Jump to content

Home

CagedCrado

Members
  • Posts

    416
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by CagedCrado

  1. It may sound cruel but it is fair that doctors can choose to not treat anybody that they dont want to. Doctors are running a business too afterall, if another business can deny service than they should also be able to.
  2. Fire arms are already used as a sport. http://www.olntv.com/showviewer.asp?sid=177&eps=155828 I have said this probably 20 times already, and every time it has been entirely ignored. You just dont get the term sport do you? http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sport Physical activity that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often engaged in competitively. One known for the manner of one's acceptance of rules, especially of a game..... Shooting at a target is certainly not going to hurt or kill anyone, perhaps instead of crying to ban guns you should consider crying for gun education to help people better understand to handle and operate their firearms and prevent accidents? Criminals already buy most of their guns illegal and a gun ban will not change this. Im sure everyone in the hood with an oozy will line right up to register their guns or turn them in because they are illegal. They are already illegal.
  3. Mccarthy attacked communists, which is an extremist form of liberalism just like socialism. You have fallen to petty name calling. I do not consider liberal to be an insult, just a resounding wow you are in that group of people who choose to deny what they are. The army does train discipline, to confuse that with propaganda is idiocy.
  4. My opinion of what a neo conservative is, a liberal, and a conservative are comparitively is whatever i say it is first of all. My view of the world is just as viable as yours, period. Liberal = socialist, george bush = mostly socialist. Simply because he does not agree with your viewpoint does not mean that he cant be generally the same politcal group as you. Liberal may be too harsh a term for george bush, possibly he is a progressive but none the less a socialist. His no child left behind act that he forced through congress is about as liberal as you get. Republican, but still liberal. There is no truly conservative party in the united states anymore, and the last mostly conservative was ronald reagan. The patriot act is also liberal, but was mostly lobbied by military/intelligence groups which these people are apart of and not the political groups that voted on it for fear of their own protection. At this time senator tom daschle and other top democrats had been victims of alleged anthrax attacks, which leaves me to believe that after these attacks they also supported the bill. There are many countries in the world that nobody can come into without explicity approval of high ranking officials in the government. Its like if i broke into your house without permission then claimed its wrong you keep me out since i was just dropping off something for you, but you dont know what that something and nor do you know me.
  5. There is nothing wrong with collecting guns. There are gun collectors that never even fired the weapons they own. It is no different than collecting swords or any other type of weapon. Just because something doesnt have a use doesnt mean that it is useless. And those weapons do have a use, sport shooting and target practice. There is no reason not to allow sport shooting with any type of weapon to test your mental skill and ability with fire arms. Guns are part of our culture, our society, our future and our past. Our weapons are what have made us a people and destroyed us as people. It isnt about self defense, it is about the right to do what you want to do. Also to the person comparing gun deaths from the UK to the US, there are more gun deaths in the UK per population, even if you consider you didnt take full information from the US. US population: 293 million (cia world factbook) UK population: 60 million that is a 5:1 ratio, so there should be 5 times more gun deaths in the united states, or about 50-60,000. Which there arent according to you. To change any of the first ten ammendments is a violation of my unalienable rights, and will be the end of my residency in the united states. To outlaw firearms is the same as outlawing freedom of speech. The same as if they outlawed computers or star wars or the media, or whatever you liberals do for entertainment. I dont own guns, but i know an infringement on unalienable rights when i see one.
  6. Baseball bats are identical to clubs. Clubs were designed to kill people, thus baseball bats are modified clubs. So they are a weapon to kill originally but were put to recreational uses. Exactly like guns.
  7. Because you, as liberals, are expecting the government to colonize space but for the government it is simply not profitable and will never happen. Companies will have no trouble exploiting resources from the moon and mars. The moon is made up of the same materials as the earth. Also the moon is filled with free power from the sun, as the moon has no atmosphere solar energy reaching the surface is many times greater. So not only would we be mining the moons surface for mineral resources, we would be getting them with no energy expense besides transport. The trip there is pricey but with big enough vehicles would be profitable, and also the fuel for these vehicles is infinite by using fusion reactors on earth to create power for the vehicles. There are a few factors not worked into that scenario, but if there is that great of a need for mineral resources that it becomes profitable that will happen, remember that 512 years ago people said we couldnt go around the world from europe to north america and back. 100 years later they were already done looting the indigenous people in mexico and south america and had a sizable empire. Human ingenuity is incredible when it comes to money. No, it doesnt, killing is killing whether it is painless or otherwise, and if you want to do away with your pet it makes no difference to me whether you do it peacefully or violently. So killing your pet is a completly viable option and is completly legal. In most states there arent even laws about shooting your pets. Food has ran out world wide many times before, even in recent history. New technology has always been needed to extract more food from the same lands. Wood has never run out as a resource globally, but salt mines have ran out before. The mines went underground in 13-1600's, so the technology changed to meet demand yet again. Not to mention precious metals, gold, platinum, etc. Gold is so valuable that any time it has been available people