floppa21
Crusty Manhole
Oh god Duck!!! That's terrible man!!! 
Do it in word then cut and paste and add your smilies afterwards... 
Do it in word then cut and paste and add your smilies afterwards... 
Question for Europeans
- Thread starter floppa21
- Start date
Whiskey Priest
Warlord
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2001
- Messages
- 297
Not quite a European point of view but close enough.
This link leads you to a radio address made by Canada's most respected (and now deceased) radio personality. He could be called the Canadian Kronkite. He made an address in 1973 that is a very strong defence of America (coming after Vietnam it was a brave statement.
http://www.rcc.ryerson.ca/schools/rta/ccf/news/unique/am_text.html
Click on "listen to original audio" (you will nead real audio)
Keep in mind that most Canadians hate America, and Americans
This link leads you to a radio address made by Canada's most respected (and now deceased) radio personality. He could be called the Canadian Kronkite. He made an address in 1973 that is a very strong defence of America (coming after Vietnam it was a brave statement.
http://www.rcc.ryerson.ca/schools/rta/ccf/news/unique/am_text.html
Click on "listen to original audio" (you will nead real audio)
Keep in mind that most Canadians hate America, and Americans
Leowind
Emperor
Wow, I've missed some great debating in this thread. A little off-topic, but...
A couple points. A while back someone brought up school shootings. Despite the press they get, school violence is actually DECREASING in the US. The ones that do happen may be higher profile, student walks on campus and shoots a bunch of people kind of things. (Kip Kinkel in Thurston, OR a few years ago is right next to the city I live in, just across the freeway
), but school violence overall is actually down.
While I support gun ownership and sonorakritch makes some very good points, I must point out that statistics bear out that a gun owned in the home is more likely to be used against the owner and/or family than to be used against a criminal, thus actually increasing the danger factor. Most gun owners are like sonorakritch, responsible, trained, use them for hunting/target practice. I don't believe you fall into this statistic. But how many city dwellers can realistically go hunting? How many gun owners actually get the training they should have? Not nearly enough. Not reasons to outlaw all guns, but reason to not treat this issue as an all or nothing kind of thing.
A couple points. A while back someone brought up school shootings. Despite the press they get, school violence is actually DECREASING in the US. The ones that do happen may be higher profile, student walks on campus and shoots a bunch of people kind of things. (Kip Kinkel in Thurston, OR a few years ago is right next to the city I live in, just across the freeway
), but school violence overall is actually down.While I support gun ownership and sonorakritch makes some very good points, I must point out that statistics bear out that a gun owned in the home is more likely to be used against the owner and/or family than to be used against a criminal, thus actually increasing the danger factor. Most gun owners are like sonorakritch, responsible, trained, use them for hunting/target practice. I don't believe you fall into this statistic. But how many city dwellers can realistically go hunting? How many gun owners actually get the training they should have? Not nearly enough. Not reasons to outlaw all guns, but reason to not treat this issue as an all or nothing kind of thing.
TheDuckOfFlanders
the fish collecter
Good ,now that i have put my frustration about the previous reply-attempt/browser-crash, (much work to waste...)(****ing Microsoft!)(grmblgrmbl) i have written a new one in a text program.
To Sonorakitch
first of all:
//haha...how did this ever evolve into a gun thing...thats okay//
I'm planning to debate other American related issue's later.
//First, I wasn't really apologizing, just trying to be more clear. I wasn't saying all Europeans dislike Americans for political reasons, just the ones sharing their "disheartening" views towards Americans for believing in a different ideology. Remember: "Again, my main point is that Europeans on this board generally share disheartening feelings towards Americans because of our different political ideologies."//
After re-reading youre reply i also came to the conclusion that it was no apoligy.I do not agree that Europeans on this board generally share disheartening feelings towards Americans
There are some who do, but i think you can count them one one hand.There also are some American's on this board that share dishaertenig feelings towards european's ,but again ,i only think a few.Only those few people are realy noticable ,they make a lot of commotion ,especialy in nationality oriented thread's ,like here when it's kinda like a bit Europe versus America.That way you would begin to think most of them think that way ,but that is not reality.
