Fighting words

[robc_uk]

US Society as a whole is much more tolerant on diversity issues, especially racial ones, than it ever was largely as a result of the mindset that created the social welfare state you so decry. You see it everywhere.. more interracial dating, greater diversity at senior corporate levels, etc.. the assimilation of people of color into the middle and upper-middle classes...

Do you honestly think so, I've travelled the States extensively and found many,especially at lower social levels to be more ignorant,ill informed and bigotted than anywhere else I've been (Even South Africa during apartheid). Many are hugely ignorant of World history, as a Brit I lost count of how many times I was told (with great delight) how someones granddad saved my [censored] in WW2.

I meant my earlier comment about education, Jeez how can a Nuclear Power allow individual States to teach Creationism, doesn't that cause confusion in Chemistry,Biology & Physics if God created everything and Dinosaurs are all a crock o'****? , What hasppens if a kid moves half way through high school, doesn't that blow his/her mind??

Even Georgie though that Europe was a 'great country' until he got elected and had an advisor point to us on a map and explain that we've had Civilisation for over 2000 years, not just 200ish, remember we settled over there, not the oher way round :-)

Almost done.... Your media needs to show more World events, and not just the bad ones, and make TV shows more accurate, you shoot someone they die, they don't go " it's just a flesh wound, I'll be fine" Kids REALLY do believe that ***t.

Finally.....The US is nowhere near integrated, you just have slightly more diverse Ghettos and have created new ones by building all your 'Gated Communities' with their Mexican domestic staff (all illegal,but HEY, I can't afford an American gardener/pool cleaner, do you know how much they want to be paid!).

You can sling anything you like at me, this isn't a 'We're better than you' post it's a 'wake up and stop defending the indefensible' post.

Rob

[Craytonic]

You. Diversity training. NOW!

Diversity is a wonderful thing. The only outcome is people learning how to get along with each other. Reverse discrimination and racial quotas, please where do you live that these are problems?

-T

Med school is the classic example; give me a smart doctor over a diverse doctor any day.

It is a huge negative for minority practitioners who get in on their own merits; their business is damaged because affirmative action creates an assumption that they were accepted not because of skill, but the color of their skin.

True of any specialization - I had a black friend in college that got into Harvard Law with a 163 LSAT (not a good score and his GPA was not that great). Poor Thomasng on this board scored a PERFECT 180 and didn't get in. Sure perhaps there are other factors but I call bull$hit

[HauteHippie]

You. Diversity training. NOW!

Diversity is a wonderful thing. The only outcome is people learning how to get along with each other. Reverse discrimination and racial quotas, please where do you live that these are problems?

Have you ever been to diversity training? It's one-sided anti-white-male propaganda. People have told me that, e.g. Indians are prone to discrimination against whites, but the government won't touch that with a 10 foot pole. Yet they will interpret common sense business decisions as "discrimination" when they work to the detriment of a member of a protected class.

Reverse discrimination is rampant in public sector hiring. Personally, I'm largely indifferent to diversity, except when it causes problems.

[HauteHippie]

It is a huge negative for minority practitioners who get in on their own merits; their business is damaged because affirmative action creates an assumption that they were accepted not because of skill, but the color of their skin.

You bet.

[capt_cope]

Whew, I leave for work and I get so far behind I don't know if I'll ever catch up to this one.

A few points: I heard a bit about the absolute right of a citizen of the United States of America to keep and bear arms. You're treading on thin ice with that one. You are choosing to interpret the meanings behind the statement, but no instructions were given on how to interpret any of the constitution. What is to say that the right to freedom of speech isn't also under the same "non-right" that some have labeled gun ownership? If we can interpret any of our rights to mean something that is completely contradictory (Constitution states: the right to keep and bear arms. Interpretation: the right NOT to keep and bear arms.) Then we've just proven our entire constitution to be a waste. And for the record by interpret I mean this: the idea that the right to keep and bear arms pertained EXCLUSIVELY to keeping a well regulated militia. It's foolish to think so, or our fore-fathers probably would have written that in. A simple "and with regards to this well regulated militia, the right to keep and bear arms shall be invoked. But only for militia business, and then the firearms must be rented. No handguns allowed. Also, no assault weapons. No one needs assault weapons." would have worked. But they didn't. Instead they wrote that it is MY RIGHT to keep and bear arms. Not rent and shoot arms, but to keep and bear.

