Subscribe to Listverse
Tyranny is an important phenomenon that operates by principles by which it can be recognized in its early emerging stages, and, if the people are vigilant, prepared, and committed to liberty, countered before it becomes entrenched. The methods used to overthrow a constitutional order and establish a tyranny are well-known. However, despite this awareness, it is surprising how those who have no intention of perpetrating a tyranny can slip into these methods and bring about a tyranny despite their best intentions. Tyranny does not have to be deliberate. Tyrants can fool themselves as thoroughly as they fool everyone else. Here are the top 16 signs that you are living in a tyranny or heading that way. Many thanks to Jon Roland for submitting this list (the original of which is here).
1. Control of public information and opinion: It begins with withholding information, and leads to putting out false or misleading information. A government can develop ministries of propaganda under many guises. They typically call it “public information” or “marketing”.
2. Vote fraud used to prevent the election of reformers: It doesn’t matter which of the two major party candidates are elected if no real reformer can get nominated, and when news services start knowing the outcomes of elections before it is possible for them to know, then the votes are not being honestly counted.
3. Undue official influence on trials and juries: Nonrandom selection of jury panels, exclusion of those opposed to the law, exclusion of the jury from hearing argument on the law, exclusion of private prosecutors from access to the grand jury, and prevention of parties and their counsels from making effective arguments or challenging the government.
4. Usurpation of undelegated powers: This is usually done with popular support for solving some problem, or to redistribute wealth to the advantage of the supporters of the dominant faction, but it soon leads to the deprivation of rights of minorities and individuals.
5. Seeking a government monopoly on the capability and use of armed force: The first signs are efforts to register or restrict the possession and use of firearms, initially under the guise of “protecting” the public, which, when it actually results in increased crime, provides a basis for further disarmament efforts affecting more people and more weapons.
6. Militarization of law enforcement: Declaring a “war on crime” that becomes a war on civil liberties. Preparation of military forces for internal policing duties.
7. Infiltration and subversion of citizen groups that could be forces for reform: Internal spying and surveillance is the beginning. A sign is false prosecutions of their leaders.
8. Suppression of investigators and whistleblowers: When people who try to uncover high level wrongdoing are threatened, that is a sign the system is not only riddled with corruption, but that the corruption has passed the threshold into active tyranny.
9. Use of the law for competition suppression: It begins with the dominant faction winning support by paying off their supporters and suppressing their supporters’ competitors, but leads to public officials themselves engaging in illegal activities and using the law to suppress independent competitors. A good example of this is narcotics trafficking.
10. Subversion of internal checks and balances: This involves the appointment to key positions of persons who can be controlled by their sponsors, and who are then induced to do illegal things. The worst way in which this occurs is in the appointment of judges that will go along with unconstitutional acts by the other branches.
11. Creation of a class of officials who are above the law: This is indicated by dismissal of charges for wrongdoing against persons who are “following orders”.
12. Increasing dependency of the people on government: The classic approach to domination of the people is to first take everything they have away from them, then make them compliant with the demands of the rulers to get anything back again.
13. Increasing public ignorance of their civic duties and reluctance to perform them: When the people avoid doing things like voting and serving in militias and juries, tyranny is not far behind.
14. Use of staged events to produce popular support: Acts of terrorism, blamed on political opponents, followed immediately with well-prepared proposals for increased powers and budgets for suppressive agencies. Sometimes called a Reichstag plot.
15. Conversion of rights into privileges: Requiring licenses and permits for doing things that the government does not have the delegated power to restrict, except by due process in which the burden of proof is on the petitioner.
16. Political correctness: Many if not most people are susceptible to being recruited to engage in repressive actions against disfavored views or behaviors, and led to pave the way for the dominance of tyrannical government.
Contributor: Jon_Roland
March 8th, 2009 at 1:58 am
cool list!
March 8th, 2009 at 1:59 am
There is much tyranny amongst us even in this day and age. It is certainly sad to see.
March 8th, 2009 at 2:06 am
1. Very interesting and insightful list…a lot seems familiar. Anyways its a very well written list on an important and familiar subject.
March 8th, 2009 at 2:10 am
Is there this kind of situation in USA?
March 8th, 2009 at 2:14 am
sounds a lot like north korea…..
March 8th, 2009 at 2:15 am
About No.14, whatever else you want to say about Hitler, you’ve got to admit that he did a good job gaining complete control of Germany. Yeah, conquering Western Europe is pretty amazing, but gaining control of a country that you were previously jailed in for a failed coup, that’s a pretty decent effort IMO
March 8th, 2009 at 3:00 am
This is a very thought provoking list.
Some of the points are necessary to a degree in any government. It is the scale that judges whether it is a true tyranny.
Public information dissemination is a duty of all governments. A free press is required to keep it in check. Press freedom cannot be absolute. Crime informant identities for example.
The freedom to have arms is a hot debate. It is not viewed as necessary by the people in many societies.
Military intervention is sometimes required when the police do not have sufficient resources. LA riots. It is a slippery slope though.
Internal spying is needed to combat terrorism. Al-Qaeda is a force for social reform. It is right that it is spied upon. Again, its about degrees.
March 8th, 2009 at 3:43 am
Reminds me of a David Icke talk. History repeats itself, we will soon be living in a Hitler fascist state.
March 8th, 2009 at 4:02 am
I think I just had a nightmare! I was in the United States, and it was 2002……
March 8th, 2009 at 4:15 am
Holy crap, I beleive that all of these things are happening in the U.S. to a certain degree. These are the sort of things that I think that the government has or is doing and thats such a horrible feeling. One of the things that has been bothering me here lately is the damn news. Every time you turn on CNN (I dont mean to be insensitive but) that little girl (Kaylie I think is her name) that was killed over a freakin year ago is still being talked about. I mean isnt their a hell of alot bigger problems than what happened to one child. It just makes me so mad, all the people that have died for us overseas and that die in much worse ways, they end up only get a 30 second spot (if even that!) on the news in between two 15 min spots about a little girl that died over a year ago and what a retarded celebrity is wearing!!!! There is no way that the news corperations seriously find these ensignificant things as big enough stories that they have been broadcasting this bull instead of what we really need to know. It deffinately is some form of gov suppression. I understand that to a certain point things should be kept quiet to keep lesser minded people from flipping out but when news is tottally suppressed and then we are fed lies and bull&*#% to keep us blinded. No wonder people end up in the looney bin yammering on about the government and how they control everything. They pretty much do control everything. What we watch, what we learn and what we do with our money, to a certain point. And on top of all this I swear the younger the generation of kids their are the dumber they get, it makes me feel like I’m livin in the movie Idiocracy.
March 8th, 2009 at 4:23 am
“Democracy means that if the doorbell rings in the early hours, it is likely to be the milkman.”
March 8th, 2009 at 4:26 am
HAHAHAHA i was right all you gun banning bastards are for tyranny. Carlos you are right you never hear anything on the major news channels that has anything to do with the state of the world unless it makes the head official look good.
March 8th, 2009 at 4:32 am
Biscuit you ass:
“Internal spying is needed to combat terrorism. Al-Qaeda is a force for social reform. It is right that it is spied upon. Again, its about degrees.”
this is such utter bullcrap I won’t even take the time telling you about it. Get some sense dude
March 8th, 2009 at 4:35 am
its weird how some of this is real in the uk
March 8th, 2009 at 4:40 am
“5. Seeking a government monopoly on the capability and use of armed force: The first signs are efforts to register or restrict the possession and use of firearms, initially under the guise of “protecting” the public, which, when it actually results in increased crime, provides a basis for further disarmament efforts affecting more people and more weapons.”
Wow, a broad, sweeping generalization of a hotly contested debate. There is no evidence at all that restriction of firearms increases crime at all. The Australian experience has seen a dramatic decrease in gun-related crime since the gun buyback in the 90s; check out the Australian Bureau of Statistics website for the stats on that. This is not a sign you live in a tyranny at all; it is merely a sign that the government recognises that the only purpose of a gun is to kill, and that therefore the less guns, the better.
March 8th, 2009 at 4:49 am
Broux
I would appreciate it if you would spare the time to explain to me why it is crap. What about the IRA, or actively working communist sympathisers during the cold war?
March 8th, 2009 at 4:53 am
Top 20! first time. wow.
March 8th, 2009 at 5:18 am
I live in Italy and you can believe me: we live in a Tyranny. All 16 signs do apply to our country…
March 8th, 2009 at 5:18 am
Very large depictions of the president in every public place.
March 8th, 2009 at 5:22 am
For those of you who are privileged enough not to live in tyranny, and have always thought one way or another of Chavez (just because he was against Bush and the USA in general), read this list!
Most items have already been used in Venezuela by Chavez’ Revolution. He is a tyrant whether you believe it or not.
(Yes, first hand knowledge, I was born and raised in Venezuela and I still reside in the country – 29 y.o.).
March 8th, 2009 at 5:22 am
OH NOEZ
This sounds a lot like where i live… ENGLAND!
March 8th, 2009 at 5:37 am
heh… sounds like almost everything in this list is happening in the Philippines :p
March 8th, 2009 at 5:40 am
I couldnt help but think the list was molded in a way to draw parallels to the US, most of which seemed to stretch the meaning of the list.
For example #2 talks about the 2 party system being flawed. It seems to me that its aimed at the current american system. But the US system uses coalitions and deal breaking to get to this, it isnt as cut throat as it sounds and historically has had influencial 3rd parties.
Also about knowing the count ahead of time:
In the US they project a winner in certain states LONG before it even gets to 30% of the total vote. However, this doesnt mean its set in stone. On occasion, the projection is overturned due to new data. The projection is solely (it seems to me) for the benefit of the public. For example in the 2000 election, Florida was overturned 3 times before it finally went to Bush.
Just a thought
March 8th, 2009 at 5:53 am
“5. Seeking a government monopoly on the capability and use of armed force: The first signs are efforts to register or restrict the possession and use of firearms, initially under the guise of “protecting” the public, which, when it actually results in increased crime, provides a basis for further disarmament efforts affecting more people and more weapons.”
WRONG WRONG WRONG ON SO MANY LEVELS
Let me educate you savages. restricting the posession of firearms is NOT a sign you’re living in a Tyranny, and does NOT result in increased crimerates. you need to check your facts. Seriously. I now see how brainwashed you Americans really are.
March 8th, 2009 at 5:54 am
So basically every one from other countries feels like this is happening in their country too. Hmmm, their needs to be a show where people can internationally speak with people from other countries about this sort of stuff since most people are too lazy to get on the net and find people to talk to about this kind of stuff. I pray for the day that people wise up, stand and speak for them selves to every one every where and something is actually done about these things because we all stood together. There are too many over paid A-holes controlling the world. They all need to be removed from their positions in society and or government and be replaced with some one whose representation of the people is real, is not dumbed down and is truly what the people need.
March 8th, 2009 at 5:58 am
15. McSquida
What was that they say about great minds thinking alike?
March 8th, 2009 at 6:03 am
@maximuz04. I think your missing the point. You think because “in the 2000 election, Florida was overturned 3 times before it finally went to Bush” that that makes it uncontrolled? The point was that they can make things do and look like what ever they want them to. Just because you witness something doesnt make it real.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:04 am
I was interested by the last one, political correctness, a term that seems to have dominated our speech, and though political correctness is not enforced by the law (for the most part) it’s rules are bound by social law, which is almost as powerful.
My problem with political correctness is that in the apparent attempt to keep everyone’s feelings from being hurt, political correctness makes more things offensive to more people.
I am not saying by any means that things like the N-word are okay, but we all do need to stop this slippery slope of deciding what is and is not appropriate for people to say or think.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:13 am
@Morono and Mcsquida. I agree that the ristriction of the right to have or buy firearms does not result in increased crimerates. But when their taking away the right for us to have the fire power to protect our selves (Right to bare arms) to me is def. a means of tyranical control. By the way Morono pretty big jump state that all Americans are brainwashed just from the statment of one or a few people, not appreciated.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:15 am
@Aaron. Damn straight!!
March 8th, 2009 at 6:20 am
You left out the most important sign.
17. When the guy who wrote this list mysteriously disappears overnight…
March 8th, 2009 at 6:22 am
the worst tyrannies show no signs
March 8th, 2009 at 6:23 am
And people look at me like I’m crazy when I tell them I’m moving out of America…
March 8th, 2009 at 6:25 am
First of all: Nowhere in the constitution does it say that you must be able to buy mini-uzi’s at every corner of every street. and second: Carlos I genuinely feel sorry for you.
All I can say is this: I hope you get some decent education.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:29 am
McSquida – Stop and think for a moment. A gun is a TOOL. It is a tool used to kill or injure other living things.
A knife or other sharp implement is also a tool; one that can be used to injure or kill other living things. In fact, the only drawback between the two is that a gun is loud, but is good for distance; a knife is silent, but usually must be used up close.
So go ahead and ban guns, and watch people become increasingly proficient at buying or making them illegally. Keep them illegal, and watch honest people learn how to become proficient with throwing knives and knife fighting in general.
We are human, and survival at any cost has always been our most urgent imperative; that’s how we got to the top of the food chain – and how we manage to stay there.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:37 am
WTF I’m not talking about the right to buy uzis at every street corner you ass. I’m talking about the rights to own a gun for lawful reasons. I have many friends and family that have firearms for hunting, recreation and protection. Your telling me that the government should have the right to take the right for them to use them away. They have never used them any unlawful way. So basically what I’m saying is that if a person has gotten into trouble for or with guns then by all means take away their right to have them. BUT IT IS NOT RIGHT FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO TAKE AWAY EVERONES.
By the way its the extreme one way or the other thinking like yours that composes “the reason” why the people think that the gun ban should be passed. I have a HS diploma and College degree by the way. Your name says it all Moron….o
March 8th, 2009 at 6:38 am
Right on Shadow.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:42 am
*EVERYONES opps
March 8th, 2009 at 6:43 am
*oops Man I need to go to bed and stop letting people like Morono fire me up.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:45 am
good night
March 8th, 2009 at 6:55 am
Suskis was right up there. Maybe not all of the 16 signs apply but here in Italy we certainly are heading towards a new tyranny. I guess it’s been too long since fascism ended, and people are so scared and blind that they’re willing to give up their freedom just to feel safe again. What a bunch of useless sheep. I’m so, so ashamed of my country right now.
March 8th, 2009 at 7:12 am
So much of this sounds like the United States post 1/20/2009.
March 8th, 2009 at 7:13 am
Carlos, you just dont get it do you?
If you really want to, you could get a permit and own a gun. This is in Holland but I think its the same in all of western Europe.
Now that you (might) understand, I want you to look up the crimerates involving fire arms.
March 8th, 2009 at 7:33 am
Aaron…I agree with you. Political correctness is so overrated!
Is this like what is happening in Zimbabwe?
March 8th, 2009 at 7:37 am
“WRONG WRONG WRONG ON SO MANY LEVELS
Let me educate you savages. restricting the posession of firearms is NOT a sign you’re living in a Tyranny, and does NOT result in increased crimerates. you need to check your facts. Seriously. I now see how brainwashed you Americans really are.”
Let me educate you a little bit, Morono…Guns don’t kill people. People kill people. And people who kill others with guns will do it regardless of the fact that guns are legal or not. Gun control only increases the amount of “illegal” weapons because telling someone they can’t own a gun doesn’t make them not own a gun. And no not all gun owners want to have uzi’s or automatic or even semi-automatic weapons. I own a gun for simple protection. Protection from those that seek to rob me of what is mine. That I and my family have worked honestly to gain. I have the right to protect myself, not because of the constitution but because it’s what God gave me. I will not simply stand by while I am victimized by an illegal gun toting criminal. Thank God, for now, that we can legally own guns. There are restrictions, guidelines, and rules in place that work rather well for those who choose to follow them. It’s not the guns fault if a person chooses not to follow the rules in place for gun ownership.
I for one will always have a gun. I WILL have it legally and will do whatever necessary to keep it.
March 8th, 2009 at 7:37 am
this sounds like pakistan.
March 8th, 2009 at 7:48 am
I really believe you should copyright this list, one day US history classes will read this as the precursor to the book on George Bush’s presidency. I always believed he was a dictator, and now I suppose that notion is confirmed.
March 8th, 2009 at 7:57 am
OK I’ve tried reasoning with you and i’ve tried to convince you with facts. It didnt work so Au revoir
March 8th, 2009 at 8:00 am
honestly people need to get over this George Bush thing. The president is not the only one that controls the country. Its called branches of the government!!! Congress has as much fault as Bush for not stopping his stupid acts. George Bush is just a pawn for Congress and they are using him to hid the errors they were not able to stop/fix. He was like the Big Brother i
March 8th, 2009 at 8:02 am
… IN OUR SOCIETY (1984) he doesnt have all the fault.. and by the way i am not a supporter of Bush i just think people actually inform themselves on our government and then they can realize that it wasnt just him in a big chair in the oval office forcing people to do whatever he said…
March 8th, 2009 at 8:05 am
The good news is, we don’t have TOO MANY of these in America today. The Democrats are trying to initiate #5 and #12. The Republicans are trying to initiate #8. I think both will fail. The worst news is that #4, 13, and 16 have already begun without the help of either party. This means there’s no opposition party to stop them.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:06 am
42. hg8057 – “So much of this sounds like the United States post 1/20/2009.”
The smartass comments without substance don’t fly here. I’d like to see your proof of this, of actual legislation signed within the last 1 month, 2 weeks and 1 day where anything from this “post 1/20/2009″ society is in anyway applicable to that list. I’ve said to another person before, complaining won’t help and Obama is in office now so either move out or give him time to actively attempt to alleviate the problem.
corinthian0430:
My knowledge of Philippine politics is kinda weak…could you elaborate, please?
