Guns are allowed in every european country... They are just registered in most of them, restricted with owners so that the government can know who has what kind of weapon (makes it easier to find people that comit crimes with them) and to make sure that people that really shouldn't have guns can't buy them in a store.
But thats really not what this thread is about, I'm still waiting for some real examples..
Gender: Male Location: between apathy and indifference
You do that most cases of death caused by gunshot in american homes is from a gun that is the possession of someone in that home?
I'm not against rifles or shotguns, I just think handguns or military equipment is a little over the top.
But this debate is focussing too much on the gun issues. Apparently there are other rights and freedoms that are being taken away by liberals, I am interested as to what they are.
__________________ "I made a typo bif deal" - JacopeX
What about public housing developments and the rights to block the building of them? Obviously one group wants them a lot more than the other.
Or maybe it's not an issue. I'm not sure, but it was off the top of my head. If anyone knows anything about that situation and why it does/does not apply, please contribute.
people resort to the "we" arguement because its easier for people to claim to speak for half the population, and against half, rather than speak one person ideas against another's ideas.
its just a cowardly cop out
I own a hand gun and not a riffle...Can't imagine me with something big.
It's tucked away, though I'm sure I wouldn't remember to use it. I'd probably grab a knife if something were to appear. Otherwise, I can't think of anything else...I guess the conservatives are worried about liberals corrupting everyone with "OPEN PLAY TIME"...they are worried about the moral decay...
Gender: Male Location: between apathy and indifference
Originally posted by Afro Cheese
Overall I think people look at everything like a liberal vs conservative issue way too much. I don't like to affiliate myself with either group because frankly they are both annoying as hell.
I sort of agree, I have more of a problem with the people who call themselves one or the other than the actual categorizing of a thought as one that is liberal or conservative.
Sometimes my viewpoint on a subject is liberal, sometimes it is more conservative, depends on the issue. I do find it amusing that people have to pigeon hole themselves.
Even more interesting is the reason why I felt compelled to start this thread. A person who declares themselves to be neither liberal or conservative announced that Liberals have taken away too many of America's rights and freedoms? I thought it was an interesting if not totally warped comment and I was interested to see if others felt the same.
__________________ "I made a typo bif deal" - JacopeX
Depending on how you've educated your self people tend to align themselves with that party, but if you really DID educated your self instead of parreting what others tell you, then you could be split. People stop voting....I'm probably going some 3rd party next time.
nor British or Norwegian cops wear guns, people are free to have them though,but you have to have them at home and there you have to keep them out of sight. And the guns have to be registered, you cant purchase a gun without it being registered if you do it considered to be an illegal weapon
FASCISM:A political movement that believes in an extreme form of nationalism: denying individual rights, insisting upon the supremacy of the state, and advocating one-party rule with ultimate authority resting in the hands of a dictator.
more rights and freedoms get taken away each day..and shockingly we allow this to happen
__________________
"How about this? Shut your mouth...Or I'll kick your teeth down your throat and shut it for you."
Gender: Male Location: between apathy and indifference
Thank you. Got that Kid?
Yes, but the subject of the thread is how are liberals taking these away? Where are all the conservatives that spout this in all the other threads? I mean, I have totally devoted a thread for them to put forth their argument, but as of yet, we have received zilch.
__________________ "I made a typo bif deal" - JacopeX
the argument about the threat of terrorism is valid...but the longer the vigilance against the threat is successful the less the percieved threat becomes...and when the presumtion of safety appears then the pressure to reverse any restriction of liberties begins...which could potentially open up another chance for a terrorist act
i'm not arguing for increased restriction of liberties...please dont misunderstand me...
the police force for my local area are going to be responsible for next months G8 summit and as such have requested increased anti terror powers which are most definitely geared towards the restriction of liberties and my own father who is a delivery man who regularly takes parcels to the auchterarder area (the nearest town to Gleneagles hotel where the summit is being held) is already suffering from severe restrictions in the form of regular searches of his van when delivering to the hotel
all guests at the hotel for the past few months have all been subject to security checks by MI5
i definitely think it can be taken to far...
but there has to be some give and take in this debate to get a acceptable balance
how many of you americans regularly suffer inconvenience because of restriction of liberties...my guess is probably a very small number of people
its a very different world we live in post sept 11th even if it doesn't manifest itself very conspicuously
look at it from the security services point of view
if they told the public of every terrorist threat that appeared and which subsequently failed to materialize then they would be accused of scaremongering...if they never told the public anything and another major incident occured then they would be accused of cover ups and being incompetent
dont forget that the people that work for the security services aren't engaged in some giant conspiracy to enslave the US population...many of them are just normal people trying to do a job to benefit you
In general political ideology, left wing = greater legislation from Government
Therefore, Left Wing Government endemically involves more restrictions than right wing.
Therefore, the argument can be advanced that Liberal government, in the American sense of the term, restricts rights and freedoms.
-
Barcautastic says that it can't be liberal to ban smoking because to be liberal is the opposite to that. But he is from Europe, as am I, where the definition of liberal is, basically, capitalist- liberal markets and as little legislation as possible. Here, the right-wing are the ones who call themselves liberal, and hence would be much less likely to introduce restrictive laws. Margaret Thatcher, the most Republican-like leader we ever had, famously described herself as a Liberal, and her policies were all hardcore liberal ones, by our definition.
As has been discussed lately, the EU constitution was just rejected by France partially on the grounds of beeing too liberal- by which they meant too capitalist.
Very different.
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
the whole point of 9/11 was to help take our freedoms away...if the goverement didnt orchestrate the attacks..they certainly knew about them and allowed them to happen
know what hitler did? he firebombed his own reichstag building and blamed it on the terrorists..he scared his own people and he took there rights away and introduced homeland security..same thing happening with 9/11..look at the freedoms and rights that have been taken away since that event..its no conspiracy...its happening and people need to wake up to this
__________________
"How about this? Shut your mouth...Or I'll kick your teeth down your throat and shut it for you."
KMC Community Forums
Jun 9th, 2005 05:28 PM
