RANT at the good old U.S of A

[Caerloc]

Did you really just mention nukes. So to conquer the country, the ONE THEY LIVE IN, they are going to completely devastate it, so then can rule over the ash. Yeah, good luck with that.

Clearly you overestimate the power of a nuclear bomb. It doesnt lay an entire country in ashes. But i was merely pointing out that this is the kind of power he is advocating using his handguns to protect himself from.

 

[Caerloc]

And to add to Skaw and Trippy's point if we had a Justice system that actually enforced harsher sentencing and an Executive branch that actually enforced the laws then a lot things would improve.

Harsher sentences, arent you guys one of the few countrys that have deathsentences?
Along with China, Saudi-arabia, Iraq and other enlightened countrys.

 

[Caerloc]

What the fuck does gun control have to do with WMDs? Now you are just splitting hairs.

Cause the American people are so fucking paranoid that maybe they should just lay away all those guns and lock themselves all into bombshelters so noone can attack them.

 

[Caerloc]

No. Far from it, actually.

Apples != Oranges, homeskillet.

Wasnt me who suggested war ment millions of lives lost. That was trippyhippy. My point was that wars costed about as many lives as 9/11 and similar terrorist attacks. Which is what i said america gets instead of invasions. Now im not saying that its right, its rather horrible. But your handguns still arent protecting you.

 

[Kagemusha]

Cause the American people are so fucking paranoid that maybe they should just lay away all those guns and lock themselves all into bombshelters so noone can attack them.

You're starting to go from "Kind of sort of civil argument" to "America bashing". Keep it up, champ.

 

[Kagemusha]

Wasnt me who suggested war ment millions of lives lost. That was trippyhippy. My point was that wars costed about as many lives as 9/11 and similar terrorist attacks. Which is what i said america gets instead of invasions. Now im not saying that its right, its rather horrible. But your handguns still arent protecting you.

You're joking right? 9/11 killed around 3,000 people, where shit like the War in Iraq has killed tens of thousands in military members, and hundreds of thousands in civilians. You really have no fucking idea what you are talking about.

 

[Caerloc]

You're joking right? 9/11 killed around 3,000 people, where shit like the War in Iraq has killed tens of thousands in military members, and hundreds of thousands in civilians. You really have no fucking idea what you are talking about.

And 9/11 is the only terrorist attack ever? And thats beside the point. I didnt say it was gonna be equal to the war in iraq down to the last casualty. I didnt even say it was gonna be equal to the war in iraq. I just said it produced similar numbers to a war. And i was comparing American losses in a war with american losses in in terrorist attacks.
I used iraq to show trippyhippy wars didnt cost millions of lives, or atleast very rarely. (WWII)

But about your numbers.

Us casualtys adds up to 3761.
Iraqi casualtys is estimated to somewhere between 7-10.000
Civilian casualtys is estimated to about 75.000 by the Iraqi bodycount association.

Iraqi tally is ofcourse hard to pinpoint, but these are the current estimates.
Mr. Tommy Franks estimate of 30-40.000 iraqi casualtys just in the beginning of the war was pretty quickly abandoned.

But to sum up.
American casualtys is one terrorist attack; 3000
American casualtys in a war; 3761

Pretty similar numbers.

 

[Ravic]

Clearly you overestimate the power of a nuclear bomb. It doesnt lay an entire country in ashes. But i was merely pointing out that this is the kind of power he is advocating using his handguns to protect himself from.

No, I know full well the power of a nuclear weapon. It would take a whole lot more than a single bomb to raze a country, especially one the size of America. The comment about ruling the ash was a joke, more or less.

I also know that no one would ever use a weapon like that on the country they were trying to overthrow, thus your whole point is moot.

 

[Caerloc]

You're starting to go from "Kind of sort of civil argument" to "America bashing". Keep it up, champ.

Yeah, cause this guy doesnt seem paranoid at all.

