They literally said they would be justified to starve 2 million people to death but their allies won't let them.
again, military directive

in the us there's congressmembers who literally believe in jewish space lasers. idgaf what some retard in the israeli cabinet says, and neither do the courts.
 
No, you guided the conversation towards this particular direction
Indeed. Because when we talk about Gun Control, it's the only right and documented approach.

You can keep the narrative for hundreds of years that gun will reduce crimes, you will never be proven right. It's just a logical impossibility.

Now, I consider that we listened enough to people saying that gun could make the world safer. People are dying, so I'm choosing to stop being open to this opinion.


not sure what you're on about

last night I probably deleted only one post of yours
Hmm.. Sorry then, I tried to find some post back and it didn't work.
 
So ? There was also no place on earth were plane existed before 1890.

Is it so impossible for you to imagine a better future ?



We are talking about making society better through a materialist lens. We have been hearing the "diverse opinion" against this kind of thinking for decade.. and it lead us to prevent us from thinking a better society.

So can we try now ?



He didn't understand the definition to begin with..

Also please @AL sama can you avoid removing all my message when they are just replying to insults, just ask me to remove the quote of insult from the message. Because I sometimes say things I go back to later. So it's a bit unpractical.
You want to do something while having no idea whatsoever how to do it. There is no healing psychopaths. There are upper class criminals too. Economical status does not define ones character. Upper class criminals usually avoid violence because they have better means of enriching themselves illegally, meanwhile the poor ones need to resort to robing, killing and trafficking guns/drugs.
[automerge]1727961523[/automerge]
How likely is this to escalate into a full blown regional war?
[automerge]1727961729[/automerge]
This "professor" sounds like a massive asshole and instigator. That said, he is right about Iran. It isn't that easy and simple to start a war with them.
 
Last edited:
You want to do something while having no idea whatsoever how to do it. There is no healing psychopaths. There are upper class criminals too. Economical status does not define ones character. Upper class criminals usually avoid violence because they have better means of enriching themselves illegally, meanwhile the poor ones need to resort to robing, killing and trafficking guns/drugs.
Mate. Your idea is "more gun". Mine is a complete restructuration of the system and the material condition in which those people are put into. I think I have a much better idea how to proceed than you with your escalation of violence.

Your idea is more repression, more violence and less compassion. You have absolutely no clue about the real implication and systemic reasons behind those violence. You are like blind man trying to put out a fire with a machine gun.

You are talking about severe cases of psychopathy. It's 1 % of the population. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with the problem of your country. The reason people seek violence in south America is not psychopathy, it's structural, economical and societal reasons. You are focusing on a strawman to avoid trying to find solutions and calm your thirst for violence.


There are upper class criminals too. Economical status does not define ones character.
Not just economical, societal and cultural too. There are 1000 reasons to become a criminal. And what we need to do is act on the system that allow those reasons to be instead of trying to fight each individual with blind firepower.


Upper class criminals usually avoid violence because they have better means of enriching themselves illegally, meanwhile the poor ones need to resort to robing, killing and trafficking guns/drugs.
And still you keep believing in capitalism. You see, I'm nort the one with contradictions.
 
Mate. Your idea is "more gun". Mine is a complete restructuration of the system and the material condition in which those people are put into. I think I have a much better idea how to proceed than you with your escalation of violence.

Your idea is more repression, more violence and less compassion. You have absolutely no clue about the real implication and systemic reasons behind those violence. You are like blind man trying to put out a fire with a machine gun.

You are talking about severe cases of psychopathy. It's 1 % of the population. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with the problem of your country. The reason people seek violence in south America is not psychopathy, it's structural, economical and societal reasons. You are focusing on a strawman to avoid trying to find solutions and calm your thirst for violence.



Not just economical, societal and cultural too. There are 1000 reasons to become a criminal. And what we need to do is act on the system that allow those reasons to be instead of trying to fight each individual with blind firepower.



And still you keep believing in capitalism. You see, I'm nort the one with contradictions.
Don't move the goal posts and learn proper reading comprehension. More guns so civilians can properly defend themselves. I never claimed guns were meant to end crime. Crime is fought by police and courts, not by random civies. Guns=self defense=life preservation=human right. What the fuck has capitalism got to do with anything i said? "ahh rich don't need to shoot people to get rich,lets ban the rich". This is JEALOUSY!
[automerge]1727963216[/automerge]
You are talking about severe cases of psychopathy. It's 1 % of the population. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with the problem of your country.
That 1% of the population is responsible for most crime pretty much anywhere in the planet. 99.9% of people that live in favelas are normal,honest and hard working people. Its the 0.1% that wields rifles and chops people's limbs. You have no idea what you are talking about.
 
