White guilt?
31 Jul 2013, 19:25 PM
#1
Posts: 148
I feel responsible for killing Trayvon Martin.
31 Jul 2013, 19:33 PM
#2
Posts: 120
just do not give every idiot a weapon and no innocent or at least less innocent people will be shot.Has nothing to do with racism.
But is this forum not more to discuss about coh2 and maybe history ?
But is this forum not more to discuss about coh2 and maybe history ?
31 Jul 2013, 20:06 PM
#3
Posts: 1944 | Subs: 2
Nobody knows for sure what happened, but based on the terrible case the prosecution made and the consistency of the physical evidence with Zimmerman's story, using a gun seems completely justified. Taking guns away from law abiding citzens because of a few crazy people is like taking fast food away because fat people abuse it.
31 Jul 2013, 20:30 PM
#4
Posts: 3293
okay this is starting to get old and stupid.
Failure is always an option. 
It's a happy massacre?! (yes, yes it is!)
Caffeine illegal for WiFi's to ingest in 48 states, 2 colonies, and 1 providences. 
To make most awesome thing in universe combine Bears and Nicholas Cage! 
and remember kids, we didn't start the flame-war!
31 Jul 2013, 20:35 PM
#5
Posts: 627
What a fucking disgusting racist.
/s
Liberal media's fucking retarded.
31 Jul 2013, 20:45 PM
#6
Posts: 172
I think I love yogeurts' threads.
Fixed.
Liberalmedia's fucking retarded.
Fixed.
31 Jul 2013, 21:00 PM
#7
Posts: 525
i blame the russian anty gay law.
Disclaimer: any post made by this user should not be taken seriously, reader discretion is advised.
31 Jul 2013, 22:09 PM
#8
Posts: 148
What a fucking disgusting racist.
/s
Liberal media's fucking retarded.
Do you not live in the US? TMZ is a gossip show where they stalk celebrities.
You can't flim flam the zim zam.
1 Aug 2013, 12:14 PM
#9
Posts: 119
okay this is starting to get old and stupid.
Starting?
I have no idea whats going on and that's the way I like it.
1 Aug 2013, 23:15 PM
#10
Posts: 35
He's not even white brah's.
2 Aug 2013, 09:44 AM
#11
Posts: 486
There's no guilt like white guilt.
This isn't even close to a good comparison. Eating badly can only kill yourself, or be harmful if you're pregnant or giving birth (and that is really going into a greyzone of what is personal responsibility) a guy with a gun can shot someone else than themselves.
TL;DR: Fat food can eventually kill the person eating, guns can kill other people than the wielder.
Taking guns away from law abiding citzens because of a few crazy people is like taking fast food away because fat people abuse it.
This isn't even close to a good comparison. Eating badly can only kill yourself, or be harmful if you're pregnant or giving birth (and that is really going into a greyzone of what is personal responsibility) a guy with a gun can shot someone else than themselves.
TL;DR: Fat food can eventually kill the person eating, guns can kill other people than the wielder.
No spreading out, no fancy stuff, just smash through. Let's see how those degenerate sophisticates handle a healthy dose of pure unreasoning violence.
2 Aug 2013, 09:55 AM
#12
Posts: 107
There's no guilt like white guilt.
This isn't even close to a good comparison. Eating badly can only kill yourself, or be harmful if you're pregnant or giving birth (and that is really going into a greyzone of what is personal responsibility) a guy with a gun can shot someone else than themselves.
TL;DR: Fat food can eventually kill the person eating, guns can kill other people than the wielder.
Maybe its not a good comparison, but the point he's trying to make is. Because after all it doesn't make sense to take away a right from all citizens because a minority abuse it.
By your logic we could say that alcohol should be banned because drunk parents hit their kids, and look how Prohibition turned out...
"A wild Command Truck appears, It's super effective!" - Rogers
2 Aug 2013, 10:17 AM
#13
Posts: 1534 | Subs: 1
Guns are harmless and are not the problem.
People are the problem, people are idiots and giving idiots access to firearms is a bad idea.
Is it easier to control the idiots or the firearms?
People are the problem, people are idiots and giving idiots access to firearms is a bad idea.
Is it easier to control the idiots or the firearms?
2 Aug 2013, 10:37 AM
#14
17 Posts: 2838 | Subs: 3
Every time I drive through Florida, I think, "if I lived in Florida, I would also want everyone to die."
