- Joined
- Jul 22, 2007
- Messages
- 127
(fun fact: the kkk was established same time as the NRA).
Here's another fun fact not unrelated to the topic, the NRA was established with the sole purpose of regulating gun-possession among black people.
(fun fact: the kkk was established same time as the NRA).
Also, Nuclear, you honestly think, that if the government deems you a threat, they would hesitate to kill you because it would go against the Constitution, or some feeling of moral sensibility. I don't think so. The government is the end of the pecking order, they can do whatever they want, and nobody will hold them accountable for it. That's why the economy is in the toilet, and Osama Bin Laden is dead.
@nuclear: I didn't know that as soon as a country legalises execution it becomes North Korea. Education prevents crime, harsher laws deter crime should education fail.
I would feel disgusted living in a country where murderers can walk free after 10 years. Btw, you do know the death sentence isn't given to randomly selected people of the streets, right?
Nah, I'd still use that word considering the only ethnic group taking such a hard stance against any effort of gun control is the White people. Which is to say rather contradictory, when as you've stated that white people die more by the hands of black people. I've never heard of a black person who outright support gun control, be it uneducated one or educated one.
...which prove the point I made when disputing the "People are going to get guns illegally anyway". Which I'll re-state.
Most criminals choose a gun as a weapon in crime because it was the most practical weapon accessible to them, it was the best choice. If guns are hard to access, the number guns involve in crimes will obviously drop.
------------------------
If you're saying that environment and social factors play a part in influencing criminal activities rather than ethnicity, then I can vouch for that.
I'm living in a city with almost no-diversity in race, 95% of people here (Bangkok) are asians. Comparing to the US and Germany (from my experience), people are divided and fit into certain social roles just like how the majority of "Black people" are stereotypically lower-class, prone to violence group of people OR any other racial stereotypes you could fit them in. These roles are exactly the same as what you have in the US. The only difference is that everyone, no matter the roles, are asians.
So, RiotZ, I don't think ethnicity could be a factor in criminal behavior.
------------------------------------------------
PS. By, statistics tho, Hispanic are the most criminally violence/active. Refer to this post for numbers, but Mexico have a very high rate of gun-murder. Up to 24.4 and a lot of South America countries tie in with the number.
-----------------------------------------------
It's not like I don't know how the world works, I simply realize that by ignoring it or sugarcoating it isn't going to make the problem go away. The reason I care so much is because it's the little things I can do to help, if I can put in some new perspective into people about this issue and could one day save a live, then I will.
Just because I probably won't have kids, doesn't mean that I'm going lie to myself just so I could peacefully live in the world when it's wrong and leave it behind for the next generations. Even if this is as little as an internet argument, I'm not going to just turn the other way and "Oh, who gives a shit" because that attitude, that action cost a little piece of my humanity. Beside, the fact it could help someone in the future, I'm also doing this for myself.
So, stop pissing in my ears and tell me it's raining.
Straw man. Can't really say anything to the "government can do anything" thing, so dark and edgy. There are systems built into "the government" to prevent that from happening. Also considering bin Laden, he was not a citizen of the country that killed him, nor was he on their lands, it was an act of war, and using that as an example when talking about a peacetime society is foolish.
When talking about black and white crime rate differences, I bet you haven't even thought about racial wage gap? I would say "check your privilege" if it didn't annoy me so much.
Here's another fun fact not unrelated to the topic, the NRA was established with the sole purpose of regulating gun-possession among black people.
Statistically, whites are the most violent, racist people in existence (sorry if anyone other than riotz takes offense to this, I'm just trying to make a point about his retard racist logic). Like Pharaoh said your stats mean jack, especially when you consider your nation's pisspoor government, education, and racism (fun fact: the kkk was established same time as the NRA). War crimes/political crimes are crimes nonetheless, so I don't care if whites don't steal or murder - oh wait they do, just that they do it in en masse, more organised, and justify it with retard excuses.
I would just shoot my fucking neighbor... Why? Because I'm poor.
No you wouldn't. I don't know if this conversation is worth having if we descend into this level of bullshit.
Hey, I'm just regurgitating your bullshit, the idea that poverty creates crime is true yeah, but it creates more crime among Blacks than any other race, I'm not even saying I know why, just pointing out a fact.
What a wonderful myth. It disgusts me that people can disregard the NRA as racist White people, when it was founded by patriots, to fulfill a patriotic duty to their country, idiot.
