Gun Free Not Working UK , London ,Australia , ....What ?

1. 0

   ahorsebackposted 5 years ago

   Recent surges in Gun crimes include fully automatic gunfire in London ?   Doctor in London ,  "Bread and butter business is treating highly increasing gun and knife wounds in London ?"  I thought they had free health -care ?
   
   Experts are saying "Its only getting worse " Are Gun Free Zones working there or what ,  perhaps "recent surges "  only means these threats  never really ended and never will ?

   replyreport
   1. 87

      crankaliciousposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      You know where gun-free zones work?
      
      College Football games
      NFL games
      NBA games
      Rock conerts
      The Republican National Convention
      
      and...
      
      The NRA National Convention

      replyreport
      1. 0

         ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         Right ......, when a serious understanding of crime is finally realized by the anti's , they will BEGIN to realize that criminal recidivists  , inner city gangs ,  black on black crimes ,  youth on youth crimes ,  drug addled school children and like minded perpetrators are the greater causes of crime .
         
         Before America is invaded by any MORE 11th century  cultures like the UK or all other immigrating countries in Europe , thus immigrating some of the most violent 11th century crimes known to man , They might consider listening to their citizen masses  instead of allowing too politically distant leaders and unions like the EU . to decide the future of their national interests and much compromised sovereignty .

         replyreport
         1. 87

            crankaliciousposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Boy, talk about dodging the irony.

            replyreport
         2. 87

            crankaliciousposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            There were 32 gun deaths in the UK in 2017, up from 25 the previous year, so that's like about a 30% increase in gun deaths in the UK! Damn!

            replyreport
            1. 0

               ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               I suggest you go back and read though the threads ,   The U.K is lying about it's rates and classifications of crime , I know .....prove it right .     Knife attacks , machete attacks , gangs etc......  The authorities changing how the crimes are actually classified or what they are actually called at the street level by cops , ..........Why do you think you can't go out a buy a good steak knife or kitchen set  without going through a background check ?
               
               Nothing outside of US gov. controlled  statistics CAN be believed for comparison to U.S. crime rates , Yet the agenda of the left  is to fold , bend and mutilate all truth to their liking , like it or not it's  true.

               replyreport
               1. 87

                  crankaliciousposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  That seems to be the Right's answer to everything they disagree with: IT'S NOT TRUE!! So the UK is lying. Great, can't argue with that. I can't prove God doesn't exist either.
                  
                  Climate Change - Scientists are lying!!
                  Vaccinations - Doctors are lying!!
                  Evolution - Academics are lying!!
                  
                  Everything is a conspiracy.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     Well there you go Newby ,  got it all figured out ..........or do you?

                     replyreport
2. 82

   Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years ago

   The government of the United Kingdom should be completely over thrown. They lost their guns, and so they then lost their speech, and their government has flooded them with hostiles from a death cult founded by a pedophile. #FreeTommy
   
   Their solution to soaring knife crime? Ban pointy things. Their solution to invasive rape gangs? Ban criticism of the complete and absolute failure of their police departments to do a solitary thing to protect children, and women.
   
   The dismissal of any attempts at solving actual problems, and instead focusing on inanimate objects and secondary problems, in this case that being persons who talk about the primary problems, is astonishing. I don't think it is going to end well at all.
   
   I'm sick to death for the land the most of my ancestors came from.
   
   While Trump can make me a bit uneasy some days, I'm thankful every single day he is our POTUS, and not that horrific woman who, just after the pulse nightclub shooting, was pushing for massive amounts of 'refugees' be imported to enrich us all. with the cudgel of doom...which is insisted to be a great great strength. Daily news reports out of the U.K., France, and Sweden just prove Trump voters right.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Wait a minute what ?      WE kicked the UK colonialists out of America when they screwed up here , NOW you want us to go back and overthrow the government there too !^#(&%@    ,  I came through the UK too but I'm not going back there ...............:-]

      replyreport
      1. 97

         theraggededgeposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         Yay

         replyreport
      2. 82

         Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         Well no. I hadn't considered my comment could be interpreted that way, but I suppose that it can be interpreted just that way.
         
         I'm hoping the natives of the United Kingdom do the deeds. But...were we to have to send persons and trillions in hardware over to save the U.K. from threats external (and in possible future cases, internal with external influences)...well then, it wouldn't exactly be a first.
         
         Somehow all of my longtime social networking friends from the U.K. are outrageously liberal. I mean, I was shocked completely one day, when a highly educated woman (albeit in the biological sciences) was saying how communism was a system where government cares for its citizens.
         
         Maybe she flunked every history course in the United Kingdom, or possibly, their university history lecturers like to spend off time wearing  those ugly black masks, flying that stupid flag, and being followed around by persons so dumb they think it is ...somehow, sensible and good.
         
         (makes statement which won't ever be acknowledged to have existed in this place. I used to be against capitalism. I used to be a moron under the influence of what we now consider fake news, or liberal news hegemony. Hangs head in shame)

         replyreport
         1. 0

            ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            London 's certainly paying the price for the UK.allowing 11th  century tribalism to immigrate into the UK ,  Crime rates soaring , knife attacks , guns too ,  as well as other cities in England , given their system of government, I can't imagine how  the Brits can possibly have any say in their government given the weird style of legislating .

            replyreport
            1. 82

               Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               It is completely fascinating how the people there have convinced themselves they can not talk about what is happening because importing savages from savage places where savagery on the streets is normal is only ever wonderful for everyone - because some brilliant persons who absolutely hate white persons in the United Kingdom spent many years repeating 'diversity is our greatest strength.'
               
               The Nazi propaganda minister would be very pleased, in a cause and effect, sciency sort of way, by how that implanted mental malfunction was eased into the public consciousness, or lack thereof.
               
               I'm still fascinated, but being fascinated about a thing that is happening, and has been happening before our eyes, and over decades of time, doesn't mean you are not also horrified to the point of illness at the same moment.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  And that all combined with the superficial level of liberal maturity accepting the great european socialisms word that WE in America must throw open our doors to the same insanity as is going on in all the immigrant infested countries , Greece , Italy , The UK. , but especially the aging populations of Denmark , Sweden Germany , Norway where social reengineering is taking place .
                  
                  Interesting isn't it that with all of the foreign aid , with all of America's philanthropic care to the rest of the world , that what we get in return is the worlds export of  their unemployable , criminal gang populations , welfare , poverty , organized crime deviants , .............We give most nations money to make life for their people  better THERE so that they can export only their undesirables to HERE .
                  Such a Deal !

                  replyreport
                  1. 97

                     theraggededgeposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     There you go, the same 'disease' that's enveloping Europe. It's a worldwide problem. Unless you are Australia who turn away illegal immigrant boats and shove any undesirables off to Nauru. It's a shame Aus is so damn hot and full of flies.
                     
                     I love your vision of a philanthropic, caring US government. It's a beautiful thing. You don't do it all by yourselves though, and as a percentage of gross national income, the UK gives far more development aid: 0.67 as opposed to your paltry 0.15. So don't make out that you are the most generous nation in the world, because you aren't.
                     