March 8th, 2009 at 8:12 am
If you want a lesson in tyranny, just visit the Philippines. And @ post 22: you are freaking right.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:14 am
@ Carlos
Hey dude I didnt really see a reason to tell me that you have a college degree, and frankly I couldnt care less what education you have as long as you can be reasoned with. Which I you can be, because you seem to think about these things like government control. You have to understand though that in europe we dont have a tradition of firearms. (which I’m grateful for.) Therefore I dont really feel like I need one. But I understand that when every thug on the street has a gun, you’d want one too.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:15 am
* Which I – THINK – you can be,
March 8th, 2009 at 8:18 am
@gabi319
Philippine politics is kinda based on a dynastic kleptocracy (see previous list) -until their term is over, or to cling on to their power as long as possible (until it’s time to pass it on to an anointed heir).
Courts are virtually useless, unless you have money and or influence.
The general populace is as afraid of the so-called police farce (i meant force, but i think you’d realize the substitution) as they are as the crooks.
Yes, the Philippines may have SEA’s freest press, but is that such a good thing? Exercising the right to freedom of expression is OK, but this freedom is often abused (crooked journalists getting paid not to publish stories… or worse… journalists extorting money so they will not blow the whistle – the current Vice President is a charismatic albeir dumbass former broadcast journalist… go figure).
The few honest journalists get gunned down, drug pushers go scot free (after the necessary exchange of bribes etc).
The list goes on…. but I don’t have all night :p
March 8th, 2009 at 8:22 am
Since I seem to be unable to make myself understood at this time, I will not post an opinion on this, but I do want to say to the originator of the list – Good job.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:23 am
Thanks corinthian! I knew the “money talks” with parents being expat pinoys and all but I didn’t know about other facts. Can’t really find much on it here since the other Filipino discussion is merely back and forth namecalling, haha.
thanks again and good night!
March 8th, 2009 at 8:24 am
oh yeah… most of the elections in the Philippines are fixed, and in order to win an election (in most cases) is to have the 3 G’s (Guns, Goons, and Gold).
Incumbents often win by 1) Cheating (via buying votes) 2) Disenfranchisement (by scaring voters who are against them not to vote, or totally paying someone off to “doctor” the voter’s list) 3) Assassinating any competitors.
In an election in the Philippines, it’s not about who wins and who loses- it’s all about who won… and who got cheated (*canned applause*).
March 8th, 2009 at 8:29 am
Sounds like America to me
March 8th, 2009 at 8:29 am
ugh… sounds like (i shouldnt say this but i will) the usa. (a small voice in the back of my head is saying STUPID STUPID STUPID!!) at least for numbers 1-10.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:50 am
Not endorsing any religion, but a good sign of tyranny is ‘having to look behind your back when you pray (or don’t).’, lest you offend or get prosecuted by someone.
#16 was the best item, all that really is is Terror of the Minority; we live in a modern-day Victorian Era and don’t even know it.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:50 am
this list just seems too “american”
c’mon, people! no two countries (and therefore governments) are ever alike and all governments possess at least one of these to some degree in order to ensure the proper functioning of government for the benefit of their nation as a whole and not solely for any individuals or groups be they “politically correct” or not
and may i point out that there are also some tyrannically-inclined people out there who disguise themselves as “liberals” or “reformers” – channeling the people’s frustrations on the old government’s apparent inability to deliver what the people want just so that they could make themselves look good and the government as the “evil” “tyrannical” oppressors.
as the great malaysian prime minister mahatir mohammad once said (paraphrased): “the government’s job is to give the people what they need which is not necessarily what they want.”
and gabi319, corinthian0430:
very well written comments, although i would really appreciate it if we could discuss not only the problems but more importantly the solutions to those problems.
good night to you all
March 8th, 2009 at 9:01 am
How about publishing a list of top 20 guidelines for civil, enlightening discussion of topics of interest and contention among humans regardless of their religious, political, or economic persuasion?
March 8th, 2009 at 9:11 am
to those who think that this list is too American, I posted it (when I normally don’t post material sent in by other websites) because I saw a few frightening parallels to my own country of New Zealand. From the other comments, people from all around the world see it in their countries too.
March 8th, 2009 at 9:12 am
63. joanne
Any solutions you have in mind? Like I said, my knowledge of Philippine politics is weak so I was asking rather than having a full blown out discussion. I’d have an edge as an objective outside observer but still be at a severe disadvantage since I have no understanding of the intricasies of Filipino beauracracy.
March 8th, 2009 at 9:12 am
Oli: we tried that. People have short memories
March 8th, 2009 at 9:38 am
jfrater: HA! Perfect.
Sic Semper Tyrannis
March 8th, 2009 at 9:48 am
JFrats this is cool but a top death metal bands or albums list would be cooler
March 8th, 2009 at 9:50 am
Really, democrats want to increase 5 and 12. They want to continue the drug war and fund the armed forcesa, and take their protection from the people? Democrats oppose middle class tax cuts and taking away all all but 2% of the people have. Conservatives want all of these things, and are winning.
March 8th, 2009 at 9:58 am
So everyone is complaining about being politically correct. So I’ll break the mold. I’ll call bullshit to all those predicting the beginning of tyranny in the United States. Most of these “tell-tale” signs are being rolled back by Obama. He has made special rules – you cannot work for him and then become a paid mouth piece for whatever PAC will pay you the most. The rule he is implementing is 2 years after leaving public office, but in practice and I quote “not as long as I am president”. He has promised to actually enforce your constitution – that Bush and his idiot lawyer suspended.
Other folks have already commented on the fallacy of gun control being a sign of impending doom. Pretty much every country in the world has gun control, even the most liberal countries. It’s only in the USA that everyone is all horny for gun ownership. The country with the highest murder rate in the developed world I might add. Go figure. Some folks don’t have the resources to understand; others choose not to. Mostly the latter; willful ignorance is infuriating.
In Canada #10 was an issue. The liberal party were in power for 12 years. The corruption that this spawned; the folks that were paid to over-see the government were all the party faithful, was amazing. But seeing as we’re a democracy, as soon as this was found out, all their political support flew out the window. In fact the head of our liberal party didn’t even win his seat in the last election. Note the difference; nobody was thrown in jail when they found out.
All you whiners need to go live somewhere where tyranny is actually happening. Then, just maybe, you’d understand.
March 8th, 2009 at 10:07 am
71. Mom424 – “I’ll call bullshit to all those predicting the beginning of tyranny in the United States”
Thanks Mom!
…why do I feel like I’m in a Jiffy peanut butter commercial all of a sudden?
March 8th, 2009 at 10:33 am
66. gabi319:
i strongly believe that long term investment in ensuring equal access to quality academic, vocational, financial, and values education is one of many keys to making democracy work for us, with groups of committed and determined filipinos at home and abroad organizing the efforts of the private sector and other charitable institutions in upgrading equipment, facilities and better training of teachers and professors. we in the philippines are truly blessed to have democracy in spirit (though not in practice) and, especially when compared with north korea, zimbabwe and others we are far better off than them and for that alone we should be very grateful. but of what use is democracy if the people do not fully recognize and take advantage of its privileges?
through education we can awaken our people from the ignorance, misguidance, and bad habits we have inherited from our turbulent tumultuous past and enlighten them on what they should and can do for our country; to enable them to comprehend and exercise their rights while not trampling on the rights of others. an educated, informed, open-minded and critical electorate is orders of magnitude more powerful than and immune to sensationalism, misinformation, propaganda and other problems that plague the nation come elections.
instead of complaining about what’s wrong and fighting over who is to blame, responsible and disciplined citizens would focus on what can be done. as the late american president john kennedy once said, we should “ask not what [our] country can do for [us](or what our country hasn’t done or shouldn’t be), but of what [we] can do for [our] country.”
again this is just one of the thoughts i have in mind and i’m too sleepy right now to thoroughly explain the others(btw i think we’re getting off-topic here so you could email your response at joanne11069@yahoo.com)… see you tomorrow.
March 8th, 2009 at 10:47 am
I’m so glad I live in the UK where gun ownership is not seen as a basic right. I can only hope America can get to where we are today, and live without an easy means of killing other people in their house.
Above someone said that with the removal of guns, people will become proficient with knives and throwing knives. The point is that it takes effort to be able to kill someone with a knife from the same distance as a gun. A gun can be fired by any idiot – and tends to be.
March 8th, 2009 at 10:53 am
sounds exactly like america, down to the last detail.
March 8th, 2009 at 10:56 am
With all the control of information etc, surely you wouldn’t know you were in a tyrrany? If the system of information control was perfect that is.
March 8th, 2009 at 11:15 am
I’m not one to argue, I hate debate and what not but guns should be taken away from anyone that has had a past criminal record. Granted these idiots would resort to making man-made weapons or other weapons of choice, but people who use their guns for protection shouldn’t be punished for someone else’s idiocy. I don’t know much about other countries gun laws, but it sounds like most countries besides the U.S. have a gun ban.
March 8th, 2009 at 11:16 am
Whether or not you believe in the right to own a gun does not really matter. It is just as much of a right to a U.S citizen as freedom of speech, which im sad to say is also being taken away due to political correctness. Many Americans enjoy recreational use of firearms in target shooting, others enjoy hunting, and some people just feel safer owning a firearm for protection. If somebody who owns a gun illegally tries to threaten your family or rob your belongings that you have earned honestly I do not believe you should just be expected to stand there and be a helpless victim. If you have commited any crimes involving violence then you should not have the right to own a firearm, but I just can not see taking a right away from honest citizens to punish criminals.
March 8th, 2009 at 11:17 am
Seems like this list is aimed straight at certain countries.
March 8th, 2009 at 11:20 am
The Bush administration is guilty of nearly every single one of these. I haven’t read the comments yet, but I’ll bet there are numerous posts about how Obama is trying to do this in America. The very same rightwing tools who created this mess are going to shift the blame.
March 8th, 2009 at 11:20 am
74. cymraegbachgen87
I could try to think of a better, more pc term but I don’t want to because I think this describes it aptly. Guns are too readily available to the ignorant and/or idiotic – essentially those who have no real concept of the gravity of their intentions because they’ve fallen for the romanticized ideas associated with guns. Better gun education, stricter rules on gun licensing and perhaps even a permit situation like we see with driver’s licenses are decent ideas to help alleviate the problem.
To the deranged, any means is an easy means of killing. There are amendments to the Constitution but not many address the Bill of Rights. Part for the reason the right to bear arms was placed there was as a slap in the face to those who confiscated said weaponry. Granted, there are plenty of colonies who faced similar situations and adapted with guns (i.e. capoeira in Brazil and Eskrima in Philippines) so it is possible but that wasn’t the avenue taken 225 years ago and gun control didn’t seem to be an issue then. I think the major issue is idiot control
Re: Information control
Put a pretty name like Patriot Acts in front of it and no one will question what is behind it. Necessary TO A DEGREE but the situation walks a fine line and extremely slippery slope.
March 8th, 2009 at 11:23 am
*Granted… situations and adapted WITHOUT guns…
I usually say screw the editing but in this case, the sentences is completely different!
March 8th, 2009 at 11:30 am
Mom424:
What exactly is Obama changing? He appointed a lobbyist for the Raytheon corporation as assistant secretary of defense. Raytheon is either the largest or one of the largest defense contractors of the defense department. He has appointed the same old folks that have been in politics their entire lives to positions in his government, which changes what exactly? And maybe i’m just a little dense but what parts of the constitution did Bush not follow? I personally think the Patriot Act went way to far into breaking personal privacy, and he did ask congress about iraq, so I’m not sure what else it would be. If you’re talking about Gitmo and the places like that as far as I know there are not any american citizens being held there outside their rights granted to them in the constitution. If you’re talking about the rights of the foreigners held there I’ll just refer you to this link: http://supreme.justia.com/us/339/763/case.html
It is a supreme court ruling on nonresident aliens, i.e. foreign subjects, in a time of war, which we are in.
March 8th, 2009 at 11:35 am
Re: Gun control
Has no one ever heard Chris Rock’s rant about this?
“Gun control? We need bullet control! I think every bullet should cost 5,000 dollars. Every time someone gets shot, people will
be like, ‘Damn, he must have did something [to] put $_______ worth of bullets in his ass.’…’Man, I would blow your f***ing head off – if I could afford it. I’m gonna get me another job, I’m gonna start saving some money, maybe get a loan from the bank…and then you’re a dead man. You better hope I can’t get no bullets on layaway…’”
March 8th, 2009 at 11:43 am
16. Your president is either a Fascist Cow (republican) or a Socialist Pig (democrat).
March 8th, 2009 at 11:53 am
83. cicero
Who knows if he hired William Lynn for evil, ulterior motives… My view? Look into the JFK Administration. It was rife with arguments BECAUSE he appointed a number of the past administration as well as a few of his political opposites…sounds absurd and has the potential to detain progress yes, but how else could he (JFK or Obama) have a broad cross-section of American needs and wants and have access to different perspectives on the same problem without the diversity inside his administration? Having a cabinet of yes-men wouldn’t be very productive or very safe. Given that you didn’t know his name and I don’t know much more than Lynn’s name, we don’t know enough of his history to pass judgements on his abilities in regards to his new position.
In regards to American citizens in a Gitmo-like environment…GW declared Jose Padilla (born in NY) an illegal enemy combatant and was arrested in Chicago with the SUSPICION of aiding terrorists in 2002. He was placed in a military prison and not given a chance to defend himself until 2006. For nearly five years, he was held without charges and without a right to fair trial. He has since then been given a trial, found guilty, and in the process of appeal but in that five year span, he was an American born citizen without the American rights clearly stated in the Constitution.
March 8th, 2009 at 11:53 am
Sounds a lot like most democratic capitalist countries
March 8th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
Let’s see how the US is doing, shall we?
1. Control of public information and opinion: The mass media is a bunch of useless idiots who forget all about our nation’s problems any time some Hollywood celebrity gets in trouble. The newspapers, the only real quality journalism, are all in danger of failing (and many probably will fail this year), leaving the government basically unsupervised.
2. Vote fraud used to prevent the election of reformers: The last few elections have been kinda suspicious, and it’s become pretty obvious that neither the Republicans or the Democrats really care about anything other than themselves.
3. Undue official influence on trials and juries: These days, jury selection is basically a game between the prosecutors and the defense to see who can stack the jury their way. The “pre-emptive challenge” allows either side to boot you off the jury for any reason at all. (Mostly because they think you’ll be sympathetic to the other side.)
4. Usurpation of undelegated powers: Big Government is trying to take decisions out of state’s hands any way they can. School money, road money, evironmental money, it all comes with strings attached, so that the federal government can dictate local policies. Heck, they’re still opposing California’s bid to create its own fuel economy standards. You’d think Obama would be all for that, but no: that would take power away from the federal government.
5. Seeking a government monopoly on the capability and use of armed force: They’ve been trying for years. DC had to have a federal court overturn its ban on handguns, because even a blind man could see that it hasn’t done anything except make the city less safe.
6. Militarization of law enforcement: Not yet.
7. Infiltration and subversion of citizen groups that could be forces for reform: Not that I can see. Yet.
8. Suppression of investigators and whistleblowers: This has been going on for decades. Occasionally, they offer a token sacrifice (like the mayor of Detroit, or the governor of Illinois, or Scooter Libby) but everyone else stays in power.
9. Use of the law for competition suppression: Look at the current banking crisis: The banks and their crooked CEO’s are handed billions of dollars with no strings attached, and that money has mostly disappeared into offshore accounts, while companies with less political clout (like General Motors) have to beg and plead to get anything at all, and that money has tons of strings attached.
10. Subversion of internal checks and balances: The Supreme Court has demonstrated its unwillingness to stand up for the constitution time and again in recent years. On subjects as diverse as election fraud and emminent domain, the Supreme Court has shrugged its shoulders and said “I don’t care. You guys do whatever you want.”
11. Creation of a class of officials who are above the law: Police officers can commit the worst abuses, and they’re almost never punished. Senators and Congressmen also seem to have a high degree of immunity. Unless their fellow legislators turn on them for political reasons, minor crimes like tax evasion just kinda disappear.
12. Increasing dependency of the people on government: Look at what’s happening now. People want the government to save their houses, give them healthcare, and give them jobs.
13. Increasing public ignorance of their civic duties and reluctance to perform them: Most people try their hardest to avoid jury duty, and in most elections the majority of people don’t vote. (To be fair, jury duty is a huge hassel: you have to skip work, and if you get stuck on a murder trial or some other big case, you might go for weeks without a paycheck. And the “payment” that the court gives you is a joke.)
14. Use of staged events to produce popular support: I don’t think 9/11 was a government plot, but if more major terrorist attacks start occurring inside the US, I’ll have to reconsider.
15. Conversion of rights into privileges: An even bigger example is the way the government is trying to restrict cars and force everyone onto public transportation. If you can’t buy anything bigger than a tiny two-seat car, then families cannot travel together without using public transportation. That makes it way easier to control when and where people can move. It could even be a precursor to Soviet-style “travel permits.”
16. Political correctness: You can’t offend someone, except if that person has politically incorrect views. Then you can blast away at them without restraint. Classic groupthink mentality.
March 8th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
@ #54 Morono:
It’s not nice to call people uneducated, he is simply stating his opinion. Everyone is entitled to do so. But play nice!