now ,about the actual debate:
//Now, you are right about Anchorage...it was a bad example. And there are socia-political differences too. But it is not just a coincidence that cities with much stricter gun controls also have much greater problems as opposed to cities without such restrictions. Again, consider Dallas, Minneapolis, and even my home, Phoenix. And I really think if the average law-abiding citizen in Washington was issued a gun and knew how to use it (and when), crime would drop substantially (criminals aren't going to rob anybody with a Dirty Harry pistol..would you?) //
this come's back to this point originaly posted by general Hotrod:
//First on the second ammendment right to bear arms. Guns don't commit crimes people do. this has been proven over and over again. I have a gun sitting in a cabinet here and all it does is sit there...i'll show you a picture. If you outlawed handguns here who do you think would turn them in. Just the law abiding citizens and not the criminals. I hope to god I never have to use a gun, but I would also never put a sign on my front door that says "gun-free household," either. I know this probably didn't make front page news in Europe but did you guys know that Paris has a higher crime-rate than NYC? Also Chicago has some of the highest violent crime rates in the country and some of the toughest gun laws as well.//
Ok, but i must really state that the economical and social situation in the South of america is generaly better than the north and East of America.The southern city's you mentioned are in comparison to for ex. New york and Chicago much younger super-city's.the south of America has a booming economy with much employement.The North and east of America are much older local economy's where i think unemployement rates are higher.There is also a lot more "old infrastructure" (old neighbourhood's,abbondoned factory's,...) in these older city's ,wich provide good operation places for crime.There is also a bigger crime tradition in such older city's than the younger ones.Chicago had already mob-syndicat's since the beginning of the 20'th century.
//You say, "I think most gun owners that would run into such a situation (just robed ,no life danger) would actually still draw their gun, risking their own life with it" I agree to the extent that some would, but I personally would rather have that choice be determined by me, and not some politician in D.C. And most who are trained in the use would probably agree here. And referring to Anthrax, I was illustrating that in the past two weeks, more people have been killed by Anthrax than accidental child shootings all year (3 vs. 2). And I agree, not all gun owners are responsible. But the overwhelming majority are.//
Read leowind's recent reply on this topic.It has some interresting point's about this part.
//Referring to revenge, there are some cases every year, but many acts of revenge-induced murder are committed by other means...it is still just about as easy to kill somebody with an axe, lamp, or knife....and a naked woman in a bed is an easy target for such devices. And as far as the crime rates in Europe, they are much lower in terms of murder, and robbery is less too. They are more violent here, but that is also because of the availability of guns to criminals (which should be curtailed) and the lack of proper prosecution (for example, O.J. Simposon), which should also be reformed. //
You are almost proving my oppinions here.If you agree that the crime in America is genneraly more violent than in Europe,then mayby you can conclude that this is the effect of a less-strict weapon's policy? Although i don't state that stricter gun law's will "solve" this problem ,i could maybe have prevented it?Only it has already gotten that far that every small fish criminal in America has a gun ,and now maybe the only sollution is confescating almost all gun's in hand's of criminal's in these city's and the applying stricter gun laws.Afcourse this would be almost impossibel ,but i think that numorous years of "flexible" gun law's have been the source of this problem.Tis is also a good statement on this part of youre reply:
//And finally, there are more than 300 million guns roaming around this country today. Europe was never so saturated with guns. To wipe off every handgun in the U.S. (not hunting rifles, those are hardly ever used for crimes), it would definetly solve the problem, and I would probably support it (although hunting with a handgun provides a much greater challenge, and gives the deer a better chance anyways ). The fact is, though, is that this is not realistic. Consider the drug war. Whenever our government tries to enforce against a popular item, they miserably fail. So the result would be good people would have no protection against bad people who didn't give up their guns. Do you really think that gangsters and thugs would line up to give in their handguns?//
I won't go further on the cultural diversity of america in comparison to Europe ,i think it's debatable ,but it's not 'on topic' here.
//I think it is imporant to point out, to further my argument, the situation in Australia. Since a very restrictive gun ban was instilled in the mid-1990's, the statistics have proven that crime, especially robbery, has increased substantially. You can do a search on the net to find this data.//
OK ,but is this the fault of these restrictive gun law's ,rather than social/polytical reasons?
//Good debate anyways!//
i Agree
edit: some typo's (not all ,since my English is not yet that developed)
To Sonorakitch
first of all:
//haha...how did this ever evolve into a gun thing...thats okay//
I'm planning to debate other American related issue's later.
//First, I wasn't really apologizing, just trying to be more clear. I wasn't saying all Europeans dislike Americans for political reasons, just the ones sharing their "disheartening" views towards Americans for believing in a different ideology. Remember: "Again, my main point is that Europeans on this board generally share disheartening feelings towards Americans because of our different political ideologies."//
After re-reading youre reply i also came to the conclusion that it was no apoligy.I do not agree that Europeans on this board generally share disheartening feelings towards Americans
There are some who do, but i think you can count them one one hand.There also are some American's on this board that share dishaertenig feelings towards european's ,but again ,i only think a few.Only those few people are realy noticable ,they make a lot of commotion ,especialy in nationality oriented thread's ,like here when it's kinda like a bit Europe versus America.That way you would begin to think most of them think that way ,but that is not reality.