have flocked to it from anywhere that could get there. It isnt because we depleted it, but simply because not a lot existed to begin with. It is funny that in a less liberal forum people would accuse you of trolling. Your inane idealistics are no different from my capitalistic viewpoint. The simple fact is that eventually we will mine in space #1, there is no way that this will not happen since no time in human history have we not tried to excel above and beyond even our wildest dreams and succeeded. The only reason i dont agree with you is that you are simply planning on government mandates that will inhibit the united states' ability to compete with nations that dont have the same laws. Trust me, if the resource is there then someone will get it. That is the economic truth, and to deny it is idiocy. I have no problems at all with people trying to save the environment, its just when it comes down to whether a company should decide what to do with its money and what the government decides to do, then i will always defend the company since the government knows nothing and changes too slowly to adapt to anything.
  8. You accuse me of not having facts to back up my claims where as all of your posts are simply bull **** from my point of view as well? The media is entirely on the liberals (your) side in any occasion in which they can. The patriot act is a step in the right direction for weeding out terrorist, and if somebody told you that the NSA is going around arresting because of you saying or buying something, then you and them have serious problems. If the NSA wanted to arrest you, they could make up a reason. The only reason there is a patriot act now is to scare terrorists. Neoconservatives? so you are talking like ronald reagan who reduced social programs and thus reduced the government. Just because george bush is religious does not mean the entire republican party feels the same way. I am not religious and never have been, if you search for some of my older posts you will see i am not. (way older, they might not exist) Just because you convert to islam doesnt make you a terrorist, that is true, but did the websites that told you that even clearly state why they were arrested besides that? There is always atleast 2 sides to a story. The patriot act was probably more than likely pushed by the CIA or FBI, there is no proof that either political party had control over its passing. Also, neoconservitive is a new word for liberal anyway. I have stated multiple times that george bush is a liberal. Although john kerry is more liberal than the liberal level vomit meter even holds. but thats a different thread. Do you truly believe that president bush reads through a description of every single person who is banned from this country? In fact, i garauntee that he had absolutly nothing to do with cat stephens being banned from the united states. He probably heard about it at the same time or after you did, which hardly justifies the statement that its poor diplomacy on his part. Also on your statement about ted kennedy getting flagged, he probably donated money to a muslim group believed to be funding fundamentalism. There is also the possibility that it was a joke or a prank, politicians are people too
  9. Just because the media portraits people as anti war doesnt mean that most people are, possibly many people are, but the media is completly liberal. Also just because many people dont want something doesnt mean its not right. After all, if it wasnt for small groups fighting to get something there wouldnt be democracy anyway.
  10. Only a small amount of people can compete in professional baseball, but it is still legal. Besides, you can kill with baseball bats, so obviously baseball should be illegal. right.
  11. The 'right wing nutters' you are referring to are about as liberal as republicans can get. Get real, your rights havent been violated, normal people never get accused of anything and we all happily keep on living no freedoms impeded. If you read my post youd know that i said we arent missing out if this person is not here. It certainly wasnt right wing people who supposedly took away civil liberties, look at roosevelt and the new deal. Liberals have tried to hide that for years. He obviously wanted communism. http://www.rooseveltmyth.com/ Tom ridge didnt say islam as a whole did necesarily had anything to do with it, just particular factions. Dont bend peoples words to fit your liking. Visas and other passports can be revoked at any time for any reason and it has always been that way.
  12. Dont forget for sport also. People use guns for target practice, and there are championships to win money for being able to hit targets at great distances. Its like competitive archery. Like i said, it doesnt specify a particular regulated militia or another. Regulated doesnt mean by the government necesarily, it can be regulated by citizens according to the second ammendment.
  13. To me there arent races, it is wrong to claim to be better than any human being for such reasons. Slavery is wrong and nothing i said would make it to be right. Plain and simply you cant own a person, thus they cant be property and that means that what you said does not even apply. Also, if you have to twist peoples words to make a point, your point is not valid at all. I never said and never would say slavery is correct. That is why i made absolute distinction between man and animal and our resources.
  14. Spider Al you are a liberal whether you deny it or not. when i stated that the british and americans are both based on german training, i was not referring to special forces, which the americans have a larger number of and also a more advanced force. The american involvement is important when people make accusations that the british have less dying due to better training. Also to say american training is based on ideology is completly and totally wrong, the program is mostly physical and learning and certainly not a progaganda school.
  15. Did i ever say a full scale revolution EVER? no, i said a small scale revolution. Thus it wouldnt be full blown. Read.
  16. I did say why. Ill make the second ammendment blatantly obvious so you can tell what it says, and then you will know what i am talking about instead of being absolutly clueless. A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. Obviously you dont understand commas if you read this.
