The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 32    Average: 3.8/5]
120 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 9392
Rating: 3.8
Category:
Date: 01/02/13 07:44 AM

120 Responses to Let`s Take A Look At REAL Crime Stats, Thank You

  1. Profile photo of Pooptart19
    Pooptart19 Male 18-29
    2441 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 7:45 am
    Link: Let`s Take A Look At REAL Crime Stats, Thank You - Is the USA a den of crime due to guns or is it just politicians and the media manipulating the info to fit their agenda?
  2. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36673 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 7:58 am
  3. Profile photo of SnoopyBG
    SnoopyBG Male 18-29
    653 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 7:59 am
    Round 1
    FIGHT!
  4. Profile photo of DuckBoy87
    DuckBoy87 Male 18-29
    3240 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 8:04 am
    Cue MacGuffin to try to argue....
  5. Profile photo of incubus_inc
    incubus_inc Male 18-29
    977 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 8:17 am
    That`s my maaaaaan throwin` down.
  6. Profile photo of lauriloo
    lauriloo Female 40-49
    1803 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 8:18 am
    The ironic part of what that guy said is that the GOP has no interest in funding the things that the guy claims will fix the violent crime problems in big cities. They just want to put more guns into the system (and they not so secretly hope that minorities kill each other off). So, nothing will get done as long as the GOP has any blockade ability in congress. EVERYBODY knows better education and lowering poverty will help lower crime more than gun control would. BUT, we have to do what we CAN do, not what we WISH we could accomplish. Nobody thinks banning assault weapons will fix common gun crime. But it will lower the number of people killed in the mass killings. Maybe a small thing in the big picture but it`s SOME progress that doesn`t hurt anyone since nobody needs one of those weapons. People need to stop the "If we can`t fix everything, we shouldn`t try to fix anything" mentality. Same goes for climate change. It`s lazy thinking.
  7. Profile photo of piperfawn
    piperfawn Male 30-39
    4911 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 8:21 am
    Accurate datas?They are accurate like his mother taking anticonceptionals pills. Pears and oranges on the same balance don`t give a fair price.Laws and what is considered crime are differents in different coutries. And i hate his voice,he is an idiot.
  8. Profile photo of piperfawn
    piperfawn Male 30-39
    4911 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 8:28 am
    Aaand where he talk about "GUNS" crimes? He just talk about a non specified and genericals "violent" crime that are differently classified in different countries with differents laws,i repeat he is an idiot.
  9. Profile photo of Quackor
    Quackor Male 18-29
    2856 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 8:33 am
    why is he fapping an invisible richard?
  10. Profile photo of AntEconomist
    AntEconomist Male 40-49
    349 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 8:34 am
    I`m amused at how the gun controllers are quick to point to Europe (without citing evidence) as being a safer place. Then, when someone actually quotes data, they claim (again without citing evidence) that differences in definitions make the data irrelevant.

    It reminds me too much of the creationists arguing with the biologists.
  11. Profile photo of piperfawn
    piperfawn Male 30-39
    4911 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 8:38 am
    AntEconomist if you are referring to me i would like to remember that everytime i posted datas about this topic they was all numbers specificaly restricted to "guns crimes" and deaths due to weapons. So don`t try it with me.
  12. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 8:42 am
    Boy he nailed it at the end but it didn`t make up for his lazy number checking. England has a much greater Violent Crime Rate than the US because they include many more types of crimes than the US does.
  13. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 8:46 am
    Our penal system has a lot to do with our crime rate. In the US we do not rehabilitate our criminals we punish them.
  14. Profile photo of AntEconomist
    AntEconomist Male 40-49
    349 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 8:46 am
    Shoes and fits, piperfawn. You claimed that "violent crime" is defined differently in the US versus the UK. You didn`t cite evidence of this claim. Heck, I would have been satisfied with an unsubstantiated set of examples.
  15. Profile photo of piperfawn
    piperfawn Male 30-39
    4911 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 8:51 am
    AntEconomist There is a think called Google that is going around from some years...use it! Try to search law codes for the two countries for example, i am not your internet biatch.
  16. Profile photo of beternal
    beternal Male 18-29
    2589 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 8:51 am
    lol... this is like comparing obesity. England and America have comparable levels of obese people but America has a FAR higher level of morbidly obese people.

    This guy is right in what he is saying though... it`s easy to spout facts out of context. I`d be interested to know about the total number of unnatural deaths per 100,000 - including suicides, accidental gun-related, manslaughter etc etc.

    I wonder if these data include all those recent school shootings...
  17. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 9:00 am
    [quote">England has a much greater Violent Crime Rate than the US because they include many more types of crimes than the US does. [/quote">
    Not to pick out just you @markust, because this point is argued by many. Here is a fair, Internationally standardized comparison:

    Source

    While violent crime differentials are not as drastic as this man claims, here are some standardized stats (2004-2005):

    US -> Canada -> England and Wales
    Robbery: 0.6 -> 0.8 -> 1.4
    Sexual Assault: 1.4 -> 0.8 -> 0.9
    Burglary: 2.0 -> 2.5 -> 3.5

    So, while there is an argument to be made regarding a face-value comparison of these stats, in most cases (sexual assault is strangely high), England and Wales has a multiple of the US crime rates.
  18. Profile photo of AntEconomist
    AntEconomist Male 40-49
    349 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 9:03 am
    Sorry piperfawn, it doesn`t work that way. He who makes the claim has the responsibility for backing it up.
  19. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 9:16 am
    Here is the link you were looking for @AntEconomist. Page 55 first paragraph. England includes minor assaults such as pushing and shoving in their numbers. The US only includes aggravated assault in their numbers.
  20. Profile photo of piperfawn
    piperfawn Male 30-39
    4911 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 9:17 am
    AntEconomist Usualy if you have a curiosity you inform yourself about it,you do some research and cause you seem to be so spiteful i inform you that i said "classified" not "defined" as you say.
  21. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 9:24 am
    Thanks for the link @HumanAction. That is what I have been looking for.
  22. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36673 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 9:28 am

    @ HumanAction - Thank you for those stats.
    USA! is Number One!!!! {in sex crimes} But still #1

    U-S-A-! U-S-A-! U-S-A-! U-S-A-! U-S-A-!
  23. Profile photo of AntEconomist
    AntEconomist Male 40-49
    349 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 9:31 am
    Thanks markust!
  24. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 9:34 am
    The quote below is from Wikipedia. The same thing applies to England. A direct comparison of violent crime totals between the two countries does not work because the classifications are different. You need a report like the one HA linked to get a true comparison.

