Thank you for visiting, Mr. President, but...

[Kieran]

Airguard, if your country doesn't want its citizens armed, I really don't care. Same for Britain and any other country. My point is Beetle is reaping what he sowed.

Anyway... Norway and Finland both have a population density lower than my home state of Indiana, considered a pretty rural state by our standards. I don't live in fear of carjackings. I don't live in fear someone will bust into my house. In that way we are probably similar. However... if someone DOES bust into my home and I am in it, there is a good chance they will be shot. The very fact many homeowners are armed will make many people think twice about crawling through a window. You gotta weigh the risk of getting injured, killed, or caught against the relatively poor potential return.

Now our bigger cities... that's a problem.

[lazs2]

seriously... are all euros such little girls about guns or is it just the ones who post here?

LOL... like I want to hear about handguns from these wussies.

don't worry... your government will protect you from the bad men  and make sure that you play nice.

lazs

[Sox62]

Originally posted by Fishu
Sox62,

More legal guns means more illegal guns.
If you don't understand, read what I said before in this thread.

Dude,this is the way it is.Our country is based on certain rights,one of which is the right to bear arms.It is not going away.Guns are legal to purchase-NOT ILLEGAL(unless you have a felony or history of violence or mental illness).

For whatever reason,six states still prohibit concealed carry of which Ohio is one,and as a result we have numerous carjackings.

I understood your post quite well,but as most anti-gun people never seem to grasp,criminals will ALWAYS find a way to obtain them,whether or not they are legal.

Your statement,"maybe if guns were illegal he wouldn't have been shot" is nothing but a cheap and mean way to justify your viewpoint that guns are bad.

I do know this though,if Tony Gordon had been armed,he at least would have had a fighting chance.

[beet1e]

All these threads end the same way. The Yanks are delighted with the status quo where they live, and the rest of the world is happy about things where they live. The Yanks point out what might or might not have happened if they were unarmed, overlooking the fact that it's because of their country's laissez faire stance on privately owned weapons that their law abiding citizens have a perceived need to arm themselves in the first place.

We, in the rest of the world, see things differently. We see regulation of firearms not as taking away our rights but of ensuring that we never have to come face to face with an armed assailant. It doesn't work perfectly, but neither does a US-style arms free for all. To see which method works best, check homicide rates for America versus the rest of the world.

The cigarette ban analogy springs to mind. America has taken great strides to eliminate smoking from restaurants and other public places -  I don't see this as an impingement upon the rights of smokers to light up whenever and wherever they want. I see it as creating more freedom for MOST of us (the nonsmokers) to breathe clean air.

Same goes for firearms. I don't want to have to be armed, but might feel the need if all the local schmucks had got theirs. I am thankful that legislation in this and many other countries around the world has made this an improbable scenario, and leaves me free not to worry about having to tool up.

[Torque]

Until newborns start dropping out of the womb with holsters and 44 Magnums i prefer my govn't prioritze on more basic rights like  universal healthcare and safe environments.

[Fishu]

Sox62,

Nobodys telling your country here, but they shouldn't either tell euros how to deal with it.

[lazs2]

LOL... basic rights like universal healthcare and safe environment?  every person has a right to a hospital building and a bunch of people taking care of him?   every person has the 'right' to no have a boulder fall on his head or lightning strike him?  

seems being able to defend yourself is a lot more of a human right.    seems a baby can't defend himself.. better he has someone to defend him.  when he gets old enough he can defend others... or.... we could just make being a bad man illegal...

I can't beive that other than the couple of euros here that the rest of em have been so conned... love to see a pole.   can't believe the world is full of these women.

lazs

[Fishu]

Lazs,

Problem is, like I said earlier, if people carries weapons all around, you'll be sure to see criminals doing the same and becoming even more hasty in their actions.
For a reason US has had gun control laws as well, instead of staying at the ol' wild west style gun control.
If lives in smaller cities or countryside, weapons doesn't become too big of a problem, but when it's a big city, the danger of abuse increases.

[lazs2]

if they abuse it they go to jail or die.   simple really.   what really happens is that the crooks don;t want the extra sentace so they don't go armed that oftern but they run into armed citizens who can shoot them with impunity.. just the way it should be.

our crime rate is going down while most others are going up.

lazs

[Martlet]

Originally posted by Fishu
Lazs,

Problem is, like I said earlier, if people carries weapons all around, you'll be sure to see criminals doing the same and becoming even more hasty in their actions.
For a reason US has had gun control laws as well, instead of staying at the ol' wild west style gun control.
If lives in smaller cities or countryside, weapons doesn't become too big of a problem, but when it's a big city, the danger of abuse increases.

That's the difference between the whiny liberals and the conservatives.  You guys want the government to be your mommy and daddy.

We'd prefer to accept some risks to preserve our freedom.

[Fishu]

and meanwhile passing patriot act laws to let your goverment act as your mommy and daddy

[AKIron]

Originally posted by Fishu
and meanwhile passing patriot act laws to let your goverment act as your mommy and daddy

While you now have a government run by only your mommy. Guess I'm gonna hafta do a bit of digging to compare relative freedoms between our countries.

[AKIron]

Something like this would cause a loud outcry in the US.

"In late 2002, VTT Technologies, a government research center, developed a new type of high frequency (900 MHz) Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tag that can be read with a transceiver up to four meters away. The signal can also penetrate obstacles. VTT experts believe that these RFID tags will be commonplace within ten years. In the Helsinki region, the most familiar application of RFID technology is the new travel cards that are replacing paper tickets in the area's public transport system. The partners in the project are Helsinki Metropolitan Area Council (YTV), Helsinki City Transport, and the railway company VR. The use of travel cards is recorded in a database. This information can be accessed to aid transport capacity planning. The movements of travel card users are saved and can be accessed for later retrieval. The data from the transport system has been used for crime investigations in serious cases.[1103]"

http://www.privacyinternational.org/survey/phr2003/countries/finland.htm

[Martlet]

Originally posted by Fishu
and meanwhile passing patriot act laws to let your goverment act as your mommy and daddy

Obviously you haven't taken the time to read the Patriot Act.  The two aren't even comparable.  Do you ever bother to inform yourself on the subject you chose to jump into?

[lazs2]

I am against the patriot act.   I would much rather just give agents a licence to kill.   sure... they make a mistake now and then but no big deal.  
lazs