2 Aug 2013, 13:28 PM
#15
Posts: 3293
you can't control any of it thats how its is if someone wnats to get a gun guess what there going to get one whether they are illegal or not and guess who can't defend themselves when someone does.
Failure is always an option. It's a happy massacre?! (yes, yes it is!) Caffeine illegal for WiFi's to ingest in 48 states, 2 colonies, and 1 providences. To make most awesome thing in universe combine Bears and Nicholas Cage! and remember kids, we didn't start the flame-war!
2 Aug 2013, 14:26 PM
#16
Posts: 1534 | Subs: 1
you can't control any of it thats how its is if someone wnats to get a gun guess what there going to get one whether they are illegal or not and guess who can't defend themselves when someone does.
I believe that is quite probable in the states but in many countries within the EU most of the petty criminals don't have access to firearms.
This whole gun debate is hard for either side to understand and is mostly pointless unless you live in the states.
We have in the EU for the most part, freedom from firearms, the threat of a criminal carrying a fire is so minimal that it doesn't cross most of our minds, however in the states where the threat of a criminal carrying a firearm is real I completely understand the want for protection.
2 Aug 2013, 15:34 PM
#17
Posts: 391
I believe that is quite probable in the states but in many countries within the EU most of the petty criminals don't have access to firearms.
This whole gun debate is hard for either side to understand and is mostly pointless unless you live in the states.
We have in the EU for the most part, freedom from firearms, the threat of a criminal carrying a fire is so minimal that it doesn't cross most of our minds, however in the states where the threat of a criminal carrying a firearm is real I completely understand the want for protection.
Which came first? Personally, I'm not keen on the Castle Doctrine type law being enacted here. What would I do if my home was invaded? Probably use a bat or something, or MOST LIKELY, let them take whatever they wanted.
Anyway, if civilians are allowed to up-gun, then the crims will come heavy too. That's not a good place to be in, I don't think.
2 Aug 2013, 15:56 PM
#18
Posts: 1944 | Subs: 2
There's no guilt like white guilt.
This isn't even close to a good comparison. Eating badly can only kill yourself, or be harmful if you're pregnant or giving birth (and that is really going into a greyzone of what is personal responsibility) a guy with a gun can shot someone else than themselves.
TL;DR: Fat food can eventually kill the person eating, guns can kill other people than the wielder.
But I have at least 200 other items in my house that could be used to kill people.
2 Aug 2013, 16:48 PM
#19
Posts: 107
I think its stupid how the debate focuses on the states exclusively. In Switzerland for instance there are more than half a million assault rifles in private circulation (due to their militia system) and the Swiss still have the lowest rates of gun crime in Europe.
Mexico on the other hand requires its citizens to bear a letter from the ministry of defence in order to bear arms. Is Mexico a gun free paradise?
The fact that America has high rates of gun related homicides and relatively easy access to firearms proves nothing, because correlation is not causation.
Mexico on the other hand requires its citizens to bear a letter from the ministry of defence in order to bear arms. Is Mexico a gun free paradise?
The fact that America has high rates of gun related homicides and relatively easy access to firearms proves nothing, because correlation is not causation.
"A wild Command Truck appears, It's super effective!" - Rogers
2 Aug 2013, 19:17 PM
#20
Posts: 1534 | Subs: 1
I think its stupid how the debate focuses on the states exclusively. In Switzerland for instance there are more than half a million assault rifles in private circulation (due to their militia system) and the Swiss still have the lowest rates of gun crime in Europe.
Mexico on the other hand requires its citizens to bear a letter from the ministry of defence in order to bear arms. Is Mexico a gun free paradise?
The fact that America has high rates of gun related homicides and relatively easy access to firearms proves nothing, because correlation is not causation.
Very true, the fact is that America has huge section of society living in poverty, this in turn leads to higher gun crime rates, Switzerland on the other hand has very little poverty and thus less gun crime.
Mexico does not have the resources to enforce their gun control unlike richer nations like the UK.
The only truth is that at the end of the day when the zombies comes for us the people with the guns are going to survive.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
3 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.653231.739+13
- 2.839223.790+2
- 3.35057.860+15
- 4.592234.717-1
- 5.278108.720+29
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.645.928+5
- 8.922406.694+1
- 9.1120623.643+1
- 10.265138.658+2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
10
Download
1244
Board Info
783 users are online:
783 guests
0 post in the last 24h
0 post in the last week
28 posts in the last month
0 post in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49399
Welcome our newest member, violatemilky
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, violatemilky
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM