- All Purchases made this month instantly go into the draw to win a USD $ 100.00 credit to your HoP account.
Forums > Social Discussion > apologies for bush
Login/Join to Participate
Posted:so sorry
-Such a price the gods exact for song: to become what we sing
-Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty.
-When the center of the storm does not move, you are in its path.
Posted:Josh,
I know the insurgents have some degree of organisation (pulling them out of Fallujah to fight elsewhere before the troops arrived), but I don't think they can be described as organised.
But I totally agree with your points anyways.
There is no possible way the ownership of guns can decrease crime. It is absurd. Owning a weapon designed to kill is not going to make anyone safer. It is not advanced thinking - it is very straightforward.
It's a simple statistic, and of course statistics can be interpreted, but I'm sure everyone gasped during Bowling for Columbine when those statistics on gun crime across the world popped up. What was it?! Upwards of 11,000 in America every year?!!
And his well-made point was - why is the figure so high in America when in other countries where gun ownership is permitted people aren't out killing themselves in such high numbers.
Perhaps greed? Perhaps a culture where life doesn't mean much any more...
These are the issues that have to be addressed. When America (and by America I mean the elected representatives) starts respecting life - of everyone, including it's own and those in the rest of the world - then we can move forward.
America needs to stop handling the solution and deal with the problem. Think back on September 11 - how many have died, how much worse has global safety become and how much more anti-American feeling is there now?!
My thoughts and sympathies are with the people in North Korea and Iran... as that is where the American killing machine is heading next.
I know the insurgents have some degree of organisation (pulling them out of Fallujah to fight elsewhere before the troops arrived), but I don't think they can be described as organised.
But I totally agree with your points anyways.
There is no possible way the ownership of guns can decrease crime. It is absurd. Owning a weapon designed to kill is not going to make anyone safer. It is not advanced thinking - it is very straightforward.
It's a simple statistic, and of course statistics can be interpreted, but I'm sure everyone gasped during Bowling for Columbine when those statistics on gun crime across the world popped up. What was it?! Upwards of 11,000 in America every year?!!
And his well-made point was - why is the figure so high in America when in other countries where gun ownership is permitted people aren't out killing themselves in such high numbers.
Perhaps greed? Perhaps a culture where life doesn't mean much any more...
These are the issues that have to be addressed. When America (and by America I mean the elected representatives) starts respecting life - of everyone, including it's own and those in the rest of the world - then we can move forward.
America needs to stop handling the solution and deal with the problem. Think back on September 11 - how many have died, how much worse has global safety become and how much more anti-American feeling is there now?!
My thoughts and sympathies are with the people in North Korea and Iran... as that is where the American killing machine is heading next.
Getting to the other side 
SpitFire
GOLD Member since Dec 2002
Mand's Girl....and The Not So Shy One
Location: Calgary, Alberta Canada
Total posts: 2723
GOLD Member since Dec 2002
Mand's Girl....and The Not So Shy One
Location: Calgary, Alberta Canada
Total posts: 2723
Posted:We'll avoid North Korea because Bush doesn't want to piss off China. We probably will avoid Iran as much as possible because the oil wealth there isn't as great. 
Solitude sometimes speaks to you, and you should listen.
DeletePosted:Hola,
Well, this takes the headlines today... Iran backs off its nuclear programme.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4031055.stm
br>(sorry lads, I still haven't worked out how to make a link into one word
)
While it's great that any country wants to seek to end production of nuclear weapons, I wonder what behind-closed-doors pressure was applied?!
(incidentally, on that page there is a link to an interesting article with lots of comments from analysts and observers re: Bush's foreign policy)
Also, Bush speaks about North Korea yesterday
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4029331.stm
Well, this takes the headlines today... Iran backs off its nuclear programme.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4031055.stm
br>(sorry lads, I still haven't worked out how to make a link into one word
)While it's great that any country wants to seek to end production of nuclear weapons, I wonder what behind-closed-doors pressure was applied?!
(incidentally, on that page there is a link to an interesting article with lots of comments from analysts and observers re: Bush's foreign policy)
Also, Bush speaks about North Korea yesterday
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4029331.stm
Getting to the other side
Posted:arashi - the government doesn't need to use weapons to control people. In fact it's better if they don't. In many countries, like Iraq, most men have guns but they still had a dictator in power. People like to be led.
