NIKV69 wrote:

We don't want to be like you. Which has been said over and over again. If this angers you I am sorry. You can stay there and we will stay here

You most certainly do NOT speak for all Americans. That is YOUR personal opinion, and it is not shared by every US citizen.

NIKV69 wrote:

Due respect but most if not all country to country bashing on this forum is Europe bashing the US. Do a search here and it's plain as day.

Apart from this thread of course; the OP was quick to say "I am a proud American myself"

NIKV69 wrote:

Not to mention most if not all Euro bashing here is usually in response to an attack from the Euro users here bashing the US.

"Please Sir, it wasn't me, it was him. He started it.....

NIKV69 wrote:

Mass shootings always result in the same cast of characters here attacking the US and giving us their "Here is how to be like us" routine.

Perhaps that is because mass shootings typically take place in the USA, and do not take place in Europe or Asia or Africa, or even the remainder of the Americas.
If there was even one far-sighted state that took the bold leap and banned guns, then you could listen to the criticism from within. But that hasn't happened, so it's left to those of us outside the States to point out where you are going wrong. We don't have to do it; we just choose to help you out of the kindness of our hearts.

NIKV69 wrote:

As I said in my response to the thread title and starter. We don't want to be like you. Which has been said over and over again. If this angers you I am sorry.

It certainly angered one dude;

LMP737 wrote:

"You keep using the word we as if you speak for all of us. News flash, you don't"

Quick Edit; ......and at least one more feels the same, from what I read above.
I do understand the underlying philosophy behind repeatedly using "we"; it makes your argument sound more powerful if millions of Americans are in lock-step with you. Whereas the truth........

bgm wrote:

You most certainly do NOT speak for all Americans. That is YOUR personal opinion, and it is not shared by every US citizen.

Nothing from keeping you from leaving.

NIKV69 wrote:

bgm wrote:

You most certainly do NOT speak for all Americans. That is YOUR personal opinion, and it is not shared by every US citizen.

Nothing from keeping you from leaving.

So you are the norm? If someone isn't up to it you get to decide whom is going to leave?

Mortyman wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

Mortyman wrote:

and the bashing amongst Americans of Europeans and Europe have also a long history. The difference is that most Americans have a very limited knowledge of the world around them and become easy targets for various media with an agenda.

Due respect but most if not all country to country bashing on this forum is Europe bashing the US. Do a search here and it's plain as day. Not to mention most if not all Euro bashing here is usually in response to an attack from the Euro users here bashing the US. Mass shootings always result in the same cast of characters here attacking the US and giving us their "Here is how to be like us" routine.

As I said in my response to the thread title and starter. We don't want to be like you. Which has been said over and over again. If this angers you I am sorry. You can stay there and we will stay here.

Also to address you calling us stupid as the to the world around us. I have been abroad and know full well all your customs, tax structure, gun laws etc. It's great but I don't want it. I don't want my right to own a gun restricted "for the common good" again if you like it fine. Keep it there.

Yes the media has many agendas and one is to if have a society in America like Europe. No guns. Which they push and exploit victims with their fake tears and props yelling at me that I don't need my guns. They can do that as much as they want. From my cold dead hand.

I was'nt talking about this forum especially, but the general bashing of Europe and Europeans in the US. Perhaps I wasn't Clear enough.

Furtheremore I did not say you were stupid, I said most Americans have little knowledge about the world around them. 50 - 70 % of Americans don't have a passport. For a country that is so very much involved around the world, that is a problem. You make alot of unnecessary problems for yourselves.

If it makes you feel better, I have been to over 100 countries, including Europe countless times, and I have zero interest in the US becoming more European.

There are many great things about Europe, just as the US has many flaws. There is no such thing as utopia and there never will be. We can only strive for bettering our respective societies over time. That will look a little different for each society.

On a side note, a lot of the lectures about "mass killings" seem to come from Germans on this forum. Not really sure you guys should be doing any lecturing on the topic.

FreequentFlier wrote:

If it makes you feel better, I have been to over 100 countries, including Europe countless times, and I have zero interest in the US becoming more European.

There are many great things about Europe, just as the US has many flaws. There is no such thing as utopia and there never will be. We can only strive for bettering our respective societies over time. That will look a little different for each society.

On a side note, a lot of the lectures about "mass killings" seem to come from Germans on this forum. Not really sure you guys should be doing any lecturing on the topic.

Except for the side note - which is below the belt - I mostly agree with you. All societies have faults and all societies have great things. It's ok that you don't want to have a more European society in your country.

