A full load of victim mentality.....:roll:
Why not if you want to be realy safe......leave your doors unlocked so they don't break down the door...
If you want to go further down the path of compliance, why not put all your stuff on the lawn so he doesn't get mad at you because of the work you're making him do hauling stuff out and break more stuff out of spite..
And if he decides to rape you....don't resist.....he might beat you up..
I agree education is not an indication of "smart" at all.First of all, education is not really an indication of "smart" Some of the most brilliant people I know never even completed high school........
And now the average level of education is college. Once again, times change, the world moves forward. Most worked in the factories on the line that was an okay education because you could live well. They made enough money to keep the wife at home, the kids in shoes, food on the table, the mortgage paid for, and a car in the driveway. In Canada you need grade 12 now to work a line.Secondly, during that period that the United States grew into being the greatest nation on earth.......say from 1900 to 1950....do you know what the AVERAGE level of education was in the USA in the first half of the 20th century?? Grade EIGHT.
or running around armedThird: What made America (and the west) great and powerful was liberty, seasoned with the restraining influence of a Christian culture. So you can not regain greatness by restraining liberty.
K...thanks for the clarification.As for the 50% thing, it is actually much higher than 50% that are killed when they surrender their weapons. Just let them have the money and back away is the very best survival tactic.
....is nuts.
And absolutely correct on this subject.
17,000 were suicide, so take the gun away and they'll just accomplish it by other means. Some of the rest is just syphoning off candidates for Ol' Sparky or the injection, so that is actually quite a saving. So maybe there are 3 or 4 thousand tragic deaths, but no more tragic than the thousands each year who die by slipping and falling![/QUOTE
What an absolutely asinine reply. Prove any part of those statements. By the way slipping and falling stats each year are around 500 a bit of a far cry from thousands in the US. What a deplorable attitude to the lives of others.
US Catholic bishops favour gun control. Will this be enough to persuade the NRA to take a sanity wafer?
Catholic bishops favor gun control - but who knows it? | National Catholic Reporter
17,000 were suicide, so take the gun away and they'll just accomplish it by other means. Some of the rest is just syphoning off candidates for Ol' Sparky or the injection, so that is actually quite a saving. So maybe there are 3 or 4 thousand tragic deaths, but no more tragic than the thousands each year who die by slipping and falling![/QUOTE
What an absolutely asinine reply. Prove any part of those statements. By the way slipping and falling stats each year are around 500 a bit of a far cry from thousands in the US. What a deplorable attitude to the lives of others.
And your "deplorable attitude" towards the up to 2.5 million people that use guns in self-defense in the USA every year????
How many were killed in the Australian confiscation of arms??The "gun death" statistical game is a con job done on the naive by those with an agenda...
The MURDER RATE in the USA is relatively low, and has been dropping rapidly for the last 20 years, as gun laws are eased or eliminated. In fact, the rate is the lowest it has been since 1960........so where is this cultural breakdown???
The USA is a relatively peaceful place to live.
At least Morgan got it right, 12,000 homicides by people armed with firearms.
The suicide rate is irrelevant.
Alex Jones is nuttier than a fruitcake.
And absolutely correct in this interview.
How many people do you think will die in the rebellions that gun seizures will cause in the USA???
Biden: Obama Will Bypass Congress for Gun Control
Revolution against tyrants.
Time to clean and lube the AR 15.
Biden: Obama Considering 'Executive Order' to Deal With Guns - YouTube
I had hoped the Executive Order thing was a joke....guess not.
So, Obama intends to over ride the Bill of Rights with an Executive Order.
THAT is justifiable cause for rebellion.
From the article:
“We support the development of a coherent national handgun control policy that includes: a several day cooling-off period between the sale and possession; a ban on "Saturday Night Specials"; the registration of handguns; the licensing of handgun owners; and more effective controls regulating the manufacture, sale and importation of handguns. We recognize, however, that these individual steps will not completely eliminate the abuse of handguns. We believe that only prohibition of the importation, manufacture, sale, possession and use of handguns (with reasonable exceptions made for the police, military, security guards and pistol clubs where guns would be kept on the premises under secure conditions) will provide a comprehensive response to handgun violence.”
Laws like this have already found by the SCOTUS to be unconstitutional.
And your "deplorable attitude" towards the up to 2.5 million people that use guns in self-defense in the USA every year????
I'm not quite sure where/when I expressed a "deplorable attitude" toward the people who use guns in self defense. Please clarify!-
! think it all started with Birdie's inability to quote properly and it went "downhill"? from there.....You put all these bad quotations together and you can't figure out who said what............I'm not quite sure where/when I expressed a "deplorable attitude" toward the people who use guns in self defense. Please clarify!-
! think it all started with Birdie's inability to quote properly and it went "downhill"? from there.....You put all these bad quotations together and you can't figure out who said what............
How many were killed in the Australian confiscation of arms??
Really!! An amendment that was instituted to allow towns to arm & form militia, before the formation of Sheriff, town,state & federal protection agencies, should be changed to reflect the changing times. Heck,otherwise, might as well go back to going back to waving a lantern before passing through an intersection as well.
I'm not quite sure where/when I expressed a "deplorable attitude" toward the people who use guns in self defense. Please clarify!-
Australia does not have a clear and unrestricted constitutional right to bear arms, as in Australia the Parliament is superior to the constitution.
In the United States, you have to suspend the constitution to seize arms.
If you want the Bill of Rights to say something different YOU HAVE TO AMEND IT, not edge around it, setting a very dangerous precedent. There is a process. Do it. Work towards it. And if you fail, then you live in the society chosen by the American people. This end-run around individual rights is simply unacceptable.
BTW, your interpretation of the second amendment is nonsense.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
-- Thomas Jefferson
She didn't say that to you, I said that to HER!!!
Confused yet???
The Supreme Court ruling in the recent case of the District of Columbia versus Heller states:
"like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose:* For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."
So while the States wants to gun up, Britain is a prime example that it can be done.
I do remember way back when one of the first bobbies were shot, everyone in the criminal element helped to track down the shooter because it is part of the code. You don't kill cops, you don't fire your gun. More and more I am going back to where I was before, guns for hunting, that's it.
Thanks, very informative.The idea of consentual policing was put forth by Robert Peel with the following principles:
Sir Robert Peel’s Nine Principles:
It was understood that the police were paid to do that which was already incumbent upon the citizen. The citizenry were armed where the police were not. Criminals who killed Sir Robert's "Bobbies" were sought after with much fervor primarily because the police were denied armed defense by law and essentially, defenseless. Guns were designed to kill, period, and those who have them for nefarious purposes will always win against unarmed targets. If both sides are armed, at least the odds are evened out a bit.
- The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
- The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police actions.
- Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observance of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.
- The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.
- Police seek and preserve public favour not by catering to public opinion but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.
- Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient.
- Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
- Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.
- The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.