Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Off-Topic > Off-Topic > International affairs/politics
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1201  
Old 15.12.2015, 23:35
Phil_MCR's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Basel
Posts: 12,374
Groaned at 265 Times in 173 Posts
Thanked 14,695 Times in 6,223 Posts
Phil_MCR has a reputation beyond reputePhil_MCR has a reputation beyond reputePhil_MCR has a reputation beyond reputePhil_MCR has a reputation beyond reputePhil_MCR has a reputation beyond reputePhil_MCR has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )



EDIT: and while we are on west wing:


Last edited by Phil_MCR; 15.12.2015 at 23:56.
Reply With Quote
  #1202  
Old 15.12.2015, 23:52
Phil_MCR's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Basel
Posts: 12,374
Groaned at 265 Times in 173 Posts
Thanked 14,695 Times in 6,223 Posts
Phil_MCR has a reputation beyond reputePhil_MCR has a reputation beyond reputePhil_MCR has a reputation beyond reputePhil_MCR has a reputation beyond reputePhil_MCR has a reputation beyond reputePhil_MCR has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

1. you have the right to guns in the US
2. there is a political process in the US to make changes to the law and constitution to ban guns if there is sufficient political and popular will to do so.
3. even if you banned guns, the genie is already out of the bottle, you can't unring the bell to unbolt the correct horse battery staple (or something like that )
4. going and physically disarming the population will:
a. cost an imperial f^ck load of money
b. will mean many more deaths (since you will literally have to take them from their cold dead hands)
c. will be ineffective since people will hide the guns
d. will leave just the criminals and maniacs with the guns, who are the people you want to take them from anyway
5. i repeat, will cost a lot more money. and when you do the calculations, there will be ways to save many lives over spending the money on other stuff
6. i repeat, it is impossible to get rid of all the guns already there
7. referring to point #2, it is not what people the people want anyway

so i totally understand what phos says when he says that people are in a la-la-land on gun control.

the argument is simple: gun control = no more guns = no more gun deaths = all such deaths prevented

when you consider it for a moment, you realise both the first and last equality are not true.
__________________
By replying to this post, you hereby grant Phil_MCR a royalty-free license to use, in any way, anything posted by you on the internet. If you do not accept, stop using EF and delete your account.

Last edited by Phil_MCR; 16.12.2015 at 10:49.
Reply With Quote
The following 6 users would like to thank Phil_MCR for this useful post:
  #1203  
Old 16.12.2015, 00:18
MsWorWoo's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Zürich Nord
Posts: 1,633
Groaned at 48 Times in 28 Posts
Thanked 2,567 Times in 979 Posts
MsWorWoo has a reputation beyond reputeMsWorWoo has a reputation beyond reputeMsWorWoo has a reputation beyond reputeMsWorWoo has a reputation beyond reputeMsWorWoo has a reputation beyond reputeMsWorWoo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

Quote:
View Post
The topic is the 'States. I'm just telling the truth there is personal choice the US. And if that is bannable, and all the derogatory remarks about Americans and personal insults are admissible, it wouldn't be much of a forum anyway.
No, the topic is mass shootings, the fact that most of the ones that are discussed here occured in the States may be a clue as to why people think that the gun laws in the US are too lax (e.g. You can still buy guns if you are a terror watchlist), but, you know, carry on.
Reply With Quote
  #1204  
Old 16.12.2015, 09:42
NotAllThere's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Baselland
Posts: 9,856
Groaned at 149 Times in 131 Posts
Thanked 13,746 Times in 5,582 Posts
NotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond reputeNotAllThere has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

Quote:
View Post
The topic is the 'States. I'm just telling the truth there is personal choice the US. And if that is bannable, and all the derogatory remarks about Americans and personal insults are admissible, it wouldn't be much of a forum anyway.
No, the (very much hypothetical) grounds for banning would be the trolling - not the content. It's entirely possible to argue from a minority viewpoint without trolling - I do it all the time.