March 8th, 2009 at 12:11 pm
gabi, 84
Lol!
But maybe he has a point.
I suppose what I have the biggest problem with is that most of the rest of the developed world manage without this intrinsic “right to bear arms” (even though it IS spelled out in our 1689 Bill of Rights) so why do the U.S need it. My other main problem is that if you lose your temper with a firearm, or have a mental breakdown or something to that effect, owning a gun can have tragic effects.
Why can the UK system not be copied in the US. Through the enactment of the 1968, 1988, 1994 and 1997 Firearms (Amendment) Acts, there is a current outright ban on the ownership of all automatic, and most self-loading, firearms. Wiki, again, explains it well:
“The ownership of breech-loading handguns is, in particular, also very tightly controlled and effectively limited (other than in Northern Ireland[15]) to those persons who may require such a handgun for the non routine humane killing of injured or dangerous animals. Each firearm owned must be registered on a Firearms Certificate (FAC) or shotgun certificate which is issued by the local police authority who will require the prospective owner to demonstrate a “good reason” for each firearm held (e.g. pest control or target shooting) and may place restrictions on the FAC relating to the type and amount of ammunition that is held and the places and the uses the firearms are put to.[16] While as late as the 1950s most certificates approved for handguns listed “self defence” as a reason, since 1968 self defense alone is not considered an acceptable “good reason” for firearm ownership; however, newly introduced laws state that a licensed firearm can be legally used on private property for self defense, if there is a considerable risk to life or property”
We (all to regularly) hear of school or university shootings in the US. Surely this is unacceptable? Why hasnt legislature been tightened. I’m not saying change as dramatic after the Dunblane massacre here (I think the love of guns in the US is too strong) but surely SOMETHING has to change?
What firearms is it legal to own in the US, and how many per household.
I agree that education must be increased. In switzerland, the law REQUIRES every 20yr old man to own an assault rifle, and is yet extremely safe. That being said, the country does practice universal conscription – the military teaches people the responsibility that comes with owning weapons.
March 8th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
88. Andrew
“give them healthcare
If the government won’t supply healthcare to all, who will?
March 8th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
@dave4248, post 51
You point is precisely my problem with politics today. No mainstream political party supports the entire bill of rights and all of the natural rights identified by the philosophers our Founding Fathers based our nation on.
You have to pick and choose.
Vote Democrat and you’re in favor of: Half of the first amendment, Third, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh and Eigth.
Vote Republican and you’re supporting: The other half of the First, Second, Third, Ninth and Tenth.
THe only one they really agree on is the right to not put a British soldier in my house…
March 8th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
In fact, as a citizen of the UK, one of the wierdest things about going abroad (not just to america) is that healthcare isn’t free for all
March 8th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
88: Andrew:
I agree with your #10: I find *most* police officers that I have encountered or observed absolutely careless and/or pompous.
Just at my school a few weeks ago, there was an incident in which this man fled from police and was later shot during a fisticuffs. I responded to an email sent out by the president of the university on this issue pointing out the multitude of ways in which the actions of Campus Police were reckless and irresponsible.
March 8th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
90. cymraegbachgen87
Touche, sir. I don’t have a concrete answer as to why amendments can’t directly address the Bill of Rights other than the fact that it hasn’t been done. Part of me thinks it’s mostly the sentimental idea of rights rights rights, blah blah blah, “it’s my right!” blah blah blah… Yes, it’s been proven guns aren’t necessary but try wresting a gun away from an active NRA member (National Rifle Association)… good luck to you, sir. It all boils down to ignorance of gun use and ignorance over gun-free environments.
We do agree over fears of mental issues with gun ownership. I haven’t done much research into school violence but the one I personally know was a result of a mentally unstable person having access to guns (bought from a store as well as online). A mentally capable person shouldn’t have that much ease to purchase a weapon, let alone one who’s mental status was questionable. I don’t know how effective the future gun control laws will be regarding nut jobs and I’ve yet to see Obama’s promised crackdown on lobbying, but I have high hopes for both.
88. Andrew re: Public Transportation
No authority is forcing anyone to give up their cars. One presidential candidate from the Green Party had tried to use that as her platform and she got less than a tenth of a percent of the popular vote. Two seater cars are fine for long distances and perhaps bigger is needed in other areas, but in a city there isn’t much that can’t be done by foot or the occassional bus/cab. It’s done all the time in New York City, Boston was actually attempting to create a driving-free environment (the town of Boston…it was not the federal government) and…my personal anecdote? I lived in a city that would’ve been far too expensive to house and maintain my car so I left it with my parents. After the initial scare of vulnerability (since I was so reliant on my car) I was fine. I could find everything I needed within walking distance or an occassional ride, everything else was material crap that I could learn to live without and it was a great way to meet people. I was halfway across the country and I met someone who went to my college and graduated mere months after me. Wouldn’t have happened if I were so busy spending every other block filling up the tank of a Hummer. In fact, I still prefer to walk rather than take a car whenever possible.
March 8th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
93. cymraegbachgen87 – Hate to break it to you, but healthcare isn’t ‘free’ anywhere.
March 8th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
93. cymraegbachgen87
Hospitals, particularly doctors and nurses voted overwhelmingly for Obama because of his universal healthcare plan. Months ago, I was discussing the pros and cons of the idea with my sister (the pre-med working at a hospital) and at one point I said something like “Well why should tax payers provide healthcare for those who can’t pay for it themselves?” and she responded with “[The hospital] does it all the time right now anyway…the only difference is that right now it’s not legal.” Most doctors take their hippocratic oath seriously and if possible, will use loopholes to provide basic care or medicines for uninsured or those whose insurance won’t cover it. She did have a good point…if it’s already being done, why not make it official and take out the drama and the economic strain on the hospitals who are merely trying to help? That conversation was enough for me to stop being such an ignoramous about the whole thing and actually start looking at the realities of it rather than judging its face value!
It’s that same “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it and if it is broke, still don’t fix it!” mentality that even I am guilty of.
March 8th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
The National Health Service in Britain is a much lamented and often criticised institution but I think it is fantastic. You WILL need medical attention at some point in your life so its re-assuring to know that it is ALWAYS there for you.
My Grandparents live in Lanzarote where a Health insurance system not dissimilar to that in the US is in action. They saw a man collapse in the street. When the ambulance arrived, the paramedics did not touch him because they could not find any insurance documentation on him. Apparantly it was 20 minutes before they started giving medical attention – by which time it was too late. Apparantly the paramedics acted within the letter of the law and were not responsible.
Just because you are unemployed (and therefore without insurance) doesnt mean you should be disqualified from excellent health care. I have never been at the mercy of American healthcare and thank my lucky stars for that. With my pre-existing medical conditions, it would cost me a fortune in both insurance and in medication bills. I really don’t know how you live without the NHS. I hope Obama can deliver something like it to you.
March 8th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
96. It may not be free, but at least it isnt a fee on top of taxes.In that case it is ‘free’. With everyone sharing the burden as well, per head the cost is cheaper. When my soon to be brother in law was hospitalised in america for three days, the cost was over $100,000! For a child!
March 8th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
I’ve thought of a 17th sign:
17. Restriction of groups or entities which are beyond government control: Organized religions are often persecuted by tyrants, espcially when they criticize the actions of the government or the ruling class. International organizations like the UN are allowed to operate only under very limited conditions, if not expelled outright. In modern times, tyrannical countries have restricted or banned the internet. All of this is done in an attempt to control public opinion and supress dissenting voices.
March 8th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
Cicero; google John C. Yoo and just see how many of your constitutional rights were in jeopardy. In fact, basically disregarded. You’ll be horrified. If you’re not, you should be. This link provides and over-view. Even better is the PBS special Bush’s War. Watch it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/03/us/politics/03legal.html?bl&ex=1236315600&en=3617d899a97e6de4&ei=5087
March 8th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
I think this list could be easily shortened to two items:
“People aren’t allowed to do shit.”
and
“People don’t bother to change that.”
March 8th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
gabi319, as someone who also works in healthcare and works with people who voted for Obama, they haven’t a clue as to how or why they did.
Socialized healthcare isn’t breathtaking or revolutionary, it’s more control of the state over you.
Some people talk about the British or Canadian healthcare system as if it’s in some vacuum, but tell me, why are so many Canadians streaming down here to the U.S. to get their healthcare needs taken care of? And now if we’re heading down that path, where are we to go?
” 98. cymraegbachgen87 – March 8th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
The National Health Service in Britain is a much lamented and often criticised institution but I think it is fantastic. You WILL need medical attention at some point in your life so its re-assuring to know that it is ALWAYS there for you.”
Once again, sounds GREAT in theory, but you neglect to talk about the waiting times and the bureaucratic mentality that now the state will be able to give you healthcare or not.
The problem is and has always been the cost. Why people don’t demand to know what an office visit would cost or how much an operation will be staggers me. People demand to know how much a car repair will cost them, down to the penny, before they take it in, but just shrug their shoulders at healthcare.
March 8th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
“#80. YogiBarrister – March 8th, 2009 at 11:20 am
The Bush administration is guilty of nearly every single one of these. I haven’t read the comments yet, but I’ll bet there are numerous posts about how Obama is trying to do this in America. The very same rightwing tools who created this mess are going to shift the blame.”
Look, he’s NOT President anymore…get over it. I think that in of itself proves the idea that we was some power-hungry war monger who wanted to stay in power for life to be moronic at best.
March 8th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
“It’s only in the USA that everyone is all horny for gun ownership. The country with the highest murder rate in the developed world I might add.”
Actually, we’re not horny for guns, for the most part law-abiding gun-owners respect them. Before denigrating everyone with a broad brush, you should understand what you speak about.
March 8th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
69. General Tits Von Chodehoffen -
apparently that is your standard comment, since i keep seeing it again & again.
so why not submit your own list? http://listverse.com/submissions
March 8th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
5. Seeking a government monopoly on the capability and use of armed force: The first signs are efforts to register or restrict the possession and use of firearms, initially under the guise of “protecting” the public, which, when it actually results in increased crime, provides a basis for further disarmament efforts affecting more people and more weapons.
I guess this comes from an american. Since when it´s normal the possesion of firearms? Less civilians with firearms results in increasing crime??? I though it was common sense that it was the opposite.
March 8th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
Sounds like the US to me…. as a Canadian, I see what the US media sees fit to show versus what the rest of the world does. It is sad how the US public has the wool over their eyes.
March 8th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
nice can of worms you have opened here, correct me if i am wrong please the right to bear arms was to protect citizens from the british now america’s lap dog so no longer really valid, i dont like guns they are a machine built for one purpose killing, sure there is a sport aspect now but the gun has been developed around war full stop. The right to defend your home and your family is a valid point and i agree you should have that right but do you really need a weapon of war to do this. I really liked the post about the swiss and while i dont know much about switzerland you never hear about mass murders involving guns, but then you never hear much about switzerland full stop. In regards to the uk whilst our gun control seems to work you still get people like thomas hamilton being allowed to have guns and killing school children,yes there have been reforms since but it goes to show the system aint perfect, 2. in regards to the press they are always biased in one way or another i myself try to read a selection of papers and then form my own opinion,3. the nhs is a wonderful thing ruined by the people who run it. But those who complain about it just imagine if we did not have it
March 8th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Steve from MKE; I do know of which I speak. And responsible gun ownership is not the problem. The problem is the inalienable right for every yahoo and his brother to own a hand-gun. We have very similar crime stats; but our assault rate is higher and our murder rate much lower. How many of those assaults would be murders if guns were more accessible?
As far as the healthcare debate, I would respectfully suggest you all make your way to the forums; there is a thread specifically for this topic. I would pose this question though; How come of all the developed countries in the world the only one without universal access to health-care is the United States?
http://listverse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1605
March 8th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
“Since when it´s normal the possesion of firearms? Less civilians with firearms results in increasing crime??? I though it was common sense that it was the opposite.”
Oh, since around 1776. The 2nd Amendment wasn’t written to protect people to go big game hunting, it was written to prevent a tyrannical government from oppressing people. Again.
March 8th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
103. Steve from MKE
There’s something wrong with socialism? Not socialist governments of the past because if you look at the history, their demise was not from socialist acts but corruption of power. In the 1800s, America took more control from the state and placed it to federal government to create a national standard of currency. Prior to that, visiting neighbooring states required a change of currency at each border since your money was no good from that point on. We see that in present day with the creation of the Euro across the pond. It’s not “breathtaking or revolutionary, it’s more control of the state over you.” and given that I travel frequently between a tri-state area, I’m actually happy this was done.
And correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t the universal healthcare only providing the very base coverage and if someone wants to upgrade, they can provide their own additional insurance? At the moment Obama’s taking baby steps. His universal health care plan that is in legislation right now is to provide coverage for all CHILDREN. Whether this is the end result or if this is a social experiment to see if it’s a viable solution that can be broadened to include all individuals, we have to wait and see.
(105) “Before denigrating everyone with a broad brush, you should understand what you speak about.”
And:
(103) “people who voted for Obama, they haven’t a clue as to how or why they did”
Hypocrite much? Tone down the anger…it doesn’t make a difference if you talk coherently or point the Mr. Potato Angry Eyes at all who oppose you. I’d prefer a decent conversation.
March 8th, 2009 at 3:04 pm
“Socialized healthcare isn’t breathtaking or revolutionary, it’s more control of the state over you.
I’m sorry that you feel that way. I wonder what has made you so disenchanted with the government.
“bureaucratic mentality that now the state will be able to give you healthcare or not.”
I don’t understand. Please elaborate. And as someone who has spent a large amount of time in and out of hospitals, waiting lists are not as bad as you think. It is a better system than allowing the rich to get treated and leaving the poor to die by allowing the rich to jump the queue.
March 8th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
“Steve from MKE; I do know of which I speak. And responsible gun ownership is not the problem. The problem is the inalienable right for every yahoo and his brother to own a hand-gun. We have very similar crime stats; but our assault rate is higher and our murder rate much lower. How many of those assaults would be murders if guns were more accessible?”
Mom424: You assume every “yahoo” who has a gun has it legally. Do you think if guns were banned, everything will be perfect? So they banned guns in England, yet knife attacks are on the rise. Do they ban knives there too now?
March 8th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
“I’m sorry that you feel that way. I wonder what has made you so disenchanted with the government.”
Watching it before my eyes.
“It is a better system than allowing the rich to get treated and leaving the poor to die by allowing the rich to jump the queue.”
Well, poor people do get treated here, even those who aren’t here legally.
March 8th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
Steve #104, we can’t get over it until we undo the damage that he caused. Let’s do a quick check off.
#1-4, yes, he did all of these
#5- no, but giving contracts to private paramilitary forces is even more dangerous, plus the premise is BS. The author is using bogus crime stats. The more guns, licensed or otherwise, the more gun crime there is.
#6-11 yes absolutely Bush was guilty of every single one of these.
#12 no, it’s even worse. He made it so that the government can’t meet any of our needs.
#13 In his personal life, he was guilty of shirking his responsibilty. He never voted until he ran for office, at best he refused to take a physical when he was in the National Guard, thus wasting the two million dollars it took to train him, at worse, he went AWOL
#14 yes of course
#15 no, it’s even worse, the government does have the right to regulate the sale of firearms, to ensure fair trade policies etc. etc.
#16 Yes again, aided and abetted by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Fox News.
March 8th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
And I’m not interested in changing hearts and minds here, but if I were to move to Austrailia or England for some reason, my mentality would be to pay for my own healthcare. Maybe that’s me and my idea that I am free individual and not a ward of the state or some victim.
I understand people across this globe have their utopian vision of what the state can do for them, but here, especially since the 1960’s, a generation of people have been under the thumb of the government and will never ever be able to think otherwise. Public housing, welfare checks replacing a family income and food stamps have corrupted people for decades and they throw a conniption fit if one dollar is taken away from them or when they were supposed to work for their welfare checks, but now that’s all moot. The permanent welfare class has the entire government working for them now.
They don’t want to help them, they want to control them.
March 8th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Yogi:
You must be a “truther” if you believe #14.
“#16 Yes again, aided and abetted by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Fox News.”
Ah yes, the right wing media machine vs NBC/ABC/CBS/NY Times/Washington Post/NPR/MSNBC who don’t report a thing that happens on the left. Next time a scandal erupts, look to see if they list the (R) or a (D). If it’s a democrat scandal, you’d think the office is non-partisan. But if it’s a Republican, who know everything about that person for the past 10 years, ala Sarah Palin or Joe the Plumber and EVERYTHING is blown out of proportion.
March 8th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
gabi319; Not in Canada – it is part of our rights as citizens to have EQUAL access to health care, no matter your income level or social stature.
I’m not naive; the very rich always have it easier; if there is a 6 week wait to have your hernia fixed you could afford to fly to Switzerland and have it done as quickly as money will buy. My personal experiences have been uniformly good. I have never had to wait for necessary care or surgery nor have I had to wait longer than a few weeks for a specialist appointment. Check out the forum link I posted earlier.
March 8th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Steve from MKE; I’ll take my chances with the knife. I can out-run the guy with the knife, I’ll never out-run the bullet.
You didn’t answer my question about universal health care that you’re so against. Nor did you reply to my statement about the differences in our crime rates. I for one don’t believe Canadians to be inherently less capable of murder than Americans; I think it’s the availability of hand-guns that makes the difference.
March 8th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
hmm i believe #1 is referring to ‘censorship’. that’s the term used by my history profs anyway.
