fucking hell what a crap attitude... see Gandhi quote \"You can be the change you want to see in the world\" be it getting cannabis legalised, stopping bush getting into power or stopping wars that ruin countires communications, infrastructure, and killing innocent civillians (10,000+ now i believe) you cant just sit on your fucking arse and hope that all you want will happen, go out into the world and fight for your freedom, you Americans seem to proclaim how great it is, make some proper use of it instead of making it a big (bullshit) cliche
and thats why the US has the largest Nuke capability in the world. enough to destroy the WHOLE planet dozens of times over. no prizes for figuring out i dislike bush. but more than that... i seriously despise the puppetmasters of bush. the PNAC specifically, but thats just yet another public front. the real enemy of world peace are the guys of the secret societies. Skull & Bones is the one that Bushy spawns from. the fool even admitted it. however, it is commonly known to us types that spend all our time trying to find out whats going on, that KERRY IS ALSO A MEMBER! so it matters not which way you all vote. Kerry will just be another Clinton. nice guy on the outside, whilst secretly setting things up so future governments can get away with absolutely whatever they want. Clinton\'s secret Executive autonomy acts, Bush\'s Victory act, Patriot Act 1, Patriot Act 2, and most recently they\'ve legalised the \"Noble Lie\". Vote anything but libertarian and you\'re just another pawn playing the game just the way they want. America has no liberty anymore. the hour is far later than anyone realises. (although i quoted bud fanatic, my reply is really to blazin420 ...and of course, to just anyone reading) i would reply more and write a few thousand words on this (because frankly i\'ve got so much to say and havnt been here to say it for too long) but i gotta get up tomoro, so i need some kip. last word... Bush not only knew about it, but was part of the team that helped orcastrate it!!!
I\'m just being realistic. Honestly, is there anything YOU can do? Other then donating your $20 to greenpeace every year or writing some letters to Bush that will never be read? Maybe you should take Ghandi\'s (and apparently your own) advice and get off your ass and try instead of sitting behind a keyboard attempting to make people think like you. A feat that you will not accomplish.
*sighs* Looks like we\'re all fucked this election day, unless we vote for Nader... This is a lose-lose situation with no way out. Also, it\'s reasonable to believe that another terrorist attack would put the U.S. under martial law... Once that happens, all hell will break loose. I won\'t vote Kerry, and I don\'t trust Bush enough to say he isn\'t going to re-instate the draft if another attack comes.. Damn it all.
That\'s a good argument, but a lame argument for the issue at hand.You also seemed to have missed my point; Let me make it more clear. Right now, anyone with the correct knowledge can produce these things with adequate resources. I don\'t believe you\'re going to change that either. If what I said is a \"lame argument\", perhaps you or I could do better? Maybe we should vote for you? Or myself? Are you going to ensure it doesn\'t happen? Am I? No; it\'s not possible. No administration can remove the knowledge that is there, or the uranium on this planet. Or, perhaps you have a better candidate for us? Would Kerry do any better? Maybe, maybe not. Nader isn\'t going to win, anyways. Sorry to say it, but we\'re stuck with puppets in the office whether we want it or not. The only way nukes will go away is when the material used in building them (namely uranium) either hits its radioactive half-life, or the human race forgets how to build the damn things (read: we will be dead for a long time before either of those happen). Point- We\'re not getting any good candidates this year, and H-bombs aren\'t going away within the next few centuries. Will you roll the dice with Kerry, go with Bush, or vote Nader?
Budfanatic-- You\'re trying to make me prove a negative, in doing so you\'re discrediting the original argument. I was arguing that Kerry isn\'t worse than Bush as a candidate concerning other countries nuclear weapons because the current admin. hasn\'t done anything but invade countries that have no nuclear programs. Your point is moot. Let me make this clear; first you say that Kerry would be a bad pres because he won\'t do anything about N. Korea\'s nuclear weapons, then go on to say that there\'s nothing to be done about nukes so my argument is \'lame\'. Yah, I\'m the lame one
i intend to get off my ass and do something when i leave education but too much of my life depends on getting through education to do anything now. the government cannot silence us forever. and uranium (i think at least) has a half life of 90,000,000 years...
The point you made in your original post is actually quite good, however, I was compelled to stretch the issue out to see where it went...which is nowhere. It was vital to show what I was really getting at and not just a fraction of my thoughts. I said it was \"a lame argument for the issue at hand\", which is what I just posted. When I originally posted it, it wasn\'t quite so sweetened to the reader and I had to curb out some of the distasteful parts.. Perhaps I should have worded it, \"Good point, however not pertinent to the following.\" On to the issue at hand: Comparing my original post to my last one, it seems like im a bloody bush supporter; I simply said \"I\'m not voting for kerry, (I\'m not sure what bush will do but he may try to stop more from being produced, which is in the Bush logical process), and here\'s why\", and in the next post I explained that no administration could completely absolve the nuclear threat regardless of any new leader. The candidates are not the best options, as I mentioned in my previous post. I\'m sorry you feel that I\'m lame, but I\'m also sorry I didn\'t make my entire point clear by merging the two thoughts and putting, \"on the other hand\" between them, instead of making two posts in completely different directions. I will furthermore ensure that I don\'t do this, and I do believe that I erred by fighting my own post with a post that was completely off course for no apparent reason: it was just what was on my mind after thinking about the issue more thoroughly to see the true problem with what I said. I won\'t make the same mistake again. I was also out of cigarettes, so I felt rather confrontational and pissed off that evening. I also barely touched on your post...but it seems like that doesn\'t hold much weight, the way that you responded. My excuses may sound like hot air, but I hold true to my reasons and have had time to contemplate on my original post, again, which is why I made the second one. If I hadn\'t quoted you it would have made a lot more sense, but I quote to stretch out issues and not necessarily bash them. I guess my whole point is still moot and I\'m still lame, eh? Edit- Diced the post up, rearranged it, and tried to edit it out to a more palatable and organized read...
I don\'t have time for a long response (there will be one ) right now but I just want to say that I should have said \"Now who\'s argument is lame?\" Instead of \"Now who\'s lame?\", I was simply trying to counter what you said about me.
Oh. Heh I tried to make it less subjective than my original post, but the outline stuck once I finished it. I hate being aggressive or defensive about issues, so I drag them out. I wasn\'t trying to bash you, but the simplest explanation would be: I started with a simple reply, then dug so deep I went incredibly off-topic into something utterly unrecognizable from the original post... My bad.
this is just like last time we are screwd either way. and the only hope we have of getting a decent pres(nader and such) have no prayer of winning ever.. if we vote for him we pretty much piss our vote away.. so i can chose A. a war crazed moron that will most likely get me blown to hell(*added note* i was all for going after afganistan and supported bush up untill iraq.. at the start of the iraq bs bushes story was that they had nukes and were going to rain down gas upon us..then about half way through that guess what? no weapons.. hmm what to do now? oh yah thats right lets lie..\"we have a moral obligation\" oh a moral obligation is it? glad you changed your reason halfway through it after lying to me and on top of that showing no remorse. on top of that eh guy(name escapes me) got so sick of bushes bs he left and wrote a book and all bush can do in defence is say he was out of the loop or was it in the loop now that he thought out what he had just said?more lies. there is alot more but i\'m getting to stressed out thinking about it) or B. some crafty guy that will raise taxes through the roof and do god only knows what else... i\'ma have to choose B. .. i\'ve seen bush lie to start a war i\'ve seen bush lie to try and get out of the heat for 911 i\'ve seen bush try and destroy MY freedom with the friggen patriot acts and i\'m tired of him.. dont get me wrong i despise democrats in general because they are alwasy trying to tax me even more but i\'d rather roll the dice with kerry than put the gun to my head with bush. atleast with kerry its a roll of the dice not a gun to the head and that my friends was my one time political opinion statement. nothing but love my brothers just needed to let that out =) peace(i hope ehhe) *note* if you care to try and debate about something i said it best not be nit picky or it wont get a responce. i dont keep silent because i dont have something to back it up i keep silent because i\'m tired of having to piddle away with moot points that i\'ve proven to so many other people..i\'ve yet to hear a decent argument against anything i\'ve stated and unless its somethig i havent heard and put to rest i\'ll bid you good day =) *further note* i noticed something was comming so i\'ll go ahead and box it down so i dont waste my time reading it.. i didnt get all this from tabloids and wierd interenet sites i wacthed some of the 911 hearings and listend to them speaking the press(which is their outlet of speaking to the american people). if i flet like it i could go find the quotes. *end*
You should realize that the republicans won\'t really help gun rights at all. In fact, it\'s guys like Bush who\'ll want to take away guns from people so they can\'t fight back when the gov. pushes through 1984-type bills like the Patriot Act. And, while I don\'t always agree w/ democrats, ANYONE is better than Bush.
Are you at all immersed in the gun culture in America? If you were, you would realize that since Bush has been in office, we have been given back more of our rights then Clinton took away. The Assault Weapon Ban will sunset in September. And so far I think its been 3 states that have established \"Shall Issue\" laws in regards to concealed weapon permits (carry licenses). States that formerly were \"May Issue.\" Which is basically, if the Sheriff \"feels\" like giving you one, he will. Otherwise he is not obligated by law to issue one to you. Gun owners in America are winning the battle as of right now. The NRA is really making a difference now more then ever. We will continue to fight, and we WILL win in the end. With a Republican in office, it will make it that much easier. My vote will always go Republican. I don\'t care if a candidate promised the unconditional legalization of marijuana. I still would not vote for him. Unless he removed all gun control laws unconditionally also. Personally, being able to effectively defend my life and the lives of the ones I love is most important.