    "The reported US violent crime rate includes only Aggravated Assault, whereas the Canadian violent crime rate includes all categories of assault, including the much-more-numerous Assault level 1 (i.e., assault not using a weapon and not resulting in serious bodily harm). A government study concluded that direct comparison of the 2 countries` violent crime totals or rates was "inappropriate"."
  25. Profile photo of JuggaloReign
    JuggaloReign Male 18-29
    55 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 9:52 am
    @piperfawn If gun control really worked, then why did you have to ban knives after you banned guns? Was it because criminals just started stabbing people instead of shooting them? And didn`t your crime rate go up across the board? Just food for thought.
  26. Profile photo of piperfawn
    piperfawn Male 30-39
    4911 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 10:00 am
    JuggaloReign i am not from England,in my country for example there are also restrictions about knives,you can`t buy all the kind of side arms if you don`t have a licence.
  27. Profile photo of MattPrince
    MattPrince Male 40-49
    2220 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 10:09 am
    Nope.. sorry still don`t buy it.. HA`s link is just an un-official low volume survey, so its far, far, from a definitive source of truth and is subject to all sorts of vagaries, at best its an indicator of peoples *perception* of crime, amongst those that received the survey, and those that bothered to respond.

    The only reliable stat for comparison purposes is the key one that *is* comparable and unlikely to be mis-reported upon from official sources - homicide rate.

    USA has a much higher homicide rate than the UK, end of story. Even if its true that we have more break-ins (and I do not accept the Dutch report as evidence of that) I would still rather have more break-ins and less homicides.
  28. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 10:17 am
    The only reliable stat for comparison purposes is the key one that *is* comparable and unlikely to be mis-reported upon from official sources - homicide rate.
    Well of course it is - because it is one of the very few stats that lends itself to your argument. Seriously, you suggest that we must dismiss all other statistics (even though every reliable source concurs with the one I`ve provided) and that we must only use one of the very few taht support your argument.

    Does this seem reasonable?

    Have you considered the possibility that, just as it makes sense for us to have a higher homicide rate, it also makes sense for us to have a lower total violent crime rate?

    Guns dissuade attackers; this is an infallible point. If you are attacking someone and they pull a gun on you, you will stop your attack. Guns are also inherently more lethal - thus higher homicide rates.
  29. Profile photo of MattPrince
    MattPrince Male 40-49
    2220 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 10:23 am
    As for the video.. didn`t get past the second "darta". Just as well I can`t have a gun. I`d shoot every f*cker that pronounced day-ta like that. Stone, cold, dead.

    I mean.. where do you store your darta? In a dartabars?
  30. Profile photo of Bakcagain21
    Bakcagain21 Male 18-29
    560 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 10:28 am
    @AntEconomist I refer you to this former post where ample links and information went into explaining why the UK has the highest violent crime rate, because of the way it`s reported. And ignore McGuffin she doesn`t know what she`s talking bout half the time. Examples we include Affray as a violent crime....
  31. Profile photo of darkmagic14n
    darkmagic14n Male 18-29
    1625 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 10:30 am
    what he fails to mention is that in the UK, verbal attacks are regarded as violent.

    I`m also willing to bet this guy doesn`t NEED glasses, he came off very hipsterish
  32. Profile photo of MattPrince
    MattPrince Male 40-49
    2220 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 10:33 am
    "Guns dissuade attackers; this is an infallible point.."

    Er.. no. A gun could be a desirable object that actually caused the attack. A burglar might be breaking in, to steal weapons, for example.

    "If you are attacking someone and they pull a gun on you, you will stop your attack."

    If someone pulls a gun on me they better shoot me before I put their throat through the back of their neck :) Violent English Yob that I am.

    I have heard anecdotes that the streets of Belfast were safer from petty crime during the height of the troubles. More likely to get blown up, but less likely to have your pocket picked. There may well be a correlation, however I am surprised that you are willing to sacrifice lives for property.

    Perhaps its the perception that it will always be someone else`s life?
  33. Profile photo of Omphaloskept
    Omphaloskept Male 40-49
    181 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 10:34 am
    Ugh. I hate that IAB has gotten so political. Can`t we all just appreciate funny boobs and not post gun-lobby videos?
  34. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 10:42 am
    A burglar might be breaking in, to steal weapons, for example.
    Perhaps; however, if we look at the statistics I`ve presented and are widely available (not to mention supported as being true by several respected studies), then we find an opposing correlation. England and Wales (since we so strongly desire international comparisons) have nearly twice the rate of burglaries and robberies. Yet, they have far fewer firearms per capita.

    Therefore, your suggestion is not supported by the evidence.

    however I am surprised that you are willing to sacrifice lives for property.
    It is the American way. We have the right to defend ourselves and our property. What is a material possession but a piece of your life? Surely you work, earn an income, and spend your money. Therefore, isn`t a thief stealing part of your life?
  35. Profile photo of fancythat
    fancythat Male 30-39
    1950 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 11:14 am
    Jesus, this douche is annoying
  36. Profile photo of MattPrince
    MattPrince Male 40-49
    2220 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 11:23 am
    "supported as being true"

    Interesting.. yes these are really the responses somebody sent back. Doesn`t guarantee they are of any worth whatsoever.

