EmployeeoftheMonth Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Oh God no .. dinna tell me the Irish are looking for reparations too? .. and beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 and beer. They've got Guinness, they've got the beer angle covered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Well I know what I'm doing with my day. Liquor store here I come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASSJAW Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 can't all be as smart as us, huh guys? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortorella's Rant Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 And don't forget about the zealots who think they have the right to treat whoever they want as less than human because it's their "religious freedom". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tystick Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Guns aren't the problem, but I do think it should be a privilege to own a weapon and not just a "right". So dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gross-Misconduct Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Nice inflammatory title to this thread. IMO, it show's a lot of ignorance. Ironic. But to the topic, those militia nuts thinking they can overthrow the government are really wacked. They'd have a decent chance if it was the year 1800. As for having weapons for protection, something can be said for that. Remember that psychopath a few years ago that went on a rampage in Norway and hunted down and killed all those people including children? Disgusting. heartbreaking story. But I guarantee you the way that played out would not of happened in the USA. Someone or multiple people in that camp on that island would of been carrying firearms and trained how to use them. It might not of prevented all the deaths ( I think it was 80 plus) but he would of been stopped before he completed the massacre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Colt 45s Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 I love having the right to protect my family. If you come in my house or on my property in the middle of the night uninvited, you are taking things for granted. I will call 911 but I am not going to wait the 10 minutes for the police to get here. I also like having the right to open carry my long rifle-AR15- on public. And my right to conceal and carry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BanTSN Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 That would be "old money". The numbers of those families are shrinking by the year. Don't forget that the U.S. has a 40% estate tax. Every generational line that dies sees a good portion of their wealth gobbled up by Federal and State withholding's.Then the reparations will come from the fed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUS_ADAMS Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Wow?!? So american democratic youth camps alllow their attending youths to come armed to these politcal get togethers? Republicans yes, of course. Especially if Bush was or Palin was coming, so everyone could get there free shot offr at them. I guess there are some democratic youth that hate Obama, and would like to get a shot at that guy... but I don't know. When you don't know the facts, maybe read up a little first, or just don't comment! This was a politcal youth camp. There was one armed (maybe?) guard on the island, otherwise, when the prime minister, or government officials came, they brought their own security. 65 youths, and four adults were killed at Utøya. The reason for so few adults is that it was a camp for the youth, run by the youth! And all were with Norways Labour party (or liberal party for you amerks). And the first person killed there was the security guard. Now, I would like to hear how the right to bear arms would have made this a different story? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gross-Misconduct Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Wow?!? So american democratic youth camps alllow their attending youths to come armed to these politcal get togethers? Republicans yes, of course. Especially if Bush was or Palin was coming, so everyone could get there free shot offr at them. I guess there are some democratic youth that hate Obama, and would like to get a shot at that guy... but I don't know. When you don't know the facts, maybe read up a little first, or just don't comment! This was a politcal youth camp. There was one armed (maybe?) guard on the island, otherwise, when the prime minister, or government officials came, they brought their own security. 65 youths, and four adults were killed at Utøya. The reason for so few adults is that it was a camp for the youth, run by the youth! And all were with Norways Labour party (or liberal party for you amerks). And the first person killed there was the security guard. Now, I would like to hear how the right to bear arms would have made this a different story? Uh, simple. In America, they would of had someone there to take this guy down. Period. Throwing flowers at a gunman would not likely slow him down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUS_ADAMS Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 So they can't have political youth camps for the youth, run by the youth there? Armed adults, or youths would be patrolling the grounds. No wonder there is so much fear in the states. Because of the gun-laws? I think the only places in Norway where you have armed guards, is the high security prisons? The cops still don't, even after july 22. And I sure wouldn't feel safe at a youth camp with armed guards patrolling the grounds! Be more like a prisoner. And I love your mocking of the norwegians throwing flowers at the gunmans feet. That's cool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gross-Misconduct Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 I think the desire for guns stems from a deeper desire for some semblance of control in the event something bad happens. As others have mentioned, many of these Americans already feel like they are on the verge of something dangerous, be it gang violence/burglary/theft or something loonier such as the government stripping away their rights. As unfortunate as the price of pulling the trigger at the wrong time is, it must help them to think that that gun will get them out of certain situations. Would knives in the place of firearms be a better alternative? Tasers perhaps? Dunno