Well this statistic is pretty steep, explain how I twisted it. It's simple, legal gun owners use guns for protection against illegal gun owners. If you were a criminal what would you rather do? Rob from an area with strict gun laws or rob from an area with very lenient gun laws?
The Regan generation will eventually rot away. As for Bibles and such, I've never read a passage anywhere that stated thou shalt not smoke hemp. Maybe in the other books, but I mean really? It's a plant, god had to have created it if he made all of existence.
Legalizing drugs and prostitution will let a lot of people out of prison that didn't deserve to be there in the first place. It will also free up space for real criminals and relieve the tax consumption that these institutions are notorious for. Also as Danny stated, there would be a new source of income for our economy. I can see it now "America, the #1 drug exporter", do you have any idea how lucrative that business would be?
Technically, the votes we cast for the "president" elect people of the electoral college who then vote for the president (they're forced to by law because they are representing your vote). It's an needless intermediate step, but it doesn't change the outcome. I think it's just pointless and a waste of time, personally, and think it should be gone regardless.
Or at least that's my limited understanding of it. Maybe I should go research this more before I open my big mouth...
Maybe our system of governing is just failing us . Maybe we should try something else.
Not socialism- it's been proven over and over again that it cannot work on a national scale with such a big country full of so many diverse opinions and ideals. I'd suggest a parliament
Edit:
Yeah, um, don't respond to my first statement yet... I'm going to read it up first.
Edit #2 (yay):
Political Dictionary: Electoral College
A mechanism for the indirect election of public officials. For the purpose of electing the President and Vice President of the United States a 538-member Electoral College is created with each state having as many electors as it has representatives and senators in the national legislature, plus 3 for the District of Columbia. To be elected, a candidate must obtain an absolute majority in the Electoral College, currently 270. If no candidate gains an absolute majority the US House of Representatives makes the choice, with the delegation from each state having one vote.
Nothing highly important or pertinent to the topic here :rolleyes:, but I figured I'd include it for completeness' sake.
Most of these arrangements were devised in the Constitutional Convention of 1787 as a compromise between those who proposed a direct popular election of the President and those who preferred to make him subject to election by the legislature. As originally conceived, members of the Electoral College were expected to be prominent state worthies impervious to transient public moods. However, such notions were quickly overtaken by the emergence of parties and the popular election of electors in place of their appointment by state legislatures. The ‘winner takes all’ rule, or convention, that all of a state's Electoral College votes go to the candidate which wins the highest popular vote, is not in the US Constitution; two states (Maine and Nebraska) assign their electoral votes in proportion to the state vote for each candidate. Occasionally, states elect unpledged electors, or electors break their pledge and vote for a candidate other than the one they said they would. Because of the constitutional origins of the college, electors cannot be punished for this.
Yeah, that counters what I said earlier, so I'm wrong xD I'm amazed I never read about this before...
Reformers regularly query the merits of the Electoral College system for ‘misfired’ elections (where a loser gains more popular votes than the winner) and for the contingency arrangements that come into play when no candidate wins a majority in the Electoral College. The elections of 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000 misfired and misfires came perilously close in 1844, 1880, 1884, 1960, and 1968. Of these, 1876 and 2000 sparked legitimacy crises. That of 1876 was resolved by a ‘corrupt bargain’ whereby the Republicans kept the Presidency and the Democrats were allowed back into power in the South, where they resumed their oppression of African-Americans. That of 2000 was suddenly ended by the terrorist attacks of September 2001, which conferred legitimacy on President George Bush that his election by one vote in the Supreme Court had failed to do. If all states followed Maine and Nebraska and allocated electoral college votes in proportion to the popular vote in the state, misfires like 2000 would be less likely and misdemeanours in counting (such as those in Florida in 2000) less momentous.
Well, that would have been nice. I didn't like any of the candidates in 2000- I don't think it would have mattered who was in office as per the events (September 11 and such) that transpired, but you never know, maybe someone else would have found a different way around, what was it, 3,000 (edit- 2,985) people being mass murdered in a Jihad. *Sigh* Extremists... A shame, since they made all the non-violent Muslims/Moslems (which one are you supposed to use?) look bad, too...
When an election is thrown into the House the bargaining required to form a majority could also create a crisis of legitimacy. This occurred 1800 and 1824 and might have happened in 1960, 1968, 1980, 1992, and 2000. There could also be a dangerous period of uncertainty in that the House would not make its decision until early January, a mere two weeks before the inauguration.
So basically, we're just trusting a bunch of people we're voting for to indirectly vote for who we want in office? And they aren't legally responsible to carry out our votes? That is rediculous
The Mafia was dealt a blow a while back that crippled their ability to remain a prominent cartel (they were competing with the CIA). Since then they have moved in on wall street and are doing their business "legally". Nowadays the CIA handles drug trafficking for foreign investors. It's sad that we let these thugs run our government.
