The Iraqis had plenty of arms. So did the Afghans. The English don't. The Swedes don't. See any holes in your theory?Oh right, you're just a nutter that lives in a fantasy world.
The English have some. Most of them were confiscated years ago. It's interesting how their violence has increased significantly since then. Then again, don't let the facts get in your way. I have always found it interesting that every democrat controlled hell hole in this country does not have guns. They also have huge crime rates. Hell, it's safer to be a US soldier in Afghanistan than an American citizen in Chicago. No guns allowed in Chicago, but its safer in Afghanistan for a soldier where they have real assault weapons. Don't forget the Swiss, everyone has a real assault weapon at home.Chicago has internet and no guns and massive crimes. Afghanistan has no internet to speak of and has guns and its safer for an American soldier than in Chicago. If I get your theory, less internet and more guns make for a safer society. I agree with you. We must ban the internet to protect our children. That might be the reasoning behind Egypt shutting down the internet or it might be that they don't want the truth to get out.What is your theory?Daniel, I thought it was funny and sad watching the Egyptians protecting their neighborhoods with knives and bat. In the US, we would protect our loved ones and homes with guns.
"Then again, don't let the facts get in your way."--------------Crimes involving the use of firearms are rare – they make up less than one per cent of all recorded crime.http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/crime-weapons.htmlGoogle. 10 seconds.
ANON 11:56 AMI'm glad you brought that up. I would beware of data from England on their data. They have a tendency to manipulate the data. If I remember correctly, if one criminal commits five crimes, it's reported as one crime. They have to make it look like the ban on guns is making people safer.Of course their overall crime is catching up to us.One other point you missed, our crimes are decreasing while the ownership of guns has increased in the last few years. Of course government guns in Europe murdered or helped murder tens of millions in the last century. Hitler took the guns away from the Jews and we know how that went.Hundreds of hours of research and reading
Look up the holodomor. Russia confiscated the guns of the peasants then he starved them to death. Over 8 million died in one winter. Much worse then the holocaust. It could not have been done if the peasants had guns. They sent men door to door to conficate their food.As for England and Sweden you might be correct. They are/were a peaceful country with a peaceful population and a democratically elected government. If some faction were to take over the government the population could not stop it without weapons so who knows what the result would be.
What must really piss you off, Miglavs, is that freedom-loving people don't need guns to overthrow a dictatorship. They're doing it. They're doing it right now, and they aren't armed, and at the moment they're not even throwing rocks. Go figure. ;-)
ANON 8:15 AMWhat would happen if the Egyptian military decided to use guns? The peasants would stop their revolution. It is only because the military is not using their guns that there are so few deaths. I heard there are about 300 dead. I guess they don't matter in your calculations.You have made one of the most idiotic statements I've heard in years. Remember the Khmer Rouge, they knocked on everyone's doors and and said they were there to protect them and that they needed the guns. Why don't you do a little reading and see what happened after that.The Egyptian military probably has had too much contact with the US so they have a higher sense of morality and better principles than most dictatorships.You should hate cars more than guns. Cars kill more of our young children than guns.
The folks that started this country were freedom loving people, did they need guns?
It does not surprise me that you would think that's an "idiotic" statement, Dave, because the statement is simply an acknowledgement of a reality that is visible and obvious to the entire world. From past discussions, I realize that you have a difficult time with reality. The statement, and the fact, and the reality of the situation is this: The Egyptian people have launched a revolution, and so far they have done so without the use of firearms. Mubarak will not last the week, I suspect. This latter statement is my opinion, but the undeniable, incontrovertible fact, once again, is: The Egyptian people are bringing down a dictatorship, and they are doing so without firearms.Note: I did not say they choose to do what they’re doing without guns. I did not say that they prefer to not use guns. The circumstances there dictate that guns are not readily available to the population, so they are primarily resorting to peaceful protest. I also am not saying that you, or any one individual or group will favor or oppose the eventual outcome, and I am not making any statements or predictions about the moral, legal or political legitimacy of whomever replaces Mubarak.I am simply stating what is: The Egyptians are on the verge of overthrowing a dictator. So far, they’ve done so peacefully, without firearms. That bothers you, doesn’t it, Dave?
