Sandy Hook Elementary School Shootings

[Jason]

Cor blimey guv'nor...don't much reckon that prayer is anything other than feel-good bollocks, much like that gun control malarkey. Your country PROSECUTES people (especially the Irish) who defend themselves against violent psychopaths. Highest violent crime rate in the world but NO GUNS! But that's ok! People now use knives and now John Bull wants to ban them as well! Because if we ban everything, the criminals will eventually follow the law!

Bloody hell, what's this world coming to? I wish to register a complaint with the British Ministry of Feel-Good Baloney and tell them that your country's violent crime rate is through the bleeding roof and over the f***ing cliff. You Brits have NO BUSINESS telling anyone that their country is f***ed in the head. Keep on hanging on to that dead Empire of yours...

If there is one country in the world that is singlehandedly responsible for fucking up this world, it's the United Kingdom. Own it. Deal with it.

[Bean Bag]

18th of May, We have the right to arm and defend ourselves.  So do you... your country/state just may not recognize it, perhaps?

It's a simple truth -- a natural law.  Go ask the animals  .  Squirrels have the right to defend themselves from a bear.  Do they not?  And with whatever is available and it is able to manipulate.  Does it not?  Stick, coconut.  Grenade.  Claws.  If the squirrel can figure out how to use it -- it will happen.  ("Claws" are the most logical answer.)  Because it can.  It's real.  It's a truth.  Natural law.  Right.

It's also a Constitutional Law.  An Amendment, added to the Constitutional to make sure days like this -- in all their surreal horror and misguided debate -- do not blind us to emotion, bullies or fear of ridicule on internet forums.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Ya know, I hate arguing with you guys and will be making a serious attempt at being more polite.... There are some very severe psychopaths out there on other boards (well, one in particular, not having to do with music, and which I will not name) but it's none of us. The last people I want to be in fisticuffs with are fellow Beach Boys fans....... But these are still good discussions and I think we all take away something valuable from either side whether we admit it or not.... If I start calling people blankety-blank idiots again, please call me on it.

[Jason]

Ya know, I hate arguing with you guys and will be making a serious attempt at being more polite.... There are some very severe psychopaths out there on other boards (well, one in particular, not having to do with music, and which I will not name) but it's none of us. The last people I want to be in fisticuffs with are fellow Beach Boys fans....... But these are still good discussions and I think we all take away something valuable from either side whether we admit it or not.... If I start calling people blankety-blank idiots again, please call me on it.

I love you Erik...ya fuckin' idiot!

[hypehat]

Cor blimey guv'nor...don't much reckon that prayer is anything other than feel-good bollocks, much like that gun control malarkey. Your country PROSECUTES people (especially the Irish) who defend themselves against violent psychopaths. Highest violent crime rate in the world but NO GUNS! But that's ok! People now use knives and now John Bull wants to ban them as well! Because if we ban everything, the criminals will eventually follow the law!

Bloody hell, what's this world coming to? I wish to register a complaint with the British Ministry of Feel-Good Baloney and tell them that your country's violent crime rate is through the bleeding roof and over the f***ing cliff. You Brits have NO BUSINESS telling anyone that their country is f***ed in the head. Keep on hanging on to that dead Empire of yours...

If there is one country in the world that is singlehandedly responsible for f***ing up this world, it's the United Kingdom. Own it. Deal with it.

18th of May is Australian. Carry on, though.

[hypehat]

Like, sure, no-one ever said that the UK was some kind of utopian paradise. But y'know, no-one my side of the pond walks into a school and shoots children with a military grade assault rifle. We're going round in circles here, but Don't Tread On Me, right?

[rab2591]

Again I'll say, with this logic we need to ban alcohol as well. If we're talking the number of human lives that could be saved, ban alcohol along with guns.

I know FAR more people impacted by the stupid choices made under the influence of alcohol, than I do impacted because of guns. What's difference? Guns can be dangerous in the hands of a madman, but alcohol can be dangerous in pretty much anyone. As I said before I had an old friend die in a drunk driving crash, I've seen alcohol tear WAY too many families apart, I've seen it cripple people for life. And the numbers show: Alcohol kills more people, in America, than guns per year.

Do the math: if you libs want to ban guns, ban alcohol as well.

[Bean Bag]

Ya know, I hate arguing with you guys and will be making a serious attempt at being more polite.... There are some very severe psychopaths out there on other boards (well, one in particular, not having to do with music, and which I will not name) but it's none of us. The last people I want to be in fisticuffs with are fellow Beach Boys fans....... But these are still good discussions and I think we all take away something valuable from either side whether we admit it or not.... If I start calling people blankety-blank idiots again, please call me on it.

