quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: quizzicalkitten


Yes Italy is great all its violent crime is someone from some other countries fault... never someone whos native....[8|]

I don't think nationality of the criminals really matters in safety perception, so I don't really what kind of point you are trying to make.
If you want a different source here is a blog entry from an american expat in italy, you'll find a part on the subject of crime scrolling the page. Here is the list of all the crimes reported in italy in different years. f you want to calculate the rates for 100000 habitants you have to divide by 609, if you need some traslation hints: rapine = robberies, omicidi volontari = murders and omicidi preterintenzionali = manslaughers, violenze sessuali = rapes, there is no real correspondant to assoult as it's is part of a group of different crimes.

quote:



I as you again.... Why is a criminals life more important to you then an innocent bystander, why do you advocate for the rape or death of innocent people, as something thats okay because the criminals right to life is more important then the person doing nothing then being in their own home.

I do not advocate for any death or rape, you are advocating for death. I didn't say more I said they are both absolute that's different.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

quote:

ORIGINAL: smileforme50

It also took Jack, Gacy, Dahmer, Bundy....months/YEARS to kill all those people.....they didn't do it in a matter of minutes or just a couple of hours.

Right. They killed a million people in 100 days in Rwanda. You can't imagine THAT happening without guns, can you?

Actually, a buddy of mine was a Marine sitting on top of the roof of an American compound and watched about 100,000 or so of those deaths. It was all done with machetes. He said a very small Marine force with gun could have easily stopped it but there was no political will to do so. Let's see, who was the President then?

It was 1994 so Bill Clinton was president.

Ah, the same Buddy, being Africa a lot around then, was in Mogadishu during the Black Hawk Down event. He said the US could have kicked ass there as well but there was no political will. Was that the same President Bama?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: AQRMZ

I usually make an attempt to remain courteous and polite,

BUT, in the case of any individuals defending the rights of the criminal, and especially those of you that are not citizens of the USA, then,

YES,

I said criminal,

IF he is in my house, on my property, in my car, on the public sidewalk, at the park, or in ____________________ you fuckin name it;

AND

he is threating my life or the life and safety of anyone in my presence, and I can manage it, he is one fuckin sorry ass.

AND

remember: big can hurt little, hard can injure soft, sharp can poke holes,

OK you get the idea, I ain't gonna spell it out for you any more.

Any of you fucking pro-criminal, anti-gun jerks have a problem with that, then just sit back and make a will.

Cause we all will just shake our heads when it happens to you.


NOW, having said all of the above, if I could I would de-escalate the problem as I have done in the past;

I have and would again and then things would settle down as they have before.

Cops would be called or the dude would just bug on out of the place.



OH AND THANK THE COSMOS FOR THE "HIDE" BUTTON ON HERE. SAVES A LOT OF SPACE ON THE PAGE AND DOESN'T WEAR OUT THE SCROLL BUTTON SO MUCH.

Got it, anyone who is anti gun is pro criminal..... Fucking laughable

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

You suffer from the delusion [Etc.]

Once again, Bama ... hopefully this will obtrude on your consciousness this time: you are shooting the messenger, here. I've told you what the ethical principle is. Please try, as far as you possibly can, to shift your head past the point of 'You're either on the side of the attacker or the defender', mmh?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

It's one of those 'guilty until proven innocent' types of case...

Exactly. Guilty until proven innocent. That is the principle you are recommending as enlightened and civilized.

I've always enjoyed British humor. [:D]

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

It's one of those 'guilty until proven innocent' types of case...

Exactly. Guilty until proven innocent. That is the principle you are recommending as enlightened and civilized.

I've always enjoyed British humor. [:D]

K.

It's pretty much the same across Europe with minor deviations in detail.

If you killed someone, you killed them. That would be an undeniable fact.
You can't escape that accusation - you're guilty of that person's death (by whatever means).

Are you saying there's a right to kill someone, regardless?
That runs against humanity and basic rights to life - everyone's life.

That's a Jihad's type of thinking... if you ain't one of us, you're a dead man for no other reason than just being alive.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: AQRMZ

to FD

In Texas we have a Law that states that you can stand your ground, The Castle Law, you do not have to run from an attacker.

Common sense should dictate just how you defend yourself however.

It was just changed recently from having to run rather than to stand your ground.

Running might be sort of hard for a person with arthritis and other ageing conditions.

Most of these comments about guns seem to be coming from people that have never faced the situation.

Walk a mile in the other guy's shoes and then talk, other-wise hold your tongue.

OK?

Do you want to stir the pot?

You could talk about the 9yo that shot a guy with a Uzi (I think) in AZ.

Common sense, yes. We don't have to run from an attacker either.
But... because guns are virtually eradicated over here, your assailant isn't likely to be armed.
So, you don't need a gun to defend yourself.
I have faced an attacker but never needed a gun and it never entered into my head that I would even contemplate wanting one.
So yes, I've walked in the other guy's shoes; and no, I don't want or need a gun here.

And there's a thread about the Uzi shooting already.
If guns weren't so prolific amongst the populace it wouldn't have happened because there wouldn't have been any gun to shoot with in the first place!! [:D]


ETA: I'm intelligent enough to realize you're replying to me 'coz it tells me in the bottom-right corner of your post - no need to announce it. [8|]

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

I think half the problem with the US (apart from the proliferation of guns) is the police seem to take forever getting anywhere to any incident.