                     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_d … try_donors

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                        AS state in YOUR posted Wiki numbers , Your offering doesn't include the most important elements of philanthropic donations ,  Nice numbers but they only apparently include government funded donations ; Not however included are any private donations ! Want to even guess at those numbers ?   Want to begin comparing Church donations ?  Corporate foundations ?  Public and private foundations ?  Individual philanthropists ?  Group foundations and funds ?
                        
                        America is the most philanthropic nation on earth .  period , The size of it's population and economy alone speaks truths uncharted by your weak Wiki offering  ,   Probably our military alone has shown up at more at most natural or man made disasters than most member nations .  If you want to offer further charts and weak  excuses for your reasoning ,TRY to  include all fact and not just those pertaining to your emotions about the subject .
                        
                        AS to violence in the worst run cities in the world  ,  First look to "Gun Free Zones "   in the US. ,the UK . or anyplace and discover that  it becomes a welcome mat for the most violent cultures and societies on earth .   An open advertisement for criminals that - "We are turning the Keys of the City over to you , it yours ! " In America ,  NYC , Chicago , Baltimore , L.A. San Francisco ,  New Orleans , Trenton N.J. ,Minneapolis Mn.  Miami Fl.  ...........
                        Let's ask ourselves why these most violent places in the US . are Democratic managed  cities and have been for up to a century ?

                        replyreport
                        1. 96

                           wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                           Seems like I saw a report a year or so ago about private donations in different countries.  The conclusion of the piece was that Europe (and the UK) taxes it's people so much that there is little left to give and then gives to the peoples and causes that the government thinks is best.
                           
                           The US taxes less and private donations are far higher as people donate to causes they think are best rather than allowing the bureaucrats to choose for them.
                           
                           In the end the result is just as you say - the governments of the EU provide more (relative to GDP) than the US, but the total given by government AND the people goes to the US as the people there give far more than individuals in the EU.

                           replyreport
                           1. 97

                              theraggededgeposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                              People in the UK are not taxed until their income reaches £11,500 or $15,400. And that amount of anyone's income is always tax free. Lower income families (average under £22,000) also get tax credits paid directly back to them. Your people are taxed 10% from $1 to $9326 (2017). And I don't know, but does the US govt. pay a State Pension? To every citizen of retirement age?
                              
                              I would also guess that the individual private donations you speak of are mostly to US charities and to international emergency aid. The figures I referred to pertain to development aid given by governments. Private individuals aren't likely to donate to those kinds of projects.
                              
                              So I think it's all levelled out in the end.

                              replyreport
                              1. 96

                                 wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                                 Not sure of your point.  That the poor in the UK don't pay taxes (or donate to foreign causes, either) has nothing to do with the percentage of GDP that goes through the many layers of government.  And THAT figure is far higher in the UK than the US.
                                 
                                 State Pension?  A qualified "yes".  It is called Social Security here.  It started out as a forced contribution to one's own "retirement account" but has become no more than a political football in the years since - a pile of money politicians can use as they wish while refusing any semblance of fiduciary duty to take care of it.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 97

                                    theraggededgeposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                                    I was responding to your point that UK citizens are taxed more than US citizens. My point is that it all levels out in the end.
                                    
                                    And of course people of all income brackets donate to foreign causes and emergencies. To say that we don't is factually incorrect.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 96

                                       wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                                       I don't see it as "leveling out" when one country takes a far larger percentage of all income than another does.  It doesn't "even out" for the country OR the individuals in it.
                                       
                                       Really?  I know that during the hard financial times of my life, when struggling to feed my family, there wasn't anything left to donate.  I assume Brits are the same - your own children come before those in Africa or some such.

                                       report
                        2. 97

                           theraggededgeposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                           Eh? Emotions? Am I emotional around the subject of international development donations? Nah. Maybe you're projecting?

                           replyreport
               2. 97

                  theraggededgeposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  How weird you think we don't talk about these things. Where do you get your information from?
                  
                  The UK is, like the US, far from perfect. We know that. It doesn't help that we have had a bunch of crappy governments who are unable to form workable policies, cannot stand up for the rights of the indigenous population, and who are in thrall to their EU masters.
                  
                  Anyway we are glad that our schools are generally safe places to send our children... as compared to the US, of course.

                  replyreport
   2. 81

      Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      "The government of the United Kingdom should be completely over thrown" 
      
      Can I assume you mean through political means? You're not suggesting that UK citizens should commit violence against public officials, are you?

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         Any clarification on this? Did you mean "overthrown" as in defeated in a fair, democratic political process? Or do you mean violently overthrown? The latter is obviously very different to the former, so I think a clarification would be useful.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Being a little dramatic aren't you DonW.?    When we conservatives look at the UK. we see ourselves further along in the chain of evolutionary democratic -republics of governments ,    We all know that America was nothing new , we took our constitution from other nations , particularly nations like  the UK....? ......I think anyways ?   No I think Wessman means " "the people rising up "  much like here in America , again and again ......

            replyreport
            1. 81

               Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

               Dramatic? Sadly no. Two years ago a Member of Parliament (Jo Cox) was murdered by a right-wing extremist because he believed her to be a "traitor" to white people. Her assailant had links to far right groups like the National Front(1), the neo-Nazi National Alliance(2) and other hate groups(3). And 5 police officers were injured recently when Tommy Robinson supporters fought with police during a recent protest(4).
               
               So when someone writes . . . 
               
               
               . . . I don't think it is "dramatic" to ask them to clarify if they are advocating violence. I think it's a fair question.
               
               So Perhaps Wesman Todd Shaw would like to provide that clarification himself. Are you speaking figuratively or advocating more of the type of violence already committed by far right groups and those connected to them in the UK?
               
               (1) https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 … cox-murder
               (2) https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/201 … l-alliance
               (3) https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/th … te-n595286
               (4) https://abcnews.go.com/International/wi … s-55774271

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Wessman will have to answer for himself and I'm sure he will.   But don't forget , we're seeing through the lense of media ,incurably  biased as they are .  "Right wing " or left fringe violence . Ideologically inspired crimes are there from all fringes of the ideologies . From knife attacks of  Islam , automobiles into the crowds  etc....who knows where government change truly originates from , there or here .
                  
                  As in America there is much anger from both ideologies , one vocal , media fueled , academia promoted , media generated  the other traditionally patriotic , rather quietly seething , deeply embedded . there is idealism working from the edges at every point of any revolution , WHAT KIND  of revolution to come is always the question .What  and who are feeders to it's insatiable hungers ?
                  
                  Blame ?  Put the blame where it openly lays , apathy of the governing bureaucracies  .   media with agenda's , the powers in the shadows , {the Soros , Koch } . I believe both nations are to economically successful to be anywhere near revolutions , the US or the UK. .....then all violence becomes just violence of individual angers , crimes of passion , religion or ideology . Until a people  become physically hungry there is little chance of  mass revolution .  All else is just normal ........

                  replyreport
                  1. 81

                     Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                     I agree, Wesman Todd Shaw is more than capable of answering for himself, and I agree with the rest of your comment in very broad terms.
                     
                     The "violence of individual angers" you refer to though can still cause real harm, so both sides of the political spectrum could do more to tone down the rhetoric.
                     