Written by:
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering
Written by:
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering
Delete
Posted:well i'm happy that there's less nukes. and i'm happy that there's at least a facade of kindness from israel toward the palestinians.
what freaks me out lately is the takeover by the white house of the secretary of state and cia and judicial system. this is getting way too creepy, esp when looked at with a historical comparison to the nazi party. the SS was originally called the "department of homeland security" and the reason the german citizens were coerced into the invasion of britain was for "preemptive strike" reasons. now the bush admin has removed or intimidated away all the obstacles to it's war agaenda, including all the military folks who tried to tell the pentagon how to run an intelligent military operation as opposed to a economic/political agenda. the machine rages on. who's up for a trip to the vomitorium?
what freaks me out lately is the takeover by the white house of the secretary of state and cia and judicial system. this is getting way too creepy, esp when looked at with a historical comparison to the nazi party. the SS was originally called the "department of homeland security" and the reason the german citizens were coerced into the invasion of britain was for "preemptive strike" reasons. now the bush admin has removed or intimidated away all the obstacles to it's war agaenda, including all the military folks who tried to tell the pentagon how to run an intelligent military operation as opposed to a economic/political agenda. the machine rages on. who's up for a trip to the vomitorium?
-Such a price the gods exact for song: to become what we sing
-Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty.
-When the center of the storm does not move, you are in its path.
Posted:I think while you're all arguing about guns, I'm gonna go sink all my cash into body armor 
Dance like it hurts; Love like you need money; Work like someone is watching.
Never criticize someone until you've walked a mile in their shoes. That way, when you DO criticize them, you are a mile away, and you have their shoes.
Posted:"Gun control" laws disarm only innocent citizens, not vicious aggressors. Unarmed individuals are vulnerable to robbery, car jacking, rape and murder. Unarmed populations are easy prey for tyrants, terrorists and foreign invaders. The right to firearms possession and ownership protects the life, liberty and property of men, women and children against predators of all kinds.
we eat and we drink and we smoke and we try!
Delete
Posted:yeah, but no gun control laws arm all of the above with lethal weapons.
clever.
clever.
I had a dream that my friend had a
strong-bad pop up book,
it was the book of my dreams.
Posted:Written by: DJ Dantana
The right to firearms possession and ownership protects the life, liberty and property of men, women and children against predators of all kinds.
you've been watching too many arnold schwarzenegger movies....
The right to firearms possession and ownership protects the life, liberty and property of men, women and children against predators of all kinds.
you've been watching too many arnold schwarzenegger movies....
My mind not only wanders, it sometimes leaves completely
Posted:Written by: DJ Dantana
"Gun control" laws disarm only innocent citizens, not vicious aggressors. Unarmed individuals are vulnerable to robbery, car jacking, rape and murder. Unarmed populations are easy prey for tyrants, terrorists and foreign invaders. The right to firearms possession and ownership protects the life, liberty and property of men, women and children against predators of all kinds.
You know in ireland even the regular police arent armed.
Dang,
Good thing its so easy to get off this little island. We're doomed. I'm off to the US where its safer.
Wait, no its not....
"Gun control" laws disarm only innocent citizens, not vicious aggressors. Unarmed individuals are vulnerable to robbery, car jacking, rape and murder. Unarmed populations are easy prey for tyrants, terrorists and foreign invaders. The right to firearms possession and ownership protects the life, liberty and property of men, women and children against predators of all kinds.
You know in ireland even the regular police arent armed.
Dang,
Good thing its so easy to get off this little island. We're doomed. I'm off to the US where its safer.
Wait, no its not....
Love is the law.
DeletePosted:dantana, if a country is safer where every citizen owns/should own/or legally can own a firearm, then explain to me why there are so many deaths due to gunshots in america compared to other most other countries(this is a percentage, so saying that the states has more ppl is not true).. and not only robbers and murderers killing innocent ppl.. no, also family members killing each other (often by accident), school kids killing each other (usually not by accident)..
if kids of age 15 for example did not have access to guns, whether illegally or stolen from their parents' closet, and the ability to buy boxes of bullets in a SUPERMARKET, 'accidents' like the above mentioned would not occur as frequently and as easily..
pls explain
if kids of age 15 for example did not have access to guns, whether illegally or stolen from their parents' closet, and the ability to buy boxes of bullets in a SUPERMARKET, 'accidents' like the above mentioned would not occur as frequently and as easily..
pls explain
Delete
Posted:Written by: Josh
exactamundo arashi. If there were no guns, ppl would use knives, if there were no knives ppl would use pointy sticks..etc etc. however a kid is unlikely to accidently kill his mum with a knife or a pointy stick. Accidental death by gun is waaaaay easier (and more common by far).