Constitutions - No society can make a perpetual Constitution or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation. They may manage it then, and what proceeds from it, as they please during their usufruct. They are masters, too, of their own persons, and consequently may govern them as they please. But persons and property make the sum of the objects of government. The Constitution and laws of their predecessors extinguished them, in their natural course, with those whose will gave them being. This could preserve that being till it ceased to be itself, and no longer. Every Constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of nineteen years. If it be enforced longer it is an act of force and not of right.
Statistically human-beings are dumbfounded dipshits, struggling to conform to a society that they fuel with their impotence, believing whatever the established order tells them. I can make this argument against any race or religion, also did you forget to consider Spain and Portugal to be members of the crusades? And did you disregard the thousands of years of civil wars between Muslims... Or how about the honor killings in India, l2p, I have an endless list of racism perpetuated by all ethnic/religious/cultural groups, my favorite though is the Black Panthers. Hey how about the Russian invasion of Poland, Russians killing Pols sounds a lot like White-on-White to me.
@nuclear: by that I mean should there be an uneducated, irrational, rage-filled person, harsh laws are there to deter him from stealing (assuming he has enough cognitive ability to realise doing something bad could mean a lethal injection).
I feel like most of your argument's support are just your opinion or easily reversible points. For example, innocents can get punished without the death sentences too, some would even prefer a quick death to 10 undeserving years in a hostile environment.
Singapore and China are big examples of countries with harsh laws and good education. However, there are other countries like Iran that have high crime rates, but like I said before harsher laws are not the only factor that determine crime rates.
You're just proving my point; your statistics mean jack shit.
Either concede that violence/intelligence is not based on race, or that whites are the worst people on earth. Hey maybe if you didn't enslave the blacks, they'd be a bit more pleasant towards you, no?
@nuclear: by that I mean should there be an uneducated, irrational, rage-filled person, harsh laws are there to deter him from stealing (assuming he has enough cognitive ability to realise doing something bad could mean a lethal injection). You seem to think justice = rehabilitation for you having slaughtered someone's family.
I feel like most of your argument's support are just your opinion or easily reversible points. For example, innocents can get punished without the death sentences too, some would even prefer a quick death to 10 undeserving years in a hostile environment.
Singapore and China are big examples of countries with harsh laws and good education. However, there are other countries like Iran that have high crime rates, but like I said before harsher laws are not the only factor that determine crime rates.
So you're saying that there's a biological reason for that? Yeah, some evidence please.
Hey, I'm just regurgitating your bullshit, the idea that poverty creates crime is true yeah, but it creates more crime among Blacks than any other race, I'm not even saying I know why, just pointing out a fact.
Here's another fun fact not unrelated to the topic, the NRA was established with the sole purpose of regulating gun-possession among black people.
Nuclear, you're not very good at reading are you. Nobody said that, don't put words in my mouth, you continue to insult my intelligence.
I'm sorry to ruin your wet dream about how all races are the same, and everyone is equal
And to Dracemia...
Nice deflection, you didn't even have the balls to include my full quote. Oh and by the way, opinions are different than facts, and I'm pretty sure you said (paraphrasing) "Fact the NRA was founded to control guns among Blacks."
RiotZ said:And in all honesty no one should even care about this issue, since it doesn't directly effect them, and the inevitability of the system is that it will never change. Some kids died yes, but this isn't new, /Colombine.
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeah, you might have missed it but I was really bothered by this
So, it wasn't even a myth. It was my own speculation (read: I made that up) to try using your own quote against you when you jump in to correct me, which you did. Now you see how saying something nonchalantly could offend people who actually care.
Also, I'm not quoting the entire thing because you just copied and pasted that whole history of the NRA from Wikipedia.
But hey! Maybe I'm stupid enough to not spend half a minute google search on wikipedia or the NRA's website and just use a "myth" in an argument that I haven't even researched into even once.
------------------------------------------------
I think everyone knows that when laws are strict enough to be considered harsh, it won't help with the crime rate. Not by a long shot and people aren't going to be happy.
We all enjoy knowing that there're things we can do that isn't morally good but not illegal. It doesn't mean we have to go do bad things necessarily, it's just the realization that you can if you want to.
--------------------------------------------------
ps. Singapore is wealthy because it's an important port-stop. Historically speaking, it was one of the first port-town in the region. It's too small to have any amount of resource enough to make a significant export.
----------------------------------------
We're going seriously off-topic ...but we're in the off-topic forum, oh well.
Really?
What does this imply then?
Hey, I'm just regurgitating your bullshit, the idea that poverty creates crime is true yeah, but it creates more crime among Blacks than any other race, I'm not even saying I know why, just pointing out a fact.
Just another example of how sarcasm belittles intelligent communication.