                     I might have assumed Wesman was speaking figuratively, but Tommy Robinson founded an extreme right-wing group and has engaged in violence himself. I think Robinson later rejected extremism, but that association (and the current political climate) is what gives me pause for thought, which is why I'm asking  Wesman for clarification.

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                        Don , I cannot help but think or even know that the similarities between fringe group rhetoric  and the inner GOVERNMENT[s] rhetoric and divisive environment are played by each other but particularly FROM the government to the fringes ?    If they keep the fringes and yes , even the violent fringes at each other throats , then the government itself wins .
                        
                        They remain , the government swamp expands , business as usual.   You've got to admit one thing , We will never hear as much "call to violence "in the streets -from the right . There is basically one ideology ready at all times to take it to the streets ,  I wouldn't be too alarmed about one or two from the right .

                        replyreport
                     2. 82

                        Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                        Tommy Robinson is the single greatest civil rights figure in the whole of Europe. He's against violent pedophile rape culture, the opposite of the European liberals.
                        

                        replyreport
                        1. 81

                           Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                           Again, when you say. . .
                           
                           "The government of the United Kingdom should be completely over thrown." 
                           
                           . . . do you mean "overthrown" through political means? Or are you suggesting that UK citizens should commit violence against public officials and representatives of government?

                           replyreport
                           1. 82

                              Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                              Does it matter? I kinda think having the freedom to speak what one thinks without fear of being arrested is pretty important. If you do not share that value, well, okay.

                              replyreport
                              1. 81

                                 Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                                 Of course it matters. There is a big difference between advocating a political campaign to change a government, and suggesting that a government be violently overthrown.
                                 
                                 But I'm not sure if you were suggesting violence or not, and it would be unfair of me to just jump to that conclusion. That's why I'm asking you for clarity. When you said "[t]he government of the United Kingdom should be completely over thrown", were you advocating that UK citizens commit violence against public officials and government representatives, or were you just speaking figuratively? It's a simple question. Not sure what the difficulty is in answering it.
                                 
                                 Fear of being arrested? Do you mean yourself? Or are you referring to Robinson being charged with contempt of court, pleading guilty, being sentenced in a court of law, then serving his sentence, like every other person who breaks the law? If so, what's that got to do with advocating violence against public officials (if that's what you are advocating)?

                                 replyreport
3. 97

   theraggededgeposted 5 years ago

   Issuing British citizens with guns is not going to solve anything. Why add another layer of potential violence? All crime, relative to the US is much lower in the UK.
   
   https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/c … 86866.html

   replyreport
   1. 0

      ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      No ones murder rate's much  worse than NYC's , but you have to admit those gun free zones are really working out in those areas ?
      Someone told me the other day ,
      
      "Ya but all the  guns used in crimes in NYC are coming from places like Vermont "
      
      I responded ,
      " That's kind of weird , how come all of that major gun crimes , murder rates , robberies , rapes and MS 13 gang activity and criminal recidivism  isn't happening  up where those guns originated in Vermont ?
      
      See the foolishness of that argument ?

      replyreport
   2. 96

      wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Are you sure?  Switzerland issues a gun to everyone in the military service (which means nearly everyone in the age range) and those are true "assault rifles" (automatic rifles) to boot.
      
      It also has half the homicide rate of England and Wales.  Are you sure that issuing guns won't solve the violence?

      replyreport
      1. 97

         theraggededgeposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         Absolutely.

         replyreport
4. 60

   Live to Learnposted 5 years ago

   I loved the news report where a motorist in London (I think) accidentally cut off a guy on a bike and he pulled out a humongous 'zombie killing' knife and attacked the vehicle.
   
   Violence will always find a way. No matter what you ban.

   replyreport
   1. 97

      theraggededgeposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I know, it was... I dunno... jaw-dropping.
      
      I kind of got the feeling it might have been set up between them. It was as if the cyclist was waiting for the car to pull out.

      replyreport
5. 75

   Castlepalomaposted 5 years ago

   You need to be careful when looking at statistics to be sure you are comparing like:like - once you correct for that UK has less violent crime.
   
   Obviuously the murder rate is vastly higher: that might be because Americans are more violent or because more guns mean more deaths.

   replyreport
6. 0

   ahorsebackposted 5 years ago

   Back to the O.P.   , 2nd amendment  rights group in  Deerfield Ill. secures  injunction against  "assault weapons " ban and confiscation .  This suburb of Chicago will become  the testing ground for gun bans . THis has been tried again and again in other places .     this ban went too far and included among other things smaller capacity magazine confiscations and fines of $1,000 dollars a day  for residents ,
   
   2nd amendment rights ,wins !

   replyreport
7. 75

   Castlepalomaposted 5 years ago

   Nobody wins with guns, as you have a greater chance to be killed than without a gun. You can't do anything worst to a human being than to kill them, unless your going to eat them like the outdated bible says.
   
   Made sense when the 2nd amendment was made. They killed for food, and before they shot at humans they had a minute to think as they loaded the muskets rather than an over emotional Christian respond.

   replyreport
   1. 96

      wildernessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      "Nobody wins with guns"
      
      Tell that to the American Indians.  To the Aztec Nation.  To the villagers in Afghanistan and Syria.  History is replete with "winners" that had guns (or the equivalent in the days before firearms).
      
      "You can't do anything worst to a human being than to kill them"
      
      "Give me Liberty or Give me Death!"  I agree with Patrick Henry.

      replyreport
      1. 75

         Castlepalomaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         You lose part of your soul when you kill a man. The US soilders in middle east have double their suicide rate. More troop have been kill by suicide than in Battle. All these brown people what have they won? The adverage American is living like they are on an Indian reservation, endless debt and many obesity physical or media crap feed. Many separate from their families.
         
         No,  the only winners financially are the Greedy yet loser of happiness. Because money has the least to do for happiness.

         replyreport
8. 0

   ahorsebackposted 5 years ago

   The State saying in my home state of New hampshire is  , " Live free or Die"  a historical saying from the revolution [Patrick Henry ?]. It's even on the number plates ,   Which essentially means violence against any tyrannical form of government .
   
   Isn't this actually "calling for violence against government " too ? If this NH. state government  approved saying is okay why demand Wessman reply to his statement as if he were what , A terrorist ?  Many people of all both ideologies believe in holding our government accountable to the ultimate extent,   why is that so wrong  ?
   
   Is it only wrong when its "conservative" wrong ?

   replyreport
   1. 75

      Castlepalomaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      No mater right or left. People power must take back the power from the Federal Government, they are no longer good for you.

      replyreport
9. 0

   ahorsebackposted 5 years ago

   Don w , There is nothing wrong with saying it either way , we all feel that government infringes on our liberties to one level or another , I for instance see local government  in America as being the over taxing part of our misery . gas taxes  property taxes , assorted  fees for everything ,   as being  horrendous . It varies nationally but begins locally . Wessman has as much right to free speech as the the protester on campus  does .
   
   I often wonder why in America  we go through life like sheep and can even imagine an uprising in America  , a tax revolt ?  An entitlement revolt ? An ideological uprising of some violent degree or another.   I also know that two things have to be in place for revolution , hunger , and public anger , We already have a government that is corrupt -not enough apparently to anger the people but corrupt by all standards - all that  is lacking in America is hunger or anger at the incendiary  level  .
   
