The Gun Grab Begins

[preacherman76 14,813]

On ‎5‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 2:50 AM, Vlad the Mighty said:

Oh so that's the argument is it, because Youtube overreacted to some silly video the UK is an oppressive police state and therefore everyone ought to carry a gun to defend themselves from the State. Well, um, what country is the home of Political Correctness? Which country has mainstream media that can shut down dissent by simply freezing it out ("dissent" now meaning any arguments in support of the current President ).

Youtube didn't convict the man of anything. The government did. The police are always putting out warnings in regards to what you are allowed to talk about. They just haven't effected you, yet.

 

[Farmer77 28,114]

12 hours ago, Paranormal Panther said:

Are you serious? Our police have nothing to do with the bans of the "Alt-Right" and Michael Savage. It has to do with the lack of free speech in the UK. It has to do with their anti-majority double standards.

LOL you're just gonna refuse to see this one huh? Sensational headlines create impressions was my point. 

Honestly of all the talking heads I like Savage the most. I may not agree with him anymore but hey if you're gonna be a dick don't hide it right? I have very fond memories of delivering pizza in the early 2000's listening to Savage. 

Regardless he called for the deaths of hundreds of millions of muslims among a laundry list of other garbage.  Considering that he isn't a british citizen this actually mirrors American policy. We (CBP)  now check people's social media to ensure they don't hold anti American positions before they enter the country. England didn't have to ask for Savage's phone to peruse his facebook, his positions are broadcast for all to hear. 

Sooo do we have a lack of free speech here too? 

[Paranormal Panther 11,035]

23 hours ago, LV-426 said:

I don't think you've got it in for us

I just want you to have some sense of perspective on what the media is doing to us these days, both left and right - it's polarizing us into seeing the world in black and white, when the truth is that it's very much grey.

Honestly, if you read many of my posts on here, you'll see that I'm far more likely to fall onto the same side of the argument as yourself. I can't abide political correctness, terrorism makes me seethe, and the kind of stories you talk about make me despair. I believe in honest work and family.

I'm not going to let these stories turn me into an angry, hate-filled man though, because they are the exception rather than the rule.

I keep drawing parallels to America, not to paint a bad picture of the US, but to emphasize the point that the world over has problems.

When you talk of Muslim rape gangs, you make it sound like there are gangs of men wandering the streets, jumping on white women while the police look the other way. What I assume you are talking about are things such as the historic child abuse cases in Rotherham. Absolutely ******* awful, despicable crimes, but they are being invesigated and prosecuted. What would you have British citizens do? Storm the courts and lynch them? Sounds good actually... but like yourself in the States, we have to abide by the letter of the law.

What do you do when American citizens are killed by Mexican drug cartels on American soil, or innocent Americans killed in the crossfire of ethnic gang violence in your cities? Have your laws managed to eradicate these crimes? Your military? Local militias?

Again, this isn't meant as disrespect to the US. It's just emphasizing the point that **** happens, and as much as we don't want it to, it does, regardless of who leads our countries. It's not right in any way shape or form, but it happens.

It's worth remembering though that these stories that hit the headlines in the increasingly small world of the Internet do not come close to portraying life in our countries.

The US has many good people, and it isn't a warzone of guns, drugs and gang violence, in the same way that Britain isn't a hotbed of some of the stories you read. There are problems, sure, but all any of us can do is make our votes count, keep our own standards high, and change the world in small ways where we can.

I understand your point. It's true that news outlets often distort and exaggerate events for varied reasons. Our situation often is dishonestly portrayed over there, so it's not unreasonable to think that the reverse also is true. I'm troubled by Orwellian trends in both of our countries. Please don't think that I find my own country above reproach in that regard. I realized that we were on the same police state and security state path when I saw old folks and young kids frisked and searched, like prison inmates, at our airports. The censorship, as well as anti-White rhetoric, on our campuses is another example. I apologize if I made single events sound like widespread trends, which is a pet peeve of mine.

[Paranormal Panther 11,035]

18 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Better yet, we got some of the best from the Indians.

I know; just look at Hinduism. Seriously, they gave us some of the best food on the planet. My guess is that you're referring to politics, but I'm referring to chocolate, as well as all kinds of crops and herbs that now are commonplace in our meals and medicine. They gave the potato to Ireland!  

[Paranormal Panther 11,035]

14 hours ago, Vlad the Mighty said:

that's a very neat way of avoiding answering any of the questions, well done to you. 

That's good to hear from the master of the art. It came from one evader (Antifa) to another. If you're referring to your points on our campuses' censorship and our government's international interventionist policies, I don't disagree with you there. Now, tell me how I'm wrong on Antifa. 

