And no one would want to be terrorists anymore if they stop believing they could get 72 virgins for blowing themselves up.
Nice one bro, you’re too clever
WRONG
radical Islamic Terrorism found its root in Turkey during the end of the 1800’s as the Ottoman Empire decline in power. People where blaming foreigners for the decay of their sand empire and started passing xenophobic and racial laws that put Muslims and Islam first, and progressed to what they thought was a more pure form of Islam. It gained a powerful foothold in the 1920’s when the Saudi clan took over the Arabian peninsula and became the leaders under the pretense that the Wahabi gave them divine right to do so.
It got its modern hold when an Egyptian minister of education was sent to the US in the 1950’s to study what was going on America and how Egypt could emulate it to become great. The minister didn’t like what he saw, and he pushed for radicalism where you target politicians and the system to shock people into conforming. His predecessors didn’t like that the people didn’t like them, and rationalized that those who didn’t stand with them needed to be killed so they could scare others into joining.
BBC, The Power of Nightmares
These people had a significant part in creating the beast that is this bullshit religion that festers. Salafaism branch of Islam is the fastest growing branch of Islam outside the Middle East. This should be a concern to any westerner who values western values
Just because people will break laws doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have laws. Doesn’t mean laws don’t work. We do know, for instance, that gun laws work.
Guns used in nearly every mass shooting have been purchased legally by the shooter. So try again.
Most gun violence isn’t mass shootings. It’s shootings that happen largely in the heat of the moment by someone who is armed. By reducing the availability of guns, we make it harder for people to just have a gun laying around handy to commit violence with. We also reduce the number of suicides by guns. I also advocate that we do something about the tragedy of our healthcare(and especially mental health) system too.
Again, the research. Removing confounding variables like cultural difference, gun control laws do curb gun violence. We know the statistics and the data on this. We also do have to do something about the violent streak in our culture(as I type this into a forum about games where people beat the ever loving shit out of each other for fun*). Those problems are systemic and not obvious. But reducing the amount of guns we have available does do something about the overall violent crime rate, even if we are still a culture soaked in crime. While crime rates have gone down, there’s a certain margin between American crime rates and non-American crime rates that is clearly explained by our gun problem.
- this is a joke. some people will take this literally even if one isn’t inclined to.
Most people who buy guns legally will never shoot them at another human being(in self defense or offense), never use them to protect their home and will more likely be used to kill a person in the home.
Forging a gun is much harder than growing a brick of weed and much less profitable and a lot harder to conceal and even harder to sell. Every week potheads need to reup on weed. Usually most people aren’t being a 1/4th of gun a week.
We also know in America, where it’s harder to get a gun(that being, not just say Chicago banning handguns, but also the surrounding areas banning hand guns), we see way less gun crime. That isn’t complicated either.
Ammo registration is easy. You stamp each cartridge jacket with a serial number before it goes into a box. We can stamp out serial numbers on every other goddamn thing we can manufacture. This isn’t an impossible task. Each bullet doesn’t even need to be individually serialized. It just needs to be serialized by manufacturer, batch and box.
It’s less about the statistical likelihood of dying. If we were worried about that we would outlaw smoking and driving and drinking and red meat and on and on and on. This is about how low friction, low skill(compare shooting someone with stabbing someone; we usually don’t see “baby stabs parent to death with kitchen knife”) it is for someone else to kill me with intent. The number of people who die that we fix through legislation is shockingly low, but we can show that legislation can prevent deaths.
I’m not advocating that people be silenced by act of Government. Maybe I don’t think YouTube or Twitter or tumblr or Reddit should be the host platform for trans/homophobes, white supremacists, etc. But that’s on the services that host those people. We can’t legislate what people think, (yet; neuroscience is working on this one),
In any case, no one should be free to shoot me. Murder is not speech. Murder is not art. Murder is not expression.
Granted, gun legislation and gun control is not going to stop someone from beating me with a rock, or stabbing me or punching me, but usually you don’t see rocks, sticks and knives designed for maximum killing power. Nor are they marketed that way. Yes, I know hunting knives and bow staves and all sorts of other things are designed for maximum damage, but nothing quite has the punch like lead through the torso.
We shouldn’t be labeling something that happens on a fairly regular basis? We label things all the goddamned time. Everything is also political on some level. I mean, if your car doesn’t start, there might be a political reason why. Where were the parts built? Who designed them? Was it a design flaw or was it just wear and tear? Usually for most things we ignore them, because we’re not insane and look that deep into things. We also take personal responsibility because a lot of things that happen in life are things we can carry the burden on because it’s usually just not that big of a deal, or it’s well within our capacity to empathize with the moral implications of it.
If you do the infinite regress on nearly everything we do as a society, it’s easy to see where some sort of law has influence.
This is something we can demonstrably fix through decent, well thought out legislation is something we should label as a political priority.
Even trying to resist fitting it into a political agenda has a political agenda. so, which is it? Don’t talk about it, don’t fix the problems, don’t do anything at all and fit the gun lobby and gun nut agenda or do something about it and fit a progressive agenda? Everything has an agenda.