On a side note, what is a European society anyway? Quite a lot of difference between the countries. The same as America, quite a bit of difference between the states I've visited.

Dutchy wrote:

FreequentFlier wrote:

If it makes you feel better, I have been to over 100 countries, including Europe countless times, and I have zero interest in the US becoming more European.

There are many great things about Europe, just as the US has many flaws. There is no such thing as utopia and there never will be. We can only strive for bettering our respective societies over time. That will look a little different for each society.

On a side note, a lot of the lectures about "mass killings" seem to come from Germans on this forum. Not really sure you guys should be doing any lecturing on the topic.

Except for the side note - which is below the belt - I mostly agree with you. All societies have faults and all societies have great things. It's ok that you don't want to have a more European society in your country.

On a side note, what is a European society anyway? Quite a lot of difference between the countries. The same as America, quite a bit of difference between the states I've visited.

There's a balance between statism and freedom. The two are in conflict. There are benefits to statism, such as greater potential for social cohesion (though at the expense of the individual). And there are benefits to individual freedom (though at the expense of social cohesion).

There is nothing inherently ethical or moral about either position - they are just different. Americans tend to err on the individual freedom side and Europeans err on the statism/social cohesion side. There are tradeoffs for each.

As for "below the belt", 2nd Amendment supporters are routinely referred to as accomplices to mass murder, including on this very forum. By contrast I've just stated a historical fact. So which one is really "below the belt"?

If gun rights opponents want to have a serious conversation, they could start by arguing in good faith. I've never met a 2nd Amendment fan who wanted kids to die in a school shooting.

Dutchy wrote:

So you are the norm? If someone isn't up to it you get to decide whom is going to leave?

Not at all. I just feel it's hypocritical to remain in a country yet try to change it to resemble another while you trample others rights. If you like the Europe model then move there, Many have.

NIKV69 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

So you are the norm? If someone isn't up to it you get to decide whom is going to leave?

Not at all. I just feel it's hypocritical to remain in a country yet try to change it to resemble another while you trample others rights. If you like the Europe model then move there, Many have.

Also if you want to change a part of society? I am actively involved in trying to change part of our society, should I move also?

NIKV69 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

So you are the norm? If someone isn't up to it you get to decide whom is going to leave?

Not at all. I just feel it's hypocritical to remain in a country yet try to change it to resemble another while you trample others rights. If you like the Europe model then move there, Many have.

Isn't that the who point of political parties, elections, etc.?

No country today resembles its 50 year ago self.

FreequentFlier wrote:

On a side note, a lot of the lectures about "mass killings" seem to come from Germans on this forum. Not really sure you guys should be doing any lecturing on the topic.

Quite the contrary. We know about it from our past. ... and we've gone beyond that.
So you could learn from German experience.

Only issue: there is a strong learning towards not knowing, not understanding and not learning.

NIKV69 wrote:

bgm wrote:

You most certainly do NOT speak for all Americans. That is YOUR personal opinion, and it is not shared by every US citizen.

Nothing from keeping you from leaving.

LOL! So everyone who disagrees with you needs to leave the country?

NIKV69 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

So you are the norm? If someone isn't up to it you get to decide whom is going to leave?

Not at all. I just feel it's hypocritical to remain in a country yet try to change it to resemble another while you trample others rights. If you like the Europe model then move there, Many have.

And here I was thinking that in a free country (you know, that concept some Americans think the US has a monopoly on?) you were free to criticize things you think are wrong, and to try to change it for the better. Guess I was wrong on that, and for the Trumpbots that's now become 'like it the way it is, or get out!'. Nice...

FreequentFlier wrote:

If it makes you feel better, I have been to over 100 countries, including Europe countless times, and I have zero interest in the US becoming more European.

Help me out here; whereabouts in the above comments was it decided that the thread was about the US becoming more European?
We're discussing changing one metric; gun ownership.

It takes a helluva lot more than that before you can say the US is becoming more European.

Indeed, if you ever do change that metric for the better, it could be said you are becoming better aligned with the rest of the planet. Not just Europe, but Africa, Asia, Australasia, Oceania, and the remainder of America, from Canada down.

And the wonderful thing is - you will still have a unique identity as the United States of America, just with fewer guns, and fewer gun deaths. What's not to like?

"Becoming more European" is a complete red-herring.

NIKV69 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

So you are the norm? If someone isn't up to it you get to decide whom is going to leave?

Not at all. I just feel it's hypocritical to remain in a country yet try to change it to resemble another while you trample others rights. If you like the Europe model then move there, Many have.