Some one breaks in to my house and threatens myself and my family (Whole tyrannical government argument aside.) I can either have a gun and be as prepared as possible, or hope for the best and trust in human decency and mercy. Haha yeah right. Fuckin-a I'll have my pistol/rifle/ w/e cocked and locked, and heaven have mercy on the asshat to comes unwelcome in to my house. I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it. As if taking guns away by means of bans would actually do anything. I live in California, and almost every gun that could do major mass harm is banned here, but they are still being sold despite the bans. I hate regurgitating this point, but if a criminal wants a gun bad enough, eventually he'll get it. And then what do we have? All the good guys are disarmed due to bull shit laws, and all the crooks who don't care armed to the teeth?
Nice. You can have my guns when you pry them from my cold dead hands.

 

[Caerloc]

No, I know full well the power of a nuclear weapon. It would take a whole lot more than a single bomb to raze a country, especially one the size of America. The comment about ruling the ash was a joke, more or less.

I also know that no one would ever use a weapon like that on the country they were trying to overthrow, thus your whole point is moot.

My point isnt moot, simply because they MIGHT not use the nuclear bombs. But who are you to tell, look at other nations where the government has run amok. They havent hesitated in the slightest to kill hundredthousands of their own people. whats to say a american TYRANIICAL government would be any different?

But thats beside the point. Even if they wouldnt use them, what good is your handguns gonna do against tanks, aircrafts, helicopters and pretty much the whole might of the american army?

 

[Ravic]

My point isnt moot, simply because they MIGHT not use the nuclear bombs. But who are you to tell, look at other nations where the government has run amok. They havent hesitated in the slightest to kill hundredthousands of their own people. whats to say a american TYRANIICAL government would be any different?

But thats beside the point. Even if they wouldnt use them, what good is your handguns gonna do against tanks, aircrafts, helicopters and pretty much the whole might of the american army?

You are aware that the our military, by law, can not be turned against our own people. Thus, again, you've just arrived at a moot point.

 

[Caerloc]

You are aware that the our military, by law, can not be turned against our own people. Thus, again, you've just arrived at a moot point.

Dude, follow the argument. You Americans have stated that you need your guns to protect yourself from a government turned tyrants. When the goverment turns corrupt and tyrannical i would assume that means they no longer follow the american laws?

And if they do, then i would have to ask, what did you need those handguns for again?

 

[Ravic]

Dude, follow the argument. You Americans have stated that you need your guns to protect yourself from a government turned tyrants. When the goverment turns corrupt and tyrannical i would assume that means they no longer follow the american laws?

And if they do, then i would have to ask, what did you need those handguns for again?

Touche. I admit i kinda walked into that one.

But my mis-step aside, the fact remains that no government could take over any country without the use of infantry, which is still susceptible to small arms fire. The only way to use all heavy artilery, tanks, fighter jets, etc. would be to completely destroy everything. Then all that's left is a 3000 mile wide parking lot, ergo, there's is still a use for guns to fend off the armies, unless the final goal is not conquest, but total destruction in which case even giving the citizenry an M1A1 in every garage would be pointless.

 

[Kagemusha]

And 9/11 is the only terrorist attack ever? And thats beside the point. I didnt say it was gonna be equal to the war in iraq down to the last casualty. I didnt even say it was gonna be equal to the war in iraq. I just said it produced similar numbers to a war. And i was comparing American losses in a war with american losses in in terrorist attacks.
I used iraq to show trippyhippy wars didnt cost millions of lives, or atleast very rarely. (WWII)

But about your numbers.

Us casualtys adds up to 3761.
Iraqi casualtys is estimated to somewhere between 7-10.000
Civilian casualtys is estimated to about 75.000 by the Iraqi bodycount association.

Iraqi tally is ofcourse hard to pinpoint, but these are the current estimates.
Mr. Tommy Franks estimate of 30-40.000 iraqi casualtys just in the beginning of the war was pretty quickly abandoned.

But to sum up.
American casualtys is one terrorist attack; 3000
American casualtys in a war; 3761

Pretty similar numbers.

Even if you do ignore the iraqi deaths (which is stupid, a death is still a death), there are about 30,000 wounded there too. Fun fact: This isn't even a real war, if you want to talk about REAL wars, then we can see how big those numbers can get.

 

[Yurian]

Yeah, cause this guy doesnt seem paranoid at all.

If paranoid = prepared for any eventuality. Then so be it. I don't trust people out of hand, because regardless of where you live and how perfect you think things are from your high horse, there are bad people in this world. Bad people who don't give a fuck about you or your statistics or your views on how things should be or anything else for that matter.