Don't move the goal posts and learn proper reading comprehension. More guns so civilians can properly defend themselves. I never claimed guns were meant to end crime. Crime is fought by police and courts, not by random civies. Guns=self defense=life preservation=human right.
I know this is counter intuitive, but it will only create more violence.

What the fuck has capitalism got to do with anything i said?
Everything.
 
I know this is counter intuitive, but it will only create more violence.


Everything.
No, it doesn't. It creates LESS violence. Criminals will be scared of invading random homes or stealing from random people because they will fear being shot. Look up the "umbrella effect".
[automerge]1727963659[/automerge]
Banning guns won't solve a thing. It's culture. There's less gun violence in the red open carry states than there are in the blue gun controlled states. However, the blue cities have denser population, higher homeless rates and higher prices which are factors.

Since 1999, gun violence has decreased by 40% but gun COVERAGE in the news has increased 800% thanks to the Columbine Shooting. People are simply more exposed to gun violence now.
Down here in Brazil, we had pretty loose gun laws and crime was not that big of a deal. Now we have strict guns laws and crime doesn't stop increasing. What happened is that we are ruled by politicians that enable criminals. Gun control is a classic authoritarian regime move.
 
Last edited:
Banning guns won't solve a thing. It's culture. There's less gun violence in the red open carry states than there are in the blue gun controlled states. However, the blue cities have denser population, higher homeless rates and higher prices which are factors.

Since 1999, gun violence has decreased by 40% but gun COVERAGE in the news has increased 800% thanks to the Columbine Shooting. People are simply more exposed to gun violence now.
Reminds me of something my mum told me like 14 years ago.

She said: "There is more coverage of pedos and kidnappers these days, but when I was young, it was a lot more prevalent. Parents who are keeping their kids indoors in fear of the 'rising crime rate' are the same ones who grew up with their nana telling them to avoid the nonce down the street."

It's a different country, but I think this is probably true with gun crime as well. The free-access we have to information now as opposed to the past means any incident will be brought to the attention of the public. However, it's possible that incidents of gun crime were more prevalent in the past, it's just we had no means of learning about them.

The media makes money off tragedy and controversy. What's juicier than a story of a teen shooting up a school, or a mentally ill person shooting up a parade? All it does it make the anxious folk of the world feel they are living in the darkest period of history. They demand ridiculous changes, not realising that crime has and always will exist.

We cannot complete erase the circumstances that breed criminality. Depriving people of guns just makes them helpless, be it against their would-be attackers, or their own government.
 
Last edited:
You want to do something while having no idea whatsoever how to do it. There is no healing psychopaths. There are upper class criminals too. Economical status does not define ones character. Upper class criminals usually avoid violence because they have better means of enriching themselves illegally, meanwhile the poor ones need to resort to robing, killing and trafficking guns/drugs.
[automerge]1727961523[/automerge]

How likely is this to escalate into a full blown regional war?
[automerge]1727961729[/automerge]

This "professor" sounds like a massive asshole and instigator. That said, he is right about Iran. It isn't that easy and simple to start a war with them.
He feels so superior while he's throwing those buzzwords around meanwhile Iran oppresses over 50% of their population and executes them for showing 2 cm of hair.

Your idea is "more gun".
Yes give everyone a gun so they all kill each other, then worldpeace is achieved:finally:
[automerge]1727965124[/automerge]
s possible that incidents of gun crime were more prevalent in the past, it's just we had no means of learning about it.
Whenever I hear people complain about society becoming more violent and evil videogames&movies my reaction is this:lawsigh:
They seem to forget that our ancestors had no concept if human rights, beat their wife&kids on a daily basis, slaughtered animals without anesthesia, publically executed their fellow citizens and prisoners of war, committed genocide for sport and collected body parts as trophies
 
Whenever I hear people complain about society becoming more violent and evil videogames&movies my reaction is this:lawsigh:
They seem to forget that our ancestors had no concept if human rights, beat their wife&kids on a daily basis, slaughtered animals without anesthesia, publically executed their fellow citizens and prisoners of war, committed genocide for sport and collected body parts as trophies
This echoes my own opinions on the matter. The rate of criminality is not increasing - nor is the depravity of the crimes being committed.