   Violent revolution  , Is but the level of revolution attained , there is always the chance and need for violence in revolution , why , because that is what it takes . Don't we see that incidentally as in the congressional baseball game where Scalise gained his fame ?    Don't we see that in attempted or actual assassinations ?  Isn't that even what's happening in protest marches , isn't there  plenty of violence there ?  Ferguson , Seattle ,  the LA riots , St.Louis , Baltimore  ,  there's  plenty of anti-government  violence there right ?     Is violence against established government or for instance  these cop killings happening almost daily the same ? Is it okay that in America the liberal party apparently advocates such violence ?

   replyreport
   1. 81

      Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      It's possible I misunderstood Wessman's comment. I don't want to make a false assumption.
      
      That's why I'm asking what he meant when he said "[t]he government of the United Kingdom should be completely over thrown". Was he advocating that UK citizens commit violence against public officials and government representatives, or was he just speaking figuratively?
      
      I'm not sure why that's proving so difficult to answer. I'm happy to rephrase the question if it helps.
      
      And for the record, if a "protester on campus" were in the forum and I wasn't sure what they meant, I'd be asking them to clarify too.

      replyreport
10. 0

    ahorsebackposted 5 years ago

    While Wessman will have to answer for himself , he makes a conservative or at least a ideological observation about revolution while  almost daily at times  liberal activist's manifest them in NYC . LA . or London on the street , or on campuses .    Isn't THAT already advocating such an "complete government overthrowing " ?

    replyreport
    1. 81

       Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

       If I'm not sure what someone means, then I ask for clarification. It helps avoid misunderstandings. I may have even asked you to clarify your comments once or twice.
       
       Wessman seems to be having difficulty, but I don't know what the difficulty is.
       
       It's not a trick question. When he says the UK government should be "completely over thrown" is he advocating violence against public officials and representatives of government?
       
       If so, the answer is yes. If not, the answer is no. Again, not sure what the difficulty is.
       
       Or does he believe his answer is something he needs to hide? If so, why might that be? Either way, I look forward to him enlightening us.

       replyreport
11. 0

    ahorsebackposted 5 years ago

    Don W , Maybe Wessman's  one of those original "rabble rousers" that ultimately became an American ?  I don't think there's any clarification really required  , you wouldn't be  just simply needling him for  an unnecessary  "clarification ",  would you .....haven't some here been known to do that ?

    replyreport
    1. 81

       Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

       I think the difference between advocating a political campaign, and advocating physical attacks on  public officials, is a very significant one, and any comment blurring the two deserves some clarification.
       
       If someone entered the forum and advocated "overthrowing" a government in support of a left-wing activist who founded a violent, far-left hate group, it would be perfectly reasonable for you to ask for clarification of that comment.
       
       Wessman has advocated "overthrowing" a government in support of a right-wing activist who founded a violent, far-right hate group. It is perfectly reasonable for me to ask for clarification of that comment.
       
       In both cases, the commenter could be speaking figuratively. There's only one way to find out.
       
       I await Wessman's reply.

       replyreport
12. 0

    ahorsebackposted 5 years ago

    There is far cry of difference between Wessmann or anyone saying "....should be overthrown ...."   and  calling him out  with a misquote ......violently overthrown ....." .      Who doesn't want political change ? If what degree or direction to that change is the question then fine but shall we now misquote Wessman at least .

    replyreport
    1. 81

       Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

       There is no misquote. I have asked him if his use of "overthrow" is in the political sense, or if he is advocating violence. That's a fair question.
       
       I have refrained from assuming anything either way. In fact that's the whole point of my seeking clarification.
       
       If you think otherwise, here is every request for clarification I have made. Feel free to point out exactly where I have misquoted his comment, as opposed to simply asking what he means:
       
       
       
       If Wessmann is advocating violence, then perhaps he should have the courage of his convictions and say so. If he isn't he can say that also.
       
       Either way, a simple clarification would clear things right up.
       
       P.S Are you Wessmann' official spokesperson now? I'm only asking because if you are, then I can direct my requests for clarification through you. If not, then I think he is capable of speaking up for himself. Unless he is only capable of making statements, but not standing by them. It certainly seems that way.

       replyreport
       1. 0

          ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          What I am --is actively participating in a forum --what you are is not liking my reasoning --what Wessmann is is voicing his opinion that your trying to turn into a major rant  as if calling for the overthrowing of your government was a major crime against you personally or something .
          
          What the UK is  ,many believe , is  just one more country moving down the road of modern socialism that -- so far-- is still open to criticism so my suggestion  , get over yourself.  This is after all a political forum .

          replyreport
          1. 81

             Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

             Yes, you are actively participating in a forum, as I am.
             
             And although we are both free to speculate about the meaning Wesman intended, you don't know the meaning he intended (I assume).
             
             So asking if you were his official spokesperson was my way of saying (politely, albeit flippantly) that I'm less interested in your speculation on his meaning, and more interested in him clarifying the actual meaning. If you don't appreciate my saying so, there's not much I can do to help you with that.
             
             Last time you accused me of misquoting Wesman's comment. I have provided you with a list of every request for clarification I have made, and encouraged you to point out where the misquote is. Can I take the fact you haven't done so, as an indicator that you are no longer accusing me of misquoting?
             
             Now you accuse me of "trying to go on a major rant" against Wesman's opinion. Again, I have to point out that I do not currently know Wesman's opinion. I don't know if "the government of the United Kingdom should be completely over thrown" means he is advocating violence against current public officials, or if he is speaking figuratively. When I know, I'll be able to express a view on it. At that stage, if I choose to go on a "major rant", that's my prerogative because, as you rightly say, "this is after all a political forum".
             
             Now, if you really need to have a discussion about why it's wrong to advocate violence against current public officials in countries with mature democratic processes like the US and UK (take that as a sneak preview of my opinion on the subject) then I'm more than happy to participate in any new forum you create about it. In fact, I'd be fascinated to hear your defense of advocating such violence.
             
             In this forum though, I think it would be unfair for us to assume violence is what Wesman meant. The fairest thing to do would be to assume he is principled enough to stand by his own opinions, and ask him to clarify. Whether you like it or not, that is what I'm doing.
             
             I await his response.

             replyreport
13. 82

    Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years ago

    I wonder who Wessmann is.

    replyreport
    1. 81

       Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

       Thanks for pointing out that spelling mistake, which I have corrected.
       
       When you say "the government of the United Kingdom should be completely over thrown" are you advocating violence against current public officials, or are you speaking figuratively?

       replyreport
       1. 60

          Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Good luck getting a cogent answer from either the claimer, or the ersatz spokesman for the claimer, Don. I've personally found it an exercise in futility to try.....

          replyreport
          1. 81

             Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

             Yes, it's amazing how a simple, honest question can make some people squirm or fall silent. I guess the pen (or keyboard) really is mightier than the sword.

             replyreport
    2. 0

       ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

       ........:-]

       replyreport
14. 0

    ahorsebackposted 5 years ago

    Well here's my answer , If the people of the UK want to be sheep forever then that's obviously their problem and so sheep they are .    If they were to chose to rise up legislatively or even violently , it is their choice to be patriots  and yet , we can see now that they have tyrants .
    