March 8th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
119. Mom424:
That bit I wrote was in reference to US’s take on the universal healthcare plan. Clinton’s was far more universal, Obama’s seems to be a hybrid of hers and the current standard. Although at the start of campaigning he did have standards similar to hers and I wonder if the subsequent alterations were to assuage those on the fence on the issue.
A mild OT tangent… In an effort to promote carpooling and decrease traffic, the state created and designated a lane as HOV – High occupancy vehicle – originally planned as HOV-4 meaning if you have four people, you may take the less populated HOV lane and breeze past the lesser passenger cars. Well all and saundry had a tiff about this new environmental proposal. Words exchanged, some logical, some irrational…the end result? HOV-2 so any car with 2 or more people can go into this single lane if they so choose while the rest of the natural world has 3 lanes to their fancy. Compromise can be good but at times like this (IMHO with healthcare) compromise can be stupid.
Thanks for the tip! If I feel the need to hash it out with competent people, I’ll definitely stop by the forum.
March 8th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
“So they banned guns in England, yet knife attacks are on the rise. Do they ban knives there too now?”
No they didnt. They heavily and strictly controlled them as I said above and did it in the UK (not just England). You can still own shotguns for example. And BTW England and The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland are not interchangable entities.
Funnily enough removing guns from standard circulation caused gun crime to plummet, and all types of violent crime are decreasing. And it is already illegal to carry a knife – it is known as carrying an offensive weapon.
“You assume every “yahoo” who has a gun has it legally.” I don’t assume that. I don’t think anyone assumes that. But if guns are available very readily LEGALLY then it will be easier to get a gun illegally than, say, in the UK.
“Well, poor people do get treated here, even those who aren’t here legally.”
That wasnt my point. My point was that people who can PAY for top class treatment get it earlier. If two people with 6 months to live with one being able to pay for their treatment, and the other going on a waiting list because they cannot pay to jump the queue, who would you put your money on surviving?
March 8th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
I actually feel sorry that you have such a cynical view of the world.
March 8th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Was GWB a dictator or a tyrant? Whatever his (undbouted) faults, how many other dictators or tyrants in history have ridden off into the sunset as quietly as he did? Will Obama ride off into the sunset as quietly in four or eight years’ time? My guess is is “yes”.
March 8th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
Scary Stuff. Some interesting parallels with current scenarios. I’m rather bemused with all the gun comments from
non-Americans. We have our gun laws and you have yours. Same with health insurance, I pay about $700 a month to cover my
wife and children. (Mine is no-cost from my employer) Having
a family was my decision. Why should I expect others to pay for my lifestyle choices? If you cannot properly protect and provide for your family, don’t have one. Yes, it really is that simple.
March 8th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
“Why should I expect others to pay for my lifestyle choices?”
Usually I would agree with you. However, just look around today. People losing their jobs and their homes. They cant afford to pay their premiums. It isnt their fault. Why should they be forced to take a drop in health care?
I suppose to us Brits who have grown up with our system your system is just….wierd :S
“If you cannot properly protect and provide for your family, don’t have one.”
Naive view my friend. For the same reasons.
March 8th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Cymra….Yeah, maybe I am naive, but I intend to stay that
way. I sleep well at night not relying on others to
provide things that are clearly my responsibility.
Your comments are welcome, though. Different strokes
for different folks. If we all thought the same, things
would really be dire. Have a good one.
March 8th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Lol. Fair enough
Peace out!
March 8th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Steve from MKE :…The permanent welfare class…
****So, Stevie-boy, how would you classify *me*? I have a couple of B.A.s and a M.A., I worked from the time I was in school until my kids were grown and gone. Then I was struck by a disease so rare, and so painful, that even the government doctors agreed after only ONE visit that I would be on disability for the rest of my life. I’m on a daily routine of drugs, any one of which would kill a person whose body was not used to the assault.
Yes, I am a permanent disability check collector. I will be for the remainder of my life. Should the government deny me? Or do you put me in a different “class” than welfare?
March 8th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
segue,
I think there is little point in trying to reason with this guy. Engrained opinions are a chore to change.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:10 pm
“I would pose this question though; How come of all the developed countries in the world the only one without universal access to health-care is the United States?”
It doesn’t matter now since we have a President and a Congress under one party rule.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
matt123 “If you cannot properly protect and provide for your family, don’t have one.”
what would u say to the person that didn’t choose to have a child and found herself pregnant? and that isnt an invitation to say something about responsibility and contraception in order to avoid the question.
i want to know what u would advise the parent to do. i can tell u from experience no one will hire a pregnant girl. once the baby is born, finding quality affordable childcare is near impossible, as is finding a job that is flexible towards the needs of a single parent.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
132. Steve from MKE – March 8th, 2009 at 6:10 pm
“I would pose this question though; How come of all the developed countries in the world the only one without universal access to health-care is the United States?”
It doesn’t matter now since we have a President and a Congress under one party rule.
What has that got to do with it?
March 8th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
Well segue…don’t really know why having a “couple” of degrees makes any difference, but no, you’re not in a different class. I’m talking about able-bodied human beings who refuse to work for a living and women who pop out kids just to get the government assistance, which has now been exacerbated under Obama who, with his “stimulus” bill, basically killed welfare reform from the mid-90’s.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
“as is finding a job that is flexible towards the needs of a single parent.”
ATM finding a job for ANYONE is hard enough!
March 8th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
“What has that got to do with it?”
Uh, everything…since democrats control the White House and have control of Congress.
I realize a constitutional republic is hard for some to grasp.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
“which has now been exacerbated under Obama who, with his “stimulus” bill, basically killed welfare reform from the mid-90’s.
The man hasn’t been in office 6months and already he is to blame for all the problems in america..?
o..k…
That man must fcuk up FAST. I do have a question. What else was he supposed to do?
March 8th, 2009 at 6:26 pm
….O dear Steve. The question posed to you was:
“How come of all the developed countries in the world the only one without universal access to health-care is the United States?”
Your reply did not address this point.
“It doesn’t matter now since we have a President and a Congress under one party rule”
Hence my reply:
“What has that got to do with it”
I realise that standard common sense and grammar are hard for some to grasp.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
Would you like to take another whack at a response that actually answers the question?
March 8th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
cym, well yes, much harder these days, but 2 years ago is when this all happened to me. jobs were plenty, just unavailable to me.
lucky for me now i have a work placement which has childcae available, i will get a qualificaion in a year as well as some gold DofE certificates and i’m hoping by then the job market will have eased. i hope.
steve from mke, do u differentiate between “women who pop out kids just to get government assistance” and women who just “pop out kids”? also, please define who u think is able to work? because different people have different ideas about who is able to work and who isn’t… like the mentally unstable who are able bodied.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
132. Steve from MKE
1933 – President Roosevelt (D) Congress majority (D)
1971 – President Carter (D) Congress majority (D)
1993 – President Clinton (D) Congress majority (D)
2001 – President Bush (R) Congress majority (R)
That’s only the tip of the iceberg but it’s obvious it’s not the first time a one party rule has happened. And with the House of Representatives changing state seats every two years depending on voting cycle of the individual states, there’s a possibility that Obama’s one party rule will only exist for two years.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
And btw, to date, Obama has been in office… 1 month, 3 weeks and 1 day. How he hasn’t fixed decades of economic trouble, years of war, and the general discontent within and without America….FOR SHAME!
March 8th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
“The man hasn’t been in office 6months and already he is to blame for all the problems in america..?”
Good grief…in 1996 AFDC was replaced with a new program that reversed the funding to the states that actually gave them more money with the more dependent people they had. Funding was cut to states which had lowered their caseloads. That new program had goals which had goals of reducing the number of people on welfare. Regardless of what you think of that, getting able-bodied into the workforce and being self-sufficient is a good thing.
But with the new so-called stimulus bill, that has been overturned and now the old style government welfare check hand-out has even been increased to the states. And no more work rules are in place.
For those who don’t care to know, President Obama has said he viewed our Constitution as an obstruction to “redistributive change”…as in reparations. That’s what all this is about. If you don’t live here, I’m sorry, you’ll never understand it. He doesn’t wish to help people, he just wants to control as many people as he can.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:34 pm
i love political lists everyones panties get all twisted
March 8th, 2009 at 6:34 pm
Am I missing something? (I know the UK uses a different system so I might be) but what does this have to do with the question:
“How come of all the developed countries in the world the only one without universal access to health-care is the United States?”
Why did steve bring it up in the first place?
March 8th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
“How come of all the developed countries in the world the only one without universal access to health-care is the United States?”
Have any of you people ever thought “Hey, all this socialism costs a lot of money”..? And I still point to all the Canadians who come down here for their healthcare. If socialized medicine is so great up there, why is there so many coming down here for their care?
You may be surprised, but lots of people actually like their healthcare and the system.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
“He doesn’t wish to help people, he just wants to control as many people as he can.”
I always thought he Obama looked like the Emperor from Star Wars. It is all falling into place.
All hail Emperor Obama!
Seriously mate. Are you for real?
March 8th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
The UK isnt a socialist country and still has the NHS.
How much do you pay on health insurance a month?
Even in Scotland – where the cost of the NHS is higher for a number of reasons, it is about £2,313 per head…PER YEAR.
So that is…less than £120 (about $170) a month per taxpayer.
Yeah this socialism is damned expensive.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
Steve from MKE – To whom are you referring? The only instances that I’m aware of, the folks could not receive the treatment in a timely manner here in Canada. Not enough machines or some such. Our health insurance paid to send them to the USA for treatment. They went to the USA because it was required that they be treated in a timely manner. Which they are guaranteed to by our Charter. How is this bad?
I have read of other instances where the surgery was deemed too experimental or dangerous; those folks paid out of their pocket. I personally have no first hand knowledge of anyone choosing to go to the United States. No one in my extended family.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
“Seriously mate. Are you for real?”
Well, mate, I’ve seen enough from democrats in my life to understand they don’t care about people’s liberties or personal property.
And seriously “mate”, you should read up on the man and about his mentors like Saul Alinsky, John McKnight,Alice Palmer and Frank Marshall Davis.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
well we are all (me included) whinging and moaning about the state of the world today but i dont see any one coming up with solutions or doing anything about it.
heres an idea, lets overthrow our governments, be they uk or american, and start fresh with new laws and new leaders. any takers?
i bet no one goes for it. u know why? because much as we hate the system its familiar. because we know we couldn’t do it any better. there are people out there who would make better prime minister/president but i dont know them and i dont want to have to go to the trouble of finding them. because even if this happened, it would all get corrupt again.
even if some one stepped up, i wouldnt do anything, because i just want a quiet life where i can bring up my son the best i can.
STEVE FROM MKE i notice you dont answer questions u dont like. thats a very annoying habit.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
“How much do you pay on health insurance a month?”
Out of pocket, $115 per month for healthcare and $25 for dental
March 8th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
Awww…is stevie gettin angry at poor little me…
March 8th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Well there’s your problem Steve: pure Republican party member… Staunch republican, staunch democrat…both of them are the true problems with the government. You’re not seeing the issues as is but rather siding with a political party. It’s promoting ignorance! Cym, there’s no help for him… he’s already prepared to distort everything to his liking with no consideration to the actual facts.
And for the record, I’ve been against the stimulus package from the get go as it is nothing but more pork barrelling. If I weren’t more focused on the actual legislation and rather took what you said at face value, you’d compel make me switch sides simply to spite you!
March 8th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
No cymrae, I don’t know you well enough to get angry.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
“Well there’s your problem Steve: pure Republican party member…”
What exactly is a pure Republican party member? Doesn’t say that on my Vast Right Wing Conspiracy card.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
According to a number of American news sites, the average american insurance premium in 2008 was cost $4,704 for Annual single coverage. I notice this increases if you have prescription plans.
Seeing as the highest per head in Britain is $3,271.74 it doesnt take a genius to figure out that, actually, our system is slightly cheaper. Our figure also stays constant, no matter how many pre-exisitng problems you have, or problems you develop.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:55 pm
It also helps that much of the tax to pay for the NHS comes from cigarettes and alcohol sales.
March 8th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
“Seeing as the highest per head in Britain is $3,271.74 it doesnt take a genius to figure out that, actually, our system is slightly cheaper. Our figure also stays constant, no matter how many pre-exisitng problems you have, or problems you develop.”
If you like it, fine, I like my plan too. But why overhaul a system that doesn’t need overhauling?
March 8th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
Shadow – “So go ahead and ban guns, and watch people become increasingly proficient at buying or making them illegally. Keep them illegal, and watch honest people learn how to become proficient with throwing knives and knife fighting in general.”
Knife fighting? Throwing knives? You’re kidding, right? I feel like I’m in the Count of Monte Cristo or something.
You can’t compare a gun and a knife. A knife has so many other legitimate purposes. A gun exists only to take life. If we’re going to refer to them as tools, we need to look at their purpose. Even if I accepted your argument (which I don’t) knife wounds are less likely to be lethal than gunshots. In addition, you have far less innocent bystanders who get injured in a knife fight…. not many 10 year old kids get killed in a drive-by knifing.
I’m not suggesting here that all gun owners own a gun purely to take life, but I’m merely making the point that more guns = more crime. If there is a society with 1,000,000 guns and a society with 1000 guns, do you really expect me to believe the latter would have more crime?
March 8th, 2009 at 7:07 pm
Because it does need overhauling?
Because Medical professionals believe by 2018 health care will consume as much as half of household income?
Because Americans pay up to nine times more for medications than the rest of the developed world because prices are not negotiated?
Because when profits come before healthcare, standard of care will be affected?
Because the U.S. is ranked 37th in the world for healthcare?
March 8th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
and that 37th is behind Oman, Colombia, the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Chilie
March 8th, 2009 at 7:15 pm
135. Steve from MKE : Well segue…don’t really know why having a “couple” of degrees makes any difference, but no, you’re not in a different class.
****
Well Mike (I like to get down on their level, it makes them feel good and safe), you haven’t really answered my question.
How are disability and welfare alike? “One of these things is not like the other thing; one of these things doesn’t belong…”
Big difference here Stevie, let’s see if you can crack the code.
Disability.
Welfare.
Check them out in the dictionary and come back with an answer. I’ll wait.
March 8th, 2009 at 7:16 pm
What is wrong with you people- the US is no where close to a tyranny.
March 8th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
It really annoys me when people say that the US is a tyranny. Really people? Really?
March 8th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
I could’ve sworn from the title this was gonna be a funny list.
Boy, was I wrong.
March 8th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
When did people start only caring for themselves and ignoring the plight of others. Yes some people take advantage of welfare but no matter what you do people will take advantage of it. But there are many people that actually need welfare to survive. This is not a society of the fittest, we already know that social darwinism is crap, get over yourself and care about other people.
March 8th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
every country is a tyranny to a degree
people calm down there are some countries around that are tyrannys
March 8th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
Enter, America.
March 8th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
Phew, I seem to have escaped verbal abuse at the Nazi reference. Good list by the way
I don’t think America is anything near a Tyranny people… But I guess most of you are joking anyway?
March 8th, 2009 at 8:55 pm
ahahahhahahahaha, the USA is such a terrible place. I hate them for having so much
March 8th, 2009 at 9:05 pm
Thanks for a great laugh. The comments today are a hoot.
March 8th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
this is SINGAPORE… without a doubt
March 8th, 2009 at 9:45 pm
166 duh: It really annoys me when people say that the US is a tyranny. Really people? Really?
Yes really. Here in California, citizens are being denied equal civil rights as we speak. Because of “tyranny of the majority”. Hello all you “Yes on Prop 8” bigots. Even a democracy can’t get it right sometimes.
165: What is wrong with you people- the US is no where close to a tyranny.
Try looking past your own nose.
March 8th, 2009 at 10:15 pm
1. I can assure you Iraq HAS WMDs. Just a matter of time before we find them.
2. No Hanky Panky in Florida 2000 nor in Ohio 2004, Trust me on this please.
3. There was no undue influence on “juries” at Guantanmo, believe me.
4. Haliburton and the Oil Companies did not gain anything from the Iraq War. In fact, they should be commended for their civic duty and patriotism.
5. We are certainly NOT Canada.
6. We only wage wars on “terror”, not crime.
7. FBI has no informants in mosques and synagogues. Just lies spread by the Soviet Union or whatever they are called today.
8. We don’t kill anyone above secretary or minister level if they disagree with our wars. Colin Powell is a living proof of that.
9. Watergate was a Chinese conspiracy.
10. Our Supreme Court members are elected by the national Bar Associations, … I believe.
11. Karl Rove did nothing wrong.
12. Not the US people, certainly.
13. Well, good thing our media gives the public a well-balanced even-handed view of world affairs – It’s on the back page of some of the bigger national newspapers.
14. We never staged anything in the 60s and blame it on Castro.
15. Got nothing here … seriously … sorry.
16. You are either with us or against us.
March 8th, 2009 at 10:22 pm
McSquid #161
“I’m not suggesting here that all gun owners own a gun purely to take life, but I’m merely making the point that more guns = more crime. If there is a society with 1,000,000 guns and a society with 1000 guns, do you really expect me to believe the latter would have more crime?”
Short answer, it depends on whose hands those 1000 guns are in.
Your statement that more guns = more crime is patent bull**** that your standard anti-gun groups routinely spew forth. It is well documented that in EVERY instance in which a state has adopted concealed carry laws, gun related crimes decrease. Concealed carry holders are the most law-abiding group among us, there is less than 1% of CCW carriers involved in firearm related crimes. As a group, that’s amazingly low, again it’s been well documented, except it would seem to be noticeably absent in the places you’ve been looking.
