Shooting in USA-thread. (23 Viewers)

[Fake Melo]

While thats all a nice sidenote, the point remains that Russia had a much greater part in Nazi Germany's defeat, compared to the US.

Definitely agreed on that.

Eighty percent of German casualties suffered in WWII were on the Eastern Front.

- - - Updated - - -

that was quite an intervention, Mel

Wow man, I'm impressed

My friends call me a Nazi because of my interest in history

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[icemaη]

Definitely agreed on that.

Eighty percent of German casualties suffered in WWII were on the Eastern Front.

- - - Updated - - -





My friends call me a Nazi because of my interest in history

Or maybe it's cause you hate Jews

 

[Hust]

I disagree. The whole "Taken" franchise is built off of exactly that. Superhero movies are entirely built off the fantasy of the myth of the noble individual who can right his world around him as he cannot depend on his fellow men for security.

Arming yourself to protect your family is never a rational decision, given basic statistical outcomes, unless you are a drug lord or hitman. It's largely an emotional decision. That's not a moral judgment but rather just how things are with human nature and epidemiological probabilities.

Ration doesn't sell movies. Movie imagery does not profit from rationalism. But emotions? Absolutely.

You may not be thinking about Rambo and the invincibility of one when you're firing off rounds in the dark at a suspicious noise. But you would not be in that situation in the first place if your brain didn't feed off the same juice that jacks you when you see those movies.

So when did protecting your family somehow switch from actually protecting your family to suddenly emulating Hollywood?

 

[Quetzalcoatl]

Or maybe it's cause you hate Jews

 

[Martin]

So when did protecting your family somehow switch from actually protecting your family to suddenly emulating Hollywood?

You're not getting it. "Protecting your family" is the idea that you got from Hollywood.

You think it's a normal thing to think about, that probably everyone anywhere in the world does. They don't. See how deep it goes?

 

[CrimsonianKing]

You're not getting it. "Protecting your family" is the idea that you got from Hollywood.

You think it's a normal thing to think about, that probably everyone anywhere in the world does. They don't. See how deep it goes?

Americans want to keep their guns because they love guns. Simple as that. This whole thing about protecting your family is pure paranoia. And Hollywood might very well played a part on this.

So an armed fella gets into your house, having a gun is gonna protect you how exactly? I mean, If you have a family it's safe to say you gun will be kept locked away somewhere hidden and of difficult access so you don't run the risk of one of your kids ever finding it. So an armed guy is in your house, you own a gun but so what? What do you do? You tell the thief to wait a minute so you can go and get your gun from that spot all the way in the top shelf of your closet?

Unless you have it on you 24/7, I don't see how it "protects" you.

 

[swag]

So when did protecting your family somehow switch from actually protecting your family to suddenly emulating Hollywood?

You're not getting it. "Protecting your family" is the idea that you got from Hollywood.

You think it's a normal thing to think about, that probably everyone anywhere in the world does. They don't. See how deep it goes?

Well, Martin nailed it.

Own a gun if you like guns -- straight up there. But getting a gun to protect your family requires buying in to the Hollywood myth and illusion. Because the odds are not in your favor that it will do more good than harm. So you have to subscribe to the belief of exceptionalism ... of beating the averages and odds.

Sure, some people win the state lottery. Some people have made it rich off of Internet penny stock picks. But by and large, most people end up on the losing end of those deals. So you have to buy into the dream myth that sees only the upside of owning a firearm to protect your family -- while dismissing the many potential downsides. And on the averages, the negatives are greater than the chances of upsides. The difference is the illusion of control and the belief in beating the odds.

Arnold shoots 100 bad guys, hits nobody else in friendly fire, and manages to escape with his life and his family safe. That's the myth that we can all beat those odds.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Shouldn't there be some statistics that show how many attempted robberies/murders were unsuccessful due to the daily owning a gun? I'd love to see one that compares that statistic with the number of children who accidentally killed themselves with said gun.