    "....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants......" Thomas Jefferson

    replyreport
    1. 75

       Castlepalomaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

       I love to see UK people overthrow their Government with skill set punches and politeness.
       Just give everyone (fool)a gun like in the US to overthrow their Government and in no time at all. Then What?

       replyreport
    2. 81

       Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

       Thanks for the information, which is revealing, but does not answer the question I've been asking Wesman.
       
       I asked him to clarify whether his is suggesting that UK citizens should commit violence against public officials.
       
       Now I'm asking you for similar clarification of your comments.
       
       Do you support members of the public violently attacking public officials in the UK, in order to bring about political change?
       
       Wesman's way of addressing the issue is continued silence. Your way of addressing the issue so far has been to squirm around it. Will you continue to squirm, or will you give me a straight answer?

       replyreport
       1. 0

          ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Don W , Yes .     
          Is that clear enough ?   Of course if a political or rhetorical voter revolution were morph into something further enraging the populace all the way to violence , AND diplomacy  fails in the voter representative process and it becomes violent,  then it's not a matter of whether ANYONE supports it or not , It will happen.
          
          In that case, yes , I would support the UK people . And you wouldn't ?
          
          Good guess ?

          replyreport
          1. 0

             ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

             Answer that  question Don W .   Wouldn't you ALSO support the voice of the people over the government of the UK. And yes even the ensuing violence when  and if it becomes necessary ?
             
             Or can you  even say so .
             
             
             I would be willing to talk to the Hessians on your behalf Don .

             replyreport
          2. 81

             Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

             I'm not sure you fully understand what I am asking you. Let me rephrase it in a way you may understand. If your answer remains the same, then that's all I need to know.
             
             This is Jo Cox.
             
             
             
             Jo was murdered by a member of the public who wanted to bring about political change through violence.
             
             The person you choose to call a "patriot" shouted "Britain first", then shot Jo three times, including once in the head, then stabbed her multiple times just for good measure.
             
             Her crime was being a member of parliament who cared about all of her constituents regardless of their color or racial background, and wanting to remain part of the EU.
             
             Do you support her killer's actions?
             
             In case what I'm asking is still not quite clear enough for you:
             
             This is Lee Rigby. Lee was a drummer in the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers.
             
             
             
             He was murdered by a member of the public who also wanted to bring about political change through violence. His murderers ran Lee over while he was crossing the road. While he was lying on the ground, they exited the vehicle and partially beheaded him. His crime? Being a British soldier.
             
             Do you support his killers actions?
             
             In case you're still not sure what I'm asking you:
             
             This is Keith Palmer.
             
             
             
             Keith was also killed by someone who wanted to bring about political change through violence. His murderer ran up to him and stabbed him in the neck outside parliament. His crime was being a police officer on duty.
             
             Do you support his killer's actions?
             
             And to Wesman, when you say the UK government should be "overthrown" are you advocating these types of actions?
             
             In case either of you are under any illusion, all three cases are examples of members of the public attacking public officials to bring about political change.
             
             Do you support their actions?
             
             My answer to your question is no. The US and UK do have mature, functioning democratic processes. They are imperfect, but they are there. Committing such violence against current public officials in the US or UK could never be considered justifiable by any reasonable person.

             replyreport
             1. 0

                ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                You still aren't getting it Don ?   My point is to the majority of voters potentially rising up against the tyranny of government  .   Not the individual acts of a violent criminal claiming a dog spoke to him from the edges of the universe , off his meds , or on meds for that matter , .............Don , tell me you understand the difference between a criminal act and a modern day revolution even involving a collective violence perpetrated from the populace , In which case , Yes I would potentially condone ?
                
                If you can't understand THAT difference than I would have to say , I'm beginning to understand why crime is on the rise in the UK ., why something politically unfriendly is occurring over and over in your streets .
                I kindly suggest you try to learn the difference between the two acts before it's too late .

                replyreport
                1. 81

                   Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                   Whether Jo Cox was murdered by one man or a mob of 500 makes no difference at all. Her murder was, and is, completely unjustifiable by anyone who isn't a contemptible fanatic.
                   
                   And euphemisms like "collective violence" don't make it somehow better. You're talking about the murder of ordinary men and women.
                   
                   I dare you to tell Jo Cox's family that her murder would have been acceptable if it was carried out by "the populace" as part of a "collective violence". Or to tell Keith Palmer and Lee Rigby's wives and children their deaths are only wrong because they were carried out by individuals instead of a mob.
                   
                   What is wrong with you? How did your moral compass get so skewed, that you can seriously suggest murdering innocent people is fine as long as it's done by a mob?
                   
                   This is what "collective violence" by a group of Irish "patriots" called the IRA looks like. Families getting blown to bits as they pay their respects at a war memorial.
                   
                   
                   
                   Veterans, out for the day, medals pinned on chests, being murdered for no other reason than the fact they served their country proudly.
                   
                   
                   
                   Someone's father lying dead where he stood a minute before singing hymns.
                   
                   
                   
                   This is what members of the public using violence to bring about political change looks like.
                   
                   Perhaps you would like to see what the English "patriots" in Northern Ireland did to Catholic civilians in return.
                   
                   This is what you support.
                   
                   Thank you for publicly confirming how completely morally bankrupt those of your ilk truly are.
                   
                   The sad part is that you can't even see there is no moral difference between what you're saying and what an ISIS sympathizer would say. You are advocating that members of the public collectively kill public officials. Your views are that of an extremist. But you've managed to convince yourself that your particular brand of repugnant extremism is somehow different. This would be funny if it wasn't so tragic.

                   replyreport
                   1. 0

                      ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                      Don , Alright so you are either a pacifist who has no understanding of any violence at all , or that you selectively choose your outrage as by any  act against a tyranny ?  The American revolution was a just cause ,  WWII was a just cause from a different perspective , The UK and Europe begged and the USA answered , the American civil war was a just cause for the north , BUT no wait...... these must be all be acts of the most horribly unjustified violence imaginable , right ? All murderers ? Because why , because they are not about YOU and your false righteousness ?
                      
                      No ! Don what you are is a selective moralist , judging each as all acts of the people rising up against tyranny by your own selfish ideological  choosing . I think however that you'd fit right in with  the American left .  What your incredibly egocentric moral outrage boils down to quite simply is hypocrisy . I understand that though ,   we have seen much cowardice from idealists in America just as you've displayed here .

                      replyreport
                      1. 81

                         Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                         Stop trying to backtrack and change the subject. The question was very clear: "Do you support members of the public violently attacking public officials in the UK, in order to bring about political change?" You said "Yes. Is that clear enough?"
                         
                         Jo Cox, a member of parliament, was killed by a member of the public who wanted to bring about political change.
                         
                         Lee Rigby, a soldier, was killed by a member of the public who wanted to bring about political change.
                         
                         Keith Palmer, a police officer, was killed by a a member of the public who wanted to bring about political change.
                         
                         The veterans of Enniskillen, were killed by members of the public who wanted to bring about political change.
                         
                         This is the violence you said you support.
                         
                         And no, there is no comparison between this and historical military conflicts. None. Only someone with a warped mind could think there is. And you do a great disservice to the honor of the men and women who fought in those conflicts to suggest such a link. Allied WWII veterans are not the same as catholic and protestant paramilitary groups, ISIS and far-right extremists.
                         
