All Americans Are Fat Retards


Status
Not open for further replies.
What I said is that taking the guns away from law abiding citizens isn't going to solve anything because other people who don't care about the law will still be able to get them anyway.
I would disagree. While you have a society that sees the gun as a symbol of its pioneering history and holds to (the rather dubious interpretation of) the 2nd amendment, that the individual should be allowed to bear and keep arms, you are perpetuating a view that the individual has a right to take another life. Most civilised societies no longer impose the death penalty let alone condone it in their citizens.

Taking guns away from people would be the first step in altering this perception.

The next generation could grow up without living in fear of retards with guns and not feeling the need to own a gun to defend themselves.

You need to to strip the gun of its romantic wild west associations and change your societies attitudes toward it. Making it illegal to own one would be the first step. Of course it is not going to happen because no politician would dare propose it. Some one would probably shoot him.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The government is not mommy and daddy and the people are not little children who need to be led by the hand because they aren't capable of doing things on their own. If people want to own guns and they have uses for them besides killing other people, they should be allowed to own guns. It's as simple as that.

About murder statistics, you can't really make a fair comparison between the U.S. and Britain. As mentioned above, there are countries that allow fully automatic guns that have lower crime rates, you can't compare between the countries because you don't have a fair control. However, i recently read about a study that was done that showed that there were lower murder rates from guns in the U.S. in the states that ALLOWED CONCEALED GUNS than those that didn't.
 
Neither one has control over humans. Nothing else does either. Humans are responsible for their own damn actions.

So the gun, as a symbol has no effect on people? When you pick up that gun don't you feel a surge of masculinity, the fact that you're exercising your right as an American to own and shoot anyone that attacks you? Don't you feel that the gun needs to be used? The buzz that you get when a bullet tears through flesh?

There's something about guns that set them apart from any other weapon. They do have a control over people; they are impersonal, don't rely solidly on your actions (as jabbing a knife into a victim at close range does) and are involved in sports.

When you say 'Nothing else (has control over humans)' what exactly do you mean? I'd argue that very little of what we percieve as 'free will' is all that free.


No, I don't feel a surge of masculinity, and I don't feel proud or big and manly cuz I'm holding a gun... I don't have that kind of symbolic mind, at least not toward guns. When I held the M1 Carbine that my friend had, it felt kind of cool to be holding a gun from WWII(by the way, I'm not entirely sure why, but I'm fascinated by a lot of things from that time, even the boots and lighters the soldiers used. It's not just the guns. Oh, and by the way... the M1 carbine was a blast to shoot, almost no recoil whatsoever. It's a nice little gun, but I don't think I'd want one in combat, if I were to ever find myself in combat for whatever reason), but I wasn't like "YEAH!!!! LET'S GO SHOOT SOMETHING NOW!!!! AAAAAAH!!!!" and No, I don't feel like the gun needs to be used. I've never shot a gun thru any flesh, so I wouldn't know what kind of "buzz" it would give me, if any.

No, in reality, nothing really does have control over humans. If anything has any kind of "control" over you, it's an illusion, and the only reason it's there at all is because you let it exist. It's all about using your head and thinking before you act. Do you remember a while back when I was arguing that advertisements don't affect me? Like I never think something is cool because an advertisement tells me it is? This is kind of similar... I make my own decisions, and I think them thru. I don't just do what some stupid ad tells me, and I don't get testosterone/adrenaline induced impulses to do things like that. In fact, probably about 99% of the things I see for sale, I look at and say "WTF? That's retarded! What the hell could I possibly want with that?" For example... I remember seeing this stupid commercial for a printer that you can either hook up directly to your camera, or else you could put the camera's memory card directly into the printer... I forget which one... either way, one of the first things they said was "why is it easier to take pictures than it is to print them?" When I saw that, I was like "uh... because... all you have to do is point the fuckin thing and press a button. it's eaiser because it's less work, but that doesn't mean that printing pictures is hard. Oh yeah, I'm sure it's so fuckin difficult to insert a cable into your camera, drag the fuckin files, then open them, and click file/print. What a fuckin stupid commercial." Maybe I'm unusual or something, but that's the way it is, honestly. I'm no puppet. NOTHING has control over me.

