Interesting … correct me if I’m wrong … but through most of English history, only the few privileged had any rights … the masses were no better than slaves … please, I’m confused, just how free was an individual to be openly Catholic in 16th Century England?
Well, in 16th century England it would depend on which monarch were ruling. As a Catholic you’d be fine under Henry VII, the first part of Henry VIII’s reign and Queen Mary but otherwise no, not much fun.
But this is exactly what I’m talking about. Englishmen fought hard for their freedom over the centuries, we even cut a king’s head off and some sailed thousands of miles across the ocean to preserve them. But in the last century and this we’ve seen some of those freedoms whittled away bit by bit:
-
The ever more restrictive laws on firearms.
-
The right to silence legislated away.
-
Double jeopardy now gone.
-
Freedom of speech progressively narrowed.
I could go on but this should be enough to lessen your confusion.
All of your points are gross exaggerations, but I’ll focus on the one that is the topic of this thread. There hasn’t been any significant change to British firearms regulation since 1997, when handguns become much more restricted following one of the worst mass murders in British history, the Dunblane school massacre.
And what Englishmen fought for were the rights to live in a free, just, and peaceful society. Do you imagine for a moment that they fought for the right to live in a society like this or this, with consequences leading to this?
What snark! No, there’s a lot that annoys me! It was the election of the short-fingered sociopath that precipitated my special anger on this issue. In any very close election one can point to a dozen different “reasons” for the outcome. The stupidity of John Podesta regarding his password was so astounding that I want to laugh until I puke. I’m not completely certain however that that cost the election.
The millions of Americans who can’t think beyond Guns, Guns!, Guns!! when they vote certainly did cause the tragic electoral outcome. If that doesn’t make you recoil in horror, then maybe you’re a little too infatuated with your surrogate penis also.
It also makes me angry to watch you insult wolfpup. Calling you an intellectual moron compared to his outstanding intellect would be an insult to morons. I’ve read posts by each of you off-and-on but would never confuse the two despite the common ‘wolf.’ Next time we have a thread to list Dopers suffering from Dunning-Kruger, I’ll mention you!
Just so you know, it was you, not netzweltler, who was playing the biggest fool in that silly .9999… “debate.” I kept a polite poker face at the time, but please re-activate the thread if you doubt this — I’ll point out some of your stupider misconceptions in that thread.
Americans listening to the UN on PRIVATE FIREARMS OWNERSHIP and other things Like Israel (The Tiny Jewish State) is hilarious …
I’m glad you cleared that up. I’d forgotten what Israel was.
And also forgotten how the US vetoed every piece of Anti Israel crap than came out of the UN for last 30 years ?
So apparently we have another blathering right-wing fuckwad on the premises who hasn’t the first clue what he’s blathering about, as usual. Aside from the fact that you put your insane bloviation in the wrong thread, it seems to me that it might be possible to find an occasion when the US didn’t actually veto an anti-Israel resolution but abstained, just like Obama did. And even maybe an occasion when it supported an anti-Israel resolution.
Let’s see if we can find one. Oh, here … 
[ul]
[li]The US abstained on UN Resolution in 1322 in 2000. Sponsored by Malaysia it deplored the visit of Ariel Sharon to the Temple Mount.[/li][li]In 1996 the UNSC adopted resolution 1073 critiquing Israel’s actions in Jerusalem. US abstained.[/li][li]In 1988 the UNSC adopted resolution 611. The council condemned the killing of Fatah leader Khalil al-Wazir in Tunisia. [/li][li]The US abstained in 1988’s resolution 608 that condemned Israel for deporting Palestinians.[/li][li]The US abstained on resolution 605 in 1987 in a resolution that condemned Israel for killing Palestinian students.[/li][li]In 1986 resolution 592 resulted in a US abstention. It condemned Israel for killing Palestinian students at Bir Zeit university.[/li][li]The US abstained on resolution 587 in 1986 which condemned Israel’s ally in Lebanon, the Southern Lebanese Army, for an attack on a UN compound.[/li][li]The US abstained on resolution 573 in 1985 which condemned Israel for an air raid on Tunisia in response to the killing of three Israeli citizens in Cyprus.[/li][li]Resolution 517 in 1982 condemned Israel for its involvement in Lebanon. The US abstained.[/li][li]Abstained in 487 in 1980 condemning Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem. [/li][li]Resolution 476 also condemned Israel regarding Jerusalem and the US abstained. [/li][li]471 in 1980 condemned Israel’s settlement activity and the US abstained. [/li][li]Resolution 469 which condemned Israel for expelling a mayor in Hebron was also abstained from, similar to 468.[/li][li]The US also abstained on 467 relating to Israel’s actions in Lebanon in 1980.[/li][li]In 2002 the US abstained on Resolution 1345. called for the end of the Ramallah headquarters of Yasser Arafat.[/li][li]The US abstained from resolution 452 in 1979 which condemned Israel’s settlement activity.[/li][li]Etc, etc.[/li][/ul]
