Voting

[Kombucha]

All you Americans, who are you voting for/ would vote for?

If you aren't American who would you vote for?

Seems to me most people here would vote for Kerry but I dunno

[ineedskillz]

Well Im a proud Canadian..But If I was an American Id have to go with Kerry.
Not because I think he would make a good president..But because I think Bush is going to start world war 3...

[Kombucha]

Has anyone seen www.betavote.com

Its interesting.

[pisshead]

i'm voting for badnarik, the libertarian candidate. he makes both kerry and bush look like the socialist UN loving whores that they really are.

he stands for the consitution and bill of rights. he's on almost every states' ballot, but you don't hear a word about him in the mainstream news. there's a reason for that too.

[psilocybin]

Definately voting Libertarian. No question in my mind, he is the right man for the job. Voting for Bush or Kerry would be the "lesser of two evils" and a waste of a vote. Check out Badnarik's plans for America - http://badnarik.org/plans.php

[Kombucha]

Whats wrong with the UN? Or socialism for that matter? I don't know anything about the Libertarians but if they make Bush look socialist they must be practically Nazis...

[Sinsemilla Jones]

Take a look at their positions on these issues -

War On Drugs
http://badnarik.org/plans_warondrugs.php

Civil Liberties
http://badnarik.org/plans_civilliberties.php

War In Iraq
http://badnarik.org/plans_wariniraq.php

Industrial Hemp
http://badnarik.org/plans_industrialhemp.php

Compared to the Libertarians, both the Democrats and the Republicans are Nazis.:eek:

[Kombucha]

Well the Libertarians have some good ideas some bad ideas (I just looked at their policies)

Legalising cannbis makes sense - its much less worse than tobacco or alcohol.
Legalising drug use would also mean that addicts could get help without fear of being charged, although dugs such as heroin and coccaine should be illegal to sell as they are so dangerous.

But what about their gun policies? What are they, psychos? Do they really think letting anyone have a gun will make the streets safer? Their idea is that if you give people guns they can protect themselves. That might be true in some circumstances, but in most, you wont be able to get to your gun. Then even if you do, you might shoot someone you didn't mean to, or shoot someone through misunderstanding. The person attacking you with a gun has a huge advantage over you.

And what if your children get hold of your gun?

In America guns are easy to get hold of and legal to own in most forms. This means all police and most common security guards have to carry guns, and often have to draw them on people because just about anyone could have a concealed gun. 16110 people were murdered in the USA in 2002.

Now lets look at the UK. Handguns are completely illegal. Rifles are only allowed if you have a very good reason to own one, and laws are tight. You can own a shotgun if you have a licence, but laws are still fairly tight. Few police carry guns, because they don't have to. Firstly they are trained to be effective without guns, secondly hardly anyone has guns. In the UK 1,048 were murdered. This includes an anomaly of 172 killed by a mad doctor (not kidding.) Yeah America has a larger population than the UK, but only about 5 times more. That does not account for the number of murders.

[Rooisme1]

Cant vote lib in my state.....not on the ballot

[XTC]

Ya, I believe only responsible people should own guns. Not anyone who can hold one. And whats the point of having an armour piercing automatic rifle? You do not shoot deer with that Ill tell you. I am voting for Kerry. First of all legalization of drugs will never happen even the slim chance of this liberal getting voted into the whitehouse. Trust me Congress wouldnt hear of it. I watched the debates and whatnot. I am on federal funding for school. College is nearly costing me 100 grand for 4 yrs. Say if I got stopped and charge with a little bit of pot on me, I am cut off of federal funding. Kerry wants to change this and he also wants to lessen the charges of people caught with some drugs. He also wants to go through with stem cell research which can help in solving many diseases and whatnot. And frankly I cant stand bush. He always dodges questions and criticism. THe only issue he gave a clear cut answer on was gay marriage which he is FIRMLY against. In my opinion Bush got to be in politics not because he is bright or smart or even educated. Its because he had connections. Well its time for him to get out.