now ,about the actual debate:
//Now, you are right about Anchorage...it was a bad example. And there are socia-political differences too. But it is not just a coincidence that cities with much stricter gun controls also have much greater problems as opposed to cities without such restrictions. Again, consider Dallas, Minneapolis, and even my home, Phoenix. And I really think if the average law-abiding citizen in Washington was issued a gun and knew how to use it (and when), crime would drop substantially (criminals aren't going to rob anybody with a Dirty Harry pistol..would you?) //
this come's back to this point originaly posted by general Hotrod:
//First on the second ammendment right to bear arms. Guns don't commit crimes people do. this has been proven over and over again. I have a gun sitting in a cabinet here and all it does is sit there...i'll show you a picture. If you outlawed handguns here who do you think would turn them in. Just the law abiding citizens and not the criminals. I hope to god I never have to use a gun, but I would also never put a sign on my front door that says "gun-free household," either. I know this probably didn't make front page news in Europe but did you guys know that Paris has a higher crime-rate than NYC? Also Chicago has some of the highest violent crime rates in the country and some of the toughest gun laws as well.//
Ok, but i must really state that the economical and social situation in the South of america is generaly better than the north and East of America.The southern city's you mentioned are in comparison to for ex. New york and Chicago much younger super-city's.the south of America has a booming economy with much employement.The North and east of America are much older local economy's where i think unemployement rates are higher.There is also a lot more "old infrastructure" (old neighbourhood's,abbondoned factory's,...) in these older city's ,wich provide good operation places for crime.There is also a bigger crime tradition in such older city's than the younger ones.Chicago had already mob-syndicat's since the beginning of the 20'th century.
//You say, "I think most gun owners that would run into such a situation (just robed ,no life danger) would actually still draw their gun, risking their own life with it" I agree to the extent that some would, but I personally would rather have that choice be determined by me, and not some politician in D.C. And most who are trained in the use would probably agree here. And referring to Anthrax, I was illustrating that in the past two weeks, more people have been killed by Anthrax than accidental child shootings all year (3 vs. 2). And I agree, not all gun owners are responsible. But the overwhelming majority are.//
Read leowind's recent reply on this topic.It has some interresting point's about this part.
//Referring to revenge, there are some cases every year, but many acts of revenge-induced murder are committed by other means...it is still just about as easy to kill somebody with an axe, lamp, or knife....and a naked woman in a bed is an easy target for such devices. And as far as the crime rates in Europe, they are much lower in terms of murder, and robbery is less too. They are more violent here, but that is also because of the availability of guns to criminals (which should be curtailed) and the lack of proper prosecution (for example, O.J. Simposon), which should also be reformed. //
You are almost proving my oppinions here.If you agree that the crime in America is genneraly more violent than in Europe,then mayby you can conclude that this is the effect of a less-strict weapon's policy? Although i don't state that stricter gun law's will "solve" this problem ,i could maybe have prevented it?Only it has already gotten that far that every small fish criminal in America has a gun ,and now maybe the only sollution is confescating almost all gun's in hand's of criminal's in these city's and the applying stricter gun laws.Afcourse this would be almost impossibel ,but i think that numorous years of "flexible" gun law's have been the source of this problem.Tis is also a good statement on this part of youre reply:
//And finally, there are more than 300 million guns roaming around this country today. Europe was never so saturated with guns. To wipe off every handgun in the U.S. (not hunting rifles, those are hardly ever used for crimes), it would definetly solve the problem, and I would probably support it (although hunting with a handgun provides a much greater challenge, and gives the deer a better chance anyways ). The fact is, though, is that this is not realistic. Consider the drug war. Whenever our government tries to enforce against a popular item, they miserably fail. So the result would be good people would have no protection against bad people who didn't give up their guns. Do you really think that gangsters and thugs would line up to give in their handguns?//
I won't go further on the cultural diversity of america in comparison to Europe ,i think it's debatable ,but it's not 'on topic' here.
//I think it is imporant to point out, to further my argument, the situation in Australia. Since a very restrictive gun ban was instilled in the mid-1990's, the statistics have proven that crime, especially robbery, has increased substantially. You can do a search on the net to find this data.//
OK ,but is this the fault of these restrictive gun law's ,rather than social/polytical reasons?
//Good debate anyways!//
i Agree
edit: some typo's (not all ,since my English is not yet that developed)
Dogberry_Old
****** of the Pack
The title of this thread is a "Question for Europeans".. altho it could also be taken as a "Question for South Americans & East Asians " too. When Citizens of the US get on this thread & rant when they are critiqued, it only reinforces the view held by some .. that we are a bunch of arrogant louts. Also, that pet issues such as gun control, abortion, capital punishment, etc... only require an explanation....NOT an argument. If somebody reacts defensively when I say something to them.. I take it for granted that I have scored a hit.