"taking the guns away from everyone, including good old law-abiding citizens, would really bring down the murder rate here in the US."

Yeah, if you could take them away from EVERYBODY and KEEP them away from EVERYBODY, but that's not gonna happen. And I see no real reason to even try because people who would never even use a gun for a crime would be affected negatively the most. I've never been hunting, but I'd like to go hunting, and it has nothing to do with wanting to kill something. I just want to eat deer because it tastes good. I mean seriously... if I really felt the way Mark described about guns, I would have lost a lot of weight, and I'd probably be in the military by now. But as you can clearly see from my profile picture, I'm fat, and I play airsoft. I don't "pretend" I'm in the military. I just put on camouflage cuz I play in the woods, it's comfortable as hell, and I like the way it looks.

"About murder statistics, you can't really make a fair comparison between the U.S. and Britain. As mentioned above, there are countries that allow fully automatic guns that have lower crime rates, you can't compare between the countries because you don't have a fair control. However, i recently read about a study that was done that showed that there were lower murder rates from guns in the U.S. in the states that ALLOWED CONCEALED GUNS than those that didn't."

Ah yes... I remember hearing that too, but I forget where I heard it. I remember they specifically mentioned Vermont as being a state where you could carry concealed weapons, and the crime rate is very low there. They also said something about it being considered one of the safest places to live in America.

digitaljez, it never says anywhere in any of our laws that it's okay to just kill someone for the hell of it. In fact, there are specific laws against killing... If there weren't, people wouldn't go to jail for murder. Just becuase we have the right to carry guns doesn't mean that we also have or think we have the right to kill each other. Some farmers who have livestock depend on guns to keep wolves away from their livestock. And if nobody had guns, nobody would hunt. Then the deer population would explode, ruining forest restoration efforts(deer eat baby trees, for those of you who don't know). They'd also end up all over the place, in people's back yards, which really isn't such a bad thing, but would you rather have them shot and eaten or see them die of starvation?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I never said your laws allowed killing. My point is that giving guns to individuals in a culture that idolises the gun because of a mythology of heroic gunfighters is unwise. To then take a phrase out of a sentence referring to the security of the state and interpret it to mean that any retard bred in that culture can carry a gun just stupid.

Would you deny that many Americans own handguns for self defence ? The implication is that being allowed to own a gun for self defence gives you license to
take life if the circumstances arise. Just having that construct in your outlook on life means it is an option that can be used and will colour your viewpoint. If you take that option away people's viewpoint will change.

If the Swiss and Israeli's can own guns and not murder each other with them it is not human nature or the availability of guns that is the problem. It is the culture that worships the gun. Bonnie and Clyde, Dillinger, John Wayne, clint Eastwood etc. An endless stream of caricatures 'Winning the West'(?) using a gun on a another human to do it.

Your entire argument about controlling deer is the same crap the foxhunters in this country churn out to justify their bloodlust. The only people who need to control wildlife are those who it directly affects. If deer are damaging the new growth in a forest then you have rangers who can be licensed to shoot them if they have no other means of control. If farmers need to defend their livestock they can obtain a license. It doesn't mean your Aunty should be allowed to carry a magnum in her purse as she wanders around Walmart.

Nature generally manages population levels. It is only when man interferes and screws up the balance you get population explosions. In that case culling may be a short term solution but you need to look at the root cause. It should be handled by specialists, not by Biff on his day off from the office/production line/cheesecake factory.

You don't go hunting with a concealed weapon or a handgun so what is the justification for allowing your average Joe to own one ?

It is hardly surprising a state that allows concealed hand guns has lower crime rates. I am just glad to live in a society where I don't feel the need for people to think I may be carrying a concealed gun as a deterrent because of the fear some fat retard has a concealed gun and may use it on me ( or are these people carrying these guns in case they see a deer chewing on a redwood sapling ?).

