Sorry, but emotional pandering doesnt sway me from my belief that health care is a personal responsibility......Yes, we've heard it before. Let the sick poor people die.
Sorry, but emotional pandering doesnt sway me from my belief that health care is a personal responsibility......Yes, we've heard it before. Let the sick poor people die.
Was I in error..?......Again with that racism noise....this is becoming too tiresome to debate........
That's in theory, we all know illegal migrants cross into the country and work under the table and drive down wages in certain sectors.
Pandering is irrelevant. What do you propose a poor person in need of a $100,000 organ transplant do?Sorry, but emotional pandering doesnt sway me from my belief that health care is a personal responsibility......
The Scots joined the union voluntarily and have voted to stay in it ever sinceDo the Scotts even belong in the UK is the next logical question. They should consider seceding and reclaim their national sovereignty.
And what language are you speaking to write this comment?I do wonder, though; when the Eurozone claims its Roman alphabet back, will UK people have to write English in Anglo-Saxon runes?
Stupid people take stupid decisions, they dont think before acting and when they do, they often fail to realize whats going on.Even stupid honest people should be allowed to protect their homes from criminals.
The reason why you need guns is because a group of 5 unarmed men can breach into your house and beat the hell out of you till you tell them where is the safe.Disagree on both points.
Guns are stupid. The only reason people need guns is because the idiot next to them has guns. Whats the common denominator here?
The only "fair" treatment of health care is to guarantee it to all. Otherwise, it's just another manifestation of free market economics; the rich prevail and the poor die.
You’re barking up the wrong tree with me.The "right" to own a gun is not synonymous with free will. It is a poor interpretation of one antiquated clause in a 200 year old document.
As I've said many times, I am a legal handgun owner in a liberal state. I own because in the USA, the idiot to my left and the other idiot to my right most likely have guns.
Enlighten me. How was Britain not a sovereign nation before today?
Well the number one killer of human beings by objects is vehicles. Guns are next to last on the list.What would happen if the US suddenly bans guns/rifles across the board in every city?
But at the same time increases police personnel/patrols, and are only permitted to carry non lethal weapons.
I meant in terms of gun violence, general safety, etc.
In these day and age, vehicles is a necessary evil in cities or even in rural areas, it enhances the quality of life for the general population.Well the number one killer of human beings by objects is vehicles. Guns are next to last on the list.
Guns are a subject because it gives someone a right to so no. This contains major fear for the leftists and certain elements. Elements that want to take without earning. And those that want to make other human beings conform to their ideology and be good little producers.
When speaking of free will, it’s the ability to so no or to have the right to live by a different paradigm.
I don’t really do politics. It’s an abberated subject.
I just never vote for liberals. Never have. Never will.
Britain even tried making swords illegal and punishable by hanging and in some cases drawn and quartered. Obviously it didn’t work.
Gun regulations in the big cities are very stringent. Very. You can’t own a gun without a permit.In these day and age, vehicles is a necessary evil in cities or even in rural areas, it enhances the quality of life for the general population.
Guns on the other hand, how does it enhances the quality of life for the general population?
The true purpose of a gun is to kill, whilst the true purpose of a vehicle is to transport goods and people.
Some of you have been to cities that has totally banned firearms or any weapons, some have harsh penalties such as hanging, as in the case of Singapore.
I think everyone can agree that Singapore is perhaps the safest city in the world.
And the number one killer there would either be diseases, old age and accidents but never gun related violence.
But in the US, tens of thousands are injured annually and that's not even counting the death toll.
2017, death related to guns - 39,000 Americans.
That's a staggering amount.
I'm trying to think on how owning a gun enhances a city's population quality of life but I can't seem to find a reasonable clue.
Let's put aside leftists, rightist or even feminism to the conner.Gun regulations in the big cities are very stringent. Very. You can’t own a gun without a permit.
In Chicago it’s a major fingerprinting ordeal and you have to justify it in writing.
It’s interesting how the more liberal the city, the more gun crimes and murders. And it is getting worse. It’s lazy and easy to equate it to guns.
When Detroit was flourishing, until the liberals took over, it had one of the lowest rates of crimes.
Pull up some pictures of Detroit now. It’s a dumpster.
Leftist’s kill hope, dreams and futures. The epitome of the degeneration of the human spirit. This is a statistical fact. Unassailable. It has given us feminism. Destruction of life at the spiritual level.
No. Let’s not. Because that’s not the reality. Guns are for hunting, self defense and war.Let's put aside leftists, rightist or even feminism to the conner.
Let's talk abt quality of life.
