Yup, I just banned him...

[AmigaClassicRule]

If you read what I said, I pretty clearly point to government as a problem.  I cannot speak for our government as for the past 100 years our government has represented us less and less.  As for your outrageous scenario with tanks and bazookas, again, we have the right to bear arms, but the freedom of what arms we may choose is limited.  Napalm?  That's easy enough to make so, sure, I can have that.  But I cannot use it.  Grenades?  Sure, but I cannot use them without repercussions.  Tank?  Sure, but impractical and the average citizen would not be able to arm it.  Bazooka?  Pretty certain that's limited.



(citation needed)



Again, (citation needed).  My grandfather was a hunter and the first thing he taught me about guns was what they could do to a person and how we never want that to happen.



Again, the vast majority of those killings are perpetrated by people who have obtained the guns illegally or illegitimately, and even more noteworthy is how all but one of the mass murders in the past decade and a-half have been committed in gun-free zones.



I read your first point several times, and I still cannot make sense of it.  Sure, I can post on Craigslist and invite you to my home and rape, torture, and kill you.  We can kill someone who enters our home and is a threat, but there is no slaughterhouse here.  Recently the big anti-gun culture target was the Florida "Stand Your Ground" law, which gives someone a legal authority to kill someone if the person is an imminent threat to life.  When these statutes passed around 2004 we were told it would be the Wild West, people would walk around armed to the hilt and pick fights just to kill other people.  Never happened, and even the Zimmerman-Martin case was never prosecuted nor defended as a "SYG" case.  
tl;dr?  We aren't the Wild Wild West of here, but we do have more than our fair share of violent people who, by the way, are violent with or without guns.



That's just a terrible posit.  No, we teach our children that we resolve disputes with discourse or, if necessary, a good ass-beating. Again, never on the offensive, only on the defensive.  I fired my first gun when I was 8: my grandfather had me shoot a .22 rifle that my dad shot when he was my age.  As with anything, while our children are under our tutelage, we instruct them of the correct ways to interact with people, to handle themselves, and to handle dangerous objects.  At some stage there is little we can do other than influence their behavior and they have to take on the responsibility for their own actions.  You're right: some people in their 50s aren't mature, but we do not elect to impose restrictions on all people in their 50s for the fallacy that therefore ALL people in their 50s are immature or will be.



Oh stop.  Bazooka, again?



Now you're just being intellectually dishonest.  My prior presentation clearly stated that we may exercise our rights and freedoms so long as they do not impose upon others', and the latter is subject to limitations.

It's probably a good idea you stay over in your country.  If you were to ever come here, I'm likely to lure you into my home and shoot you with my nuclear bazooka.  FFS.

To recognize for a moment the people who will gladly give up their rights and freedoms to protect others, first you do not understand a thing I have said already, and secondly that you would do so gives you no right nor power to impose the same unto me or others who would not.  I am happy that, in your opinions, you would give up your sovereignty for the safety of others.  I hold onto my sovereignty because I am not a threat to others, and if I ever become one I will face the repercussions.

All of this notwithstanding, guns exist.  Weaponry exists.  Always has and always will because there are no angels amongst men.  So long as our civil society persists, we have no reason to turn those arms on each other and those who do are punished (well, not so much under our current administration.)  To paraphrase my homosexual friends, "We're here, we're armed, get used to it."

I do not understand that last part of the sentence "my homosexual friends". Are you saying all these people who have posted here are homosexual just because they do not like violence or gun? If I do not like violence, or see people dispute matters through violence or shooting each other....does that mean I am sissy, or love having sex with men? Please do not imply that if a man hates violence or do not like having weapons around means he is homosexual.

[LoadWB]

Confirmation bias?

Intentionally.  And your bias is just as good as mine.

In any case, I said my piece, and I think it has resonated with several people here, for better or worse.  I have nothing more to say so long as all I have to respond to are dramatic hyperbole and spit-balls.

My first point: the difference between "rights" and "freedoms."  I made the mistake of responding to the snarky "gun culture" derision you made, falsely making the intrinsic link between rights and freedoms and our penchant for gun ownership and that one cannot be discussed in the absence of the other.

My second point: in our country and our culture our right to live is supplemented by our right to defend ourselves with arms.

My last point: things are different in your country.  Good, enjoy it.  I don't begrudge you your culture, and I expect that you don't begrudge me mine.  No one I know will ever come to your country and push anything on you, or take anything away from you, to which you might object.  Don't do the same to me.  (Governments aside, I have no control over that.)

[LoadWB]

I do not understand that last part of the sentence "my homosexual friends". Are you saying all these people who have posted here are homosexual just because they do not like violence or gun? If I do not like violence, or see people dispute matters through violence or shooting each other....does that mean I am sissy, or love having sex with men? Please do not imply that if a man hates violence or do not like having weapons around means he is homosexual.

YES.  You figured me out!  If you don't own guns, then you're a homo!

*sigh*  If anything, I equated gun owners to queers.  The slogan is, "We're here.  We're queer.  Get used to it."  You are free to draw your own inferences,  erroneous or otherwise.