You think it's hypocritical?
I think it's hypocritical to cling on to a flawed interpretation of an amendment to the Constitution, written in the age of muskets, whilst ignoring the changes brought about by modern automatic and semi-automatic weapons. And then claiming America still needs a well-armed militia, when it has 2,500 F-35s coming into service, backed up by nuclear weapons just in case Cuba finds a way past them & your other defenses. Or are you still worried that Mexico might come back and try to re-take the Alamo?

I see the same hypocrisy in scholars preaching strict adherence to the Qur'an, in an age of jet travel and AK-42 assault rifles.
In both cases it's inappropriate and archaic, and born out of ignorance.

The people who disagree with you are not trying to change the USA to resemble Europe;
They are trying to change the USA to resemble somewhere more appropriate to the 21st century.

It is not them that need to leave the USA behind; it is you who need to leave the 18th century behind.

NIKV69 wrote:

bgm wrote:

You most certainly do NOT speak for all Americans. That is YOUR personal opinion, and it is not shared by every US citizen.

Nothing from keeping you from leaving.

Nor you. Why is it when there is a problem, the right tells everyone else to leave? Why do you righties have a problem with all other Americans showing patriotism that does not align with your (collective) opinions? You all cry and whine because you all claim no one is listening to you or doing what you all want but when anyone else expresses a different opinion, all of that hate and vitriol and "don't let the door hit you..." come out. Why is that?

A majority of Americans are sick and tired of a minority of Americans forcing us to live by the second half of one Amendment while completely ignoring the first half of the same Amendment.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/ ... oll-244759

If you want a gun crazy country, why don't you immigrate to one, Nik?

NIKV69 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

So you are the norm? If someone isn't up to it you get to decide whom is going to leave?

Not at all. I just feel it's hypocritical to remain in a country yet try to change it to resemble another while you trample others rights. If you like the Europe model then move there, Many have.

Like:
https://whyy.org/articles/pennsylvania- ... trict-map/

Or:

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/20 ... -court-id/

Or:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/08/us/weddi ... index.html

But, yeah, gunning down people is much more important...

Greece was a great economy to live in.... until it wasn't.

Venezuela was an anti-US worker's paradise.... until it wasn't.

Socialism is great .... until it isn't.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

Greece was a great economy to live in.... until it wasn't.

Venezuela was an anti-US worker's paradise.... until it wasn't.

Socialism is great .... until it isn't.

The countries with the highest happiness index in 2017:

1- Norway
2- Denmark
3- Iceland
4- Switzerland
5- Finland
6- Netherlands
.
.
.
.
.
14- USA

Well, I see a strong correlation between happiness and social democracy.

seb146 wrote:

When the Second Amendment was ratified in October of 1791, there was no such thing as bump stocks or AR-15s or semi-automatic weapons or automatic weapons or the need to pull off 30 rounds a minute. When the Second Amendment was ratified, the United States was still fighting off Redcoats and tyranny. There was a need for the men to be trained to fight in case England invaded again.

How dare you bring historical context to an irrational discussion? Shame on you, Sir!

The problem isn't even whether Europe should set an example or not, at least not on gun controls. The problem is... voting.

People against gun controls are already a minority, gun owners also are a minority, but they are a very politically focused and active minority. They show up and vote for every primary and every general election and choose candidates based on their position on gun control.

Gun-control proponents don't need a European example, what they need to do is show up and vote, at every primary and every general election, and vote on a candidate's gun control stance, not on candidates' position on tax breaks, gay marriage, or whether the earth is flat. If proponents of gun control had shown the same discipline and focus as the other side, we would have gun control already.

Instead, Congress is quietly trying to pass a law making all gun licenses from any one state valid in every state, irrespective of other states' laws.

DfwRevolution wrote:

And yet, Germanwings Flight 9525 happened. .....
The case of Andreas Lubitz and Nikolas Cruz have remarkable similarities. Both were screaming warning signs that were well noticed and documented. And yet, both European and American authorities were unable to take action that protected the public.

But no one was sending thoughts and prayers, regulations where changed. Even the armored murder cockpit doors where discussed, alas they could only be removed with international agreement. And for that to happen i guess a couple more Flights 9525, Flight 1951 and Flight 990 needs to happen....

It's a shame you all resort to personal attacks and insults. There are gun control measures I could support. But there is zero chance I will support anything when it's clear you hold responsible gun owners in bad faith. It is impossible to negotiate without trust and why should I trust anyone who holds me in such obvious contempt?