They really eat dog in the Phillipines ? How godawfull... those people are barbarians & should be exterminated ! ( j/k )
Dog
They really eat dog in the Phillipines ? How godawfull... those people are barbarians & should be exterminated ! ( j/k )
Dog
The Chinese eat dogs too but that's in the past. It was considered a delicacy. Chinese also eat snakes, frogs, monkey brains and so on. Still happening in backwater regions and some places. That's what happens when you have a billion plus ppl in a protein-deficient land.
Rest assured, personally I have never eaten any exotic stuff so I wouldn't know. So you're safe fr me ..... for the time being.
joespaniel
Unescorted Settler
Boy, am I glad to hear that...
One of my grandfathers served in the Army Air Corps in the Pacific. He had the dubious honor of trying monkey-brains.
He said they were surprisingly good, but a little rubbery...
One of my grandfathers served in the Army Air Corps in the Pacific. He had the dubious honor of trying monkey-brains.
He said they were surprisingly good, but a little rubbery...
gjts00
Arrogant American
This is some of the most predictable reading that I've done since the "Non Americans have every right to complain" thread...
As I've said before...I attribute most of the anti American sentiment that's being expressed here to jealousy. I would like to make it clear that the preceding in NOT a blanket statement. There are more than a few European posters on these boards that are quite intelligent. But back to my point...It is my opinion that if those of you who continually bash the US walked in our shoes for a mile or two & saw the world the way that we do, you'd be singing a different song to be sure. Can any of the critics of the US (honestly & objectively) say that they'd behave differently given the same circumstances/advantages that we (the US) enjoy??? I know that I'm going to get a lot of bullsh1t holier that thou "Of course not!" type of responses to that querry. And that's fine. All I ask is that you at least be honest with yourselves. The only people who love numero uno are the people who are on top. Most every one else who's not, wants to be number one. Well, there can be only one numbre one. Which leaves most of those not on top with a bad taste in thier mouth, A.K.A. JEALOUSY. So, because of an inability to change the ballance of power on the part of our (the US's) critics, we get a steady diet of "They're over paid, over sexed & over here" type of resentment. And while that type of attitude isn't overly respectable (IMO), it is certianly understandable.
The bottom line is that (as I've already said) there can be only one #1. I'm damn grateful to be an American. I've been around the world. And the biggest lesson that my travels have tought me was, that while the US isn't perfect, I have yet to see a better way of life. I recognize and relish the fact that the country in which I live is the single most powerful (all around) in the world.
I've also read a lot of whining about our foreign policies too. To that I say, no matter wheather we act on any given issue or not, we're going to catch sh1t from somebody... We're damned if we do & we're damned if we don't. So, why not take the "I'm going to do what's in my own best interest" route?!?!? Hell, IMO if you're not doing what's in your own best interest as a top priority, you're a fool.
To those of you who think that my opinions make me a so-called "bad, arrogant or otherwise spoiled" American....That's just fine with me. I'll take the role of the bully over the punk any day.
As I've said before...I attribute most of the anti American sentiment that's being expressed here to jealousy. I would like to make it clear that the preceding in NOT a blanket statement. There are more than a few European posters on these boards that are quite intelligent. But back to my point...It is my opinion that if those of you who continually bash the US walked in our shoes for a mile or two & saw the world the way that we do, you'd be singing a different song to be sure. Can any of the critics of the US (honestly & objectively) say that they'd behave differently given the same circumstances/advantages that we (the US) enjoy??? I know that I'm going to get a lot of bullsh1t holier that thou "Of course not!" type of responses to that querry. And that's fine. All I ask is that you at least be honest with yourselves. The only people who love numero uno are the people who are on top. Most every one else who's not, wants to be number one. Well, there can be only one numbre one. Which leaves most of those not on top with a bad taste in thier mouth, A.K.A. JEALOUSY. So, because of an inability to change the ballance of power on the part of our (the US's) critics, we get a steady diet of "They're over paid, over sexed & over here" type of resentment. And while that type of attitude isn't overly respectable (IMO), it is certianly understandable.
The bottom line is that (as I've already said) there can be only one #1. I'm damn grateful to be an American. I've been around the world. And the biggest lesson that my travels have tought me was, that while the US isn't perfect, I have yet to see a better way of life. I recognize and relish the fact that the country in which I live is the single most powerful (all around) in the world.