I've heard things on here that indicate it isn't out of the norm to wait 20-30 or more minutes for them to arrive.
That isn't the case here, usually.
Anything violent, once reported, they arrive within minutes.

In the case with my stepson wielding a steak knife and threatening everyone in a manic temper tantrum, the cops were here and in the door (front and back in a 'pincer' movement) ready with batons, cuffs and pepper spray before the wife had finished explaining what was going on - quite literally, within a minute or two.
And that wasn't the only incident with my stepson but each time any sort of violence was mentioned they were here within moments.

Another time, we reported someone sulking around our back gardens and again, within minutes, there were several cop cars, an armed unit, a police van full of policemen and a police helicopter (with searchlight) milling around the neigbourhood searching for the blighter.
And yes, they caught him two roads down from us hiding in a dog kennel I believe.

Admittedly there are the odd cases where some poor soul gets beaten by thugs but it's not that common here.
Despite what some band about as violent crime stats, many things are filed like that under those headings here that don't even appear in US stats because of the way it's reported and recorded which lead to unreliable and misleading figures.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrosaDom
If someone tries to kill someone else, the the aggressor forfeits his right to life insofar as ending his life is necessary for or a consequent of the defense of the innocent's life. Otherwise you are drowning in sea of moral relativism. Where Charles Manson has the same right to life as you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AQRMZ

Hello kitten, it is what it is with him because on this subject he is nothing but a total dumazz jerk.

He could be a rocket scientist at work but on this subject, total fule.

Sorry Italy dude, but it is what it is.

as to building a "better society", This country has spent 50+ years and countless $ and for what, you got Ferg. Mo on another thread. Check out the feelings in the St. Louis writings and see what people think and what some of them have to deal with.

"building a better society with education and eliminating obstacles to inequality " GOOD LUCK.

I have a url to a vid with 2 dudes on a porch being asked this question. "if you are in a car traveling 80MPH, how long will it take you to go 80 miles. They could not answer the question. and these are guys around 18 - 20 or so. """"building a better society with education and eliminating obstacles to inequality""" NOT!

OK but I digress.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrosaDom
If someone tries to kill someone else, the the aggressor forfeits his right to life insofar as ending his life is necessary for or a consequent of the defense of the innocent's life. Otherwise you are drowning in sea of moral relativism. Where Charles Manson has the same right to life as you.

That might be true for the US.
I'm pretty sure it's not true (legally and otherwise) elsewhere.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrosaDom
If someone tries to kill someone else, the the aggressor forfeits his right to life insofar as ending his life is necessary for or a consequent of the defense of the innocent's life. Otherwise you are drowning in sea of moral relativism. Where Charles Manson has the same right to life as you.

That might be true for the US.
I'm pretty sure it's not true (legally and otherwise) elsewhere.


ETA: even the most vile, despicable, low-life, criminal has a right to life just like everyone else.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrosaDom
...Which means your right to life is actually less than the criminal's. That is morally repellent, emesis-inducing, no matter which country has that as a governing principle.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
When you put the life of Manson on the same level as Tate and La Bianca...

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
When you put the life of Manson on the same level as Tate and La Bianca...

Who?? [sm=confused.gif][sm=dunno.gif]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

I went to a fun store last week I hadn't been in before. I found it very comfortable. Then, a local brought in a guy from Britain to show him a gun store. Everyone was nice to him and chatted nicely to him. Then suddenly he noticed all of the store staff was wearing sidearms. He started to get nervous. I told him I was carrying concealed and probably everyone else in the store was as well. (It's a little piece of Free American in California. But I'm not going to say where because the leftists will try and stamp it out.) When the Brit realized everyone was armed he literally ran from the store with no other words. The leftists train people to fear well in Britain.

lmfao....... Another dopey fucker, you do know we have a Conservative government dont you.

Nah, I didnt think so.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

Looked it up. Clinton again. So literally million of lives lost because leftist politicians didn't understand the proper application of applied firepower. Sounds like the leftist here that want black and white applications.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
When you put the life of Manson on the same level as Tate and La Bianca...

Who?? [sm=confused.gif][sm=dunno.gif]

The Manson family killed seven people over two days. Not one of them had a gun by the way. Can you honestly say that people who will cut open a pregnant woman and use her blood to write on the walls ha as much life as the pregnant woman? Can you honestly say that justice was served by them killing these people and going to jail rather than if the La Biancas (the first victims) had shot them, or one or two of them leading to the arrest of the rest?

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
When you put the life of Manson on the same level as Tate and La Bianca...

Who?? [sm=confused.gif][sm=dunno.gif]

The Manson family killed seven people over two days. Not one of them had a gun by the way. Can you honestly say that people who will cut open a pregnant woman and use her blood to write on the walls ha as much life as the pregnant woman? Can you honestly say that justice was served by them killing these people and going to jail rather than if the La Biancas (the first victims) had shot them, or one or two of them leading to the arrest of the rest?

Actually, I don't agree.
Personally, I think they should all be strung up by their tender bits with razor wire and left to the crows.

But.... I have to live with what we have.
Either way, I couldn't live in a culture that embraces weapons with such fervour that it eclipses all common sense.

C'est la vie! [:D]