US support for anti-Israel UN resolutions:
[ul]
[li]US condemned Israel in 487 in 1981 for its attack on an Iraqi nuclear reactor.[/li][li]The US co-sponsored resolution 904 which condemned the massacre in Hebron in 1994.[/li][li]Resolution 726 also condemned Israel for deportations and was supported by the US, the same was true of 694 in 1991 and 681 in 1990 and 673 deplored Israel not cooperating with the UN[/li][li]Resolution 672, supported by the US, condemned Israel for killing Palestinians in 1990.[/li][li]Resolution 641 in 1989 deplored Israel’s deportation of five Palestinians to Lebanon, the same was true of 636 and 607 in 1988.[/li][li]UN resolution 799 condemning Israel for deporting Palestinians was adopted in 1992 with US support.[/li][li]UN Resolution 1397, which sought to end violence of the Second Intifada in March 2002, called for a two-state solution and was supported by the US (Syria abstained).[/li][li]Resolution 1860 (2009) called for an end to war in Gaza, the US supported it. [/li][li]Resolution 1701 (2006) to end fighting in Lebanon, supported by the US.[/li][li]The US also condemned Israel for not cooperating with UNIFIL in Resolution 444 regarding Lebanon.[/li][li]Etc, etc.[/li][/ul]
Is mama still tying your knickers in a knot? … maybe tell her you’re a big girl now and tie your own knots … so you think gun advocates usurped the will of the American Voters, or are you still not aware of how many people hate women? … now dry your tears and let’s not be scared of the booger man … it’s not forever now is it?
Thank you … you’ve inspired me … for only The Truth can rise that much ire … I can’t believe you think so little of wolfpup that the lil’ cub needs your protection from the likes of me … I’m a moron … I’m sure that’s shocking news to everybody on the planet, who’d thought? … (I’m being facetious in case you didn’t notice) …
The nine nine nine thread … [rolls eyes] … yeah, I threw dx around fairly freely … it’s your fault you withheld, that was a foolish thing to do …
I like wolfpup, he posts some amazing cool things … my usage above of “The Truth” with the capital letters is his definition … I’ll let him explain if he wants too … pretty funny and quite useful …
So in other words America has NEVER supported Israel and The Arabs should have taken over by now (The way you tout these Links to 1/8th of the Anti Israel Crap out of the UN IN LAST 50 YEARS
They ( Far Left & Left ) want us disarmed .
No, in other words you bloviated about “how the US vetoed every piece of Anti Israel crap than came out of the UN for last 30 years” and you’re so full of shit that it’s coming out your ear holes. If you want to start on the long road to maybe being taken seriously in these discussions, you need to stop lying and flaunting that kind of blatant ignorance and make some effort to educate yourself with actual facts.
On second thought, never mind. I see from “They ( Far Left & Left ) want us disarmed” that you’re just basically brain dead.
Well, I do want crazy people disarmed. That must be what he means by “us”.
Bullshit. Some (more than just some?) of us on the Left have weapons too. We just happen to think maniacs and violent criminals shouldn’t have them. Problem?
I’m a gun advocate, I’m sure you’ve noticed … but there’s plenty of common-sense regulations we could enact that wouldn’t be onerous to my right to own a gun, any gun … since these new laws and regulations don’t impede the Right to own a gun, they should be allowed under the 2nd Amendment … I’m just not sure any new restrictions would do much to slow down gun violence … being the issue is violence, not guns …
California is moving forward with their draconian regulations … power to them … we’ve our “Laboratories of Democracy” set up here in the USA … let’s use them … if Orange County voters are willing, then let’s go ahead and have them ban handguns … only then can we find out if such a law would work in the general sense … then let each other community decide for themselves …
Sounds like I’m advocating repealing the 2nd Amendment, but not replacing it … let the 10th Amendment kick in … excuse me now while I wash my mouth out with soap …
Seriously … the gubbermint ain’t gonna grab our guns until We the People say they can …
No, the issue is life, and protecting the right to it.
It continues to astonish me how so many can claim that doing what every other civilized country on the planet has done, successfully, is simply inconceivable here, so the effort should be toward the realistic goal of changing basic human nature instead.
That claim goes well beyond misunderstanding and misstating the contrary view, as is common in reasoned debate. It is actually not consistent with mental health.
I’m sorry, but I’m keeping my arms. I’m rather attached to them.
Gunnism is the death of America.
I’m not clear on how that Springfield .38 is less able to protect you if it’s registered with the B of ATFE … as compared to the gun not being registered … the only difference I can see is that gun owners become responsible for who they sell their guns to … I’m sure there’s more than just me who takes on that responsibility already … it’s the right thing to do …
Think a little harder about whose lives are at risk, and from what.