It's kind of a taboo in our culture but why don't people just assassinate them if they're such a problem, we used to do that when we were at the apex of civilization without a guilty conscience, so why are we some how different? Are we as a people being self-righteous? Are we not more barbarian than our 1st Renaissance ancestors, our society is by nature a carnivore.
So basically, we're just trusting a bunch of people we're voting for to indirectly vote for who we want in office? And they aren't legally responsible to carry out our votes? That is rediculous
That's it, I'm moving to Canada.
Exactly. It happened in 2000 when Govenor Bush became president.
Then again in 2000 anyone could of been pres and you wouldn't of known...
Quote from "milanv" »
so you want drugs to be legalised just because it will get he government more money to spend? imagine America spending ever more on wars. where's the logic there...
Yea, but no. Legalized drugs would give us more money to rebuild our nation. But you do have a point, religious zealots (Said religous, not pointing out any one religion.) would use the money to wage more wars accross the world...
As much as I love this nation and as much as I hate to say it, it might be a good idea to go to Canada after all...
so you want drugs to be legalised just because it will get he government more money to spend? imagine America spending ever more on wars. where's the logic there...
More money to spend on peace. Do you think Americans would support another war like that? Just a heads up here, if there is a terrorist attack by a country like Iran know that it was our own governments doing. Oh and apparently things in Iraq arent that bad, it's safer to live there than in Chicago:D I do think there needs to be a single government across the world, that way we can work towards becoming a space civilization together. Weater it should be America or China I do not know but Russia is just a joke.
On a seperate note, who wants to join my country, Freedomstan?:P
[EDIT] LinkX stop being so politically correct, fuck religious zealots that take their religion so seriously that they end up being detrimental to society. Don't let me get into why Christianity is the most retarded of all religions.(please do, it sounds fun)
More money to spend on peace. Do you think Americans would support another war like that? Just a heads up here, if there is a terrorist attack by a country like Iran know that it was our own governments doing. Oh and apparently things in Iraq arent that bad, it's safer to live there than in Chicago:D I do think there needs to be a single government across the world, that way we can work towards becoming a space civilization together. Weater it should be America or China I do not know but Russia is just a joke.
On a seperate note, who wants to join my country, Freedomstan?:P
[EDIT] LinkX stop being so politically correct, fuck religious zealots that take their religion so seriously that they end up being detrimental to society. Don't let me get into why Christianity is the most retarded of all religions.(please do, it sounds fun)
We shouldn't believe the money would be used towards peace though. The religious (Said religious, not any one religion) would use that money to fight more wars and you and I both know that.
(Off topic: I have to speak in broad statements when speaking of religous people as anything that I say can and will be used against me by (a) member(s) of the moderation/administration team(s). )
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
We shouldn't believe the money would be used towards peace though. The religious (Said religious, not any one religion) would use that money to fight more wars and you and I both know that.
(Off topic: I have to speak in broad statements when speaking of religous people as anything that I say can and will be used against me by (a) member(s) of the moderation/administration team(s). )
I say it's about time for another revolution. To form a true socialist democracy with a true free market. Not just in America, but across the world.
I have another idea for creating a corruption free politicians. A politician must give up the right to trade stock and must have a yearly earnings cap. They would be be closely monitored, and no "gifts" may be given by anyone outside of his/her immediate family. This would single out the selfless individuals deserving of leadership.
To form a true socialist democracy with a true free market.
I'm pretty sure that's a contradiction of terms. Socialism is by nature not indusive to a free market, since free market is a capitalist idea. All absolutes are bad, you need moderation or things get out of hand.
I'm pretty sure that's a contradiction of terms. Socialism is by nature not indusive to a free market, since free market is a capitalist idea. All absolutes are bad, you need moderation or things get out of hand.
By free market I meant no banning of things that can be sold (that's how black markets get started).
Which would include guns, illicit drugs, and so on...? Dunno. I guess if it works and my own personal liberties of self expression (liberally and conservatively) aren't limited, and I'm not forced to believe things that go against my personal morals, and as long as I'm still able to send my kids to private schooling since public education sucks ass, and as long as the money I earn- I EARN- doesn't get diced up and sent to people all over America so that I can do such a thing... Then I'd be fine with it.
On a secondary note, I just found a bit of irony in my previous post:
All absolutes are bad
Isn't that an oxymoron since I'm using an absolute statement to say that absolutes are bad? Lol... I should think more before I type :rolleyes:
Which would include guns, illicit drugs, and so on...? Dunno. I guess if it works and my own personal liberties of self expression (liberally and conservatively) aren't limited, and I'm not forced to believe things that go against my personal morals, and as long as I'm still able to send my kids to private schooling since public education sucks ass, and as long as the money I earn- I EARN- doesn't get diced up and sent to people all over America so that I can do such a thing... Then I'd be fine with it.
