|
|
Post by TheGlove on Oct 27, 2004 18:16:55 GMT -5
well, it can, drug dealers often use rifles and shotguns
|
|
TonyG2
Level 5: Destroyer
Remember the Pegasus
Posts: 261
|
Post by TonyG2 on Oct 27, 2004 18:39:58 GMT -5
Ouch!
Bad news
Makes me glad to live in an area where (a) the drug dealers are so dumb that they sound car horns or set off fireworks to advertise they have goods to sell (their careers are fairly short. even the dumbest cop can catch them) and
(b) those that have guns tend to use them on the local wildlife (rats, foxes etc) as opposed to the two legged wild life....
|
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Oct 27, 2004 19:59:13 GMT -5
set off fireworks ?? thats stupid  |
|
|
|
Post by Nerath on Oct 28, 2004 16:09:42 GMT -5
;D Look at all the liberals.
I'm a die-hard conservative and not afraid to say it. Yes, I'm #5 for Bush in the poll. Here's my reasoning, but first, my soapbox talk about Bush and the Iraqi war.
I beg to differ with people thinking that war has no place in the world. No offense to Glove, but if we had no war whatsoever, people like Saddam Hussein would have much more power. If the world had not gone to war against Hitler, just imagine the results. If we had left Saddam in power, the Iraqis would still be tortured by their dictator. I would rather have a war than have citizens be under a man like Saddam. I'm glad we got him out of power. War has a place in this world, and pacifistic groups need to be careful that they don't become doormats. Sometimes force is necessary.
Yes, I'm willing to admit that maybe we haven't done the right thing at all times, but then again, EVERYONE (even Bush) is human! We make mistakes, all of us. That shouldn't be a revelation to anyone.
Oh yeah -- I'm not stupid. "Fervant Republicans would vote for him even if he came out as a paid up member of the Klu Klux Klan and advocated the death penalty for anyone who implied he was a jerk." No, no I wouldn't. If I thought Kerry was better than Bush, I would vote for him, and I do have common sense.
Why I'm conservative...
1. I'm all for the Federal Marriage Amendment. No one can change my mind on that. Trying to do so is quite futile. This is my biggest reason.
2. I don't support abortion.
3. I DO support the Iraqi war and such. (Though I don't condone every action we've taken in the war.)
4. It's the liberals who are getting the Ten Commandments taken away from public areas and are trying to get "under God" out of the pledge (Not while I'm alive!).
5. This isn't the biggest concern of mine, but I do support the right to keep and bear arms (i.e. own a gun).
I don't really approve of conservative ecological policies. That's one thing I don't like. My main concerns are social issues.
Conservatives here, speak out! Liberals get their voices heard, so why can't we? Most conservatives I know tend to keep quiet and let the liberals rant...we need to talk, too! I know there are some here, because there were 4 other votes for Bush.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Oct 28, 2004 16:55:13 GMT -5
well, Hitler's pertured mind was a result of WW1  give time to time... dictators dun live forever and ppl often get tired and assassinate their prez w/ a sniper shot... dun trow urself in other countries problem if there will be death involved... 1) Abort (and prostitution if u think a a bit): the body is yours, do wadda u want w/ it 2) War is dumb... why send an army to a country oceans away to kill an government that not even pissed u off ?? 3) Guns are dumb... i read once at darwin awards of an american guy that was a bit sleppy and the phone ringed, that was a .38 besides the phone, he answered the gun and POW... dead dude ps.: dictators arent all evil and baddass |
|
Cherel
Level 6: Carrier
will someone make a paper Whitestar for me?
Posts: 565
|
Post by Cherel on Oct 29, 2004 12:23:41 GMT -5
We (well, at least me) don't think there is no place for war in the world. It's a pity, but sometimes, it might be necessary (WWII for instance).
However, I'm against the way this war has been begun. First of all, I don't think false accusations should be enough to start a war. Wars should only take place if international organizations decided that these wars were legal, I mean, if there were true proofs. It might be true that Irak and afganistan wars were "good" as these took some criminals out of the goverment, but these should be arrested (by force if necessary) and judged by international organizations, with proofs, of course.
However, this war was not approved by all nations, and UEA goverment acted alone, beyond legality. Now, we know the evidences it presented were not true. They might be mistaken, of course, and the world may be safer without all these goverments out.