    I wasn`t denying that their might be a correlation by the way - logic would suggest that there would be a deterrant amongst petty crime, but it would also suggest that there would be a step-up in serious crime. Bad guys wouldn`t just pull a gun on someone - they`d shoot them - rather than getting in a firefight.

    As for stealing your life. How much are they going to get? What percentage of your lifes earnings do you carry on you?

    I got mugged by a group of kids in Birmingham 20 years ago, took my laptop. If I`d had a gun I could have shot them in the back instead.
  37. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 11:33 am
    logic would suggest that there would be a deterrant amongst petty crime, but it would also suggest that there would be a step-up in serious crime
    As I hinted before, I agree with this. I believe that having a higher percentage of firearm saturation positively correlates with homicides rates in the US. However, they also negatively correlate with the far more common crimes of burglary, larceny, robbery, etc.

    What percentage of your lifes earnings do you carry on you?
    Is there an "acceptable" percentage? Let`s say someone does something to permanently reduce your lifespan by 30 days. Is this acceptable? If not, why then is it acceptable to steal?

    If I`d had a gun I could have shot them in the back instead.
    At which point they would have learned a very valuable lesson.
  38. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36673 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 11:39 am

    :-D I`m really enjoying this.
    Whenever the statistics don`t agree with you, then the statistics are wrong!
    LOLOLOL
    This applies to both sides, pro-gun and pro-gun control.



    Here`s me mixing in now,
    If crime is high you need a gun to protect yourself.
    If crime is low, then you have no excuse to take my gun away.
    so....STFU!
  39. Profile photo of MattPrince
    MattPrince Male 40-49
    2220 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 11:39 am
    "Is there an "acceptable" percentage? Let`s say someone does something to permanently reduce your lifespan by 30 days. Is this acceptable? If not, why then is it acceptable to steal? "

    Hmm.. taking this to its limits.. amount of life lost on here, fancy I`d be careful if I were you!
  40. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 11:45 am
    I got mugged by a group of kids in Birmingham 20 years ago, took my laptop.
    I think the more important question is: you had a laptop 20 years ago??
  41. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36673 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 11:50 am

    HA "you had a laptop 20 years ago??"
    Yes, there really was technology "way back then".
    We even had mobile phones and color TV !

    POWERBOOK - the laptop of 1993


  42. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32823 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 11:56 am
    The "war on drugs" is exactly like Prohibition in the 20`s and 30`s.
    Illegal booze fueled the "Gangsters" like Al Capone (and 100 others) who then caused huge amounts of crime.

    Illegal Drugs fuel the "Mexican Cartels" (and 100 other gangs like bikers and the Mafia) which in turn CAUSE huge amounts of crime!

    Legalize the drugs? Just like Prohibition the problem solves itself in a couple of years.
  43. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32823 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 12:05 pm
    and lowering poverty
    @lariloo: I know! Lets raise taxes! That`ll lower poverty for sure!
    And spend more money on "free stuff"! That`ll encourage people to get jobs!

    When a person makes MORE MONEY on welfare than working full time? Why on earth would they get a job? In Philidalphia (iirc) a single Mom (of 1) needs to earn 60K to break over the welfare income... any single mother earning "only" 40K is FAR better off on welfare.

    Banning guns does.... ZERO! No lowering of crime numbers, OR deaths. Look at Chicago and tell me again how "tough gun laws" lower crime...

    Sorry to pick on you, there`s several IABers who this applies to. @piperfawn for example...
  44. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 12:12 pm
    @HumanAction - "It is the American way."

    It`s Life Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Jefferson made a choice to take out Property.

    I am personally more preoccupied with the guy who was shot than the guy who lost his tv. And if the choice is between loosing a few dollars, a couple of hours of "my life", and my entire life, then I choose the dollars. Similar decisions are made every day, from medication, to transport, down to smoking.
  45. Profile photo of DuckBoy87
    DuckBoy87 Male 18-29
    3240 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 12:21 pm
    @klaxor, can property not correlate to happiness?
    If not, then why is there such a thing as "shopping therapy", where people buy stuff to make themselves feel better?
    It`s not an end all solution, but it still exists.

    If I work for something and earn it, is it not worth protecting?
  46. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 12:29 pm
    @klaxor

    It`s Life Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Jefferson made a choice to take out Property.
    Hence why I said "the American way" and not "the Constitutional way".

    Similar decisions are made every day, from medication, to transport, down to smoking.
    Indeed, the difference, of course, is that these are all choices. As such, your liberty is not being infringed upon. You do not have a choice if you are being robbed.

    I am personally more preoccupied with the guy who was shot than the guy who lost his tv.
    Personally, I would rather just be able to defend myself. Even in a utopian gun-free world, we forget that we are all inherently unequal. For instance, I am a 6`2" and 200lbs in good shape. Even so, I cannot hope to defend myself against multiple attackers. With a firearm, I have the capacity to protect myself; without, I do not.
  47. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 12:30 pm
    Then it`s the Pursuit of Property that is protected. Life still trumps ownership. The fact that Americans would argue otherwise is a HUGE problem in our culture.

    You do have a right to protect your property, but the idea that property equals Life is wrong. And its also a decision that most people would instinctively know. If confronted with a situation, most people would give up their property before their life, not the other way around.
  48. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 12:40 pm
    There are govt. smoking bans to stop the infringement upon other people`s health.

    Cars cause pollution that damage our lungs, but they are not illegal.

    These are societal decisions on both ends of the spectrum.