If I had to be in a town full of guns, as you suggest, I’d much rather be in a town of 1,000,000 NRA members and CCW carriers than in a town where the only guns belong to 1000 criminals. I know where I’d be safer, and the statistics bear it out. Might I suggest you actually do some research before you spout off like that, because it’s blatantly obvious the only evidence you pay attention to is the type that appeals to your personal views.
March 8th, 2009 at 10:53 pm
This list is like astrology: It can apply to everyone if we just squint a little bit.
Hey, eggs: Tell me this doesn’t apply to you: “because it’s blatantly obvious the only evidence you pay attention to is the type that appeals to your personal views.”
March 8th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
Eggs Ackley – like I said in my original post, that I’m guessing you haven’t read, I have done my research. I even wrote a paper on it. It is blatantly obvious that the evidence I pay attention to is the evidence of what is happening in my own country (Australia), since that is where I live. If Americans want to kill each other, then go for it.
In the 90s following the Port Arthur massacre, Australia implemented a massive gun buyback. There has been a huge reduction in gun numbers across the country. And guess what? Serious crime has dropped. Not just gun crime, either. Check it out at http://www.abs.gov.au. Do YOUR research before criticizing mine.
March 8th, 2009 at 11:16 pm
In addition, I am not questioning the fact that CCW owners ARE law-abiding. But the simple fact is that when you have so many guns in circulation, it is so much easier for a criminal to acquire one. That’s just common sense. So yes, I totally agree with your statement that CCW owners ARE more law-abiding. But the criminals aren’t usually the ones who are licensed to carry guns.
In addition, if I was a criminal, and I was breaking into a house, if I knew there was a gun in the house, I’d be far more likely to take a gun in too. If I knew I wasn’t going to be shot at, then the chance that I would go in armed with a firearm would decrease.
March 8th, 2009 at 11:58 pm
“The first signs are efforts to register or restrict the possession and use of firearms, initially under the guise of “protecting” the public, which, when it actually results in increased crime, provides a basis for further disarmament efforts affecting more people and more weapons.”
I’m sure someone will have already said this, but there is absolutely no basis for that at all. Other than that, pretty interesting list.
March 9th, 2009 at 12:01 am
176. nick : Warning, slight right-wing tendencies sensed….
179. McSquida : Right on the mark there, Australia had very strict gun control and we’re doing fine with our civil rights.
March 9th, 2009 at 2:23 am
Great list! Its a bit disconscerting though to see that people are still for banning guns.
To say that getting rid of guns will lower the crime rate is quite cynnical. Almost all of gun crimes are done with illegal firearms to begin with. You think that keeping honest, law abiding citizens from owning guns will also keep scum from getting them as well? I’m pretty sure that they wouldn’t have much more trouble doing it if guns are banned. Look at countries like Switzerland or Israel; every adult is required and trained to own a fully automatic weapon (rifles in Switzerland, and Uzis in Israel). The Swiss’ crime rate is amazingly low, and thanks to everyone having an Uzi in Israel, the Palestinians would never think about marching an army in there because they’d get blown away.
The craziest part of trying to ban guns is that do you really think that criminals will just say “Aw gee whiz! I can’t get a piece! Darnit all, guess i’ll get an honest job.” No. What do you think criminals did before there were guns? Will knifes be banned? Clubs? Tree limbs? Rebar? People’s own hands?
If the US required every home to have a weapon and every adult to carry a concealed weapon, i garauntee that crime would drop. The chances of anyone committing a crime with the knowledge that everyone is packing and is trained to sling some righteous lead, would be very slim indeed.
March 9th, 2009 at 2:42 am
182. Rascalian : I didn’t say do it in the US buddy. I said it was one of the best things to happen in Australia, which is definitely the truth. But I hardly think you should take the position that criminal activity in the United States is being handled well, because that’s almost as far from the truth as you can get – almost as bad as those fundies.
But why do you think the duty to carry a concealed weapon would be safe? Do you think that would stop the mentally unstable, because I don’t. I think you would only be putting countless people at risk from themselves and others with mental defects. For example, if I had a gun handed to me and I was told to carry it around with me everywhere, there would be some very sad and angry parents right now. Actually I think that having little to no access to firearms is one of the main reasons that I haven’t done something insanely stupid already.
March 9th, 2009 at 4:22 am
As usual, people only think of gun laws in terms of crime rates. This being an article on tyranny, there’s other things to consider. Namely, that a large populace, unarmed, untrained, determinedly pacifistic (as you’d so love people to be) is no match for a well trained and equipped. Now, imagine if that army was composed of recruits from your own nation? Considering how little trust the average left-wing (and post-Bush, most people) have in the military, and the government that controls it, I’m sure the scenario’s gone through a lot of minds before. And don’t think it’s so farfetched…every politician’s just a wannabe dictator in a Sunday suit.
Of course, if it were to actually happen, I’m sure most of you would be all too happy to comply with any orders you recieved. Anything to prove a point, huh?
March 9th, 2009 at 4:29 am
185. DarkDecapodian : What are you on about? Not having access to an extremely dangerous and lethal weapon makes you pacifist? Man, Australia’s screwed if we ever have to fight in a war… Hey, wait a second, I remember something called Afganistan wasn’t it? And Iraq, Vietnam, Korea, WWII, WWI, The Boer War…. Wow, my country must be useless. Let’s make a list of all of those wars we fought in and lost…. Vietnam, the US fought in that too. But wait, I thought because they don’t have gun control their army would be too cool for school.
Take your right-wing crap elsewhere buddy, I’m fine with any beliefs – political, religious or otherwise – that you want to hold. But I’m not ok with you coming in here and baggin mine and other peoples’ beliefs out. So if you want to talk in a rude manner, just leave….
March 9th, 2009 at 4:40 am
Mark: I’m not right wing…I’d like to see Rush Limbaugh strung up outside his own house as much as Michael Moore. I merely have no faith in my own species, especially those in power. I’ll cop to rudeness too, merely because everyone else with an opinion and a modem seems to feel the need to verbally destroy anyone with an opposing view too.
March 9th, 2009 at 4:53 am
For a moment there I thought the list is named “16 Signs That You Live In A Country” or “16 Signs That You Live Under A Government” or something like that..
March 9th, 2009 at 4:57 am
And, if i’m going to be playing the part of loathing-fuelled misanthrope, I might as well say that this list is probably the ultimate goals of every government and, in a reduced sense, every group of people. It’s all evolutionary, innit? You’ve gotta disempower the competition to get the best grub, after all.
March 9th, 2009 at 5:21 am
187. DarkDecapodian : I don’t feel the need to verbally abuse. I had no problem with – most of – your points, I just didn’t like the aggressive way in which you put them.
189. DarkDecapodian : Most groups of people, but my “group” we’ll refer to them as, don’t feel the need to. Quite the opposite, we are all about the individual and doing what you want. Anarchism is a prime example that disproves your hypothesis. I’m not saying your wrong, just a bit too general.
March 9th, 2009 at 5:33 am
whatever happened to live and let live
March 9th, 2009 at 5:37 am
i mean, for those that dont think they live in a tyranny, whats your argument?
and for thosewho think they do live in a tryranny, whatare you dong about it?
March 9th, 2009 at 5:42 am
191. 6twistedbiscuits : A little thing called humanity came along and absolutely annhilated that theory my friend…
March 9th, 2009 at 5:46 am
mark – its such a shame, i live my life by that ideal. all i ask is an explanation of why people tink the way they do, othr peoples thaugh, theories, beliefs etc fascinate me.
March 9th, 2009 at 5:49 am
194. 6twistedbiscuits : That is going to be a challenge, I think you would have a lot of opposition in that endeavour. Like me for example, the reasons I live the way I do are very complicated and not pretty. So I would have problems answering those in the act of “trying to protect your sanity”
March 9th, 2009 at 5:53 am
mark- i have no sanity
i just like knowing how people have come to think about things the way they do.
March 9th, 2009 at 5:58 am
196. 6twistedbiscuits : Compared to me you would look like Anon on a sanity scale my friend, don’t doubt it for a second. But if you do, look up some of my “idols” – I don’t actually like their music, I just respect what they did/do :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_norwegian_black_metal_scene
I don’t necessarily agree with them or what they, but I do want to get where they were musically. Underground metal ftw…
March 9th, 2009 at 6:17 am
Seriously, why stop at nationalized health care for US citizens? What about free housing ? I mean if the people are homeless, yes they have free health-care, but shouldn’t we provide homes for these people? And since their health is the jumping off point here, shouldn’t the government provide people with three nutritious meals a day? And don’t forget about transportation! How are some people who can’t afford a car or car insurance supposed to get to work? Especially people who live in towns with little to no public transportation. The government should provide for rides to and from work as well!
I remember reading something along the lines of “life, liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness.” Not it’s guarantee.
Read up on the NHS system… fascinating stuff:
http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/socialized.html#britain
http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/socialized.html#britain
March 9th, 2009 at 6:18 am
i’m sick of people comparing guns to cars and knives etc.
yes, cars kill too, and so does knives. but they serve other purposes; good luck getting to your job in time riding on a gun, and i hope that that toast you just buttered with a heckler&koch 45C tastes amezome.
fact of the matter is that guns serve only one purpose.
shooting a criminal carrying your tv out the window should be consider murder. shooting people trespassing on your cornfield should be considered murder.
firearms should be heavily regulated by the government; given only to those that pass a mental check and has an iq above 85.
saying guns keep america safe is bullshit and contradicts actual statistics. saying that removing the guns completely would make usa safer is also bullshit.
canada has way more guns than usa does, but only a fraction of the gun-crimes. its not the guns, people. its your society.
regulation is the clue here.
now, if only america could pass a law where if it is suspected that a person is extremely dumb, they would have to pass an iq-test in order to legally have children.
but what would then happen to nascar?
March 9th, 2009 at 6:19 am
wtf…
awesome*
March 9th, 2009 at 6:30 am
198. Cernunnos : I partially agree with the sentiment – apart from the anti-American thing, that was uncalled for – but next time, a bit more respect please. Don’t forget I’m on your side, gun control and regulation is the way to go. But being rude isn’t going to win us any friends. Be polite and you get respect.
P.S. Check out the Creationism topic to see my point
March 9th, 2009 at 6:33 am
Social and cultural context is probably more important than legislation in any gun control debate. The US can do what it likes with its gun laws but I bet the murder rate and the reasons behind it will remain. The Swiss can decide to chuck all their machine guns in Lake Geneva and their murder rate will stay low – because they’re cuckoo-clock making bankers and watch makers i.e. they’re the boring Swiss and they don’t really go in for capping each other in the ass.
Sometimes gun legislation merely reflects our cultural morms. In the UK, the nanny state is perhaps an accurate reflection of our national consciousness – we really do all think it’s best to keep guns away from all the lager louts and football hooligans.
March 9th, 2009 at 6:35 am
morms ???? = norms
March 9th, 2009 at 6:36 am
201. Iain :
“…we really do all think it’s best to keep guns away from all the lager louts and football hooligans.”
I hope you don’t think that’s a bad idea, because if you did I’d think you were a Spurs supporter who wanted to cap a certain manager….
March 9th, 2009 at 6:36 am
im not really anti-american, just anti-amerika, but i am waiting in exitement to see what obama can do.
and i stand by my comment on the problem partly being the society.
but really, i meant no disrespect. and i have (unfortunately?) checked that topic.
some of the debates here cause enough heat to abolish the need of powerplants, so being political correct isnt always the way to go. put “George Carlin – soft language” in youtube
not all things that sound harsh are meant that way. (exept the nascar thing.)
March 9th, 2009 at 6:38 am
At first I thought, “Geez, these all sound like America, I guess we live under tyranny.” Then I realized that the 16 things in this list are things that GOVERNMENT always does. I suppose all government is tyranny to an extent. Is that a bad thing?
March 9th, 2009 at 6:39 am
205. Cernunnos : The NASCAR thing was kinda my point… But I know that the problem is with society, sort of. Down here we’re all descended from convicts so I think that if society is to blame for crime we’re doing quite well
March 9th, 2009 at 6:41 am
wow. Scary reactions.
March 9th, 2009 at 6:41 am
206. robneiderman : Nope, not bad, reality. People commenting on this list complaining about it need to realize that, no government is going to be perfect. As a matter of fact the US is about the furthest you can get away from tyranny, most people overlook that, which is pretty annoying
March 9th, 2009 at 6:54 am
the nazcar reference was a joke, no more.
i still stand by it though, as i find it as boring a sport as watching paint dry. they should add ramps and lava-pits, including a blue koopa shell would be neat too.
Australia has rather low crime-rates, doesn’t it?
but so does my country (Norway), so i dont really know the extent of crime, or the desperate actions people take to stop it.
@robneiderman: “democracy is the dictatorship of the masses”
March 9th, 2009 at 6:57 am
Can anyone say “Zimbabwe?”
March 9th, 2009 at 6:57 am
210. Cernunnos : Low crime rate maybe, but some of the most f*cked up crime ever seen…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_norwegian_black_metal_scene
Dead is a bit of a personal idol though. So what does that say about me
March 9th, 2009 at 7:05 am
Dead was swedish though:P and he would probably still be alive had it not been for Euronymous, Varg did great in killing that asshole. unfortunately he was judged by who he was, not what he did and got the norwegian max sentence (21 years). (one of the faults in norwegian society; prejudice.)
mayhem hasnt been the same since dead died (lol), but we have plenty of music that surpasses Mayhem. you should try Limbonic Art, one of my personal favourites.
March 9th, 2009 at 7:43 am
damien_karras it is blatantly obvious you don’t live in the UK. The NHS is a fantastic service which works surprisingly well considering the budget constraints it has to keep to. Stop reading capitalist propaganda (not that I am a socialist, communist marxist or any other ist) and come and experience it for yourself.
March 9th, 2009 at 7:50 am
#214 cymrae: Capitalist propaganda? Slow down there a bit. Did you read where the sources are from? Your very own “capitalist” sources are Daily Mail (UK), The Sun, The Times, Guardian Unlimited, BBC News, The Scotsman…
Shall I go on?
March 9th, 2009 at 9:05 am
listing “The Sun” as a source is never a good way to imply anything. XD
March 9th, 2009 at 9:12 am
Mark – I’m not masochistic enough to support Spurs and generally I think it’s best to keep anything sharp or bullety away from most Brit civilians – we like a drink and a fight on a Friday night too much (y’see – cultural context).
March 9th, 2009 at 9:24 am
216. Cernunnos: You are correct, that’s why I cited more than one reference.
March 9th, 2009 at 9:26 am
Guns protect us from our government, plain and simple. Take them away from the people and the gov’t can do whatever they want.
March 9th, 2009 at 9:37 am
#199 Cernunnos:
“canada has way more guns than usa does, but only a fraction of the gun-crimes. its not the guns, people. its your society.”
Canada has more guns than the U.S.A.? Upon what do you base that statement? They must have one humongous cache of guns up in the Klondike…
As for the “it’s your society” bit, you are absolutely correct. Our Constitution specifically guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, and the Supreme Court recently ruled that the 2nd ammendment is an individual, not a collective, right. So, there we are. Whateveter your opinion of guns, America’s got boatloads of them, and I think that’s unlikely to change.
An earlier poster said that banning guns does not increase the crime rate. What about the millions of legal gun-owners who are suddenly criminals through no action of their own? Wouldn’t that be a significant increase?
Many States now allow Citizens to carry concealed weapons (after a background check, training course, and fees) legally. In EVERY State where such laws have been enacted, the violent crime rates have dropped dramatically. Why? If I were a bad guy, I’d much rather roll anyone in NY City or Boston than an old man in Dallas or Miami. In NY and Massachusetts the bad guys know that their victims are unarmed. In Texas and Florida, you’re taking your chances.
What’s “right”? I’m more concerned with what is. Deal with it however you’d like…
March 9th, 2009 at 9:46 am
“Our Constitution specifically guarantees the right to keep and bear arms”
http://tubearoo.com/articles/24307/Family_Guy_Right_To_Bear_Arms.html
March 9th, 2009 at 9:48 am
197 Mark: look up some of my “idols” – I don’t actually like their music, I just respect what they did/do
(wiki Death metal link snipped)
Maybe you could treat us all to a list, so General Chodenhoffen will stfu.
March 9th, 2009 at 10:31 am
mpdwag:
not more firearms in terms of volume, but guns per household. i base it upon bowling for columbine.
surely, banning guns would make people with guns criminals. but i doubt that that was what he or the guy saying it would, meant. banning guns is not going to increase, nor decrease the amount of criminal actions, merely how they are conducted and what kind. i would much rather be held up by a guy with a steel pipe than a gun any day. i can defend myself against a steel pipe, bullets are a little harder to dodge and block.
March 9th, 2009 at 10:32 am
Guns don’t kill people. People kill people. If it was not a gun it would be something else. A knife, a bat, a tire iron, straight-up snapping necks. People were being murdered way before the gun came into existence. If someone wants someone else dead they will find a way to get it done. I guess a gun is just the easiest way. I am not saying I am cool with relaxed gun ownership laws. I am just saying the problem goes way beyond firearm ownership. I think goes more into our social fabric and basic human nature (Agression, anger, hatred, and hostilities)
March 9th, 2009 at 10:34 am
mpdwag #220, that is total bullshit. There has been exactly one thoroughly discredited study by a rightwing think tank that suggests the crime rate decreases in states that allow concealed weapons. It was conducted at a time when all crime was going down. Now that the rate is going back up, those states have more gun crime per capita.