Ok, i play..... what sort of gun control measures would you support that would make a repeat of Florida unlikely?

So why is the answer for me to give up rights I haven't abused?

Your right to bear arms is untouched by regulations regarding weapons.

best regards
Thomas

FreequentFlier wrote:

On a side note, a lot of the lectures about "mass killings" seem to come from Germans on this forum. Not really sure you guys should be doing any lecturing on the topic.

Why not? We know what we are talking about..... we even learned from your mistakes and don´t have the habit of sending people back where they may get murdered like the US did with the MS St. Louis.....

And once we talk about the sins of our forefathers, how is that plan coming to return all of the US to the native Americans, or at least reimburse its full value. Heck, using biological WMD against civilian population, hell... even we didn´t do that. .... two can play that game....

best regards
Thomas

blueflyer wrote:

seb146 wrote:

When the Second Amendment was ratified in October of 1791, there was no such thing as bump stocks or AR-15s or semi-automatic weapons or automatic weapons or the need to pull off 30 rounds a minute. When the Second Amendment was ratified, the United States was still fighting off Redcoats and tyranny. There was a need for the men to be trained to fight in case England invaded again.

How dare you bring historical context to an irrational discussion? Shame on you, Sir!

When the Second Amendment was ratified arms and weapon had distinctive different meanings.......

best regards
Thomas

blueflyer wrote:

seb146 wrote:

When the Second Amendment was ratified in October of 1791, there was no such thing as bump stocks or AR-15s or semi-automatic weapons or automatic weapons or the need to pull off 30 rounds a minute. When the Second Amendment was ratified, the United States was still fighting off Redcoats and tyranny. There was a need for the men to be trained to fight in case England invaded again.

How dare you bring historical context to an irrational discussion? Shame on you, Sir!

The problem isn't even whether Europe should set an example or not, at least not on gun controls. The problem is... voting.

People against gun controls are already a minority, gun owners also are a minority, but they are a very politically focused and active minority. They show up and vote for every primary and every general election and choose candidates based on their position on gun control.

Gun-control proponents don't need a European example, what they need to do is show up and vote, at every primary and every general election, and vote on a candidate's gun control stance, not on candidates' position on tax breaks, gay marriage, or whether the earth is flat. If proponents of gun control had shown the same discipline and focus as the other side, we would have gun control already.

Instead, Congress is quietly trying to pass a law making all gun licenses from any one state valid in every state, irrespective of other states' laws.

That's the problem: We do show up in droves. The terrorist organization, NRA, buys law makers. They constantly use the "slippery slope" argument to make the second half of the Second Amendment the most important part of the Constitution.

Besides, even if we were able to control all the state houses and Congress, the White House and Supreme Court are stacked against us.

Rational gun violence discussions are not possible with US gun lovers, if that isn't apparent.
For those of you from civilized societies - 80% of Americans would happily get rid of guns, but the 20% will not allow it (my estimates). Constitutional amendments are no longer possible.

Yes - these 20% are perfectly fine with the continued violent deaths; even of children. Because, of course - it would "never happen to them" and "guns don't kill people , people kill people".

FlyHappy wrote:

Yes - these 20% are perfectly fine with the continued violent deaths; even of children. Because, of course - it would "never happen to them" and "guns don't kill people , people kill people".

Keeping 0.1% of the population in job, or more likely a fraction thereof since no one is proposing a complete ban (not even Japan has a complete ban, even remotely) is clearly worth killing more than that every decade. Well, at least if you are dead, you are not clogging up any (un-)employment statistics...

best regards
Thomas

So I was having a conversation with a friend of mine who argues that any gun control law would be useless, as those who might kill will find a way to get their hands on a gun somehow, and that won't stop the killing completely. I told him why don't we apply the same logic on immigration and border control? Why make border control a priority and spend billions on a useless wall if illegal immigrants will find another way to get in? Does that make border control policies useless as well?


In other words, it's dumb to have tougher gun control laws if it is not going to be 100% effective, but it is okay to have tougher border control laws even though it is not 100% effective? Why?

seb146 wrote:

Besides, even if we were able to control all the state houses and Congress, the White House and Supreme Court are stacked against us.

Well, the supreme court problem may be addressable somewhat: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... homas.html

Can´t have a criminal sitting on that Bench.

best regards
Thomas

As a European I wouldn't be too smug about the lack of gun crime on the continent. Since 2015 we have seen a shocking increase in terrorist attacks, and airports, railways stations and areas where people congregate in large numbers are now patrolled by heavily harmed police, who now operate a shoot-to-kill policy. I woudn't have believed this five years ago. It's not difficult to see where this could go: more racial profiling, which leads to more resentment and alienation, which leads to more attacks. And add to the mix the rise of the far right on the continent, we could be living in a completely different Europe in twenty years' time.

