Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Titoist

US Man kills Tenants over Snow Shovelling

178 posts in this topic

I can't believe you can kill someone over snow shoveling. What the hell is wrong with people? Can we please enforce a stupidity test to repopulate? If you fail you get shots so it kills your sex drive and if you still get someone pregnant you go to jail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Americans do not care about their constitution either. They allowed the right to bear arms to mean every redneck, psychopath, and non-militia can bear arms.

They also allowed such ludicrous rulings such as Citizens United. Additionally, need I remind you, the US constitution does not mention access to fundamental social services such as healthcare?

I agree with most everything you say. I too believe a gun was made for one purpose, and that is to kill. I too do also not buy these other arguments like "lets ban sticks now, sticks poke eyes out," but one thing does slightly bother me about your posts. When you make comments like "Americans" as if we all feel the same thing.

Please realize, you are arguing with someone who is from Tennessee according to their profile. That is the South here in the states. The South is known for a few things, guns is definitely one of them. He does not represent ALL Americans. Not even close. I am an American, and I think pretty much the exact opposite he does on this stance. So when you make comments like "Americans" that leads me to believe you may think we all think the same, act the same, have the same beliefs, when that is simply not true.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with most everything you say. I too believe a gun was made for one purpose, and that is to kill. I too do also not buy these other arguments like "lets ban sticks now, sticks poke eyes out," but one thing does slightly bother me about your posts. When you make comments like "Americans" as if we all feel the same thing.

Please realize, you are arguing with someone who is from Tennessee according to their profile. That is the South here in the states. The South is known for a few things, guns is definitely one of them. He does not represent ALL Americans. Not even close. I am an American, and I think pretty much the exact opposite he does on this stance. So when you make comments like "Americans" that leads me to believe you may think we all think the same, act the same, have the same beliefs, when that is simply not true.

Way to stereo type. Im not originally from TN,im originally from PA and lived in different parts of the country. My beliefs have absolutely nothing to do with my location. You may not care about the constitution but I know a lot of people do and no they all dont.live in the south.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Way to stereo type. Im not originally from TN,im originally from PA and lived in different parts of the country. My beliefs have absolutely nothing to do with my location.

Your damn right I stereotype. Stereotypes exist for a reason, as a lot of times they happen to be true.

And your beliefs may not have a lot to do with your location, but your location definitely could reinforce your beliefs. Southern states seems to be much more passionate and in to their guns then Northern states. That is just a fact, but call it a stereotype if you want.

With that said, plenty of people on both sides of the fence right in NJ. But you, or no one else for that matter, cannot tell me that the South does not have more of a gun heritage than the North.

And by the way, PA is pretty gun crazy too. Lots of forests and farms, so I would also say someone from PA is more inclined to support guns as well. A lot of it does have to do with geography.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We've been over this already and you seem to not know the difference between innocent people and a tyrannical government. You all voted for your disarmament, fair enough but the people of the united states will have no such importunity to vote either way. A government forcefully removing me of my right provided to me by the constitution is not my government anymore. American citizens are under no obligation to follow unconstitutional laws.

Firstly, the US Constitution is open to interpretation. Secondly, it can be amended. Either way law restricting guns are not unconstitutional, which means you can't choose whether you want to comply with such a law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So don't stereotype Americans, but it's fine to stereotype a large region of it. Makes sense.

For the record, I'm from a very rural area of the south, grew up around guns as my father favorite passion is to hunt. But I have no admiration for firearms of any sort and don't understand anyone's fascination with a piece of metal. I also don't hold any delusions that a civilization is going to overthrow a tyrannical government with a bunch of pea shooters compared to what armory the U.S. government has, nor could the forefathers have predicted any of that over 200 years ago.

In short, even as an American who grew up around a bunch of dumb rednecks with a 1980s pickup trucks with 30 inch tires and suspension lifts and 3 rifles hanging in their back window, I would be just fine without guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were to snap towards you, and I had no firearm, yet you ended up dead, what then?

What then? Then I'm dead and "confuscious say you go to jail bad boy!"

http://youtu.be/Fxwr5jfBjqI?t=1m49s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Wife just pointed out something I didn't consider:

She (and I) both feel sadder that the guy didn't end up killing himself in the process. Why? Because now we'll have to deal with this crap for days, weeks, months, the families will have to deal with it daily as the killer lives and their children are now gone, and society will have to foot the bill (as I noted I'd rather not do above) for his care and upkeep, the lawyers, the police, medical bills for the surivor, and so on.

/me wonders, what's it going to take to change things...

One major problem in this day and age. People only give a damn about themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your damn right I stereotype. Stereotypes exist for a reason, as a lot of times they happen to be true.