But thanks for the laugh.  And another spit-ball.

[nicholas]

In the UK we have the right to free healthcare but not gun ownership.
In the USA they have the right to own guns but not healthcare.

I know which right I prefer.

[save2600]

In the UK we have the right to free healthcare but not gun ownership.
In the USA they have the right to own guns but not healthcare.

I know which right I prefer.

Horribly twisted convolution, but LoadWB really *is* articulating it the_way_it_is.

BTW: Your own "health care" is a choice that you and you alone make. You have the freedom to chose to lead an unhealthy lifestyle: eat, drink, smoke and inject whatever you want, ignore and be ignorant of consequences, not exercise, etc., so why do you expect others to pay for your crummy lifelong habits and choices? The irresponsible way that you chose to conduct your life is and should NOT be a "right" by any stretch of the imagination, when trying to suck others into your worthlessness. Unless of course, you blame somebody other than yourself for everything that has ever gone wrong in your so-called life.

Above outline is yet another immature, selfish and entitled mentality. One that is plaguing *our* nation right now. Facts are facts. Funny how so many today are choosing to ignore them. Perhaps "healthcare" wouldn't be such an issue or thrust upon all of us, if people would get their heads out of their asses and re-learn a thing or two. Such as what to eat. How to prepare foods, etc.

[LoadWB]

In the UK we have the right to free healthcare but not gun ownership.
In the USA they have the right to own guns but not healthcare.

I know which right I prefer.

Damn, trolled me into it.  FYI, everyone in the US gets health CARE.  Just not private health INSURANCE because the insurance companies have to amortize the costs of care for individuals which are not in optimal health.  Group coverage, however, is different, and thanks to the "Liberal Lion" of the senate and his friends back in the 60s, the primary way to obtain group coverage is through an employer, though some families have incorporated or formed organizations which allow them to purchase group coverage irrespective of health conditions of individual members as the risk is spread more broadly.

Under the new "Affordable Health Care" law, however, that has changed.  I received notice from my insurance provider that the policy I've had for over a decade is no longer allowed under the law.  I have a non-group policy which is provided to me as I am self-employed.  I pay under $500 a month for essentially 100% coverage -- I pay $10 to see a doctor (some first visits are actually free,) $15 for urgent care, $50 for emergency room visits, $15 for specialist visits.  I haven't had to pay for a single test, and in the past few years I've had several MRIs as we attempt to discover the source of a condition I suffer.  My medicines cost as low as $2 and no more than $50.  It's a great plan.

Thanks to the ACA, my provider is no longer allowed to provide this plan to me, or small families who have formed organizations for small group coverage.  My new premium will indeed be lower, but only by a couple hundred dollars and I do not qualify for subsidies (someone else pays part or all of the premium) as I'm self-employed.  My deductible will be just over $5,000.  After that it would cover 80%.  In the end my out-of-pocket costs will increase.

Everyone has heard stories about how someone was denied treatment in the US because they lacked insurance.  That hasn't happened for decades, until now.  Hospitals and doctors are now requiring that patients pay their deductibles up-front or they get to wait or get turned away altogether.


As for your comment about the UK having free health care, I sent that in a text to my cousin living in England.  Her response is "Bollox!"

[agami]

Thanks to everyone who participated in this extensive discussion and by your actions proving CJ wrong.

Turns out that we, the members of the Amiga.org forum, are a diverse bunch of individuals after all, and are capable of having conversations not related to the Amiga. And we have no issue discussing these topics on an Amiga forum website without fear of the sky falling or the world ending.

As for the 2nd amendment fanboys, to all of us outsiders y'all are nuts. No offence. Even for many of us that have lived amongst you, we still think your anti gun-control fervour is unreasonable. In Australia we have tight gun controls that you would no doubt consider an invasion of personal freedom, but it makes for a much safer and more liveable society. No man is an island.

I actually enjoy weaponry, I was in the armed forces (national service in Yugoslavia) and I enjoy handling and firing handguns and rifles. That's what gun clubs are for, I don't need these things in my home.

[save2600]

I actually enjoy weaponry, I was in the armed forces (national service in Yugoslavia) and I enjoy handling and firing handguns and rifles. That's what gun clubs are for, I don't need these things in my home.

Until someone armed (or not) and illegally enters your home and... tried to rob, rape and...

Pick up a nearby lamp and beat them to death? Baseball bat? Sorry... Cricket paddle... lmao

God given right is to be able to defend yourself. Plain and simple. Don't grasp that concept? Yeah... you're the one I feel sorry for.

[Retro_71]

I really wasn't going to say anything BUT i am so sick of people saying things from pure ignorance yes ignorance, If all your anti gun rhetoric comes from the anti gun media then i would say before you open your mouth about the evils of weapons actually go to a gun club and try it out. firearms are not evil nor are they good they are a tool like everything else we make. the point that in Australia more people die from knives then guns seems to have been overlooked, or for that matter vehicles.

