(10-08-2015, 04:57 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2015, 04:44 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]But get ignorant and start calling me names and I will say screw you, talk to yourself. Just something to keep in mind.
Did you not call everyone who supports the Australian model a pansy ass?
Good thing they're not too sensitive to continue talking to others, even in contentious debate, or else a lot of good discussion would be foregone.
Just something else to keep in mind.
Yes I did and yes you are right. But the Australians have jack squat to do with us.
(10-08-2015, 04:54 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]Its just population control. After all we have to make room for the wetbacks from the south and the rag heads from the east.
Maybe y'all should just start putting in some big ovens along the southern border and Ellis island with big 'Free Entry' signs on the ramp? Mightn't have to stockpile so much ammo then.
(10-08-2015, 04:59 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2015, 04:54 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]Its just population control. After all we have to make room for the wetbacks from the south and the rag heads from the east.
And you were just drawing your line in the sand in regards to ignorance and name-calling by others.
Knucklehead!
I guess the sarcasm didn't come through in that post.
(10-08-2015, 04:59 PM)crash Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe y'all should just start putting in some big ovens along the southern border and Ellis island with big 'Free Entry' signs on the ramp? Mightn't have to stockpile so much ammo then.
Now that actually made me LOL. Thanks Crash.
(10-08-2015, 04:59 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2015, 04:57 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2015, 04:44 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]But get ignorant and start calling me names and I will say screw you, talk to yourself. Just something to keep in mind.
Did you not call everyone who supports the Australian model a pansy ass?
Good thing they're not too sensitive to continue talking to others, even in contentious debate, or else a lot of good discussion would be foregone.
Just something else to keep in mind.
Yes I did and yes you are right. But the Australians have jack squat to do with us.
Well, that's your narrow take on it, to which you're entitled (as always).
However, MS, blueberry and user (to a degree) expressed agreement with the Australian model. And crash is most definitely part of "us" in terms of board discussions.
Are you saying that since they consider public safety and reduced gun deaths more important than F.U.'s personal fears and gratification that they have nothing to do with "us"?
That sounds ignorant, to me.
(10-08-2015, 04:18 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ]Anyway, I could see how legislating mandatory new smart technology for all guns (old and new) could reduce gun violence if it meant only the legal owner could fire the gun through fingerprint recognition, or something like that.
Should smart gun technology come to be, what is your opinion on the forced altering of family heirlooms?
(10-08-2015, 04:59 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]But the Australians have jack squat to do with us.
Why? We are allies. Australians are citizens of the world. At any given time there are tens of thousands of Australians in America. We have the right to call stupid where we see it.
At least we didn't invade your country over your poor choices about weapons. Or lack thereof..
(10-08-2015, 05:04 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2015, 04:59 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2015, 04:57 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2015, 04:44 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]But get ignorant and start calling me names and I will say screw you, talk to yourself. Just something to keep in mind.
Did you not call everyone who supports the Australian model a pansy ass?
Good thing they're not too sensitive to continue talking to others, even in contentious debate, or else a lot of good discussion would be foregone.
Just something else to keep in mind.
Yes I did and yes you are right. But the Australians have jack squat to do with us.
Well, that's your narrow take on it, to which you're entitled (as always).
However, MS, blueberry and user (to a degree) expressed agreement with the Australian model. And crash is most definitely part of "us" in terms of board discussions.
Are you saying that since they consider public safety and reduced gun deaths more important than F.U.'s personal fears and gratification that they have nothing to do with "us"?
That sounds ignorant, to me.
No, what I am saying is they should worry about their own country and let us worry about ours. That's also something that I wish our government would do, but that's the topic for another discussion. This gun issues is a American issue. It effects them not.
Yes I am aware that sounds ignorant.
(10-08-2015, 05:09 PM)crash Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2015, 04:59 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]But the Australians have jack squat to do with us.
Why? We are allies. Australians are citizens of the world. At any given time there are tens of thousands of Australians in America. We have the right to call stupid where we see it.
At least we didn't invade your country over your poor choices about weapons. Or lack thereof..
Those people are visitors to our country, they don't get to tell us what to do here. If they want to change your country so be it, I wont attempt to tell them what to do.
(10-08-2015, 05:11 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]This gun issues is a American issue. It effects them not.
Bullshit.
The gun culture in America and the rampant production of weapons creates a surplus. A percentage of that surplus ends up here at a cheap price.
Remember that Australian guy that was shot by the threes teenage assholes? Yeah, I think his family would beg to differ.
And like it ir not (for both sides), Americans love to let the world know how great they are. Your cultures rub off. Take the amount of people roaming the globe with baseball caps, teenagers who wear their jeans at their knees and boxers around their tits. Halloween is now a thing in Australia. Your cultures are influential, unfortunately one of them is guns and the devaluation of human lives.
(10-08-2015, 05:07 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2015, 04:18 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ]Anyway, I could see how legislating mandatory new smart technology for all guns (old and new) could reduce gun violence if it meant only the legal owner could fire the gun through fingerprint recognition, or something like that.
Should smart gun technology come to be, what is your opinion on the forced altering of family heirlooms?
You mean to tell me that you'd start crying if a 1/64" was taken off the firing pin of your great grand pappy's winchester?
(10-08-2015, 05:21 PM)crash Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2015, 05:11 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]This gun issues is a American issue. It effects them not.
Bullshit.
The gun culture in America and the rampant production of weapons creates a surplus. A percentage of that surplus ends up here at a cheap price.
Remember that Australian guy that was shot by the threes teenage assholes? Yeah, I think his family would beg to differ.