And your beliefs may not have a lot to do with your location, but your location definitely could reinforce your beliefs. Southern states seems to be much more passionate and in to their guns then Northern states. That is just a fact, but call it a stereotype if you want.

With that said, plenty of people on both sides of the fence right in NJ. But you, or no one else for that matter, cannot tell me that the South does not have more of a gun heritage than the North.

And by the way, PA is pretty gun crazy too. Lots of forests and farms, so I would also say someone from PA is more inclined to support guns as well. A lot of it does have to do with geography.

You stereotype people? Manson was white, therefore all Whites are bad? Martin Luther King was Black so then all Blacks are Good? Bin Ladin was an Arab so then all Arabs are terrorists? What do you see when you look in a mirror?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I strongly disagree. He should spend the rest of his life in jail, where he can reflect on his despicable actions. The death penalty has no place in a modern, civilised society.

No death penalty does make sense when properly administered. In cases like this for example. If it were proven to be accidental then death penalty isn't warranted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name=theyarecomingforyou' timestamp='135722558

post='595430234]

Firstly, the US Constitution is open to interpretation. Secondly, it can be amended. Either way law restricting guns are not unconstitutional, which means you can't choose whether you want to comply with such a law.

what part of shall not be infringed do you not understand. I guess we should change the first amendment too. I mean obvisously you disagree with me and hate me so why dont you just silence me if the amendments can be amended.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You stereotype people? Manson was white, therefore all Whites are bad? Martin Luther King was Black so then all Blacks are Good? Bin Ladin was an Arab so then all Arabs are terrorists? What do you see when you look in a mirror?

Stereo typing has its strengths and weaknesses. Sometimes its too broad and does group people into a group that they do not belong in. But overall its a necessary way to be efficient. Not just people but with anything, people, food, objects, ideas, solutions, etc. You take what you know, group up all your known experiences and images, and then look for familiarization. Racial profiling and stereo typing is something EVERYONE does, even if you say you don't. the easiest example.... if i said i was from Africa, what color would you guess me skin to be? What about the middle east? Your guesses are based on stereotyping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what part of shall not be infringed do you not understand. I guess we should change the first amendment too. I mean obvisously you disagree with me and hate me so why dont you just silence me if the amendments can be amended.

Infringe isn't the same as to interpret something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stereo typing has its strengths and weaknesses. Sometimes its too broad and does group people into a group that they do not belong in. But overall its a necessary way to be efficient. Not just people but with anything, people, food, objects, ideas, solutions, etc. You take what you know, group up all your known experiences and images, and then look for familiarization. Racial profiling and stereo typing is something EVERYONE does, even if you say you don't. the easiest example.... if i said i was from Africa, what color would you guess me skin to be? What about the middle east? Your guesses are based on stereotyping.

As a former Police Officer , I strongly disagree with you. Police do not use Racial Profiling, you may but you cannot speak for everyone. My guesses as you say would be made by my educational knowledge of that region and not by stereotypical behavior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a former Police Officer , I strongly disagree with you. Police do not use Racial Profiling, you may but you cannot speak for everyone. My guesses as you say would be made by my educational knowledge of that region and not by stereotypical behavior.

could be just interpretation, but i still believe its stero typing, in the end, you are still pre-judging someone based on your experience/knowledge because its natural.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your damn right I stereotype. Stereotypes exist for a reason, as a lot of times they happen to be true.

And your beliefs may not have a lot to do with your location, but your location definitely could reinforce your beliefs. Southern states seems to be much more passionate and in to their guns then Northern states. That is just a fact, but call it a stereotype if you want.

With that said, plenty of people on both sides of the fence right in NJ. But you, or no one else for that matter, cannot tell me that the South does not have more of a gun heritage than the North.

And by the way, PA is pretty gun crazy too. Lots of forests and farms, so I would also say someone from PA is more inclined to support guns as well. A lot of it does have to do with geography.

There's plenty of forrest in northern states, Stereo typing is ignorant at best. I took up gun ownership in the most liberal state of all,California. I don't need a state to tell me what my beliefs are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what part of shall not be infringed do you not understand. I guess we should change the first amendment too. I mean obvisously you disagree with me and hate me so why dont you just silence me if the amendments can be amended.

My point is, if the second amendment is interpreted literally then the right to bear arms applies only to well-regulated militias - that means there is no right to own them for personal use. Therefore even if all firearms were banned then your rights under the US Constitution would not have been infringed. Further, amendments can be made to the Constitution that invalidate previous amendments - in that situation your rights under the US Constitution also would not have been infringed. The problem comes when people start interpreting things to mean what they want, which is best exemplified by the extreme intolerance demonstrated by many Christians in America.