Oh and the bulk Singapore's economy is based on exports. I recall back in History class they were (during the WW2 era) the world's largest exporter of spices as well. Wrong again I guess, oh lawdy.
"Exports, particularly in electronics and chemicals, and services including the posture that Singapore is the regional hub for wealth management [13][14][15] (and the opening of the city state's first casino in 2010 [16]) provide the main source of revenue for the economy"
So, you can't admit that it ticked you off when I accused the patriotic founders of the NRA for being racists ? Now, you're just bitter because you could offend others and be "honest" with your opinions but can't take any information you deem offensive ?
Sarcasm is a literacy tool. If I'm wrong, I say that I'm wrong. Your ego and that "Why should we care" attitude is what belittles this argument.
When you buy stuffs from someone and sell to the others for better price, does that make you a provider ? or just merchant ?
Because that's exactly how Singapore got wealthy. India and Indonesia are world's largest Spice exporters. As in they raise the crops themselves. Singapore is also a very busy trade port/hub in the region, imagine all the fees and taxes. They had always (and still do) buy products from manufacturers in the region and sell them to passing westerners on boats.
How about the size of the country ? Singapore is a small island on the tip of the northern part of Malaysia. It's like 10 times smaller than that part alone. And Texas is 2 times the size of Malaysia, imagine that.
India on the other hand is as big as the entire ASEAN (South East Asian) which is one-third the size of the entire US and almost half the size of Europe, would you compare the sheer amount of resources available to the Indian with Singapore and still think Singapore is an exporter of anything ?
@nuclear: im just making a point about how you make a point: "I'd be deeply disgusted to live in a nation where murder is legal for the government" "Innocent people will get sentenced, and you can't cancel execution, but you can let them out of prison" < opinions or too situational/reversible. plus that was a response to you asking me to explain wat i meant by 'harsh crime stepping in when education fails'. the only point you have over me is that i dont have enough evidence. but then again, i feel singapore and china are huge examples. im not sure about iran, i couldnt find any statistics for its crime rate. i do noe from previous posts that the UK, australia, and possibly a bunch of european countries have higher crime rates (per entire population, not every 100000) than the US, which has death sentences in certain states.
@riotz:
1. obviously im not against this claim since it would further my argument, but plz provide statistics
2. the sky can be grey. point is why did u raise that random observation.
3. wtf im talking crime rates.
4. i believe i meant china had lower living standards, to which you abruptly pointed out this topic was about crime. i then dropped the subject, never disagreed that having death sentence in china did not lower its crime rate.
btw im against public executions, but im all for the lethal injection.
Why you keep bringing up Singapore when it has been said several times how it's a very wealthy place, and thus it's obvious?
This is a fun thing to watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAUv2OTVm9M
I wouldn't trust a government to be able to perform legal murders, and I can't see any sufficiently proved upsides in it.
I don't think it's even debatable if public executions should be made, that would be, like 1500's? What a grotesque degradation of society would that be.
The size of a country has nothing to do it's exports. /Saudi Arabia, Singapore is massive exporter, which you basically said yourself, so that's settled then.
And yes, I didn't realize you needed me to say so. I was very pissed off that you would try and smear a legitimate establishment as a campaign against Blacks.
3. Dracemia made the argument that Singapore had a low crime rate based on their GDP, I was just explaining why they have a high GDP.
Okay, it's just technical terms. I'm just saying that when they trade things they didn't make, it doesn't make that products their export goods.
Thank you for admitting that. Everyone could be offended in some way, the only kind of people who can't be offended is dead people.
Wait, I certainly did not! I've never talked about GDP or Singapore before that post that I said Singapore isn't technically exporting. I know that if I'm going to talk about crime in Singapore, it's going to be about their harsh laws. (which basically fined your ass so much for even the littlest thing like $50 for small littering)
----------------------------------------
ps. GhostThruster spelled the word "Gray" in a Europian way, which is Grey with "e".
An easy way to remember is using "a" in America and "e" in Europe.
'Fundamental human right to bear arms'
It is not fundamental, nor is it a right that we get for being a human, to bear firearms.
Just as a query of interest with regard to American patriotism and gun-toting, if America is such a great country, then why are its citizens so paranoid of their own government that they feel that bearing firearms is a fundamental necessity for the event that their government turns tyrannical? Shouldn't you feel that you don't need these weapons so much?
And what of the mass shootings? Assault Rifles are definitely not meant to be in the hands of citizens, at most they should be semi-automatic assault rifles.
It doesn't make sense. It seems that people want the right to bear arms to protect themselves against the people who have the right to bear arms, and yet when a mass shooting occurs, everyone else forgot to bring their automatic rifles to school.