Braybuddy wrote:

who now operate a shoot-to-kill policy. .

Not here. The federal police, in charge of airport security, doesn´t have any statute to shoot first and would be judged as any civilian would in case they do fire first. There is no discussion changing that.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

Not here. The federal police, in charge of airport security, doesn´t have any statute to shoot first and would be judged as any civilian would in case they do fire first. There is no discussion changing that.

best regards
Thomas

There is in France. I admire your optimism.

seb146 wrote:

If you want a gun crazy country, why don't you immigrate to one, Nik?

Looking around there is no further "one up" available in that domain.
Next escalation level I can think of is where they shoot back in volley.
Don't think the "self defenders" will go there.

DfwRevolution wrote:

The case of AndreasLubitz and Nikolas Cruz have remarkable similarities. Both were screaming warning signs that were well noticed and documented. And yet, both European and American authorities were unable to take action that protected the public.

The difference (apart from the frequency of such events taking place) was that there was a rational debate had after the Andreas Lubitz case in order to effect change on future circumstances.

DfwRevolution wrote:

By all means, if you have arguments for why I should not be allowed the most effective tools for self-defense, please make them.

The issue here is that you have made a statement with an assumption and then you are trying to argue outside of that assumption. Guns are not the most effective means of self defense, quite the opposite in fact.

DfwRevolution wrote:

So why is the answer for me to give up rights I haven't abused?

For the same reason that people give up rights every single day that they haven't abused, because they infringe on other peoples rights and a judgment has to be made on which is most important. Many here, including myself believe that the number of people killed is an unacceptable sacrifice for a particular right. Do you believe it should remain and that the killing of these children is acceptable for you to maintain your right to your guns?

FreequentFlier wrote:

On a side note, a lot of the lectures about "mass killings" seem to come from Germans on this forum. Not really sure you guys should be doing any lecturing on the topic.

Maybe the lectures come from Germans because they have experience in living with the aftermath of mass killings and have useful and pragmatic responses that can somewhat curb the effect. Would you rather a rally driver taught you car control even though he may have crashed a few times or a 9 year old because he had never crashed a car.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

Greece was a great economy to live in.... until it wasn't.

Venezuela was an anti-US worker's paradise.... until it wasn't.

Socialism is great .... until it isn't.

Guns are great .... until they kill the innocent.

DfwRevolution wrote:

There are gun control measures I could support.

I'm Listening, I'm sure you have a much greater understanding of the nuances of how they could be implemented.

DfwRevolution wrote:

But there is zero chance I will support anything when it's clear you hold responsible gun owners in bad faith.

I certainly don't hold responsible gun owners in bad faith... I am one.
The issue is determining which are the responsible ones and which aren't when the onus seems to be on proving that someone is not responsible enough to have a gun rather than someone having to prove that they are responsible enough. The problem is that we find out all too often that someone is not responsible enough via a news report of another shooting.

With great freedom comes great responsibility, what happens when one end of the bargain isn't help up?

Fred

tommy1808 wrote:

FreequentFlier wrote:

On a side note, a lot of the lectures about "mass killings" seem to come from Germans on this forum. Not really sure you guys should be doing any lecturing on the topic.

Why not? We know what we are talking about..... we even learned from your mistakes and don´t have the habit of sending people back where they may get murdered like the US did with the MS St. Louis.....

And once we talk about the sins of our forefathers, how is that plan coming to return all of the US to the native Americans, or at least reimburse its full value. Heck, using biological WMD against civilian population, hell... even we didn´t do that. .... two can play that game....

best regards
Thomas

Yeah honestly, history from the previous century is something they actively try to prevent now- they have a solid motivator and maybe we should listen.

Braybuddy wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

Not here. The federal police, in charge of airport security, doesn´t have any statute to shoot first and would be judged as any civilian would in case they do fire first. There is no discussion changing that.

best regards
Thomas

There is in France. I admire your optimism.

There was a well-publicised case here where SWAT cops shot a drug trafficker in the legs and caught him alive, even after being hit twice themselves (link in Spanish)

http://www.elmundo.es/espana/2018/02/05 ... b4677.html

Terrorism is another thing entirely, and has been for a good while now (remember that Brazilian mistakenly shot in the tube a few years back).