I've also read a lot of whining about our foreign policies too. To that I say, no matter wheather we act on any given issue or not, we're going to catch sh1t from somebody... We're damned if we do & we're damned if we don't. So, why not take the "I'm going to do what's in my own best interest" route?!?!? Hell, IMO if you're not doing what's in your own best interest as a top priority, you're a fool.
To those of you who think that my opinions make me a so-called "bad, arrogant or otherwise spoiled" American....That's just fine with me. I'll take the role of the bully over the punk any day.
floppa21
Crusty Manhole
I kind of agree with GJTS. I understand the "what America does affects the whole world" thing, but I also agree it is jealousy.
I hate Brad Pitt. He's a flamin pile of crap. And he's gay too.
Similar idea no?
As for guns, I like the redneck NRA guy from UHF. "Guns don't kill people, I do..."
I hate Brad Pitt. He's a flamin pile of crap. And he's gay too.
Similar idea no? As for guns, I like the redneck NRA guy from UHF. "Guns don't kill people, I do..."
joespaniel
Unescorted Settler
As for guns, I like the redneck NRA guy from UHF. "Guns don't kill people, I do..."
Good one, Floppa.
Thank you for an intelligent post gjts.
I dont chalk it up to jealousy, but rather the human tendancy to generalize. Some Americans are fools. But not all of us.
I hope the Europeans here do not hold us Americans all in the same regard as we are all different. We are just as diverse as the people of the world. Please judge us accordingly.
And I for one, dont agree with EU (and some member countries) policy on everything either, but am glad that most of the nations of Europe are our friends. Perhaps in the not too distant future, you guys will be helping to realign some misguided American policies.
Good one, Floppa.
Thank you for an intelligent post gjts.
I dont chalk it up to jealousy, but rather the human tendancy to generalize. Some Americans are fools. But not all of us.
I hope the Europeans here do not hold us Americans all in the same regard as we are all different. We are just as diverse as the people of the world. Please judge us accordingly.
And I for one, dont agree with EU (and some member countries) policy on everything either, but am glad that most of the nations of Europe are our friends. Perhaps in the not too distant future, you guys will be helping to realign some misguided American policies.
TheDuckOfFlanders
the fish collecter
I do not agree to Gtjs his post, and i don't know if i would call it "intelligent".
There is nothing more wrong with America than any other country ,and to world standard's America is indeed a great country.But it's not perfect and "all good".
There is realy no argument on that aint it ,because everything we criticize will be answered with:
And that is a bit to easy ain't it.That way we can't keep a good discussion here ,because everybody is thinking it black or white.America ,although it is a very good country ,ain't perfect ,as no country in the world is.
The thing i hate here is that there are a Some American's here that will name all the good things America has done through history ,but will name none of the bad things.I won't go further on what these bad things are ,but naturaly there are some black pages in America's history, as there are in all country's history.
But i pitty those who can't have some criticism on their own country because of over-patriotic feelings.I think that constructive criticism is an responsibilety of every inhabitant of a democratic system.
I think Europe is pretty great place to live in to ,but it ain't perfect neither.And i have criticism toward's my country's policy in some degree ,and i am happy that most of the people in europe are like that towards their own nation's.
floppa21
Crusty Manhole
True Duck. I don't have many strong and steadfast opinions because almost nothing is black and white for me. Sometimes, I'll think and think on something and not come up with a conclusion because there is too much left open... ya know? I guess I'm not very opinionated because I can't see things that way... I should take a debate class...
And I must agree with Joe too, see what I mean?
There are good people everywhere. There are bad people everywhere. If I'm a jerk, that doesn't mean the guy next to me is. (Hope I'm not a jerk... )
And I must agree with Joe too, see what I mean?
There are good people everywhere. There are bad people everywhere. If I'm a jerk, that doesn't mean the guy next to me is. (Hope I'm not a jerk... ) 
Why do you come out with all these things? This is all true, but you're off-topic. Your casting up is off-topic. We're speaking about the american things that european don't like.
If you want, we can start a thread with all the good things of USA, which are surely more than the bad things; but we're talking of the bad things in the european vision.
I don't know why you get angry in this way.
Nobody is hating you or your country in this forum.
Surely french government isn't selling anything to Iraq. If you're talking about smugglers, you can't accuse anyone. It's like to say that you americans have sent yourself the planes to the twin towers, only because the hijacker lived in USA.
The fact that in USA there aren't socialsts parties is a lack. Your left wing correspond to, for example, italian "centre-centreleft" parties. What do you say about McCarthism? Where is your freedom?
Socialist parties are necessary to balance some things, like school, or pensions. Without anyone who supports social protection, for example public schools here would become a sort of Bronx compared to private schools.
Anyway, I don't want to start an argument about politics.
