Printable View
Shoot them. If you carry a gun though by law... if some one comes after you, like that, you have to run away only if they cornered me could i shoot them. So it depends on how they attacked.
and here they are
check the library at the firing line
http://thefiringline.com/
http://thehighroad.org/
IMHO it is better to beat them causing less damage.
There is a chance of them getting my gun if i do that.
Please guys - if you want to start a discussion on guns, do so in the dedicated threads like in this one .
No reason to turn this one into a new gun discussion.
Thanks :bow:
Ser Clegane
ok i will shut up now :bow:
First real discussion in the Left Wing Club is about guns. Oh Baby it's a wild world ~:confused:
The funniest thing is that half of the official members participated in it ( see the members list on the first page ).
LOL! You can be a member of the Left Wing Club if you are in general politically left. In other words, you do not have to support every left wing issue. And all are welcome to post!
Just one question:
Do you consider communism to be possible>
What do you mean. Everybody here has his own definition about communism. I like William Morris (News from Nowhere) most!
Utopic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Franconicus
Quote: "Socialism in all its form is a dangerous ideology that should be countered at all times.
It not only endangers the wealth and economy of nations, but the cultural makeup as well.
Socialism breeds dependency, irresponsibility, and laziness and threatens those that are successful with taxes and laws aimed at social engineering.
As Europe becomes more socialist you will see unemployment rise, economies stagnate, and an ever increasingly entrenched class system."
No such things were normal in the USSr, or in the nowadays China.
The things I stated were present in communist Russia.Quote:
No such things were normal in the USSr, or in the nowadays China.
Russia's economy was driven into the ground and its culture was completely changed. There was a great degree of incompetence and lazyness on the part of many Russians, as there was very little incentive to do any work - unless they had the misfortune of having their life threatened.
I dont know if China could be regarded as a socialist country - it was a stretch to compare the USSR, but it did have many socialist policies.
In any event, Chinas ancient culture was by and large destroyed and the cultural revolution was a disaster. And only as China has begun to embrace capitolist ideas has its economy started to grow.
Well than I must admit you don't know history of my country:Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
1. There was not any rise of "unemployment" ( more than that yhere was a raise of employment ( correct word? ) during 45-70)
2. As for incompetence and lazyness those began in 80-90.
Do you know that the USSR was the firet country which stopped using product cards after WW II?
What would you say about this statement:
"Capitalism in all its form is a dangerous ideology that should be countered at all times.
It not only endangers the wealth and economy of nations, but the cultural makeup as well.
Capitalism breeds dependency, irresponsibility, and laziness and threatens the poor with taxes and laws aimed at social engineering.
As Europe becomes more capitalistic you will see unemployment rise, economies stagnate, and an ever increasingly entrenched class system."
A rise in employment doesnt automatically correlate with a rise in productivity. A comparison of American companies and Russian government run industry would show the merits of capitolism.Quote:
Well than I must admit you don't know history of my country:
1. There was not any rise of "unemployment" ( more than that yhere was a raise of employment ( correct word? ) during 45-70)
2. As for incompetence and lazyness those began in 80-90.
Do you know that the USSR was the firet country which stopped using product cards after WW II?
Also you didnt address my other two points. Russia's economy could not survive under extreme socialism and the culture of Russia was completely changed by the communist years. (whether thats a good thing or a bad thing is irrelevant.)
I would say its simply an incorrect assessment. Where ever free market capitolism has been introduced, there has been a sharp improvement in the economy standard of living.Quote:
What would you say about this statement:
"Capitalism in all its form is a dangerous ideology that should be countered at all times.
It not only endangers the wealth and economy of nations, but the cultural makeup as well.
Capitalism breeds dependency, irresponsibility, and laziness and threatens the poor with taxes and laws aimed at social engineering.
As Europe becomes more capitalistic you will see unemployment rise, economies stagnate, and an ever increasingly entrenched class system."
Socialism, taken to its extremes, tanks an economy.
Panzer,
I have an American collegue. Once he told me about his grandfather. He was working for a mining company in the mountains somewhere at the eastcoast. There was only one way to get to the mines, a railway, built and owned by the company. There was only one way to live, in the houses of the company. You could only buy in the company stores and the company sold you also your equipment. The company gave you not money but cards to pay at the company stores. He had to borrow money to buy the equipment and he was never able to pay everything back.
I would call this capitalism. But it did not increase the standard of living at least not for the workers. And created dependency.
Do not get me wrong. I am not talking about the US as it is today. I am talking about capitalism.
