while i think fighters are great, they do have major drawbacks:
AA guns… these things are viscious…
Uncap… Airplanes cannot conquer territories on their own…
America had over 11 000 gun homicides last year.
This figure was actually brought up by super liberal Kevin today during my George Bush Rant. It DOES include those caused by accidents. Of those that were crimes, as either you or F_alk so aptly put it, 96% were performed by illegally owned firearms. Your first priority should be to find a way to remove illegally owned firearms from our country, or my country i should say. (your from canada, right?) This, which would be VERY difficult, but surely someone as smart as you could figure out a solution. I think since we have been over the banning guns philosophy on both sides, this would be a great way to branch off but stay on topic.
This number is nearly 70 times that of Canada (with 1/10th the population - again, not including the wounded).
off topic: i went to Canada last year, and despite all the jokes people may make, Canada does have a few really good things going for it. As i drove through Ottawa, i noticed that the city is insanely clean! and really easy to navigate. While on another road trip, i got lost in the bronx for three friggin hours because the roads were all screwed up, and a past the same damned blue bridge 16 times! Also Canada’s crime rate is like Nil. On the news up there, they were talking about a massive crime wave, and the numbers they spoke of were so miniscule i almost laughed. My trip there was really fun and pleasant though; with only two things going wrong. Some guy in an army surplus store lied to me when i bought a helemt there. i knew he was lying, but still bought it. He told me it was British WWII era, but it looks nothing like any of their helmet models.
The second thing was that while driving home through Quebec, i got bit by an elk (also known as the Wapiti). It didn’t break the skin, but it was still traumatizing.
Should all hunters suffer the loss of a firearm if it would prevent 1 death? I suppose the dear, moose, fox, etc. wouldn’t mind so much . . . .
That was really well written, and you must have put a great deal of thought into it. But let me just say that hunting is a lot more humane than any of the ways fast food joints ETC kill their animals. Damn Macdonalds and its ‘making a bad name for the United States’-ness.
I know our education system sucks, but i’m in high school (sophmore) and i can answer these…… wow.
I still think we’re the greatest country in the world, lead by the greatest man in the world.
(this is a bit of a joke on how much i like G.W. compared to say, every other human alive. I spent all of today’s lunch discussing how G.W. Bush invented the universe… its truly funny to see me do these things. )
Correct, i don’t read your posts not properly.
Thats a double negative… i mens yes i do read your posts properly.
You can get trigger locks very cheap or even for free from the sensible gun-controlists.
You cant really standardize a lock/safe, seeing as the governmnet cant walk into your house to inspect. Thats not a bad idea. All newly made firearms have a safety mechanism.
Since when is more slaughtered people and more people in jails preferable to a society with fewer slaughtering devices?
Ok you got me on this one…. i guess i just read it as a rhetorical question. Even reading it over now… i still get the impression that thats what it was…
A society where the right to have guns takes precedance over the lives of its citizens is a society with whacked priorities… trampling the rights of people to own guns is soo much more onerous than people losing their lives to these guns.
Nope…. a statement regarding the topic, not asking the question. And i gave my reasoning/opinion.
The costs … how much is a human live worth? You seem to know the answer, and it doesn’t seem to be that much.
I agree totally with CC here, and whoever takes his own “rights” as more important than other peoples lives
I answered this one. But the date is incorrect and i cant find the post anymore.
evidently not one where rationality and citizens lives takes precedence over the right to a little death-spitter
That was more of angry remark, and while its on the subject, it doesnt ask the question.
Sorry that i didn’t ask that question explicitly before. If i overestimated your capabilites of to abstract, then i am sorry for that and will try not to let it happen again.
Thats like like we’re having a conversation on penguin conservation and you expect me to magically know when to talk about how their breeding affects survival. ok…. that was an absolutely terrible analogy, but basically you can’t expect me to say absolutely everything you want to hear when you want to hear it any more than i can you.
