The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / Law  % width posts: 1,615

The right to own guns: would you support such legislation in Poland?


Llamatic - | 144
21 Jul 2011 #331
America has been taught that guns are a necessity- it is no longer the case. This right stems from the beginning of colonization and is no longer valid.

Umm, no. We need guns now more than ever.

Poland doesn't need guns because they are a civilized society.

True Poland doesn't have the violent black problem the US has. For now.

Nobody needs a gun here.

Says you. If you don't want a gun don't have one. Don't deny others that choice.
AntV 2 | 167
21 Jul 2011 #332
America has been taught that guns are a necessity

I don't think America has ever taught that guns are a necessity. What we have always been taught is that the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution guarantees us the right to bear arms. That's quite a large difference, pip.

This right stems from the beginning of colonization and is no longer valid.

The US Constitution was written about 200 years after Europeans began colonizing the North American continent. It was the Constitution that made it a right. And, it was made a right for several reasons, one being to arm the population to fend off any government strong-arming and another was the ability to protect and preserve individual life and property. Although I do not own a gun, I strongly believe that gun ownership is as valid today as it was for the colonists and revolutionaries.

Nobody needs a gun here.

I'm sure there are Poles who disagree.

The fact is Poland doesn't need guns because they are a civilized society.

Poland certainly is a civilized society. Are you inferring that the US isn't a civilized society, pip?
isthatu2 4 | 2,704
22 Jul 2011 #333
Are you inferring that the US isn't a civilized society, pip?

Hmmm, murder rates comparable only to third world narco states............death penalty............3 strikes and life laws........private run for profit jails incarcerating kids for profit and backhanders to the judge........yup, far from most definitions of "civilized" .......................
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
22 Jul 2011 #334
Hmmm, murder rates comparable only to third world narco states...

Not quite the whole truth. The murder rates in certain communities are indeed high, and one can claim that these communities are a bit "third world' in themselves. Excluding minority violence, the U.S. murder rate is comparable to any other low murder country. For example; In Chicago, the other week-end, there were 5 murders and 18 others wounded. That was just the week-end. All 23 victims were minorities and all perpetrators were minorities. I'm also willing to bet that none of the guns involved were duly registered.

This creates a double problem for those minorities who work hard and want the best for their kids. They are sometimes seen as a threat by general society and they are disproportionately harmed by others in their own community.

I will add that legal owners of guns have a very low crime rate. That's common sense if one takes the time to analyze it.
brisrodney 1 | 18
22 Jul 2011 #335
Legal or not ,if the bad guys want them they will find them. End of story. Gun laws are only for honest people.
Llamatic - | 144
22 Jul 2011 #336
Excluding minority violence, the U.S. murder rate is comparable to any other low murder country.

Yep. Gun-grabber Libs never want to talk about this. They use the black violence in their effort to disarm everyone.

Chicago, the other week-end, there were 5 murders and 18 others wounded. That was just the week-end. All 23 victims were minorities and all perpetrators were minorities. I'm also willing to bet that none of the guns involved were duly registered.

A couple years ago gun violence was nuts in Philly, the black-on-black murder rate was through the roof. This led to much hymning and hawing and hand wringing and gun-grabbing efforts. Then it was revealed that a full 70% of the murder victims were themselves violent felons. Suddenly the hand wringing stopped. The silence was quite noticeable. I suspect most were like me and were 70% perfectly ok with the murder rate. Lol.
AntV 2 | 167
22 Jul 2011 #337
Hmmm, murder rates comparable only to third world narco states

The vast, and I mean vast, majority of murders in the US are connected to the drug trade. For instance, in my middle-sized Midwestern city the murder rate is rather high (we had 70 murders last year in a population of 300,000 or so). Very few of those were not related to the drug trade. Most of these murders are in concentrated areas. Go outside of those concentrated areas, that is most other areas in the city, and violent crime is low.

death penalty

I'm against it personally, but how does having the death penalty make a society uncivilized? BTW, not all states in the US have the death penalty something like 34 of them do, the federal government does not have a death penalty.