By the way, do you think that the USSR regime and the socialists in the european governments are the same thing? These are your words...
If you're sure of this, I'll stop speaking....
Originally posted by floppa21
And I must agree with Joe too, see what I mean?
Exactly because you could have been born in any country as well although it may give you different views. Its a possibility though that if two countries have generally different views then they will think more people from the other country are jerks and therefore the stereotype gets enforced and increased. This results in people looking for evidence to back up their stereotype of the other country.
Eg The media shows loads of fat Americans walking about and that reenfoces the stereotype that all Americans are fat...
Dogberry_Old
****** of the Pack
& I am paraphrasing here.."if you were to travel the world & examine all it's peoples & customs .. you would return home assured that your's was the best."
I am eternally grateful & fortunate that I was born a citizen of the USA. I like many of the European Countries.. & I know a little ( sometimes a lot ) about their history & customs. I especially single out Italian Food & German Beer, the Dutch aren't too bad in the last catagory either. I have never been fortunate enough to have traveled in Europe, although it is a dream of mine to visit the Aegean & south Italy & Sicily some time, along with my ancestoral home of Ireland.
I do believe that the Europeans have been in a position post-World War II, where many of them could take a vacation ( a much needed one.. some would say ) from world history. That leaves us clumsy & undereducated Yanks to assume that burden. We are still learning & sometimes our raucus & even hilarious political culture aggravates these misunderstandings.
Dog
I am eternally grateful & fortunate that I was born a citizen of the USA. I like many of the European Countries.. & I know a little ( sometimes a lot ) about their history & customs. I especially single out Italian Food & German Beer, the Dutch aren't too bad in the last catagory either. I have never been fortunate enough to have traveled in Europe, although it is a dream of mine to visit the Aegean & south Italy & Sicily some time, along with my ancestoral home of Ireland.
I do believe that the Europeans have been in a position post-World War II, where many of them could take a vacation ( a much needed one.. some would say ) from world history. That leaves us clumsy & undereducated Yanks to assume that burden. We are still learning & sometimes our raucus & even hilarious political culture aggravates these misunderstandings.
Dog
joespaniel
Unescorted Settler
I dont want to stir up trouble, but France HAS been selling things to Iraq that are not allowed under the embargo. For a few years now, as well.
However, thats about the only thing I agree with Sumo on.
Ducky - I dont support gjts whole post either, just the part about not every American being a total idiot.
Im only a partial idiot.
However, thats about the only thing I agree with Sumo on.
Ducky - I dont support gjts whole post either, just the part about not every American being a total idiot.
Im only a partial idiot.
TheDuckOfFlanders
the fish collecter
I don't know if something like that has happend in the recent 3-5 years ,i do know that France has sold some nuclear technoligy to the Iraqi 10/15 years ago.Anyway ,that's not on topic we are talking about America here.But indeed France is not perfect neither.
I ame relieved.Especialy about the posting from Sumociv ,man ,is he really trying hard to be offensive?
Me to
(better to know youre a partial idiot than to think youre fine )No ,we shouldn't say this about ourselfs Joe.Don't say what you think you are ,but don't say what you arn't either.
sonorakitch
Overseas hunter
Hi Duck,
We could probably beat this thing around all day. Thats okay!
First, I keep forgetting English is not your native tongue, and so I know it is hard for you. Let me restate the whole Europe: Disheartening feelings issue. The Europeans who speak negatively about the U.S. do so for only political reasons. There. That is what I meant the whole time! Hopefully you can understand me now...
Referring to the enlightening debate:
The economic and social situations are certainly a primary component of the crime problem here. But the statistics show that there are many cities in the "older economy" areas in the United States that enjoy much lower crime rates. Consider Indianapolis, Columbus and Cincinatti, Ohio, and Minneapolis, MN. Looking closer, one finds that these three states have concealed weapons permist widely available to those who qualify (Indiana, Ohio, and Minnesota). All of the aforementioned cities lie in old economy areas, whereas Indianapolis and Minneapolis were once the heart of agriculture in the late 1800's and early 1900's, and both Cincinatti and Columbus were steel and lumber powerhouses in the 1800's. I understand these are smaller cities than New York and Chicago, but there are many smaller cities in the old economy regions where gun restrictions are many and crime is rampant. Consider Buffalo, NY, or Flint, MI, or Baltimore, MD. All three are comparable in size, have similar economic institutions, and in the same regional area. Some cities have enormous problems with crime; some cities enjoy lower rates than the national average. One of the obvious differences? The citizens of some communities have guns, and some don't. It really is the perfect deterrant. And also, I think you meant the Western U.S. when you spoke of the new economy regions. What is commonly referred to as the South, ie. Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, etc. generally share the same "old economy" problems as the Mid-Atlantic and Great Lakes regions. This is not to say these are the bad places though. In fact, they contain most of the history and are generally very beautiful (and yes, I am a strange one for thinking that old steelmills are beautiful sites!)