I hope someday you learn this first hand, and understand where I'm coming from. Hopefully you will survive to learn a lesson. From what I've heard from you it seems you have a lot of time on your hands, watch a lot of biased news, and generally hate America.

I don't need a gun to protect myself from the government, I need a gun to protect myself from the psycho's and pieces of human trash that people like you empower. You have no perspective as to why I might choose to have a gun other than what I've stated, but you assume a lot. Good Lord I detest people like you, lots of talk and bitching, and no answers just finger pointing while trying to keep morale high ground.

Go jump on another bandwagon.

 

[Trippyhippy]

Dude, follow the argument. You Americans have stated that you need your guns to protect yourself from a government turned tyrants. When the goverment turns corrupt and tyrannical i would assume that means they no longer follow the american laws?

And if they do, then i would have to ask, what did you need those handguns for again?

Anyone who thinks the military can't be used against the american people needs to ask Janet Reno about this: http://www.serendipity.li/waco.html

Wasnt me who suggested war ment millions of lives lost. That was trippyhippy. My point was that wars costed about as many lives as 9/11 and similar terrorist attacks. Which is what i said america gets instead of invasions. Now im not saying that its right, its rather horrible. But your handguns still arent protecting you.

If a force of the same size that invaded Iraq invaded America, do you think they would have just 3500 casualties? No, they would all die at the hands of proud gun owning Americans. There isn't a military force in the world that could invade America, even if we didn't have an army.

Now you want to talk about nukes. The USA has over 5000 active nuclear warheads in stock. Anyone fires a Nuke, and they are getting the same sent back at them 100 fold. I'm not saying gun ownership is a universal protection against every possible kind of Assault. There is no such thing.

 

[Caerloc]

If paranoid = prepared for any eventuality. Then so be it. I don't trust people out of hand, because regardless of where you live and how perfect you think things are from your high horse, there are bad people in this world. Bad people who don't give a fuck about you or your statistics or your views on how things should be or anything else for that matter.

I hope someday you learn this first hand, and understand where I'm coming from. Hopefully you will survive to learn a lesson. From what I've heard from you it seems you have a lot of time on your hands, watch a lot of biased news, and generally hate America.

I don't need a gun to protect myself from the government, I need a gun to protect myself from the psycho's and pieces of human trash that people like you empower. You have no perspective as to why I might choose to have a gun other than what I've stated, but you assume a lot. Good Lord I detest people like you, lots of talk and bitching, and no answers just finger pointing while trying to keep morale high ground.

Go jump on another bandwagon.

You NEED your gun? You couldnt make it without it? Then let me ask you this. How often have you had to use it?

 

[Caerloc]

If a force of the same size that invaded Iraq invaded America, do you think they would have just 3500 casualties? No, they would all die at the hands of proud gun owning Americans. There isn't a military force in the world that could invade America, even if we didn't have an army.

Ofcourse they couldnt. Every american would bravely pick up their handgun and go toe to toe with a tank.

Now you want to talk about nukes. The USA has over 5000 active nuclear warheads in stock. Anyone fires a Nuke, and they are getting the same sent back at them 100 fold. I'm not saying gun ownership is a universal protection against every possible kind of Assault. There is no such thing.

The discussion was wether a tyrant american government would use the nuclear bombs against its own people. An extreme, i admitt, but it wouldnt be the first time a dictator government went to extremes. I very much doubt any other country would be stupid enough to open fire on America with nuclear bombs. Just like i said no other country would be stupid enough to invade america. But i still think your kidding yourself if you think its your handguns that keeps them from it.

And no, you are right, there is no universal protection. But your handguns arent needed in the protection of america. Your army is more then enough.

 

[beeznuts]

You NEED your gun? You couldnt make it without it? Then let me ask you this. How often have you had to use it?

My house has never caught fire either, brb, I'm going to go throw all the fire extinguishers away.

 

[Caerloc]

Even if you do ignore the iraqi deaths (which is stupid, a death is still a death), there are about 30,000 wounded there too. Fun fact: This isn't even a real war, if you want to talk about REAL wars, then we can see how big those numbers can get.

Off course a death is a death. But i was comparing american losses. And fun fact, a war is a war, no matter how fast the opposing army surrenders.