Discuss.
Printable View
Discuss.
rofl, ;)
wanted to take this out of the God one rofl!
:P.
Not land of free. Especially with Obama in there, things are going to be sociallized(if he actually does something lol). There are way too many regulatory organizations... it has even been called the fourth branch of government(the regulatory branch).
Read here for more libertarian views of the US. Harry Goslin is my College History teacher, great guy.
Click here.
Ok here we start, i think that USA is not land of the freedom and so on, i think USA is land of smart people but without their own thoughts ( of course there is some people ) but mostly they are pretty stupid.. Some questions like, What is Europa? They will answer " Eruopa, what's that ? I thought USA is the whole world.. If you get my point :)
~Home
So your saying the Libertarian views are right? So.. your liberal?Quote:
Originally Posted by mormonman
Home, I totally agree, aswell.
liberal is not libertarian... not exactly.
never said they were right either. you just said to discuss it ... so i added my input.
this was more of a pisstake thread xDQuote:
Originally Posted by mormonman
I dont understand how the US congress system works. I suppose I shall have to read up on it. :norris:
Don't guys make this as a FlameWars, OK ? This is a place where people gives their own inputs, and i think all of us should respect them as we respect our own thoughts :)
~Home
It will make your mind hurt if you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Torrent of Flame
As long as we have two main parties that want to control people's lives (liberals want to control money, and conservatives want to control social aspects [abortion, gay marriage, etc.]) we will never be the land of the free.
Unless all government power is stripped, except the essentials (court system, police, and jails), we will be enslaved to them. Taxes need to be removed and replaced with a simple, optional* system; abortion, gay marriage, and drugs need to be legalized, and the constitution needs to be upheld in all cases, so we don't get anymore Patriot Acts. Until that happens, we're not even close to being the "land of the free".
*People won't have to pay taxes, but they only receive taxpayer benefits (namely police protection and possibly fire protection [if that isn't privatized]) if they do
Libertarian party forthewin <3
EDIT: I forgot to mention, all social programs need to be removed also. Men aren't entitled to other men's money just because they exist.
Also, gun restrictions and things like that need to be removed.
Patriot Act is f-in retarded... pretty much gives president power to do anything to anybody.
Your definition of free doesn't really equal mine...Quote:
Originally Posted by mormonman
I think the right on abortion is definitely a freedom that everyone should be granted.
So is the right to say whatever I want. I also think that everyone should have to freedom to 'use' what they want. (EG: Drugs, Food).
I think I also read somewhere that some states are against gays, or in particular gay marriage. (EG: Utah, Texas ...)Yachoman sure wouldn't like this. ;)
I don't call that freedom.
EDIT: And I think guns should be banned. I wouldn't feel safe in America.
i agree completely... thats why i have libertarian views :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Wizzup?
I think freedom is just a imaginary label they put on to make US look more attracting to people from other parts of the world. Really it is not freedom, especially when you walk down the streets or talk on the phone even, some may not know but really, you have no privacy, you are being watched, you are being listened to, you have no freedom or right to talk without realizing that your words and your actions have/might be looked at people behind phones or even t.v screens. In some parts of the US there are cameras located in every corner of the street, so you are under surveillance basically everytime you walk out your house, how is this being free? You are just another average puppet for the government, and if not the government you are definetly just another puppet for the Illumaniti, Free Masons.. And to talk about other types of freedoms, you are also told what to do and restricted to only so much of what can be done in the country. Its reasonable how some rules are set out I guess, but why do some rules attack ones personal choices? Homosexuals, Why can't they just let them be free and be not scared to say it openly to the world that they are gay and going to get married to the same gender...? What harm will it do to YOU..? Rastafarians are somewhat restricted from practicing their religions in open society, It is in there religion to carry their holy Marijuana with them where ever they go, they get caught and thrown in jail for just practicing their religion. It seems they also target Muslims, because of the of terrorism. Not all Muslims are terrorists, and just because their names resemble many of these so called 'Muslim' terrorists have the same name... Terrorists have no religion, its just a mask they use and a reason for fight. (One of my dad's, friend's son's name was Osama, he was 16 years old when he got thrown in jail for having the same name a week after 9/11. How can the country be free if you are socially rejected because of a name...?
Many countries, if not almost all countries seem free but in one way or another they are not so close. Although each country respectfully has their rules based on majority off the majority of the religious views in the society, or some places like India, where majority is run on literal corruption, or even Africa. So I wouldn't just say US is a free country, but it definitely is somewhat safer and socially and comparably free comparing to a few others.
~NS
I could say that I feel safer here than a place where guns were banned, because if somebody wants to, say, shoot everybody they can in a store, college, or any other place, I and people around me would have no ways to defend ourselves. That guy would be carrying an illegal weapon, but what does he care, he's probably planning on killing himself anyways.
I'll give you a real example though. During the Holocaust, Jews in the the Warsaw Ghetto held off Nazis with smuggled and homemade weapons for about 2 months. If everyone had had a gun, the Nazis would have had an even harder time controlling them, and ghettos all over Germany would have been able to hold off the Nazis possibly as long or longer than Warsaw did.
The right to bear arms was put into the constitution for situations exactly like those. Our founding fathers knew that something like that could happen, so they gave us a way to defend ourselves.
EDIT: Was at wizzup; I was slow..
EDIT2: Mormonman, I'm seeing a lot of unlibertarian things in your teacher's articles, namely him being against gay marriage.
If I recall correctly the USA has the highest percentage of murders per 1000 civilians.Quote:
Originally Posted by bullzeye95
If no one had the right to bear guns, you wouldn't need them to protect yourself.
he isn't 100%... he doesn't like abortion or gays. he hate the government, and we watch libertarian videos like every other day.Quote:
Originally Posted by bullzeye95
If someone wants to commit a murder, they'll get a gun, illegal or not.
As for that percentage, if you could find it again, I'd like to see it.
@ 1: Government power limits the court system,police, and jails powers.Quote:
Originally Posted by bullzeye95
@ 2: 11 year olds with guns. (yes some kids get these still. But at least restrictions filter at least 75%* of potential kids who want guns. *Not a real statistic (a personal estimate)
There is a difference between having a gun, and having to go through all the problems to actually get one. Not having a gun doesn't stimulate the feeling to kill. If you already have a gun; it is much easier to just get it out, and shoot at a (random) person.Quote:
Originally Posted by bullzeye95
This site shows the percentage of a weapon used in murders:
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/cri...ims-weapon-gun
Do you think it would be the same if guns were not allowed?
1. I'm talking a government takeover, like my Nazi Germany example. I doubt many people in Germany thought that something like that would/could happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by zasz
2. I'm not saying that kids (under 18) should have guns o.O
@Wizzup, Having a gun doesn't stimulate the feeling to kill either. "...and shoot at a (random) person..." makes it sound like having a gun makes people want to shoot down random people on the street.
To answer your question though, no. I think that the murders would be in the same general area though. I think, like drugs, guns would be "cool" to teenagers, especially the gang-type ones. They'd probably get them illegally just to carry around. So those street shootings might be just as high as they were. Of course, I'm basing that on absolutely nothing, as I really don't have any experience with gang people, so that might sound completely stupid ;P
I think we have different priorities. Yours is keeping people from shooting each other via government intervention. Mine is keeping the people safe from government intervention.
even so, just makes it so kids CAN have guns.Quote:
Originally Posted by bullzeye95
EDIT: NOOO Community Member!! FIX ME WIZZUP! (changed email)
Kids CAN have guns whether they're illegal or not..Quote:
Originally Posted by zasz
Meant to apply it to my previous statement. IT would make it a lot easier for kids to get guns.