JJJ wrote:

Terrorism is another thing entirely, and has been for a good while now (remember that Brazilian mistakenly shot in the tube a few years back).

Being shot in "the tube" is probably very painful.

Not all of us are from the UK, so to avoid any confusion;
The Tube can mean....
- slang for television, from the term cathode ray tube
- one of several TV programs, incl a BBC documentary, an ITV documentary, and a much beloved former Channel 4 (UK) music programme
- various songs, and various bands
- a defunct US music video channel
- Houston (TX) channel 55, KTBU
- Cardiff Bay Visitor Centre, known as The Tube because of its distinctive shape

But in this case I suspect JJJ is referring to the Brazilian shot whilst entering a London Underground station.

SheikhDjibouti wrote:

But in this case I suspect JJJ is referring to the Brazilian shot whilst entering a London Underground station.

...and a perfectly good example why "shoot to kill" in that sense is a pretty stupid thing to have, it is practically legalized murder.

The UK governments excuse for not prosecuting the Police officer is pure gold, paraphrasing, if we press charges, other officer may in the future be reluctant to shot innocent people in the head without warning.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

FreequentFlier wrote:

On a side note, a lot of the lectures about "mass killings" seem to come from Germans on this forum. Not really sure you guys should be doing any lecturing on the topic.

Why not? We know what we are talking about..... we even learned from your mistakes and don´t have the habit of sending people back where they may get murdered like the US did with the MS St. Louis.....

And once we talk about the sins of our forefathers, how is that plan coming to return all of the US to the native Americans, or at least reimburse its full value. Heck, using biological WMD against civilian population, hell... even we didn´t do that. .... two can play that game....

best regards
Thomas

You have a very odd obsession with the US. Physician, you may want to heal thyself. Your efforts to assimilate the rapidly increasing Muslim population in Germany are going terribly, and your far right parties are seeing electoral gains not seen since the 1930s.

Perhaps you should spare us the lectures and focus on avoiding a repeat of the past in your own country.

K thanks.

FreequentFlier wrote:

Your efforts to assimilate the rapidly increasing Muslim population in Germany are going terribly, and your far right parties are seeing electoral gains not seen since the 1930s..

which rapidly increasing Muslim population are you fantasizing about? Ten percent by 2050 is about realistic, the vast majority is very secular too, heck even among the very religious gay marriage has clear majority support. Heck, by far most of our Muslims would probably be lefty liberals by US standards for religious people ....among those very religious 90% say democracy is the way to go, numbers the US can´t even dare to dream about in the general population......

and your far right parties are seeing electoral gains not seen since the 1930s.

Considering we don´t have a party of note you would consider "far right", the US democrats are a right wing party by our standards, that is another fantasy of yours, even the AfD just gets about 15% in polls, which is already on the decline..... and the AfD is considerable left of the GOP. How many people vote for that far right party?

Perhaps you should spare us the lectures and focus on avoiding a repeat of the past in your own country.

Our preparation runs a little deeper... we have a constitution giving us the right to kill anyone that tries to overturn said constitution "by all means necessary".. The moment any party starts ambitions like that, they will be off the ballot anyways.... what your news media obviously isn´t reporting is that support for migrants/refugees in the population is actually increasing, not declining (77%).... those right wing parties don´t even have the voter potential you fantasize about.

And with your attitude you probably shouldn´t be looking at this threat.

But i am glad we could help cleaning up the Mess Bush Junior left with ISIS, as their Human resource problems, not NATO or Russian bombs, let to their decline. You are welcome, its on the house.

Not back to your slow cooking genocide of the poor and black by firing squad.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

FreequentFlier wrote:

Your efforts to assimilate the rapidly increasing Muslim population in Germany are going terribly, and your far right parties are seeing electoral gains not seen since the 1930s..

which rapidly increasing Muslim population are you fantasizing about? Ten percent by 2050 is about realistic, the vast majority is very secular too, heck even among the very religious gay marriage has clear majority support. Heck, by far most of our Muslims would probably be lefty liberals by US standards for religious people ....among those very religious 90% say democracy is the way to go, numbers the US can´t even dare to dream about in the general population......

and your far right parties are seeing electoral gains not seen since the 1930s.

Considering we don´t have a party of note you would consider "far right", the US democrats are a right wing party by our standards, that is another fantasy of yours, even the AfD just gets about 15% in polls, which is already on the decline..... and the AfD is considerable left of the GOP. How many people vote for that far right party?

Perhaps you should spare us the lectures and focus on avoiding a repeat of the past in your own country.

