To be fair, there's been a few other people on the Cellar who've said that.

You give what you give because your arguments are all murder- and violence-friendly, Urb.

Thankfully, my morals just aren't what they could be - they could be anti-humanity, like yours.

At least I have a brain and twice your IQ.

Ignorance is bliss. :)

Here is Stephen King's take on Cho's writing.
Caution, there's a picture of a girl in a bikini on the top of the page.
http://www.wwtdd.com/post.phtml?pk=2193

Wrong. Everyone here but you knows that. Having no actual rebuttal, you resort to bitchery, thereby condemning yourself.

For instance: for a brain, you have a hoplophobic neurosis and no connection with the realities of armed self defense, as all our previous dispute has made clear. Never credit yourself with intelligence when you're busily refusing to use any.

Pro-self-defense is anti-humanity? You're over the edge.

I've decided to prevail shoud someone want to murder me. You aren't going to, and you're immoral enough to ask that I take your view of it. Hell no.

Your careful ignorance is lethal -- to you. My careful knowledge will aid me.

Not very effective resources, however. It's hard to really say, since a lot of college campuses don't report crimes to the local municipality, since they aren't involving the "townies", and don't make their internal crime statistic information available.

Things have probably changed, but on starting college, I went to a seminar in which the Campus police explained "how to say no to a rapist and survive," which primarily consisted of instructions on how to disable or kill your attacker. This was 1980 and the campus police were admitting they were powerless to stop crime on campus. (this was even a few years after they were allowed to carry their guns on the campus after 4pm. Yes, that was a real regulation. The place I went, the campus police were actually sworn police officers, not just security guards)

You must be wrong. I didn't read a word you said, but I'm sure you're wrong. Therefore, you're also a stupid cunt. That's the way it rolls around here.

Bye cunt fuck whore.

Ban me ban me, shove it up your ass and fan me.

:confused:

The "need" for money for crack or heroin or to establish primacy in a gang territory is not the same kind of "need" that Jean Valjean had when he stole the bread to feed his family.

Absolutely not. Avoiding situations that put you into danger is called "tactical thinking." Sometimes, despite our best efforts to avoid such, that dangerous situation presents itself. Cowardice would be complying with an attackers demands when you have the means at your disposal to deal with that situation.

It's carryover from another thread. She's not over her tantrum yet.

Wolf - I can't be certain but I think campuses do a lot more for student's safety in the past because I know for a fact there are more things you can do except learning how to disable someone with a gun or a knife. The number of crimes that could have been prevented with a gun is very low because of how college crime works. If you are trigger happy and paranoid the chances of shooting an innocent horny drunk teenager skyrockets since they will tend to violate people's privacy but not go far enough to actually hurt someone.

Yes, there is a difference but you can not assume that all the crime is from that.

I am sorry if I misjudged you but I see americans as crazy with the crime.

Correction.. I'm scared to death of the average Joe's ability to get a gun and use it.

Did they have this in mind when 230 years later armed gangs roamed the streets? Or when 1 in 5 women are raped? Did they expect crime in america to be so out of control by now that everybody needed guns?


I just left thank you :)


My dad moved here for greed only not because america is woohoo.
And you have friends from hong kong huh? What did they do? where did they work? Were they mid level?

Yes I was made fun of for my simple view before. But you complex guys who pretend to know what you are talking about don't really say anything do you? Your time is spent pointing out how simple or stupid somebody like me is.

As your second paragraph alludes to, its not the average Joe you should be afraid of. Average Joes aren't the ones committing most of the gun crime. And the armed gangs that you imagine are taking over America's streets at sunset are a fiction of Hollywood. Besides, gang members aren't legal gun owners now nor would they be even if the most draconian of gun control laws came to be.

And the founding fathers lived in a society substantially more violent and threatening than the one we live in now. Part of - a lot of- the reason America has prospered as it has is because the founding fathers were very distrustful of the government and gave it as little power as they could since government authority comes at the direct expense of individual freedom.

I mean who would you trust - the half-wit millionaire club running America today with its religious zealots, Marxists who don't even understand Marx, petty men fueled by greed, power brokers, men of limited intelligence, men who worship empty ideologies they don't understand or men such as Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and James Monroe - the forward-thinking visionary architects of the most powerful nation in world history.

If the clowns in Washington today don't want to screw up the little country club they have built for themselves at the expense of those they supposedly govern then they are advised not to screw with the one we citizens were given by the men who made this whole thing possible.

Yes, America might have been more violent back then but it is still different.

Back then no one could shoot up 32 people in a row. They could get maybe one and then they would have to reload for 20 seconds before they could get another shot off.

Back then a citizen was just as good as a soldier then the soldier's were if not better. Now, I would like to see a group of people armed with handguns stop a swat team or a tank. The army is much more powerful and a rebellion would end in a slaughter instead of a fight. The only way to fight now is extreme guerilla tactics that deal more with explosives then guns. Rifles would be somewhat useful but even I will fight to not have them banned.

Ducky you want to hear something you don't want to hear?

You are too young to judge such an issue as banning guns in this country AND you don't know enough about the United States to tell us to ban guns and call us "rampant" with violence. The truth is, you are ignorant in your opinions on the USA and guns. That's the truth. We aren't judging Hong Kong, but you are judging the US with little substantial evidence only by "your simple terms". And you think "americans are crazy with crime?" That has to be the most retardeded thing I have ever heard in my life. Like literally, my IQ dropped 10 points by hearing someone actually say that. Seriously. You are one of the most ignorant people I have ever read posts by. A 16 year old who knows how we should run OUR country when she doesn't even know what our country is about.

Case closed.



NEXT!