Well said. It's not a black or white issue, it's complicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Then the reparations will come from the fed. Good luck with that idea. That's what the argument finally came down to in the end during the nineties. The proponents wanted two generations to receive reparations out of the U.S. treasury (taxpayers). Obviously people in the end laughed at the idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuckin_futz Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Nice inflammatory title to this thread. IMO, it show's a lot of ignorance. Ironic. But to the topic, those militia nuts thinking they can overthrow the government are really wacked. They'd have a decent chance if it was the year 1800. As for having weapons for protection, something can be said for that. Remember that psychopath a few years ago that went on a rampage in Norway and hunted down and killed all those people including children? Disgusting. heartbreaking story. But I guarantee you the way that played out would not of happened in the USA. Someone or multiple people in that camp on that island would of been carrying firearms and trained how to use them. It might not of prevented all the deaths ( I think it was 80 plus) but he would of been stopped before he completed the massacre. What exactly is your guarantee? Sadly the vast majority of gun owners have no training on how to use them as none is required for ownership. While I have no experience with one, I suspect there is more to operating an AR15 than point and shoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrible.dee Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Have you ever been attacked by the goverment? Just keep believing those lies. Your country depends on it. Living with the thought that you're protectors might turn and kill you is just pointless. Is it really that hard to see that normal people shouldn't have access to guns. Wow ! p.s. you drafting Bennett or Reinhart? I'd honestly go Bennett. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_Ridge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege http://www.libertyforlife.com/law/posse_comitatus_destroyed.htm http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html Having spent all my life living in both countries, I can honestly say the difference between Canadians and Americans is this: -Canadians: "I have a problem, What's the government going to do about it?" -Americans: "I have a problem, what am I going to do about it?" BTW I was all about Bennet until I found out he can't do a single chin-up!!! But I suppose it's ok, as a Canadian he probably expects his local MP to come do it for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BanTSN Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Good luck with that idea. That's what the argument finally came down to in the end during the nineties. The proponents wanted two generations to receive reparations out of the U.S. treasury (taxpayers). Obviously people in the end laughed at the idea.No i mean the fed. The federal reserve bank has around $3 trillion in assets. Reparations will be a fraction of that.Pretty sure the slave owner families have a large chunk of assets in the fed.Making reparations a public expense would be stupid. Probably an idea suggested by the same fat white hogs who got GM bailed out with public money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gross-Misconduct Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 What exactly is your guarantee? Sadly the vast majority of gun owners have no training on how to use them as none is required for ownership. While I have no experience with one, I suspect there is more to operating an AR15 than point and shoot. Do you believe that the hunt and kill that took place unimpeded would of been the same if someone trained with a gun was present? 80+ people were killed. I said that a similar scenario in the US would not of ended up the same if a trained gunman or gunmen were there. Read my post. I was specific. And if that scenario played out the way I said, I guarantee 80 + people would not die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefan Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Saw a sweet article on the onion a few days ago that's relevant to this... http://www.theonion.com/articles/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this,36131/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=LinkPreview:1:Default Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabreFan1 Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 No i mean the fed. The federal reserve bank has around $3 trillion in assets. Reparations will be a fraction of that. Pretty sure the slave owner families have a large chunk of assets in the fed. Making reparations a public expense would be stupid. Probably an idea suggested by the same fat white hogs who got GM bailed out with public money. I know what you meant. Each idea, including this one, was brought up and dismissed. Slave owner families barely exist any longer. Once the industrial age came into it's prime, "rich" turned into a whole other idea. The rich industrialists could buy and sell plantation families. The industrial families like the DuPont family, Carnegie family, etc. One of the large wealthy companies that had it's start from slave labor was Lehman Bros. and they went belly up at the beginning of the recession. The same happened to Wachovia. The final vestiges of former profiteering from slave labor can only really be found in the financial sector that includes families like the Rockefeller's and the Morgan's. These are the same people and companies that brought the global economy to it's knees and were deemed "too important to the country" to be brought to justice. That's why you get tinfoil hatted nutcases running around screaming "Illuminati". These people/families and companies don't do well because of vast "illuminati" conspiracies, they do well because they have been corrupt to the core for hundreds of years and will continue to get away with it for hundreds more. The biggest reason why historians consider Lincoln a great president is not only because of the civil war and the act of freeing the slaves, it was the nasty powerful profiteers that he had to beat down to do it in the first place in order to get it done. I'd keep writing but I'll bet most people are bored by it and won't even read down to this last sentence.... lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.