    Our constitution stands for the rights of all humans. Just b/c slavery was the "American way", doesn`t justify it. Govt. is there to protect those rights. Govt. is supposed to be one to stop against those multiple attackers. Sadly, that doesn`t happen, So we have the right to protect ourselves. But if one attacker has a gun, then you`re kind of screwed either way. Certain gun laws, not abolishment, would try to ensure that the criminal isn`t the one with the gun, at least for a higher percentage of the time.
  49. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 12:43 pm
    Why on Earth is he muddy-ing up the debate with facts?~!
  50. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 12:48 pm
    @klaxor

    Life still trumps ownership. The fact that Americans would argue otherwise is a HUGE problem in our culture.
    Individual liberty trumps lift. The fact that Americans would argue otherwise is a HUGE problem in our culture.

    but the idea that property equals Life is wrong
    I agree, though property is equivalent to a PIECE of your life (not the whole thing!). You trade hours (part of your total lifespan) for money. You then trade that money for property. Therefore, one must conclude that life is traded for property. Quite literally, you give part of your life for property.

    If confronted with a situation, most people would give up their property before their life, not the other way around.
    Obviously. Your property is a fraction of your total life. Therefore, giving up your property would be significantly less than your entire life.
  51. Profile photo of MattPrince
    MattPrince Male 40-49
    2220 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 12:52 pm
    ROFL . Oh my word..must be 17 or 18 years ago. Viglen Pentium 1 laptop specced to the hilt. Costing.. several thousand pounds!! Hosted an oracle database (ran Doom more importantly). Worked for 20 minutes before overheating.

    Don`t save money on taxi`s walking from work to the B&B carrying three grands worth of laptop was the lesson *I* learnt.
  52. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32823 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 12:54 pm
    If confronted with a situation, most people would give up their property before their life, not the other way around.
    @klaxor: You`ve got it backwards:
    If YOU chose to take MY property?
    Then YOUR life is worth less than MY property.
    The <criminal> is the one saying "life is worth less than money" because he RISKS his own life & liberty to steal someone else`s money.
    Get it?

    I can defend my home for 25 years and not one single person will be harmed!
    OR I can spend 25 years stealing stuff from other people... how many hundreds are thus harmed by my lifestyle choice then, eh?
  53. Profile photo of MattPrince
    MattPrince Male 40-49
    2220 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 12:55 pm
    "Why on Earth is he muddy-ing up the debate with facts?~!"

    Lol. A late happy new year to you all..
  54. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 12:59 pm
    There are govt. smoking bans to stop the infringement upon other people`s health.
    The is an argument for gun-free zones, if anything. Smoking bans only apply to areas, not populations.

    Our constitution stands for the rights of all humans
    Only US citizens.

    Govt. is there to protect those rights.
    I agree; government should protect your rights from being infringed upon. For instance, it should be illegal for someone to shoot you (and it is).

    Govt. is supposed to be one to stop against those multiple attackers.
    How? We cannot afford having police at every corner. Thus, we should enable citizens to protect themselves.

    You suggest that a gun is an unfair advantage. I suggest that a gun is a fair equalizer because unfair advantages exist naturally. The people who stand to benefit most are those with natural disadvantages.
  55. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32823 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 1:02 pm
    Property Crime is caused by GREED. More than all other factors combined, greed is why people steal.
    If it were "poverty" then why do rich people steal things too? Obviously having money doesn`t preclude being a criminal, correct? Bernie Madoff?

    And millions of "poor people" are as honest as the day is long! So what seperates a "poor honest person" from a "poor criminal"? GREED. The easy way out, the shortcut, the idea that "I have a right to what YOU own!"

    Why should I work for months to get something when I can stick a knife into YOU and take it! It`s just a few seconds of `work` for me, and I don`t care one iota about you bleeding to death or not. That`s the Government`s responsibility! Not mine!
  56. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 1:12 pm
    Nothing trumps life. It is at a minimum equal to liberty. If you want to get technical, it is mentioned first and has precedence. If you want to change it to "Life liberty and the American way" then you have to go into the constitution to change it.

    Constitution derives it`s laws from the inalienable rights of All Men. That`s why even immigrants have certain rights.

    The purpose of laws is to reduce the number of times it is an unfair advantage;i.e. in the hands of a criminal.

    And i don`t know about Canada, but in the US you only have the right to shoot if you feel that your life is threatened.
  57. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 1:25 pm
    Nothing trumps life
    Let us consider rape then. By your logic, a woman should give up her ability to defend herself with lethal force because the rapists life is more valuable than her liberty. Do you stand by your argument?

    You have committed yourself to the argument that life is worth protecting moreso than something temporary. Therefore, let us imagine two scenarios:

    First, a woman is attacked by a would-be rapist; she is armed. With her weapon, she kills the attacker and is not raped.

    Second, a woman is attacked by a rapist; she is dependent on a police force to protect her. Since the average response time is several minutes in her area, she is raped.

    You seriously this that scenario #2 is preferable to #1? You will never convince me of the same.
  58. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 1:27 pm
    If you want to change it to "Life liberty and the American way" then you have to go into the constitution to change it.
    Why would I want to do that?

    Constitution derives it`s laws from the inalienable rights of All Men.
    Are Japanese men protected from their governments by the US Constitution? The answer, of course, is no. The scope of the Consitution is limited to the entities which have the capacity to enforce it - namely, the US government.

    The purpose of laws is to reduce the number of times it is an unfair advantage
    That`s why concealed carry is an excellent option.
  59. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 1:41 pm
    Rape involves a detriment to life. To say that it is temporary shows that you have no concept of the issue.

    The US can choose to protect individuals from other govt`s that they feel have unjust laws. It feels that Japan has just laws.

    I`m not against owning guns.

    The problem with equating life to property is that you have to put a monetary value on life. Since all men are created equal, that value goes for everyone. That would be the only way to legally kill someone, if they stole something worth more than their life.

    So where do you put the value of a life, including your own? A Lamborghini? An Ipad? A slice of bread?

    Also, you justified killing for property as "The American Way". Problem is, even right to kill laws state that you can only kill if you feel that your life is threatened, not if a guy is stealing from you. That is the reason why there needs to be some licensing laws. People don`t even know the law.
  60. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32823 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 1:49 pm
    @HumanAction: Entire "Japanese" families were rounded up too. Women & children included.