The indications of trolling to me are a) picking a subject that's highly emotive and picking a minority side, in conjunction with b) accusing others of trolling + c) drawing obviously wrong conclusions from other's posts (like saying it's about the content, when it clearly isn't). Absolutely classic signs. But do carry on - it whiles away the day. We could even make it a form of bingo.
__________________
Witty, pithy remark pending.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank NotAllThere for this useful post:
  #1205  
Old 16.12.2015, 09:59
kiwiguy08's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Horgen
Posts: 1,237
Groaned at 28 Times in 21 Posts
Thanked 852 Times in 420 Posts
kiwiguy08 has an excellent reputationkiwiguy08 has an excellent reputationkiwiguy08 has an excellent reputationkiwiguy08 has an excellent reputation
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

Quote:
View Post
Have a read through all of Phos' posts in this thread (yeah, I agree, it's really not worth the pain), and you'll find multiple instances of him telling those who disagree with them to shut up (I'm paraphrasing, but the effect is the same) and butt out as they have no knowledge of the U.S. (how he "knows" this is not clear) and are impotent to change the law there (his word, "law", not mine).

It's refreshing to see someone adopting an intelligent, debating stance in this discussion. Thank you. Ironic that it's a Kiwi (I'm assuming, I admit) coming to the aid of an American to inject substance into a debate on an American issue. Now, I challenge your assertions that "the majority of Americans reject a ban on assault weapons", and "an overwhelming majority reject the kind of laws that Australia and the UK/Europe have". Could you please provide evidence to back up those two claims?

You're correct that the position that many Americans take on gun ownership is incomprehensible to me. That's why we're having a debate. It usually requires two sides to have opposing views before a debate can form.

I'm reasonably sure that the authors of the amendments to the Constitution didn't foresee automatic assault weapons and the like, either. One can't expect them to have legislated on items that didn't exist in the late 1700s. Like electricity. Sure, the 10th Amendment goes some way to try to salvage that oversight, but it was already kneecapped by the 2nd before it could get going on the subject of gun ownership.

Finally, your statement "First you state there is a law that permits gun ownership. This is false, there is no stated law that permits people to own guns, its stated in the Bill of Rights in the constitution" is in fact false. Article VI of the Constitution states "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land". The Constitution is the supreme law of the United States and the Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments to the Constitution) is part of that Constitution.

But hey, I'm not American, so according to Phos I have no right to know anything about the U.S., nor to voice an opinion on anything to do with the U.S.
Nope, I'm not a kiwi. Just a big fan, who spent time living there, I'm actually American.

I think what angers some here and why they seem like they are shutting down debate is that people who are not from america are on here debating without having an understanding of how deeply this is ingrained in America's fiber. You can have dozens more mass shootings and it seems that each one seems to launch another wave of gun buying.

The poll I referenced was a New York Times poll that had 50 % of the people opposing a ban on assault rifles.

I don't get what you are saying in the last paragraph. I said the bill of rights is a part of the constitution and you basically refuted my argument by saying that it is a part of the constitution
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank kiwiguy08 for this useful post:
  #1206  
Old 16.12.2015, 10:11
olygirl's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: d' Innerschwiiz
Posts: 5,367
Groaned at 235 Times in 156 Posts
Thanked 11,778 Times in 3,585 Posts
olygirl has a reputation beyond reputeolygirl has a reputation beyond reputeolygirl has a reputation beyond reputeolygirl has a reputation beyond reputeolygirl has a reputation beyond reputeolygirl has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

America's mentality in a nutshell:

Be a hero. Support a hero.

Support your veterans every time you purchase a gun from Cabela's. A laser-engraved American flag magazine well shows you support our wounded veterans.

Taken from one of the gun descriptions found on: http://www.cabelas.com/catalog/browse.cmd?N=1114861



I love Cabela's. It's the best and worst of America in one store.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank olygirl for this useful post:
  #1207  
Old 16.12.2015, 10:45
22 yards's Avatar
Only in moderation
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Basel-Land
Posts: 7,310
Groaned at 210 Times in 168 Posts
Thanked 12,969 Times in 5,329 Posts
22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

Quote:
View Post
Nope, I'm not a kiwi. Just a big fan, who spent time living there, I'm actually American.
Nice place, New Zealand -- nice, safe place. I can see why you'd like it.

Quote:
View Post
I think what angers some here and why they seem like they are shutting down debate is that people who are not from america are on here debating without having an understanding of how deeply this is ingrained in America's fiber. You can have dozens more mass shootings and it seems that each one seems to launch another wave of gun buying.
I fully understand that guns are entrenched in American society and even deeper, in the American fibre, as you eloquently put it. The same went for Australia until the curbs on gun ownership. But that's not the point, which is:

1. Nobody is trying to enact change in the U.S. through writing a few posts on EF. We're not deluded. We don't believe a chat forum on the internet will effect change.