3 strikes and life laws

Again, you're talking about 24 states that have such laws, and most of them are administered loosely.

private run for profit jails incarcerating kids for profit and backhanders to the judge

You got me on this one, I'm not aware of kids being incarcerated for profit with kickbacks to judges. There are private-run prison facilities, but they incarcerate about 5 to 6% of America's prisoners. Hardly enough to be considered representative.

Ishatu, I'm interested in knowing what you define as civilized--I don't mean this smugly, I'm genuinely curious.
isthatu2 4 | 2,704
22 Jul 2011 #338
You got me on this one, I'm not aware of kids being incarcerated for profit with kickbacks to judges.

I have not got the details to hand,I think it was in Virginia/Carolina one of the states in that neck of the woods a year or so back now. This was "small town America" these were not ghetto kids being targeted these were in effect everyday middle class (white) kids being sent to youth custody for absurd reasons such as smoking cigarettes ,"only" getting a sentance of a couple of weeks but then having them extended for "bad behaviour" inside. It wasnt rumour,it was discovered and heads rolled,eventualy,but one does wonder if it took so long for alarm bells to ring when good kids were being abused in this way,how long for the kids from the wrong side of the tracks?

I'm interested in knowing what you define as civilized--I don't mean this smugly, I'm genuinely curious

Well, murder by commitee is not civilised by any standard is it? Bit too old hebrew for my tastes all this eye for an eye crap.

Example,white power nut job,violant man all his life shoots three muslims as "revenge" for 911,one victim survives and campaigns against his assailents death penalty. This is ignored,the wronged party is ignored in favour of "state revenge",no more,no less. Where is the "justice" in killing someone when his victim is clearly against it..................does that offer the "closer" for the victim that we here babbled about by supporters of the death penalty?

I mean,its not like the options were Death or Freedom, the guy was never going to leave jail alive for a double murder and attempted murder was he?

Whats more,watching the interview the guy did a couple of days before he was killed by the state it was clear he had been greatly affected by his victims forgiveness and campaign against his excecution, this was a changed man,if you like,not the same angry man who murdered. That shouldnt be a get out of jail free card,dont get me wrong,you cant just say "aww sorry 'bout that" and walk, but what angered me watchin it was just how usefull this man could have been within the Prison system working on re education programes etc. If talking to him stopped even one first timer inside wanting to come back then surely that would have been a far more rational and "civilized" thing to do.
pip 10 | 1,661
22 Jul 2011 #340
no, actually I don't think America is civilized. I think the idea of America is great- however, there is a reason the economy is in the toilet and the rich are getting richer and not paying their fair of taxes.

Any country that would let its citizens die because they can't afford health care is not civilized.
Any country that would rather invest elsewhere- such as China, all to save a buck- is not civilized.
Any country that allows manufacturers to pollute the environment while making money doing it -is not civilized.
Guns are just stupid. And the people that have them, unless Police or the like, are even more stupid.
Lyzko
22 Jul 2011 #341
Poland and the US have such completely different histories, it makes little sense to try to introduce into Europe a panacea for a uniquely American problem. After all folks, from whence did the gun "culture" arise?? It arose from the Constitution's allowing all US citizens the right to bear arms, as America saw itself as an isolated demoracy in need of its own protection.

European states are in no similar situation of being primitive, indeed fledgling, frontier democracies in imminent danger from neighboring attack, as was the US at the time the Consitution was being framed, e.g. by highwaymen, Native Americans especially, indignant at the white man's desire to drive them off their own land, etc..
Llamatic - | 144
22 Jul 2011 #342
Well, murder by commitee is not civilised by any standard is it?

The death penalty in all phases is actually conducted in quite a civilized manner.

rich are getting richer and not paying their fair of taxes

Boo-hoo. Not true.