[sawleaf]

Gun laws only affect law abiding citizens? What do they do to stop criminals from getting guns? Nothing. Therefore more gun laws only give an advantage to armed criminals. Plus who is the government or anyone to say how you can or can't protect yourself??? More restriction is less freedom. My vote went to Badnarik.

[Kombucha]

More restriction is less freedom?! How far are you gonna take that? "The government can't stop me killing people."

It is the governments job to protect people through law. Guns are obviously responsible for more loss of life than saving of lives.

You dont need to "protect yourself" with guns. If you get attacked chances are you wont have a gun on you. If no one has a gun, no one needs one to protect themselves. Who cares about some 200 year old right? You think the British are gonna try to invade America, and that ordinary people with guns could do anything to stop them? Be realistic, is it worth the loss of 1000s of lives just so you can have a right that doesn't make really affect you at all?

[sawleaf]

Do you have any idea of the current gun laws we have on the books? We already have tons of gun laws. The problem is that they are not enforced. People think new gun laws will stop violence. What we really need is harsher penalties for commiting crimes with firearms. How are more gun laws going to solve anything if criminals don't care about the law??? It's not the NRA members who are commiting crimes.

[Torog]

Do you have any idea of the current gun laws we have on the books? We already have tons of gun laws. The problem is that they are not enforced. People think new gun laws will stop violence. What we really need is harsher penalties for commiting crimes with firearms. How are more gun laws going to solve anything if criminals don't care about the law??? It's not the NRA members who are commiting crimes.
Howdy sawleaf,

You're right,there's already more than enough gun laws,better enforcement of existing gun laws and a well-armed citizenry is proven to reduce crime at every level.

Stay Safe-Stay Armed !

[pisshead]

and if bush only expands and creates more gun laws torog...does that make him conservative?

[pisshead]

More restriction is less freedom?! How far are you gonna take that? "The government can't stop me killing people."

It is the governments job to protect people through law. Guns are obviously responsible for more loss of life than saving of lives.

You dont need to "protect yourself" with guns. If you get attacked chances are you wont have a gun on you. If no one has a gun, no one needs one to protect themselves. Who cares about some 200 year old right? You think the British are gonna try to invade America, and that ordinary people with guns could do anything to stop them? Be realistic, is it worth the loss of 1000s of lives just so you can have a right that doesn't make really affect you at all?


care to back up the statement that guns are more responsible for loss of life than saving lives? the opposite is true. guns are used anywhere from 40 to 80 times more often for protection than to kill, depending on if you believe demopublicans or republicrats...

http://www.gunowners.org/fs0404.htm

you're incredibly ignorant of history. and how do you plan on getting rid of guns? anywhere strict gun control laws are in effect, that increases crimes. criminals who get guns (you're NEVER going to get rid of all guns) are more apt to break in to your house and shoot you because they figure you won't have a gun.

research any city that has strict gun control laws and compare it to cities that have lax gun control laws.

it seems logical that banning guns will make you safe, but it's just not true.

[Bro DZ]

But what about their gun policies? What are they, psychos? Do they really think letting anyone have a gun will make the streets safer? Their idea is that if you give people guns they can protect themselves. That might be true in some circumstances, but in most, you wont be able to get to your gun. Then even if you do, you might shoot someone you didn't mean to, or shoot someone through misunderstanding. The person attacking you with a gun has a huge advantage over you.



They are simply trying to uphold the constitution. Its our damn right to have guns.

but i voted for Bush because he was the only guy i partially agree with and had a good shot at winning.

[pisshead]

yeah, historically, governments don't disarm their own citizens because they love them and care about them, it's because they have some evil stuff planned, and they want as little resistance as possible.

[Kombucha]

Guns might be used more to protect yourself but that doesn't mean that people are successful in protecting yourself. I have already shown you statistics which prove that a country without guns is much safer.

Pisshead, I am not in the slightest ignorant of history. What's your point.

Bro DZ, it might be your constitutional right to own a gun, but it shouldn't be. It's stupid. Why have that right just for the sake of having a right. I'd rather lose the right to own a gun and be much safer.

It is a proven fact that you are more likely to shoot yourself or someone else you don't want to shoot with your gun than someone that is threatening you.