  17. Slavery is an entirely seperate issue, as you can not own another human being even if it is on paper. To compare an animal or a piece of land to a human being is foolish. (yes people are animals technically but we are far superior to all others, thus the term animal is used to express them and not us. Since most normal human beings reguard themselves as humans and not as animals, the term animal is hereby always referring to non human animals and the term human refers to all human animals.) Although the socialism/communism that liberals support hasnt had any trouble enslaving billions of people world wide.
  18. The national guard is the equivelant of a militia, it allows soldiers to benefit economically while serving in the military. Without the national guard the standing army would have to be much larger. So yes militias are very important to the armed forces, and most countries do have militias of some type.
  19. The government would never get away with supplying all of the united states' power, companies would protest it. Even if the government did take it over, there is still the fact that over 5 billion dollars would be lost every year, so i dont think that it would be a capable situation. Thats not even considering the general loss of power production yearly income, mineral resource factory and processing, and any other unaccounted for business that would be wiped off the face of the country, possibly 100s of billions of dollars a year. (also why government should stay out of peoples lives and especially companies. )
  20. I dont know or care what religion race or creed this person is. I dont care what race you are, because there is only 1 race and that is the race of human beings. I dont care if he is muslim, there are many muslims who are not terrorists. I simply dont care, i didnt say arabs who support terrorism should be banned, i said ANYBODY fairly clearly without any reguards to 'race'. Secondly, yes we will get along fine without 1 person being in the united states. I mean come on, this guy is not important anyway. Its obvious he did SOMETHING to get on the watch list, and if he is wrongfully on it then im sure he will eventually be taken off.
  21. there are commas in the second ammendment that you blatantly ignore. The militia and the bearing of arms are two seperate related things. The militia is regulated not the guns necesarily. It doesnt say 'in order to maintain a militia' it just says 'a militia'. Thus your ideology is flawed. If there werent commas you would be correct, but there are. So the militia is not important to owning weapons, it doesnt even say it has to be a government regulated militia. The simple facts are banning guns wont stop gun deaths. It wont stop murder either, if someone wants to kill somebody else there are plenty of other ways to do it and very much less obvious ways to do it since most other types of weapons are harder to trace. The UK has a ban on firearms yet has a higher knifing death toll. So people who want guns for sport dont get to have them, and people who want illegal weapons for crime will just buy them so banning guns solves absolutly nothing.
  22. Who says that many members of the army wouldnt support the revolt? Also small scale revolts are legal, they are called protests and or demonstrations. Banning alchohal DID start a civil war, in many cities the mob was more powerful than the government by far. In many cases, the mob was the local government. Thus a small scale revolution happened.
  23. We have ran out of resources in the past due to the fact we couldnt get to them or extract them. Actually you can have your pet put to death if you so wish, as long as it is supposedly humane. What do you call putting to 'sleep'? Also the government has no right to tell you what to do with something you own, i clearly stated that was my stance in the last post. Society would survive through either, but the point that harvesting resources would bring about climate change is foolish, considering the fact that the supply as it is currently has not totally outstripped everything, and by the time it does we will easily be able to harvest the moon as we have the technology now. We have hydroponic farms also, it doesnt matter what the climate is like for those and through cloaning we would have an endless supply of meat by this time also if we so wished. The simple fact is greed will drive companies to make money exploiting resources by any means possible, and as the earth runs out of resources they will just find another way. Same reasons brought about the plow, crop rotation, irrigation, animal domestication, iron, copper, steel, etc. All of this was direct result of resource shortages. My attitude is possibly unrealistic, but it is simply an ideal. Somewhere in the middle would be better. Your idea is also completly unrealistic if mine is.
  24. There is no proof this is the fastest in all of history by any means. Also when you say that humans are animals that may be true, but that also classifies you as a darwinist which believes survival of the fittest. When the other animals build vast cities similar to ours, build technology to destroy the world and harvest all of the resources, then ill accept that we dont own them. Secondly nature is a part of the planet that we own, its just a negative side effect of owning it. One that we will eventually surpass. It isnt the governments place to stop companies from exploiting the earth that they own anyway. If you own the mineral rights, all of the resources beneath the ground there are YOURS. It is real great you want to save the world and all, but to destroy our society in order to do it is entirely unrealistic. Believe it or not, we have ran out of resources in the past and it never ruined us. We just found better ways of getting it every time. Whether it be in space or on earth it wont matter, technology will over come a resource deficit simply due to supply and demand. If a valuable resource runs out and it is profitable to mine mars or the moon, i garauntee it will be done. So to say we are running out of resources is like saying the ocean is out of water. (dont get started on water pollution, because there are just as many reasons it doesnt matter.) Also if pollution is decreasing our life spans, then why is it that the countries that produce the most pollution have the longest life spans?
  25. As far as you claiming americans are ethnocentric, its just generally how liberals are. General and not understanding at all. Also the germans were the first to use paratroopers, and the japanese were the first to use amphibious warfare. The new training regimines you speak of were almost entirely based on german technology and programs. The american army program is not based on ideology, and to experience some of the training you should download the game the army made. It isnt exactly the same as the real training but it will teach you what its like and destroy your misconceptions of it. Also its fun.
×
×
  • Create New...