Whats going on in Canada?

[lazs2]

And... I would contend that it is indeed a fact, proven over and over that the majority of people who espouse gun control are indeed uninformed or.... more correctly missinformed.

A very simple book to start with on the subject is "the seven myths of gun control"  work up to Lott's "more guns, less crime"

I on the other hand will be glad to read any books you have on a workable pure democracy or any book that proves that removing the human right to defend yourself (or removing any inalienable right) is in the end.... not dangerous or best for every human.   Any book that contends that the right to defend yourself in not a human right.

I think that you will find with even the most cursory examination that your "feelings" are based on intentionally biased media reporting and outright missinformation and that there really are not well researched tomes that would support your position...

In short... yes... the majority are missinformed... this is not an unusaual thing historicaly by the press or the government.... One could say that it is happening as we speak... either bush was "missinformed" or we were for example.  regardless... the press bought it and the "majority" bought it.

It can not be argued tho in my opinion, that democracy needs safeguards.... checks and balaces and.... a bill of rights.

lazs

[soda72]

They realized that democracy was good only if first of all.... these inalienable rights were protected from the whim of the majority....

Well said .....

[Curval]

Originally posted by lazs2
Our founders realized that people are instilled with god given inalienable rights that no man or group of men can take from them... Do you agree with this premis?

They realized that democracy was good only if first of all.... these inalienable rights were protected from the whim of the majority who.... historicaly have murdered and tortured and maimed millions of their fellow citizens for such things as not saying the right things..  All in the name of civilization.

Out of curiousity...how many of your "founders" were slave owners?  I think you will find quite a few of them were.  Sort of dulls the effect of such majestic ideals.

[beet1e]

Originally posted by lazs2
beet... regardless of if you use the FBI or DOJ stats... the trend for the last couple of decades is downward.   It is also clear that all violent crime in the U.S. is down not matter which figures you use.

Oh FFS. Only in the branch of Mathematics known to this board as Lazsmatics™ could this be construed as a true statement. As you've apparently omitted to follow my FBI links - presumably because they don't tell you what you want to hear - I will post the relevant FBI spreadsheet data here.

In Lazs's world, the laws of Lazsmatics™ state that 14,465 is less than 14263, which in turn is less than 14,061, which is less than 13,230.

[lazs2]

not at all curval... In point of fact, many recantred their views on slavery.   Once the founders recognized that colored people were indeed people they upheld their inalienable rights too.  It is not so much a discussion of what are human rights but..  who was human.   Who could blame them at the time since the colored peoples were the ones selling their own people into slavery.   They had no real human values that we could recognize at the time.... as we became more familiar with then of course, this changed.

Those who fought to end slavery also believed in the constitution.   Sooo... are you saying the founders were wrong but.... say.. Lincoln was right?  he was a firm believer in the bill of rights.  

Perhaps you can explain how having a bill of rights is a bad thing for a democracy?

Perhaps you can show me an example of how a pure democracy with no provisions for protection of human rights works?

It seems that your idea of government has brought humans a lot more grief than anything the U.S. bill of rights (including the second amendment) has brought us.   Your government has a history of disarming and subjegating peoples.  

lazs

[lazs2]

beet.... 3 years is not "decades" it is a bump.

look at real stats for decades

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/hmrttab.htm

You will see that the rate has gone from 10.5 per hundred thousand in the 90's to down to around 6 for 2002 and another drop in 2004

It continues to drop.

lazs

[lazs2]

Also... by looking at the chart I showed it is obvious that the least amount of homicides was when there was the least amount of gun control..

The hysterical gun control nannies of the sixties increased homicide rates for decades and only when concealled carry and the relaxing of gun control took effect have the rates been dropping back to "wild west" numbers.

lazs

[Curval]

Originally posted by lazs2
Once the founders recognized that colored people were indeed people they upheld their inalienable rights too.

Awwww....that was nice of them.  Curiously it only took them almost a hundred years to recognise it.  Imagine the subjugation that went on during the interveneing period!   The British outlawed slavery before the Amurikans...btw...and actually sent their navy to destroy the trade....against the wishes of the United States, I might add.

[Hangtime]

Curvie.. what in bloody blue blazes has the slave record got to do with anything?

Shall we delve into englands religious persecution? Their debtors prison system that made slaves of millions? the colonization period? englands imperailisim, india?

has nothin ta do with anything relevant. Quit peeing into the wind. looks unseemly, ruins yer makeup.

[Curval]

Originally posted by Hangtime
Curvie.. what in bloody blue blazes has the slave record got to do with anything?

It has to do with lazs' patriotic usage of the Founding Fathers and Inalienable Rights in this typical gun discussion.

See, its all wonderful to use this as justification for all that is good, clean and democratic within the US...but the reality is that they (The Founding Fathers) were a bunch of slave owners who had no intention of giving those rights to anyone that they considered "non-human"...their slaves.

That's all.

[Hangtime]

4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.

[Curval]

lol

Next thing you know you are gonna "sic" the NRA on me.....

"Oh no...Hangtime and Lazs' buddies...the NRA!!!"

[lazs2]

He most certainly does but he really doesn't care since he is pretty much.... british.

funny story.. my girlfriend and I were watching a show and some foppish guy with a brit accent was on... I said something like "is that guy gay enough or what?"

she said...."all brits are gay tho"  I said that I didn't think they ALL were...  she said "well... the ones that aren't are all bisexual tho".... I said "yeah..probly"

I really don't want to hear about human rights  from someone who comes from a people who's history is rooted in imperialism and the political ideal if disarming and then subjegating whole peoples.   I don't think the average zulu or afrrican for that matter felt that the U.S. was more of a threat to their humanity than the brits were.

lazs

[Curval]

...and as usual the discussion decends into British people being called gay and womanly.<- insert gay rolley eyes thingy.

Geeze you guys are starting to "sound" so much alike now.  

ASSimilation must be complete.

wtg lazs, another one to add to the collective.

[lazs2]

4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.