2. We're engaged in a debate, a discussion, about the relative merits of gun control vs free access to guns. We haven't talked about how to implement this. I'm sure that's a bigger question than most of us can answer.

3. Phos' only line of defence is "you can't change it, it's the law!" Just reflect on that for a few moments and you'll realize how ridiculous that stance is. In fact, that stance nullifies the amendments to the U.S. Constitution, which changed the existing law.

4. Phil_MCR provides another slant: it's too late and/or too difficult to take all the guns away. He is probably correct, in which case one should be open in this debate to looking at alternative strategies, such as eliminating the acquisition of yet more guns (over time, the population of guns would decrease), restricting access to ammunition, even challenging the definition of "arms" in the 2nd amendment -- who said that "arms" has to include all types of weapons? I doubt a citizen would be allowed to wander around with an RPG launcher on his shoulder. If the guns mess can't be cleaned up in one fell swoop, as it was in Australia, then take a long-term approach.

5. Phos wants all non-U.S. citizens to shut up as they (in his mind) have no "intimate" knowledge of the country, yet he feels perfectly comfortable providing his opinions on the gun control situation in Australia. That's hypocritical and clear trolling, designed to inflame others, and detracts substantially from the debate.

6. Let me repeat, no-one here thinks they are going to change anything in the U.S. with discussion on EF. It's amusing that he gets so worked up about defending the right provided by the 2nd amendment (a very poorly-worded amendment, at that, which leaves itself open to interpretation, especially since it is not even clear which of two variants (differing in comma placement) is the intended final version), yet is happy to trample on the right of people here to express an opinion and engage in discussion.

7. Once again, the debate is about whether gun control could reduce deaths in the U.S. Phos may believe it's fantastic (in the literal sense) to discuss an option that he believes could never be implemented, but he has no right to try to suppress the debate. Furthermore, as an Australian (and it's the same for NZ), I don't give up because something looks difficult. As I said before, same-sex marriage looked impossible in the 1950s. Travel to the moon was science fiction in the 1920s. Independently-powered land transportation was a dream in the 1850s. Communication through wireless, hand-held devices from and to anywhere in the world was impossible in the 1970s. If the proponents of all those projects had thrown up their hands and cried "it can't be done! We must stick with the status quo!", then we would indeed all be living like the Amish.

Quote:
View Post
The poll I referenced was a New York Times poll that had 50 % of the people opposing a ban on assault rifles.
I thought you might say that.

I think we all know about polls and getting them to say what you want them to say.

Quote:
View Post
I don't get what you are saying in the last paragraph. I said the bill of rights is a part of the constitution and you basically refuted my argument by saying that it is a part of the constitution
You said: "there is no stated law that permits people to own guns". As we've heard thousands of times, the right to "bear arms" (which has been interpreted by the judiciary to include owning guns) is enshrined in the Constitution, which is defined (by itself) as "the supreme law of the land". So yes, there is a stated law that permits people to own guns in the United States.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank 22 yards for this useful post:
  #1208  
Old 16.12.2015, 11:46
3Wishes's Avatar
Moderately Amused
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Bern area
Posts: 7,569
Groaned at 51 Times in 47 Posts
Thanked 11,474 Times in 5,386 Posts
3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute3Wishes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

Quote:
View Post
...You're correct that the position that many Americans take on gun ownership is incomprehensible to me. That's why we're having a debate. It usually requires two sides to have opposing views before a debate can form...
This is the crux of the matter, I think. Any time there is a mass shooting, the standard line from the right is "If the victims only had guns this would not have happened!" The standard line from the left is "More gun control!"

There doesn't seem to be a reasonable voice for the middle ground. I know my own views are conflicted just because of how and where I was raised. I don't see why anyone needs semi- or fully-automated weapons. At the same time, I am not sure banning them does any good. In some of the more recent shootings, the weapons were obtained legally. Had there been a law preventing the sale of semis or fulls, would that have stopped the shooters from obtaining them? I'd like to think it would at least slow them down and maybe minimize the harm. In the Wild West the most one could do was empty a few six-shooters, and even then it was a good idea to have a gang (bad guys) or posse (good guys) to cover each other while you reloaded.

