other radical Islamic groups and individuals such as the Boston marathon bombers in an attempt to shift the blame of his actions from his own feelings of failure which it seems may have included his repressed sexual desires that disgusted him to one of " perceived glory". I think that realisation is what changed his parents position so quickly!
I don't like guns, I don't understand the gun mentality, I don't get the attachment and passion for guns especially the septics apparent obsession with their right to have them - but if they must have guns ( and it seems they must) why do they need assault thingys that can kill so many so quickly?
This I really don't understand |
Samantha Bee must have heard you.
Your question of course is far too logical & reasonable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t88X1pYQu-I _________________ “I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
Morrigu
Joined: 11 Aug 2001
|
Post subject: | |
|
^ hmmm but I'm still none the wiser - and I read some of the comments they need a gun like this ( paraphrasing) in case the Government tries to remove their rights to bear arms or some other crazy shite that I couldn't get my head around - seriously?? Do these folk think they are in the Congo or something??
Stui, Wokko - am I missing something? Is it too simplistic to suggest that guns that can kill so many so quickly should be restricted? Or is that just my lack of knowledge of guns talking? Wouldn't it make a difference to the number that were killed or injured before being shall we say neutralised if they didn't have these guns - well at least legally couldn't just waltz in and buy them? _________________ “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
Morrigu wrote: | ^ hmmm but I'm still none the wiser - and I read some of the comments they need a gun like this ( paraphrasing) in case the Government tries to remove their rights to bear arms or some other crazy shite that I couldn't get my head around - seriously?? Do these folk think they are in the Congo or something??
Stui, Wokko - am I missing something? Is it too simplistic to suggest that guns that can kill so many so quickly should be restricted? Or is that just my lack of knowledge of guns talking? Wouldn't it make a difference to the number that were killed or injured before being shall we say neutralised if they didn't have these guns - well at least legally couldn't just waltz in and buy them? |
Lets put it this way, in Australia it worked, I don't think it's that simple in the USA.
It's a question I'll come back to tomorrow if that's OK. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
Of course they should be restricted. There is a meme going around, I posted it on my Facebook page, with George Washington saying "forfucksake we were talking about musket balls, not 13.3 bullets a second".
They need a government with enough balls to say no to the national gun lobby's money.
I have maybe 8-10 USA friends, only 1 backs their current gun control laws. (no surprise she lives in Atlanta, and boy she comes out with some doozies!) the rest are all calling for gun controls.
I'd be interested to see a a national vote on this one item only.
My take is the same take I have in Australia, only criminals, police and farmers have/need guns. Sport shooting? Nothing sporting about shooting, unless the shooters are playing hide and seek with each other! _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
Post subject: | |
|
It's pretty much 50/50 if you ask the very broad question of "More gun control or protect the right to own firearms"
http://www.pewresearch.org/data-trend/domestic-issues/gun-control/
If you drill down on questions like "Should we ban people on the terror watch list from buying guns" or "Should felons be restricted from buying guns" you get a much higher percentage of people backing those measures.
The problem for personal rights and freedom advocates is that gun control is a creeping mechanism of government control. The powers that be whittle away at personal freedoms year after year in any way they can, so accepting the smallest "reasonable" measure inevitably leads to more and more Government control. The whole point of the right to own firearms is a final check and balance against a Government becoming a tyranny. That meme is stupid because at the time the British had muskets and so did the average citizen. Because of that the American people launched a revolution and won their freedom. The 2nd amendment wasn't about hunting or protecting your home, although they are both covered by it, it was about the people being able to defend themselves against dictators or evil Governments like Communist Russia, Nazi Germany, Pol Pot's Cambodia.
People who say Trump is 'The Next Hitler' can rest easy, the people who gave birth to the United States thought of that and gave them the means to oppose exactly that from happening. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
Because in the years before Australia was settled, the US was concerned about Communist Russia, Nazi Germany, the Next Hitler and Pol Pot?
In what way does being shot by your own 2-year-old protect against tyranny? |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003 Location: Andromeda
|
Post subject: | |
|
So the Republican Party seriously wants to enable a violent popular uprising? I'd love to ask their leaders that to their face.