 

[Bjerknes]

Obama should just STFU entirely. Everything he says is disgusting. Good to see him owned again.

http://cnsnews.com/blog/mark-judge/...ent=facebook&utm_campaign=b-james-woods-obama

- - - Updated - - -

It's about not relying on anything besides yourself ... neighborhood watches to the public safety system ... to take matters into your own hands.

Defending your family from a burglar has everything to do with the culture of independent justice, nobody-can-touch-me, etc. that Schwarzenegger movies catered to in America. We eat that $#@! up because we all like to think we are just like him in those movies. We put on the distortion goggles and dream we are superheroes even at the peril of our family members more readily committing suicide as a more realistic outcome of our decisions and actions.

As the brother of an officer, you should know they do NOT have a duty to protect anybody. Their duty lies in their response to a crime.

As for the movie stuff, what a bunch of bull. Seriously, if you're afraid of me having a gun in the house, that's pathetic.

- - - Updated - - -

Something is really off if you can't feel safe without a gun in one of the most developed countries in the world. I've lived in both high & low crime rate countries. While in Kenya I was fortunate never to have been robbed, while my friends who have, simply complied to the burglars. They mostly left without injuring anyone. In Sweden I've had my bike stolen & had my apartment's attic burglarised. In both cases I have never ever thought that if I had a gun things would have been better.

But you wouldn't think of having a gun to begin with... so... who cares?

 

[Osman]

Americans want to keep their guns because they love guns. Simple as that. This whole thing about protecting your family is pure paranoia. And Hollywood might very well played a part on this.

So an armed fella gets into your house, having a gun is gonna protect you how exactly? I mean, If you have a family it's safe to say you gun will be kept locked away somewhere hidden and of difficult access so you don't run the risk of one of your kids ever finding it. So an armed guy is in your house, you own a gun but so what? What do you do? You tell the thief to wait a minute so you can go and get your gun from that spot all the way in the top shelf of your closet?

Unless you have it on you 24/7, I don't see how it "protects" you.

Someone seen Jim Jefferies brilliant bit




The full long bit on the topic is so worth seeing, I know you have But for the rest in this thread who havent

 

[swag]

Shouldn't there be some statistics that show how many attempted robberies/murders were unsuccessful due to the daily owning a gun? I'd love to see one that compares that statistic with the number of children who accidentally killed themselves with said gun.

You won't get any federal funding to do such a study, however, as lobbyists will threaten their political constituents to kill it. It's really bad when even asking questions and trying to learn patterns in the data to improve everybody's lives gets sacrificed as part of a political agenda.

Obama should just STFU entirely. Everything he says is disgusting. Good to see him owned again.

http://cnsnews.com/blog/mark-judge/...ent=facebook&utm_campaign=b-james-woods-obama

IMO, that whole Christians angle seems like an attempt by the shooter to game the public into more fame. There's nothing to suggest the guy had a history of anti-Christian, or even anti-religious, activities ... unlike the guy who shot the Muslim students in North Carolina.

In other words, say what you will about Obama, but it looks like James Woods took the bait. People do these things to get in the papers, and James is falling for it.

As the brother of an officer, you should know they do NOT have a duty to protect anybody. Their duty lies in their response to a crime.

Yes and no. Departments will get publicly reamed for their failures in that department (see: Baltimore) and police chiefs lose their jobs over it.

As for the movie stuff, what a bunch of bull. Seriously, if you're afraid of me having a gun in the house, that's pathetic.

I'm not afraid of you owning a gun, but your family should be.

 

[swag]

Someone seen Jim Jefferies brilliant bit




The full long bit on the topic is so worth seeing, I know you have But for the rest in this thread who havent

"I'm a responsible slave owner"

 

[CrimsonianKing]

Someone seen Jim Jefferies brilliant bit




The full long bit on the topic is so worth seeing, I know you have But for the rest in this thread who havent

Guy's brilliant.