And calm down on the snide remarks, there’s no need for you to get angry. I’m glad that your passionate about the subject, but acting like that really does nothing but make you look petty.
That is what i asked you…… finally, you come to it.
While severe gun controlists like yourself seem to want to do anything and everything to save a life without thinking of those you hurt. Then you (well, CC actually) say that “Well who cares about what millions of honest americans will think about this, we saved a life, and that makes it alright” (Paraphrased) Sure its great that you saved a life, but you made millions of lives a bit worse. The whole issue, including which side you stand on, boils down to your opinions on morality. People will always die. In most cases, there would have been a way for us to have saved them. But if society were to do everything it could to save these people, we would have nothing. Moderation is the key. YOU are not a hunter/gun owner. YOU have no experience with them. Name something thats dear to you. ok, lets not use you, lets use the millions of people worldwide who use tobacco products. Tobacco is dangerous not only to those who use it, but to those near those who use it. I have no experience with tobacco, so in my mind i would gladly wish it banned to save the thousands who die from it every year. But what about all those smokers out there? I’m sure they dissagree with me.
And for me, it is no right, thus any single live is enough.
Well in that case, owning a chainsaw, to me, is no right. Does that mean that it makes sense to ban all chainsaws to protect people from death and injury?
“The same principle of law should apply to gun owners that applies to all other citizens you break the law and cause harm to others; you get punished and you lose your freedom and rights . You dont get punished just because some fanatical group of people with an opposing view says you should be.” Quote from my friend’s father, also a hunter.
If you look up what Sherman28 said in a different thread:
In an American Court conspiracy to commit X, typically carries the same weight as committing X.
good quote, but average gun owners do not conspire to go out and murder people in their sleep.
Doesn’t fit, because of the word “fanatical”. Soone fanatical has not only opposite views, but also acts according to his views, which would make him a criminal or at least conspiring. Anyway, that’s just a minor point. Fell free to anwer, i won’t carry it further after your reply.
So when i make a small point, you can turn it into a rhinocerous, but i cant’? ha!
P.S. fits fine…
I am close to call you names for that. First you ask, and then you totally ignore the answers. Why did you ask us then in the first place?
I didn’t ask you if you thought it was a good idea, just if you had a problem with it. Get over yourself.
Also… that estimate that there are over 200 million firearms in the country acording to the FBI; thats about the only thing pro and anti gun advocates agree on.
Well, whoever looks for the stick in the others eye should look for the log in his own… or something like that. That’s another good quote to pull out…
i like my quote better
Well i recently started a PBEM against Hurkyl and he as russians play Russia Restricted moved 16 infantry, 2 fighters, and 3 tanks to karelia; leaving caucasus empty and only two infantry on Russia. If i took Russia, my front lines would have been weak enough for him to take germany quickly, so i attacked Karelia instead and lost all but a bomber and five infantry of the german army.
That was just an interesting thing for you to think about….
Generally, the axis need to play visciously and try to inflict heavy losses to the allies early on while taking land.
As germany, aviod ending up in a stalemate with Russia. Most strategies say to either go after africa with all your might or do something crazy like attack america.
As Japan, try to aviod engaging The pacific fleet directly. Capture alaska and take as much land in Asia as you can to get more IPC’s per turn. Simply Dueling in the Pacific, Japan will fall to America’s Economic Power.
Most american strategies say to either take Africa or concentrate on The pacific front. Use you economic power to build a massive and overwhelming army.
The Uk needs to own the high seas to keep Germany from doing anything crazy, I.E. invading great britain or the US. It’s also a popular idea to build a Industrial complex in either South Africa or India. Of the two, i recommend south africa, because japan could possibly take india on turn 1.
Russia should try to keep a bit of pressure on Japan to keep it from getting too much land in Asia, while having a slow moving curtain of death slowly strangle Germany.
Ok… While i’m sorta new at this, these are the general idea’s i’ve heard from everyone… i hope they helped.
Ok, now whats your position on this article? someone please have a good first post to start this up.