Yes, unfortunately those company towns were a big problem in the height of the coal mining industry.
However, that is not capitolism, but a very unique subversion of it. As America has shown, such things are not tolerated for long in a responsible capitolist country.
Any economic structure can be taken advantage of. What is telling is that America has been able to overcome the shortfalls of capitolism and continue to be successful, whereas Russia could not make socialism work.
OK, sign me up. As long as you don't mind someone who has been called a loon (lunacy), liberal scumbag, pinko traitor, nigerlover, softminded twit ..... on and on by our conservative breathern.
Topic? I own a few, 12 gauge Winchester pump (hunting), AK47 (heavy barrel, sniper set up - for popping caps, fun), an AR-15, and a small caliber hand gun (22) for killing vermin (armadillas and such that like to burrow beneath the foundation of my home).
In Florida it is now legal (Jeb signed the Bill months ago) to shoot (and kill) anyone that you feel threatened by. I was appalled by the outlandishness of such a bill, (it was proposed to get one person off of being charged with the murder of his neighbor). Now, we can all legally murder our neighbors as long as we can get a few others to agree the offending neighbor was a threat. Isn't it a wonderful idea? Passing laws that support murder.
:balloon2:
So if a man pulls a knife says "I am gonna get you" you dont think you should be allowed to shoot him??? where did you come up with this logic :dizz :
Sounds more like communism to me to be sure. "I lost my soul to the company store". I love that song.Quote:
Panzer,
I have an American collegue. Once he told me about his grandfather. He was working for a mining company in the mountains somewhere at the eastcoast. There was only one way to get to the mines, a railway, built and owned by the company. There was only one way to live, in the houses of the company. You could only buy in the company stores and the company sold you also your equipment. The company gave you not money but cards to pay at the company stores. He had to borrow money to buy the equipment and he was never able to pay everything back.
I would call this capitalism. But it did not increase the standard of living at least not for the workers. And created dependency.
Do not get me wrong. I am not talking about the US as it is today. I am talking about capitalism.
Doesnt sound like capitalism at all. Capitalism is about competition. It doesn't sound like in this town there was any competition as everything was owend by the company.Quote:
I would call this capitalism. But it did not increase the standard of living at least not for the workers.
No.. You inform the authorities and let them sort it out. You shouldn't go around shooting everyone you disagree with / argue with / get threatened by. That is vigilante justice of which we thought we got rid of in western society centuries ago. It seems however there is an increasing streak in the US for retributive justice done by citizens themselves, as well as citizens thinking they are judge, jury and prosecutor.Quote:
Originally Posted by ceasar010
Well count me in aswell, I think that on most points I'm left ( a socialist i think) but not on all topics.
Edit: about the gun topic, I'm against guns because I don't think you need one, it will only make things worst.
for example: I've seen a program about this on belgium telly, I can't remeber the numbers but I do know that:
-family tragedies (that's what we call them in Belgium; you know a man kills his children and wife and commits suicide) happen more in families with guns.
this is the same for normal suicides.
Is that before or after he slits your throat? ~:confused:Quote:
No.. You inform the authorities and let them sort it out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAG
So if you are carrying a gun (you are allowed in most states in america) A mugger phyco etc has a knife says "i am gonna get you"and comes after you. You dont shoot.
wth are you gonna do, call 911 and wait 15 minutes. I am sure he will sit on the side walk and wait for the police :help:
And it would be best for society if he was dead or seriously wounded because.... If he does it to you and gets away with it, he will do it again.
most don't if you act cautious and think before you act.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Perhaps some will but allowing guns will make it also much easier for them.
btw: most criminals would attack you before you know what the hell happend so you can't use your gun anyway.
No you cant have a felony and own guns. So no must wouln't. If you outlaw them there will still be some and only criminals would want them. So its best that we let us decent people have them.
All i want to do is go hunting and target shooting. But the government keeps passing all these laws and bans etc. Most gun owners are law abiding people. But they wont leave us the hell alone.
Maybe the guys a physco and just wants to kill you. Then what? You cant reason with everyone. Sometimes it comes down to you or them. Ill take me and my gun everytime thank you. One day liberals will return to living in the real world.Quote:
most don't if you act cautious and think before you act.
When guns are outlawed only crimanals and the police would have them, and it will be allot more difficult for criminals to get them. Just let the police do the crimefighting and the judge dicide the punishments.Quote:
Originally Posted by ceasar010
Here you can own a gun and go target shooting (there is a shooting club in my neighbourhood) but you can't take your gun to your house. And you can go hunting with hail guns (altough there isn't much to shoot).