If people are concerned about crackdowns on liberty, they should put their energy into protesting about draconian airport security. Or voting restrictions for criminals. The right to carry around lethal weapons seems like such a bizarre thing to stake one's sense of freedom on. _________________ All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
stui magpie wrote: | Morrigu wrote: | ^ hmmm but I'm still none the wiser - and I read some of the comments they need a gun like this ( paraphrasing) in case the Government tries to remove their rights to bear arms or some other crazy shite that I couldn't get my head around - seriously?? Do these folk think they are in the Congo or something??
Stui, Wokko - am I missing something? Is it too simplistic to suggest that guns that can kill so many so quickly should be restricted? Or is that just my lack of knowledge of guns talking? Wouldn't it make a difference to the number that were killed or injured before being shall we say neutralised if they didn't have these guns - well at least legally couldn't just waltz in and buy them? |
Lets put it this way, in Australia it worked, I don't think it's that simple in the USA.
It's a question I'll come back to tomorrow if that's OK. |
OK, more detailed response.
Short answer is logically yes. There is no real legitimate need for a civilian to own a semi automatic firearm. I used to own a number of them, the benefits are that you don't need to reload so you don't have to remove the rifle from your shoulder and re-take aim so you can fire repeat aimed shots far quicker.
Australia also restricted magazine capacity when we banned semi autos so that bolt action and other manually loading rifles need to be refilled after 3-5 rounds.
Both of these things make a large difference if you're talking about a gun in the hands of someone with intent to kill people. If you have to manually reload after each shot and if your magazine runs out quickly you're more vulnerable.
Now where it gets complicated is that the USA is not just Australia in a different part of the world, they have a very different culture and a lot of it is ingrained.
They have the NRA who is a very powerful lobby group.
They have a number of large weapons manufacturers who fund the NRA and also directly lobby congress.
They have a hand gun culture that we never had, including laws allowing concealed and open carry of weapons by private citizens, including semi automatic handguns.
Their laws include the right to kill in self defence or in defending property. In many states of the USA, if you break into a house with intent to steal the spare change on the kitchen counter, the home owner can use deadly force, shoot you dead without having to check if you are armed or even bother to ask why you're there. Kill first, call 911 after and not get charged.
Owning a gun for self defence is not just a legitimate reason (in Australia, it isn't) but it is the main reason why so many people own guns, handguns in particular.
A surprising number of people do still believe that the populace needs to be armed in case the government goes rogue. Trust in the government is not something overly common and the founding basis of the 2nd amendment still has surprising relevance to a large number of people.
So, in summary you have a culture indoctrinated over centuries with the right to bear arms, utterly unlike Australia.
There's also the matter which I'm not sure about, which is how much jurisdiction congress would have over the states if they decided to try to ban semi and fully automatic weapons and restrict magazine sizes. Remember, Howard had to get the states to agree to uniform national gun laws. We've got 6 states and 2 territories and we're an island girt by sea, they have 50 states and umpteen ways to get stuff over the borders into the USA.
There's also the unfortunately legitimate argument in their case that if you ban guns(or some guns) only the criminals will have them. The proliferation of weapons in their society is such that if you offered a gun buy back amnesty and put new rules in place, you would spend a metric shitpile of money for little tangible result and create a thriving black market.
So, sorry if that's long.
The difficulties in bringing about a change in the USA don't mean it's insurmountable and doesn't mean it shouldn't be tried, but a crash through approach IMHO is doomed to failure.
The beginning starts with cultural change, which will take time. If I was in charge I'd be looking to use all the principles we see in the various lobby groups in Australia to chip away at the rock of public opinion. Don't tell them what to do, persuade them and influence them. Paid media campaigns, particular focus on social media these days, turning people away from gun ownership, which will take time. This is the preliminary work required to soften up the populace until you reach the tipping point where if you don't have a majority at least you have a vocal enough and large enough minority to effect legislative change. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Morrigu
Joined: 11 Aug 2001
|
Post subject: | |
|
^ thank you Stui that explains it in plain English I can understand! I still think they are mental but..... _________________ “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” |
|
|
|
|
5150
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
|
Post subject: | |
|
Morrigu wrote: | ^ thank you Stui that explains it in plain English I can understand! I still think they are mental but..... |
Imagine if Eddy said that... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|