Some people like to shoot (not at people) just for fun. I grew up with trap and skeet shooting. Many people I know hunt, but they use rifles and they hunt for the meat not just the "thrill of the kill" or whatever. I think the ones opposed to gun legislation feel it's a slippery slope. If they ban this, then they will ban that next and soon the 2nd Amendment won't mean anything. Or something like that.
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank 3Wishes for this useful post:
  #1209  
Old 16.12.2015, 11:57
Phos's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: ZRH
Posts: 7,398
Groaned at 544 Times in 418 Posts
Thanked 10,130 Times in 5,411 Posts
Phos has a reputation beyond reputePhos has a reputation beyond reputePhos has a reputation beyond reputePhos has a reputation beyond reputePhos has a reputation beyond reputePhos has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

Quote:
View Post
3. Phos' only line of defence is "you can't change it, it's the law!" Just reflect on that for a few moments and you'll realize how ridiculous that stance is. In fact, that stance nullifies the amendments to the U.S. Constitution, which changed the existing law.
...
5. Phos wants all non-U.S. citizens to shut up as they (in his mind) have no "intimate" knowledge of the country, yet he feels perfectly comfortable providing his opinions on the gun control situation in Australia. That's hypocritical and clear trolling, designed to inflame others, and detracts substantially from the debate.

You could discuss, and I don't have a problem with it. What I am saying is that your points have no grounding in reality. You're imagining a solution to an imaginary scenario that doesn't exist in reality. You are ignorant about America laws, Americans and culture. And you exhibit some dogmatism in it. I think it may be fit for pre-school kids. Perhaps I was trying to elevate your discussion a little towards adulthood. Perhaps that was too ambitious.

Last edited by Phos; 16.12.2015 at 12:08.
Reply With Quote
This user groans at Phos for this post:
  #1210  
Old 16.12.2015, 12:46
kiwiguy08's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Horgen
Posts: 1,237
Groaned at 28 Times in 21 Posts
Thanked 852 Times in 420 Posts
kiwiguy08 has an excellent reputationkiwiguy08 has an excellent reputationkiwiguy08 has an excellent reputationkiwiguy08 has an excellent reputation
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

Quote:
Nice place, New Zealand -- nice, safe place. I can see why you'd like it.
Yes, surviving not one but two earthquakes really made me glad they didn't have guns there.

Quote:
I fully understand that guns are entrenched in American society and even deeper, in the American fibre, as you eloquently put it. The same went for Australia until the curbs on gun ownership.
Sorry if this sounds cold, but if one massacre unwound the "fiber" in Australia then I am not sure it was that deep to begin with. Just the opposite happens in the USA, every massacre causes a run on guns and a firmer call to maintain the rights.





Quote:
I thought you might say that.

I think we all know about polls and getting them to say what you want them to say.
This washington post article (the WP is notoriously centrist) references a pew poll. I am referring to the new york times

Yes, the NYT is biased.....they are for banning assault weapons. Just five days before running this poll they ran a front page editorial (for the first time since 1920) that called for a ban on these weapons. I am sure they skewed their questions to be pro gun

Quote:
You said: "there is no stated law that permits people to own guns". As we've heard thousands of times, the right to "bear arms" (which has been interpreted by the judiciary to include owning guns) is enshrined in the Constitution, which is defined (by itself) as "the supreme law of the land". So yes, there is a stated law that permits people to own guns in the United States.
Now you are just playing semantics, you know full well what I meant
Reply With Quote
  #1211  
Old 16.12.2015, 13:02
kiwiguy08's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Horgen
Posts: 1,237
Groaned at 28 Times in 21 Posts
Thanked 852 Times in 420 Posts
kiwiguy08 has an excellent reputationkiwiguy08 has an excellent reputationkiwiguy08 has an excellent reputationkiwiguy08 has an excellent reputation
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

Quote:
View Post

Some people like to shoot (not at people) just for fun. I grew up with trap and skeet shooting. Many people I know hunt, but they use rifles and they hunt for the meat not just the "thrill of the kill" or whatever. I think the ones opposed to gun legislation feel it's a slippery slope. If they ban this, then they will ban that next and soon the 2nd Amendment won't mean anything. Or something like that.
The slippery slope argument is one that I personally find the most compelling. There are some changes that I personally wouldn't be opposed to.