I also hear a few cries of "They can't manage to confiscate the guns, there's too many" California sure as hell did. You take a look at CA or NY and their [censored] up gun laws, then you tell me no one will ever try to ban all guns. (Not that it'd start that way, it'll start with Nazi Pelosi banning assault rifles, then big bore rifles, then pistols, then semi-automatic firearms, then soon enough there won't be any damn guns left to ban.)

I find it rather funny, TTK has brilliantly demonstrated the attitude I fear the most in our society, mainly that it isn't the criminal's fault. If some low life breaks into my house and steals a gun, any crimes he commits aren't his fault, they are MY fault, because I made him do the crime by owning a gun. Such logic is at once absurd and frightening, as it removes responsibility from the people who need to take it.

[Richard Tracy]

Have you ever been to diversity training? It's anti-white-male proganda. It's very one sided. People have told me that, e.g. Indians are prone to discrimination against whites, but the government won't touch that with a 10 foot pole. Yet they will interpret common sense business decisions as "discrimination" when they work to the detriment of a member of a protected class.

Reverse discrimination is rampant in public sector hiring. I'm largely indifferent to diversity, except when it causes problems.

I think we need to chill on the subject of race,.......

This board was an oasis from the very sort of misguided ideologies

and myth masquerading as fact, that we are beginning to read in this thread,..!

[Tim]

Med school is the classic example; give me a smart doctor over a diverse doctor any day.

It is a huge negative for minority practitioners who get in on their own merits; their business is damaged because affirmative action creates an assumption that they were accepted not because of skill, but the color of their skin.

True of any specialization - I had a black friend in college that got into Harvard Law with a 163 LSAT (not a good score and his GPA was not that great). Poor Thomasng on this board scored a PERFECT 180 and didn't get in. Sure perhaps there are other factors but I call bull$hit

I'll tell you in all honesty, the most bigoted people I've ever met are highly educated PhD types. I am not saying that to just get a rise out of you. Perhaps from your perspective, if that is the crowd you normally hang with, you in all probabilty do not see it. I work in probably one of the most educated cities in the US, spent a number of years working at a major university here in town, and it was incredible to me how people so advanced in their position in life and education could possible be so dumb. I am not just talking about simple prejudice either but out and out white-supremist style racism. God's chosen so to speak, simply a better class of genetics in their own mind.

-T

[Tim]

I think we need to chill on the subject of race,.......

This board was an oasis from the very sort of misguided ideologies

and myth masquerading as fact, that we are beginning to read in this thread,..!

I agree with that. I think I mostly choose to live in ingnorance on these subjects thinking the best of my fellow humans; that they are good people at heart. Because when I learn how people really think it is so depressing to me and fills me with a sense of hoplessness that we as a species are doomed.

-T

[ryyannon]

Because when I learn how people really think it is so depressing to me and fills me with a sense of hoplessness that we as a species are doomed.

-T

I really don't understand how you can think like that....

[KB]

Guy's I also think you should chill on anymore racial talk before it goes where we don't want it, I have very strong views here as my own cherished wife is of Indian descent and I would be more likely to ban than warn should it start getting out of hand.

Ken

[archibald]

I just remembered something which you seldom hear about (I wonder why, given the "war on terror" talk that has obsessed our gubment for the last 5 1/2 years.) In the lat 90's Bin Laden-trained guy name Kansi, I think, walked into a gun store in northern VA and bought a semi auto AK-47 clone. A couple days later he murdered and wounded a number of CIA agents. Odd, isn't it? An evildoer kills people on US soil, at the CIA for God's sake, is succesfully "brought to justice" and we never hear about it? Wonder if the fact that he bought the assault rifle legally is the reason his attack never gets tossed into list along w/ the dozens of others repeated ad nauseum the people that never stop talking about terrorism?

Hypothetical: Imagine if the VT shooter were a muslim extremist and got the guns at the local Wal-Mart. Just wondering if anyone posting in this thread would be willing to submit to more stringent gun laws to make it harder --however slightly--for terroists to get guns.

[capt_cope]

I just remembered something which you seldom hear about (I wonder why, given the "war on terror" talk that has obsessed our gubment for the last 5 1/2 years.) In the lat 90's Bin Laden-trained guy name Kansi, I think, walked into a gun store in northern VA and bought a semi auto AK-47 clone. A couple days later he murdered and wounded a number of CIA agents. Odd, isn't it? An evildoer kills people on US soil, at the CIA for God's sake, is succesfully "brought to justice" and we never hear about it? Wonder if the fact that he bought the assault rifle legally is the reason his attack never gets tossed into list along w/ the dozens of others repeated ad nauseum the people that never stop talking about terrorism?

Hypothetical: Imagine if the VT shooter were a muslim extremist and got the guns at the local Wal-Mart. Just wondering if anyone posting in this thread would be willing to submit to more stringent gun laws to make it harder --however slightly--for terroists to get guns.

Nope, I believe that the gun laws in effect are more than needed, and in some states are absurdly over done. What IS needed is enforcement. Once again a tool is being villianized, it's becoming a theme here. How many cries do you hear for "Rock control laws?" Rocks are a weapon too, have, are, and will be used time and again to kill people. They are everywhere, and deadly. Human life is pretty damn fragile, and like it or not, it doesn't take a whole lot to snuff it out. Perhaps instead of devoting so many man-hours to getting rid of a tool, we should devote some time to understanding WHY [censored]ed up people exist, and how the hell to deal with them before they can get a tool. And while I am no bomb expert, it probably doesn't take too much to kill 33 people with a bomb. One asshat with a bomb on a bus or a train could accomplish that. More than likely easier than buying a gun and killing 33 people. Hell where is TTK to tell us that all owners of bomb making materials are the real reason WMD are around. If someone blew up someone he knew he'd be suing YOU for owning lawn fertilizer. You're the problem because you support a government that doesn't ban fertilizer. oh and owning fertilizer doesn't make your penis bigger, and you haven't told me why you NEED fertilizer.

Am I starting to get through? Or at least can you understand where I'm coming from? I wouldn't change my views on guns and gun control over a debate online, and I wouldn't expect the same out of anyone else, but do you at least see my point, regardless of your views? I'd love to actually discuss the various arguments for and against stricter gun laws, and the eventual banning of firearms. But right now all I'm seeing is a small group arguing about religions and race (neither of which play any more than a tiny role in the big picture, thought they are exposing a bigot or two. And a large group of people arguing about the fine points of a changed subject. My main complaint was pertaining to gun control, and why there shouldn't be a banning of guns simply because there is no real NEED for them. (On a side note I'd like to apologize, I was wrong when i stated I never said "I need firearms" I did, and I stand by it. I need firearms to maintain my quality of life.)

The whole religion/race/what country can beat up what country/who has nukes/who should we nuke posts aren't really pertaining to the original intent, and I think they are cluttering the thread. I don't really care to hear who is a bigot, if you want your own [censored]ed up views that's fine, make a post about them, but don't sully up fine firearms discussion with it. Same goes for religion and politics. Both have no business here, as they will only stir up a hornets' nest of opinions (more so than guns) and will result in our being sidetracked, as I was last night. And I will mention I've been drinking, so there's no telling what I'll respond to tonight.

[capt_cope]

[censored], forgot to say this: Making more laws doesn't stop people who break laws. All it acomplishes is further restricting the freedoms of the law abiding.

[Ethan]

On a final note......you've been here a month

Amen. Post your gun theories somewhere else New Guy; let's stick to watches please.

