BACK TO Home Page 50 TOPICS
Guns

Guns - Forums and Letters



Response To Bill Gates Backing Universal Gun Permit Background Checks - Opposition

Why is it that felons can't buy guns but can buy alcohol? If Gates wants to save lives how about banning convicted drunk drivers and felons from buying or possessing alcohol too! Issue convicted drunk drivers and felons portrait ID or DL!

Look at it this way, it is already illegal to sell guns to criminals. If people ignore that law do you think universal background checks will help? Making an illegal activity more illegal isn't going to make any difference. Gates wasted $1M dollars. How about life in prison for knowingly selling or loaning a gun to a convicted felon? That would be more effective.

If we have the right to kill our unborn children then we should have the right to kill the ones who survive long enough to make poor life decisions like breaking into our homes.

Do you clowns know what that even means? People who have never bought, let alone fired, a firearm should have no place in determining what people should be allowed to own-or not.

All the gutless cowards afraid to defend themselves will be killed by the criminals they seek to coddle. Darwin in full force.

How many intruders have you shot? How many gun owners do you know who shot themselves, their families or friends? You never know. You many beat the long odds and someday actually use that chunk of cold steel to protect yourself. But probably not.

Response To Bill Gates Backing Universal Gun Permit Background Checks - Support

I have no idea if Gates involvement will make a dent in this fight. And I have a real problem with the fact political initiatives seem to more and more depend upon wealth individual benefactors just to be able to be heard. But as long as that is what the politics of the day demand as far as I am concerned his effort (by which of course I mean his money) is more than welcome.

Mention background checks and the NRA crowd goes over the edge. Few things scare the NRA more than background checks. Why is that?

I just sold my vehicle to someone -- individual to individual. I signed over the title and the buyer had to register the vehicle with the state and buy a license plate. I'm worried. The government knows exactly who owns every vehicle in this country. So, if there is ever an attempt by the government to take away our rights, and we try to fight back, they'll take away all our vehicles. How are we ever going to get to where the fighting is if we can't drive there? It's a shame the U.S. Constitution doesn't have a provision giving every citizen the right to own a vehicle without having to register the damn thing with the government.

Assuming, against all available evidence, that Wayne LaPierre is not a serial murderer by proxy, then he probably is privately thrilled about Bloomberg and Gates. For every dollar against guns, the NRA will get more than a dollar from the merchants of death who make and sell guns. Every gun control regulation that is enacted will provoke dozens, hundreds or thousands of paranoid gun perverts to join Wayne's army and march for magnums, roar for rifles and slay for the Second. Demagogues thrive on conflict. All Wayne LaPierre needs now is another Civil War to make him happy.

It seems to most civilized people that you gun perverts are cramming muzzles down decent people's throats. Almost three hundred million guns in this nation and you demand more. Wake UP! Our lives and our children's lives are under attack by people who love guns and death more than life.

Gates almost certainly knows how to live your life better than you have lived it. He has saved millions of lives. You have killed some ducks. You or Gates? No brainer.

Reaction to Charleston, S.Carolina Shooting June 2015

This is the fundamental thing that the rest of the civilized world does not understand about the US

Every other rational society thinks "maybe it would be a good idea to restrict access to guns"

and they put that thought into action

America listens to the wingnuts who go "no the answer is, MORE GUNS"

and that opinion is what gets legislated

and only one society has this same, repeated, insane scenario

and lacks the will to stand up to the gun nuts

What this idiot and his ilk can't grasp is that most of us would prefer to die rather than live in pants-shiatting fear every second of our lives, re-imagining scenarios where lazy urbanites burst into our homes and our women's eyes bulge at the size of their penises, and they can only be stopped by standing our ground, again and again, oh yeah, take that, yes yes, that's it, blam blam, give me an hour and I'll be ready to stand my ground again.

Back in the old days people walked around armed because they needed to. Law enforcement was almost non-existent, dangerous animal and people abounded. Then in the 1880's the frontier was closed and tamed, the rule of law was extended throughout the country, and people put away their guns. For 120 years no one wore a gun on his hip unless he was in the army or the police force. There was no need to.