Mark #209 and Rob #206, good point! The premise of this list is utter nonsense. Although the Bush administration did in fact promote 14 out of 16 of these, America is not a tyranny. And to think, this all started because Jamie can’t get unpasteurized cheese in New Zealand. Oh the horror.
March 9th, 2009 at 10:43 am
You do live in a tyranny. All the people who have made comments against the US on this list, are about to disappear, never to be seen again. Bush didn’t really leave office, he’s a real smart guy who is pulling the strings from behind the scenes. Go live under Mugabe, you’ll be much better off. Our governments are run by fallible people, who like yourselves, don’t always make smart choices, they must be tyrants.
March 9th, 2009 at 11:28 am
in regard to gun control…
“…being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”
end of story,
MOLON LABE!
March 9th, 2009 at 11:54 am
The 2nd amendment wasn’t to protect us against criminals and armed robbers people it is there to protect us from the Government. Why can’t people understand this. We control the government now, if they take our guns they control us. I don’t care how you feel about violence and all this, if they take away the 2nd amendment who is stopping them from total control? You may think I’m paranoid but the truth is you can’t forsee 5, 10, 50 years down the road and see what corruption may exist in your own country. Do you thinkg the holocaust would have happened if everyone has the right to bare arms?
March 9th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Freshies #229 and evan #228, you would need a lot of fire power to fend of the US Army. Should civilians be allowed to keep automatic weapons, rocket launchers, tanks, nuclear bombs?
March 9th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
well Yogi, on a Federal level fully automatic and select fire weapons are completely legal if they meet some criteria and the purchaser jumps through the legal hoops. So yes i fully believe they should remain legal and NFA laws be repelled.
Now when you make the jump to tank and nuclear bombs takes another level criteria. Again with tanks itself, they are legal to own. The tank shells they fire, not so much. Why? Same reason nuclear weapons aren’t, the intent. The measuring stick has basically been if a weapon is discriminate or indiscriminate. The latter being illegal since you cannot use the weapon on an individual target without causing harm to others. Which again a rocket launcher would full under.
You’d be surprised what little firepower you’d need, look through history, revolutions have been started and won by the masses taking up arms with little more than hunting rifles. Add to that a large percentage of the military would probably join the cause to overthrow tyranny, and i think you have a pretty good deterrent to tyranny itself.
Do I want a revolution to occur? Absolutely not. But do I want safe guards to freedom? Absolutely.
March 9th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
damien_karras:
Cutesy sarcasm is no way to deal with life’s big issues, damien.
Let’s turn your little questions around, shall we?
What should an enlightened, supposedly compassionate society do in order to deal with systems that are gamed against people? Or to cope with crushing costs? The answer of laissez faire capitalism to such a question is “tough shit.” If the rich and powerful take advantage of others, rape the environment, scam the weak out of their money, lord their power over the masses, and so on, well hey, that’s just the Nietzschean way of things.
Shall we go with that, damien? Or should we admit that a caring and, not to choke on the word, but a CHRISTIAN society does better by its citizenry?
No, a government shouldn’t coddle its citizens or “take care of them” 100%. But neither should it allow unfairness, injustice, greed, and the dog-eat-dog nature of the “private world” to run rampant over the needs of the citizenry.
It isn’t wrong to expect a society to share, and to help those who need help. Nor is it wrong to say that with certain things (like health care) that all should have at least some basic access.
It’s amazing to me how middle class grumblers harp on this kind of thing. If they were REALLY to live in the laissez faire world that some of them call for (such as you were hinting at) they—and you–would find it unbearable.
March 9th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
Freshies:
“The 2nd amendment wasn’t to protect us against criminals and armed robbers people it is there to protect us from the Government.”
Wrong, Freshies. The 2nd amendment was put there, all scholars agree, to ensure the basic situation which was prevalent at the time the Constitution was written: namely, that the American colonies/states were used to a citizenry that defended itself largely through state-managed militias. The founders were distrustful of standing armies, though of course they acknowledged the need for the existence of some kind of army, as they had finally ackowledged the need for a stronger central government (we must remember that the Constitution as we know it comes on the heels of the failed experiment with anti-federalism).
The founders, therefore, were concerned with protecting the right of citizens to bear arms, in the event they were needed to repel invasion or tyranny. Hence the clause in the 2nd amendment–”a well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state.”
This business of the amendment being there to allow citizens to protect themselves against their own government is oversimplification of the worst kind. It has a kernel of truth to it, perhaps, but not really in the way you and other gun-types like to interpret it. In point of fact, the purpose of the amendment was to address a state of being which at the time existed but no longer does in precisely the same way. Therefore, it calls for a modern interpretation of the amendment, and, I feel, another amendment to address its out-of-date failings (though that’s unlikely to happen).
I am for our citizenry having the right to bear arms in a REGULATED fashion—because as with ALL of our rights, this one must be balanced between the RIGHT of the individual and the needs and safety of society. You should have the right to have a weapon to defend your home appropriately, and to hunt with, appropriately. And, if need be, to defend your land against an invader, though this is of course unlikely. But the safety of society should curb this right to the extent that you should NOT be allowed to keep, say, machine guns and assault weapons, grenade launchers and bazookas, and the like. You get the picture.
But if you want to carry this to the ridiculous length that your right to bear arms is so that you can defend yourself against the GOVERNMENT–then you tell me where that ends—because your government is ALWAYS going to be far more heavily armed than YOU, Freshies… and so what do you call for? An arms race between the citizenry and the government? Or would you call for disarming the government so that it can do no harm? (but then, nor could it do it’s job of protecting us).
Cutesy simplifications of your type do no good, Freshies, and in the end just illustrate that you’re not thinking, plain and simple.
March 9th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
Scalia’s opinion in heller vs dc is pretty good summation of the 2nd amendment and it’s intent.
March 9th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
I read in an earlier post that if someone broke into your home and stole your T.V and you killed them they consider that murder. What if they came back next week and stole something elsr and so on. What if it was someone carring a loved one away would you still not shoot them ?
If someone broke in my house I dont care if they have my T.V or a cookie. He is gonna get shot.In the U.S thats called self defense and im glad about that.
All you people that live in countries you claim are more evolved than the U.S and dont have guns to protect yourselves. Good luck to ya.
As a united state we cain`t even agree about our gun laws or the constitutional meaning on owning a gun.I have a whole lot of guns and there ALL loaded and locked in a cabinet (except my 9mm S/W autoloader) thats for the T.V thief. HA
Anyway you folks from other countries are not gonna talk us out of our guns,so give it up.Maybe we will evolve some time but not in your lifetime.
P.S. Whoever said Canada has more guns than the U.S puts them in a whole different light.Were gonna have to keep a more vigilant eye on them.
March 9th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
233 Randall-I agree totally.
March 9th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Why do people always shorten my name to cymrae? Odd.
Right Damien. I suppose you believe everything you read in the media? Currently on the BBC website you can find articles saying that a glass of red wine is good for the heart, and that a glass of red wine causes breast cancer.
My own sources (i.e me actually experiencing the NHS and the experiences of my friends and family and colleagues) are vastly more reliable than the scare stories that come out about a number of government sectors.
You find all this stuff about the NHS now? What about not long ago when the NHS celebrated its 50 year anniversary. The beeb was singing its praises as was the Times and all of the major political parties.
Now. Citing the Sun. Never good. Daily Mail (UK) (a tory leaning paper so of course they are going to criticise the current labour governments running of EVERYTHING) the times I didnt see in the citation (will have to look again I suppose) The scotsman? one of the least read newspapers with a reading audience of about 55k, the guardian (I dont like it – its anti student and sensationalist)
Until you have experienced it for yourself on a daily basis, you are not qualified to comment
March 9th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
@ Mark (#207) – Not ALL of us down here are descended from convicts… one state is pure of mind and body, having been settled only by free settlers
March 9th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
bigski – “I have a whole lot of guns and there ALL loaded and locked in a cabinet (except my 9mm S/W autoloader) thats for the T.V thief. HA”
Great, so you have a completely unsecured gun lying around the house. That basically makes the fact that you’ve locked the rest of the guns up pointless. And you’d kill someone for breaking into your house? That’s not self-defense… self-defense is defending yourself if someone is attempting to harm you.
Ah well. It’s pointless even arguing this. I’ll stop now.
March 9th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
20. Alex – March 8th, 2009 at 5:22 am
For those of you who are privileged enough not to live in tyranny, and have always thought one way or another of Chavez (just because he was against Bush and the USA in general), read this list!
Most items have already been used in Venezuela by Chavez’ Revolution. He is a tyrant whether you believe it or not.
(Yes, first hand knowledge, I was born and raised in Venezuela and I still reside in the country – 29 y.o.).
Alex, my condolences. I liveed in Venezuela the first 18 years of my life but I left to go to college 10 years ago and never went back. Two of my brothers and their families still live in Venezuela and I have to say that I worry about them every single day. The rate of violence and crime, not to mention Chavez´s CRAZY reforms which all manage to get passed at some point or another. My biggest fear now is his threat that he wants all children to belong to the State. Yes, you heard correctly. Children born in Venezuela will legally belong to the Government and parents will only be “entrusted to care for them”. That means you cannot make any decisions about your child´s life (travel, etc) without the express consent of the Government. Scary….
________________________________
84. gabi319 – March 8th, 2009 at 11:35 am
Re: Gun control
Has no one ever heard Chris Rock’s rant about this?
“Gun control? We need bullet control! I think every bullet should cost 5,000 dollars. Every time someone gets shot, people will be like, ‘Damn, he must have did something [to] put $_______ worth of bullets in his ass.’…’Man, I would blow your f***ing head off – if I could afford it. I’m gonna get me another job, I’m gonna start saving some money, maybe get a loan from the bank…and then you’re a dead man. You better hope I can’t get no bullets on layaway…’”
I LOVE that rant… Makes me chuckle every time…
________________________________
233. Randall:
It really is pointless to find a post like Freshies´ at 229 and get all excited with a rebuttal only to find that you posted exactly what I was typing… I´ll go sulk in a corner now that I have nothing new and refreshing to add.
And Freshies, you should seriously think about what you post. Do you really think you can beat the big, bad government monster with a 9mm hidden in your closet? Especially if you live in the USA? With the BILLIONS of dollars spent on Defense? You and your 9mm will be able to take them on?
Sorry hun… The best way to protect yourself against a tyrannical government is to get involved and change things before it´s too late…
March 9th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
How do I know the stranger in my house is there to kill, then rob me or just rob me ? I dont like the odds Mc Squida.
10 unlocked loaded guns or 1 loaded and hidden so kids cain`t get to it.
You wake up and have a stranger in your house and tell me your next purchase isn`t a gun or a defensive weapon ,thats irresponsible !!
March 9th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
“You wake up and have a stranger in your house and tell me your next purchase isn`t a gun or a defensive weapon ,thats irresponsible”
So typically american.
*sigh*
Ask most Brits and they would say owning an offensive weapon (because thats all a gun is) is irresponsible…particularly if there are children presence.
Keeping one unlocked is asking for trouble IMO.
Still, live and let live.
March 9th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
People from a lot of different countries have commented on how the list resembles where they live. I don’t think we’re too far from having one world government that’s completely a tyranny.
March 9th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
Randall, I have no problem with sharing my spoils that I’ve earned through my own blood, sweat, and tears. It’s when the government steps in and says I have no choice BUT to share my hard-earned wealth… that’s where I have a problem.
Sorry, but I will pursue for now my OWN happiness and prosperity but I don’t owe my neighbors jack shit if I am so inclined.
March 9th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
“You wake up and have a stranger in your house and tell me your next purchase isn`t a gun or a defensive weapon ,thats irresponsible !!”
I’ve had a laptop, tv, my wallet and a dvd player stolen from my own home when I was sleeping. So yes, I have had a stranger in my own home, although I was not awake for it which perhaps is more the angle you’re suggesting; and not in a million years would I even think about buying a weapon. I don’t want to hurt/kill anyone over mere possessions. It’s just stuff. It doesn’t matter.
March 9th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
Guilty of being a typical American. Thanks.
We have much more vicious type criminal over here in the U.S. than probably where your from. So we have to be much more vigilant.
P.S Im a democrat.
March 9th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
#244- You need a alarm system or you sleep to deep.
And are brave I might add.
March 9th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
bigski – It was a cheap rental, so no alarm system, and I sleep hell deep. I have two alarms on the other side of my room since if they’re next to my bed, I turn them off without waking up. Highly frustrating!
March 9th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
Im feeling ya man. Be cool.
March 10th, 2009 at 2:17 am
222. Maggot : Sounds like an idea there. But the link was for Black Metal, I may sound like I’m splitting hairs here. But to a metal lister saying that Black and Death are the same thing is like saying that Jazz and the Blues are the same thing. Not quite right, y’know?
217. Iain : Too true about the keeping guns away from Poms thing. What club do you support? I’m a Arsenal man myself, go the Gunners! By the way, loved the Spurs joke – for obvious reasons.
I’m out of energy to continue with the gun control/political debate. Play nice while daddy’s gone kiddies
March 10th, 2009 at 4:05 am
I hate people who complain about political correctness. It’s not about depriving you of your freedom of speech, it’s about NOT BEING A TOTAL PRICK, and it is in no way forced on you. Stop being so self-righteous about it.
March 10th, 2009 at 8:12 am
damien_karras:
I’ve got news for you damien. The government already does that and HAS done it for a very, very long time. The government takes your “spoils” and “shares” it out to support all kinds of services and operations that benefit not just you but others in our republic. Perhaps because YOU see some benefit from many of these, you don’t object to them.
I have further news for you. You live in a SOCIETY, pal. You don’t wanna be a part of that, go find a goddamn deserted island to live on so you can feel unmolested by the neediness of others. But the fact is that NONE of us are just humming along earning our own livings in a vacuum. YOU benefit from ALL KINDS of aspects of living in a society, in a nation-state. You wouldn’t have the lifestyle you have, if you didn’t live in such a society and state.
So get off it. Knock of the self-righteous BS. It’s this attitude, in people like you, that you “work hard to earn what you’ve got” (implying that others who are less fortunate do no work) that is the towering height of irresponsiblie selfishness and self-centeredness. Yes, some people in our little world are lazy good for nothings, that’s true. But MOST people do what they can, and struggle as best they can. YOU benefit from living in the society that we have—and it’s your responsibility—and it’s only just–to give back to that society to help others. As I say, if you don’t want to do that and don’t like it, then get the hell out.
All this phony right wing bull about “hard work” and how you shouldn’t have to help the needy is nothing more than a smokescreen for “I should be able to get what I want and can get out of society, and others can F off.”
March 10th, 2009 at 10:19 am
“So get off it. Knock of[f] the self-righteous BS. It’s this attitude, in people like you”
HAHAHAHAHA! Pot meet Kettle. Kettle, Pot.
March 10th, 2009 at 10:52 am
gun_nut:
So… sniffing glue is popular, I see, in your trailer park, “gun_nut.”
March 10th, 2009 at 11:48 am
All of you are funny. You have NO clue to what is really going on and are too busy arguing your pointless arguments with each other to see the REAL situation. As long as you snipe at each other over your stupid little issues, the government will continue its juggernaut afforts to continue to rape our freedoms. Welcome to slavery, ladies and gentleman. While you were arguing with each other over how the other party sucks, BOTH parties got together and enslaved your ignorant butts. Good jobs, everyone! You have condemned our future generations to enslavement to the government or a violent revolution. Way to go. How proud you must be of yourselves.
March 10th, 2009 at 11:54 am
@Randall… aahhh, nevermind. You are too arrogant and selfabsorbed to realize your errors anyway.
March 10th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
randall,
Nope no trailer park or glue here. But it’s nice that your arrogant, self-righteous, self-absorbed, elitist snobbery doesn’t go above broad brush and ignorant statements. Well-done sir! Please continue hanging yourself, you’re colors are all to clear. I love how you can call someone else self-righteous with the non-sense you spew. How can someone possibly have a different view than you??? They must be wrong than. There is only one view, yours! LOL you are too entertaining to truely this closed minded.
Judging by your distribute the wealth view I bet you’re a liberal no doubt. Curious, Are you a teacher of some sort?
March 10th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
gun_nut: I share many of the same views as Randall. Most importantly when it pertains to society’s responsibility to ALL it’s members; the less fortunate, the ill, the infirm, the mentally deficient and even gun toting yahoos. I am firmly middle-class; in fact my husband works for the auto industry. You don’t have to be an academic, or if you prefer elitist, to have a social conscience and a sense of responsibility.
March 10th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Randall,
Instead of telling me to get the hell out how about telling the very same thing to the people who are sucking off the government teat to take a hike?
But no, lets coddle them. Let’s provide for their every need. Seriously, why give them an incentive to pull themselves up by thier own bootstraps and encourage them to use the opportunities afforded to them by our “nation-state” ?
Here’s a rough analogy to the bail-out that is now in effect. Let’s say I’m just one of the “struggling masses” and that I’m short on rent for my apartment month after month. Well, hell, why waste my time looking for a second job to make ends meet? Why use my own ingenuity when someone has already done it for me? I mean there’s my affluent neighbor across town who has enough to spare! I’m sure he’ll lend it to me.
March 10th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
mom, thanks for completely missing the point.
union man?
March 10th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
gun_nut: not in this life-time. Wrong-O. Again.
March 10th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
gun_nut; And I didn’t miss the point. You’re too quick to make assumptions was the point I was trying to make.
March 10th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Randall,
And yes, you’re right. Through my Federal and State Income taxes I do pay my own healthy chunk to the government. But now, if you are in a $250,000 income bracket, the government feels you should be penalized and pay more in taxes if you’ve been successful. This is an amazing incentive for future generations of entrepeuners and high income professions to follow their craft.