I simply dont understand how ppl think that if guns are easily accessible there is going to be less crime? surely you would realise that the first thing a criminal is going to do in a society of gun lovers is get a gun? And a crim is more likely to shoot you first and drag you from the car if he thinks its likely you might shoot him.
Josh
I like the notion of going back to swords and doing away with guns entirely.
Guns make me uncomfortable.
Raph
exactamundo arashi. If there were no guns, ppl would use knives, if there were no knives ppl would use pointy sticks..etc etc. however a kid is unlikely to accidently kill his mum with a knife or a pointy stick. Accidental death by gun is waaaaay easier (and more common by far).
I simply dont understand how ppl think that if guns are easily accessible there is going to be less crime? surely you would realise that the first thing a criminal is going to do in a society of gun lovers is get a gun? And a crim is more likely to shoot you first and drag you from the car if he thinks its likely you might shoot him.
Josh
I like the notion of going back to swords and doing away with guns entirely.
Guns make me uncomfortable.
Raph
Delete
Posted:yea then we can have those medievil fights to the death using bear hands, or two knights charging at each other at full speed on horseback with two meter long lances pointed at each others eyes.. 
at least thats more of a fight to determine who is a REAL man/woman
at least thats more of a fight to determine who is a REAL man/woman
Delete
Posted:Written by: stickman
yea then we can have those medievil fights to the death using bear hands, or two knights charging at each other at full speed on horseback with two meter long lances pointed at each others eyes..
at least thats more of a fight to determine who is a REAL man/woman
Well, I'd be more concerned about little johnny bringing his father's gun to school and killing half his classmates in the cafeteria than johnny doing the same thing with a katana.
Additionally, it would change the nature of warfare back to a time when the commander of an army led the charges and so would not commit troops to actions where he himself would likely get killed. Its very easy for modern Generals to sit in Palm Beach moving pieces around on maps while the armies are half a world away.
Raph
yea then we can have those medievil fights to the death using bear hands, or two knights charging at each other at full speed on horseback with two meter long lances pointed at each others eyes..
at least thats more of a fight to determine who is a REAL man/woman
Well, I'd be more concerned about little johnny bringing his father's gun to school and killing half his classmates in the cafeteria than johnny doing the same thing with a katana.
Additionally, it would change the nature of warfare back to a time when the commander of an army led the charges and so would not commit troops to actions where he himself would likely get killed. Its very easy for modern Generals to sit in Palm Beach moving pieces around on maps while the armies are half a world away.
Raph
Delete
Posted:first of all, gun control laws do NOTHING to disarm violent criminals, who by deffinition are willing to break the laws which restrict gun ownership.
Secondly, gun control only disarms the people who are willing to give up their guns (the law abiding) Thus leaving them defenseless to the criminals who still will be able to own blackmarket guns (which are easlity available all over the world, even in england and china) .
Third, with a total ban on handguns in England, pistols are still the most commonly used firearm by criminals, and can be bought on the streets for $200 easily.
Fourth, focusing on ONLY gun deaths ignores the number of people who are just as dead because of knives, clubs, cars, and strong armed bandits. (and what about rape? Is that worth using a gun to defend from)
The gun makes the little old lady with a gun equal in power to the muscular thug with a gun.
Guns will never be eliminated from the planet. They can be build with simple hand tools, from easily available parts.. and I HAVE... (are you going to illegalize metal water pipes, or drills and chunks of metal?)