On a secondary note, I just found a bit of irony in my previous post:
Isn't that an oxymoron since I'm using an absolute statement to say that absolutes are bad? Lol... I should think more before I type :rolleyes:
I was gunna say, lol. Silly Magnum. reminds me of "All generalizations are wrong"
And I side with Magnum's post, although I don't think of it much. I just think that anyone that does any level of crime should be sentenced to death. If they go against society in such a way, they are merely slowing down progress of advancement, and don't deserve to exist. Although you get the problem of people who want to change the ways of how things are being handled. And of course it could be change for the better, but still may cause riots in the progress. Of course they could always try through peace, but we all know that don't work.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
One becomes strong when they are fighting to protect someone close to them... - Shiro Haku
I think im a humanitarian. Excuse my language but I feel it appropriate. Fuck democracy, communism, fascism, all of it. I don't want to divide people. Every time we divide it only causes conflict. Everyone's like "Oh im republican" "screw that! im a democrat!". All these divisions are whats wrong with us and why cooperation and unity is impossible. We divide up the world as we please with these invisible lines and fight over them. For what? It does nothing.
Democracy is the worst form of government except for all of the rest.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
What is normal? Normal is a concept that everyone or a majority of people are the same or similar. However, we know that everyone is unique. If everyone is unique, then everyone is different. If everyone is different, then everyone is weird. If everyone is weird, then everyone is normal.
By free market I meant no banning of things that can be sold (that's how black markets get started).
Black markets arise because there is a need for something that cannot be gotten legally, that correct. Doesn't mean we would always be better of by not limiting any illegal trading processes.
Should we allow human trafficking then? Should people be allowed to buy other people?
Quote from "Magistrate" »
Which would include guns, illicit drugs, and so on...? Dunno. I guess if it works and my own personal liberties of self expression (liberally and conservatively) aren't limited, and I'm not forced to believe things that go against my personal morals, and as long as I'm still able to send my kids to private schooling since public education sucks ass, and as long as the money I earn- I EARN- doesn't get diced up and sent to people all over America so that I can do such a thing... Then I'd be fine with it.
Any society needs to be more than just a bunch of perks that people give each other as a result of monetary earnings, it also needs to be a system that can support and help less fortunate people.
Quote from "Killer-Swift" »
And I side with Magnum's post, although I don't think of it much. I just think that anyone that does any level of crime should be sentenced to death. If they go against society in such a way, they are merely slowing down progress of advancement, and don't deserve to exist. Although you get the problem of people who want to change the ways of how things are being handled. And of course it could be change for the better, but still may cause riots in the progress. Of course they could always try through peace, but we all know that don't work.
Do you realize how this sounds? If you ever read 1984, I'd say you did a pretty accurate description of it in that paragraph.
PlugY for Diablo II allows you to reset skills and stats, transfer items between characters in singleplayer, obtain all ladder runewords and do all Uberquests while offline. It is the only way to do all of the above. Please use it.
Supporting big shoulderpads and flashy armor since 2004.
I was gunna say, lol. Silly Magnum. reminds me of "All generalizations are wrong"
And I side with Magnum's post, although I don't think of it much. I just think that anyone that does any level of crime should be sentenced to death. If they go against society in such a way, they are merely slowing down progress of advancement, and don't deserve to exist. Although you get the problem of people who want to change the ways of how things are being handled. And of course it could be change for the better, but still may cause riots in the progress. Of course they could always try through peace, but we all know that don't work.
That makes no sense. Crime should exsist. Crime is an important part of our society. If there wern't criminals then who would challange the laws that we have. Think of it this way, do you remember Rosa Parks? That lady who wouldnt give her seat up to a white guy? Yea, they would of just shot her dead and been done with it.
Then you have the whole problem of equalizing crimes together. This crime is now equal to that crime. You stealing a loaf of bread is now equal to the freak who killed some girl, pealed her skin off, and is now wearing it pretending to be a girl. You really feel good about enforcing that one?
Slave trading goes against the equality of socialism, so no. We should get rid of the incentive for criminal acts by enforcing the propositions stated above. People being in prison does nothing to correct their behavior, it only trains them to be better criminals.
My friend almost got shot in the head with an ak-47 yesterday. The only reason he is still alive is because my other friend shot the assailant. Illegal guns will never go away, the only protection we have as citizens is our legal guns.
The Regan generation will eventually rot away. As for Bibles and such, I've never read a passage anywhere that stated thou shalt not smoke hemp. Maybe in the other books, but I mean really? It's a plant, god had to have created it if he made all of existence.