I don't want to live in a climate of fear. But like McDonalds and The Simpsons this gun culture is seeping out of the states and polluting the rest of us.
 
I don't want to live in a climate of fear. But like McDonalds and The Simpsons this gun culture is seeping out of the states and polluting the rest of us.

True, Guns have been glorified trough the media, just llok at gangsta rap and as such made the must have fashion accesory amongst youths these days. Its seen cool to have a gun :(
 
Last edited by a moderator:
if US country (and my fucking italian country too) will BAN OUT any army, and use the HALF of the money they trash in military fee on umanitarian help or PEACE KEEPING people (without army, not like the fascists marines do), we will live in a better world.
The law should not permit to PRODUCE armies, ANY, gun UZI or F16Tomcat
you should fight to BREAK AND TRASH LOCKHEAD , not bush.
 
Okay, Digitaljez, you make some good points. I have no reason to be afraid of anything where I live, so I have no need to carry a gun. But a lot of places are much more dangerous than my little town in the middle of the Lebanon Valley. So I understand why some people would want to carry a gun. And as far as I'm concerned, if you're ever in a situation where anyone/anything else is trying to kill you, you have every right to fight back and end that bastard's life if that's what you have to do to keep him/it from killing you. In a perfect world, there would be no violence between humans, but this world isn't perfect. And I'd rather have crime rates low due to fear of being shot than have criminals be able to do whatever the hell they want to law-abiding citizens who can't fight back. And the guns have already been glorified... It's already in everybody's head. Nobody seems to be making any kind of effort to end it, and until somebody does, the problem won't go away.

And I realize that killing the deer isn't the best solution. The best one is one that would never happen... The best solution is to stop invading the deer(or any other animal, for that matter)'s natural habitat because that's what causes the most problems... but the human population will continue to expand... Plus, deer tastes good, and some people just like to kill for the hell of it. They're not gonna change that.

By the way, off the top of my head I can only think of one person who I know personally who has a gun for protection. My friend's dad has a revolver under his pillow. I don't know of anybody else who does that, but it's probably because of the area in which I live.
 
dear isobel, i hope your well, and what youve done is right
oh its been such hell i wish you well, and hope your safe tonight...

But on teh subject of guns:

Tall, jsut like a girafee, you have to climb to find its head
but if theres a glitch, your an osterich, youve got your head in the sand.

And on the subject of magus:

Seriously, its just not that important, why do you feel you have to argue with everyone, even when the original issue isnt contentious, e.g. seabrook crisps. Okay, so some day dont like the "wiggles", but cant we just live and let live? I think you should chill out, shoot up if thats what takes.

To everyone who isnt magus:

Seriously, ive seen it several times and he never shuts up, so just learn to ignore him as far as is possible. WE know hes wrong, he probably knows hes wrong, but cant accept it for some reason. Either that or hes the biggest troll ever. Lets spread the love and live and let live in his case.


I agree.


Plus, dido?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
True, Guns have been glorified trough the media, just llok at gangsta rap and as such made the must have fashion accesory amongst youths these days. Its seen cool to have a gun :(
Gangsta rap - now where did that label originate ?

Gangsta rap is, thankfully, a very small section of the community. As far as I can tell they are black adolescents for the most part. Adolescents have a tough enough time as it is, having no voice or financial clout in an environment not of their making. If you have the added stigma of being part of a minority group you are going to be more motivated than if you were not. This means they have gone that extra mile to acquire guns. If we did not have some of the tightest firearm regulations in the world it is concievable a lot more adolescents would be taking the same path because it would be easier. The problem could be so much worse.

They don't use these weapons on the general public but on other drug gangs. If adolescents from other sections of the community could easily get firearms we could have inter racial wars as well as turf wars.

I can not see how the banning of handguns in the UK can be directly related to the subsequent rise in gun crime. Since firearms have not featured very highly in the UK's public awareness since the end of WWII the ban was a non event for 99% of the population. If they tried it in the US there would be an outcry but here there was just a whimper from gun clubs and toy soldiers.