[Paranormal Panther 11,035]

11 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

LOL you're just gonna refuse to see this one huh? Sensational headlines create impressions was my point. 

Honestly of all the talking heads I like Savage the most. I may not agree with him anymore but hey if you're gonna be a dick don't hide it right? I have very fond memories of delivering pizza in the early 2000's listening to Savage. 

Regardless he called for the deaths of hundreds of millions of muslims among a laundry list of other garbage.  Considering that he isn't a british citizen this actually mirrors American policy. We (CBP)  now check people's social media to ensure they don't hold anti American positions before they enter the country. England didn't have to ask for Savage's phone to peruse his facebook, his positions are broadcast for all to hear. 

Sooo do we have a lack of free speech here too? 

We do have a lack of free speech at some colleges and universities. We find an attack on it from corporations that control information (Facebook, Google, news outlets, etc.). They do it in sneaky, underhanded ways, though. Do you have a link to Savage calling for the deaths of millions of Muslims, by the way?

[LV-426 9,295]

50 minutes ago, Paranormal Panther said:

I understand your point. It's true that news outlets often distort and exaggerate events for varied reasons. Our situation often is dishonestly portrayed over there, so it's not unreasonable to think that the reverse also is true. I'm troubled by Orwellian trends in both of our countries. Please don't think that I find my own country above reproach in that regard. I realized that we were on the same police state and security state path when I saw old folks and young kids frisked and searched, like prison inmates, at our airports. The censorship, as well as anti-White rhetoric, on our campuses is another example. I apologize if I made single events sound like widespread trends, which is a pet peeve of mine.

No worries PP, no apology needed. It's better to discuss these things openly.

At least we can on UM to some degree

[Space Commander Travis 50,164]

7 hours ago, Paranormal Panther said:

That's good to hear from the master of the art. It came from one evader (Antifa) to another. If you're referring to your points on our campuses' censorship and our government's international interventionist policies, I don't disagree with you there. Now, tell me how I'm wrong on Antifa. 

I don't know where you got the impression from that I'm a supporter or defender of them. 

[Paranormal Panther 11,035]

15 hours ago, Vlad the Mighty said:

I don't know where you got the impression from that I'm a supporter or defender of them. 

I never said or thought that. I said that you doubted my claims about them. I provided a link to an article that backed my claims. It was ignored.

[Alaric 831]

On 5/4/2018 at 2:23 PM, LV-426 said:

Sorry Alaric, no offence, but do you think you know our laws better than Vlad, a British citizen?

These are traditional and ceremonial roles. If the monarchy actually tried to interfere in British politics, let alone that of other nations such as Canada and Australia, we'd become a republic before you could say "Someone fetch the guillotine!"

We maintain the monarchy as they're valued as our head of state for international relations, tourism, history, charitable work, etc. We maintain the monarchy as the majority of the public see them as part of our culture. Millions around the world won't be tuning into Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's Wedding due to some obsequious reverence to royalty. They'll be tuning in as they like the guy, and his glamourous American wife.

How many other nations have heads of state that have such popularity, or are as recognizable as our queen? You'd be hard pushed to name most of these former career-politicians, that are also subsidized with taxes.

Ah the old appeal to authority, Vlad is an expert on the Royals is he? Can you actually refute any of those points? The Queen’s Prerogative is quite well documented and all of those are part of it.  Are you so blind to say that absolute control of the disposition of the armed forces and the sole power to declare war are merely “traditional and ceremonial roles”?

Yeah, if the Queen does something you don’t like, you’ll fetch a guillotine... hilariously enough, that will be about the extent of your capability to resist... write her a strongly worded (but polite) letter perhaps?

The oath soldiers take when joining U.K. armed forces:

“I, (Insert full name), do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, her heirs and successors, according to law. So help me God.”

The oath US soldiers take:

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

Big difference there, one is an oath to the guiding principles of our democracy and the officers duly elected under that system... the other is an oath of fealty to someone who is unelected and can bear no legislative or judicial penalties for their actions. Call it what you like... I’ll call it tyranny.  

I have a solution. You keep your (purely ceremonial and definitely not tyrannical) monarchy, we’ll keep our Constitution, our democracy and our guns.

[Alaric 831]

On 5/4/2018 at 2:41 PM, OverSword said:

Can we please stop bickering about Royals?

There are multiple people posting here from the British Commonwealth basically saying, “All you Yanks need to do to solve your problems is be more like us and get rid of your guns...”. I’m pointing out that so many other parts of the UK political system are anathema to us, it’s a ridiculous proposition to give up one of the Bill of Rights so we can be more like them.

[Space Commander Travis 50,164]

8 hours ago, Paranormal Panther said:

I never said or thought that. I said that you doubted my claims about them. I provided a link to an article that backed my claims. It was ignored.

well I'm sorry about that, perhaps I didn't have time at the time.