Legalizing drugs and prostitution will let a lot of people out of prison that didn't deserve to be there in the first place. It will also free up space for real criminals and relieve the tax consumption that these institutions are notorious for. Also as Danny stated, there would be a new source of income for our economy. I can see it now "America, the #1 drug exporter", do you have any idea how lucrative that business would be?
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
Technically, the votes we cast for the "president" elect people of the electoral college who then vote for the president (they're forced to by law because they are representing your vote). It's an needless intermediate step, but it doesn't change the outcome. I think it's just pointless and a waste of time, personally, and think it should be gone regardless.
Or at least that's my limited understanding of it. Maybe I should go research this more before I open my big mouth...
Not socialism- it's been proven over and over again that it cannot work on a national scale with such a big country full of so many diverse opinions and ideals. I'd suggest a parliament
Edit:
Yeah, um, don't respond to my first statement yet... I'm going to read it up first.
Edit #2 (yay):
Nothing highly important or pertinent to the topic here :rolleyes:, but I figured I'd include it for completeness' sake.
Yeah, that counters what I said earlier, so I'm wrong xD I'm amazed I never read about this before...
Well, that would have been nice. I didn't like any of the candidates in 2000- I don't think it would have mattered who was in office as per the events (September 11 and such) that transpired, but you never know, maybe someone else would have found a different way around, what was it, 3,000 (edit- 2,985) people being mass murdered in a Jihad. *Sigh* Extremists... A shame, since they made all the non-violent Muslims/Moslems (which one are you supposed to use?) look bad, too...
So basically, we're just trusting a bunch of people we're voting for to indirectly vote for who we want in office? And they aren't legally responsible to carry out our votes? That is rediculous
That's it, I'm moving to Canada.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
Exactly. It happened in 2000 when Govenor Bush became president.
Then again in 2000 anyone could of been pres and you wouldn't of known...
Yea, but no. Legalized drugs would give us more money to rebuild our nation. But you do have a point, religious zealots (Said religous, not pointing out any one religion.) would use the money to wage more wars accross the world...
As much as I love this nation and as much as I hate to say it, it might be a good idea to go to Canada after all...
On a seperate note, who wants to join my country, Freedomstan?:P
[EDIT] LinkX stop being so politically correct, fuck religious zealots that take their religion so seriously that they end up being detrimental to society. Don't let me get into why Christianity is the most retarded of all religions.(please do, it sounds fun)
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
We shouldn't believe the money would be used towards peace though. The religious (Said religious, not any one religion) would use that money to fight more wars and you and I both know that.
(Off topic: I have to speak in broad statements when speaking of religous people as anything that I say can and will be used against me by (a) member(s) of the moderation/administration team(s). )
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
I have another idea for creating a corruption free politicians. A politician must give up the right to trade stock and must have a yearly earnings cap. They would be be closely monitored, and no "gifts" may be given by anyone outside of his/her immediate family. This would single out the selfless individuals deserving of leadership.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
I'm pretty sure that's a contradiction of terms. Socialism is by nature not indusive to a free market, since free market is a capitalist idea. All absolutes are bad, you need moderation or things get out of hand.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
On a secondary note, I just found a bit of irony in my previous post:
Isn't that an oxymoron since I'm using an absolute statement to say that absolutes are bad? Lol... I should think more before I type :rolleyes:
I was gunna say, lol. Silly Magnum. reminds me of "All generalizations are wrong"
And I side with Magnum's post, although I don't think of it much. I just think that anyone that does any level of crime should be sentenced to death. If they go against society in such a way, they are merely slowing down progress of advancement, and don't deserve to exist. Although you get the problem of people who want to change the ways of how things are being handled. And of course it could be change for the better, but still may cause riots in the progress. Of course they could always try through peace, but we all know that don't work.
One becomes strong when they are fighting to protect someone close to them... - Shiro Haku
Democracy is the worst form of government except for all of the rest.
--Steel :cool:
Should we allow human trafficking then? Should people be allowed to buy other people?
Any society needs to be more than just a bunch of perks that people give each other as a result of monetary earnings, it also needs to be a system that can support and help less fortunate people.
Do you realize how this sounds? If you ever read 1984, I'd say you did a pretty accurate description of it in that paragraph.
That makes no sense. Crime should exsist. Crime is an important part of our society. If there wern't criminals then who would challange the laws that we have. Think of it this way, do you remember Rosa Parks? That lady who wouldnt give her seat up to a white guy? Yea, they would of just shot her dead and been done with it.
Then you have the whole problem of equalizing crimes together. This crime is now equal to that crime. You stealing a loaf of bread is now equal to the freak who killed some girl, pealed her skin off, and is now wearing it pretending to be a girl. You really feel good about enforcing that one?
My friend almost got shot in the head with an ak-47 yesterday. The only reason he is still alive is because my other friend shot the assailant. Illegal guns will never go away, the only protection we have as citizens is our legal guns.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.