Generic News and Politics Topic

Originally posted by fabian:[..]

I believe threatening and killing in defense needs an offensive deed to be defensive. I am sure you could draw your own conclusion, but let me help you: guns are mostly used in an offensive way.

Originally posted by Risto:[..]

Who will shoot down attacking jets of the government?

Originally posted by Ali709:[..]

even knives and guns?

Point is, "the liberal logic of punishing people who have nothing to do with what one madman did" is what many things are based on.

The whole existence of police and detectives is based on that. Because one madman one day decided to attack the others or steal from others etc. Why should we suffer police stops, police investigation and all that?

Having to get a license to drive is based on that. You could always trust people to only drive if they know how to do it properly...but some madman would try to do it. Why should we suffer having to go through all that's needed to get a license?

Requiring photo IDs for voting is based on that. You could trust people to not commit voter fraud, but because some madmen would do it everyone has to get photo IDs. Even honest citizens that would find it difficult to the point that they might not vote at all. Even if it's just a very small fraction.

This logic is what constitutions and laws are based on. It's what almost everything is based on. A group has to be protected against it's weak spots - that is, the "madman".

Originally posted by wtshnnfb01:[..]

Having a drivers license makes sense, as there are basic standards for operating a motor vehicle. Police and detectives are predominantly a reactive institution. Taking rights away from people who had nothing to do with a tragedy is wrong.

Gotta wonder if the people who think these types of mass shootings are some kind of false flag op by the left, to take guns away are onto something.

Originally posted by wtshnnfb01:[..]


Now let me help you. When someone breaks into my house at three in the morning, hes getting his head blown off.

Originally posted by Ali709:[..]

So you're telling me you believe operating guns and machine guns have no "basic standards" and no training is needed? Because the fact that people are getting guns without proper training is the reason you have these tragedies.
And what about the other examples I gave you?

"Taking rights away from people who had nothing to do with a tragedy" is what the Patriot Act did. I didn't see many conservatives worried about that. And having slaves used to be a right some time ago, that doesn't make it right.

Originally posted by Mr_Trek:I don't think Adam Lanza would've gotten a gun if they could only be bought illegally.

There's also a logic in just getting less guns in circulation.

Of course harder punishments could be good too, but I don't really know that part of American law.

And Aaron, let's just hope that since the thief can get a gun legally too, he doesn't blow your head off first.

Originally posted by fabian:[..]

Unless he blows your head off first. Anything that makes your house more appealing to the thief than a millionaires home?

edit: oh, olof just said that

Originally posted by wtshnnfb01:[..]

Have I ever once said I'm a fan of the patriot act. Also, you evidently don't know American gun law well. For starters, machine guns are illegal.