All of a sudden people are again in fear of their lives. Has the violent crime rate increased? No, it's gone down. Is your property more in danger of being stolen today than it was ten or twenty years ago? Quite the contrary, property crimes have declined precipitously as well. There is simply no reason to arm yourself anymore, nor has there been a reason for more than a hundred years. The decision to stick a gun in your pocket before you go out to buy a loaf of bread "just in case" you find yourself in a dangerous predicament is analogous to putting on a helmet and fire retardant suit every time you get into the car "just in case" you find yourself in a fiery crash. The possibility exists, but is so remote you're wasting your time and money. More seriously, by wearing a helmet in the car you are impairing your vision and making an accident more likely, just as carrying a gun for no reason makes a gun accident more likely. What an insult to the cops, too! "I don't trust you to do your job and protect me, so I'm arming myself to avoid the repercussions of your incompetence." What's worse, the abundance of kooks/morons with guns means that sane/intelligent people need to arm themselves to protect themselves from crazy gun owners. I'm considering it, and I hate guns.

Let's be strict constructionists of the Constitution. The Second Amendment states, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Therefore, all gun owners should be drafted into a local militia. One weekend a month should do the trick; that highway trash isn't going to pick itself up. Let's regulate the snot out of those militias too. It's what the Constitution calls for, after all.

Additionally, we all know now that guns don't kill people, people with mental illnesses kill people. Therefore, all gun owners should be subject to biannual psychiatric screenings, failure to show evidence of mental health to result in immediate revocation of all gun licenses. Can't have the crazies running around with guns, can we?

Another thing to consider. If these republican idiots follow their logic to its conclusion and everybody is armed to the teeth with guns containing multiple rounds, does this mean that every time a person goes to church, eats a subway sandwich or gets pizza carry out for their kids, they potentially have to face a Wild West shoot out just by appearing in public? Why is that a society that ANYONE wants to live in?

So his point, I'm guessing, is that if you want to feel safe in a church, take a gun. Letsee, I've got my tie on, money for the collection, my bible and my gun. Yep, I can go to church" Going to church to worship the "Prince Of Peace" should now entail bringing a weapon and then blaming them for not doing so.

Switzerland

Every other rational society thinks "maybe it would be a good idea to restrict access to guns" Really? Switzerland seems to be doing just fine with an assault rifle in almost every household.

(sigh) Let's go over this again. Switzerland has gun laws not unlike those here in Norway, and like Norway, a pretty high level of gun ownership. BUT, and it's a big but, there are licensing laws, rules about storing ammunition away from guns, and you have to apply for a gun license with a reason for owning a gun, and SELF DEFENSE IS NOT AN ALLOWABLE REASON unless you are a professional bodyguard or something.

You cannot carry a loaded firearm in Switzerland legally, unless you have a carrying permit, which is only issued for people who work in security or such. Much as it is here. People may have their military-issued assault rifle at home, but they HAVE NO AMMUNITION FOR IT.

You do see people carrying their assault rifles on their way to do their military service, but the are unloaded. BY LAW.

I end up posting some variant of this in every gun thread I bother to. There are countries with guns that manage to have low levels of both gun violence and accidental gun deaths. I live in one of them. But there are strict laws on the licensing and storage of firearms, you are not allowed to carry them around loaded, and self defense is not an accepted reason for owning a firearm.

And it makes for a pretty safe country, without all the guns being "grabbed".

Switzerland is a civilized country, and they don't let every random Joe Liebfraumilch have a gun in his house. In 2005 there were guns in 29% of Swiss homes, as opposed to 43% in America.

You are aware that *restriction* does not mean complete and total removal, or banning right?

That's the real problem people hear "restriction" and immediately slide their way down to "TOTAL AND COMPLETE BANNATION!!!!!"

And Switzerland does have restrictions and gun control laws -- note that this is again different than "BANNATION!"

Norwegians own a lot of guns, too. But you need a license, you can't carry them around, and you can't buy them for self defense. And you can't store them loaded, and you have to keep them locked up. And by and large, it works. But certainly, yes, the problem is not enough guns. In church. I'm going on 3 years abroad in this stint, and the longer I am out of the US, the crazier it starts to look.

**************************************

F*ck it.

Just get the Congress to take a few bucks from the defense budget, and give EVERYONE in the country a gun. Just arm everyone. Set up distribution centers around the Post Office, and send EVERY SINGLE LIVING PERSON IN THE NATION A GUN. Everyone. Everyone gets a Colt--because Lord knows they need the money right now--and three boxes of ammo, and you're still looking a drop in the damn bucket to the billions we pour into defense. Just arm the entire populace. And then tell the cops to go home. Just let them take a few days off. Go relax. Have a cold one down by the river with their buddies. Let the nation have a weekend, with all the free guns and ammo they could ever want, and let's put this grand thought experiment to work. Just arm everyone, and let the nation go hawg wild to see how this "Good Guy with a Gun" sh*t really works.

