> > Okay, then I terminate this 'discussion' with you - until you attack
> another
> > non-American.
> >
> > -H(ypocrite) Richard Utzig
> >
> >
> >
> Wah Wah Wah! Oh poor baby. Did I hurt your little feelings? See I try to
> explain because you asked me to and all you do is attack attack attack. You
> asked for it, you got it, you didnt like it. Insted you lost your cool. As
> evident by your own lack of self-respect and self-esteem you attack others and
> me in attempt to raise yourself up. The amount of self-hatred you appear have
> for yourself is without measure. From this point on I will always look upon
> you as the little boy throwing a temper tantrum everytime he cant have his
> way. Your insults have no weight. I'll say what I want, when I want, and
> will NOT under any circumstances be supressed or censored by you; no matter
> how many names you call me or others. But like I said yesterday, tomorrow is
> a different day, and that would be today. I'm SO done with you. Have a nice
> day, if you can!

Modifying my statements to make brownie points for yourself only proves the fool that you are.

Can't make any of your own arguments for fear of what?

Not only a fool but you a cowardly fool when you start modifying statements.

-H. Richard Utzig

> > Just so we can get this out of the way: I'm Canadian. The only time I
> have
> > ever seen a gun in my life, they were carried by Police officers or the
> RCMP
> > (which stands for Royal Canadian mounted POLICE, they aren't
> paramilitary,
> > they are the police in in many Northern and Rural areas).
>
> ***Sorry ebrndl they are paramilitary. That is why they also go on peace
> keeping missions as well as our armed forces. That is why they also raised
> mounted rifle battalions in World War I, it is why they were used for the
> Yukon Field Force, raised mounted rifle companies during the Boer war. Yes
> they are a police force but the original concept under the North-West Mounted
> Police Act was a para-military police force - though policing has and is their
> main purpose.***
>
> -H. Richard Utzig
>

Interresting I didn't know that. But what she said is still very true. I rather live in
country where only police carry guns. Personnaly I never felt the need for a gun
small or big and I don't know anyone (friends, familly, etc) who ever wanted to
have a gun. I did have a few fights that were legitimate (ex a woman was agressed
by two man) and it became very violent. thanks god they were not carrying guns.
Who knows what I would have done myself if I had one in my jacket that day?

I guess it's a cultural thing and we cannot blame americans who own guns small
or big. But it is surely not mine and those of almost all "civilazed" country. They showed
a report the other day on a french channel (TV5) about this and we saw a familly with
their 2 kids age 8-10 in a gun stores. I was shocked. The woman was trying a gun and
she explained it was necessary to "protect their familly" wich I can understand because I
think every parents want to protect their familly, but honestly the day I will really feel the
need for a AK47 to protect my self or my familly it would mean that things are going really
bad in my country, and I would move right away.

Good night
Marc

> Interresting I didn't know that. But what she said is still very true. I
> rather live in
> country where only police carry guns. Personnaly I never felt the need for a
> gun
> small or big and I don't know anyone (friends, familly, etc) who ever wanted
> to
> have a gun. I did have a few fights that were legitimate (ex a woman was
> agressed
> by two man) and it became very violent. thanks god they were not carrying
> guns.
> Who knows what I would have done myself if I had one in my jacket that day?
>
> I guess it's a cultural thing and we cannot blame americans who own guns
> small
> or big. But it is surely not mine and those of almost all "civilazed" country.
> They showed
> a report the other day on a french channel (TV5) about this and we saw a
> familly with
> their 2 kids age 8-10 in a gun stores. I was shocked. The woman was trying a
> gun and
> she explained it was necessary to "protect their familly" wich I can
> understand because I
> think every parents want to protect their familly, but honestly the day I will
> really feel the
> need for a AK47 to protect my self or my familly it would mean that things are
> going really
> bad in my country, and I would move right away.
>
> Good night
> Marc

Marc, I'm not disagreeing with you on this - just look at my arguments below. Unfortunately, the U.S. is a culture based on violence and many seem to feel that the only way to stop it is by being more violent. From the arguments one can read in this thread; one can observe how it is easy to spiral out of control and this started because of the ability to buy assault rifles, sub-machine guns, bayonet mounts for these rifles, and large capacity magazines. It hasn't even, except glancingly, covered topics like the ability to buy large calibre weaponry disgarded as obsolete by their military.

