Cheap Northern Drugs, Cheap Southern Guns,and The Mob on Top

[Schme]

Scheme just made this post to get people fired up. Lock it now and save us all some grief.

Stop targeting me just because you have nothing to say, and stop calling me Scheme.

[wichita]

I'll twist off a fatty with you Sindycat. Puff, puff give!

What sparked the need for this debate this time, anyway? I get it. You hate the states. The yankees are evil. The canucks hold the key to infinite wisdom. We get it. Thank you.

[Schme]

Yes, that's right gringo. Of course that's right.

You sure got my number.

[Schme]

Did you ever think I just don't like to see people shot? Oh no, but that can't be it.
















Of course it's not that! It's all you, yankee, it's all about you! Everything is about you! Watch out, the worlds out to get you! Big conspiracy, us, the Europeans, the Mexicans and the Chinese.

That's right. It's all about you.

[kinvoya]

Is that big empty space symbolic of something? Hmmm...let me think.

[Schme]

Oh, wow, your insult has made your wonderfully worded arguments all the better! How charismatic you are!



Oh, wait a minute...........


Listen, if your not going to say anything relevant, please, I ask you again, DO NOT POST HERE.


I welcome relevance wholeheartedly, but this is just petty crap. Cut it out.

[wichita]

Listen, if your not going to say anything relevant, please, I ask you again, DO NOT POST HERE.


I welcome relevance wholeheartedly, but this is just petty crap. Cut it out.

Well the expert on relevance has spoken. Shall we be off then kinvoya? We've got some killing to do. It's tax day and I'm still four shy of my federal quota.

[Schme]

That post was completly pointless. Please, if you've had enough of this thread, just leave, don't post.

No need to throw non sensical insults and spam into this thread.

I welcome your input. But if you'd prefer not to post, and are afraid to have your arguments and opnions questioned and critiqued, well, this is not the place for you.











I am the king of hypocrisy.

[wichita]

Does anybody wonder if the Freedom of Speech is actually a bad idea? It seems a lot of people seem to pick and chose which ammendments are important, which ones are fixed, and which ones evolve with time. I just think that freedom of speech is too great a responsibility to be handed out as a right to the genral public. Some people should not be allowed to speak in public, or share their opinions, because of the damage they will inevitably do with them. Sorry if that is a bit too Hamiltonian a notion, but there are certain people that just make me realize that modern democracy can easily become the greatest form of tyrrany ever devised by mankind.

[rklenseth]

When will people finally realize that the true source of most of the world's social problems is ignorance and pride? I know it's cliche, but the phrase "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is 100% true. Please don't blame the hardware if a minority of people using it decide to behave badly. Besides, guns are not nearly as destructive as the rantings of a blithering idiot. I mean the media is full of 'em and look at how much damage they cause. Got all sorts of people spouting opinions about crap they know nothing about.

Blah, blah, blah...I am the smartest man alive.

And Mr. Deeds is on TV right now. Hilarious! John Tuturro is a friggin' genious! Always with the sneaky, sneaky.

I agree with you. Ignorance and pride are great problems.

But let me tell you this. It makes absolutly no difference if these dealers are pridefull or ignorant. What makes them kill is greed.

And may I also say, perhaps your pride, ignorance and greed causes alot of deaths, but I must point out, it's alot harder to shoot someone if you don't have a gun.

Hitler or Stalin never once used a gun. Yet millions died because of them.

You are right that people kill out of greed but not everyone. But how are those good people going to defend themselves because lets face it, those greedy bastards will get their hands on guns or some other weapons to kill us or worse enslave us anyways. Or they will inspire other people to do it for them (see Hitler or Stalin comment).

So if you if you believe in that philosophy of get banning guns will keep people from killing each other isn't it a lot harder to stab someone if we don't have knives or other sharp objects? Or what bludgeoning someone to death? And since rhetoric is just as dangerous as any weapon ever invented we should ban freedom of expression and thus freedom to hold your own opinion because more people have died because of someone's opinion in history than any weapon could ever do.

Your fight shouldn't be to ban the tools of evil people which in this case are guns but to fight the evil people themselves by standing for what you believe is right and standing against what you believe is wrong. Which I believe you agree is to defend the defenseless against people who would do them harm. Banning the guns or anything isn't going to end this problem for they are just tools used by evil people for their greed. The only way to end this problem is to stand against while defending what you believe is right.