Now, I am not suggesting American crime is more violent because of any one tool used by a criminal. This is much more a socia-political phenomena here. There are very real social differences between America and Europe (ie. the diversity issue...we don't have to debate that I guess). The availability of guns does sprout more crime than if a nation was totally disarmed. I agree with this, but it is not close to the real problem here. Consider Switzerland, where adults are required to own firearms to support the citizen militia. Crime is not more violent there, and in fact, enjoys a much lesser rate than most of your neighbors (if not all of them...but maybe Luxembourg... ). Something that is interesting: Switzerland has nearly zero diversity too. And is very wealthy...GDP per capita is comparable with the U.S.'s. So while I do agree with the notion that crime in America is more violent, I do not subscribe to the theory that guns directly result this discrepency. And another interesting tidbit: much of the crime here is between groups of criminals really. To understand this, watch just about any cop show in Los Angeles...
Australia's rising crime rates are directly a result of the practical ban on firearms. In the very following year of the legislation, armed robbery when up something like 40%. Murders were about even. Why? Most murders worldwide kill each other. There are statistics available for all this; again do a search. I can probably dig up the Australia stuff if you would like.
Hopefully, I have answered all of your questions so far. I am sure we can do another round!
~Chris
We could probably beat this thing around all day. Thats okay!
First, I keep forgetting English is not your native tongue, and so I know it is hard for you. Let me restate the whole Europe: Disheartening feelings issue. The Europeans who speak negatively about the U.S. do so for only political reasons. There. That is what I meant the whole time! Hopefully you can understand me now...
Referring to the enlightening debate:
The economic and social situations are certainly a primary component of the crime problem here. But the statistics show that there are many cities in the "older economy" areas in the United States that enjoy much lower crime rates. Consider Indianapolis, Columbus and Cincinatti, Ohio, and Minneapolis, MN. Looking closer, one finds that these three states have concealed weapons permist widely available to those who qualify (Indiana, Ohio, and Minnesota). All of the aforementioned cities lie in old economy areas, whereas Indianapolis and Minneapolis were once the heart of agriculture in the late 1800's and early 1900's, and both Cincinatti and Columbus were steel and lumber powerhouses in the 1800's. I understand these are smaller cities than New York and Chicago, but there are many smaller cities in the old economy regions where gun restrictions are many and crime is rampant. Consider Buffalo, NY, or Flint, MI, or Baltimore, MD. All three are comparable in size, have similar economic institutions, and in the same regional area. Some cities have enormous problems with crime; some cities enjoy lower rates than the national average. One of the obvious differences? The citizens of some communities have guns, and some don't. It really is the perfect deterrant. And also, I think you meant the Western U.S. when you spoke of the new economy regions. What is commonly referred to as the South, ie. Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, etc. generally share the same "old economy" problems as the Mid-Atlantic and Great Lakes regions. This is not to say these are the bad places though. In fact, they contain most of the history and are generally very beautiful (and yes, I am a strange one for thinking that old steelmills are beautiful sites!)
Now, I am not suggesting American crime is more violent because of any one tool used by a criminal. This is much more a socia-political phenomena here. There are very real social differences between America and Europe (ie. the diversity issue...we don't have to debate that I guess). The availability of guns does sprout more crime than if a nation was totally disarmed. I agree with this, but it is not close to the real problem here. Consider Switzerland, where adults are required to own firearms to support the citizen militia. Crime is not more violent there, and in fact, enjoys a much lesser rate than most of your neighbors (if not all of them...but maybe Luxembourg...
). Something that is interesting: Switzerland has nearly zero diversity too. And is very wealthy...GDP per capita is comparable with the U.S.'s. So while I do agree with the notion that crime in America is more violent, I do not subscribe to the theory that guns directly result this discrepency. And another interesting tidbit: much of the crime here is between groups of criminals really. To understand this, watch just about any cop show in Los Angeles...Australia's rising crime rates are directly a result of the practical ban on firearms. In the very following year of the legislation, armed robbery when up something like 40%. Murders were about even. Why? Most murders worldwide kill each other. There are statistics available for all this; again do a search. I can probably dig up the Australia stuff if you would like.
Hopefully, I have answered all of your questions so far. I am sure we can do another round!