You want you grandmother or daughter to be helpless in the face of a muscular thug? You think your grandmother could use a sword to defend herself from a 6'6" 250 pound thug with a sword? (or bat, or golf club, or big rock)
With 60,000,000 gun owners in the USA our rates of accidental death have been steadily falling. Education is the key (HEY IDIOTS< DON'T POINT GUNS AT PEOPLE, AND KEEP YOUR FINGER OFF THE TRIGER. All it takes is education of the idiots. 1000 times more people die from car wrecks, 10,000 more people die from hospital accidents. Ban doctors, not guns. 60,000,000 gun owners.... despite that, only 15,000 a year die from guns (that number is including the violent criminals who get killed by police and by law abiding citizens.
And here is the kicker, the logic and facts that beat out allt he others......
The areas in the USA with the most restrictive gun laws also have the highest crime rates in the USA, BECAUSE THE CRIMINALS STILL OWN GUNS AND THE LAW ABIDING DON'T. Washington D.C. has a complete ban on all guns (even more restricitve than the UK, yet they have the highest murder rate in the entire USA. D.C. Leaders blame it on neighboring states with loose gun laws, yet these neighboring states have extreamly LOW gun crime (and low crime of all types) and other crime in general. So does every other area in the USA with the most restrictive gun laws.
In other areas of the USA, where gun ownership and carrying is extreamly prevalent (and even mandatory), the crime rate is an order of magnitute less... Simply because the criminals FEAR to prey on victims who are likely to be armed. The first state to allow the law abiding to carry guns, experienced a 85% drop in all crimes, especial violent ones, within the FIRST YEAR.
Every state in the USA that has began allowing the LAW ABIDING CITIZENS to carry guns, has had a dramatic DECREASE in all crimes, including gun crime. These are facts that cannot be disputed.
The reality, is that "an armed society is a pollite society. Look at Switzerland, where everybody has machine guns, rocket lanchers, and who knows what else. There, crime rate is one of the lowest in the world.... if not THE lowest.
It is a proven act that criminals interviewed in prison few law abiding citizens with guns, more than they few cops with guns. Because the cops are less likely to pull the trigger. And the cops are always a long time away. Where as the armed citizen has easy access to a gun to defend themselves.
Secondly, gun control only disarms the people who are willing to give up their guns (the law abiding) Thus leaving them defenseless to the criminals who still will be able to own blackmarket guns (which are easlity available all over the world, even in england and china) .
Third, with a total ban on handguns in England, pistols are still the most commonly used firearm by criminals, and can be bought on the streets for $200 easily.
Fourth, focusing on ONLY gun deaths ignores the number of people who are just as dead because of knives, clubs, cars, and strong armed bandits. (and what about rape? Is that worth using a gun to defend from)
The gun makes the little old lady with a gun equal in power to the muscular thug with a gun.
Guns will never be eliminated from the planet. They can be build with simple hand tools, from easily available parts.. and I HAVE... (are you going to illegalize metal water pipes, or drills and chunks of metal?)
You want you grandmother or daughter to be helpless in the face of a muscular thug? You think your grandmother could use a sword to defend herself from a 6'6" 250 pound thug with a sword? (or bat, or golf club, or big rock)
With 60,000,000 gun owners in the USA our rates of accidental death have been steadily falling. Education is the key (HEY IDIOTS< DON'T POINT GUNS AT PEOPLE, AND KEEP YOUR FINGER OFF THE TRIGER. All it takes is education of the idiots. 1000 times more people die from car wrecks, 10,000 more people die from hospital accidents. Ban doctors, not guns. 60,000,000 gun owners.... despite that, only 15,000 a year die from guns (that number is including the violent criminals who get killed by police and by law abiding citizens.
And here is the kicker, the logic and facts that beat out allt he others......
The areas in the USA with the most restrictive gun laws also have the highest crime rates in the USA, BECAUSE THE CRIMINALS STILL OWN GUNS AND THE LAW ABIDING DON'T. Washington D.C. has a complete ban on all guns (even more restricitve than the UK, yet they have the highest murder rate in the entire USA. D.C. Leaders blame it on neighboring states with loose gun laws, yet these neighboring states have extreamly LOW gun crime (and low crime of all types) and other crime in general. So does every other area in the USA with the most restrictive gun laws.
In other areas of the USA, where gun ownership and carrying is extreamly prevalent (and even mandatory), the crime rate is an order of magnitute less... Simply because the criminals FEAR to prey on victims who are likely to be armed. The first state to allow the law abiding to carry guns, experienced a 85% drop in all crimes, especial violent ones, within the FIRST YEAR.