It's all good!  Trust me!!  Allow me to explain... 

It's interesting, the two sides.  On one side... Conservatives/Libertarians have not had the luxury of pop culture support.  The world's been programed to think they are rednecks, racists, homophobes, poor-haters, sexists, bigots... and most importantly -- that it's OKAY to ridicule them.  One must have a sense of humor and a thick skin to survive on this side.  But don't shed a tear... this is to their advantage.

The other side... Liberals/Leftist/Communists even (yes, even Communists) have ironically been portrayed as the victims.  Victimology is their bread and butter.  They're also granted the sheen of being hip and rational -- through all channels of media and entertainment as well as education -- from Kindergarten to Harvard.  They have a lock-down on education.  Movies, media, Hollywood stars.  You name it!!  As a result of all this... they don't have the adapted ability to take too much challenge to their ideas.  Even with all their Big Education.  It means nothing if it's just theoretical.  Faculty lounge tripe.  Doodles on the chalkboard!

I know you shrug when I pick on Obama... but, man oh man  ... he is the crown JEWEL to us!  Of all the things I just spoke of.  He's the baby of decades of collegiate massaging and pop culture coddling.  He's a professor from HARVARD!!! (His grades are sealed, by the way!!!  )

That's what I mean when I say:  "I don't hate Obama, it's not about Obama"  But then.... I go and zing him again.  It's sooooo fun.  He's a total twit.  It's everything... even the way he responds to it.  You can see he can't handle ANY criticism.  He's gets soooo angry, but he tries not to show it, because he feels he has to maintain the facade that he's smarter than us!  I'm not strong enough to resist, I suppose.  It's like a total wedgey-fest every time this guy walks out on stage.  It's "prank the dean" time.

Which brings me to why I don't mind, at all, if you lose your cool.  You should.  You're better than Obama.   

[rab2591]

Funny, a lot of the conservatives I know ARE rednecks, racists, homophobes, bigots (they aren't all, but many of them are). Whereas most of the liberals I know are tolerant, rational, open-minded, you can have a discussion with them without them blowing their top. I don't agree with them on several issues (as this thread proves), but I find them to be the most open to listen. To me, the stereotypes ring true.

What I find funny is that we've all been indoctrinated into a world where you can only be conservative or liberal, you can only be communist or libertarian. Somewhere we lost the ability to imagine newer/better political/economic structures that could help advance our society to a higher echelon of civility.

[Bean Bag]

Funny, a lot of the conservatives I know ARE rednecks, racists, homophobes, bigots (they aren't all, but many of them are). Whereas most of the liberals I know are tolerant, rational, open-minded, you can have a discussion with them without them blowing their top. I don't agree with them on several issues (as this thread proves), but I find them to be the most open to listen. To me, the stereotypes ring true.

When people are told constantly that they're losers, there's a human tendency to believe it.  As well, a human desire to have a place in society.  Stockholm syndrome, battered-wife syndrome.  It's something like -- it's actually easier to fulfill than it is to constantly battle.  A very physiological/psycho-mechanical stress relief phenomenon.  Or something...

I bet if you put said folks into a private situation they would reveal themselves to be better.  I don't know them, etc. but I just generally hold that view of people.

What I find funny is that we've all been indoctrinated into a world where you can only be conservative or liberal, you can only be communist or libertarian. Somewhere we lost the ability to imagine newer/better political/economic structures that could help advance our society to a higher echelon of civility.

That's true.  The right/left thing are the boundaries -- constructs of the debate -- so I just accept it and work with it.  Battered-wife am I?    No, no... it's just a common ground thing.  But in reality... it's doing the right thing... or not.  Touching the hot stove, or realizing... "hey... what for?"

The illusion of opinion.  Which is why I take no offense... it's not my opinion...if I'm just realizing stuff.  Or trying to anyway.

[Mike's Beard]

I'm a guy from the UK and I'm very glad we don't have the gun culture the US does. BUT if I did live in America I would no doubt own a handgun for my own protection simply because there are so many whackjobs there. But a handgun is one thing but there is no need for a citizen to have access to a semi automatic weapon. They are not designed for self protection, they are for taking out every last mutherfucka in the room. Big difference and that is how these massacres keep happening.