    @klaxor: If a knife-armed guy breaks into my house and I defend myself (just to scare him, not even shooting!) with a gun? It`s likely that I`M going to jail for longer than him. Canada has some really stupid laws.

    "nothing trumps life"
    And people questioned what gun rights and abortion have in common? (on that other thread) Pay attention folks! Apparently some things DO indeed trump life...

    Apparently, @klaxor, you don`t understand the difference between "laws" and "rights" at all. The USA does not have "the right" to arrest it`s own citizens because the actions of another nation make it angry. It may be "legal" but it`s not "constitutional". Ok?
  61. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 1:50 pm
    Rape involves a detriment to life. To say that it is temporary shows that you have no concept of the issue.
    Rape, in it`s essence, is a very specific type of theft. It is the forceful taking of ones property without consent. Skirting the argument via some plea for empathy demonstrates a lack of counter-argument.

    By your logic, you suggest that the "raped but living rapist" scenario is preferable to the "dead rapist but not raped" scenario.

    The US can choose to protect individuals from other govt`s that they feel have unjust laws.
    Perhaps it is you who has misunderstood our founding fathers. It is called non-interventionalism.

    Also, you justified killing for property as "The American Way"
    I justified killing for the defense of an individual`s liberty. As is demonstrated in my rape scenario.
  62. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32823 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 1:55 pm
    Rape involves a detriment to life.
    So does holding a knife in my face and stealing my Timex. What`s your point? Is the trauma I feel less worthy of protection under Law than that of others? Does the amount of cash stolen determine if it`s a crime or not?
    If a criminal beats me and robs me, it`s less important than if he beats, robs and rapes me? Aside from the addition of a 3rd crime, it`s still bad to "only" beat and rob, right?

    So when the attack starts, how am I (the victem) supposed to the the difference? I should wait until rape starts before I`m "allowed to" defend myself? Just where do you draw that line?

    Me? (and @HA too I`d guess) say the instant the attack begins: defending ones property is identical to defending one`s life. ONLY in the aftermath can one tell the difference.

    20/20 hindsight is NOT a good thing.
  63. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6757 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 2:07 pm
    "In 2011 out of the homicides that were caused by firearms only 3.5% were caused by rifles"

    Most murders are caused by handguns? No s.hit. MOST murders don`t concern me, don`t pose a threat to me or my family, and don`t involve me.

    It would be nice if nobody got murdered. But a guy shooting his business partner, or a woman murdering her ex husband, or the myriad of other typical murders of one person killing another person don`t worry me. They don`t scare me.

    Discriminate murder, murder for a specific reason, whether it is shooting with a gun or stabbing or poisoning will never be stopped. My concern is indiscriminate murder and mass murder.

    What worries me is someone walking into a mall or a theater or a school where me or my children are with a gun and blasting away.

  64. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36673 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 2:14 pm
    "Our constitution stands for the rights of all humans"
    "Only US citizens"
    Not true, while aliens cannot vote, they still get the same freedom of speech, the right to assemble, and most of the others. Those are considered inalienable human rights.
  65. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 2:16 pm
    The US has the duty to uphold Constitutional Human Rights within its boundaries. That`s one of the reasons we can defend ourselves. We also protect other individuals within our borders. I wouldn`t want China arresting anyone on American soil.
    Japanese internment was unlawful. I don`t know where you go "the right to arrest citizens b/c another country..."

    Like I said, you can protect your life. If a guy pulls a weapon on you then yeah, go ahead and shoot to kill. But if you catch him stealing an orange from your store and he runs away, then no, it`s not lawful or legal. At least according to US Constitution.

    HA- I suggest you actually talk with a rape victim to get an understand of its effects, and should stfu until you do. It seriously drats up your LIFE. It`s not just theft, even in technicality. To say so GREATLY diminishes the anguish of a rape. You sound like a dumbass.



  66. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 2:19 pm
    @Gerry

    Not true, while aliens cannot vote, they still get the same freedom of speech, the right to assemble, and most of the others. Those are considered inalienable human rights.
    The question is, are these inalienable rights for aliens because it is mandated by the Constitution, or because they are provided by our government?

    If the Constitution covers all people, why then are Constitutional rights abused at Gitmo? This alone suggests that the Constitution does not apply to everyone.

    Perhaps a better explanation is that Constitutional rights apply to anyone in the US rather than US citizens. Even so, there are situations where this is not so (we cannot arrest a US citizen and deport them afterall).
  67. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 2:23 pm
    @klaxor

    I suggest you actually talk with a rape victim to get an understand of its effects
    My mother is a rape victim. Your turn.

    It seriously drats up your LIFE.
    ... and being stabbed doesn`t? Being beaten by a group of 8 adults doesn`t?

    It`s not just theft, even in technicality.
    It is a very specific form of theft, as I have already explained.

    To say so GREATLY diminishes the anguish of a rape.
    What about the anguish of being stabbed? Or beaten? Or attacked with acid? So on and so forth.

    You sound like a dumbass.
    This is what you`ve become? Someone presents an argument that you have no counter for and this is how you handle it? How disappointing.
  68. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 2:46 pm
    HG: My concern is indiscriminate murder and mass murder. What worries me is someone walking into a mall or a theater or a school where me or my children are with a gun and blasting away.

    Then advocate for better mental health care instead of attempting to usurp the 2nd amendment rights of the citizenry.
  69. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 2:50 pm
    HA-Your mom, not you. Like I said, have a conversation, and open your f*ing mind. I also have relatives, that`s why I don`t equate rape to property crime.

    You keep equating life to property. If you are attacked, go ahead and shoot. If those thugs beat up your tv, then sorry, it`s unlawful. Your tv isn`t a person, or equal to a human life.