1) a national database of firearm purchases that would be periodically cleared. (maybe every 5 years) This would allow monitoring of possible dangerous or mentally sick people without penalizing responsible long term owners. However, people don't trust the government to do this with the realistic belief that if you offer an inch they will take a meter.

2) mandated de-sensationalizing by media. In my opinion, showing the shooters face, his name, and reading his ramblings is not newsworthy. It also encourages people who want their 15 minutes to act out with the knowledge that they will be infamous. I like the approach in switzerland and germany (and likely elsewhere in europe) where media uses a persons first name and last name initial. Also their face is blurred out in all photos of them.

What really sickened me in this latest shooting is the police allowing the media to basically ransack the shooters house, film live in an active crime scene, show the babys crib and so on. If you have no hope in life, are sick in the head and you see how these people have their face plastered everywhere then its logical to think why not me.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank kiwiguy08 for this useful post:
  #1212  
Old 16.12.2015, 13:04
22 yards's Avatar
Only in moderation
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Basel-Land
Posts: 7,310
Groaned at 210 Times in 168 Posts
Thanked 12,969 Times in 5,329 Posts
22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

Quote:
View Post
You could discuss, and I don't have a problem with it. What I am saying is that your points have no grounding in reality. You're imagining a solution to an imaginary scenario that doesn't exist in reality. You are ignorant about America laws, Americans and culture. And you exhibit some dogmatism in it. I think it may be fit for pre-school kids. Perhaps I was trying to elevate your discussion a little towards adulthood. Perhaps that was too ambitious.
I have a little secret to share with you:

Quote:
View Post
Some would say that highlighted statement above was the hallmark of a condescending prick -- of course, I wouldn't use that language, even if I agreed with the sentiment...
... actually, I would use that language. You're a condescending prick, and an ignorant one, too, as you know absolutely nothing of my knowledge of the United States.

Really, if the best you can do is repeatedly post pictures with the caption "Windmill! Charge!", or repeat unfounded personal insults, then all you'll get back is the same. Why not read what people post in this debate and try very hard to formulate some original thought in response? And finally, rethink your (tautological) sentence "You're imagining a solution to an imaginary scenario that doesn't exist in reality". Does that make any sense at all? (Hint: no.) What's the imaginary scenario you're referring to? The one that I mentioned, where tens of thousands of Americans die of gunshot wounds every year? I wonder why you can't see that as a "scenario that exists in reality".

I know you like pictures. Here, this might help you understand:
Attached Thumbnails
shooting-just-happened-fill-blank-head-up-ass.png  
Reply With Quote
  #1213  
Old 16.12.2015, 13:17
22 yards's Avatar
Only in moderation
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Basel-Land
Posts: 7,310
Groaned at 210 Times in 168 Posts
Thanked 12,969 Times in 5,329 Posts
22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

Quote:
View Post
Sorry if this sounds cold, but if one massacre unwound the "fiber" in Australia then I am not sure it was that deep to begin with. Just the opposite happens in the USA, every massacre causes a run on guns and a firmer call to maintain the rights.
Is this where I'm supposed to answer "You are ignorant about Australian laws, Australians and culture. And you exhibit some dogmatism in it. I think it may be fit for pre-school kids... etc"? (I won't. You and I are much smarter than that.)

Quote:
View Post
This washington post article (the WP is notoriously centrist) references a pew poll. I am referring to the new york times
Yes, I know. The WP article is not intended to be a rebuttal of the NYT poll; it's illustrative of how polls don't necessarily reflect public opinion.