No it does not. They are not using guns because they don't have them. If they did, they might have done this revolution much earlier. More power to them. Like I said, if the military or police really used their weapons, this revolution would have been stopped. The people of Egypt are very lucky that the military has decided not to get involved very much.I wonder why they are revolting now instead of years ago. I've heard it is the price of food that has caused this revolt and the other ones in N Africa. Don't forget the 300 dead. They might not be dead if they had a guns and could shoot back.
One other point. We will have to wait and see how things iron out and see how much the violent muslims like the Muslim Brotherhood are involved with the new government. If they are heavily involved, I bet we will see a lot of firearm usage. It will be against citizens of Egypt and Israel. Then all your fawning over a non-gun revolution will just be crap.
It won't be "crap" if we end up with the Muslim Brotherhood. I told you: I am not making any statements or predictions about the moral, legal or political legitimacy of whomever replaces Mubarak. The point is: He is likely to be replaced, and whether they end up with Bozo the Clown or the reincarnation of Ghengis Kahn as president, that would not negate the FACT that he was swept out office by a peaceful revolution by people who did not use firearms, which I still maintain must bother you just a little, otherwise you wouldn't have called it "one of the most idiotic statements I've heard in years."
11:44 AMDon't worry, it looks like they don't needs guns. They have started using molotov cocktails.
I gotta say. Only bums hate guns. And thats the democratic government.
Hey Anonymous, Iraq and afghanistan have nothing to do with this debate, that is terroism by muslim extremists. I have personaly met many gun carrying Iraqs that are great people who want to do nothing more than to protect themselves from the terrorist like MOST of us do.In sweden civilian are given rifels and training to use them and many would say due to the fact that the swedish people are armed and have good training it detures crime. If you look back when DC first put their gun control law into place the crime rate rocketed. Please everyone look into the information before you speek or make a decision, MAKE AN EDUCATED DECISION.
Daniel: Please cite the passage in the Bible indicating God's mandate that people have the right to own and "bear" arms.
Anon 8:15:"What must really piss you off, Miglavs, is that freedom-loving people don't need guns to overthrow a dictatorship. They're doing it. They're doing it right now, and they aren't armed, and at the moment they're not even throwing rocks."Anon 8:15 @ 10:28:"...the fact, and the reality of the situation is this: The Egyptian people have launched a revolution, and so far they have done so without the use of firearms. Mubarak will not last the week, I suspect. This latter statement is my opinion, but the undeniable, incontrovertible fact, once again, is: The Egyptian people are bringing down a dictatorship, and they are doing so without firearms.""I am simply stating what is: The Egyptians are on the verge of overthrowing a dictator. So far, they’ve done so peacefully, without firearms."Anon 8:15 @ 11:44:"...that would not negate the FACT that he [Mubarak] was swept out office by a peaceful revolution by people who did not use firearms..."From the AP, February 10th:CAIRO – Egypt's Hosni Mubarak refused to step down or leave the country and instead handed his powers to his vice president Thursday, remaining president...Fantasy and reality. Apparently, they really are two different things.
Well, well, well... it appears that Mubarak stepped down after all.We'll see what happens next.
What a stuff of un-ambiguity and preserveness of valuable knowledge concerning unpredicted feelings.Also see my page - wisselkoerse
Howdy! This is my first visit to your blog! We are a collection of volunteers and starting a new project in a community in the same niche.Your blog provided us valuable information to work on. You have done a wonderful job!Visit my weblog : best way quit smoking
Hi, I do think this is a great site. I stumbledupon it ;) I may return once again since i have saved as a favorite it.Money and freedom is the best way to change, may you be rich and continue to help other people.Here is my web-site - el paso pipeline partners lp buy stocks
Thank you for some other excellent post. The place else may just anybody get that kind of info in such an ideal means of writing? I've a presentation next week, and I'm on the look for such info.My website > affiliates
Post a Comment