Every state in the USA that has began allowing the LAW ABIDING CITIZENS to carry guns, has had a dramatic DECREASE in all crimes, including gun crime. These are facts that cannot be disputed.
The reality, is that "an armed society is a pollite society. Look at Switzerland, where everybody has machine guns, rocket lanchers, and who knows what else. There, crime rate is one of the lowest in the world.... if not THE lowest.
It is a proven act that criminals interviewed in prison few law abiding citizens with guns, more than they few cops with guns. Because the cops are less likely to pull the trigger. And the cops are always a long time away. Where as the armed citizen has easy access to a gun to defend themselves.
we eat and we drink and we smoke and we try!
Delete
Posted:Your stats give your argument value, but if you read Michael Moores Downsize This (or it could Stupid White Men) his stats give the opposite view.
Also, my granny is about to get attacted by an armed robber, before she could even get her hand on the gun, she'd be shot where if she had no gun, there'd be no threat to the robber and he wouldn't need to shoot...??????
I'm personally happy with the no guns policy here in the UK.
Also, my granny is about to get attacted by an armed robber, before she could even get her hand on the gun, she'd be shot where if she had no gun, there'd be no threat to the robber and he wouldn't need to shoot...??????
I'm personally happy with the no guns policy here in the UK.
I used to be indecisive, but I'm not so sure now.....
Posted:micheal moore is a propaganda machine. his stats are the worst of false and missleading. It is unfortunate that many people take his missleading statements at facvalue.
Do yourself a favore, ignore Micheal moore, he is the worst of pollitical ativists who will use LIES to further his agenda. This have been proven time and time again.
Do yourself a favore, ignore Micheal moore, he is the worst of pollitical ativists who will use LIES to further his agenda. This have been proven time and time again.
we eat and we drink and we smoke and we try!
DeleteTheBovrilMonkey
SILVER Member since Sep 2001
![TheBovrilMonkey]()
Liquid Cow
Location: High Wycombe, England
Total posts: 2629
SILVER Member since Sep 2001
Liquid Cow
Location: High Wycombe, England
Total posts: 2629
Posted:Written by: ado-p
prove it then
That's pretty easy - the man says it himself, admitting that he made faurenheit 911 to try and get Bush out of the white house. Or something like that, I'm not sure of the exact wording.
Written by: DJ Dantana
Third, with a total ban on handguns in England, pistols are still the most commonly used firearm by criminals, and can be bought on the streets for $200 easily.
I'm not going to get dragged into a large arguement about gun control, but I'm going to comment on this point.
I'd say that even without a ban, pistols are still going to be the most commonly used firearm by criminals. I doubt very much that they'd be walking around with sub-machine guns and rifles if the ban wasn't in place, so that point is completely irrelevant.
What might be worth looking at is the percentage of crimes commited with a firearm rather than a knife or other weapon, but I can't be bothered to go dig up any statistics.
On a slightly lighter note, I reckon that if you tried to buy a gun on a street in england by waving $200 at someone, you wouldn't get very far, it might be an idea to visit a bank and get the currency exchanged first
prove it then
That's pretty easy - the man says it himself, admitting that he made faurenheit 911 to try and get Bush out of the white house. Or something like that, I'm not sure of the exact wording.
Written by: DJ Dantana
Third, with a total ban on handguns in England, pistols are still the most commonly used firearm by criminals, and can be bought on the streets for $200 easily.
I'm not going to get dragged into a large arguement about gun control, but I'm going to comment on this point.
I'd say that even without a ban, pistols are still going to be the most commonly used firearm by criminals. I doubt very much that they'd be walking around with sub-machine guns and rifles if the ban wasn't in place, so that point is completely irrelevant.
What might be worth looking at is the percentage of crimes commited with a firearm rather than a knife or other weapon, but I can't be bothered to go dig up any statistics.
On a slightly lighter note, I reckon that if you tried to buy a gun on a street in england by waving $200 at someone, you wouldn't get very far, it might be an idea to visit a bank and get the currency exchanged first
But there's no sense crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake.
DeletePosted:Written by: TheBovrilMonkey
Written by: ado-p
prove it then
That's pretty easy - the man says it himself, admitting that he made faurenheit 911 to try and get Bush out of the white house. Or something like that, I'm not sure of the exact wording.