Real estate is going to be a buyer's market again in the wake of this. Home repair and the medical community will be doing business like crazy. The survivors can then decide how wise it is go poppin' wise in public, and we can finally get some real talk about the causes of violence in this country. Assuming that the pundit class survives the Knight of the Warm Barrels. And if they don't, that's a service to the nation anyway.

Come on, you f*ckers. Just do it already.

If you think the lesson to be learned from all of this is that preachers and choir directors need to pack heat, you are a worthless stain on humanity.

Churches are sanctuaries. Where people have gone for centuries for safety and shelter from a cruel and harsh world. The idea that a minister should profess faith in God, but show that he has no faith in his congregation is something to be ashamed of.

Look at 2 of the victims. They were 87 years old. 87. That means they spent 35 years of their lives in the shadow of Jim Crow. 35 years when the sight of a Confederate flag was not a history lesson, but a warning. To them, it said things like "you may not want to stop in this town," "if you do stop, keep your head down and keep your mouth shut," and "don't let the sun set on your black ass here."

The racial hatred that flag represents, that this guy is so passionately trying to defend, helped give Dylann Roof an identity that would eventually take him through the doors of that church. How about we attack that instead of handing out rifles at mass?

Those 87 year olds avoided the threat of racist violence for about as long as anyone could on this Earth. They deserved better than to have some twerp who bought into the Jim Crow myths attack them in the one place everyone should feel safe.

**************************************

You're saying the US isn't a civilized country? What are we third world country finally? I'm proving that high gun ownership rates don't correlate at all with high incidents of gun violence.

Define "civilized."
Would a civilized country legislate the homeless away?
Would a civilized country fight to separate entire classes of people and try to take away their rights?
Would a civilized country cripple education?
Would a civilized country incarcerate you for possessing a plant, but a man can pursue a "suspicious character" against the expressed command of the police, engage him, shoot him in "self-defense," kill him and then go free?
Would a civilized country just accept that the police can execute you for re-selling cigarettes?
Would a civilized country witness the death of 19 6-year olds in school and do absolutely nothing?

What people completely forget is, the "Wild West" was not a shoot out waiting to happen at any moment. Almost every town, Tombstone being an excellent example, had an ordinance against wearing guns in town. Because it was the civil thing to do.

The US isn't a developed or civilized country. We're just as barbaric as the Taliban -we just like to institutionalize and sugar-coat our cruelty.

The US has a gun death rate, per capita, that is 5x Canada and 40x the UK. The NRA fights every day to make sure this stays the case, and 10,000+ people die every year as a result of our lack of sensible gun restrictions. It is safe to say that the NRA is the most dangerous terrorist organization in the US. Guns killed 3.5x the entire death toll of 9/11 just in 2013, and they'll do it every year until we change something. If you support the NRA's quest to kill tens of thousands of people, you are a terrible American, and I hate you.

Dude, he literally walked into the first African Methodist Evangelical church built in the south, announced to the people assembled "I want to shoot black people," and then proceeded to shoot and kill a bunch of black people. If you don't think the primary issue here was the shooter's racism, you're farking nuts.

As for mental health, it turns out that mental illness is only weakly predictive of propensity to "go off" and instigate a mass shooting. The most predictive factors are access to firearms (surprise surprise), having a history of arrests for violent acts, and substance abuse. Improving mental health in this country would be great, but it's not going to stop mass shootings.

Dude, I love me my firearms. However I also understand they need to be *controlled* and restricted. Heck even the Army knows this, which is why firearms on base are so controlled and restricted. Again it is not "don't have them" it is "lets make sure they are own, and controlled responsibly and punish those that do not do so."

Is Britain more violent than US?

Please read the article. It says that a closer examinable of the data shows a rate of about 775 violent crimes per 100,000 people in the UK versus about 383 violent crimes per 100,000 people in the US for comparable crime.

The claim of 2000 versus 466 is false, but the argument that the UK has a lower violent crime rate than the US is also false. The UK's rate is not 5 times that of the US, but rather about twice.

The statistics are not comparable.

The FBI's Uniform Crime Reports defines a "violent crime" as one of four specific offenses: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. The British Home Office, by contrast, has a substantially different definition of violent crime. The British definition includes all "crimes against the person," including simple assaults, all robberies, and all "sexual offenses," as opposed to the FBI, which only counts aggravated assaults and "forcible rapes."