We’re unique in being the only country in the first world where gun violence is a problem.
I have one question for you. What core belief do you have that I could sway you on?
What core value do you hold that leads you to these conclusions?
For me, the best data we have shows that guns cause way way way more problems than they solve. They do not stop home invasions, they do not stop interpersonal conflicts, they do not stop mass shootings, they do not really do anything other than make a loud noise and punch holes through things. They cause more violence than they stop.
If you could find me better data, better research, and enough of it to confound all of what we know about psychology, sociology, etc. Then sure, I’ll get behind gun ownership right away.
no its not
No that isn’t Mexico’s problem. Mexico’s problem is that the government allowed and armed the cartels and still benefit from them to this day. The cartels didn’t start well armed, nor with any power, it was enabled by the government and they have worked with the cartels from the begining. Get this shit outta here
Nobody is free to shoot you without just cause, Taiki. At least under the law, they’re not.
Whether gun control “works” depends entirely on your end goal. If you just want to reduce gun violence, it “works”. If you want to reduce ALL violence, it is utterly fucking useless, demonstrated by global murder rates.
The estimate of firearm usage in self-defense is in the order of tens of thousands to millions, depending on the data you prefer. The number of gun deaths is in the low tens of thousands. A gun does not need to be fired to be an effective deterrent.
what’s your point. DC is at 11 and they have even stricter guns, Iowa is at 7.5 and they have extremely loose gun laws. Missouri has even looser laws and it’s at 6, and rhode island at 3.
all I’m getting is that states with large minority populations that are under educated, or filled with low tier trailer trash suffer from high death rates.
[quote=“Xvideos, post:409, topic:180032”]
[/quote]I commented once on their hypocrosy.
they deleted the comment on the quickness. Fuck these people, fuck their religion
Loved the last southpark game
This one just looks great
[quote=“Xvideos, post:409, topic:180032”]
[/quote]
[quote=“pedoviejo, post:410, topic:180032”]
Tada. As Imams have said: “There is no radical Islam. There is only Islam.” These are the REGULAR, peace-loving muslims.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLqkizGtFo0
Relevant, kinda. Agree or disagree with his points, but stay for the gay kissing.
California is majority minority with Hispanics making up one of the largest population groups and they’re 44th in the country. Alaska is one of the whitest states in the nation with the population being around 75% white and they’re at number 1 in the country. While education has something to do with it, the demographics don’t support your assertion.
He did say low tier trailer trash. You don’t have to be poor to be stupid. Look at Alaska’s own Sarah Palin.
[quote=“Xvideos, post:409, topic:180032”]
[/quote]Yupp, peaceful religion fo sho :giggle:
Did you not read my post.
.low tier trailer trash
Alaska also has big gang problems
Like hawaii a lot of meth goes through alaska
[quote=“drunkards_walk, post:417, topic:180032”]
Look. Imma break it down for you.
I hate all organized religions. I think they’re all pretty terrible, and serve as lightning rods for judgey, terrible, bigoted, stone age value systems.
However, a lot of what I hate about organized religions comes from the organizations and institutions that propagate them, and not the actual book/faith itself. Book Jesus is a lovey dovey hippy communist. Puritanical Protestantism is judgey “live life this way or burn in fire and brimstone” kinda bullshit.
That’s the problem when you assume the FAITH is the problem. There are totally hippie/hipster christians dedicated to social justice and defending the defenseless. They don’t deserve to be lumped into the Westboro Baptist Church.
You’re all like “Islam is the problem, it’s inherently violent”, when it’s certainly no worse than Christianity, and many would say has a much better track record. You see, the Arab Muslims conquered the Turks, Egyptians, Spanish, Punjabis, and last I checked… those peoples still exist today. Many of the native nations of Americas weren’t so lucky.
And sure, they expanded their empire by conquest, no different than Greece, Rome, the Mongols, the Russians, or even the USA. But once there, they usually settled themselves on top of the existing social structures and allowed people to pretty much do their own thing. I don’t want to be flip, but massive genocide and destruction gets EXPENSIVE, and limits the speed of expansion, since you run out of people to settle land pretty fast.
I’m also admitting that things have fundamentally changed (pun intended) as far as what constitutes the loudest voices in Islam. Whereas the ancient and medieval Muslim empires used to embrace science, education, and scholarly work, modern fundamentalist controlled governments actively reject these things.
These images are often circulated when you google “Iran pre Islamic revolution”
4.bp.blogspot.com/__e2VLp6gwyk/SeWT-PY8qJI/AAAAAAAADFQ/OE_IOypofH0/s320/BR9.jpg
That’s 1970, 46 years ago.
Something happened, you know? The religion was there for 1300 years before that, what took it so long?
And what’s alarming is that it’s not that different from what’s going on over here. People denying science, trying to oppress women and gays in the name of ‘family values’, striving to put religious creed into law, etc etc. The problem of Democracy is that it’s fragile, and we could become them at any time.