Quote:
View Post
Now you are just playing semantics, you know full well what I meant
Not at all, and no, I didn't. You said: "First you state there is a law that permits gun ownership. This is false, there is no stated law that permits people to own guns". I pointed out that my statement was not false. We agree that the Constitution allows people to own guns, but you said that there was no law permitting this, and I said there was. It turns out I was right, as the Constitution is the law. Nothing semantic in that.
Reply With Quote
  #1214  
Old 16.12.2015, 13:32
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Ostschweiz
Posts: 5,145
Groaned at 160 Times in 135 Posts
Thanked 6,564 Times in 3,369 Posts
Urs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

Quote:
View Post
The poll I referenced was a New York Times poll that had 50 % of the people opposing a ban on assault rifles.
gun control =/= ban on assault rifle (let alone on guns in general)
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank Urs Max for this useful post:
  #1215  
Old 16.12.2015, 13:59
VFR on top's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Basel
Posts: 902
Groaned at 28 Times in 18 Posts
Thanked 1,944 Times in 731 Posts
VFR on top has a reputation beyond reputeVFR on top has a reputation beyond reputeVFR on top has a reputation beyond reputeVFR on top has a reputation beyond reputeVFR on top has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

Quote:
View Post
....but you said that there was no law permitting this, and I said there was. It turns out I was right, as the Constitution is the law. Nothing semantic in that.
OH SNAP!

You smoked dat foo!


My take on this thread (lately) is you always have to be right and @Phos wants to be loved.

And its not really about guns*. Rather, another passive aggressive way to take a swipe at the damn septics. Could of easily been named, "another dumb thing Americans do..."

But this is just my opinion thru limited observation. No statistical backing or polling data. I reserve the right to change it often and whimsically depending on my mood and coffee intake. and apologies if my English grammar blows.


* thread started in 2012 because apparently the prior thread debating US gun control just wasn't sensational or satisfying enough (too academic). go to the first page and see.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank VFR on top for this useful post:
  #1216  
Old 16.12.2015, 14:17
Phos's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: ZRH
Posts: 7,398
Groaned at 544 Times in 418 Posts
Thanked 10,130 Times in 5,411 Posts
Phos has a reputation beyond reputePhos has a reputation beyond reputePhos has a reputation beyond reputePhos has a reputation beyond reputePhos has a reputation beyond reputePhos has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

Quote:
View Post
OH SNAP!

You smoked dat foo!


My take on this thread (lately) is you always have to be right and @Phos wants to be loved.

And its not really about guns*. Rather, another passive aggressive way to take a swipe at the damn septics. Could of easily been named, "another dumb thing Americans do..."

But this is just my opinion thru limited observation. No statistical backing or polling data. I reserve the right to change it often and whimsically depending on my mood and coffee intake. and apologies if my English grammar blows.


* thread started in 2012 because apparently the prior thread debating US gun control just wasn't sensational or satisfying enough (too academic). go to the first page and see.


Perhaps the thread was intended to be a showcase of American violence, and an opportunity to ridicule perceived American cliches, their culture, religion and all. But I kinda crashed the party and am impervious to ridicule. Alright, shameless if you'd like. It was somewhere between a pity party and a lynch mob.

It turns out it isn't really about a rational discussion. Its a lament about man's inhumanity to man, or something like that.
Reply With Quote
  #1217  
Old 16.12.2015, 14:18
22 yards's Avatar
Only in moderation
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Basel-Land
Posts: 7,310
Groaned at 210 Times in 168 Posts
Thanked 12,969 Times in 5,329 Posts
22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

Quote:
View Post
OH SNAP!

You smoked dat foo!


My take on this thread (lately) is you always have to be right and @Phos wants to be loved.

And its not really about guns*. Rather, another passive aggressive way to take a swipe at the damn septics. Could of easily been named, "another dumb thing Americans do..."

But this is just my opinion thru limited observation. No statistical backing or polling data. I reserve the right to change it often and whimsically depending on my mood and coffee intake. and apologies if my English grammar blows.


* thread started in 2012 because apparently the prior thread debating US gun control just wasn't sensational or satisfying enough (too academic). go to the first page and see.
lol. Yeah, your sample (and take on the situation) is a bit limited.

I'll always defend my corner if I know (provably) that I'm right. I have an opinion on gun control -- it's just an opinion, there's no right or wrong. I think my stance is better than Phos', who believes the reverse. However, I can prove that I'm right about the legal status of the U.S. Constitution. that's just fact.

I have no desire simply to take a swipe at septics. It's unfortunate that most of the mass shootings reported in the international media occur in America, but that's why the debate has swung toward discussion of gun violence in the U.S. I think you'll find that it's Phos who reduced the discussion to the level of us vs them, singling out contributors to the discussion as Americans (who are qualified to comment) and The Rest, who are ignorant and may not contribute opinions under any circumstances.