That doesnt exactly prove it eh?
I dont want to drag this off topic with the merits of michael more... but the movie that he made about guns wasnt 9/11... It was Bowling for Columbine...
I know he's a muck raker. Even given that, there are plenty of facts he's exposed that simply cant be disputed. There is plenty of back up on his site to prove this too.
sorry for the
now back to guns and ammo
Written by: ado-p
prove it then
That's pretty easy - the man says it himself, admitting that he made faurenheit 911 to try and get Bush out of the white house. Or something like that, I'm not sure of the exact wording.
That doesnt exactly prove it eh?
I dont want to drag this off topic with the merits of michael more... but the movie that he made about guns wasnt 9/11... It was Bowling for Columbine...
I know he's a muck raker. Even given that, there are plenty of facts he's exposed that simply cant be disputed. There is plenty of back up on his site to prove this too.
sorry for the
now back to guns and ammo
Love is the law.
Deleteflash fire
BRONZE Member since Jan 2001
![flash fire]()
Sporadically Prodigal
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Total posts: 2758
BRONZE Member since Jan 2001
Sporadically Prodigal
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Total posts: 2758
Posted:Just want to make sure everyone is playing nice. All ok in here?
HoP Posting Guidelines
Is it the Truth?
Is it Fair to all concerned?
Will it build Goodwill and Better Friendships?
Will it be Beneficial to all concerned?
If you can answer YES to these 4 questions then you may post a reply.
Posted:actually, not to give DJ D any more ammo, but Micheal Moore presents misleading 'facts' in the extreme. I'm not about to bother proving it for you, but I'll say this, I knew enough of his stuff was flat out wrong in farenheit 911 even as I was watching it to know it wasn't going to do much damage to Bush in the end because of how easily discredited it was.
One example - the members of the Bin Laden family in the USA did not fly out during the air travel ban, and they were all questioned before they did fly out. Yes, they did have the priveledge of being among the first allowed out of the USA, but I do beleive that this was in fact necissary for their protection.
That is one of literally HUNDREDS of factual errors in farenheit 911 or any other Micheal Moore film (most purposefully commited), except for maybe the first few her made way back when, which have fewer (but still major) purposeful errors in them.
I am a hard-core anti-Bush liberal, and I am entertained by Micheal Moore, but I do not take what he says any more seriosly than what his right wing counterpart, Rush Limbah, says, and neither should you. He is an entertainer, not a true documentarian.
One example - the members of the Bin Laden family in the USA did not fly out during the air travel ban, and they were all questioned before they did fly out. Yes, they did have the priveledge of being among the first allowed out of the USA, but I do beleive that this was in fact necissary for their protection.
That is one of literally HUNDREDS of factual errors in farenheit 911 or any other Micheal Moore film (most purposefully commited), except for maybe the first few her made way back when, which have fewer (but still major) purposeful errors in them.
I am a hard-core anti-Bush liberal, and I am entertained by Micheal Moore, but I do not take what he says any more seriosly than what his right wing counterpart, Rush Limbah, says, and neither should you. He is an entertainer, not a true documentarian.
-v-
Wiederstand ist Zwecklos!
Posted:can i say this again
i was talking about Bowling for Columbine.
i also said
"I know he's a muck raker"
i'll let it go...
i was talking about Bowling for Columbine.
i also said
"I know he's a muck raker"
i'll let it go...
Love is the law.
DeletePosted:Written by: DJ Dantana
The reality, is that "an armed society is a pollite society. Look at Switzerland, where everybody has machine guns, rocket lanchers, and who knows what else. There, crime rate is one of the lowest in the world.... if not THE lowest.
Dan, i see a bit of a pot and kettle situation here...
your statement regarding Switzerland is extremely misleading. the Swiss army comprises almost half a million part-time soldiers who are required to keep their (government issued) fire-arms at home. you make it sound like everyone in Switzerland is toting guns just for the heck of it.
also, both Brazil and Jamaica have both handgun licensing and registration of gun ownership, and yet have vastly higher firearm related homicides than both Switzerland and the US.
if the reality is, in your words, that "an armed society is a polite society", explain that.....