Perhaps pride is the issue here, where people think that they deserve all the rights in the world at any cost.
*Constitutionally amended right. And we don't change the constitution to our liking here, unlike other countries.
Implying that constitution worshipping fundamentalism is a good thing. That's also an argumentum ad antiquitatem, appeal to tradition.
Besides, even I know that the USA constitution allows guns for "a well regulated militia", which is not random Bob or Dave from somewhere, but a regulated organization.
Besides, even I know that the USA constitution allows guns for "a well regulated militia", which is not random Bob or Dave from somewhere, but a regulated organization.
No... A regulated organization is susceptible to corruption. Citizens are not.
Sadly, this happened
You must be joking.
Because I haven't been born in a dictatorship and land of oppression such as USA, I can't relate to the argument of government turning against its citizens, since I feel that I, and my fellow citizens are part of the government. I'm mostly worried about external threats. It'd be really interesting to see a land of 250 million people turning against itself.
What's the use of guns if your people can't even vote for their benefit?
That's... well, at least I've learned something new today.
It's still an appeal to authority, though.
The accuracy for burst fire is the same as full-auto, there are some exceptions for some rifles that was specifically designed as a burst weapon (like the AN-94).precisely place 2-3 rounds
I would feel safer having a gun under my bed but I would be a lot more paranoid knowing that every neighbor has one too. I've read a lot about people who has been shot on sight because they were "trespassing" on someones property, the recent one was about three hispanic guys who were going to pick up a friend but the car-gps sent them to the wrong address and the owner of the house shot one of them down. I would not like to live with that fear, what if someone thinks I'm a burglar when I leave my friends house in the middle of the night?I honestly feel safer from criminals with my Remington 870 Express near by...
I believe this law or similar ones are applied in a lot of countries today, even those that have strict gun laws or absolute gun bans. In practice it wouldn't work to remove this kind of laws since it is both publicly supported and impossible to apply in reality.I also wonder if the government can take away your right to defend yourself from them
They tried to remove the free internet, NRA was very quiet back then.what other rights can they remove without fear of revolution, i.e. China.
Needless to say, America changes its constitution when it suits itself.
Mostly unrelated, but RiotZ mentioned the two-party system some time back. What do you think about the two-party system vs many-party systems? My personal thoughts are that systems that allow many parties, but restrict them so that a certain voter % is needed to get representatives into a Congress-analogue are quite good. They allow minority voices to be represented in a much better fashion, and allow support for parties that aren't middle-of-the-road.
The accuracy for burst fire is the same as full-auto, there are some exceptions for some rifles that was specifically designed as a burst weapon (like the AN-94).
I would feel safer having a gun under my bed but I would be a lot more paranoid knowing that every neighbor has one too. I've read a lot about people who has been shot on sight because they were "trespassing" on someones property, the recent one was about three hispanic guys who were going to pick up a friend but the car-gps sent them to the wrong address and the owner of the house shot one of them down. I would not like to live with that fear, what if someone thinks I'm a burglar when I leave my friends house in the middle of the night?
I believe this law or similar ones are applied in a lot of countries today, even those that have strict gun laws or absolute gun bans. In practice it wouldn't work to remove this kind of laws since it is both publicly supported and impossible to apply in reality.
They tried to remove the free internet, NRA was very quiet back then.
Honestly, the only reason why they struggle so hard to keep every civilian armed is to make profits out of it. The US government has so many weapons it would be suicide to go up against it, and even so, the army is full of people who see their position as a job and probably did not sign up to shoot civilian rebels.
And putting military power in the hands of the people is generally not a good thing to do, Schweiz is a working example and some African countries are not. It makes it easier for strong ethnic groups to take power and wipe out other groups, which is why its better that democratic governments has the military power in secular and multicultural countries.
And comparing a democracy like the US to China is a bit extreme. Even though its not a 100% democratic system it still has a lot more freedom of choice.
Mostly unrelated, but RiotZ mentioned the two-party system some time back. What do you think about the two-party system vs many-party systems? My personal thoughts are that systems that allow many parties, but restrict them so that a certain voter % is needed to get representatives into a Congress-analogue are quite good. They allow minority voices to be represented in a much better fashion, and allow support for parties that aren't middle-of-the-road.
We weren't talking about the rest of the world, dracemia, we were talking about America. And there's a reason for that - they use the statement 'we don't change our constitution' as an excuse to ignore the responsible choice.
So basically, everything you said in response to that was a waste of time.
And over the last 200 years the US has evolved as the most popular country on Earth... There must be a reason for it.
Call it "the US", bros. As for its inhabitants, I just call them USians for the lulz.