Yes i am a LEGAL gun owner and in Australia that means i have been checked by the police till the cows come home, have done and passed my safety test, applied and have gotten permission for every firearm i own and have met the requirement to keep said firearms. (in case you don't know then here is a brief outline). Firearms are to be keep inside the safe at all times, empty and with the bolt out, bolt and ammunition not to be stored with the firearm but in their own separate lock box/safe. (in other words in piece, it would be quicker to use my various knives or bow for a home invasion, not to mention that hanging over my head there is a 10 year + $50000 jail term if i so much as do the wrong thing with my firearms...).

I am just sick of know it all's that always say they hate or disagree with something when they have never bothered to research both sides.

In Australia we have a big feral's problems and hunters are the best form of pest control unlike traps or poisons we choose what to hunt and not trap or kill anything that walks by. In fact most if not all hunter are more worried and trying to do things for the environment then the so called greenies. If you have been out to the bush you would know just how much our native wildlife is getting hammered by foxes, cats, wild dogs, rabbit etc etc....

But anyway the only thing i disagree with American gun laws is that you should be made to keep things in safes.. BTW the police do random checks on me to make sure i keep everything properly just in chase you people think i am some kind of psycho for owning firearms in Australia.

[agami]

Until someone armed (or not) and illegally enters your home and... tried to rob, rape and...

Pick up a nearby lamp and beat them to death? Baseball bat? Sorry... Cricket paddle... lmao

God given right is to be able to defend yourself. Plain and simple. Don't grasp that concept? Yeah... you're the one I feel sorry for.

Yes, I have the natural instinct and the, hmm what's the best word to use here... choice, to defend myself, i.e. Fight or flight.

Unfortunately, in Australia, if I used any of the bludgeoning weapons you mentioned, which I surely could do to much effect since I am a large semi-muscular man and I do have a putter in my study, I could end up in more trouble and doing more jail time than the assailant.

We are not to take the law into our own hands; Someone enters your home uninvited, get out and call the police from a mobile or a neighbour's phone.

[save2600]

BTW the police do random checks on me to make sure i keep everything properly just in chase you people think i am some kind of psycho for owning firearms in Australia.

Wow. Random "checks"? That's exactly what Nazi's and the Gestapo did.

[save2600]

Yes, I have the natural instinct and the, hmm what's the best word to use here... choice, to defend myself, i.e. Fight or flight.

Unfortunately, in Australia, if I used any of the bludgeoning weapons you mentioned, which I surely could do to much effect since I am a large semi-muscular man and I do have a putter in my study, I could end up in more trouble and doing more jail time than the assailant.

We are not to take the law into our own hands; Someone enters your home uninvited, get out and call the police from a mobile or a neighbour's phone.

You totally and utterly just made our case. It's exactly what happens when you have a liberal grubment. Say goodbye to common sense. Logic. Reasoning. Independent thought.

So you cannot "legally" protect what you've acquired, built and worked for all your life? %&$#?@!%&$#?@!%&$#?@!%&$#?@! that. You call that living?

Funny choice of words here. You say 'unfortunately' in regards to Aussie law, yet you're defending an anti-gun stance. Pretty sure, no make that ABSOLUTELY sure, that most citizens if armed, would squash any adversity that arises during the times when they (those that choose to feel dis-enfranshised) choose to act in a less than civilized way in order to get what they want.

[Retro_71]

Wow. Random "checks"? That's exactly what Nazi's and the Gestapo did.

Unfortunately the vast majority of people in Australia have been brainwashed into thinking LEGAL gun owners are like the CRIMINAL gun owners and hence forth the checks that the police do because as everyone know we adults can't do anything for ourselves...

[Megamig]

So does that make butch dykes who love guns straight? People who buy into stereotypes should quit!

As for US gun laws you don't need several guns that can fire 100+ rounds to protect you, your family and property. Balance is the key and the number of mass killings would be greatly reduced if citizens were restricted by the number and the type of guns they owned

[Retro_71]

We are not to take the law into our own hands; Someone enters your home uninvited, get out and call the police from a mobile or a neighbour's phone.

Running away sounds nice and if that person was after you or you can't run then what?

Actually you are allowed to defend yourself BUT it comes down to reasonable force (the same rules applied when i was a bouncer use just enough force to get the job done), that is why no gun owner in Australia would use a gun, remember it is in piece and would be much quicker to grab a knife.

[fishy_fiz]

Per capita there's more deaths by guns in places where guns are easily accessible (US topping the charts).
Do people not see the connection there?  
It may be a persons right to defend themselves, but why must it be guns? This attitude (and almost reflex response of "its our right to defend ourselves" when questioned) is obviously quite dangerous. Its not like nations who arent so quick to bare firearms dont also have a right to defend themselves. They do. They just dont put themselves in a kill or be killed situation so quickly. The notion that guns = defense is ludicrous if most people have them.

Simple equation. Stop people having unneccessary guns, there's less people using them.

And backtracking a little, but of course you can defend yourself and your belongings in Australia, but it all comes down to reasonable force (if violence is involved). You do what you need/have to do, without going over the top,.. like using a gun on someone for trying to steal your tv and xbox360 (as a random example). Yes, a thief is far from a stand-up citizen, but shooting someone is a far worse crime.