Guns are just stupid. And the people that have them, unless Police or the like, are even more stupid.

Witness the childish mind of the gun fearing folks. Next shall we let third graders decide foreign policy? :s

European states are in no similar situation of being primitive, indeed fledgling, frontier democracies in imminent danger from neighboring attack

Maybe if Polish households had been armed the country wouldn't have been so easily overrun and conquered.

Native Americans especially, indignant at the white man's desire to drive them off their own land, etc..

Boo-hoo. It wasn't "their" land. They didn't own it; they were just squatters who took the land from those before them.

And today instead of the Indian threat we have the black threat.
pip 10 | 1,661
22 Jul 2011 #343
rich are getting richer and not paying their fair of taxes
Boo-hoo. Not true.

so you must be one of the stupids. Actually it is true. do your homework.
Lyzko
22 Jul 2011 #344
Llamatic, if not the Native Americans' land, then whose, pray tell?? Squatters?? Apprarently you're unfamiliar with the meaning of the word! A squatter is someone who lives in/on or occupies another's dwelling for the express purpose of settling there AGAINST the owners permission or consent. Who "owned" the Americas?? Obviously the Europeans didn't 'discover' the New World if when they landed there were already people ashore to greet them! They sure as heck didn't own it, even though they arrogantly persisted that this was the case.

Your diploma should be rescinded (....just as soon as you earn one!)-:)
nott 3 | 594
22 Jul 2011 #345
Lyzko: from whence did the gun "culture" arise?? It arose from the Constitution's allowing all US citizens the right to bear arms

Gun culture arose from the development of mass production of reliable and relatively cheap firearms. And it died, where it died, as a result of state regulation. In Poland, firearms regulation was first introduced by the tzarist regime after the January Uprising. And if I am not mistaken, this was the first regulation of this kind in Europe.

Now look at this:
"Crime was, by today's standards, remarkably low. Yet anyone could walk into one of numerous shops and buy a revolver. The fashionable Wembley-Green could be had blued or in nickel plate, with an ivory or mother-of-pearl handle. Edwardian Britain was an armoured country, even after the Pistols Act of 1903 thoughtfully banned sales of handguns to people under eighteen or 'drunken or insane'. In the 'Tottenham Outrage' of 1909, police chasing a gang simply picked up four pistols from passers-by for the pursuit; other armed citizens joined in."

from 'The Making of Modern Britain' by Andrew Marr, 2009. United Kingdom never had a constitution
Llamatic - | 144
22 Jul 2011 #346
so you must be one of the stupids.

Back atcha, Ms. 'Guns are poopy heads'. Lol.

Actually it is true. do your homework.

Umm, no. That's just a Leftist Socialist lie that gets repeated by simpletons. The truth is that the wealthy already pay more than their "fair share" while consuming the least. In fact, the bottom 50% pay almost nothing to keep this joint running.

Who "owned" the Americas??

Certainly not the Injuns.

One real threat to America is that her reputation will be ruined online by such postings from ignorant racist pigs like Llamatic.

Boo-hoo. I already told you that being called a racist by an apologist is like being called an idiot by a moron. You prove this over and over with your pathetic 'racist behind every tree' silliness that you believe with all your bleeding heart. Lol. <-- AT you.

he is so wrong with everything he wrote- just because you believe it, doesn't make it true

Ah, the simple Liberal mind... Again, right back atcha, hon.
nott 3 | 594
22 Jul 2011 #347
pip: just because you believe it, doesn't make it true.

Try: just because I believe it...
:)
pip 10 | 1,661
22 Jul 2011 #348
Umm, no. That's just a Leftist Socialist lie that gets repeated by simpletons.

actually, you are way wrong. It is the right wing propaganda telling you this. Do your homework. Who got the bailout. Middle America? I think not. Corporations and banks. Not the people that are now living in tent city.

tax cut after tax cut- American corporations are still investing abroad. My husband deals with these people daily. In fact, he had his best year this year from American investors. Good for Poland, sucky for you. I can count how many American companies have invested in Poland while shutting their doors in the U.S.