March 10th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
what was the point then?
March 10th, 2009 at 4:19 pm
You have a 250,000 bracket? At what rate is this income taxed? In the UK, the 40% tax bracket starts at any income above £34,800
March 10th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Here in the UK, the former CEO of RBS (which our government is now the majority shareholder) is still receiving a pension of £700,000 per year. He is a key figure in the bank going bust and going to the government for billions.
Should he be rewarded for his failure with this extortionate pension (roughly $960,000p.a)?
March 10th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
No, he should not be rewarded. Why should he be rewarded for being irresponsible? By the same token, why should I be penalized for being successful? As I implied in my above posts, I am fully against the current bail-out plan.
Listen, do what you want with your profits. Make a couple hundred paper mache Macy’s Day Parade floats with your money. Give it to every Tom, Dick, and Sally that walks by.
That’s youre perogative.
Just don’t step in saying you’re a government agent and say I HAVE to give this much above and beyond everyone else because I’m successful.
March 10th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Anyone know the answer to my 264?
266. At the end of the day, this person is still getting the full amount (although a governmental review has been called) He says he earned that money and nobody can take it away from him; he didnt think he was being irresponsible.
I suppose my point is, thats the way of the world and you are not going to be able to change it unless you yourself get behind that desk in the white house. Just roll with it
March 10th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
Taxation isn’t fair period. Can you develop a better system?
Surely if a better one existed, it would have been adopted by now. Higher earners always pay more tax. It might not be fair, but c’est la vie!
March 10th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
It seems to me that you are averse to giving ANY of your “hard earned” money away to the government.
Imagine what it would be like if there were no taxes. How would the government raise income? Society as we know it could not survive if we didnt group together, and taxes pay for public sector enterprises.
March 10th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
A better system? Lower everyone’s taxes. Poor, middle, rich, corporate, you name it. Lower it all. The end result? People will have more money to spend. Small businesses will have some elbow room and the ability to hire more people for future growth.
These “evil corporations” that everyone demonizes are the backbone of this country. They are the ones that provide jobs.
March 10th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
And then the government has a massive deficit to plug.
Sanitation
Policing
Fire department
Boarder Control
Infrastructure maintenance
Defence
Education
All this costs money. Where would you make the billions worth of cuts. The public sector employ millions of people – their jobs would be at risk. You are the ones who waste trillions on wars
BTW whoever said that America was withdrawing from Afghanistan – check your facts! 17,000MORE troops are being sent there!
March 10th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
woops forgot:
Prisons
Utility maintenance and supply
I’m sure there is other stuff I am forgetting.
March 10th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Do you agree with the Presidential wage? That comes out of your taxes too.
March 10th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Cym:
Fact check. The troop withdrawal is from Iraq and it’s on an 18 month timetable…previously on a 16 month, so while there’s a definite goal, there’s wiggle room should the worst happen.
Afghanistan is a whole different story.
Sorry you’re putting up with this mess… I just about got sick of another complainer elsewhere. If you [complainers] hate the way things are so much then move the f*ck out. Refuse to pay the higher taxes to the same society that gave you the opportunities to get rich in the first place. Just get the f*ck out.
March 10th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Nah its quite fun! I dont have 250 comments for no reason. Its always entertaining when someone believes taxes can be cut but services remain the same.
March 10th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
We already HAVE a massive deficit to plug with the current stimulus bill in place and another on the way. And the massive spending taking place is using money that doesnt exist. The current plan is just to print MORE money.(I weep for the bill that has to be paid by future generations.) So let’s throw oppressive taxes into the mix and stifle commerce and economic growth.
There is the possibility of creative financing on the part of our Federal government but I find this to be sorely lacking since there are very few members from Congress that are going to have time to actually read this thing.
8000 earmarks in this bill…
March 10th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
Nice sidestep, not addressing any of my points. Ignored me like a pro
Anyway – I suppose doing nothing is preferable? O deary me!
Enough of this – bed for me!
March 10th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
I don’t refuse to pay my taxes… where did you get that idea? My problem is… and noones answered why this is: why are the people in a certain income bracket being forced to pay a higher rate than everyone else?
March 10th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
A parting shot. President Clintons’ pension is estimated to cost americans more than $6M (in addition to the massive salary he had whilst in office). Surely THAT is something to complain about rather than providing healthcare, housing or food stamps.
Why don’t people think things through?
March 10th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
why are the people in a certain income bracket being forced to pay a higher rate than everyone else?
Because they can afford to. After a certain amount of money, it is no longer being spent on essentials, just luxuries. The fact you CAN afford it is the very reason you are paying it.
It is the same the world over and you will never change it.
Naive.
March 10th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
“A parting shot. President Clintons’ pension is estimated to cost americans more than $6M (in addition to the massive salary he had whilst in office). Surely THAT is something to complain about rather than providing healthcare, housing or food stamps.
Why don’t people think things through?”
Why do you throw up strawmen at every turn? Who was talking about Clinton’s pension?
March 10th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
How can we lower taxes and still pay for government services?
Trim the fat! I have a partial list of some of the ridiculous government earmarks in this bill.
• $1,900,000 earmark for the Pleasure Beach Water Taxi Service in Connecticut;
• $3,800,000 earmark to preserve the remnants of Old Tiger Stadium Conservancy in Michigan;
• $238,000 earmark for the Polynesian Voyaging Society of Honolulu, Hawaii, which organizes sea voyages in ancient-style sailing canoes;
• $380,000 earmark for restoration and preservation of Maine’s historic lighthouses for the American Lighthouse Foundation in Rockland, Maine;
• $300,000 earmark to commemorate the 150th anniversary of John Brown’s raid on the arsenal at Harpers Ferry National Historic Park in West Virginia;
• $1,791,000 earmark for swine odor and manure management research in Ames, Iowa;
• $200,000 earmark for tattoo removal in Mission Hills, California;
• $1,500,000 earmark for the California National Historic Trail, Interpretive Center and Nevada Ampitheater
• $5,471,000 earmark for the Harkin grant program for Iowa
• $380,000 earmark for construction of recreation and fairgrounds in Kotzebue, Alaska;
That’s it.. my capitalist butt is going to bed.
March 10th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
Damien Karras,
Earmarks only make up 1% of the budget. Start with the defense budget (i.e. missile defense)
March 10th, 2009 at 8:49 pm
213. Cernunnos : Totally missed this one. Dead was Swedish, yes, but his suicide wasn’t what I was talking about. It was what Euronymous did afterwards – taking bits of his skull o.O
Kinda weird wouldn’t you agree? But I don’t actually like Black Metal. Heavy, low stuff for me, Doom is the best – apart from Nu of course :p – but Death or Thrash will do fine. And I’m not a complete metalhead, grunge, Zeppelin, Mountain, Hendrix – it’s all good.
By the way, of course Mayhem wasn’t going to be as good after all that crap, no Dead or Euronymous… Can you imagine “Zeppelin” without Page and Plant *shudders*
What a great comments section, this is insanely funny to read. Keep up the good work
March 10th, 2009 at 10:45 pm
@Damien,
If you are making over 250,000 a year why does it matter if you have to pay more, you are still making a ridiculous amount of money. Who needs that much money? Odds are you are buying expensive, luxury items that really serve no greater purpose and work no better the regular items. Why do you need that much money, or haven’t you realized that money doesn’t buy you happiness yet. Just a reminder, the most important things in life aren’t things.
March 10th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
249 Mark: Sounds like an idea there. But the link was for Black Metal, I may sound like I’m splitting hairs here. But to a metal lister saying that Black and Death are the same thing is like saying that Jazz and the Blues are the same thing. Not quite right, y’know?
Yeah I noticed my error right after I posted. Ugh. But then, the General thinks he’s going to lead off his death metal list with Slayer. To a person splitting hairs on the definitions (rightly so), do you think like me, that this is a tad incorrect? And I’m saying this as a big Slayer fan myself, btw. They may have greatly influenced the genre, but aren’t necessarily *in* the genre.
March 11th, 2009 at 12:18 am
286. Maggot : Rofl, already mentioned it to him on multiple lists. It’s funny that someone who’s been so annoying about a Death Metal list is going to put a Thrash band first, that just cracks me up
March 11th, 2009 at 1:42 am
“why are the people in a certain income bracket being forced to pay a higher rate than everyone else?”
Because that’s fair. Which part of that is unclear to you? If you earn load of cash, and a beggar earns 10 bucks a day, how the do you expect him to pay the same amount of taxes as you do?
Not to mention the fact that you can afford all the expensive doctors, spas, cars etc when you get sick. All he can get is a cheap patch in a local hospital when a car hits him. Isn’t it fair for the wealth to be redistributed? Or are you so selfish and ignorant of other people that you want to keep everything to yourself?
Careful now…
March 11th, 2009 at 1:49 am
288. dr. Hannibal Lecter : Cool off, this is a political debate you need to remember that. There is no view-point that is “right” so you have to convince people that you are correct. The best way to this is to be polite, civil and use good points. Those were great points, but that last full paragraph, that was bordering on insulting. Just tone it down a bit, because I think that the left-wing – what you were arguing for – has more well-constructed support here on LV than the right. Just an observation not trying to insult anyones political beliefs because I consider myself a centrist, so I’m not going to get much support here
March 11th, 2009 at 2:04 am
Mark, I don’t think this has anything to do with any wings (maybe chicken wings..mmm…), but with the moral principles of every human. In this case the moral sounds leftist, but it shouldn’t be labeled as such (I am a misanthrope after all and to me left wing and right wing are two sides of the same stinking arse).
Speaking of cooling off, some “people” (they shall remain nameless) get away with a much more impolite, insulting and aggressive attitude than mine. I used to be all about diplomacy on LV, but then I got overrun by arrogant plonkers so I’ve decided not to be as polite anymore.
March 11th, 2009 at 2:09 am
290. dr. Hannibal Lecter : Well done, you grasp the first principle of politics. The left and the right are just different ways to do the same thing. But still, be polite, it garners respect but you won’t see that respect until you are polite consistently for a long period of time. Trust me, when I see someone being insulted and they keep a cool head and argue well, they go up a few notches in my mind. Just keep that in the back of your mind because you’re not going to win anymore arguments by being hostile than you will by being polite. So you might as well be polite
March 11th, 2009 at 2:22 am
Heh..well I don’t know about that..that’s how tyrannies are made
“When I grow up, I want to be a tyrant”
March 11th, 2009 at 2:29 am
292. dr. Hannibal Lecter : Yeah, but do you really want to be a tyrant, I know I do and I come across as pretty polite…. Being aggressive is great if you’re trying to convince frustrated Germans to vote for you. But when arguing on LV it’s not such an attractive quality
March 11th, 2009 at 6:27 am
288. Dr Hannibal Lecter- No, what’s fair is the $10 dollar a day beggar has the same opportunity as I do to become financially successful. And yes, I can afford the expensive doctors, spas, luxuries, what have you because I worked hard to earn them.
I delivered the mail for several years to areas the COPS wouldnt even go to. You know what I saw in this microcosm? People on the dole wearing designer clothes, having luxury flatscreen t.v.s, some expensive rides. But they hovered over me the second I got out of my mail truck screaming “Where’s mah check? You got mah check?”
I donate to my church on a regular basis.
March 11th, 2009 at 6:42 am
294. damien_karras : We also have areas where rich people reside and wear designer clothes and have flatscreen televisions, although in Rockhampton we call this region “The Range”, our version of a ghetto is known as “Glenmore”. But don’t worry, we’ve got a name for deluded mailmen that get the two mixed up, specious!
March 11th, 2009 at 6:43 am
294. damien_karras : Or, if you would prefer how about hypocrite? Or maybe I’ll just stick with insanely right-wing nutcase?
Get off your soapbox…
March 11th, 2009 at 6:44 am
damien_karras:
OH YES, the tired old saw about the wicked underclass in this country that “sucks off the government teat.” YAWN.
GET OFF IT. Yes, there are people who abuse the system in our society, damien. ON BOTH ENDS of the economic spectrum. And in point of fact, it’s those who abuse it on the HIGH end who do a HELL of a lot more damage than those on the low. Bernie Madoff is just ONE small example. The entire mess our banking system is in now is due to a larger one. Enron and associated scandals from a few years ago were another. Shall I go on? THESE are the “hard working” types who’ve made a success, damien. ABUSING not just the system but ALL of us.
But who’s the first group that people like YOU think of? Welfare types and the like. Uh huh. No class hatred or racism on your part, is there, damien? Sure.
“Instead of telling me to get the hell out how about telling the very same thing to the people who are sucking off the government teat to take a hike?”
I’d like you BOTH to get the hell out. The ills of this society of ours are due in large part to the rotten attitudes and misbehavior of those who are all over the economic map. Complacency and indolence of SOME on the one hand, and the GREED and rapaciousness of a LOT MORE on the other. And then it’s made worse by people like YOU who turn a blind eye to the latter and focus their anger like laser beams on the former, because their pitifully small, mean middle class minds worship the wealthy no matter HOW BADLY they screw the rest of us, and hate the poor for not simply “pulling themselves up by their bootstraps.” UTTERLY ignoring that while some, yes, are just plain lazy, MANY MORE face a gamed system and roadblocks that don’t allow them to make much more headway against the tide than *maybe* progressing to lower middle class–at best.
Who’s sucking on this “teat” that you’re so angry about, damien? The poor saps who’ve gotten laid off right and left across this country in recent months because of the irresponsible greed and shortsighted stupidity of Wall Street and the unregulated banking system? (Along with some “house flipping yuppies” as Anne Coulter called them)? You were speaking against helping ANYBODY earlier–does that go for you too, if you found that someone in your family was facing a life threatening illness that would BANKRUPT you no matter how much health insurance coverage you have? Does that apply to you if you’re one of these poor bastards who are laid off and suddenly find yourself THIS close to absolute poverty because you were living paycheck to paycheck as it was?
“But no, lets coddle them. Let’s provide for their every need. Seriously, why give them an incentive to pull themselves up by thier own bootstraps and encourage them to use the opportunities afforded to them by our “nation-state” ?”
Oh look, you went and gave us the “bootstrap” cliche anyway. How nice.
Your prejudices are plain for all to see, damien. You and people like you are small minded and ignorant, because you think, in your complacent middle class, bourgeois attitude, that if people are poor it’s their own fault, and how dare they anyway? And goddamn it you will NOT give them ONE iota of help…
Even though, you smug SOB, YOU have gotten all KINDS of entitlements and “help” from this government you rail against. It not only keeps you safe and makes possible all the conveniences of this happily bloated modern world of ours, but it also provides you all sorts of givebacks and middle class entitlements and rewards that you turn a blind eye to. And while it still allows rotten bastards like Bernie Madoff and his ilk to rape others into financial destitution, it still provides SOME safeguards that people have DEMANDED over the years to keep this society from becoming one of VERY rich and VERY poor, and that’s it. Which is what we WOULD have if your f**ked up little laissez faire capitalist/libertarian view were to prevail.
“Here’s a rough analogy to the bail-out that is now in effect. Let’s say I’m just one of the “struggling masses” and that I’m short on rent for my apartment month after month. Well, hell, why waste my time looking for a second job to make ends meet? Why use my own ingenuity when someone has already done it for me? I mean there’s my affluent neighbor across town who has enough to spare! I’m sure he’ll lend it to me.”
Which is how people like you think, damien—that if we HELP people, they’re just going to naturally become totally dependent on that, because GOD KNOWS the underpriviliged and underclass CAN’T be trusted—and they’ll worm their way into teat-sucking indolence the FIRST CHANCE they get.
No, damien. More news for you: MOST people–even the poor and struggling, surprisingly–would rather work and do what they can to support themselves. MOST people have a certain amount of pride and a desire to be independent. Yeah, some don’t. But they’re a woeful minority. YOU, however, see it as the natural way of things–that if you HELP your fellow citizen, he’ll be at your doorstep every succeeding day, looking for more handouts.
Nice. Of course, one can’t take a naive view of human nature–human beings can be scum. But a WORSE kind of naivete is failure to see that “scum” can manifest itself in MANY forms, and not just in the poor bastard who needs help now and then from those who are better off.
March 11th, 2009 at 6:56 am
297. Randall
“Nice. Of course, one can’t take a naive view of human nature–human beings can be scum. But a WORSE kind of naivete is failure to see that “scum” can manifest itself in MANY forms, and not just in the poor bastard who needs help now and then from those who are better off.”
damien, I believe the technical term is, owned. Good post Randall. I can’t really critisize it for being angry, because mine was too – if a bit more concise
March 11th, 2009 at 7:05 am
We HATE each other, dr. Hannibal Lecter and I—but I would like to note that we seem to have found a point on which we agree 100%.
A graduated income tax is FAIR not only because it makes sense that as someone earns more, they should pay a bit more, but also because it offsets the effect of OTHER taxation forms on those who make less. Sales tax and property tax/school taxes, as we know, hit all of us, but as a percentage of income they hit the lower and middle classes much harder than those who earn a great deal more.
From Cecil Adams:
“…most efforts at tax “reform” are really attempts to reduce the tax burden on the wealthy. The most blatant recent example of this was the tax act of 1986. Between 1986 and 1987 the effective tax rate on millionaires fell from 40 percent to 29 percent, and as a result they paid $3.6 billion less in tax. Meanwhile people making from $50,000 to $75,000, a reasonably prosperous but hardly rich crowd, paid $7.6 billion more. Some reform.”