The reality, is that "an armed society is a pollite society. Look at Switzerland, where everybody has machine guns, rocket lanchers, and who knows what else. There, crime rate is one of the lowest in the world.... if not THE lowest.
Dan, i see a bit of a pot and kettle situation here...
your statement regarding Switzerland is extremely misleading. the Swiss army comprises almost half a million part-time soldiers who are required to keep their (government issued) fire-arms at home. you make it sound like everyone in Switzerland is toting guns just for the heck of it.
also, both Brazil and Jamaica have both handgun licensing and registration of gun ownership, and yet have vastly higher firearm related homicides than both Switzerland and the US.
if the reality is, in your words, that "an armed society is a polite society", explain that.....
My mind not only wanders, it sometimes leaves completely
Posted:Written by: flash fire
Just want to make sure everyone is playing nice. All ok in here?
Certainly not! They aren't talking enough about swords!
Raph
Just want to make sure everyone is playing nice. All ok in here?
Certainly not! They aren't talking enough about swords!
Raph
Delete
Posted:DJ D, your comments on M.Moore only prove my point (which I don't think I wrote too clearly), that stats are used by the person to 'prove' they are right. But MM, in my opinion, also states 'facts' that go against his political view, which make him more believable.
If you are to use stats, use all the stats, not just what indorce you view, as this only creates scepticism.
If you are to use stats, use all the stats, not just what indorce you view, as this only creates scepticism.
I used to be indecisive, but I'm not so sure now.....
Posted:Many of you are missing the main point. A guns makes your grandmother equal in raw power to the street thug. Take away all gund, and the weak people will be at the mercy of the strong thugs (and rememebr other tools can murder just as easily.)
Do you know why Texas passed it's law to let law abiding citizens to carry pstols? Because the evil epopel were already. And because on of them bad guys went into a resurant in Texas and started killing everybody. One of the girls had a gun, in her truck, which she left in the truck, because it would be illegal for her to carry it in the store. That murderouse rampage could have been stopped by one person, right there, and 20 people would be alive right now.
Imeadiately the crime rate fell, becuase criminals knew they could get shot for their violent crimes gainst humans.
Do you know why Texas passed it's law to let law abiding citizens to carry pstols? Because the evil epopel were already. And because on of them bad guys went into a resurant in Texas and started killing everybody. One of the girls had a gun, in her truck, which she left in the truck, because it would be illegal for her to carry it in the store. That murderouse rampage could have been stopped by one person, right there, and 20 people would be alive right now.
Imeadiately the crime rate fell, becuase criminals knew they could get shot for their violent crimes gainst humans.
we eat and we drink and we smoke and we try!
Delete
Posted:Written by: Bretch
DJ D, your comments on M.Moore only prove my point (which I don't think I wrote too clearly), that stats are used by the person to 'prove' they are right. But MM, in my opinion, also states 'facts' that go against his political view, which make him more believable.
First off: a hug, because we're all friends here.
Next, the info I'd like to offer:
War, Lies, and Videotape
A Viewers Guide to Fahrenheit 9/11
(as posted by the Ethics and Public Policy Center)
http://www.eppc.org/publications/pubID.2189/pub_detail.asp
br>
Bowling for Truth
A database of the misleading tactics used in Bowling For Columbine
edit: also updated to include Fahrenheit 9/11 information
http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/
br>
Moore's Myriad Mistakes
A breakdown of Moore's book, Dude, Where's My Country?
http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20031016b.html
br>
Michael Moore, Humbug
A scroll through Moore's entire career, not just the recent movies.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_3_michael_moore.html
br>
More believable? The man is laughable. But nobody's going to read these, they'll just dismiss them as propaganda from the other side. As far as I'm concerned, his misleading fiction is much less of a threat to the world than the people who follow it blindly without question.
Far from hypocritical, I have checked him out before and while some of his material resonated for me, taking a deeper look into the facts seemed to contradict what he had to say ("Roger & Me" and "Bowling for Columbine"). He's very good at making an emotional, seemingly-realistic portrayal of facts, and it's honestly quite hard not to agree with the way he shows things when he arranges them so masterfully. It's like putting a scene to sad music when you want to elicit a sad response from your audience, only done much more methodically to convince people of an entire message, not just the feelings associated with a particular scene.
