10-12-2004, 04:12 PM | #1 |
Ironworks Moderator
Join Date: March 1, 2001
Location: Midlands, South Carolina
Age: 48
Posts: 14,759
|
I just heard on the news that pay-per-view has a televised debate tonight in London that supposedly will be the first world-wide open-forum debate of its kind. If I heard right...the president of the NRA will be supporting the US view on guns while an Australian woman will be representing the rest of the world! It is supposed to be one that you would not want to miss kinda deals. I don't have the option to view this event, so will somebody watch it and report back to us on how it turned out?
__________________
|
10-12-2004, 05:23 PM | #2 |
Vampire
Join Date: January 29, 2003
Location: Sweden
Age: 43
Posts: 3,888
|
Isn't gun control a national issue rather than an international one? Illegal arms smuggling I can understand, but gun control within countries?
__________________
Nothing is impossible, it's just a matter of probability. |
10-12-2004, 06:08 PM | #3 | |
Ironworks Moderator
Join Date: March 1, 2001
Location: Midlands, South Carolina
Age: 48
Posts: 14,759
|
Quote:
I heard this woman talk about the stand point of England and Australia, and the reasons behind what their rules incorporate, and I gotta admit that she is a strong advocate for her point of view. In the past, the US has been able to use the second admendment to protect its pro-gun stand, but that will not work in this debate. I really hope somebody here will let me know how it goes.
__________________
|
|
10-12-2004, 06:14 PM | #4 |
Takhisis Follower
Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Mandurah, West Australia
Age: 60
Posts: 5,073
|
So are you saying Stratos that we should not worry about going on holidays and getting wasted in another part of the world where the event night not have happened if there had been gun control?
Having said that though, it is very clear that gun control will remain a national issue rather than an international one. Change has to come from within - if it was imposed then them there militias are gunna start putting the wagons in a circle and digging in for a scrap . There are too many of the "cold dead hands" brigade standing ready to put up the barricades and wave some muzzles to protect their current rights. They oppose change from within most vociferously, and change from without stands as much chance as those school children at Columbine did. BTW, I would agree with those that would fight to the bitter end an imposed change from without because I agree it is a national issue. International opinion is going to be listened to the same amount as was some of those kids pleas not to be shot in the cafeteria. So summing up Larry - I hope the Aussie girl kicks NRA butt - but whether she does or not - status quo is inevitable for many years to come.
__________________
Davros was right - just ask JD |
10-12-2004, 06:17 PM | #5 |
Ironworks Moderator
Join Date: March 1, 2001
Location: Midlands, South Carolina
Age: 48
Posts: 14,759
|
I think she will have more to stand on during the issue, and the valid points of so many other nations will be behind her. It is really supposed to be a fun debate to watch, as it is "open forum", so watch out!
Man...I wish I could see it. So...does anybody know more about this event and why they are having it? Is there something that I do not know as to why it is even being staged?
__________________
|
10-12-2004, 06:36 PM | #6 | |
Vampire
Join Date: January 29, 2003
Location: Sweden
Age: 43
Posts: 3,888
|
Quote:
font> [/QUOTE]But the right to bear arms is in the Second Amendment and limited to the USA alone. It has no direct relevance outside USA's borders. Same thing the other way around with European constitutions. I think it will just be a ideological debate where where one side really doesn't need to heed the words of the other side, since everyone can just after the debate go home to their own countries and their own laws. I don't think it will fundamentally change anything. It will probably just be a matter of "you do what you want on your side of the Atlantic, and we on ours."
__________________
Nothing is impossible, it's just a matter of probability. |
|
10-12-2004, 06:44 PM | #7 | |
Vampire
Join Date: January 29, 2003
Location: Sweden
Age: 43
Posts: 3,888
|
Quote:
[ 10-12-2004, 06:45 PM: Message edited by: Stratos ]
__________________
Nothing is impossible, it's just a matter of probability. |
|
10-12-2004, 11:34 PM | #8 | ||||||||||
Baaz Draconian
Join Date: June 17, 2002
Location: NY
Age: 37
Posts: 723
|
Quote:
Quote:
As I recall, Europeans have a problem with a momma that likes the "Sadistic abuse for the simple pleasure of it" school of parenting. America had enough of that back in '76, and we decided that the government would be the people's whipping boy, not the other way around. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
"It's about as exciting as watching flies ****!" I'm about as interested in a European politician's opinion on Domestic policy in my country as I'm certain you're interested in Pat Buchanan's position on your Domestic policy. Let America solve its own problems, or stop complaining when we act like a self-appointed policeman. Quote:
Furthermore, if you don't like the US's gun policies enough that you're worried about getting shot, well, don't come here. You have no particular right to be here above and beyond citizens of this country. And since I wholeheartedly object to Australian gun policy, I won't go there. Not like I have any business there anyways. Quote:
Quote:
To say that a couple of Nazi Psychopaths (they were both) like they are an honest representation of the Second Ammendment foundationalist types is a beyond unreasonable and downright myopic way of looking at the situation. You ought to read the Nazi platform for starters... I suppose if you're afraid of people voting from the rooftops, you think the .50 ban in California was a good idea. Then you found out I hope that despite the lack of crimes committed with .50BMG loaded rifles, that the law passing process in California worked something like this: 1)Watch action movies with such rifles 2)Assume such rifles are used a lot by criminals 3)Plan to do research 4)Stay up partying all night staring at naughty zoo and drinking S'mores Schnapps 5)Don't do research 6)Put bill on floor anyways 7)Vote 8)Fail to pass 9)Put up again 10)Fail to pass 11)Put up again 12)Knowing it will fail, vote (illegally) in presence of nonpresent state assemblymen I forgot the step inbetween steps 5 and 6, acquire (through political connections at the top of state government) Concealed Carry Weapon permit while saying that they shouldn't be allowed. Well, this rule only applies if you're Dianne Feinstein or a scumsucking elitist rat-bastard. If any disparity exists between the two however, it's news to me! Quote:
Quote:
[ 10-13-2004, 09:36 AM: Message edited by: Larry_OHF ]
__________________
[img]\"http://www.jtdistributing.com/pics/tshirts/experts%20copy.jpg\" alt=\" - \" /> |
||||||||||
10-13-2004, 09:11 AM | #9 |
Takhisis Follower
Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Mandurah, West Australia
Age: 60
Posts: 5,073
|
Head in the sand as usual Oblivion [img]smile.gif[/img] - might doesn't equal right, and lengthy replies mean doodly squat over shorter ones iff'n you don't read what was said in the first place.
Tell me where I used BfC for an argument in my post instead of where I spoke of the kids of Columbine. My reply was nothing about Mr Moore's documentary, nor did I touch on your usual ostrich approach to said movie. I haven't bought BfC the movie, or the Director into this discussion, and would be just as happy to leave both out. The examples I used in my two similes may be evocative but they remain relevant for all that you try to tie them to your dismissal of the movie. The kids had little chance, and their pleas weren't listened to. Would you like to tell me which of those statements you disagree with, and for the Kewpie Doll on the top shelf, tell us why. So the statement about gun control being a national issue, change having to come from within, amd militias circlin the wagons strikes you as rude does it. Nothing of debate in your reply to this paragraph - just comments about you internal angst level. Would you care to elaborate on what I said rather than on sharing your emotive drive with me. Tell me what you disagree with. Is gun control a national issue like I said? I am thinking that you would agree with me. If change is ever to be effected, will it come from within, or be imposed from outside the country? I am thinkin it will only ever come from within if it indeed ever happens. Now if you are calm while reading this, I am betting you will probably agree again. Are there not people out there who resist change by shouting the mantra that goes along the lines of "cold dead hands" and would rather take the law into their own hands than see the 2nd amendment overturned and gun controls introduced by some no-good useless Beatnik liberal government of the future. I am thinking yes. Perhaps you meant to say "I don't happen to like yer tone Mr Davros, but I actually agree with what you said in that there paragraph".
__________________
Davros was right - just ask JD |
10-13-2004, 09:28 AM | #10 |
Dracolich
Join Date: January 24, 2004
Location: UK
Age: 41
Posts: 3,092
|
I believe it was the "cold dead hands" reference that is the link to BfC, which probably means you've been pigeon-holed into being a Moore liberal already.
As for the debate, i'm sure it will be interesting, if only because it's a debate and you might learn something. Debate is always a good thing because it forces you to re-assess old ideas which would otherwise become entrenched in your thinking if they were not questioned. As for proof that banning guns reduces crime, I rather suspect it's like smoking. As far as I understand it, nobody has actually managed to prove that cancer follows smoking in the same way that 'a' follows 'b'. Yet the research is so compelling, and the coincidences so large, that any right-minded person would agree that smoking causes cancer. All I know is, I'm much more likely to get shot in America than I am in the UK or Australia. It seems fairly obvious to me why that is, especially as most of the high publicity gun crime isn't caused by criminals. But, it's your life, so if you value the 2nd amendment over the increased risk of you being shot then that's entirely up to you - I'm not living in the US, so it's not something that bothers me particularly. It just seems fairly common-sense that as you increase the number of guns in a country then you increase the risk of them being used in a harmful way. [ 10-13-2004, 09:57 AM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ] |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Worldwide Mandriva Linux 2006 Install party on Saturday the 19th | Felix The Assassin | General Discussion | 17 | 11-18-2005 09:47 PM |
Gun Control. Knife Control. Tomorrow, pointy sticks? | VulcanRider | General Discussion | 76 | 06-04-2005 11:17 AM |
Worldwide anti-smoking treaty comes into force | Dreamer128 | General Discussion | 4 | 02-28-2005 06:02 AM |
Worldwide Threat From Killer Bug - Could someone confirm whether this is media hype? | Downunda | General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) | 6 | 03-15-2003 05:12 PM |
massive antiwar protests expected worldwide... | norompanlasolas | General Discussion | 29 | 02-16-2003 04:25 PM |