Our preparation runs a little deeper... we have a constitution giving us the right to kill anyone that tries to overturn said constitution "by all means necessary".. The moment any party starts ambitions like that, they will be off the ballot anyways.... what your news media obviously isn´t reporting is that support for migrants/refugees in the population is actually increasing, not declining (77%).... those right wing parties don´t even have the voter potential you fantasize about.

And with your attitude you probably shouldn´t be looking at this threat.

But i am glad we could help cleaning up the Mess Bush Junior left with ISIS, as their Human resource problems, not NATO or Russian bombs, let to their decline. You are welcome, its on the house.

Not back to your slow cooking genocide of the poor and black by firing squad.

best regards
Thomas

Ah, wasn't sure if you were one of the naive internationalist "we are all one nation" types, or just a "I constantly bash the US because it makes me feel better about the failures of my own country" types. Clearly it's the latter, with some hyper irrational anti-US comments to boot! Yup, we're just lining up all minorities and the poor and shooting them for sport here. It's perfectly legal too! Great fun!

Meanwhile, it's perfectly healthy for a party with neo-Nazi roots to move from 0% to 15% in the polls in a short span of time. Nothing to see here, move along. It's also TOTALLY healthy to ban speech or parties that are gaining popular support, rather than address the underlying concerns of those voting for them. What could go wrong?

Yes, everything is going swimmingly in Germany, which is why your PM has completely reversed her migration policies, and the EU is collapsing in front of your very eyes.

I don't pretend the US is perfect - far from it. But maybe you should spare us the lectures and worry about some of your own internal problems.

FreequentFlier wrote:

You have a very odd obsession with the US. Physician, you may want to heal thyself. Your efforts to assimilate the rapidly increasing Muslim population in Germany are going terribly, and your far right parties are seeing electoral gains not seen since the 1930s.

Perhaps you should spare us the lectures and focus on avoiding a repeat of the past in your own country.

There is Fox News and then there is reality. they don't mix well.

FreequentFlier wrote:

Ah, wasn't sure if you were one of the naive internationalist "we are all one nation" types, or just a "I constantly bash the US because it makes me feel better about the failures of my own country" types. Clearly it's the latter, with some hyper irrational anti-US comments to boot! Yup, we're just lining up all minorities and the poor and shooting them for sport here. It's perfectly legal too! Great fun!

Meanwhile, it's perfectly healthy for a party with neo-Nazi roots to move from 0% to 15% in the polls in a short span of time. Nothing to see here, move along. It's also TOTALLY healthy to ban speech or parties that are gaining popular support, rather than address the underlying concerns of those voting for them. What could go wrong?

Yes, everything is going swimmingly in Germany, which is why your PM has completely reversed her migration policies, and the EU is collapsing in front of your very eyes.

I don't pretend the US is perfect - far from it. But maybe you should spare us the lectures and worry about some of your own internal problems.

OR, we could try to stick to the subject; the US's massive gun problem. I get how it's a kneejerk reaction for those who don't really want to talk about that to resort to the typical 'whataboutism' the US right has gotten so very good at, but can we please, pretty please, leave it out of this thread? Want to talk about Europe's problems? Start a thread about it.

FreequentFlier wrote:

I don't pretend the US is perfect - far from it. But maybe you should spare us the lectures and worry about some of your own internal problems.

we don´t have a habit of tackling fantasy problems (voter fraud.. haha) and real problems we tackle effectively (gun control).

Meanwhile, it's perfectly healthy for a party with neo-Nazi roots to move from 0% to 15% in the polls in a short span of time. Nothing to see here, move along.

Exactly, nothing to see. This isn´t the first time a right wing party is on the raise, polls between 10 and 20% and is gone after a few years...... and they are already in full self destruct mode.

It's also TOTALLY healthy to ban speech or parties that are gaining popular support, rather than address the underlying concerns of those voting for them. What could go wrong?

Exactly, it is totally healthy to ban parties from the ballot that want to overturn the constitution. Also better for them to be banned ....

What is this nonsense about "we need guns to defend against Tyranny" BS your 2nd Amendment objectophiles can´t stop talking about? So, we ban them from being elected with due process of law by the supreme court, you plan to murder them extra-legally...

And there is no ban whatsoever on stating an opinion, any opinion, in Germany. Must be another fantasy of yours.... considering that your Export Administration Act actually curtails freedom of speach with significant penalties you should probably keep a little quiet about that sort of thing......

which is why your PM has completely reversed her migration policies

More fantasies of yours... aside the fact that we don´t have a PM. She is against illegal immigration, which we have, but not much, and wants to strengthen the EU outside borders... which is not exactly new, but a Schengen Agreement requirement.

and the EU is collapsing in front of your very eyes.