Society determines the values that apply to it and they evolve over time. It used to be acceptable to own slaves, yet that is now rightfully illegal. Now momentum is building to restrict firearms and if that trends continue then it's only a matter of time until firearms are properly restricted, which if properly implemented will improve the safety and well-being of the citizens of the country. Threatening to shoot anyone who tries to confiscate your weapons only demonstrates why people shouldn't be allowed them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is, if the second amendment is interpreted literally then the right to bear arms applies only to well-regulated militias - that means there is no right to own them for personal use. Therefore even if all firearms were banned then your rights under the US Constitution would not have been infringed. Further, amendments can be made to the Constitution that invalidate previous amendments - in that situation your rights under the US Constitution also would not have been infringed. The problem comes when people start interpreting things to mean what they want, which is best exemplified by the extreme intolerance demonstrated by many Christians in America.

Society determines the values that apply to it and they evolve over time. It used to be acceptable to own slaves, yet that is now rightfully illegal. Now momentum is building to restrict firearms and if that trends continue then it's only a matter of time until firearms are properly restricted, which if properly implemented will improve the safety and well-being of the citizens of the country. Threatening to shoot anyone who tries to confiscate your weapons only demonstrates why people shouldn't be allowed them.

Did you leave out part of second amendment on accident or did you leave it out on purpose.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

the Supreme Court ruled that the second amendment grants individuals the right to own and carry firearms.

Look up District of Columbia v. Heller

and McDonald v. Chicago

I'm sure the Supreme Court knows more about U.S law than you do.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you lot never get bored of this crap... neither side listening to the other, each just gets proven wrong about one thing and then moves on to the next.

Could go on forever.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you leave out part of second amendment on accident or did you leave it out on purpose.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Laws change to fit the times they are in, the second amendment doesn't make much sense in this day and age when you have police and the armed forces.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Laws change to fit the times they are in, the second amendment doesn't make much sense in this day and age when you have police and the armed forces.

The Supreme Court disagrees with you. We can't go changing laws every time you disagree with something. If we did i'd make them do away with speed limits, no one hardly ever follows them anyway.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Supreme Court disagrees with you. We can't go changing laws every time you disagree with something. If we did i'd make them do away with speed limits, no one hardly ever follows them anyway.

Amendments say the opposite, it was fine to own slaves until the 13th amendment, laws change to fit the times we live in.

The second amendment was created in a time where you didn't have a police force or armed forces where it made sense to have a well armed militia.

You are just hiding behind an outdated concept to justify owning semi auto rifles based on military weapons with high capacity magazines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you leave out part of second amendment on accident or did you leave it out on purpose.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

the Supreme Court ruled that the second amendment grants individuals the right to own and carry firearms.

Look up District of Columbia v. Heller

and McDonald v. Chicago

I'm sure the Supreme Court knows more about U.S law than you do.

I didn't omit anything, though I did assume that you?being an American?would know the entire amendment. The part you highlighted in bold does not change the interpretation that I put forward and in fact you seem to be suggesting that the beginning of the clause should be ignored entirely. I'm sure you're well aware that precedents can change, particularly if a more liberal justice is appointed. Nothing you replied had any material bearing on what I posted. You also entirely ignored the idea of a new amendment, though I'm used to you selectively replying to my posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Supreme Court disagrees with you. We can't go changing laws every time you disagree with something. If we did i'd make them do away with speed limits, no one hardly ever follows them anyway.

laws need to be changed all the time and do. For example, did you know in Tennessee Stealing a horse is punishable by hanging? What about that law? Do you support it?
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't omit anything, though I did assume that you?being an American?would know the entire amendment. The part you highlighted in bold does not change the interpretation that I put forward and in fact you seem to be suggesting that the beginning of the clause should be ignored entirely. I'm sure you're well aware that precedents can change, particularly if a more liberal justice is appointed. Nothing you replied had any material bearing on what I posted. You also entirely ignored the idea of a new amendment, though I'm used to you selectively replying to my posts.

I didn't omit anything, though I did assume that you?being an American?would know the entire amendment. The part you highlighted in bold does not change the interpretation that I put forward and in fact you seem to be suggesting that the beginning of the clause should be ignored entirely. I'm sure you're well aware that precedents can change, particularly if a more liberal justice is appointed. Nothing you replied had any material bearing on what I posted. You also entirely ignored the idea of a new amendment, though I'm used to you selectively replying to my posts.

There is nothing to interpret. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed how am I interpreting that to fit my agenda? I am taking it as it is put forth in the 2A. You are interpreting it to fit your agenda instead of taking it literally which is how it was meant to be taken.

laws need to be changed all the time and do. For example, did you know in Tennessee Stealing a horse is punishable by hanging? What about that law? Do you support it?

There are all kinds of silly laws that no one enforces, what's your point?
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.