The USA is stuck in a total catch 22 situation. It's pointless to ban guns outright because the criminals will still hold onto theirs, thus making normal law abiding citizens helpless against them. Make every registered gun owner take a yearly psychological test and if they fail revoke their licence. That is by no means a foolproof scheme but it should help weed out many of the nutters who are not safe to carry arms.

[Bean Bag]

That's so evasive, though.  Psychological "exams."  Will there be probing?  I would just stick a damned armed guard in the school and call it a day.  Why in Obama's $5 billion "safety fest" is there nothing in there about armed guards?  There's training for grief counseling and I don't know... what else.  Training films?  Good grief.  Why no armed good guys in the school?  Stupid...

by the way.. I'm pretty sure the "exams" are in there.  He (Obama) is going to use his newly federalized medical force (aka your doctor) to report on you.  Socialized, brown-shirt medicine.

Listen ... Gun or not... nuts should get capped fast if they doddle around campus hurling life-threatening objects at innocent people.  That's how you play chess.  Protect the king.  Block the move.  No probes.  They'll go away.

[rab2591]

Funny, a lot of the conservatives I know ARE rednecks, racists, homophobes, bigots (they aren't all, but many of them are). Whereas most of the liberals I know are tolerant, rational, open-minded, you can have a discussion with them without them blowing their top. I don't agree with them on several issues (as this thread proves), but I find them to be the most open to listen. To me, the stereotypes ring true.

When people are told constantly that they're losers, there's a human tendency to believe it.  As well, a human desire to have a place in society.  Stockholm syndrome, battered-wife syndrome.  It's something like -- it's actually easier to fulfill than it is to constantly battle.  A very physiological/psycho-mechanical stress relief phenomenon.  Or something...

I bet if you put said folks into a private situation they would reveal themselves to be better.  I don't know them, etc. but I just generally hold that view of people.

What I find funny is that we've all been indoctrinated into a world where you can only be conservative or liberal, you can only be communist or libertarian. Somewhere we lost the ability to imagine newer/better political/economic structures that could help advance our society to a higher echelon of civility.

That's true.  The right/left thing are the boundaries -- constructs of the debate -- so I just accept it and work with it.  Battered-wife am I?    No, no... it's just a common ground thing.  But in reality... it's doing the right thing... or not.  Touching the hot stove, or realizing... "hey... what for?"

On your first point: I think there's a heavy dose of contradiction there, or I just don't get what you're saying.

On your second point: I realize that the left and right are boundaries, but within those confines probably lies numerous ways to create a transparent, uncorrupt, political system that doesn't exploit people. Yet our society tells us we can only be on one side of those boundaries - there's no room for give and take - which is ridiculous. We live in a world where mathematics have solved world trade problems, medical, and technological problems. I'd love to see a political system that adds the chaos theory to the equation. I'd love to see a political system that is empathetic and looks at all facets of human tendencies, cultures, and needs (without exploiting those people).

[SMiLE Brian]

I'm a guy from the UK and I'm very glad we don't have the gun culture the US does. BUT if I did live in America I would no doubt own a handgun for my own protection simply because there are so many whackjobs there. But a handgun is one thing but there is no need for a citizen to have access to a semi automatic weapon. They are not designed for self protection, they are for taking out every last mutherf***a in the room. Big difference and that is how these massacres keep happening.

The USA is stuck in a total catch 22 situation. It's pointless to ban guns outright because the criminals will still hold onto theirs, thus making normal law abiding citizens helpless against them. Make every registered gun owner take a yearly psychological test and if they fail revoke their licence. That is by no means a foolproof scheme but it should help weed out many of the nutters who are not safe to carry arms.

Great points, I don't hate firearms for the most part, its the nutty gun culture around in the US that creeps me out. Edit:  I mean by nutty those people are hate the government for trying to ban barrett 50 cal. or 100 round drum mags. for assault weapons.

[rab2591]

I'm a guy from the UK and I'm very glad we don't have the gun culture the US does. BUT if I did live in America I would no doubt own a handgun for my own protection simply because there are so many whackjobs there. But a handgun is one thing but there is no need for a citizen to have access to a semi automatic weapon. They are not designed for self protection, they are for taking out every last mutherf***a in the room. Big difference and that is how these massacres keep happening.

The USA is stuck in a total catch 22 situation. It's pointless to ban guns outright because the criminals will still hold onto theirs, thus making normal law abiding citizens helpless against them. Make every registered gun owner take a yearly psychological test and if they fail revoke their licence. That is by no means a foolproof scheme but it should help weed out many of the nutters who are not safe to carry arms.