One explanation could be that the guns taken from the people who had them, responsible licensed enthusiasts, have found there way back into society but are now in the hands of hoodlums. Of course this is wild speculation implying corruption in high places so, of course, there is no way that could have happened.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Magus, i'm glad that you are a thinking gun advocate but for every person like you there is the opposite extreme. The statistics don't lie. The U.S. has a huge murder rate. Maybe the reason is the accessiblity to guns combined with TV violence combined with the ingrained mentality that liberty and justice for all is achieved by force.

I rarely watch TV but when I do I have to role my eyes when I see the military recruiting commercials that show disciplined recruits who have found "their" way by joining the armed forces against the evil that might get us if we don't protect ourselves with big guns and modern military equipment. Everyone of these commercials looks inspiring if you don't think. If you do think then they are laughable and sad since many out their will behave like sheep and sign up immediately.

Guns kill people. For every 1000 guns that your law abiding neighbors have 1 of those guns will eventually find its way to someone who doesn't follow the law or is mentally unstable or is just a moron who fears those around him and thinks he needs protection from the unknown and will be quick to shoot it.

Sadly, why do we need these guns is never addressed logically. They may be nice and shiny, make a loud grin-inducing sound, and are the most powerful things you could own but why oh why do we even have these things in our homes.

Just to say from my experience, i've noticed an obvious difference in the personalities of those who aren't from the USA: they simply are more laid back then most people i've met in the states, they just don't take every little thing so serious, and were no where near as paranoid as the typical American. :ph34r: :unsure: :ph34r: :unsure: :ph34r: :unsure: :ph34r: :unsure: :ph34r:
 
Neither one has control over humans. Nothing else does either. Humans are responsible for their own damn actions.

So the gun, as a symbol has no effect on people? When you pick up that gun don't you feel a surge of masculinity, the fact that you're exercising your right as an American to own and shoot anyone that attacks you? Don't you feel that the gun needs to be used? The buzz that you get when a bullet tears through flesh?

There's something about guns that set them apart from any other weapon. They do have a control over people; they are impersonal, don't rely solidly on your actions (as jabbing a knife into a victim at close range does) and are involved in sports.

When you say 'Nothing else (has control over humans)' what exactly do you mean? I'd argue that very little of what we percieve as 'free will' is all that free.
Magus? Exercise?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No, in reality, nothing really does have control over humans. If anything has any kind of "control" over you, it's an illusion, and the only reason it's there at all is because you let it exist. It's all about using your head and thinking before you act. Do you remember a while back when I was arguing that advertisements don't affect me? Like I never think something is cool because an advertisement tells me it is? This is kind of similar... I make my own decisions, and I think them thru. I don't just do what some stupid ad tells me, and I don't get testosterone/adrenaline induced impulses to do things like that. In fact, probably about 99% of the things I see for sale, I look at and say "WTF? That's retarded! What the hell could I possibly want with that?" For example... I remember seeing this stupid commercial for a printer that you can either hook up directly to your camera, or else you could put the camera's memory card directly into the printer... I forget which one... either way, one of the first things they said was "why is it easier to take pictures than it is to print them?" When I saw that, I was like "uh... because... all you have to do is point the fuckin thing and press a button. it's eaiser because it's less work, but that doesn't mean that printing pictures is hard. Oh yeah, I'm sure it's so fuckin difficult to insert a cable into your camera, drag the fuckin files, then open them, and click file/print. What a fuckin stupid commercial." Maybe I'm unusual or something, but that's the way it is, honestly. I'm no puppet. NOTHING has control over me.


We are all products of our enviroments; our society and our history, and that's what has an influence over us. You cannot become a lord, can you? No, because your society doesn't allow you to, so therefore has a control. The 10% of Americans cannot get out of poverty because society will not allow them to, not because they can't work hard. If you want psychical things that have a hold over people, there's drugs. There's gambling. There's alcohol, there's addiction to everything.