    If you don`t like being called a dumbass, then don`t say dumbass poo
  70. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 2:52 pm
    And rape isn`t theft, it`s rape.

    that`s why it`s not called grand theft or auto theft.
  71. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 2:55 pm
    @klaxor

    Your mom, not you.
    You told me to talk to a rape victim, not become a rape victim. Are you now advocating that I become a rape victim...? I guess I am confused by your general lack of direction.

    that`s why I don`t equate rape to property crime
    Who did that? I never said "rape and burglary are the same thing". If I did, can you please provide the quote for it? What I said was, if you define theft as an unlawful and forcible taking, then rape is a specific subset of theft. This is reasonable.

    You keep equating life to property.
    No; I stated that, in order to obtain property, one must generally trade time. Time can be construed as a piece of your entire life (because it is). Again, I`m not sure where you got lost.
  72. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:00 pm
    If you are attacked, go ahead and shoot.
    This directly conflicts with your previous statement, which I used the rape comparison to disprove:

    Nothing trumps life. It is at a minimum equal to liberty.
    If you stand by this, then you must believe that a living rapist is preferable to a dead would-be rapist. In order to not conflict in your statements, you should redact one.

    If you don`t like being called a dumbass, then don`t say dumbass poo
    I`m fine being called whatever you wish to call me; I`ve been called much worse. However, I should point out that you are acting like a petulant child.

    In all of this, you have yet to state which of the scenarios you prefer. Perhaps you are aware that it is a catch-22. If you prefer the first, you concede to my point. If you prefer the second, you contradict yourself.

    So, go ahead and choose.
  73. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:01 pm
    that`s why it`s not called grand theft or auto theft.
    By this logic, an apple is not a fruit because it is not called an apple fruit.

    However, we know that it is both an apple and a fruit. Why? Because apple is a specific kind of fruit. Philosophically, rape is a specific kind of theft.
  74. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:07 pm
    As an 18-29 relatively athletic, not pretty male, I know that I will probably not be raped. Hence, I am not quick to use rape scenarios to justify my arguments about guns.

    You brought up rape as evidence against the idea that the right to life is superior to the right to liberty in the form of liberty to own property.

    Once again rape isn`t theft. Maybe to you it is, but according to the word of law it isn`t. It`s assault.

    This is why there needs to be some sort of basic training before you can own a gun. People don`t know the actual laws, and make poo up.
  75. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:14 pm
    As an 18-29 relatively athletic, not pretty male, I know that I will probably not be raped. Hence, I am not quick to use rape scenarios to justify my arguments about guns.
    As an athletic, 24 year old, 6`2", 200lb male, I know that I will probably not get pregnant. Hence, I should never use a pregnancy scenario in an argument? That`s pretty messed up logic my friend. Seems emotionally driven rather than driven by logic and reason.

    You brought up rape as evidence against the idea that the right to life is superior to the right to liberty in the form of liberty to own property.
    You stated that life trumps liberty; you put no clause on it stating that the scope of your claim was only property. Do you wish to add that now? I can come up with equally appalling scenarios using these restrictions if you`d like.
  76. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:16 pm
    18-29, I basically am a child aren`t I. That`s why I don`t talk about "the philosophical definition of rape" Also philosophy is fine for yourself, but it doesn`t justify unlawful action. NeoNazi`s have philosophy of ethnic cleansing.

    Also, what you are saying is that an apple may be a fruit but philosophically, it could be a vegetable, because it has leaves.

  77. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:17 pm
    Once again rape isn`t theft. Maybe to you it is, but according to the word of law it isn`t. It`s assault.
    Once again, I totally agree with you. Legally, rape is not theft. However, given the definition I`ve provided (and you have implicitly agreed to), rape can be philosophically linked to theft. I`m not sure where I`ve lost you.

    This is why there needs to be some sort of basic training before you can own a gun. People don`t know the actual laws, and make poo up.
    I agree. People such as yourself, with the seeming inability to seperate philosophy and legality should not own firearms. Such situations would be incredibly dangerous.

    So, on that regard, I completely support you.
  78. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:19 pm
    The problem is HA, that you are mixing your personal philosophies with Laws dictated by the constitution. I`m not arguing your philosophies, I could care less. What I am arguing is the word of Law.
  79. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:22 pm
    I basically am a child aren`t I. That`s why I don`t talk about "the philosophical definition of rape"
    So, because you are young, you cannot possibly have the mental capacity to think abstractly? I now find myself pitying you. Perhaps you simply lack the maturity to remove your emotions from logic?

    Also philosophy is fine for yourself, but it doesn`t justify unlawful action.
    Who said it did? I never said legality, did I? This was purposeful. Obviously, if someone is dicussing lifespan in the terms of property, the discussion is philosophical. I don`t know how that could have eluded you.

    Also, what you are saying is that an apple may be a fruit but philosophically, it could be a vegetable, because it has leaves.
    If you define a vegetable as something that has leaves, then philosophically yes. I am not sure why you would do this though.
  80. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:23 pm
    The problem is HA, that you are mixing your personal philosophies with Laws dictated by the constitution.
    Do you have a particular instance of such a situation? I would be happy to either show you where you erred, or redact the statement in which I mispoke.
  81. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:24 pm
    There`s also a difference between legality and law that you don`t seem to understand...
  82. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:26 pm
    There`s also a difference between legality and law that you don`t seem to understand...
    Would you care to elaborate?
  83. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:31 pm
    "I totally agree with you. Legally, rape is not theft. However, given the definition I`ve provided (and you have implicitly agreed to), rape can be philosophically linked to theft."

    "Rape, in it`s essence, is a very specific type of theft. It is the forceful taking of ones property without consent."

    It`s not your definition of rape that we follow.

  84. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:34 pm
    Holy Hell man. Law is linked to inalienable Human rights (LIfe liberty POH) that can`t be taken away, ever. Gitmo is unlawful, so is the redaction of Habeus Corpus.

    Legal code is what certain societies impose as mutual agreement. Walking on public property is never unlawful, but trespassing on certain public lands is considered illegal by society.
  85. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:35 pm
    Simple sentence structure my friend; this is where you`ve erred. Follow along...