Ah, but you'll find handguns are used in most murders in the US. Only the tiniest fraction of murders occur with assault rifles (or even the AR-15 - a weapon that the liberals demonize, yet going by the numbers it really hasn't been used in that many murders). Does that mean we should get rid of handguns?

And, let's say that there was peaceful and smooth transition in America when it came to a gunban - and EVERYONE was without a gun. What is stopping 4 people from breaking into my home and overpowering me with just their fists? Am I supposed to taser one and hope the other three don't come after me? Am I supposed to use pepper-spray and possibly injure myself in the process? You're right: guns are a Catch 22 here. You need them for self-defense (or the "illusion of self defense" as rockandroll puts it), but then criminals will find a way to get a hold of them.

ALSO: I will say that if there is ever a device that can stun/demobilize multiple people quickly, without harming them in the long-term, I would get rid of any firearms I own and use that for self-defense....but then you have to ask yourself "Couldn't criminals just as easily take advantage of that device and use it for evil?"

It's an all-around crappy world...and sadly, getting rid of guns won't solve the problem.

Edit: I do agree with you that assault rifles, or even the AR-15 (a gun which I've shot numerous times and loved), are virtually pointless...Do I think they should be banned? Perhaps. But if you ban those, you're not at all dropping the number of gun-related murders in America by much at all.

[Mike's Beard]

 I'm guessing many handgun related deaths are caused by "heat of the moment" behavior or accidents? Assault rifles seem to be the weapon of choice when some loon wants to climb a tower and start picking people off or when they wish to open fire in a cinema.

BTW  here's a pretty good story. Quite a few years ago I remember reading an interview with the actor Kurt Russell. The interviewer was giving him a hard time because he is pro guns. Kurt replied "You know what, many of my anti guns friends would give me a hard time for owning many guns and for enjoying going hunting, and then the LA Riots happened and suddenly the same people are calling me up and asking 'um you don't have a spare gun I could borrow do you'"?

[Bean Bag]

On your first point: I think there's a heavy dose of contradiction there, or I just don't get what you're saying.

I just don't believe that most people are inclined to hateful and/or other draining and unproductive mindsets.  I don't think it's in our DNA.  I think people naturally want and crave positive relationships.  For selfish reasons, that may be.  But human beings, I think, have an inclination towards joy over say, listening to Obama lecture us on how bad we are. 

So... you said all/most of the conservatives you know are those stereotypical things.  I would surmise that so too are liberals.  Racist/sexist/bigoted, etc.  Furthermore, and most importantly, I don't believe that people want to be.

On your second point: I realize that the left and right are boundaries, but within those confines probably lies numerous ways to create a transparent, uncorrupt, political system that doesn't exploit people. Yet our society tells us we can only be on one side of those boundaries - there's no room for give and take - which is ridiculous. We live in a world where mathematics have solved world trade problems, medical, and technological problems. I'd love to see a political system that adds the chaos theory to the equation. I'd love to see a political system that is empathetic and looks at all facets of human tendencies, cultures, and needs (without exploiting those people).

Interesting (bolded statement.)  Chaos theory.

Well, first let me say there is a system that addresses all the beauty and uniqueness of each human spirit.  It's Conservatism.  The premise being exactly that - the supremacy of the individual.  That's what builds a better collective society.  Unleash individuals.  Let what naturally compels them, guide how they serve their fellow man.  Let them fail, let them win... naturally.  Do not let a bunch of intellectual elites "figure it all out" -- who wins, who loses -- all from their comfy leather chairs -- and become "rulers."  That's the opposite of individualism.  That's why TRUE conservatives despise racism -- it diminishes individualism.  It's completely at odds with the premise.  "You're black... you're white... you're Hispanic."  Ok... whatever.  That's why the folks you describe could not be conservative, but rather isolationists.


The problem is this.  We have "the planners."  The authoritarians.  Intellectual liberal elites.  Tired of wasting their talents inside a bubble, they want to rule others -- from inside their bubble.  They're high on themselves and LUST to control others.  Being smart, they realized they can plan and control everything from a Capital or an Ivy League tower.  They could be using their intellect to serve (just like everyone else who is working their butts off).  But no... they're content to spank it and decree what is a "human right" and what isn't.