I like Americans. I even have a friend who's American.
Reply With Quote
  #1218  
Old 16.12.2015, 14:19
aSwissInTheUS's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Zurich area
Posts: 7,772
Groaned at 64 Times in 58 Posts
Thanked 11,204 Times in 5,090 Posts
aSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond reputeaSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond reputeaSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond reputeaSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond reputeaSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond reputeaSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

Quote:
View Post
1) a national database of firearm purchases that would be periodically cleared. (maybe every 5 years) This would allow monitoring of possible dangerous or mentally sick people without penalizing responsible long term owners.
Considering how much paperwork is involved to buy a used car and register it so that you can use it on a public road? (Lukely not in Switerland)
Considering you now have to register certain drones?
Considering you have to do a written exam to get a amateur radio license or driving license but nothing to get a gun? (In Switzerland even to get a dog)
Considering you can cary a gun in public but not drink a beer in public? (Luckely it is the otherway round in Switzerland, as I really enjoy the later)
Considering that "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." should it also be "When only lawful may have guns, only crooks give outlaws guns"? (Or mostly stolen from people who not securly store their guns)
Considering the previous statement, aren't you interested to know who this crooks are and put them in jail? (Which means you need a long term gun registry)

Quote:
View Post
However, people don't trust the government to do this with the realistic belief that if you offer an inch they will take a meter.
Hmm right. O.K. forget it.

Quote:
View Post
2) mandated de-sensationalizing by media. In my opinion, showing the shooters face, his name, and reading his ramblings is not newsworthy. It also encourages people who want their 15 minutes to act out with the knowledge that they will be infamous. I like the approach in switzerland and germany (and likely elsewhere in europe) where media uses a persons first name and last name initial. Also their face is blurred out in all photos of them.
Not only that, U.S. public tv and other media shows much more violence then their eurpean conterparts. No problem with blasting away someones brain on prime time. On contrast an unintentional nip slip on public tv will lead to the harshest penalties.
__________________
PLAYER 1 ENTER YOUR NAME:_
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank aSwissInTheUS for this useful post:
  #1219  
Old 16.12.2015, 14:22
Phos's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: ZRH
Posts: 7,398
Groaned at 544 Times in 418 Posts
Thanked 10,130 Times in 5,411 Posts
Phos has a reputation beyond reputePhos has a reputation beyond reputePhos has a reputation beyond reputePhos has a reputation beyond reputePhos has a reputation beyond reputePhos has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

You're still getting it wrong. You keep talking about Phos and your perception of his opinion, but Phos is telling you facts, which is the reality of the situation and the laws. You're not up against Phos' opinion, your opinion is up against the reality of the situation. Phos is the straw man in your argument.
Reply With Quote
  #1220  
Old 16.12.2015, 14:33
aSwissInTheUS's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Zurich area
Posts: 7,772
Groaned at 64 Times in 58 Posts
Thanked 11,204 Times in 5,090 Posts
aSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond reputeaSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond reputeaSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond reputeaSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond reputeaSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond reputeaSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond repute
Re: A shooting just happened in ( *fill in the blank * )

Quote:
View Post
Perhaps the thread was intended to be a showcase of American violence, and an opportunity to ridicule perceived American cliches, their culture, religion and
A lot of this sub-discussion about U.S. gun control/death/culture what ever should have been split off a long time ago.

To come back on the original title of this thread:

Moscow, Russia, Monday. 8 injured two dead.
http://derstandard.at/2000027541266/...im-Zentrum-von

According to the article there was a minute long shootout between a Korean restaurant operator and his allies on one side and a construction company which did renovation works in said restaurant on the other side.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
florida, gay, isis, killed, muslim students, shooting, usa




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
My boss is a.......(fill in the gap) goombie General off-topic 35 28.01.2011 15:55
Recreational Shooting in the Geneva canton MAWLER Sports / Fitness / Beauty / Wellness 9 31.08.2010 17:04
What just happened please i could not access the forum Sutter Forum support 44 25.05.2009 20:03
Do I need to fill in Tax forms for the US? Roe Finance/banking/taxation 14 18.06.2008 19:17
What's just happened to the Swiss Franc? Tim Finance/banking/taxation 7 08.05.2007 17:24


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 06:34.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0