However, before we put too much credibility on these calculations, we should note that criminologists say there is actually no good way to compare violent crime rates in these two countries.

Our rough effort to equalize the definitions improved the quality of the comparison, but what we did is not enough to fix the comparison entirely, said James Alan Fox, a criminologist at Northeastern University. "Once you get away from clearly defined terms like homicides, all kinds of problems come in," Fox said. "You have to take comparisons not just with a grain of salt but with the entire shaker."

For instance, the vast majority of violent crimes are aggravated assaults, and this is a category that isn't as well defined as homicides, rapes and robberies. Many aggravated assaults don't result in an injury, Fox said, and even police in the same country don't always use the same standard in counting this particular crime.

Another problem is that aggravated assaults, rapes and robberies are victim-reported crimes, so whether the crime gets reported varies widely, depending on such factors as the victim's trust in the police. This difference shows up in comparisons of FBI crime data, which consists of crimes reported to police, and the far higher rates of crime victimization found in a survey of Americans by the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics. The survey counts all crimes that respondents say they have experienced, not just those they reported to police.

The International Crime Victims Survey, conducted by an arm of the United Nations most recently in 2005, shows the difference between reported crime and all crimes committed by conducting polls that ask people if they've been victims of specific crimes. Polling data showed that England and Wales had 2,600 cases of robbery per 100,000 population and 8,100 cases of "assaults and threats" per 100,000. While those figures are even higher than the meme suggested, the U.S levels are also much higher -- 1,100 cases of robbery and 8,300 cases of assaults and threats per 100,000. And the rate of sexual assault is actually about 50 percent higher in the United States than it is in England and Wales. So this data set doesn't support the thrust of the meme, either.

You do realise that under UK crime statistics, throwing a biscuit at someone counts as actual bodily harm and would therefore be counted as a violent crime? That could quite possibly be the most British thing I have ever heard. **************************************

Here is what I don't get, US types. Your police are armed to the teeth so you can't tell the difference between military and cop. Surely that amount of artillery would have sharply reduced crime? And it is pretty obvious from statistics* that this has not occurred; funnily enough, even though statistics are only compiled by amateurs due to a lack of official tracking** in many cases, there is a sharp rise becoming increasingly apparent in civilian deaths, and deaths in general - and all too often, it is sharply black and white divides:(

So, as all that is bleeding obvious to a middle aged crippled geek in the bottom end of Australia, (next stop, Antarctica!), how the hell is it being missed so much there. So much so, that it is now the almost Pyhtonesque level of absurdity: well, more guns haven't made us safer, in fact, it has been the opposite. Say, I know what we need - MOAR GUNS. You have a situation of arms race within your own country, when you use arms races AGAINST other countries.

Anyone can explain it logically, I would be more than grateful. Because this situation just makes NO DAMN SENSE.

Okay, let's take this to its logical conclusion. Do you really want every single person, including the pastor, to have to strap on an AR-15 and hundreds of rounds of ammunition just to walk down the street to church and feel safe? Really? That mental image doesn't just make you laugh?

What an incredibly F'd up country we would have if everyone needed military grade weaponry hanging from their shoulders at all times as they go to church, the store, their jobs... wherever. We'd be friggin' Somalia. There is nothing "free" about such a society. It would be a complete nightmare.


More to your point, the US's murder rate is only modestly higher than that of much of Europe, and is in the lower half of all countries. We have 5 or 6 murders per 100,000 population versus about half that for most EU countries. Can we improve? Of course. Are we a blood-thirsty, wild-west third-world slaughterhouse? Hardly.

That graph doesn't have us "modestly" higher than much of Europe. It places us more or less at the boundary between the 1st and 3rd world.

Racist Media

Here we have a person who immediately stated that the reason why he murdered 9 people was for no reason other than their race, and that he murdered them with the explicit goal of starting a race war between blacks and whites. Yet, even in the face of the most explicit evidence you can get indicating his motives, you have mouth breathing farkers desperately trying to blame this on anything except racism and guns.

It's because the kid took the things right-wing pundits say on a daily basis, and took them to their logical conclusion. They can't backpedal on those ideas because they lose their audience, but they can't fully own up to them because they also know they're stoking the fear and anger that leads to exactly this kind of thing. So, what do they do? They try to make it about anything other than race.