[HauteHippie]

Hypothetical: Imagine if the VT shooter were a muslim extremist and got the guns at the local Wal-Mart. Just wondering if anyone posting in this thread would be willing to submit to more stringent gun laws to make it harder --however slightly--for terroists to get guns.

Absolutely. And here today we find out that the VT shooter was declared mentally ill and an imminent danger to others by a court in 2005. This is an individual who should have never passed a background check and been allowed to legally obtain his weapons. But, you're right. Even had the system not failed, it would have only been *slightly* more difficult for him to get a gun. Although, I'd argue that it wasn't the background checking system that failed first and foremost, but rather the judicial and social services systems which permitted this imminent danger to others to be out freely shopping for guns in the first place...

[capt_cope]

Amen. Post your gun theories somewhere else New Guy; let's stick to watches please.

Strange, could have sworn this was the "off topic" section, and that this forum's main "topic" was watches. (Meaning this section of the forum was dedicated to subjects OTHER than watches. If you'd like to stick to watches, be my guest, the various sections pertaining to watches are at the TOP of the page, under Replica Watch Group> The RWG Lounge.

And I have tried to stick to facts, just a little heads up. I understand nobody's perfect, and I have posted theories, but try to look a little deeper, or simply refrain from posting, you're cluttering up this topic for no apparent reason.

[Craytonic]

I'll tell you in all honesty, the most bigoted people I've ever met are highly educated PhD types. I am not saying that to just get a rise out of you. Perhaps from your perspective, if that is the crowd you normally hang with, you in all probabilty do not see it. I work in probably one of the most educated cities in the US, spent a number of years working at a major university here in town, and it was incredible to me how people so advanced in their position in life and education could possible be so dumb. I am not just talking about simple prejudice either but out and out white-supremist style racism. God's chosen so to speak, simply a better class of genetics in their own mind.

-T

Myself and those I "hang with" and work with just want the person who will do the job best; I don't particularly care if that person is purple with pink purple dots. The guy I share my appt with is Korean; several of my good friends are Indian. I eat most of the flavors at Ben & Jerry's. I am no model for diversity in action but I don't think I am the bottom rung on the ladder either. I think I associate with some relatively highly educated people (and my idiot bros I hang out with for beers ) and I have never heard any such argument advanced. Maybe I'm not at a high enough level to see it but I don't think it is there.

If it is true that the most highly educated people (therefore those who have been subjected to the most forced diversity in college & grad school) are the most biggoted, that means the entire system of affirmative action is a sham that has exacerbated and polarized the problem - the exact opposite of its intended effect.

I have heard professors upset with a few students who they felt were not performing up to standards and they thought "did not belong" at a very good university, but it was because they were failing exams and perhaps didn't have the grades to get in to begin with and not a matter of race. I really to be told linear algebra and other advanced math classes are not color blind.

ps. are you talking about chicago?

[capt_cope]

Absolutely. And here today we find out that the VT shooter was declared mentally ill and an imminent danger to others by a court in 2005. This is an individual who should have never passed a background check and been allowed to legally obtain his weapons. But, you're right. Even had the system not failed, it would have only been *slightly* more difficult for him to get a gun.

HOLD THE PRESSES! Re-read what you just wrote. The grievous error here was in ENFORCEMENT/ Adding more laws that aren't enforced would have done all of jack [censored]. And I gather from that *Slightly* you mean illegally, but that is already a problem, as felons can get firearms. How are we supposed to enforce new laws when we can't even keep old ones effective on anyone but law abiding citizens, who are NOT the problem.

[HauteHippie]

HOLD THE PRESSES! Re-read what you just wrote. The grievous error here was in ENFORCEMENT/ Adding more laws that aren't enforced would have done all of jack [censored]. And I gather from that *Slightly* you mean illegally, but that is already a problem, as felons can get firearms. How are we supposed to enforce new laws when we can't even keep old ones effective on anyone but law abiding citizens, who are NOT the problem.

Right. This is a person who would with 99.9% certainty obtained a gun by alternate means. The fact that he was free to do so is the most concerning to me in light of today's news. But even so, you can't reasonably argue that court decreed mentally ill imminent dangers should come up clean in a background check.