~Chris
sonorakitch
Overseas hunter
Dogberry:
Yes, they actually still eat canine on a regular basis throughout the Philippines, and is a primary staple. The last time I was there, in 1999, I was in Legaspi and ate dinner at a home where dog sausage was the main course. It was very red, very gritty, and not very good. I had to eat it though; looks rude not too. And indeed, it is a good way to experience the local culture. Pig intestines are worse.
Leowind:
I agree with you. Training ought to be enforced and is with right to carry laws. But I must say that unfortunatly, I am a city dweller, and my rare escape is the hunting season. Because Arizona is so incredibly urbanized, this is the norm here. I know NYC is a little different...
~Chris
Yes, they actually still eat canine on a regular basis throughout the Philippines, and is a primary staple. The last time I was there, in 1999, I was in Legaspi and ate dinner at a home where dog sausage was the main course. It was very red, very gritty, and not very good. I had to eat it though; looks rude not too. And indeed, it is a good way to experience the local culture. Pig intestines are worse.
Leowind:
I agree with you. Training ought to be enforced and is with right to carry laws. But I must say that unfortunatly, I am a city dweller, and my rare escape is the hunting season. Because Arizona is so incredibly urbanized, this is the norm here. I know NYC is a little different...
~Chris
TheDuckOfFlanders
the fish collecter
Oh ,just beautifull points uphere ,our discussion has just raised by another level.Youre an excelent debater Sonarkitch .
beautiful
Oh yes we can
Basicly ,after reading this ,i was stuned.at first i thought i was just plain stupid trying to explain socio/political diferences in America to an well-informed American,considering i hadn the statistic's to back my point.But there is still some debating here.At first you say: "The economic and social situations are certainly a primary component of the crime problem here." Knowing that it is considerd a component ,i ask to what extent is this a component?It could be that this component is for ex. only for 50% responsible for the high crime rates ,but maybe it could be 90%.As thus the impact of firearms as source of crime could be significaly less than the inpact socio/political problem's have on the general crime rate of a community.That way ,it could be hard to tell from these statistics you gave me what effectively the inpact is of firearms laws in these region's are ,considering that the crime rates could mainly be the effect of socio/political reason's.
I'm pointing to another statement you made to back up my point:
So are you saying then that generaly social life in Ameerica is more violent?I think that is what this statement means.
What that i'm trying to say here is that althoug loose gun laws are only resposible for a smal percentage of the crime ratio of the communities ,i think it effectively makes the crime's more violently ,and it still add's a small (very small) amount of extra crime.Note that this is diferently towards every inividual community.City's like Los Angeles with indeed it's many social difference's have a mainly socia/political problems as reason's for crime rates.But i think that loose gun laws will only add to the problem there ,only not significant enough to notice easily in the crime statistics.
Yet indeed i think that the gun policy in America has to be reviewed by community.I think a system of loose gun laws for law abiding community's ,and strict laws for urban crime centers is the best sollution.Only ,with me it would be the choice between strict and very strickt."loose" would still be pretty strict.
I won't review the Australia thingy ,a bit off topic and i'm a bit tired right now. (hectic debate) I'll maybe reply on this later
.beautiful
Oh yes we can
Basicly ,after reading this ,i was stuned.at first i thought i was just plain stupid trying to explain socio/political diferences in America to an well-informed American,considering i hadn the statistic's to back my point.But there is still some debating here.At first you say: "The economic and social situations are certainly a primary component of the crime problem here." Knowing that it is considerd a component ,i ask to what extent is this a component?It could be that this component is for ex. only for 50% responsible for the high crime rates ,but maybe it could be 90%.As thus the impact of firearms as source of crime could be significaly less than the inpact socio/political problem's have on the general crime rate of a community.That way ,it could be hard to tell from these statistics you gave me what effectively the inpact is of firearms laws in these region's are ,considering that the crime rates could mainly be the effect of socio/political reason's.
I'm pointing to another statement you made to back up my point:
So are you saying then that generaly social life in Ameerica is more violent?I think that is what this statement means.
What that i'm trying to say here is that althoug loose gun laws are only resposible for a smal percentage of the crime ratio of the communities ,i think it effectively makes the crime's more violently ,and it still add's a small (very small) amount of extra crime.Note that this is diferently towards every inividual community.City's like Los Angeles with indeed it's many social difference's have a mainly socia/political problems as reason's for crime rates.But i think that loose gun laws will only add to the problem there ,only not significant enough to notice easily in the crime statistics.
Yet indeed i think that the gun policy in America has to be reviewed by community.I think a system of loose gun laws for law abiding community's ,and strict laws for urban crime centers is the best sollution.Only ,with me it would be the choice between strict and very strickt."loose" would still be pretty strict.
I won't review the Australia thingy ,a bit off topic and i'm a bit tired right now. (hectic debate) I'll maybe reply on this later