                         I've shown you what a "modern day revolution" looks like in reality. It's nothing like your ridiculous  fantasies.
                         
                         It consists of ordinary people like Jo Cox, lying in the street with half her head blown off and multiple stab wounds.
                         
                         Like Lee Rigby, lying in the street with his head nearly separated from his body.
                         
                         Like Keith Palmer lying on the floor with multiple stab wounds to his neck.
                         
                         Like elderly veterans lying in the rubble with their limbs blown off.
                         
                         That's what your "modern day revolution" looks like.
                         
                         If you don't support and condone these murders, then condemn them right here and now.
                         
                         But then please take the time to explain what "members of the public violently attacking public officials in the UK" looks like, if not this.

                         replyreport
                         1. 75

                            Castlepalomaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                            Yes, violence is never the answer.

                            replyreport
                         2. 0

                            ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                            
                            
                            AS to your UK. colonialism , I suppose you can easily justify and inject your own values as to what or where violence comes FROM and then delivered to WHO  ?
                            
                            
                            
                            Judging just by what YOU call violence against government  and what others call it is being a bit morally selective Don ,  The history of your hypocrisy is openly evident .
                            
                            
                            
                            
                            Yet here you are all morally and justifiably outraged because I say certain revolutionary violence may be  justified ?
                            
                            
                            
                            
                            
                            
                            
                            
                            
                            Better polish those boots Don W, I hear that Ireland and the people in the north  are considering  themselves  as a free people once again ?  Time to send in the rolls of barbed wire , ammo supplies , armored personnel carriers ?  Violent crime or revolution Don , which are you taking about ?

                            replyreport
                            1. 75

                               Castlepalomaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                               That loyalist photo reminds me of why we are much more intelligent and kinder today. Under the heirachary empire rules for centuries people's adverage lifespan did not get pass age 40.
                               Non violence revolution will be the answer for independence people in the future.

                               replyreport
                            2. 81

                               Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                               I categorically and unequivocally condemn the violence committed by republican and loyalist paramilitaries, and any unlawful and indiscriminate violence by British troops against Irish civilians.
                               
                               See how simple that is. It's not rocket science.
                               
                               Now your turn.
                               
                               Do you condemn the murders of an MP (Jo Cox), soldier (Lee Rigby), police officer (Keith Palmer) and army veterans (people from the town of Enniskillen), by members of the public wanting political change, or do you support and condone those murders?
                               
                               If you condemn them, please explain what "members of the public violently attacking public officials in the UK" looks like, if not exactly this.

                               replyreport
                               1. 0

                                  ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                                  You already know a conservatives stance on violent crime especially  politically motivated violence and crime -  is much stricter than the  liberals  or pacifism  displayed by many  , So I will not play your "Answer My question only " game anymore for the benefit of your substantial ego  ,  I've said  a million times around here that violent criminals are a plague on our societies .
                                  
                                  Aren't you actually a journalist of some kind ?  So , let's stop playing this game of selective hearing Don , There is a far cry of difference between individual acts of violence of ANY kind  And the act of political revolution ! 
                                  If you cannot decipher that difference then you truly don't belong in journalistic media  !   Perhaps THAT'S why many sheople  the UK especially of late seemingly have  so much trouble separating politics from crime .
                                  
                                  Lesson one for Don , The people you bring into the conversation are individual violent criminals bent on maiming and killing , pretty simple . Whether they get their  directions from a manual of some  kind or a barking dog in the Westminster 's dark of night , they remain criminals and criminals alone.   
                                  
                                  Lesson Two , When an entire population rises up under tyranny and over decades , no sorry ,  centuries of said tyranny as in Northern Ireland or perhaps Scotland , they are then more than likely  revolutionaries .   Perhaps Don W needs to  re-study or re-boot  the lessons of British colonialism or any nations colonialism ?
                                  
                                  Don , You are a journalist , right ?

                                  replyreport
                                  1. 81

                                     Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                                     Stop with your Braveheart BS.
                                     
                                     Jo Cox wasn't a "tyrant". She was an ordinary mother of two, going about her business. You're saying that murdering her for being an MP would be fine, if the murder was done by a group of people calling it a "revolution" instead of an individual with a political agenda.
                                     
                                     Newsflash, it doesn't matter whether she was killed by one man with a political agenda, or a group of 10,000 idiots who fancy themselves the next Rob Roy. Her murder would still be morally wrong. It would also still be politically unjustifiable because in countries like the US and UK there are mature democratic processes in place, supported by an independent judiciary. So even though it's very far from perfect, people's views, on the whole, can be represented; and justice, on the whole, can be done. Even people like you, who spew hateful nonsense, can have their views represented (see Trump).
                                     
                                     And yes, you are hateful. You think it was fine for the IRA to kill a group of elderly veterans and their families, just because the IRA was a group with a political agenda, and because you have some romantic fantasy about modern day "revolutions". You think there's something glorious in killing a person because of their race, religion or politics.
                                     
                                     You've abandoned reason.
                                     
                                     You're no different to any other violent extremist. You spew the same crap ISIS do. Just replace your "collective violence" with "Jihad", and your "modern day revolution" with "holy war" and there would be no difference. You're cut from the same cloth.
                                     
                                     I only wish the sensible, sane people in the world could give people who support violent extremism like you, your own little patch of land, where you and all the other deluded extremists could run around fighting each other and having as many little "revolutions" as you want, without dragging the rest of us into it.
                                     
                                     Seriously, if you want to enact a revolution, go do some role-playing somewhere and leave the rest of us out of it. People like you are what is currently wrong with the world.
                                     
                                     Randy did warn me about it, but I had to see for myself. I wanted to know how far you've walked away from reason. But you haven't just walked away, you've gotten in a car, driven to the airport, flown to Cape Canaveral, launched yourself into space, and are now floating on the other side of the solar system somewhere between Venus and Mars.
                                     
                                     If Wesman shares the same views as you, then I now fully understand why he wanted to hide them, which indicates an intuitive understanding of how shameful those views are. Apparently you don't even have that. You're more than happy to express each and every extremist brain fart you have on this forum, as if it's some kind of reasoned argument, and I'm genuinely sorry for you.
                                     
                                     But not as sorry as I am for future victims of the vile ideology you and others support; ordinary people living their lives right now, oblivious to the fact that at some point in the future, some odious cretin who has watched too many Mel Gibson movies, will take their life in the name of a "modern day revolution"
                                     
                                     I feel desperately sorry for them, and for the families who will have to suffer the loss. Just as I feel for Jo Cox MP, Pvt. Fusilier Lee Rigby, PC Kieth Palmer and their families, and all the men and women who lost their lives during the conflict in Northern Ireland.
                                     
                                     There is no glory in committing violence against ordinary people because they happen to work for the US or UK government. That's the very definition of extremism.
                                     
                                     You need to deal with your repugnant, delusional, historical violence fetish, before it consumes you.

                                     replyreport
                               2. 75

                                  Castlepalomaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                                  I've been part-time security head and was willing to put my life on the line for the public. Been shot at and attacked by over a hundred people, still no one was harmed.
                                  