Too bad it will be too late for people like you who follow the flock.

As for the bottom 50 %- how can they pay if they don't have it. And of course the wealthy don't pay enough, so the tax burden is on middle America. Too rich and too poor all at the same time.

And then there are people like you who spout the dribble of the right wing.
AntV 2 | 167
22 Jul 2011 #349
I have not got the details to hand,I think it was in Virginia/Carolina one of the states in that neck of the woods a year or so back now.

Although I'm not familiar with this, it is definitely the exception and not the rule. Hence, it's not representative of the criminal justice system and this aspect of American civilized society. Matter-of-fact, since heads rolled, it proves that such dealings are contrary to what is acceptable in American society.

Well, murder by commitee is not civilised by any standard is it?

It's not quite murder by committee. Murder, at least understood by it legal definition, is the intentional taking of a human life without provocation or legal justification. The death penalty is a sentence of legal justification. You and I may disagree with its use as a legal justification, but it is not murder. Frankly, I find those who argue against the death penalty as a form of murder to muddy the legitimate arguments against the death penalty. For instance, do you think it just that Hans Frank, the Gauleiter of Poland, who oversaw the mass execution of Jews, Slavs, homosexuals, et al, was executed by committee? I think a civilized society is well within the clear parameters of justice to have executed Frank. One may put forward a compelling argument that executing Frank was an act to safeguard civilized society.

but what angered me watchin it was just how usefull this man could have been within the Prison system working on re education programes etc. If talking to him stopped even one first timer inside wanting to come back then surely that would have been a far more rational and "civilized" thing to do.

That's a whole lot of wishful thinking.

I think the idea of America is great- however, there is a reason the economy is in the toilet and the rich are getting richer and not paying their fair of taxes.

I accept your opinion that America is not civilized (I disagree, but your opinion is your opinion), but this thing about the rich getting richer and not paying their fair share of taxes is indisputably false. It is not even in the same universe as reality. The rich pay the vast majority of taxes in the US. Most earners (like myself) who make $50,000.00 or less pay little to no income tax--most is refunded to them when they file their taxes. I know of what I speak, I work in the field.

Any country that would let its citizens die because they can't afford health care is not civilized.

Please name me one person in the US who has died because they were denied health care. It's unlawful for a health care facility to deny help to anyone in need of medical care--the uninsured, as well as the insured.

Any country that would rather invest elsewhere- such as China, all to save a buck- is not civilized

Do you propose that American investors pull their investments from Poland? I certainly hope they do no such thing, I want Poland to grow economically--I love the place :)

Any country that allows manufacturers to pollute the environment while making money doing it -is not civilized

So, you have basically deemed virtually every country on the face of the Earth uncivilized.

Guns are just stupid. And the people that have them, unless Police or the like, are even more stupid

Not very convincing, Pip. I don't know if you have children or not, but let's say you do. Furthermore, let's say you live in one of these uncivilized uber-violent cities in the US. You and the kids are home eating pizza and drinking coca-cola while watching a movie. Your husband--a rich guy--is in his home office working on new ways to not pay his fair share of taxes :) All of a sudden, some thug busts down the door and threatens you and the kids. Husband--who is not only rich, but a gun owner--puts down his nefarious complicit tax cheating pen and gets his gun. Husband with gun in tote runs to where you and the kids are to find a guy who looks more like the incredible hulk than a rich tax cheat lurching toward your youngest child with a life-threatening object in his hand. Instead of your youngest being harmed physically, the malcontent is blown away by your husband pulling the trigger on his .45--like 99.8% of all American gun owners it's the first time he's shot somebody. Do you still think that that gun and gun owner are stupid?
Llamatic - | 144
22 Jul 2011 #350
actually, you are way wrong.