And like it ir not (for both sides), Americans love to let the world know how great they are. Your cultures rub off. Take the amount of people roaming the globe with baseball caps, teenagers who wear their jeans at their knees and boxers around their tits. Halloween is now a thing in Australia. Your cultures are influential, unfortunately one of them is guns and the devaluation of human lives.
That is your opinion. I am cool with that. But If I am not willing to do something about it when people in my country are getting killed by the gun, what makes you think I care about some Australian that I never heard of ?
Sorry, we are discussing guns in America and ways to make OUR country safer. Not Australia safer. Feel free to chime in anytime you like, but don't expect me to feel sorry for you because our guns end up there.
(10-08-2015, 05:26 PM)crash Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2015, 05:07 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2015, 04:18 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ]Anyway, I could see how legislating mandatory new smart technology for all guns (old and new) could reduce gun violence if it meant only the legal owner could fire the gun through fingerprint recognition, or something like that.
Should smart gun technology come to be, what is your opinion on the forced altering of family heirlooms?
You mean to tell me that you'd start crying if a 1/64" was taken off the firing pin of your great grand pappy's winchester?
We don't know how this smart gun shit will work yet. SO yes, alter that thousand dollar 100 year old Winchester of my grandpappys and yes, I will cry.
ETA . . . Ok not real tears but you know what I am saying.
Well supper is done and then I am off to work. Have a great night all.
(10-08-2015, 05:30 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2015, 05:26 PM)crash Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2015, 05:07 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2015, 04:18 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ]Anyway, I could see how legislating mandatory new smart technology for all guns (old and new) could reduce gun violence if it meant only the legal owner could fire the gun through fingerprint recognition, or something like that.
Should smart gun technology come to be, what is your opinion on the forced altering of family heirlooms?
You mean to tell me that you'd start crying if a 1/64" was taken off the firing pin of your great grand pappy's winchester?
We don't know how this smart gun shit will work yet. SO yes, alter that thousand dollar 100 year old Winchester of my grandpappys and yes, I will cry.
ETA . . . Ok not real tears but you know what I am saying.
Yes, I do know what you're saying.
I don't think this would be an issue (and shouldn't) be an issue in American gun reform. It's not like there are too many homies out there shooting up the hood with 100 year old Winchesters. Nor have too many massacres been carried out with one since the days of the OK corral.
Giving your 10 year old son an armourlite for his birthday is a different story.
(10-08-2015, 05:11 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]No, what I am saying is they should worry about their own country and let us worry about ours. That's also something that I wish our government would do, but that's the topic for another discussion. This gun issues is a American issue. It effects them not.Yes I am aware that sounds ignorant.
Okay.
Now back to the question that I asked you, F.U. Do you think MS, user, blueberry and crash are part of "us"?
If so, and they support investigating the Australian model for possible implementation in the U.S., then it's not only Australians that you aren't willing to consider when they don't agree with you and your priorities. It's your fellow Americans and Mock Members. That's a fact, not an opinion.
People and organizations build off ideas, processes, policies and concepts established by others all the time. It's smart and efficient to consider what's working elsewhere and whether the same model could be leveraged to alleviate a similar problem at home (but it requires a genuine desire to alleviate the problem and an open, non-isolationist mindset).
I like Factcheck.org. No more articles/charts (from me) but I believe this to be accurate and yes, I'd like to implement some of the gun control measures that have been taken by other advanced countries.
The firearms homicide rate, and homicide rate overall, is also higher in the U.S. than other advanced countries, such as Canada, Australia and those in Europe, according to data from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. The U.S. gun homicide rate was 3.2 per every 100,000 people in 2010, according to UNODC figures. The UNODC measures “intentional homicide,” which is “an unlawful death purposefully inflicted on a person by another person.”
The international data show that country-to-country comparisons are inherently difficult to make — and, as the NRC said, provide “contradictory evidence.” For instance, Latin American countries with high levels of firearm homicide show low levels of gun ownership. Honduras has a gun ownership rate of 6.2 per 100 people and a gun homicide rate of 68.43 per 100,000 people, and Colombia has a gun rate of 5.9 and firearm homicide rate of 27.09, as shown in this chart produced by the Washington Post using the same data we have cited here.
But among advanced countries, the U.S. homicide rate stands out. “We seem to be an average country in terms of violence and aggression,” says Harvard’s Hemenway. “What we have is huge homicide rates compared to anybody else.”
Says Wintemute: “The difference is that in this country violence involves firearms and firearms change the outcome.”
Factcheck article:
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhe...gun-facts/
Here's a link to the chart from the Washington Post that was cited:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/spe...hip/table/
(10-08-2015, 05:42 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ] (10-08-2015, 05:11 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]No, what I am saying is they should worry about their own country and let us worry about ours. That's also something that I wish our government would do, but that's the topic for another discussion. This gun issues is a American issue. It effects them not.Yes I am aware that sounds ignorant.
Okay.
Now back to the question that I asked you, F.U. Do you think MS, user, blueberry and crash are part of "us"?
If so, and they support investigating the Australian model for possible implementation in the U.S., then it's not only Australians that you aren't willing to consider when they don't agree with you and your priorities. It's your fellow Americans and Mock Members. That's a fact, not an opinion.
People and organizations build off ideas, processes, policies and concepts established by others all the time. It's smart and efficient to consider what's working elsewhere and whether the same model could be leveraged to alleviate a similar problem at home (but it requires a genuine desire to alleviate the problem and an open, non-isolationist mindset).
Its simple. If they are a resident of the USA then yes discuss away. If you don't live here then you have no dog in the hunt and your opinion means nothing to me. That's all I am saying.