                                  Today , the public lays their life down on the line for authorities. Plus Authorities kill more people than the public do. I have no longer faith and most part have divorced the system.  Violence and killing will never stop killing or Violence, unless it is direct defense of protecting your body by equal force. I can't imagine running out of ideas to harm someone. Militarily have endless ways of harming and killing people.

                                  replyreport
             2. 60

                Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                Don, please remember you're speaking to people who actually voted for a con man. No amount of facts, logic, or reasoning can get through to these folks. They knew what Trump was from the beginning, and as they are all similar in nature to him, they will stick by him even if horns sprout from his comb-over.
                
                But don't let me stop you from trying though...been there, done that! 

                replyreport
                1. 75

                   Castlepalomaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                   The horns are hidden under the hat.

                   replyreport
15. 0

    ahorsebackposted 5 years ago

    So Don W , apparently you are a pseudo - pacifist who understands little about  the differences in the world of , crime , politics , governing people , or tyrannical governing bodies , obviously you can't tell the difference between  one man's act of criminal violence being  a simply a crime OR the overt possibilities of an armed revolution .   
    
    I can't feel sorry for that kind of total ignoring of the worlds political realities though as all of those like you usually become instant warriors when the proverbial shyte hits the fan  , the old " atheist's in the foxhole " comes to mind as I read your garbage filled rant . Your moral superiority however hides nothing I haven't seen a thousand times on campuses ,  in the meeting houses , even in churches of those who always hold themselves somehow morally superior to others .
    
    I am more conservative than you obviously are and yet  I obviously know more about the natural  law of the land than you do ,  from one mans violent crimes against another to actual acts of war . From your naive outlook and judgemental rants about others beliefs on politics ,to your egocentric criticism of others is all astoundingly predictable.  Keep on with that though , it just makes you appear as you are , long winded and mostly just wrong .
    
    Keep up the  writing though , it's good exercise. Friendly note , content means little.

    replyreport
    1. 81

       Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

       You've shown your worldview to be morally bankrupt because you exort the virtues of the rule of law, but support violent extremism. You condemn religious fanticism, but condone political violence.
       
       If the MP Jo Cox was killed by a group calling it an "armed rebellion", would that make her any less dead? Would her children be any less motherless?
       
       People in the US and UK have political options open to them; feedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of association; even freedom to come on forums like this and express support for violent extremists.
       
       The democratic processes are not perfect, but if people in either country want to change the government, or change the country's direction, there are peaceful, political options available to them. If that wasn't the case, Trump would not be in the White House, and Brexit would not be happening. So in 2018 violent attacks on public officials in both countries are totally unjustifiable.
       
       We don't live in the 18th century any more, so shouldn't act like it. That's not "pacifism", it's just common sense. Your views, on the other hand, are distorted, and your violent revolution fetish is dangerous. Do you know (do you care?) that your views fit the FBI's definition of violent extremism? I've highlighted the parts that are most applicable to you:
       
       "Violent extremists often think that their beliefs or ways of life are under attack and that extreme violence is the only solution to their frustrations and problems. . ."(1)
       
       And . . .
       
       "Militia Extremists. Example of distorted belief: The U.S. government is a threat to the people and should be opposed by force"(2)
       
       Recognize your views there? If you don't, you should. You said that if the majority of the public choose to start killing public officials in the UK you would support them. I have no doubt you would say the same under a democratic government in the US.
       
       The FBI is talking about people like you.
       
       Trump is the closest thing to having a tyrant in the White House there has been for some time, but that doesn't mean it would be acceptable for thousands of people to start killing public officials as part of some form of "collective violence". That's ridiculous.
       
       Watch some Mel Gibson movies (for the 1000th time) to fulfil your revolution fetish if you have to, but stop trying to radicalize people.
       
       (1) https://www.fbi.gov/cve508/teen-website … -extremism
       (2) Ibid.

       replyreport
       1. 0

          ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Don Don Don ........I think you're terribly confused if you believe I'm radicalizing by having to explain to you the difference between a crime and a revolution , If I'm radicalizing then you don't know a thing about all that you profess .
          
          I live in America , my people have actually been here since before it was called America , you know ? Actually before the revolution , so you lecturing me about my appreciation of America as a people's republic is like telling a classic pianist he must attend music class .  Good try though .
          
          Take all that you want out of context and bend my contribution , fold , twist , mutilate and splay it wide open , and you still don't show me that YOU know the difference between a violent crime as in  your related photos and sensationalizing and that which I call a political revolution .   I fear that my trying to explain the difference is just flying above your understanding of either  OR your acceptance of neither. 
          
          Perhaps , like we did as children , you need a class visit to the library or even the criminal justice courts .You've obviously made up your mind about that which you couldn't have possibly have understood from me.

          replyreport
          1. 75

             Castlepalomaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

             Horse is right about one thing, there will be a violent revolution. My real nightmares have never been wrong.
             
             Nobody will really know how to prepare for it. The worst of it will be ground Zero America because of the economy unsustainable. An over focus on money like a real God.. The regular police are looking more like troopers. They programed Media and violence everyday. A gun for everyone in numbers. A self prophecy about the end of the World. Sorry, it must get worst, before it gets better.

             replyreport
          2. 81

             Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

             This disconnect from reality is fascinating.
             
             Me: "Do you support members of the public violently attacking public officials in the UK, in order to bring about political change?"
             
             You: "Yes. Is that clear enough?"
             
             So we've established you take "members of the public violently attacking public officials in the UK, in order to bring about political change" to mean some kind of armed revolution.
             
             But this is where the disconnect is.
             
             I previously mentioned a young woman called Jo Cox, an MP killed by a far-right extremist because of her political views.
             
             You believe that act was morally wrong because it was done by an individual.
             
             But if Jo Cox was murdered by a large group of people who said they were enraging in an armed "revolution", she would still have done nothing to warrant being killed. She would still be dead, and her children would still be motherless.
             
             So how does the murder of Jo Cox suddenly change from being morally wrong (when committed by an individual) to morally right (when committed by a group of people)? How is the switch from one to the other happening in your mind?

             replyreport
             1. 0

                ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                So Don , If you wish you may begin writing your own novel , taking as much or as little out of context of our conversations as you wish ," Trinity "by Leon Uris is already taken however , as there  seems to be some creative intent in the twisting and turning of questioning of my morality .  Perhaps I can write a forward for you ? Let's clear up your confusion before you write the book however.
                
                I'll write this as a telegram for the ease of your understanding  ;
                
                If an INDIVIDUAL ,  professing left wing , right wing or no wing for that matter  , injures or  takes the life of anyone , politician or private citizen ; it's more than likely a crime .  STOP
                
                If an majority  populace rises up against a government body ,that group being  left wing , right wing or no wing , that can then more than likely  be construed as a revolution , STOP
                
                I condone neither , crime nor revolution. STOP
                
                END
                
                Now , Is this clear enough for you ? Should we perhaps raise a panel of HP judges  to clarify my opinion of the difference between a crime and a revolution and perhaps to judge your rather rude and persistent responses.
                Beyond this ,  I suggest your bring out the Britanicas .  I advise two words that you might begin to study ;
                --Crime
                --Revolution
                
                Any other questions?

                replyreport
                1. 81

                   Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                   From the very beginning all I have asked for is clarification. I'm not sure why it was so difficult, but thanks for providing it.
                   