But the fact is that this way to make war has not been the right way, and when it was done by my goverment, without the support of international organizations, I felt as if I we were as "evil" as these "enemies" we were going to capture. The way you make things is as important as the things you make. Now, international relationships are tenser, and both war times (you know, it seems some soldiers did not respect their enemies, although it is not but their fault. I won't comment prisions) and the period after war are a huge cost people have to pay, which would have been smaller if all nations were in agreement and had acted together, when true evidences had been shown.
(we know about terrorismn, we have lived it for more than 40 years, and we are winning our own crusade against terrorisimn using the police, within the law, and I'm proud of it. In fact, there were important goverment people long time ago who started a secret dirty war against terrorists. This was discovered, and these people have been convicted and pay their crimes as they should.)
Nerath, I disagree with most of your points, I'm sorry.
my main discrepancies are with point 5 and the next sentence. I think 1, 2 and 4 are just convictions which must be respected if not shared, and I've expressed my oppinions about point 3.
5- In my country, it's harder to get a gun and weapons are much more controlled. This way, policemen have easier jobs. In fact, we haven't many gun disasters, and most crimes are caused by people with illegal guns or a child kills himself or someone by accident with hunting weapons (it's the parents' fault, I think)
but gun crime is really rare here if it's not a robbery in big enterprises. I think having guns makes it harder for policemen and increases the scope of crimes as common criminals are more dangerous.
And about being concerned about social issues and not as concerned about ecology... I'm sorry, but it's selfdestruction. I agree with you in social issues being important, as economy is, but I think ecology is more important as what you're doing is not only affecting your nation, but all the world, It doesn't matters what others do, it's like smoking near someone else: you're killing him as you're killing yourself.
But with ecology is worse, becouse he will die as the same time as you, not later.
No offense, of course. I just want to express what I think. In addition, I'm not very aware of politics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nerath on Oct 29, 2004 14:33:33 GMT -5
No, no, you misunderstood me on ecology! Conservatives tend to not be strong for the environment. I care a LOT about the environment, so I'm more moderate on the ecology than conservative. That's what I mean. I'm against drilling for oil in protected areas, while many conservatives don't mind it, for example.
My reasoning behind the weapons policy is that criminals are going to get guns anyway. I know there could be better gun -selling security and such (probably a LOT better), but banning guns will result in criminals having guns and civilians not having them. So therefore, a guy walks into your house with a gun, you have no defense. If you have a gun in the house, you could at least shoot him before he shoots you.
Glove -- to address your first comment. I'll be blunt about this. If a person is going to go off and pay to have sex with someone, that person has a problem. An absolute NO to prostitution. Second, I think that abortion really is cutting off a life. That's just my view.
And it's true that "dictator" as a word means an absolute ruler. Not all dictators, by the dictionary, are evil. A tyrant is an evil dictator, I believe. But now, dictator has taken a serious negative connotation. I'm against evil, not "dictator" by the book.
About international organizations. I really don't know much about foreign policy and such, but what I think right now is that if one country wants to go to war, it shouldn't have to check up with the rest of the world first. That's dependency to the nth power.
Cherel, it's cool that you're taking time to be kind about your views. Lots of people don't, and I'll admit that those people include conservatives and liberals, both.
