631–640 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most people would have just called animal control
In most US counties animal control responds late or not at all. Obviously you can't seriously expect farmers to just wait around while feral dogs kill their livestock.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's admirable about it? This is just a fiction that you Americans tell yourselves about the next revolution. Name one, just one way, that ease of gun ownership has protected Americans from their government in a way that citizens of other western democracies have suffered? There is no scenario in which any citizen with a gun in any country defeats their government. Your gun will keep you safe about as well as your…
If you were an officer of the law pressed to go door-to-door to say, purely hypothetically, take the oldest child by force to inscribe them in some dystopian military program, you'd probably be a lot more hesitant if you knew that there was a chance you'd get shot in the process right? I believe that's the security that us Americans (I imagine your sneer with that) feel by being armed. Isn't it that the Swiss are all…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sadly, our neighborhood thinks everyone is a potential criminal and hangs signs around saying "I don't call 911" with a picture of a gun. This is not inviting to other neighbors, and not a way to build trust with one another.
I grew up in an area where people have these signs and bumper stickers, and never had a problem socializing. I saw no evidence that people couldn't trust their neighbors or community. I've seen these in rural and urban places as well, and still haven't seen any issue like what you're suggesting. What's the problem supposed to be?
Why hang a sign that insinuates "I may shoot you", unless that person really means it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a very simple litmus test. In how many countries can you openly (with lots of publicity) organize "Draw a Muhammad" or "Burn the bible" events.
Interesting. Kids in many countries throughout the middle east and northern Africa have essentially unrestricted access to firearms, including shit you can't buy in most US states, but your "Draw a Muhammad" litmus test wouldn't fly. What does this indicate? Let's burn the American flag instead. How's that gonna go in rural counties of the US? Will it be safe, or will the response be armed?
The response will be armed
You will not be Shot unless you tried to harm someone first
You will be yelled at, called names, and maybe at most hit across the head
They will try to stop you, put out the fire, and prevent you from burning the flag
They will not shoot you dead...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But the U.S. murder rate is not all that remarkable, really The US is at 4.96/100,000 for 2012. For reference, Angola is better at 4.85. Bulgaria and Romania, the poorest countries in the EU, are at 1.3. France is at 1.2. If by not remarkable you mean 3 as bad as other developed countries, sure. The numbers are only for intentional homicide, not even counting accidents and suicides which are also made worse by the…
PS: I am strong supporter of Gun rights and proud gun owner. I fully agree with anti-gun crowd that having vast majority of guns in hands of citizens (legally or illegally) leads to more deaths. USA's comparison with Angola is actually more serious than the numbers tell you because you need to realize that USA has far better medical response and doctors trained to handle gunshot wounds. So to truly compare Angola and…
There's something admirable about the idea that a government would not take away all the guns. The idea that people should not have to give up all of their ability to fight. The idea that people should not be entirely dependent on police for their defense. And the idea that physically weaker people (often women) can defend themselves against the strong. Does this idea work? Surprisingly well. If you had to guess the…
> But the U.S. murder rate is not all that remarkable, really The US is at 4.96/100,000 for 2012. For reference, Angola is better at 4.85. Bulgaria and Romania, the poorest countries in the EU, are at 1.3. France is at 1.2. If by not remarkable you mean 3 as bad as other developed countries, sure. The numbers are only for intentional homicide, not even counting accidents and suicides which are also made worse by the…
Small arms appear to have served Vietnam and Afghanistan well in repelling a much larger and stronger force.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the tragedy isn't the gun, but the necessity for one, and it's a tragedy inherent in our mortal existence. Well, they're sure not necessary here in Australia. I don't think I've ever met someone who owns one, certainly no-one has ever mentioned owning a gun to me. It's just not a thing. Seems to be just "a tragedy inherent" in the USA. I was watching every day, and supporting, the George Floyd protests, and after a…
This reminds me of my first year of high school in Australia. I had come from the USA and everyone wanted to hear my war stories about people shooting each other (and for me to say 'Watermelon' over and over). It completely blew my mind how misinformed Aussies (granted we were young) were about life in America. It's a huge country, you gotta keep in mind the news and action movies sensationalize and glorify isolated…
Consider the frighteningly lengthy list of school shootings in the USA. [0]
I note that Wikipedia does not have an entry for school shootings in, say, Australia. Or in fact most other places.
I'm seeing a figure of ~ 1300 school shootings in the USA since 1970, so it doesn't appear to be an entirely modern problem.
In the USA (contemporary, again, sorry I'm not sure what era your experiences are from) there's ~30-40 (children-aged) victims of gun-related violence a day, with ~8 of those resulting in death. [1]
From outside that society, how people put up with this, living with regular active shooter drills, managing the additional anxiety, etc, is definitely going to be of interest.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_th... [1] https://www.sandyhookpromise.org/gun-violence/16-facts-about...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the tragedy isn't the gun, but the necessity for one, and it's a tragedy inherent in our mortal existence. Well, they're sure not necessary here in Australia. I don't think I've ever met someone who owns one, certainly no-one has ever mentioned owning a gun to me. It's just not a thing. Seems to be just "a tragedy inherent" in the USA. I was watching every day, and supporting, the George Floyd protests, and after a…
I think Australia is a great example of what happens when guns are given up. You have a government that’s going on witch hunts for covid cases and exerting extreme authoritarian pressure for remarkably low covid rates. Some would say it’s them testing the limits of their populace. What are they gonna do? Protest? That’s illegal when in lockdown.
You do have one of the lowest Covid death rates in the world. You have a lot of states with complete freedom.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
PS: I am strong supporter of Gun rights and proud gun owner. I fully agree with anti-gun crowd that having vast majority of guns in hands of citizens (legally or illegally) leads to more deaths. USA's comparison with Angola is actually more serious than the numbers tell you because you need to realize that USA has far better medical response and doctors trained to handle gunshot wounds. So to truly compare Angola and…
What evidence do you have for suggesting that a citizenry with guns serves to protect other freedoms? The US generally isn't among the top countries on the various international freedom indexes[1] despite our prevalence of guns. We are usually behind Canada, New Zealand, the Scandinavian countries, and a few other European countries depending on the specific criteria being evaluated. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Genuine legal interpretation question: Why does everyone quote "Shall not be infringed" but ignore "Well-regulated"? If the goal is a "well regulated militia", and therefore gun rights "shall not be infringed", why do we interpret that as "everybody should have largely unfettered access to weapons" rather than "If part of a well-regulated armed force, access to weapons should be allowed during militia activities"? or…
The US Supreme Court held "The Amendment's prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause's text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms."[1] [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZO.html