[HauteHippie]

Myself and those I "hang with" and work with just want the person who will do the job best; I don't particularly care if that person is purple with pink purple dots. The guy I share my appt with is Korean; several of my good friends are Indian. I eat most of the flavors at Ben & Jerry's. I am no model for diversity in action but I don't think I am the bottom rung on the ladder either. I think I associate with some relatively highly educated people (and my idiot bros I hang out with for beers ) and I have never heard any such argument advanced. Maybe I'm not at a high enough level to see it but I don't think it is there.

If it is true that the most highly educated people (therefore those who have been subjected to the most forced diversity in college & grad school) are the most biggoted, that means the entire system of affirmative action is a sham that has exacerbated and polarized the problem - the exact opposite of its intended effect.

Agreed. American public academia is a bastion of liberalism. So really, it depends on what we're terming "bigoted". Because if he means in the traditional sense, then absolutely not. However if he means being at the forefront of promoting reverse discrimination policies, then without a doubt.

[capt_cope]

Right. This is a person who would with 99.9% certainty obtained a gun by alternate means. The fact that he was free to do so is the most concerning to me in light of today's news. But even so, you can't reasonably argue that court decreed mentally ill imminent dangers should come up clean in a background check.

And the obvious fact is that he shouldn't have come up clean. But the hot line for background checks is often plugged in my area, so it takes sadly little imagination on my part to accept that the FBI [censored] this one up and gave the green light to Mr. Cho. But what good would adding more restrictions to firearms have done? Since we already know he wasn't legally fit to own a firearm, clearly adding more laws wouldn't have helped at all. What might have helped is stronger enforcement, and a stronger response to infractions. We need both a deterrent effect, and the ability to effectively weed bad apples out of society, and isolate them, because gun or not they WILL find some way to harm society.

[capt_cope]

I'm an American, Ex-Military, however have the sense to look to older or more progressive societies

for examples of what is reality in human nature, and in life.

Most Americans don't realize how young our society is...and how far we have to go to gaining

a worldly outlook...

We are great, creative, individualistic people,... Yes,..but many of us are like the Ancients who thought

their cities were the center of the universe... when during those same moments, there existed other societies

in the world, that had answers to problems that would have saved millions of lifes, if only minds were

opened and pride based upon relation to pigmentation, or culture, was viewed as solid & stable as gaining height

by stepping upon a block of ice.

Look....

Walking barefoot is easier, the less broken glass you have around you.

No different than the common sense goals to keeping Nuclear arms down to a minimum on earth..

is the reasoning behind the fact that the more guns you have on the streets, the more bullets that

go whizzing by....

Just saw this, and while I am grateful of your service to this country, your poetic stuff I'm not such a fan of. In fact I'm decidedly against it. I like the US, as [censored] up as it's getting, living here is still light years better than any other country that I can think of. I won't bother posting reasons, because they are opinions, but if the US starts following the trends set by older societies... we're no longer the United States of America, then we're some [censored] "peace love happy landmass" That's actually some form of oppressive dictatorship, Not to mention we would no longer stand up for the very beliefs our nation was founded on. We were founded, as a nation, because we REFUSED to listen to the older society. Yes we're young, but age and wisdom don't walk hand in hand. Age and stagnation, however, DO.

[Craytonic]

Agreed. American public academia is a bastion of liberalism. So really, it depends on what we're terming "bigoted". Because if he means in the traditional sense, then absolutely not. However if he means being at the forefront of promoting reverse discrimination policies, then without a doubt.

Don't get me started on the ivory tower; the quickest way to make a college professor hate you is not to be black - it is to tell him you read Richard Weaver, Russle Kirk, and think maybe those greeks like Aristotle were on to something we can still learn from.

[Guest TTK]

Hell where is TTK to tell us that all owners of bomb making materials are the real reason WMD are around. If someone blew up someone he knew he'd be suing YOU for owning lawn fertilizer. You're the problem because you support a government that doesn't ban fertilizer. oh and owning fertilizer doesn't make your penis bigger, and you haven't told me why you NEED fertilizer.