Is the kid crazy? Abso-farking-lutely. That still does not negate the issue of racism in this shooting. Maybe if he hadn't been racist, he would have found some other reason to go out and kill some people. But, the truth of the matter is that you can watch FOX News for a few hours and hear very similar things that kid was thinking; dialed back a notch or two, but it's essentially the same shiat.

The conservative collective is incapable of self-awareness, let alone remorse. They have way too many channels in which they propagate racist dog whistles, acting as sort of a gateway for more extreme ideas, and it's becoming a damn big problem. This isn't the first racially-motivated shooting we've had recently. Remember a few years ago, that stupid farker that shot a bunch of Sikhs at a temple because he thought they were Muslims? Or those two white supremacist nutbars that shot those cops execution-style in Las Vegas? shiat's getting out of control.

This brand of hate is as American as the Ku Klux Klan — as red, white and blue as the Confederate battle flag. It’s white supremacist hate, and this is far from the first time it’s erupted into violence in this country. This is the hate that’s been winked at and surreptitiously fed by right wing politicians for many, many years, people who depend on the “Southern Strategy” of slyly encouraging the racists in the Republican base to win their votes. And it’s kept alive by right wing media like Fox News, who frequently allow extremist loons to spout ugly propaganda and racist incitement to their audience of millions of like-minded bubbas.

Blaming this on “Mideast hate” is so moronically ignorant and bigoted it could only have come from a Republican politician, pandering to the right wing base that never gets tired of this nasty rhetoric.

"What does the world think of gun-loving Americans?"

Name a country that gives a crap what other countries think of them and their laws. I'll wait.

Actually, we know you don't. From an outsiders view who speaks your language but doesn't think the same way you people do. I think it's only a matter of time before your country implodes like a dying star.

Americans love to hate. You hate foreigners. You hate Liberals. You hate freedom unless it confirms and enslaves certain groups and ideas, though you say you don't.

You love guns, death, violence, religion and pornography.

Your country is as messed up and convoluted as those failed states in the middle east. Your far right wingers are destroying your democracy, your religious zealots are programming a generation to hate gays, jews, blacks, hispanics, and liberals. You're continuously on the brink of boom and bust and the gap between the have and have nots is eating away at the heart of your country. Your rich are destroying any sort of credibility you ever had, and your politicians are as easily bought and sold as any other tin pot countries around the world. It's actually kind of funny when you think about it.

Your media is culpable in the destruction of your culture, and your revisionist education system is a failure.

I think in the next 100 years, you entire country is going to come undone and I'm certain it'll break up into smaller countries. I think Canada will absorb some of your states, and some of them might dissolve into a prolonged civil war.

In short. I don't envy Americans in any way, shape or form.

**********************************************

I'd also point out, that just because you think something, that doesn't make it true. Over 80% of the American people think gun crimes, including homicides, have either stayed the same or gotten worse in the last 20 years, when in fact they've gone down. By a huge amount.

So therefore, because millions of people have a preconceived notion about something, there's absolutely nothing wrong & things don't need to change? I don't see what your point is. Just because a group of people are misinformed about a statistic doesn't change the overall reality of a specific situation.

The real statistic is homegrown terrorists gunning down children and people in church in mass spree shootings. That's the thing weighing heavily on our soul. I refuse to believe that the best we can do is shrug and wait for the next elementary school to be shot up. I don't think it is out of the question that I have to wear body armor to church.

This shiat is disgusting and seems to be only be happening here and is happening with greater frequency. That's why we look like gun nuts.

The situation that you paint is one that villifies something that's only a surface symptom of a problem, and does not accurately reflect what's actually going on in this country.

Things *do* need to change, since the gun violence problem we have in this country is, by leaps and bounds, a symptom of poverty and poor conditions in roughly 10-15 of the country's biggest cities.

I mean, it's really telling that when you take those cities out of the equation, the number of murders and gun crimes drops by roughly 85-90%. It's also really telling that when you overlay the same maps with education rates, income, poverty rates, and incarceration rates, the same areas that have the worst gun crime also have the highest rates of incarceration for minor crimes, the lowest incomes, the lowest education statistics, the lowest employment statistics.

So, shut the fark up about "gun culture" already and get your head out of your ass. It's tiresome that a hundred million people can own and use guns responsibly, and because of the shiat caused by people left to die in squalor and inattention from decades of racist and classist policies, fear, and neglect, we have to get shiat on every time you want to talk about cultural issues.