-Richard

> Marc, I'm not disagreeing with you on this - just look at my arguments below.
> Unfortunately, the U.S. is a culture based on violence and many seem to feel
> that the only way to stop it is by being more violent. From the arguments one
> can read in this thread; one can observe how it is easy to spiral out of
> control and this started because of the ability to buy assault rifles,
> sub-machine guns, bayonet mounts for these rifles, and large capacity
> magazines. It hasn't even, except glancingly, covered topics like the ability
> to buy large calibre weaponry disgarded as obsolete by their military.
>
> -Richard
>

Oh yes Richard I know your arguments and I totaly agree with them.

Marc

> Oh yes Richard I know your arguments and I totaly agree with them.
>
> Marc

Merci beaucoup, Marc!

Ok I must jump back in for a comment about how violent the U.S. is and how many people feel it is not safe here.

Can you say Middle East, Asia, Africa, Indonesia, India, and feel free to add countries to the list where mass murder is the apparent "norm"?

This would be a good time for someone to turn the "Damn Yankee Western Devil" thread toward the more common Car bombings, be-headings, and other crimes against humanity perpetrated almost daily in the rest of the world that is not the United States.

And least you all forget, Europe started out with a very violent policy of Imperialism and Colonialism that still reverberate in the world of today.

It would best be served to look back at your own bloody centuries of history before condemning this young country for the woes of the world.

If the uninformed want to look at us as some kind of Wild West culture out of some old story book, maybe the ignorance of it should be reciprocated in kind.

Judging from history, are you all still taking over other peoples lands for the glory of England, France, Belgium, Germany et al? Are the Guillotines still singing in Paris? How are the Serfs doing these days? Treating the Wogs any better? Keeping your ghettos under control?

For every inflammatory comment made about the United States of America, I could easily make a corresponding one for any other country.

What would be the point?

One last time, not everyone in the U.S. carries a gun nor do we as a people advocate violence.

This rant is singing to the choir. Those who agree will say nothing but a silent Amen, the rest will continue to shake their fists and raise their voices to the Judas Goat of ignorance.

The points you make are true.

The U.S. is not as violent as South Africa, Russia, the mid-east.

It is, however, far more violent than any other western democracy in the world and those can't compare to the non-violence in a democracy like Japan.

-H. Richard Utzig

> It is, however, far more violent than any other western democracy in the world
-
-
Then we must exclude Parliamentary countries? That little tiff in Northern Ireland seems a bit excessive.

double post

>
> > It is, however, far more violent than any other western democracy in the
> world
> -
> -
> Then we must exclude Parliamentary countries? That little tiff in Northern
> Ireland seems a bit excessive.
>
Northern Ireland is not a separate country but part of the United Kingdom and its statistics are included therein.

-H. Richard Utzig

> >
> Northern Ireland is not a separate country but part of the United Kingdom and
> its statistics are included therein.
-
-
Yes indeed, that is the Parliamentary country in question.

> > >
> > Northern Ireland is not a separate country but part of the United Kingdom
> and
> > its statistics are included therein.
> -
> -
> Yes indeed, that is the Parliamentary country in question.


So! What's your point?

Yours is still a more violent country having more murders/assaults per capita than the United Kingdom and any other western democracy and Japan is less than any of them.

-H. Richard Utzig

>
>
> So! What's your point?
>
> Yours is still a more violent country having more murders/assaults per capita
> than the United Kingdom and any other western democracy and Japan is less than any of them.
>

Point? I think you are getting it.

Maybe you would like to share your Per Capita data? Maybe you could include some demographics with it.

> Belial... Do you REALLY believe this?!!
>
> > I see no reason to deprive other people of the enjoyment that owning a
> > fine firearm or a 'fun gun' such as a assualt rifles with all the goodies
>
> > like banettes and flash hiders and whatever else people want to put on
> them.
> > Some people enjoy this as a hobby...I see not reason to deprive them of
> it.
>
> Have you had a look at the murder rates in the US recently? I'd have thought
> there were a few million reasons there...
>
> > While of course we would hope people make wise choices...they are of
> course
> > free to make bad ones also and suffer any bad consequences of those
> choices.
>
> Surely it's part of the role of Government to try to protect innocent
> civilians from nutters who "make bad choices" with their assult rifles and
> inflict those bad consequences on others. Let's just hope to God that you or
> your loved ones never fall victim to some mad-man with his "hobby" assult
> rifle having a bad day and making a couple of "bad choices"
>
> [url=http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/team_display.php?teamid=112265]
> <a>
>


Of course...why wouldn't I believe it? I have faith in my fellow citizens.


