Lets just say Belgium is a pretty standard Western-European country, only with better beer and a very good gastronomy (we invented the french fries, the french part of the name only refers to the way the potatoes are cut)
No it doesnt remove the possibility of being shot, in fact there was a random shooting spree in Luik last year http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Li%C3%A8ge_attack
But it was an exception, this was the first shooting in a public place since WW2. Not having guns available freely does not remove the possibility of being shot. But it does makes the chance significantly smaller.
And possible wound/kill random bystanders, because lets face it, you're not a 1 hit 1 kill man unless you are within 10 feet (even if you are good at the shooting range)
I'm not going to comment on this, because I don't know the law in America, but I think the principle is reasonably similar to other western countries.
Indeed it does not make you safer, because when its a tradition to carry concealed weapons, criminals will be shooting faster at random people because of the possible threat of a concealed weapon. You aren't putting yourself on par with the 'badguys', you are making yourself a threat and therefor painting a big target on your head and on the heads of others around you.
---------- Post added 2012-12-29 at 12:09 AM ----------
You are not a demon, nobody thinks that. You do however act like the stereotype American by talking about freedom like that. You do realize that by saying this you indirectly imply that other country's are not free.
Being able to own weapons does not make you free. You never will be free, infact if you where completly free you would be an outcast to society, because (I'l keep repeating this) the more people you live together with, the more freedom you are giving up. Living in a huge thriving society like todays has its price.
Owning weapons should be a privilige, obtained after a couple of years of police/guard training where you learn to prevent the use of weapons(any weapon from knife to assault rifle). It shouldn't be a right.
But like you said different cultures ....
Last edited by mmoc013aca8632; 2012-12-28 at 11:11 PM.
What's your point? I've lived in Los Angeles my entire life and I've never seen anybody shot either. That has nothing to do with gun control, that's just random happenstance.
The FBI keeps track of all crime stats and the South is the most violent place in the country. And by a relatively wide margin too. Sorry if reality doesn't comport with your world view.
When survival is the goal, it's into the spider hole!
Gotta add a few cents to this discussion.
I have my CCL and own several guns, at least one would fall into the category of an "Assault Rifle". That being said, I think there should be a national discussion on gun regulation. This doesn't mean we should ban any/all guns, but we should have an open and honest discussion about it, looking at facts and opinions from both sides. This is apparently not allowed in congress, and the public seems incapable...
We see it all the time here on the forums, but it's not any better up to the highest levels of government. Take this thread for example. Do you think the OP had ANY room for a dissenting opinion when he created this thread? We see the same thing all over. People want to talk, but no one wants to listen. People look for facts to support their opinion instead of looking for facts to INFORM their opinion.
On the internet (and in life) it is easy to hear someone express an opinion, and then lump them in with people who you have heard share that opinion. You start to argue past each other because instead of listening to their point, you are already forming your counter-argument. Usually this counter-argument isn't even directed at the person you are talking to, but some other person or thing you read about before.
I'd like to address a few specific statements from this thread:
Guns are designed for...
Guns are a tool, but they are a tool that is designed with a very limited purpose. That purpose is to injure or kill another living being. A tool that has this purpose has another name which is "Weapon". Now weapons are in fact tools, but I prefer to call a spade a spade. Are you in favor of limiting US citizens access to weapons?
Gun Free Zones:
The purpose of a gun free zone is to remove the ambiguity of a gun threat, not to prevent criminals entering with guns. No one thinks that putting up a sign will prevent a madman from breaking the law. Yet we still post speed limits. This way the average person knows what is expected of them, and someone traveling 120 has no excuse when caught. In the same vein, someone carrying a gun into a Gun Free Zone can be instantly identified as a threat, rather than having to wonder if they are just some child's uncle there to pick him up with an AR-15 for self protection / hunting. I'm not saying it works, but lets be clear on the intent rather than characterizing the other side as unable to comprehend basic logic. I will repeat one more time: NO ONE THINKS GUN FREE ZONES ARE MAGIC.
So much more... but I can't spend all of my time on the internet. These were just two that I see as comments that are made over and over again, that really don't carry water.
Aside from what you may conclude my opinions are on gun control from the above statements, here are some really well thought out points from someone who is against increasing gun control:
http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/
This logic is flawed. You can still kill someone without a gun, need I remind you of prisons? And other "controlled" places.
A situation like making something out of objects for ill purpose use, projectile or not.