[sawleaf]

Kombucha who are you or anyone to say how we can or can not arm ourselfs? Just because you hate guns doesn't make you right. That is just your opinion. Nobody is forcing you to arm yourself, but don't hate people who choose to arm themselves and enjoy firearms.

[pisshead]

yeah, slaves were disarmed in this country and in rome. roman slaves needed their 'papers' to go from place to place, as did slaves in this country, as did native americans at one point...

rulers only want a disarmed citizenry so they can control them more effectively and track and trace them.

this used to be called tyranny, but today we call it freedom.

this is shown in history time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time again.

people like to forget history, mostly because they aren't taught it.

[Kombucha]

I don't hate guns, and in some ways it is your right to do whatever you want. But realistically you can't always do what you want.
In the same way, sure its more freedom to be allowed to drive at whatever speed you want through roads with schools in or whatever, but is it not worth forfeiting that right to ensure the safety of others?

Do you not see that if no one has guns, chances are you aren't going to need a gun to protect yourself with one?

If someone attacks you with a gun unless you have it in a holster on you how can you protect yourself with it? You could leave it lying around and easy to get to if you need it (although chances are it still wont help) then children can get hold of it easily.

I'm sure some people can responsibly use guns, but others don't. I think possibly a bigger danger than criminals with guns is paranoid people waving guns around anxious to protect themselves. Just about anyone can get a gun if they really want it.

It seems to me that you want to be able to own guns more as a matter of principle than anything else. Is that really the most important thing?

Pisshead, maybe some governments in history might have disarmed citizens for their own reasons but do you really think the American government has any evil deeds planned at home? Sure they might cause World War Three and destroy the planet and all of mankind but they wouldn't directly hurt Americans.

[pisshead]

uhhh, i most certainly know for a fact that the government has evil deeds planned for right here.

go to my thread called 'most of alex jones videos...' it's on page 3.

watch road to tyranny, and you'll see foreign troops working with our troops and police to round people up and put them in camps as they scream, "no, i'm a citizen, i have rights..."

and troops searching peoples' cars. we're being trained to accept martial law. and it will happen after another attack or 2.

when you look at the model state emergency health powers act and the anti terror and effective death penalty act and the homeland security act and the patriot act, or when you read official government documents or army war college reports, they tell you the evil things they have planned.

then they also know that 99% of people aren't going to read that stuff.

but watch that video if you want to. are you serious when you say they'll start world war III and not hurt us? are you kidding? look at the treatment of the troops with gulf war illness, or the tuskegee experiment, or the forced vaccination plans and the links to neurological disorders and the slush funds to protect the government from any wrongdoing with vaccinations.

i could talk for hours and hours and hours, hundreds of hours probably on the atrocities of the american government against their own people.

giving up our guns to them would be stupid. look at chicago. since a gun ban, crime and murder rates have skyrocketed. taking guns away from people doesn't protect them. it makes them more susceptible to crime. why on earth would you not want to be able to protect yourself from someone who wants to hurt you.

guns are used far more often for protection than to kill. they save millions of lives a year. sure, some people shouldn't be able to have them, but why punish everyone for 1 person's wrongdoing?

[Kombucha]

Is it really a punishment to lose guns. What I'm saying is, if NO ONE had guns, they wouldn't need to save any lives because the chances of someone pulling a gun on you would be tiny.

It works very well in the UK.

In Chicago the gun ban will be a bad thing as criminals can just get their guns from just out of town and bring them in to the city. However, if the whole country had a gun ban it would be a lot better. Would you not like to live without fear of getting shot? Just having a gun wont stop you getting shot most of the time unless you shoot them first. And chances are you wont because you wont know they're gonna attack until they have.

Anyway about the government, I don't think they plan to damage America, I think they probably just see it as fair that they can take some people's freedom and lives in exchange for what they see as the greater good. I'm sure there are some kinds of conspiracies but I don't think they are that extreme. Anyway, what good would having a gun do you in such a situation. Do you want to get into a firefight with trained (if badly) soldiers and apaches?