I guess that is a wet dream of many on the other side of the pond...... support for closer EU integration is growing, not going away....

best regards
Thomas

DIRECTFLT wrote:

America stays strong by having it's populace armed and ready to fight. Whomever.

When a tyrant like Hitler, or the Land of the Rising Sun, rises up and declares war on the world... It's been a 2nd Amendment Nation like the US, that comes to the rest of the world's rescue.

Our existence while grotesque, and incomprehensible, to some, saves lives.

I’d rather those with anti-gun feelings just said ‘thank you’, and went on their way.

That’s the biggest bucket of poo statement I’ve ever heard. You turned up late to WW1, the war was almost over, yet the US made stupid mistakes and lost vastly more soldiers than you needed to using tactics the British and French had already discarded early in the war. I don’t see where the 2nd helped here.

Germany lost WW2 when Air Chief Marshall Sir Keith Park won the Battle of Britain and Hitler foolishly invaded Russia. Russian then ground down and spat out the Germans in the most brutal no holds barred conflict in human history. The US helped but you didn’t win it, it was a team event. Again how did the 2nd help, guess what it didn’t, only an idiot could fabricate a link between all out war and civilians owning guns.

CCGPV wrote:

bagoldex wrote:

CCGPV wrote:

How would you go about that?

Amend the constitution then use whatever means necessary, including military force.

Haha ok. Let me just casually amend the BILL OF RIGHTS and suspend habeas corpus real quick.

Ridiculous.

No it is not...read up on your Civics as to how the Constitution is amended....they did it for booze they can do it for firearms...like this:

"“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.”

DIRECTFLT wrote:

America stays strong by having it's populace armed and ready to fight. Whomever.
When a tyrant like Hitler, or the Land of the Rising Sun, rises up and declares war on the world... It's been a 2nd Amendment Nation like the US, that comes to the rest of the world's rescue.
Our existence while grotesque, and incomprehensible, to some, saves lives.
I’d rather those with anti-gun feelings just said ‘thank you’, and went on their way.

One major issue I see with your srceed is that those you lift on a pedestal are by character exactly those
that cheeringly will march for and with guys like Hitler, Mussolini.
Cheap program in simple 3..4 word sentences. Thinking is something you let others do for you.

One reason why those in power see "real lefties"(TM) as a danger and right wingers as tools.

A lot of people on here oppose gun control.

Do you conclude that the cost is worth paying.

How would you reduce the number of fatalities.

bhill wrote:

CCGPV wrote:

bagoldex wrote:

Amend the constitution then use whatever means necessary, including military force.

Haha ok. Let me just casually amend the BILL OF RIGHTS and suspend habeas corpus real quick.

Ridiculous.

No it is not...read up on your Civics as to how the Constitution is amended....they did it for booze they can do it for firearms...like this:

"“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.”

We can't even pass a bill to keep the government in operation half the time and you think we can organize a nation wide campaign to change one of the amendments of the bill of rights? Not to mention getting it ratified by most states. Its about as far fetched as it gets at this point.

We need stricter gun control but changing the 2nd amendment isn't going to happen short of the total collapse of government and society that requires a new government being created.

CCGPV wrote:

bhill wrote:

CCGPV wrote:

Haha ok. Let me just casually amend the BILL OF RIGHTS and suspend habeas corpus real quick.

Ridiculous.

No it is not...read up on your Civics as to how the Constitution is amended....they did it for booze they can do it for firearms...like this:

"“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.”

We can't even pass a bill to keep the government in operation half the time and you think we can organize a nation wide campaign to change one of the amendments of the bill of rights? Not to mention getting it ratified by most states. Its about as far fetched as it gets at this point.

We need stricter gun control but changing the 2nd amendment isn't going to happen short of the total collapse of government and society that requires a new government being created.

Sounds like a plan. Can we auction off the shithole/red/pay-less-in-taxes than-they-receive states to the highest bidder?

MALA ... Make America Lean Again!

Lecturing Americans about guns doesn't work. As an Australian, every time there is an American mass-shooting we see finger-wagging and references to our own gun reforms in the 1990's which stopped mass shootings completely. But facts, emotive language, even the slaughter of children won't convince the United States to properly legislate for the "well regulated" component of the second amendment.

Nothing will change in this field, American mass shootings will continue. It's the price you pay for a culture informed by a mis-reading of the second-amendment. A price Americans are willing to pay.