Magus, really. You *will* be effected by advertisments, as that's their purpose, and millions are spent to get the results they want. When we all go to the Supermarket, we go for the brands we know. Sometimes economic factors mean we take the risk and go for the unknown brand, but if they are at the same price we will go for the big names, even when we have no past experience of that product. That's thanks to advertising.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No, in reality, nothing really does have control over humans. If anything has any kind of "control" over you, it's an illusion, and the only reason it's there at all is because you let it exist. It's all about using your head and thinking before you act.
Each individual always lives within the illusions and limitations that their current perception of reality imposes on them. Most people live their lives being spoonfed their values and beliefs through the media,church etc and to think there is no conscious manipulation, by those in power, of what we are fed would be naive.

America, seems to me, to have a particlarly jingoistic set of messages that are so a part of their everyday lives they are probably unaware of them. All this 'land of the free, mom's apple pie' propaganda.

I have no doubt you could point to instances of similar brain washing in the UK that I am unaware of because, like the concept that a fish has no understanding of water, it is the medium I live in.

As soon as you decide nothing has control over you, you have lost. You will have bought into a belief and your guard will be down.

Without stressing myself out about it, I would always try to keep in mind that I am vulnerable to peer pressure and propaganda. It is the way our minds are. Look at what Hitler achieved with propaganda. Good people will do the most terrible thing if it is framed to match their beliefs.

As you so rightly say, use your head and think first.

The big drawback to all this is that in order to question any propaganda you are going to have make a judgement based on your own belief system. Since the culture you live in has installed that belief system and providing the propaganda is consistent with those beliefs you are going to accept it anyway.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
and more than 50% vote bush.
This isn't true.

Population of USA: 295,734,134
Number of Bush voters: 62,040,610
Percentage of Americans that voted for Bush: ~21%


p.s shut up viperman you fat troll
I imagine the population figure includes minors and prison inmates(I don't think they get a vote) and (if we are to believe certain reports) minorities that the system can ignore at will. So, as Mark says, you can only consider the numbers of registered voters.
I'm well aware of this, but it isn't fair to claim that 50% vote Bush, when they don't. Those that aren't eligible to vote may have (I'd say are significantly more like to have) voted Kerry/Democrat.

We can say that 50% of eligible voters voted Bush, but we must remember that that only accounts for less than a quarter of people. It would be unfair to say anything else given that 100% of adolescents and a number of others have no opportunity to vote.



100% of American adolescents don't vote Bush!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We are all products of our enviroments; our society and our history, and that's what has an influence over us. You cannot become a lord, can you? No, because your society doesn't allow you to, so therefore has a control.
As far as I'm aware there isn't such a thing as a 'lord' in the US, so this doesn't really mean much.

Society never created 'lord', but that doesn't mean that it has a specific hold on you saying you can't be a 'lord'.

It's not society stopping me being a space monkey; there's no such thing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm well aware of this, but it isn't fair to claim that 50% vote Bush, when they don't. Those that aren't eligible to vote may have (I'd say are significantly more like to have) voted Kerry/Democrat.

We can say that 50% of eligible voters voted Bush, but we must remember that that only accounts for less than a quarter of people. It would be unfair to say anything else given that 100% of adolescents and a number of others have no opportunity to vote.



100% of American adolescents don't vote Bush!
A lot of population studies - such as TV viewing figures - are done on much smaller samples of the population. Would the big money still rely on these studies if they were inaccurate ? I think it is safe to assume that over 50% is an accurate representation, but only if that 50% represents actual votes as opposed to the points system.