They despise individualism.  Crush it.  "If you're poor -- you're trailer trash.  Stay there.  If you're rich, come here and give me some.  Blacks over here and think this way...you're angry.  Whites, just sit over there, think about what you did.  Women, you angry about this AND that.  Hispanics, when your done getting your REAL minimum wage... this is your political concern.  And if you're middle class... knock it off!  Forget your stupid 'Leave it to Beaver' fantasy of a better life... just how the hell did you get out anyway!? Guards!!!"

That's why you feel like society decrees you must be this or that.  With Conservatism, it's up to you.  Big bang.  Chaos -- with self desire as your guide.  Pursue happiness.  That's not where our leaders are taking us today.  And that's why Conservatives are the enemy.  Not Republicans... please.  It's Conservatives that seek to end the rule.

[rab2591]

I'm guessing many handgun related deaths are caused by "heat of the moment" behavior or accidents? Assault rifles seem to be the weapon of choice when some loon wants to climb a tower and start picking people off or when they wish to open fire in a cinema.

BTW  here's a pretty good story. Quite a few years ago I remember reading an interview with the actor Kurt Russell. The interviewer was giving him a hard time because he is pro guns. Kurt replied "You know what, many of my anti guns friends would give me a hard time for owning many guns and for enjoying going hunting, and then the LA Riots happened and suddenly the same people are calling me up and asking 'um you don't have a spare gun I could borrow do you'"?

Yeah, they are primarily used in those cases - thus I personally have no qualms in banning them. But again I'll say, banning those weapons won't put a dent in the gun-related murder tally.

Haha, good story...when it hits close to home, it is almost necessary for one to own a gun just to feel peace of mind. I honestly don't expect most UK, Australian, etc friends to see this side of the story, but after you've been shot at, burglarized, etc - it's kinda difficult to live without a firearm for protection.

I'm glad there are people like you who can see this though! Believe me, I'd love to live in a world/country where I could sleep soundly without a weapon of self-defense nearby, but after living in this country for my entire life it's very hard not to.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Ya know, it's OK to remove this conversation from all the forced sociological weight and just look at as: hey, some people just get off on the idea of guns and shooting and killing and others ...... don't..... I find a lot of gun nuts rhetoric disingenuous and that's what I have a problem with.... Just admit you get off on guns for the simple pleasure of it alone... And that's OK.... But it should be also understood that for just about everyone else in the world, gun are simply machines that fire high speed projectiles that will tear into your body and likely kill you if you happen to be in it's path.... Not a fun idea to most people...

This idea of defending against tyranny of the government is ridiculous. First off, the government has no need to violently confront it's populace or take it over. They already have us right where they want us: working sh*tty jobs for decreasing pay, accepting barbaric health care where any pathetic attempts at change is scoffed at as socialist, while we argue amongst ourselves over these induced notions of left/right.... You can't battle it out with your guns against the Government and then head down to wal-mart afterward for big savings on pork rinds: it's all or nothing and the US is VERY VERY good at death and destruction. We've been training death squads all over the globe for much longer than any of us have been alive. We run a school in Georgie to train guys on putting down revolts with firepower as a first resort and with wanton rape and torture just for the fun of it... Just ask David Koresh who stocking up on weapons and taking on Uncle Sam usually turns out.... And he only got to meet the nice guys of the bunch....

[rab2591]

@Beanbag:

On your first point: People are genetically inclined to survive. Most humans have empathy, but their instincts for survival override this trait most times. We are just creatures of the universe, no more and no less, following the laws of nature that are passed down in our DNA. We can see this by watching animals in a zoo. And, in the big picture, we are no different than animals.

On your second point: In this Darwinian world, people are ruthless - you see it everyday: from the CEO of AIG, to your street-corner drug dealer. People will do anything to survive. History has shown that man can't be trusted (it's in our DNA to survive by pretty much any means necessary). This country was a proving ground as to why conservatism could never work: People are easily persuaded, people are easily conned. Private corporations, with enough power, can easily sway the vote, con the regular-joe, etc. Your average CEO cares more about profit than his fellow man...he'll dump toxic chemicals into a river without a single thought, he'll start wars merely because the sales of his F/A-18 Hornet's are down.

The individual (in the private sector or politically) has proven time and time again that he can not be trusted with power.

BTW, I think you misunderstand my inclusion of chaos: basically the smallest actions in a set condition have drastic consequences on the 'final' output. I was merely stating that this needs to be a factor in political systems.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

@Beanbag:

On your first point: People are genetically inclined to survive. Most humans have empathy, but their instincts for survival override this trait most times. We are just creatures of the universe, no more and no less, following the laws of nature that are passed down in our DNA. We can see this by watching animals in a zoo. And, in the big picture, we are no different than animals.