Bowling for Columbine springs to mind at the moment, well whenever i hear NRA.........Peace out.........Sid
I liked that movie. So much, that I have it on DVD. It is a very good film. But thats all it is. Its a movie. Not a documentary. It is full of lies and bullshit propaganda. But once you get through all that, you soon understand what Moore is getting at. He\'s just asking the question thats on all of our minds.....Why are Americans so violent? While I\'m big into guns and the culture that surrounds them, I still see that America is a pretty fucked up place. Why do people resort to such violence here and not in other countries? Why? Can anyone answer? Not even Michael Moore himself could find a decent explination in the entire time it took to make that film. Taking guns off the streets will solve nothing. If someone wants to kill someone else, he will do it. No gun is necessary. There are far more stabbings then there are shootings. I am a firm believer that you must fight fire with fire. And as long as there are criminals out on the streets with guns, then I will also have guns to protect myself from them. If there was not so much violence and crime, I probably would not own so many guns, if any at all. But about the NRA....Moore tried way too hard to demonize Charlton Heston. The guy has Alztimers (sp?) for Christ\'s sake. How can you conduct a decent interview with a person like that? It would have gone much differently if he had interviewed Wayne La Pierre (former Vice President and current President of the NRA).
Heston and the NRA were turning up in places where there had been shootings, 2 i think in particular were pointed out in Moores film........now that\'s just bad taste! if the British equivelant of the NRA (if there is one?) had tuned up at Dunblane in Scotland after Ian Hamilton had shot 16 4-5 year olds and their teacher, they would have been shut down by the govt, not to mention lynched by the locals. i\'m not saying that guns don\'t have a place in the world today, yes your right you can\'t just take them away now that they\'re there........ but you can control more tightly who posesses them, you should need to be of a certain age, a member of a gun club for a number of years, and have a test certificate or something. but as for automatic weapons, and i know you own 1 or 2, i do not beleive those weapons have any place in society, only in the hands of an army. there\'s a diffrence between defending your family with a pistol, or going to town with an M-16. now i\'m not too worried about someone like yourself possessing one, but i don\'t think that a machine gun should be allowed off a firing range, and if the U.S. govt were to turn, and the U.S. people needed to defend themselves, then i\'m sure you\'d be able to get the machine guns from the ranges if need be.......... unless i\'m way off the mark, and there is another purpose for a machine gun in society that i\'ve missed? Peace out.........Sid
Bad taste, yes. I won\'t argue that. But I believe they booked one of the locations before there even was a shooting. As for who can possess a gun. Its much harder then you think. You must be 18 to buy a rifle, 21 to buy a handgun. Let me take you through the process I had to go through to get my first rifle. First I had to apply for a \"Firearms Identification Card\" at the police station in my town. When I applied, I had to be fingerprinted, photographed, have 3 personal references, and give police permission to do an investigation into my mental health history. Then, if everything checks out with the FBI (the FBI processes all the data and conducts the investigation), I should receive the card within 30 days.(but that never happens. mine took 2 months. my dad\'s took 6 months and the only trouble hes had with the law was a speeding ticket 20 something years ago.) Now that I have the card, I can purchase rifles and shotguns. I go to the store, pick out the rifle, and show drivers license, and firearms ID card. Then the salesman calls NICS. \"National Instant Check System.\" They give your social security number and it runs a check into your criminal history. If it comes up negative, you can\'t have the gun. If positive, you can pay and take the gun with you. If I want a Handgun, I first have to have the Firearms ID Card that I spoke of before. I go to the police station with that and fill out an application for a \"Handgun Purchase Permit.\" After 3 days to 3 months, you will get the permit. Once you get that, you go to the gun store and start the process all over again. Those are the gun laws of my state. Very strict. But in other states, you just need a drivers license, they do a NICS check on you, and theres a 5 to 7 day waiting period before oyu can take the handgun. No waiting period for rifles or shotguns. By automatic weapons, I meant semi-automatic. I do not own any machineguns. My AK-47 and M4 (short M16) are both semi-auto only. If I wanted to own a machinegun, I would have to apply for a machinegun purchase permit through the FBI. I would have to be fingerprinted, photographed, and have my local Sheriff write a letter saying I\'m ok to own it. It is a process. I\'m glad you put in your post the real reason for the Second Amendment. So that we can fight back against the government if they do anything we don\'t like. The people are supposed to run this country the way we want to, but unfortunately its the other way around. Well, actually, the Media runs the country, then the government, then the people.
but the diffrence is, you can\'t just plant a piece of metal in the ground and grow a gun......they have to be made..........Peace out........Sid