I'm talking abt banning guns across the board since gun ownership doesn't increase the quality of life for the residents of a city.
It will almost likely reduce deaths and injuries by guns by 90% or even 99%?
Wouldn't that be good?
Wouldn't that make a city safer from gun related violence?
Something to think about once politics is removed from the equation.
No it wouldn’t. Murderers are murderers. They are created mostly by duress. This is politically driven.Let's put aside leftists, rightist or even feminism to the conner.
Let's talk abt quality of life.
I'm talking abt banning guns across the board since gun ownership doesn't increase the quality of life for the residents of a city.
It will almost likely reduce deaths and injuries with guns by 90% or even 99%?
Wouldn't that be good?
Wouldn't that make a city safer from gun related violence?
Something to think about once politics is removed from the equation.
In other countries it is a reality.No. Let’s not. Because that’s not the reality.
Yes it is and hence my contention - there's no use of it in the cities.Guns are for hunting, self defense and war.
More reasons for guns to be banned and harsher punishment meted out such as the death penalty just for carrying a gun.The vast majority of gun deaths are gang related. Drugs.
I don’t support draconian measures hence they be used on you when the power base changes. Selling tractors really well and rising above others can get you killed. Hence the heavy taxation.In other countries it is a reality.
Cities like Singapore is safe, you're been there yourself.
Even Tokyo and Seoul is safe.
Yes it is and hence my contention - there's no use of it in the cities.
More reasons for guns to be banned and harsher punishment meted out such as the death penalty just for carrying a gun.
In some countries, even carrying a switch blade puts one on the death row.
Nothing in what you said has any relevance towards the quality of life for residents of a city or urban areas vis a vis gun ownership.I don’t support draconian measures hence they be used on you when the power base changes. Selling tractors really well and rising above others can get you killed. Hence the heavy taxation.
I don’t even carry a gun because I can kill without breaking a sweat. The cities caused their own problems. Then cry foul.
Do I own guns? Yes I do. You already know I am a IPSC shooter. I can clear a room in a heart beat. But that doesn’t make me evil or wrong to be so.
Think of it like this. A skilled fighter will most likely never get into a fight. A weak mind with a big mouth gets in lots of them.
Cities creating a problem due to their own political proclivities, belongs to them. If I make a bad decision or get lazy and my business collapses, should I then demand another to fix it?Nothing in what you said has any relevance towards the quality of life for residents of a city or urban areas vis a vis gun ownership.
In fact high gun ownership has been proven time and again over the years to lower the quality of life in any city vs those cities that has banned gun ownership - this is an undisputed fact.
However in rural areas where policing is lax due to a large area that's sparsely populated, little resources, and large farmlands to protect, guns and rifles will naturally enhance the quality of life for those that dwell there - this also is an undisputed fact.
The chances of your fanatical scenario are infinitesimal. Preceisely, there are only two reasons why such would ever have a motive:The reason why you need guns is because a group of 5 unarmed men can breach into your house and beat the hell out of you till you tell them where is the safe.
A ban is nothing without confiscation. It would require a Star Trek transporter to make all guns vanish. Unfortunately, there are too many guns in circulation for this to ever be feasible.What would happen if the US suddenly bans guns/rifles across the board in every city?
Stricter gun laws yield lower incidents of gun homicides, domestic homicides, and domestic suicides. The data on this is comprehensive.I meant in terms of gun violence, general safety, etc.
Interestingly, we agree.I don’t even carry a gun because I can kill without breaking a sweat. The cities caused their own problems. Then cry foul.
Do I own guns? Yes I do. You already know I am a IPSC shooter. I can clear a room in a heart beat. But that doesn’t make me evil or wrong to be so.
Think of it like this. A skilled fighter will most likely never get into a fight. A weak mind with a big mouth gets in lots of them.
False. Guns are for war.No. Let’s not. Because that’s not the reality. Guns are for hunting, self defense and war.
Oh brother. LMAOFalse. Guns are for war.
Did humans hunt before gunpowder?
Guns as self-defense is only applicable in a society with guns.
In 2020, cities drive countries. Cities subsidize rural areas, not vice versa.Cities creating a problem due to their own political proclivities, belongs to them. If I make a bad decision or get lazy and my business collapses, should I then demand another to fix it?
People need to suffer through their poor voting decisions and grow. I will not help them solve it or participate in more perversion in even dumber solutions.
How they solve it is within their power. The gun laws are very stringent yet supposedly there is an increase. More gun laws keep making it worse. So who’s creating this?
That is the million dollar question. Who is creating it? I lived in the burbs for quite a while. I get it.