To say otherwise is foolish. the next process you will see is the 2nd amendment being "voided" and what then? when 1 is stricken. that just means the rest will follow sooner or later. I will say it again (the word foolish) to think that's not possible is also foolish.
The very essence of our country is based on a sacred document that millions have died for, what makes us so different from the rest of the world. I think the deaths should not be in vain when people think of now, rather then consequences or tomorrow. Think about that.
All of this nonsense goes back to the core. 'the right to bear arms"
I think after all of this discussion ive come to the same realization. I dont feel any gun should be made illegal, but we need to regulate it a lot better. We need gun regulation not gun control. I have no issue if they said you need to pay to have a psych eval every year to keep your firearms. If they actually enforced and had harsher penalties for illegal firearms i would have no issue with that. I think its fear getting in the way of good discussions. When idiots come out and immediately say BAN your going to put people on the defensive. You dont want to initiate discussions with panic causing wording.
As I see it Mr Morgan is exercising his first amendment right to speak about the 2nd amendment; Perhaps the folks that submitted and signed said petition are exercising THEIR first amendment rights. While I think about it, if the exercise of someone's first amendment rights is not what Mr Morgan had or his supporters had in mind, then perhaps he should use better judgement in what he says and to whom.
in parting, exercising your right of free speech doesn't make someone a crazy or ignorant.
---------- Post added 2013-01-02 at 01:56 PM ----------
Unfortunately, those you are suggesting 'deporting' are probably US Born Citizens, and thus, couldn't be deported. Mr Morgan, on the other hand, as I understand is a subject of Her Majesty.
---------- Post added 2013-01-02 at 02:02 PM ----------
To reach compromise, it takes all the parties involved, and it requires all parties involved to grasp that they aren't going to get everything they want. Short answer, the Dems don't respect the GOP, the GOP doesn't respect the Dems, both are dug in, and both don't wanna budge. Personally, I find anyone that willfully, maliciously and without remorse attacks the other side as not worth of respect, consideration or to be compromised with. I give respect until the other person proves to me they no longer deserve it.
--- Want any of my Constitutional rights?, ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
I come from a time and a place where I judge people by the content of their character; I don't give a damn if you are tall or short; gay or straight; Jew or Gentile; White, Black, Brown or Green; Conservative or Liberal. -- Note to mods: if you are going to infract me have the decency to post the reason, and expect to hold everyone else to the same standard.
Why is that? Most violence related to Mexicans--shockingly--happens in Mexico.
I suspect crime rates in the South tend to be higher because of poverty, and warm weather. People don't go out as much and end up confronting each other (leading to violence) when it's freezing out.
Sure, they can start a petition. Having any expectation of them getting their way is ridiculous, though, and would be hypocritical. Saying you want somebody deported is using one's speech. Getting them deported in order to silence them, however, is a violation of the other's.
In order to deport Mr Morgan you'd have to be able to prove he violated the laws.
Thusfar I've seen no evidence of anyone presenting a cogent case to deport him, as I see the petition its reactionary and appears quite baseless. Despite that, it DID get the public attention it was seeking, and it DID bring a smile to those that viscerally dislike Mr Morgan.Grounds of Deportability
Here's a brief summary of the types of personal characteristics or history that may make someone deportable.
Having gained legal status by committing marriage fraud
Being a terrorist
Having been convicted of certain crimes
Having helped smuggle aliens into the U.S.
Having not deserved an earlier grant of legal status, because the person was inadmissible at the time
Having failed to timely notify U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) of one's changes of address
Having falsely claimed to be a U.S. citizen in order to gain a benefit from the government
--- Want any of my Constitutional rights?, ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
I come from a time and a place where I judge people by the content of their character; I don't give a damn if you are tall or short; gay or straight; Jew or Gentile; White, Black, Brown or Green; Conservative or Liberal. -- Note to mods: if you are going to infract me have the decency to post the reason, and expect to hold everyone else to the same standard.
@Seran
Signing the petition without any expectation of it working is fine. Expecting it to happen, and I do imagine that quite a number of people do want it to happen, would be a violation of the first amendment, and as a result would make that line of attack a hypocritical one. At that point I just start crossing off people from my imaginary list of people to take seriously.
--- Want any of my Constitutional rights?, ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
I come from a time and a place where I judge people by the content of their character; I don't give a damn if you are tall or short; gay or straight; Jew or Gentile; White, Black, Brown or Green; Conservative or Liberal. -- Note to mods: if you are going to infract me have the decency to post the reason, and expect to hold everyone else to the same standard.