[Schme]

Does anybody wonder if the Freedom of Speech is actually a bad idea? It seems a lot of people seem to pick and chose which ammendments are important, which ones are fixed, and which ones evolve with time. I just think that freedom of speech is too great a responsibility to be handed out as a right to the genral public. Some people should not be allowed to speak in public, or share their opinions, because of the damage they will inevitably do with them. Sorry if that is a bit too Hamiltonian a notion, but there are certain people that just make me realize that modern democracy can easily become the greatest form of tyrrany ever devised by mankind.

Witchita, I agree with you. In any sensible society, people like you and me would have no way like this to spread our stupid opnions.

I'd be talking about this with my friends at the basketball court (well, more.)

But that's not how it is.



But, I say AGAIN, that is NOT what this thread is about. PLEASE people, stick with what I'm trying to talk about. You can start your own threads.

[nitefyre]

What the hell is going on in this thread?

[Schme]

Might I say that both Hitler and Stalin did use guns. Hitler was a soldier in the first world war.

Stalin fought the tsarists.

But you are quite right, neither were armed during the political carreers.


I understand where your coming from. But there is a problem with it.


First, I really don't want to get into a debate about your self defense stuff with your toys of death. That's Americans bussiness. But that rule does not apply up here.

Your quite right about inspiring, convincing, ordering other people to kill for you. I've seen many a gang leader set up a nice driveby. But what can you do? Let me tell you what you can do.

You cannot stop people from getting weapons or from harming each other, if they want to do it (in the long run, that is.)

Your very right. I've seen people killed just as badly with a piece of pipe as with a gun.

But think about this.

If you know a guy, or some guys, are killers, and will fight to the death for a market, if you know anyone has the intent to harm or kill anyone else for that matter, how can you say it is right to give them easy access to weaponry?

How?

If I came into your part of town and started selling discount handguns to bangers, how would you react? Think about it man!

Furthermore, history has shown us that we cannot appeal to human decency or intelegence to safeguard ourselves, our societies.

Both of those things have proven unrealiable.


And I must say that injecting weaponry into any situation usually turns out badly.

[AoM]

Schme, I think whether or not guns are good to have and to be legalized in America is not only very relevant to this topic, it IS the topic. You're angry and fearing for your life because American guns are in Canadian gangster hands. And the solution you seem to be spouting is that we should make guns illegal...

...but that's not how we view it. Our little "militia thing" has a valid arguement to it, as RKL was pointing out. There is a moral and ethical counter arguement to your view that guns should be illegal, but you downplay that as "irrelevant." Try to be a little open-minded... you sure as hell claim to be.

Believe it or not, we've got mob problems too. I'd wager we have it a lot worse than you. Bad people, who are willing to go to great lengths to acquire a piece so that they can dominate an illegal market are going to get guns, no matter what. If America illegalized guns tomorrow and went door to door collecting every registered gun, I can safely assure you that there'd still be a lot of guns out there, and they'd be in all the wrong hands.

Americans believe in the right to bear arms and to defend one's self, family and property. We will most probably continue to believe this. Therefore, the solution that you are looking for is neither realistic nor is it necessarily on the moral highground. It's Canada's choice on how you regulate your criminals and how you contain them. We certainly like to crack down on our potheads.


In the end, your anger would be better directed at the Canadian gun-running criminals than at the big bad USA. This is a classic example of displacement, and frankly your naive, holier-than-thou articulation isn't going to win you the respect points you need for a decent topic discussion.

[rklenseth]

Does anybody wonder if the Freedom of Speech is actually a bad idea? It seems a lot of people seem to pick and chose which ammendments are important, which ones are fixed, and which ones evolve with time. I just think that freedom of speech is too great a responsibility to be handed out as a right to the genral public. Some people should not be allowed to speak in public, or share their opinions, because of the damage they will inevitably do with them. Sorry if that is a bit too Hamiltonian a notion, but there are certain people that just make me realize that modern democracy can easily become the greatest form of tyrrany ever devised by mankind.

But if it weren't for democracy then we would be under the brutal rulership of Feudal Lords, Imperial Emperors, Popular Tyrants, and Fat Kings.

The separation of powers and levels of government protect against such a thing. A tyrant is always possible to come to power but it could only be done undemocratically in America due to the protections because it would require every elected representative in all local, state, and federal governments and within all three branches of each level to support such a tyrant. That is why the Greek and Roman democracies fell to tyrants because they didn't have these things. That is why the Wiemer Repubic in Germany allowed the rise of Hitler. Because there wasn't any seperation of powers and levels of government like the US has.

So are we going to go down the path of the Chinese government by telling their people that they can't pray to a god or practice any religion, that they're not allowed to have any other opinion other than that of the governments whether it is right or wrong by them. That is exactly what a tyrant would want so why not just skip the process of getting a tyrant and go straight to the effects of one. Doesn't make much sense to me.