Yeah, we got a problem in this country, but it ain't all about the guns, sweetheart.

So? We still have rates of gun violence that are pretty much nonexistent anywhere else in the rest of the developed world.

The entire world has become more peaceful over the last century due to environmental factors and the rise of evidence-based law enforcement. But gun crime in the US has decreased at a demonstrably slower rate than other forms of violent crime, and has actually increased as a percentage of overall violent crime. Guns hold a near-monopoly in violent crime resulting in fatalities.

The idea that the US doesn't have a problem with gun violence is indefensible, and not supported by any science or statistics. And, for what it's worth, my takeaway from years of fark gun threads is that our problem really lies in the "culture" part of our "gun culture".

It's OK to show people get horrifically murdered on prime time network television but God forbid a nipple gets shown. Your whole culture is built on violence. And yes TV is about the extent of American culture.

I can recall the story a friend of mine told when she visited England in the late 90s. She was in a taxi and struck up a conversation with the driver.

Her: "So, have you ever been to the United States?"
Driver: "Nope, and I will never go there."
Her: "Why not?"
Driver: "I don't want to get shot!"

That cab driver is stupid. They start the new guys on training runs that only involve getting stabbed at first.

Nothing will ever be done. So long as the actual 'gun nuts' and groups like the NRA do everything they can to make sure that nothing impedes the ability of Americans to purchase as many guns and ammo as they can afford, the mass shootings will continue and nothing will be done to stop them. other than calls for even more guns to be sold or given to just about anyone possible.

I'm one that believes that there needs to be an Amendment to the 2nd Amendment that would spell out plainly who can and who cannot own a weapon. I cannot believe that those who wrote the Constitution would have made it so a single Amendment would have been seen as being unbounded and absolute. Even the 1st amendment is not without boundaries!

You make it sound like there are absolutely no restrictions at all, which is absolute bullshiat.

And you make it sound like you can't own guns, which is also absolute bullshiat. There's plenty of crap that could be eliminated or made to work better, but that will never happen if the gun nuts keep acting like their rights are hanging by a thread even after we do nothing to change them after multiple mass shootings.

***********************************

(What would you change?)

I'm perfectly fine with changes that make background checks required for sales (but only in cases where there are no arbitrary fees or burdens placed on the individual wishing to exercise his rights over his properties, such as arbitrarily requiring the process be governed by organizations or individuals without reciprocal requirements that they process the requisite background checks, etc...sort of like saying they have to vote only in government-licensed voting facilities, but turning around and saying that such facilities have no obligation to set up and hold polls or allow people coming there to vote do so).

I'm fine with mandatory safety training.

I'm fine with electronic storage of records to ensure that if guns are reported stolen they are easier to track down.

I'm fine with requiring stolen guns to be reported, and holding people failing to report guns liable for crimes.

I'm fine with tracking multiple purchases and cross-checking against lists of guns used in crimes to identify people with a higher number of guns purchased that ended up used in crimes.

I'm fine with oversight on gun sales and more scrutiny on sellers.

I think at this point, accountability is probably the best way forward. Let's empty our prisons of nonviolent drug offenders, and refill them with the so-called "responsible gun owners" whose guns have caused deaths. We need to codify into law the fact that where guns are involved, there is no such thing as an accident, only differing degrees of negligence.

I used to read Robert Heinlein books as a youngling. And one of his alternate timelines had the US entering what he called 'The Crazy Years', characterised by religious extremism, and every man for himself - and most of all, a strange, society wide malaise, almost psychosis.

This was the alternate timeline. WTF US of A? It is fiction. So is Idiocracy. And I just don't get why it is so hard.

We had to deal with it in Australia. We had the argument. We got rid of stockpiled honest but ridiculously high powered weapons. It was hard an there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth. But we did it. Sure, crooks get guns. And we have had one terrorist related shooting. And our current PM is trying to see if he can ramp up our right wing paranoia so he can stay in power.

But the guns debate is long over, and the world didn't end.

Okay, we don't have your Proclamations and Bills and things. The right to bear arms was not enshrined. We don't have thathistory or rebellion. Or Civil War. Mind you, you at least try to acknowledge (sort of) your indigenous people. Way ahead of us on that. And you have some potential leaders. More than we have atm. Got me on that, too.

But what the hell guys? Seriously, what the hell? I just don't get the gun thing.













BACK TO Home Page 50 TOPICS