His entire "come in like a lamb" motif also makes him very disarming to viewers. I remember his interview with Bill O'Reilly - I thought it would be very interesting to see two polar opposites clash like they did - but when it was over I was left thinking "Who's this nice guy? He seems quite likable and not at all extreme like he has been portrayed."
I encourage you to question him and do a little fact-finding. His material draws you in and does a good job of taking you along for the ride, but if you accept it at face value you're doing yourself a disservice. I wouldn't be so upset with him personally if I hadn't been a supporter at one time who got his illusion shattered by checking the facts.
Conclusion: another
DJ D, your comments on M.Moore only prove my point (which I don't think I wrote too clearly), that stats are used by the person to 'prove' they are right. But MM, in my opinion, also states 'facts' that go against his political view, which make him more believable.
First off: a hug, because we're all friends here.
Next, the info I'd like to offer:
War, Lies, and Videotape
A Viewers Guide to Fahrenheit 9/11
(as posted by the Ethics and Public Policy Center)
http://www.eppc.org/publications/pubID.2189/pub_detail.asp
br>
Bowling for Truth
A database of the misleading tactics used in Bowling For Columbine
edit: also updated to include Fahrenheit 9/11 information
http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/
br>
Moore's Myriad Mistakes
A breakdown of Moore's book, Dude, Where's My Country?
http://www.spinsanity.org/columns/20031016b.html
br>
Michael Moore, Humbug
A scroll through Moore's entire career, not just the recent movies.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_3_michael_moore.html
br>
More believable? The man is laughable. But nobody's going to read these, they'll just dismiss them as propaganda from the other side. As far as I'm concerned, his misleading fiction is much less of a threat to the world than the people who follow it blindly without question.
Far from hypocritical, I have checked him out before and while some of his material resonated for me, taking a deeper look into the facts seemed to contradict what he had to say ("Roger & Me" and "Bowling for Columbine"). He's very good at making an emotional, seemingly-realistic portrayal of facts, and it's honestly quite hard not to agree with the way he shows things when he arranges them so masterfully. It's like putting a scene to sad music when you want to elicit a sad response from your audience, only done much more methodically to convince people of an entire message, not just the feelings associated with a particular scene.
His entire "come in like a lamb" motif also makes him very disarming to viewers. I remember his interview with Bill O'Reilly - I thought it would be very interesting to see two polar opposites clash like they did - but when it was over I was left thinking "Who's this nice guy? He seems quite likable and not at all extreme like he has been portrayed."
I encourage you to question him and do a little fact-finding. His material draws you in and does a good job of taking you along for the ride, but if you accept it at face value you're doing yourself a disservice. I wouldn't be so upset with him personally if I hadn't been a supporter at one time who got his illusion shattered by checking the facts.
Conclusion: another
What hits the fan is not evenly distributed.
DeleteSpanner
BRONZE Member since Feb 2003
![Spanner]()
remembers when it was all fields round here
Location: in the works... somewhere...
Total posts: 2790
BRONZE Member since Feb 2003
remembers when it was all fields round here
Location: in the works... somewhere...
Total posts: 2790
Posted:I question almost everything I hear and read anyway, but one of the main people who has inspired me to do so, is Michael Moore. He might not be playing fair, but he's no worse than Bush, simply playing him at his own game.
Whatever you think of him, he ensured that people from all walks of life became interested in current affairs and that they keep on asking questions, which I think can only be a good thing. And it doesn't look like he's going to give up any time soon. No wonder Bush's supporters aren't keen on him
Whatever you think of him, he ensured that people from all walks of life became interested in current affairs and that they keep on asking questions, which I think can only be a good thing. And it doesn't look like he's going to give up any time soon. No wonder Bush's supporters aren't keen on him
"I thought you are man, but
you are nice woman.
yay,
:R"
Similar Topics
Using the keywords [apologie* bush] we found the following similar topics.1. Forums > apologies for bush [277 replies]
2. Forums > Bush Words [18 replies]
3. Forums > Bush caught redhanded again [28 replies]
4. Forums > Bush and Kerry in Dead Heat [18 replies]
5. Forums > when is the bush gonna burnout [24 replies]
Show more..
© 1998 - 2017 Home of Poi Ltd,
New Zealand unless otherwise stated.
All rights reserved
*All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com.