You're just wrong all over the place. And trying to pass your childish opinions as facts. You need to read what this guy has to say...

this thing about the rich getting richer and not paying their fair share of taxes is indisputably false. It is not even in the same universe as reality. The rich pay the vast majority of taxes in the US. Most earners (like myself) who make $50,000.00 or less pay little to no income tax--most is refunded to them when they file their taxes. I know of what I speak, I work in the field.

JonnyM 11 | 2,620
22 Jul 2011 #351
As for the bottom 50 %- how can they pay if they don't have it. And of course the wealthy don't pay enough, so the tax burden is on middle America. Too rich and too poor all at the same time.
And then there are people like you who spout the dribble of the right wing.

Exactly. Somebody has to pay for society - and the poor don't have any spare cash.
Ironside 50 | 10,939
22 Jul 2011 #352
try again, please

Nobles were armed in old Poland - before 1795.
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
23 Jul 2011 #353
A question for those who are opposed to personal legal ownership of guns.

Upon taking power, why do all dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Castro.......etc) immediately enact laws which confiscate guns from citizens?
After answering that question, should only governments be allowed to own guns?
isthatu2 4 | 2,704
23 Jul 2011 #354
so you must be one of the stupids.

nah, he's either just a harmless blowhard troll or a sad Uncle Tom for the mega rich...................coz odds on he aint one of them.

Upon taking power, why do all dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Castro.......etc) immediately enact laws which confiscate guns from citizens?

They dont. Quote them please, references,links anything substantial ..............
Babinich 1 | 455
23 Jul 2011 #355
there is a reason the economy is in the toilet and the rich are getting richer and not paying their fair of taxes.

The top ten percent paid seventy percent of federal income taxes. Forty-nine percent of U.S. households paid no federal income tax at all.
Llamatic - | 144
23 Jul 2011 #356
Of couse. All that boo-hoo about the evil rich not paying their "fair" share is a lying talking point repeated by the mindless simpletons.
ZIMMY 6 | 1,601
23 Jul 2011 #357
Upon taking power, why do all dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Castro.......etc) immediately enact laws which confiscate guns from citizens?

They dont. Quote them please, references,links anything substantial ..............

______________________________________________________________________ ___

Obviously, you failed to read my post number 5; I'll repeat most of it here:

"“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing."..............Adolph Hitler

"“If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves.”
....... Joseph Stalin

"I gave the categorical order to confiscate the largest possible number of weapons of every sort and kind. This confiscation, which continues with the utmost energy, has given satisfactory results.” ....Benito Mussolini

"“All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns..." Mao Tze Tung,

“Guns, for what?"
A response to Cuban citizens who said the people might need to keep their guns,........Fidel Castro

The above dictators (among others) instituted laws which prohibited citizens of their countries to own firearms. Try to do some research on your own.
Bzibzioh
23 Jul 2011 #358
ZIMMY: Upon taking power, why do all dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Castro.......etc) immediately enact laws which confiscate guns from citizens?

Isthatu2: They dont. Quote them please, references,links anything substantial

Of course they do.
youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dV1aYxCzepI

youtube.com/watch?v=dqQqYj-pbdg
Llamatic - | 144
23 Jul 2011 #359
Upon taking power, why do all dictators (Stalin, Hitler, Castro.......etc) immediately enact laws which confiscate guns from citizens

Of course. You'd think a place like Poland would know this by now.
Lyzko
23 Jul 2011 #360
The term is "Native Americans" or, better still, "Amerinds" (coined by the great anthropologist Franz Boas of Columbia U., round about 1904!), NOT "injuns" which is derogatory. If the US didn't belong to the original inhabitants, then to whom? Certainly not the white settlers who broke many treaties and literally took over someone else's territory, the claiming it as their own. Their thinking was that the original inhabitants, not being white Christians, somehow didn't count-:)


Home / Law / The right to own guns: would you support such legislation in Poland?
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.