    I said this:

    Rape, in it`s essence, is a very specific type of theft. It is the forceful taking of ones property without consent.
    So, what can we glean from this statement? First, we see that the definition of THEFT being presenting is "the forceful taking of ones property without consent." Next, we see that I claim that rape fits this definition. Therefore, I`ve concluded that rape is a specific subset of theft, given the definition stated.

    By the way, I consider a woman`s body and sexuality to be her property. They belong to the woman. A rapist forcibly takes these.

    That should help clear things up a bit for you.
  86. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:37 pm
    Holy Hell man. Law is linked to inalienable Human rights (LIfe liberty POH) that can`t be taken away, ever. Gitmo is unlawful, so is the redaction of Habeus Corpus.

    Legal code is what certain societies impose as mutual agreement. Walking on public property is never unlawful, but trespassing on certain public lands is considered illegal by society.
    I have absolutely no idea what point you are attempting to convey with these statements.
  87. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:40 pm
    Once again, I`m not arguing what you believe.

    Rape doesn`t "fit under the definition of theft". Rape is Rape.

  88. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:41 pm
    Rape isn`t just illegal, it`s a human rights abuse. Unlawful
  89. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:43 pm
    Rape doesn`t "fit under the definition of theft". Rape is Rape.
    If this is your new argument, perhaps you should be arguing that the presented definition of theft is incorrect. I would then ask you to present your own definition.

    The other possible argument you can have is that rape does not fit the definition of theft given. If this is your argument, you should elaborate. I have given reason enough to conclude that rape fits the definition I`ve provided.
  90. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:44 pm
    Rape isn`t just illegal, it`s a human rights abuse. Unlawful
    I know... I have never stated that rape is legal.
  91. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:51 pm
    Once again, I`m not using your definition. I`m not arguing what you think words mean b/c we`ll never get anywhere.

    You are confusing your definition of theft and illegal/unlawful actions, with the actual legal definitions and think that acting like a dumbass makes it ok.
  92. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:55 pm
    You are confusing your definition of theft and illegal/unlawful actions
    This is probably the stupidest thing you`ve said. I have clearly shown that my argument lays within the scope of the definition I`ve provided. I have also clearly shown that I do not consider the definition I`ve provided to be legally binding. At this point, you are being willfully ignorant.

    and think that acting like a dumbass makes it ok
    I take it that you have no counter argument again? This seems to be your go-to reaction in such cases... such a shame.
  93. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 3:59 pm
    Well shucks, let`s just take a look at legal definitions then - since you are so preoccupied with them.

    Theft - A criminal act in which property belonging to another is taken without that person`s consent.

    Rape - A criminal offense defined in most states as forcible sexual relations with a person against that person`s will.

    So, considering the legal definitions, isn`t rape also theft? Or, perhaps you are one of those people that believes a woman`s body and sexuality does not belong to her? Or, perhaps you think that all women are consenting?

    Yes, now I`m being an ass because you refuse to acknowledge your defeat.
  94. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 4:07 pm
    "Yes, now I`m being an ass because you refuse to acknowledge your defeat" - lol. stop being a dumbass.

    Stealing an apple isn`t the same as sex. You should`ve paid attention in sex ed.
  95. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 4:09 pm
    Stealing an apple isn`t the same as sex. You should`ve paid attention in sex ed.
    So you equate consenting sex with rape? Now I see why we disagree so fervently.
  96. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 4:11 pm
    lol... dumbass
  97. Profile photo of InTheNameOf
    InTheNameOf Male 30-39
    335 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 4:24 pm
    Sorry, I can`t take seriously anybody who can`t pronounce "data" correctly: dAta
  98. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32823 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 4:29 pm
    Japanese internment was unlawful. I don`t know where you go "the right to arrest citizens b/c another country..."
    @klaxor: YOU said the USA had the right. Internment WAS "lawful"! They passed a law and everything! What it was is "unconstitutional" which is why I say you cannot tell the difference & are confusing the two things. And thus confusing "rights" and "laws".

    You told me to talk to a rape victim, not become a rape victim.
    @HumanAction has refuted your error @klaxor, and you resort to insults and name calling? Amazing. Typical, but still amazing.

    And you`ve completely ignored my question: since you have no answer to it. Obviously.
  99. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32823 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 4:33 pm
    Legal code is what certain societies impose as mutual agreement. Walking on public property is never unlawful,
    Tell that to a female in Saudi Arabia! You obviously have NO IDEA of what you`re talking about.

    Fact: It`s ILLEGAL for a woman to drive a car in SA. Is it her Human Right to be treated equally? Yes! Is she? No!

    Thus "laws" and "human rights" are entirely NOT interchangeable.

    There`s also a difference between legality and law that you don`t seem to understand...
    Oh! The irony!
  100. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 5:03 pm
    @5Cats

    lol... dumbass
    This is why, in general, I cannot stand my generation.
  101. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 5:05 pm
    5Cats, I`m calling HA a dumbass b/c his only argument is, "I think this is what this means, so this is what it means", which is a dumbass argument.

    Japanese internment was deemed unlawful by Reagan. Govt can pass any laws it wants, doesn`t justify them. According to the Declaration of Independence, govts. are put in place to protect human rights.

    You said it yourself, it is illegal for a woman to drive in SA. SA is a monarchy, I don`t even think it has a constitution, they have different ideas about human rights. Is it right, I don`t think so, but, like HA said, our Constitution only applies within our borders. Once, again, "Japanese internment was unlawful. I don`t know where you go "the right to arrest citizens b/c another country...", Just saying "You said", isn`t really good enough

    Please don`t start using dumbass arguments to defend a dumbass
  102. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 5:09 pm
    "This is why, in general, I cannot stand my generation."