And Adams again, regarding progressive taxation:
“The income tax is progressive for several reasons, the cynical one being that there are a lot more poor voters than rich ones. The practical reason is that a progressive income tax overcomes the regressivity of the sales tax, which falls most heavily on the poor, and the property tax, which falls most heavily on the middle class. Some analysts say total taxes as a percentage of income are about the same for all income levels.”
March 11th, 2009 at 7:09 am
299. Randall : I agree with it too, although I don’t know how Australia’s compares…
March 11th, 2009 at 8:08 am
I agree. Damien – u have just bein pwnd
March 11th, 2009 at 8:11 am
Jon_Roland
I read you loud and clear, and agree 100%
EXCELLENT JOB
March 11th, 2009 at 10:17 am
OK, call me ignorant but if everyone was taxed the same % of their income, wouldnt the wealthy still pay more $$$ at the end of the day? Tax someone making $10,000 a year 30% and they would pay $3,000… Tax someone making $100,000 a year de same % and they would pay $30,000…. How is that a tax break for the rich?
I´m all for social benefits programs but I have to say I think I´m a bit more cynical about human nature. Yes, everyone should have basic health care, education, etc. but I do have a problem with people getting free everything from the government. I´ve lived in Venezuela for most of my life and I am sickened by the state of things there now. People actually believe they have a RIGHT to take from someone who “has more” than they do. The result is an increase in crime. Quite wonderfull really…
March 11th, 2009 at 10:26 am
I think the point is that the person on 10K now only has 7K a year to spend on essentials and living whereas someone on 100k would have 70K left to spend.
Why should it stop at basic healthcare. It is in the governments best interests to keep people healthy and in work. Sick days cost the economy billions every year. Surely that is reason enough for high quality, tax paid healthcare?
I mean. What else are the government therefore but to provide a service (indeed services – as I outlined above in 271 & 272)? If you don’t think people should get stuff free from the government (its not really free as it is being paid for with taxes), whats the point of having one (yes I realise this is reductio ad absurdum)
March 11th, 2009 at 10:58 am
GTT:
Read again my post here about the necessity of a graduated income tax to offset the effects that property and sales taxes have on the lower and middle classes.
You’re essentially talking about a “flat tax.” But in any case you’re talking about getting rid of a *progressive* tax. That’s not a good idea.
So here’s some more words of wisdom on the topic, from Cecil: (note that he was addressing the “first” call for a flat tax which happened back in the mid 90s, but the situation has changed but a little since then, and flat-taxers still base their support for the idea on the “theories” that Malcom Forbes had offered up at the time)
“…the flat tax is like a date with Julio Iglesias. It takes you a while to realize you’ve been screwed.
Let me explain. Following the 1986 tax reform, the average income tax paid by somebody in the $50,000-$75,000 bracket indeed went down, and I mean way down–$1,100. The total tax take for that bracket went up $7.6 billion because there were many more taxpayers in that range in 1987.
Ha, you say, Cecil was using statistics to lie! Uh-uh. Fact is, taxes for virtually all tax brackets went down. Yet the total tax collected went up. How was this miracle accomplished? By eliminating many popular tax deductions. This forced millions of Americans into higher brackets, so they paid more tax. Example: elimination of the IRA deduction. If you and your spouse (a) both worked, (b) made a total of more than $50,000, and (c) had previously both taken the maximum IRA deduction, in 1987 your taxable income increased $4,000 even if your real income stayed the same. Assuming two kids, $53,000 in joint income, and $9,000 in deductions in both ‘86 and ‘87, your taxes went up $862.
Taxes went up for most affluent Americans. In 1987 they reported an additional $300 billion in income, of which maybe two-thirds stemmed from closed loopholes. As a result, people making from $50,000 to $1 million paid an extra $24 billion in tax. OK, nobody’s bleeding for a $500,000-a-year lawyer. But look who paid less tax: those making under $50K (average tax cut: $5 to $867) and those making $1 million and up (average cut: $214,000). Like I say, some reform.
Forbes claims his flat tax rate will be 17 percent. Most knowledgeable observers say if that happens the government will go broke. The real flat tax rate will have to be at least 20 percent. The working poor will get screwed because they will lose the earned-income credit, which lets them collect a tax “refund” greater than the amount of taxes withheld. You don’t have to be a genius to figure out that if taxes for the Forbes crowd go down, they have to go up for somebody else.”
Get it GTT?
FURTHERMORE… the situation you report in Venezuala is IN FACT due to a society and a system in that country (and in many other countries) which has tolerated and even supported a glaring discrepancy between rich and poor. THAT is what causes social discontent and crime, and even, in extreme cases, nasty and bloody revolutions. This is a fact. And actually it’s what Alan Greenspan recently warned about in THIS country—nice of him to finally recognize the damage he’d helped do—that we are allowing the gap between rich and poor in the US to grow far too large. THAT, Greenspan now realizes, is clearly what causes great increases in crime and dissatisfaction–even to the point of violence–amongst a populace.
Yes, we’ve clearly seen that Socialism works its own special kind of negative magic on a society, bringing about all kinds of wrack and ruin. But runaway laissez faire capitalism of the type you’re talking about does no better, and is an equally sure way to a miserable social situation.
Fairness is something that MUST be inculcated into a society, and yes, it oftentimes DOES have to come from governmental action. Leave the rich to their own devices and they tend to protect capital over all other considerations. And within their subset, many will even take every advantage to cheat and steal from each other as well as the middle and lower classes. It happens now, rampantly, even in our relatively controlled capitalist system. Imagine what it would be like in the kind of crazy libertarian nightmare some people seem to cream their pants over.
March 11th, 2009 at 11:37 am
287 Mark: Rofl, already mentioned it to him on multiple lists. It’s funny that someone who’s been so annoying about a Death Metal list is going to put a Thrash band first, that just cracks me up
Hm, had I seen those I prolly woulda piped up in support (not that you’d need it). Just as Death is not Black, Thrash is not Death. But when I first saw his mention, I pretty much wrote him off, figuring to get into it if/when the actual list is published.
March 11th, 2009 at 11:57 am
I think Damien has been scared away by our amazing sense of what is right. I don’t think he can argue anymore. He knows that he lost. Regardless of how you spin it, capitalism is selfish and self centered.
March 11th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Another flaw in Damien’s argument is the gross hypocrisy. He’s a freakin’ mailman. He has a government job, in an industry that should be privatized. No wonder he’s so smug. The taxpayer’s get to pay his union wages, his health insurance, and his pension. Thanks Damien, now find yourself a real job in the private sector. Stop sucking off the taxpayer’s teat!
March 11th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
YogiBarrister:
Damn good point.
March 11th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
He is just getting owned left right and centre.
March 11th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
Re: the anti-gun control zealots…..
It looks like the Wild West is alive and well in the US of A. Be careful walking down the street, you may look at someone the wrong way and they have a CCP and they plug you with their Glock.
March 11th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
305. Randall:
I´ll concede the tax thing. I´ve never actually analized tax law in the States so I guess I was just looking at it in a grossly oversimplified way. I´ll get back to you on that…
However…..
“FURTHERMORE… the situation you report in Venezuala is IN FACT due to a society and a system in that country (and in many other countries) which has tolerated and even supported a glaring discrepancy between rich and poor.”
Yes and no. It has to do with the corruption of pretty much every government the country has ever had. Chavez, the big socialist reformer, has been president through a period where oil prices (on which Venezuela´s economy depends) where a record high. He has had more money to spend on social programs than any previous government. And what has he done?
- spent millions on a presidential plane that rivals Air Force One
- spent unprecedented amounts of money on military armaments
- closed a privately-owned TV station just because they refused to report what he wanted
- brought Cuban doctors to work in Venezuela instead of hiring and equipping locals or building more hospitals
- the main bridge leading from the airport in Caracas literally lay in ruins for God knows how long because he refused to spend a single cent on infrastructure such as roads…
And this is the same man who gets in front of a crowd and spews the same crap about “redistribution of wealth” and the “big, bad oligarchy”…
You want social programs? Be my guest. Free healthcare (not hack Cuban doctors), public transportation and state of the art road systems, an effective police force (not civil militia like he wants to implement), impeccable sanitary conditions, you name it, Chavez could have paid for it with the oil revenues. He didnt. Instead, he chose to spew his crap about how the “wealthy class” was the root of all evil while not only lining but fully padding and stuffing his own pockets (his supporters too). And of course my absolute favorite was a speech in which he claimed that “the poor have an inherent right to take from those who have more than they do.”
I´m sorry, the situation in Venezuela today is not due to a romanticized struggle of the poor masses against their “high class” oppresors. It is due to a lying and cheating government that exploits these false notions for its own benefit.
Rant over.
March 11th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
While I was reading I was thinking, how long will it take for this to turn into a bunch of euro-trash bashing america. It made it to comment 4.
March 11th, 2009 at 8:06 pm
Yep, sounds like the current situation in the Philippines, alright. Our “president” is supposedly stepping down in 2010. If she extends her term, it’ll just further confirm what most of us in the country are already thinking.
Solution for Filipinos? To begin with: voter education, transparency in government and media, a justice system that actually works, and regaining a sense of nationalistic pride that translates to toppling corrupt officials and electing QUALIFIED candidates, not celebrities or charismatic people. And that’s just to begin with.
And p.s., we might have the “freest” press in South East Asia, but we also have one of the highest number of journalists being murdered. Highest in the world, I might add.
March 11th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
306. Maggot : God we could have some fun if it did get published with Slayer at #1…..
March 11th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
315 Mark: God we could have some fun if it did get published with Slayer at #1
See, I’m not a total ass, I don’t have to disagree with you about everything>/i>.
By the way, why did you, a self-proclaimed “atheistic Satanist”, use the word “god” there to invoke a positive connotation? Just wondering. lol
March 11th, 2009 at 10:45 pm
argh…damn html tags…
March 11th, 2009 at 10:48 pm
316. Maggot : I was waiting for the God question. I do believe in a “God” of some description, myself. I do everything for the good of me – half the reason I’m not lying on the ground with slit wrists, so don’t knock it. It works for me.
I know you’re not an ass, that’s why I’ve made a point to myself to – at all costs – not confuse you with Pi
March 12th, 2009 at 2:02 am
Heh, “atheistic satanist” sounds suspiciously like an oxymoron.
Or maybe it just means you like only the early work of Samael?
March 12th, 2009 at 2:07 am
319. dr. Hannibal Lecter : Are we talking about the angel or the band? Because I’m not into Black Metal and I don’t believe in God…
March 12th, 2009 at 2:14 am
The band.
Their early work was..well..quite anti-God. Later works are almost completely opposite.
Oh I get it now, you just respect the killing.
March 12th, 2009 at 2:18 am
321. dr. Hannibal Lecter : Not the killing so much as the “we do what we want” attitude, not the best final result. But a great group of musicians (psychos?) nonetheless
March 12th, 2009 at 8:45 pm
My comments are getting deleted like hell today…. i wonder why.
March 12th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
Jubbs: are you sure? We don’t generally delete comments here… I certainly haven’t deleted any though I did just take two out of moderation – they should be visible now
March 14th, 2009 at 12:16 am
6twisted….#133
Sorry for the delay in replying, but moving
very small and active people from Bangkok to
the Middle East kind of makes internet nonsense
a non-priority. One is unpacking while the other
is packing. Fun stuff if you love them.
“Didn’t choose to have a child but found herself
pregnant”
“Found” as if you found your keys? How does one
“find” oneself pregnant? The fact that you can
log on and operate a keyboard suggests that you
know where they come from. Be responsible, Ma’am.
Please.
I’m not sniping and being petty here, but we all
must live with our decisions; not deride others in a
pathetic attempt to feel superior.
Find that person who “found” herself pregnant and
buy her diapers or food or something that will
provide for the baby with a dose of tough love
such as job training, substance and/or alcohol abuse
aversion therapy etc etc….
Sorry, but you asked what I’d say. That’s what I say.
I sincerely hope everything works out well for all
involved.
March 14th, 2009 at 9:51 am
This is terrifying. It made some things abundantly clear… Thanks Dubya.
Wonderful list!
March 14th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
i read this as ’sixteen signs you live with a tranny’ yeah. I’m thinking new glasses maybe
March 15th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
327 Sarah: i read this as ’sixteen signs you live with a tranny’ yeah.
I’ve a hot little tranny at my house right now. She’s a beauty too. My wife doesn’t much care for my interest in her, but she puts up with it. It takes a certain kind of guy to recognize the allure of a good tranny, you know. Dare I say, they can be quite sexy. I’m talking about in that “special” sort of way. I am practically obsessed with her. She’s a Ford T-18. She’s in pieces right now, but when I’m thru rebuilding her, she’s going into my Jeep project. That’ll be one sweet setup.
March 21st, 2009 at 9:11 pm
For all those people who have been enlightened by this list and just now come to the realisation “hey, this is my country”.
One measure that doesn’t get mentioned, and I imagine very few (if any) of the posters have experienced is a lack of real freedom.
It’s all very well and good for a middle class American who has never had to deal with the Government to say “Wow, Bush was a dictator”.
You don’t need a list to know you live under tyrrany, everybody who does, knows. Those who don’t, try to see find it in theoretical lists.
March 23rd, 2009 at 6:29 pm
Great list!
March 24th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
Sorry Randall, I’ve been away… what is this getting OWNED crap all about? Man, let me get some coffee before my rebuttal.
March 24th, 2009 at 8:23 pm
And listen “pal” (your favorite “cuddle-up phrase” when you’ve been ticked off) I’ve read some of your retorts. I base you’re arguments upon the Beatle vs. Led Zep argument when it wasnt until the 500,765 post where you finally apologized to the guy for insulting him and his choice of music.
It is upon this basis that I see you’re just too stubborn sometimes. But, now I’m awake, sane, sober and ready to LISTEN.
March 24th, 2009 at 9:22 pm
And BTW… the P.O. has been self-sustaining since the early eighties… yes I delivered the mail, but I had a degree and decided that I wanted to change careers. Much to my benefit.
Out of the millions of NYC people who actually reside in the city, it’s a little over 11,000 people who actually pay over 70 percent of the taxes OF the city.
And, if I may, don’t ever infer or outright call me a racist. I NEVER once referred to some of these leeches I saw on an everyday basis by race, color or creed. And THESE people BRAGGED about ripping off the system!
If you ever call me racist or anything ever again… please have the balls to give me your home address…
Whew! I feel better
March 24th, 2009 at 10:55 pm
“If you ever call me racist or anything ever again… please have the balls to give me your home address…”
wow
that is one of the lamest threats I have ever heard!
March 26th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
Sounds like NK?
Its starting to sound like the US.
April 4th, 2009 at 2:37 am
Italy! Italy has it all…
April 4th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Follow up to post # 6, Mark, March 08, 3:00 am.
Not the only paradox in recent history – happened before and since. Most prominent case though, was similar ‘achievement’ by Nelson Mandela in South Africa. He too had been jailed for many years before being ‘elected’ to highest office in that land.
April 4th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
xxxxxxxx
April 26th, 2009 at 9:16 pm
I would have liked a better source for this. I agreed with many of the points, but some of the points seemed a little too specifically directed at particular modern governments. I think that it is fair to point out ways in which modern governments are tyrannical, but not if the arguement is based on a politically biased standard.
That being said, I think that most governments now are far too large and powerful and that people need to wake up and demand their freedom back.
June 8th, 2009 at 12:31 am
Wow, damien_karras got PWNT and never came back with his “rebuttal.”
I read through all of these comments and I really must commend dr. Hannibal Lecter, Mark, Randall, YogiBarrister, and cymraegbachgen87. My brother and I learned a lot from reading through your comments. Thanks
.
June 9th, 2009 at 12:44 am
This is more a list of
“Signs that you’re not living in the country Americans think they’re living in”
June 23rd, 2009 at 9:57 pm
all 16 points describe my country zimbabwe. what a shame
June 29th, 2009 at 9:08 pm
Could they just pretty much put Obama and 90 percent of his policies up here as well? haha
June 29th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
Randall why do you hate freedom? A flat tax is terrible. We should punish people who make money. Stop hating people just because they are rich. Yes some of them are bad people who take money but there are bad people in the lower class too. Except I have no respect for the panhandlers in that class and no respect for those who give them handouts and give them an incentive to be lazy. Greed is a sin but so is sloth.
July 17th, 2009 at 10:15 am
Now, FLY MY GLORIOUS MONKEYS!
August 7th, 2009 at 1:41 am
I think every country has some on this list. If your countries got half, then its probably best to get out before its too late.
August 10th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
Here in Finland the situation seems to be quite good..
August 16th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
I agree with the stupidity of #5.
There is no single country in Europe in which arms are readily avaliable without heavy control, like psychologic tests, a meaning of use (hunting pass, police, whatever) and I feel pretty good knowing that no burglar is going to point at my head with a Colt, at most they will have some big knife, and I already have one of those in my kitchen.
The right to defend yourself of someone which, thanks to that right, can kill you with ease, looks completely retarded from here.
Also, I don´t think explosives are easy to buy in the US, whats the difference? Both can kill in their own way, and both can be used with some good purpose, mining comes to my mind.
October 4th, 2009 at 7:59 pm
The resulting debate from this article is even more intriguing than the actual article; I appreciate the thurrow yet concise info, but I am familiar with the contense. I only ask if it is possible for posters to quit the monotany of referring to any one with an opposing view as “stupid” or “idiot”. This does nothing to promote your individual standpoint and does not help sift through the facts. (okay moron..o is hard to pass up)