                   My whole point has been that although the democratic processes in the US and UK are not perfect, things have not gotten to the point where people can legitimately claim to have cause for a violent revolution. For the most part, people can find representation within the political system and, despite the administration's best efforts, protections afforded by the Constitution and other legal frameworks are still intact. So talk of trying to violently "overthrow" governments, in either country, is unjustified and extreme, unless by "overthrow" someone means politically. That's why I asked Wesman to clarify.
                   
                   Maybe he would like to follow your lead and share exactly what he meant.
                   
                   Perhaps you could help me persuade him to!

                   replyreport
                   1. 0

                      ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                      I think that in America , as we have discussed here and I discuss with people in my life ,  the left has risen to the highest  point of  political obstruction by their influences over the news media , social media , campus and street activism , etc....as ever before in our history , they are the ones inciting political or party violence in America . As a conservative , our party fully believes in using the system of voting to change . This new alt-left ,in my opinion is foolhardy in the idealism .    When violence truly hits the streets in America it will be the fault of the most obstructive and  destructive party in America  , The democratic party .
                      
                      If you'd like to call the FBI on anyone  , I suggest you begin there . Stop worrying about the occasional rant from one or two  like Wesman or any conservative . IMO.   That old saying ?  "start by cleaning up your own house".

                      replyreport
16. 60

    Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago

    Debating the self-proclaimed intellectual genius of the HP political forums is a waste of time, Don. But you'll learn this yourself if you haven't already from his recent comment.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

       Perhaps your intellectual jealousy is hard to live with Randy ?

       replyreport
    2. 81

       Don Wposted 5 years agoin reply to this

       I am learning it the hard way Randy, but where I have the time I do like to challenge nonsense when I see it. Don't worry though, I know my pain threshold. I know how long I can bash my head against the wall before I need to stop.

       replyreport
       1. 0

          ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Rany , Don , it happens that way when you have to accept reality instead of hiding real facts , ignoring statistics , creating one's own manicured and cataloged amount of crime and violence statistics  .    While the UK folds in on itself with uncontrolled violence , "beating your heads against the wall " must seem like an acceptable  form of relief .

          replyreport
       2. 60

          Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          I admire your efforts, Don. Though sometimes you cannot undo the brainwashing effect of Fox News and other right wing sources on their victims.  Sure, many of the brighter victims finally see the detrimental effects of such propaganda on their thinking processes, but then, others are too far gone to trouble with.

          replyreport
          1. 0

             ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

             But we notice that you DO continually Randy !

             replyreport
17. 75

    Castlepalomaposted 5 years ago

    In Australia, the more they insult you, the more they like you.
    
    Would that apply to you guys?

    replyreport
    1. 75

       Castlepalomaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

       replyreport
18. 60

    Randy Godwinposted 5 years ago

    Fox fans often question my intelligence and I'm okay with that. I know I've accomplished a lot things in my life most people haven't. I've read over 10,000 books in my life on a wide variety of subjects. I've excelled in some sports and trained in the only Karate style which is registered in Japan. I play a variety of musical instruments and was a professional musician for several decades.
    
    I'm experienced in many fields such as gasoline and diesel mechanics, agricultural crops and marketing, electrical wiring and plumbing, construction of both homes and farm buildings, hydraulic and heavy equipment repair. I also repair home appliances. 
    
    I've only been writing around 11 years and have sold both fiction and travel articles. On this site I get thousands of views a day and at least a dozen or so questions a day from those who want the benefit of my intelligence on a variety of my articles.  With over 27,000 comments and questions, I'm well on my way to 5,000,000 views, I earn enough here each month from AdSense clicks and Amazon sales to purchase a very nice vehicle if I wished.
    
    Oh yeah, I'm known as a excellent trivia player and have come in 2nd in a National contest and have been on TV in the bargain.  There's much more I can relate if that's not enough for you to realize I'm not a complete dumbass.  Feel free to list your qualifications for intelligence if you feel the need to show me just how ignorant I am. 

    replyreport
    1. 75

       Castlepalomaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

       I like you Randy and can like Horse when he lowers his Yosemite Sam guns.

       replyreport
       1. 0

          ahorsebackposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Castle ,  You just haven't figured out yet that everyone on the left [but you]
          wears a gun too !  You like symbolism I know , ........ liberals just like to carry their Yosemite six-guns  "concealed " my friend  ...............;- ]
          
          note , I don't dislike anyone Castle ,  just their  ideology, the ideology  that I feel threatens true American values the most .....and that's it !

          replyreport
          1. 75

             Castlepalomaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

             Where to invade next:
             Was a movie basically about the American brilliance of Idealogy worked in other countries.  Moore wanted to invade and steal them back.  Idealogy like the American Constitution and many other most outstanding ideas working beautifully there.  America instead caved in to giving money to the wealthy, in hopes money would trickling downwards to the poor.
             
             1. France, schoolchildren feast on four-course dinners.
             2. Slovenia swooning over their free college tuition and non-existent student debt.
             3. Prisons in Norway, look nicer than your average New England hostelry.
             4. Healthcare is a bit left out, Moore covered that well in Sicko movie.
             5.Germany, schoolchildren willingly take on the Holocaust without excusing themselves from their grandparents’ actions.
             6.In Portugal, makes all drugs legal, Solution “21st century slavery” – the use of America’s overcrowded prison population as a cheap workforce.
             7. Iceland solve their bankruptcy by locking up the worst bankers and politican. Put women in charge, Moore concludes.
             
             
             Sure, Moore dose not expose the full bigger picture of America’s.  Perhaps America will steps in the right direction again.

             replyreport
       2. 60

          Randy Godwinposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Notice he didn't provide any info on why he thinks he possesses some modicum of intelligence, Castle.

          replyreport
19. 0

    ahorsebackposted 5 years ago

    So,  Breitbart has reported that the UK  has -Softened Crime Reporting -by  authorities since the 1997 hand gun ban , actually reclassifying crimes to lesser classifications if reported at all ,While everyone wonders Why NYC  is more violent than say London ?
    
    
    Well, No it Isn't !   
    Apparently In The UK.
    - if someone steals your smart phone , Its classified as a lost phone .
    -The bar for 'labeling' crime has been lowered .
    -A burglary is labeled "criminal damage ".
    -A Gun crime is labeled just a "crime"
    -If the UK  'massages' these recorded crimes so how can we compare ?
    -The chance of being victimised in the UK has been HIGHER since 1995 in the UK than in the US for violent crimes , rape , robbery , assault , in fact sexual assaults are through the roof . ' Gun Bans'  Haven't  worked in the UK.
    
    Go Breitbart ! Time to blame something else for elevated crime levels ,regional  gun bans have been proven not to work in the US , Just as they haven't in the UK , so much for U.K. media accuracy ?

    replyreport
    1. 75

       Castlepalomaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

       UN study concludes in general the more availability firearm's the more crime. Personally I won't have any guns in my home. Can't imagine anyone able to kill me with object with my skill set. Any emotional fool can pull a trigger, and life is over.

       replyreport