    We`re stuck together like siamese twins brother...dumbass
  103. Profile photo of Listypoos
    Listypoos Male 40-49
    3069 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 5:29 pm
    "Japanese internment was deemed unlawful by Reagan. Govt can pass any laws it wants, doesn`t justify them. "

    On the subject of the Japanese, the allies ruled during the trials after the 2nd world war that water boarding was tortue and and a war crime - those Japanese commanders they found guilty of ordering it were sentenced to death...... but when Bush decided he wanted to order the use of it...hey it`s suddenly not torture or a war crime any more. Yeah, governments can be fickle when it suits.
  104. Profile photo of Burton_Ian
    Burton_Ian Male 18-29
    815 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 5:40 pm
    "Put on their boots and go to those neighborhoods to figure out..." Boots with red laces, I`m assuming.

    His eyes are haunting
  105. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 6:40 pm
    I`m calling HA a dumbass b/c his only argument is, "I think this is what this means, so this is what it means", which is a dumbass argument.
    Actually, the most recent definitions I`ve posted are legal definitions. Yet, in spite of this, you refuse any attempt to refute my claims.

    I call you a petulant child because, unlike a grown man, when faced with overwhelming evidence desputing your claims, you do not admit that you are incorrect. Instead, you behave like a child throwing a tantrum.

    We`re stuck together like siamese twins brother...dumbass
    If I am a dumbass and we are siamese twins, does that not then imply that you are also a dumbass? Only a dumbass would unknowingly imply that they are a dumbass.

    (see? we can both do it... the point of doing so? I am not sure.)
  106. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 6:54 pm
    "If I am a dumbass and we are siamese twins, does that not then imply that you are also a dumbass? Only a dumbass would unknowingly imply that they are a dumbass."

    - Siamese twins aren`t the same person, dumbass
  107. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 7:06 pm
    Siamese twins aren`t the same person, dumbass
    Conjoined twins are also genetically identical twins. Therefore, it stands to reason that, in your suggestion, you are also a dumbass.

    My question is, are you more upset about being so utterly incorrect; or, are you more upset about being called out on it?

    This guy... what a dumbass.
  108. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 7:19 pm
    lol... genetically identical doesn`t mean what you think it means... dumbass
  109. Profile photo of SilverThread
    SilverThread Male 30-39
    3431 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 7:38 pm
    He`s right. Creepy, but right.

    I happen to live in one of those "pockets". Taking guns away from me as a law abiding citizen will neither disarm criminals, nor make me safer.
  110. Profile photo of Tekinette
    Tekinette Male 30-39
    273 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 8:10 pm
    Yeah let`s compare the US with the other rich country that has the highest crime rate than any other rich nation and use two different sources that have a different definition of "violent crimes" to compare them...

    Let`s ignore the UN Survey that uses a real data and where the US has more crime per 100k than the UK & France combined.
  111. Profile photo of thelonious
    thelonious Male 40-49
    3284 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 8:18 pm
    How do you post in italics?
  112. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36673 posts
    January 2, 2013 at 9:20 pm

    How do you post in italics?
    Like this but without the space after the 1st bracket
    How do you post in italics?
  113. Profile photo of r66tramp
    r66tramp Male 40-49
    674 posts
    January 3, 2013 at 2:13 am
    The guy in this video needs to hire a talking head if he wants an audience. Do-it-your-self jag off "data" videos need to be deleted if there is a "true" chance someone may listen and believe them. More smoke 2 blow up yer a$$. Kids, you need to learn how to filter this junk from yer minds when surfing the interwebs. Listen to the narrators words. Look & listen for the "IF" "LIKE" "AS" words. Those r words to blow smoke in yer butt.
  114. Profile photo of TheGuySmiley
    TheGuySmiley Male 18-29
    1243 posts
    January 3, 2013 at 4:33 am
    interesting, now i know how to type slantways on i-a-b.
  115. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 3, 2013 at 6:05 am
    @klaxor

    So, is your stupidty a recent thing or have you been stuck with it for you entire life? Just curious... Personally, I tried it once in the `80s but I did not like it.
  116. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32823 posts
    January 3, 2013 at 7:03 am
    Japanese internment was deemed unlawful by Reagan.
    @klaxor: Well! 40 years later it became illegal, eh? Nice to know. So until then it WAS legal, just like I said, correct?

    The US can choose to protect individuals from other govt`s that they feel have unjust laws. It feels that Japan has just laws.
    YOU SAID the USA has a "right" to arrest it`s OWN citizens based on the Laws of another country.
    Why do I keep saying "you said it"? Because YOU DID!
    Or do you need to read Wiki`s overview of what "Japanese Internemnt" was all about? You`ve been spouting off on YET ANOTHER topic you have no clue about, eh?

    @listypoos: One particular Japanese commander (in the Phillipines iirc) was executed because he didn`t stop his troops from doing crimes. Of course US troops raped, robbed & killed civilians too... MacArther? Not executed.
  117. Profile photo of thelonious
    thelonious Male 40-49
    3284 posts
    January 3, 2013 at 10:04 am
    Like this

    Thanks, Gerry.
  118. Profile photo of klaxor
    klaxor Male 18-29
    646 posts
    January 3, 2013 at 10:26 am
    @5cats - I don`t know how you`re misconstruing my statement. The US doesn`t have to extradite individuals if it feels that their Human rights would be violated. Once AGAIN, please tell me where I said that the US can arrest its own citizens b/c of another countries` laws.

    @HA - Is this what you have come to? Petty insults? I can`t say I`m surprised. I just wish things could have been different...
  119. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    January 3, 2013 at 10:38 am
    @klaxor

    Is this what you have come to? Petty insults? I can`t say I`m surprised. I just wish things could have been different...
    Dare to dream, my friend, dare to dream... But alas! It was never meant to be.
  120. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10732 posts
    January 3, 2013 at 5:17 pm
    Is this what you have come to? Petty insults?

    Look who`s talkin`

Leave a Reply