|
|
TonyG2
Level 5: Destroyer
Remember the Pegasus
Posts: 261
|
Post by TonyG2 on Oct 29, 2004 15:47:51 GMT -5
Sorry for any offence with the KKK crack. My point is that there maybe a difference between what I see as fervent supporter and what you do. I would suggest that there are those who are incapable of giving any thought to the issues and whose support is a knee jerk reaction. ”I beg to differ with people thinking that war has no place in the world.” Agreed it is necessary at times however regrettable. However action must be tempered with humanity. The reported 30,000 civilian casualties in Iraq is testimony to the facts that lessons of history must be learned and that indiscriminate bombing serves only one cause – to breed more terrorists. “'m glad we got him (Saddam) out of power”. Agreed. He deserved to go. Just be sure of the rational behind his removal. ”Why I'm conservative...” Well for the record I’m a fully paid up member of the conservative party and no liberal… Besides what you call a liberal is only a bit to the left of a conservative. You should see what our liberal party advocates. You would vote for Kerry over them any day….. ”I'm all for the Federal Marriage Amendment. No one can change my mind on that. Trying to do so is quite futile. This is my biggest reason.” Agreed. With you 100% ”I don't support abortion” – disagree when it applies to rape cases, where the mother’s life would be at risk or where the quality of life of mother and child would be adversely affected. But not for indiscriminate convenience abortions. ”I DO support the Iraqi war and such. (Though I don't condone every action we've taken in the war.)” – so do I but not condone the way the peace has been handled. The US has to get past the “Shock & Awe” school of combat. It works when you face an organised military force. Use against insurgents and you only harm the innocent. There is no such thing as a precise cluster bomb. ”It's the liberals who are getting the Ten Commandments taken away from public areas and are trying to get "under God" out of the pledge (Not while I'm alive!)” Didn’t know that! Really stupid idea. Sort of daft idea Blair would support. ”This isn't the biggest concern of mine, but I do support the right to keep and bear arms” I agree (as well as the right to arm bears…  ) But only for target and sports rifles for competition, hunting rifles and shotguns for vermin. I’ll grant you small pistols (no Dirty Harry specials or 50cal Action Express or other compensatory phallic symbols) for home defence. No carrying weapons in public. No semi and full auto assault rifles. Every gun owner to be finger printed and a ballistics record made of the gun and attached to a permanent file. Then I’ll give you the guns a reasonable owner would want. You want an M60 or Mac10 or pump action granade launcher….go straight to jail. ”I don't really approve of conservative ecological policies. That's one thing I don't like. My main concerns are social issues” Agreed. Two words. Kyoto Accords. ‘Nuff said ”Conservatives here, speak out!” As requested. One paid up member speaking his mind. |
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Oct 29, 2004 17:09:40 GMT -5
well, war isnt kinda in our blood... our hymn is the only one that dun speak about war and well, i doubt u guys can understand what we have here, its a whole other hemisphere... |
|
gremdek
Level 5: Destroyer
groza
Posts: 379
|
Post by gremdek on Nov 3, 2004 14:46:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Nov 3, 2004 15:12:58 GMT -5
 well, US choice Bush viado fdp |
|
|
|
Post by Nerath on Nov 3, 2004 18:27:02 GMT -5
;D Huzzah. I want my amendment.
Anyway, sorry to be gleeful among the depressed Democrats/liberals, but if people can be depressed, I can be happy. That's how it went at classes, anyway...you could see all these glum faces and then the occasional pair of high-fiving conservatives. It was rather amusing, at least to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Nov 7, 2004 0:59:33 GMT -5
shouldnt sum1 lock votation by now ?? |
|
|
|
Post by Nerath on Nov 7, 2004 11:09:40 GMT -5
Well, I figured this could also be our let's-talk-politics thread, because there are so many other threads that should be locked by now and aren't. I can't lock the votes without locking the thread.
|
|
TonyG2
Level 5: Destroyer
Remember the Pegasus
Posts: 261
|
Post by TonyG2 on Nov 7, 2004 13:16:49 GMT -5
Politics more than religeon now seems to be the polarising issue... So on that subject, I find some very odd things concerning the issue of US politics 1) The Republicans as a party are - shall we say somewhat to the Right (some more than others). Yet correct me if I'm wrong, but the Republican party uses Red as its colour (usually associated with Communism ie Red China, Red Menace etc) 2) The Democrats - considered by Republicans to be a left wing party - takes blue as its colour. A colour more often associated with the Right and conservatism) 3) The French Republic was a revolutionary party more often asociated with left wing sentimentalities. 4) One definition of a Democracy is the common people being the primary source of power whereas a Republic is often decribed as rule via elected representatives. Yet the US republican party seems to consider the Democrats as being the party of Big Government. Have you guys ever considered switching names? And if republics disagree with Democrats, can they truly agree with democracy?? |
|
) But only for target and sports rifles for competition, hunting rifles and shotguns for vermin. I’ll grant you small pistols (no Dirty Harry specials or 50cal Action Express or other compensatory phallic symbols) for home defence. No carrying weapons in public. No semi and full auto assault rifles. Every gun owner to be finger printed and a ballistics record made of the gun and attached to a permanent file. Then I’ll give you the guns a reasonable owner would want. You want an M60 or Mac10 or pump action granade launcher….go straight to jail.
I'm not the kind of person you think I am
well, US choice