3

17 comments

[–] Boukert 1 points (+1|-0) Edited

Apart from my point above being about politicians who make a statement on record, then get confronted with their statement (held accountable for a lie), call it lies and "fakenews" on their turn, while there is obvious proof they made those remarks.

I'll engage in this debate a bit:

I've always found it funny the most predominantly anti-gun white people live in the whitest areas and countries. When people from the UK, Canada, or Australia criticize US gun laws I can't help but laugh. Your countries are roughly 90% white and don't actually have free speech.

I've always found it funny it's only Americans from predominantly white rural areas that stampede over any opinion differing from them towards gunlaws or any reasonable critisism/ discussion on them.....

I agree with the point @pmya makes somewhere in these threads.

We live in countries where we decided that having guns among general population is a bad idea. Guns are illegal (very hard) to get, gun possession has harsh penalties and police very actively pursue illegal guns or sightings of them. There are very, very few guns among our population, which is our normal state. Imagining gun distribution among our population is an abnormal idea dismissed upon by an overwhelming vast majority. I mean it isn't even an issue on the political agenda for any political party in these parts.

You live in a country with an abundance of guns and some sort of weird lovestory /fetish with them. Restricting guns in your normality would make you "vulnerable", as others would be a threat due to having the advantage, cause "guns are everywhere" and so automatically there are "threats". With such an abundance of guns, tis culture and guncontrol being a massive political issue, its an abnormality for you to think about restricting access.

Not judging or anything just trying to sketch viewpoints, as it is generally incredibly difficult to have a proper constructive conversation with Muricans about this issue. As our reference points are completely different and Muricans tend to go from 0-100 in an eyewink over this.

[–] revmoo 0 points (+0|-0)

Muricans tend to go from 0-100 in an eyewink over this.

Let me clue you in on a little secret: it's nothing to do with guns. It's about personal liberty and the gun debate is a manifestation of that. We watch from across the pond at you guys trying to do "knife control" and we see how the slope has already slipped. You can't ban guns, because I can make a gun with parts from Home Depot. Ask the aussie gangs who fabricate their own firearms. So you don't just ban guns, you ban guns, the tools to make them, pointy objects, 3D sintering/printing machines, etc etc. Americans realize this, and we realize that with all the bad that comes from free gun ownership, there is a lot of good that gets overlooked in the screaming matches between both sides. BTW I don't own a gun but the second somebody tries to pass a law banning them I'll obtain several. A huge portion of this country has the same mindset.

"Shall not be infringed"

[–] Boukert 0 points (+0|-0) Edited

Nothing bad intended but ^ is nothing I haven't heard already

Like I said In the EU this is not a political issue at all on the entire political spectrum, so our reactions to this issuee are very mild compared to the US debate. To Europeans the whole debate doesnt existHence the 0-100 remark that you actually confirm by your above reply.

On the American political agenda this is a very high issue, with a very heated debate, a lot of (fabricated) reasoning on both sides and much feefees involved. Muricans often put this issue in a very personal scenario (see above). "I need a gun to protect myself from danger/infringement/muuuuhhhh civil rightsSSSS", While Europeans look at the bigger picture and think "less guns = less danger" .Your general mindset "Gun = safety/freedom" our general mindset "Gun = danger" combined with "Governement is an enemy" vs " the governement is ourself" we will most likely never agree on this issue due to our different reference points.

It's about personal liberty and the gun debate is a manifestation of that.

This is one of the core differences in our perspectives, We actually view someone who is armed as someone who is about to infringe on our personal liberty.

We watch from across the pond at you guys trying to do "knife control" and we see how the slope has already slipped.

? I really fail to see any context here. and what do you mean by "you guys", I'm guessing the British (I'm Dutch myself) as you mention knives, but this all feels like a "whataboutism" and a judging jab at "Yurp" just "because" ....

You can't ban guns, because I can make a gun with parts from Home Depot.

So your reasoning is, you can't ban anything man-made? That's plain bullocks..... I have no doubt i could just get a gun on the black market surprisingly easy over here anyway, so i fail to see the point you are trying to make. The overwhelming majority of population over here couldn't even think of any reason why we would ever want to own a gun in the first place, and that is the whole difference in mindset between our continents. We just don't think in guns.

there is a lot of good that gets overlooked in the screaming matches between both sides

I am highly skeptical on any "good" from guns and i doubt you could ever persuade me to think otherwise, cause Like I've been trying to explain to you without judging either standpoint is; that our perspectives and care-levels are probably way to far apart for this issue to be discussed in a normal matter.

[–] revmoo 0 points (+0|-0)

I agree with everything you said. I also understand where you are coming from. You don't understand where I am coming from. It's impossible to win a debate against someone who's viewpoint you don't or can't understand. Keep that in perspective if you want to change minds.