I worry more about driving in my car then about someone attacking me with a machine gun...50,000 people or so die a year from car wrecks. You don't see me or anyone else trying to get these dangerous vehicles outlawed do you? Cars are no different from guns.

> I worry more about driving in my car then about someone attacking me with a
> machine gun...50,000 people or so die a year from car wrecks. You don't see
> me or anyone else trying to get these dangerous vehicles outlawed do you?
> Cars are no different from guns.


Yea !!! Ban cars would be a very good idea. Bicycles my friends.
No pollutions, no noises, more places for childrens to play on the
streets, less fatal injuries, etc. It's just like fast foods. A lot
more americans dies every years from heart attack because of bad
eating habits then from terrorist attacks. I'd say we should also
make "war on McDonalds and such" too. Actually it might not be a good
idea. It would not make the military industries healthy. War on terror
does that very well. lol

Richard:
I'd only ever seen them in a police capacity, and didn't realise they were sent on international missions (can you show me a link to that, btw?)... if you're counting things like clean-up in Cuba etc after storms, then the Toronto Police also does that: does that make THEM paramilitary?

Kevin said:
> The real problem is that Criminals are using these weapons and they do not go
> to the local store to buy them. They are acquired from other criminals. Law
> abiding citizens are not the ones with the firepower out on the streets using
> it to cause havoc.


Keith said:
> Exactly, people say that gang members and what not use Tek 9s. I seriously
> doubt these were legal weapons. Everyone seems to brush over the fact that
> these bans don't affect them, they only affect the guy who has kept his nose
> clean and never committed a felony.

I agree that not having guns for legal sale doesn't directly prevent criminals from getting the big, powerful guns. However, it does mean that the powerful automatic weapons are (theoretically) in properly secured locations and not in people's homes (which are much easier to steal things from.

Even this won't prevent most criminals, they get black market guns. But if the producers of the guns (who are generally the people who let the guns get into the black market) were held responsible for the guns that their company produced that ended up on the black market, and could be potentially charged with illegal sale of a weapon, don't you think that they'd change their game plan a little?

By controlling who can get them, that law was hoping to control how many of those guns were produced. If less guns are produced, less criminals will get them.

Maybe I see it in a simplistic manner, in fact, I know I do.

Kevin:
There were 7950 homicides due to guns in 2000 (this does not include accidental shootings or suicide by gunshot) (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/weapons.htm)
There were 281,421,906 people in the US in 2000
(http://www.census.gov/popest/archives/2000s/vintage_2001/US-2001EST-01.html)

That makes about 0.02 deaths per capita (1000 people) that year were due to gun homicides.

In Canada, there were 184 homicides due to guns in 2000 (same year to make it directly comperable) (http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/legal01.htm)
The Canadian population that year was about 30,689,000 (http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/demo02.htm)

That makes about 0.006 deaths per capita were due to gun homicides in 2000. This is about 1/3 that of the States. (remember this does NOT include accidental deaths due to guns, just homicides)

There are some statistics (from government sites, btw)...

Petit Soleil, peut-tu les trouver pour la France, svp? Je ne peux pas trouver leur site des statistiques. Merci beaucoup!!!


<br />

Feel free to take a look inside my brain

I'm from Belgium, but I lived in the States (Chicago, IL) for 3 years...
I want to the stores at night, came home from ballgames at 11pm, etc..., but I never felt that I was in danger at anytime and I haven't seen any assaults (not even in the South Side when I went to the Sox games)...
I've been back in Belgium for about 5 years now, and i'm afraid to go out at night. Even going to a fair is dangerous.

But what do we see in the newspapers?
page 1: "2 people killed by drive-by shooting in America" (half a page article)
page 6: "man stabbed with knive at fair at 5pm" (about 5 lines)
page 7: "Neerpelt resident killed while sitting in car" (10 lines)

This way it seems the U.S. is nothing more than a collection of criminals who just start shooting at eachother for no reason, while the local criminal facts and murders are tucked away somewhere in the middle of the newspaper.

All I want to say with this is that the U.S. is no more or no less violent than any other western country.

> Petit Soleil, peut-tu les trouver pour la France, svp? Je ne peux pas trouver
> leur site des statistiques. Merci beaucoup!!!

Avec plaisir. C'est comme si c'était fait.