 

[Martin]

Shouldn't there be some statistics that show how many attempted robberies/murders were unsuccessful due to the daily owning a gun? I'd love to see one that compares that statistic with the number of children who accidentally killed themselves with said gun.

to your point:
http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-07-02/quietly-congress-extends-ban-cdc-research-gun-violence

 

[Seven]

While thats all a nice sidenote, the point remains that Russia had a much greater part in Nazi Germany's defeat, compared to the US.

Russia's war effort was based on the same thing as always: sheer numbers. It is not what you'd call an efficient tactic.

 

[Bjerknes]

You won't get any federal funding to do such a study, however, as lobbyists will threaten their political constituents to kill it. It's really bad when even asking questions and trying to learn patterns in the data to improve everybody's lives gets sacrificed as part of a political agenda.



IMO, that whole Christians angle seems like an attempt by the shooter to game the public into more fame. There's nothing to suggest the guy had a history of anti-Christian, or even anti-religious, activities ... unlike the guy who shot the Muslim students in North Carolina.

In other words, say what you will about Obama, but it looks like James Woods took the bait. People do these things to get in the papers, and James is falling for it.



Yes and no. Departments will get publicly reamed for their failures in that department (see: Baltimore) and police chiefs lose their jobs over it.



I'm not afraid of you owning a gun, but your family should be.

I was expecting this response. No point in wasting time here.

 

[lgorTudor]

Russia's war effort was based on the same thing as always: sheer numbers. It is not what you'd call an efficient tactic.

Nobody claims it was. Btw humans weren't worth shit anyway for Stalin and NKVS anyway so nothing of value was lost. Following this logic one could argue it was a very effective strategy by the CPSU. Losing nothing of value and winning the war. Oh and Germany's tactics weren't too brillant either. They always had the chance to produce 10 PzIVs for every slow, Blitzkrieg unsuitable, mechanically unreliable and overly complicated Tiger but they were obsessed with Übermensch philosophy and chose not to. They took war as a science contest and designed so many gimmicky vehicles wasting tons of recourses instead of building high numbers of solid, reliable battle machines.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

to your point:
http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-07-02/quietly-congress-extends-ban-cdc-research-gun-violence

That explains it!

 

[Hust]

Obama should just STFU entirely. Everything he says is disgusting. Good to see him owned again.

http://cnsnews.com/blog/mark-judge/...ent=facebook&utm_campaign=b-james-woods-obama

As the brother of an officer, you should know they do NOT have a duty to protect anybody. Their duty lies in their response to a crime.

As for the movie stuff, what a bunch of bull. Seriously, if you're afraid of me having a gun in the house, that's pathetic.

But you wouldn't think of having a gun to begin with... so... who cares?

James Woods - not bad for a guy with a 184 IQ but hey, what does he know right?

AND as a brother-in-law of a police officer: spot on about the crime response. He works in a state prison outside of SF and some of the guys he meets face to face I would be very surprised if he didn't keep a gun if he ever left Law Enforcement. They only act when a crime has been or is being committed.

And for Swag's Hollywood/Movie excuses - I can't wrap my ahead around the logic. On one hand he says "straigt up" for someone who has a gun because he "likes" to shoot guns but for the guy that wants to have one for protection in the obscure chance he would need it is somehow living out a childhood fantasy of a superhero.

 

[Bjerknes]

James Woods - not bad for a guy with a 184 IQ but hey, what does he know right?

AND as a brother-in-law of a police officer: spot on about the crime response. He works in a state prison outside of SF and some of the guys he meets face to face I would be very surprised if he didn't keep a gun if he ever left Law Enforcement. They only act when a crime has been or is being committed.

And for Swag's Hollywood/Movie excuses - I can't wrap my ahead around the logic. On one hand he says "straigt up" for someone who has a gun because he "likes" to shoot guns but for the guy that wants to have one for protection in the obscure chance he would need it is somehow living out a childhood fantasy of a superhero.

As if James Woods needs more publicity. But yeah, surely it's just because he wants to get a bigger paycheck.