This is where your absolute stupidity manifests itself absolutely.......you extrapolate my reasoning all the way to absurdity.......but that's only to be expected in your case......you can't grasp the simplicity of the logic......so you take it to extreme....just as you have in your possession of firearms......'let me take it to the extreme.....I'm gonna buy an ASSAULT weapon.......why.....because it's my RIGHT ....".....an ASSAULT weapon was designed for what purpose .....as a tool......what was the designers intent when designing......oh let's see...I'm going to make a tool that will make it easier for combatants to KILL ........to ASSAULT AND KILL.......assault who.....?........'the enemy'.!

As for fertilizer.........I believe that farmers NEED fertiliser.....it's an essential 'tool' for them..........I think your Government already has in place ...laws that regulate fertilizer......it's just that as usual....they do a fukking poor job of actually 'regulating' them......just as they do a fukking poor job in terms of Intelligence gathering.......in terms of FEMA aid to disaster areas......in terms of looking after it's people in general....SNAFU.....!

You BOAST about having a FAL.....what possible reason could you have for a weapon of this type......and please....I know your small brain has difficulty with certain words and their meanings......NEED.....not RIGHT.........( I carried the BA equivalent of the FAL....the L1A1....chambered in 7.62mm ...a MILITARY cartridge ).......I think I'm seeing the beginnings of a certain similitude to Mr Cho here......" I need firearms to maintain my quality of life"........if that's what's required to maintain your quality of life......TRANSLATION......as long as I'm ok....and nobody takes my TOYS away.......FUKK everybody else......when's the video coming out......I just bet you have some wunnerful fotos of you with your ASSAULT weapon.......mind you.......you need an ASSAULT weapon....'cos you're incapable of doing any damage with the small number of brain cells you have in YOUR armoury..........!

Do you honestly think it was his avowed intention that this WMD should be available to the general public......if so.....WHY?......to what end would the general public....NEED....an assault weapon.......well....truth is......they don't....but it's their RIGHT....under the constitution.....so using your extrapolation......why don't we just allow the general public access to RPG's.......Laws rockets........percussion grenades......ad infinitum....!

The truth of the matter is that all those who own guns.......if their state was suddenly to impose a complete handgun ban....they would all whimper and cry and protest that their RIGHTS were being taken away......'it's an injustice....it's an injustice'........they're taking away my TOYS......it's not fair.....when the dust had settled.......their lives would carry on as before.......they'd find that they had no NEED for their toys......and the local government would then be free to concentrate on the task at hand......removing all ILLEGALLY held guns.......from the criminals.....it won't be easy.......in fact given the absolute determination of this nation to hold on to it's toys.....it'll be downright [censored] difficult........but if you're gonna bring the children into alignment.....well.....!

But of course the children whose toys would be taken from them....won't put up with that.....they'll shout and bawl and have temper tantrums......and just like the Rugrats that they are ...they'll marshal themselves together to maintain a status quo that suits them and nobody else.....!

I have to laugh when a YANK.....boasts proudly that they live in the best country in the world.....it's exactly that sentiment that causes non-Americans to laugh......and pity the poor uneducated Yank that holds the view......never been out of their own state never mind their own country.......completely insular.........they wouldn't have a clue if it bit them on the leg....and said ..."hi ...I'm a clue".... !

God Bless America....and nowhere else......HUH...?

Edited April 19, 2007 by TTK

[millwright]

" If you outlaw guns, then only outlaws will have guns. "

That about says it all.

You get a licence to drive a car.

A car is a VERY effective killing tool.

So is a gun. And you get a license to purchase and carry one of those too.

The rate of deaths per auto accident is higher than that of shootings.

Not only is it ou Consitutional right to bear arms, but that very right is what keeps us safe.

Like on poster said... it's not the gun that killed those people. Gun's don't kill people... people kill people.

'Nuff said.