A lot of the time it is simply anxious, soft-hearted people who make such comments. Sometimes they're simply too kind, or perhaps naïve. My wife used to be somewhat like that in the past.

I want a safe world. However, if there will always be aggressive people who seek what they want through domination and violence, then giving law-abiding people the ability to defend themselves with lethal force if necessary is... a no-brainer?

I don't understand the argument that giving guns out to people will create MORE violence. Gun crime is not prevalent in many countries that allow people to keep guns (take Switzerland, for example). The issue with gun crime lies not in the gun itself.
 
'Safe' is the politically correct word for mass surveillance.
Nah. I don't want mass surveillance. We have enough of that already, thank you very much. Call me crazy, but I am fervently against "SMART" devices for this reason.

No, I meant... giving people the right to defend themselves. If defending others wasn't the fastest ticket to being put in jail and sued by a criminal for damages (for preventing THEM from hurting someone else), then we'd have more people standing up in the defence of others, I feel.
 
Call me crazy, but I am fervently against "SMART" devices for this reason.
People who peddle this smart bs should all be h**g
No, I meant... giving people the right to defend themselves. If defending others wasn't the fastest ticket to being put in jail and sued by a criminal for damages (for preventing THEM from hurting someone else), then we'd have more people standing up in the defence of others, I feel.
If you have to defend someone against a criminal just k*ll the criminal and tell the police that you are a criminal and that the real criminal was an innocent victim. Should be easier for you to get away with it:datas:
 
Reminds me of something my mum told me like 14 years ago.

She said: "There is more coverage of pedos and kidnappers these days, but when I was young, it was a lot more prevalent. Parents who are keeping their kids indoors in fear of the 'rising crime rate' are the same ones who grew up with their nana telling them to avoid the nonce down the street."

It's a different country, but I think this is probably true with gun crime as well. The free-access we have to information now as opposed to the past means any incident will be brought to the attention of the public. However, it's possible that incidents of gun crime were more prevalent in the past, it's just we had no means of learning about them.

The media makes money off tragedy and controversy. What's juicier than a story of a teen shooting up a school, or a mentally ill person shooting up a parade? All it does it make the anxious folk of the world feel they are living in the darkest period of history. They demand ridiculous changes, not realising that crime has and always will exist.

We cannot complete erase the circumstances that breed criminality. Depriving people of guns just makes them helpless, be it against their would-be attackers, or their own government.
I stopped watching news because of all the fear mongering. My mental health has improved a lot since this decision.
 
People who peddle this smart bs should all be h**g

If you have to defend someone against a criminal just k*ll the criminal and tell the police that you are a criminal and that the real criminal was an innocent victim. Should be easier for you to get away with it:datas:
why didn't i think of that:shocked:
[automerge]1727966208[/automerge]
:risitameh:
As we speak, the so called upper class criminals are intentionally provoking a world war so they can sell more weapons :risitameh:
How d**b are you?!
Are they killing with their own hands? NO! Down here they kill people by letting gangs loose and stealing money from health care.
 
People who peddle this smart bs should all be h**g

If you have to defend someone against a criminal just k*ll the criminal and tell the police that you are a criminal and that the real criminal was an innocent victim. Should be easier for you to get away with it:datas:
You don't like SMART tech either?

Unfortunately, the world doesn't work like that. Too many people sympathise with criminals these days. If I beat up a man for trying to rape a woman, I do not doubt that I'd be dragged through the court of public opinion as a monster, especially if the criminal had any identifiable "protected" characteristics.

People are very soft towards criminals these days, I feel. If I, god forbid, killed a man in the defence of another (and you better believe I would if it was for my wife or our future kids), there would be so many arguments about "proportionality."

There is a famous case a Swedish friend of mine told me. There was a man whose home was being attacked by five people. He shot and killed one of them. The judge, in the trial asked: "Did you tell them politely to stop?" As if that would have been a solution to anything. I feel so many people these days would ask similar questions. "Why didn't you stop attacking when you knew they were down?" the obvious answer is: "I didn't know what would happen if they suddenly got up."

Unfortunately, people do not empathise with the defender in these situations a lot of the time.
 
Top