On your second point: In this Darwinian world, people are ruthless - you see it everyday: from the CEO of AIG, to your street-corner drug dealer. People will do anything to survive. History has shown that man can't be trusted (it's in our DNA to survive by pretty much any means necessary). This country was a proving ground as to why conservatism could never work: People are easily persuaded, people are easily conned. Private corporations, with enough power, can easily sway the vote, con the regular-joe, etc. Your average CEO cares more about profit than his fellow man...he'll dump toxic chemicals into a river without a single thought, he'll start wars merely because the sales of his F/A-18 Hornet's are down.

The individual (in the private sector or politically) has proven time and time again that he can not be trusted with power.

BTW, I think you misunderstand my inclusion of chaos: basically the smallest actions in a set condition have drastic consequences on the 'final' output. I was merely stating that this needs to be a factor in political systems.

There's no historical consistency (where it matters) in these silly "brand names" anyhow... Left/Right are only relevant to who's pushing each brand at any given time.... They need to be dropped.

In fact, dropping/refusing these terms would be one non-violent or gun related way to push-back at the "tyranny of government"

I only hope Bean Bag has a giant Obama bobble-head affixed to the top of his monitor 

[SMiLE Brian]

@Beanbag:

On your first point: People are genetically inclined to survive. Most humans have empathy, but their instincts for survival override this trait most times. We are just creatures of the universe, no more and no less, following the laws of nature that are passed down in our DNA. We can see this by watching animals in a zoo. And, in the big picture, we are no different than animals.

On your second point: In this Darwinian world, people are ruthless - you see it everyday: from the CEO of AIG, to your street-corner drug dealer. People will do anything to survive. History has shown that man can't be trusted (it's in our DNA to survive by pretty much any means necessary). This country was a proving ground as to why conservatism could never work: People are easily persuaded, people are easily conned. Private corporations, with enough power, can easily sway the vote, con the regular-joe, etc. Your average CEO cares more about profit than his fellow man...he'll dump toxic chemicals into a river without a single thought, he'll start wars merely because the sales of his F/A-18 Hornet's are down.

The individual (in the private sector or politically) has proven time and time again that he can not be trusted with power.

BTW, I think you misunderstand my inclusion of chaos: basically the smallest actions in a set condition have drastic consequences on the 'final' output. I was merely stating that this needs to be a factor in political systems.

There's no historical consistency (where it matters) in these silly "brand names" anyhow... Left/Right are only relevant to who's pushing each brand at any given time.... They need to be dropped.

In fact, dropping/refusing these terms would be one non-violent or gun related way to push-back at the "tyranny of government"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vr1bz877zE0

[18thofMay]

Cor blimey guv'nor...don't much reckon that prayer is anything other than feel-good bollocks, much like that gun control malarkey. Your country PROSECUTES people (especially the Irish) who defend themselves against violent psychopaths. Highest violent crime rate in the world but NO GUNS! But that's ok! People now use knives and now John Bull wants to ban them as well! Because if we ban everything, the criminals will eventually follow the law!

Bloody hell, what's this world coming to? I wish to register a complaint with the British Ministry of Feel-Good Baloney and tell them that your country's violent crime rate is through the bleeding roof and over the f***ing cliff. You Brits have NO BUSINESS telling anyone that their country is f***ed in the head. Keep on hanging on to that dead Empire of yours...

If there is one country in the world that is singlehandedly responsible for f***ing up this world, it's the United Kingdom. Own it. Deal with it.

18th of May is Australian. Carry on, though.

Thanks mate and my name is Nathan.

[Bean Bag]

just look at as: hey, some people just get off on the idea of guns and shooting and killing and others ...... don't.....

I'm not sure that's the issue though.  For example, I don't like guns.

This idea of defending against tyranny of the government is ridiculous.

That's my concern. Because...

First off, the government has no need to violently confront it's populace or take it over.

... you said it!  Hitler worked his way up into the government.  No need to violently taking over his own nation.  Then you disarm them.

[Bean Bag]

The individual (in the private sector or politically) has proven time and time again that he can not be trusted with power.

I agree with that concern.  Likewise to trust an all powerful individual, federal government is bad.  At the federal level, earthly power is complete.  You'd have to escape the union if you don't agree.  It's not a matter of moving to Texas, like 60,000 Californians did.