What evidence do you have to suggest ineligible voters would more likely have voted Democrat ? A large number of them would have just coloured in the voting slip.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No, in reality, nothing really does have control over humans. If anything has any kind of "control" over you, it's an illusion, and the only reason it's there at all is because you let it exist. It's all about using your head and thinking before you act. Do you remember a while back when I was arguing that advertisements don't affect me? Like I never think something is cool because an advertisement tells me it is? This is kind of similar... I make my own decisions, and I think them thru. I don't just do what some stupid ad tells me, and I don't get testosterone/adrenaline induced impulses to do things like that. In fact, probably about 99% of the things I see for sale, I look at and say "WTF? That's retarded! What the hell could I possibly want with that?" For example... I remember seeing this stupid commercial for a printer that you can either hook up directly to your camera, or else you could put the camera's memory card directly into the printer... I forget which one... either way, one of the first things they said was "why is it easier to take pictures than it is to print them?" When I saw that, I was like "uh... because... all you have to do is point the fuckin thing and press a button. it's eaiser because it's less work, but that doesn't mean that printing pictures is hard. Oh yeah, I'm sure it's so fuckin difficult to insert a cable into your camera, drag the fuckin files, then open them, and click file/print. What a fuckin stupid commercial." Maybe I'm unusual or something, but that's the way it is, honestly. I'm no puppet. NOTHING has control over me.


We are all products of our enviroments; our society and our history, and that's what has an influence over us. You cannot become a lord, can you? No, because your society doesn't allow you to, so therefore has a control. The 10% of Americans cannot get out of poverty because society will not allow them to, not because they can't work hard. If you want psychical things that have a hold over people, there's drugs. There's gambling. There's alcohol, there's addiction to everything.

Magus, really. You *will* be effected by advertisments, as that's their purpose, and millions are spent to get the results they want. When we all go to the Supermarket, we go for the brands we know. Sometimes economic factors mean we take the risk and go for the unknown brand, but if they are at the same price we will go for the big names, even when we have no past experience of that product. That's thanks to advertising.



It's affected, not effected. affect is the verb, effect is the noun... but anyway...

Okay... technically EVERYTHING that ever happens ANYWHERE in any part of the universe affects every single thing in it. So yes, seeing an advertisement will affect me because duh, I'll see it and usually think it's retarded... but advertising doesn't get me to buy things, not in the way the people who make the ads want it to happen. What I mean by this is that if I see an ad for some kind of niche product, like a GP32 for instance, that I never knew existed, I might end up buying it, but it's because my need for it was already there. Had I not known about the GP32, I wouldn't have bought it... but if I didn't already want exactly what the GP32 is, and I saw the ad, I'd have the same reaction to it as I do to other things that are stupid and/or pointless. That's the extent to which advertising affects me.


"if you say you're not being controlled, then you are." Oh, okay... so this works just like "I know you did something because you denied it." Uh... No, not quite... If someone accuses you of doing something, and you didn't do it, you're going to say you didn't do it. If someone accuses you of doing something you don't want him/her to know you did, you're going to say you didn't do it. There's still a 50/50 chance no matter what response you give. You can lie and say you did somethig just as easily as you can lie and say you didn't do something, so what you say doesn't even really matter. The reason I specifically said that nothing has control over me is because it's true. In case you haven't noticed, in many threads on this forum, I'm mostly by myself, arguing against a bunch of other people... Because I tend to have views that go against the norm, can we all agree on that? So now tell me... since the majority is being controlled, and I'm going directly against the majority, wouldn't that indicate that I'm not being controlled like the majority is(and fuck you to whoever tries to say I just want attention because that's a crock of shit. If I really wanted attention, I wouldn't be wasting my time on an internet forum. I'd be outside, raising hell)?


Look... I'm fat, and I'm smart enough to realize that it doesn't matter. I'm perfectly fine with myself the way I am. If I were being controlled, I'd think that it's the worst thing in the world. I'd do everything I could to lose weight. I'd be either not eating or forcing myself to throw up after I eat. I'd be running around doing stupid exercises, buying stupid exercise bullshit I see on TV. None of that is happening... I know how my own damn brain works, and I'm not being controlled, end of story.

I know damn well the people in power try to manipulate us, but it doesn't work on me. I make my own decisions. I believe what I want to believe, not what some asshole wearing a white collar tells me to believe.

The people who say that we should follow the president and stand behind him no matter what he does are the people who are being controlled, not me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is it just me, or did anyone else skip entirely over magus' last post?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top