[Space Commander Travis 50,164]

6 hours ago, Alaric said:

Ah the old appeal to authority, Vlad is an expert on the Royals is he? Can you actually refute any of those points? The Queen’s Prerogative is quite well documented and all of those are part of it.  Are you so blind to say that absolute control of the disposition of the armed forces and the sole power to declare war are merely “traditional and ceremonial roles”?

Yeah, if the Queen does something you don’t like, you’ll fetch a guillotine... hilariously enough, that will be about the extent of your capability to resist... write her a strongly worded (but polite) letter perhaps?

The oath soldiers take when joining U.K. armed forces:

“I, (Insert full name), do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, her heirs and successors, according to law. So help me God.”

The oath US soldiers take:

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

Big difference there, one is an oath to the guiding principles of our democracy and the officers duly elected under that system... the other is an oath of fealty to someone who is unelected and can bear no legislative or judicial penalties for their actions. Call it what you like... I’ll call it tyranny.  

I have a solution. You keep your (purely ceremonial and definitely not tyrannical) monarchy, we’ll keep our Constitution, our democracy and our guns.

oh for cripes's sake, you're not still banging on about this are you. So where did you obtain your in-depth knowledge of what the reality of an all-powerful monarchy is like?

[Space Commander Travis 50,164]

6 hours ago, Alaric said:

Ah the old appeal to authority, Vlad is an expert on the Royals is he? Can you actually refute any of those points? The Queen’s Prerogative is quite well documented and all of those are part of it.  Are you so blind to say that absolute control of the disposition of the armed forces and the sole power to declare war are merely “traditional and ceremonial roles”?

Yes, because it hasn't been done since the 17th century. 

[Space Commander Travis 50,164]

6 hours ago, Alaric said:

The oath US soldiers take:

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

Big difference there, one is an oath to the guiding principles of our democracy and the officers duly elected under that system... the other is an oath of fealty to someone who is unelected and can bear no legislative or judicial penalties for their actions. Call it what you like... I’ll call it tyranny.  

You mean the way that a President, however capricious and unpredictable he may be (or alternatively whatever long-planned agenda, such as for instance the Project for a New American Century, he may be coerced into) , has the power (have given themselves the power) to initiate military action against any country anywhere on the thinnest of pretexts, or assassinate anyone that they might decide to call a "terrorist", and by means of issuing Executive Orders can pretty much decree anything that comes into their head (although the latter usually seem to be blocked by the courts), and doesn't even need to bother to run it by Congress or the other checks and balances there supposedly are? Yes, I' do tend to agree that that does sound dangerously close to tyranny.  

[Paranormal Panther 11,035]

15 hours ago, Vlad the Mighty said:

well I'm sorry about that, perhaps I didn't have time at the time.

The damage is done. The forum is ruined. (another unnecessary sarcasm disclaimer)

[FLOMBIE 3,350]

On 30.4.2018 at 8:39 PM, aztek said:

that is not what i heard here before, (maybe it was uk)  but i'll take your word for it.

however this is what wiki says.

is that true?

If you feel that your life is threatened, you may use them. Self defense has to be proportionate in Germany. 

[odas 3,577]

On 05/05/2018 at 7:39 PM, .ZZ. said:

BS>///////

Just wait until you need a cop.

 

No BS. Some Truckers, white or black in Canada refuse to cross border to US in recent year. Many are doing it but are afraid. Now, the reality is that I never had an issue. In fact I like driving in the US because it is more Trucker friendly then here in Canada. But there are second thoughts now and a few stories I was told by others that are disturbing.

[DieChecker 27,102]

Is this for real? 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-crime-murder/london-murder-rate-overtakes-new-york-as-knife-crime-rises-idUSKCN1HA1DH

Quote

But British politicians and police are increasingly expressing concern about London’s rising murder rate, which is driven by a surge in knife crime. Of the 47 murders in London so far this year, 31 have been committed with knives.

Should there be a Knife Ban?

Is a lack of guns saving anyone then? Would there be ten times as many dead if guns common in the UK?

[aztek 24,903]

Just now, FLOMBIE said:

If you feel that your life is threatened, you may use them. Self defense has to be proportionate in Germany. 

so basically he has to beat me up badly before, so  deadly force is proportional, got it,  just because he pulled a knife on me is not enough to kill him, right?

Edited May 11, 2018 by aztek

[FLOMBIE 3,350]

7 hours ago, aztek said:

so basically he has to beat me up badly before, so  deadly force is proportional, got it,  just because he pulled a knife on me is not enough to kill him, right?

No. You have to feel that it is a life threatening situation. Being scared for your life is legitimate cause. 

You do not have to interpret everything negatively, brother.