Noticed there was no streetlight manifesto, as well as no ska period. so the next best thing is rancid
Search
Search results: 21 found, showing up to 50
I think Russians would win, but I am a little biased
who is they?cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
Don't they spend their own money not the tax payers?=KOKS=BETREZHEN wrote:
actually in allot of cases it is more expensive to kill a convict than have him or her in prison all his or her life
because of the many very expensive appeal hearing that happen before the actual execution
the convicts?
the convicts are imprisoned with tax money
actually in allot of cases it is more expensive to kill a convict than have him or her in prison all his or her life
because of the many very expensive appeal hearing that happen before the actual execution
because of the many very expensive appeal hearing that happen before the actual execution
Being an atheist I don't believe in any god, but being a rational person I see the need for such an illusion to be maintained. Can you imagine if nobody believed in any type of religion, the world as we know it could not possibly exist.
I understand that religion is thought of as evil because of the actions of individuals.
There are however individuals who believe in the same religion as the evil acting individuals who leads completely good and morally sound lives.
Religions as a whole are generally good in their teachings, its the interpretations and manipulations by individuals that seem to corrupt the whole idea.
Therefore its the evil individuals who are at fault not the religious scriptures.
I understand that religion is thought of as evil because of the actions of individuals.
There are however individuals who believe in the same religion as the evil acting individuals who leads completely good and morally sound lives.
Religions as a whole are generally good in their teachings, its the interpretations and manipulations by individuals that seem to corrupt the whole idea.
Therefore its the evil individuals who are at fault not the religious scriptures.
In my opinion while the person is alive he should be treated as humanly as possible.aardfrith wrote:
Why is it that people like the death sentence, want to be able to use lethal force to defend themselves or whatever but get ants in their pants when someone who's about to die is abused a little?
In places around the world, the death sentence is a legal form of punishment whereby someone that has been tried and convicted of a major crime (multiple murders, genocide, etc.) has their life terminated. In parts of America there is wrangling going on about whether lethal injection is acceptable because the convict may suffer a bit. In Iraq, there's consternation because Saddam Hussein was heckled whilst on the gallows.
So what? At the end of the day, the person is a convicted criminal and is being put to death. It's not supposed to be a pleasure cruise, it's a punishment. The ultimate punishment.
If death is the ultimate punishment then no other punishment should be inflicted no matter how irrelevant to the ends.
If you are about to die, would you want someone to be insulting and degrading you?
In your first paragraph you say that its the person behind the guns fault, well as true as that may be isn't it also true that a person with a gun as opposed to his fists could do more damage. The point here is that the gun is a means to an end, if you take away the means(gun) the end(school shootings) cant be accomplished.HammerID wrote:
I am just going to respond to both here, killing two birds with one stone so to speak. = )Scorpion0x17 wrote:
Exactly my point.BF2Craglyeye wrote:
But violence in general will happen.
What we are talking about is GUN RELATED VIOLENCE, look up the stats, a country with gun control is more likely to have lesser numbers than a country without it. Coincidence I think not.But it's not a "lame ass argument" - the data on gun-related crime clearly shows that you get greater levels of gun-crime (commited by those of all age groups) in countries/areas in which access to fire-arms is easier, than in those where it isn't.<[onex]>Headstone wrote:
FFS Answer the question instead of bringing up this same lame ass argument. We have the Privilege to bear arms so lets deal with that OK? Now the question was, "Should teachers be allowed to carry guns" Yes or No. Yee fucking Ha that your country doesn't have that privilege, But we do, and Some of us Cherish that right, not just for the purpose of defense. I Hunt to supplement for what i cant afford in Beef during the winter months. So this Privilege is very Important to me personally!
I'm not saying that you shouldn't be allowed to go out hunting to feed you family - of course, where neccessary that should be allowed - but having 'the right to bear arms' enshrined in your constitution has clearly encouraged a 'gun culture' within the US and it is this that is the root cause for the high level of gun crime (amongst all age groups) in your country.
Gun related violence, while gruesome and horrible, is still the fault of the person standing behind the gun. I did manage to find a few items. This link show 2005 aggravated assault in the us http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/ … table.html
Interesting to note that hands/feet are used more than guns. If you look around that site you can find 2004 statistics. Guns used as the weapons type did increase 1.7%, but in years prior to 2004 it was lower. Small fluctuations are going to happen. As the average over several years the crime rate, with all types of weapons not just guns, is dropping not raising.
While I couldn't find much information on Britain's crime rates, I am at work and lunch is almost over, I did find what was the "last straw" and prompted Britain's to ban all guns. The draconian gun ban in 1997 was from a school shooting, but has it made Britain more safe since? Several web pages that google turned up were from reports that could be questioned so i will not post them. All of them have said the same common point, that crime is rising in Britain not getting better. Coincidence I think not (couldn't help but use your wording!)
<[onex]>Headstone, I am not sure if that was directed all at me. I did vote, it is in paragraph two. I voted no. While there is a place and time to enjoy shooting/hunting a school is NOT the place to do that.
Scorpion0x17, I must disagree that having the 2nd amendment is the root cause of gun violence. I read in a stat somewhere while researching that 80% of guns used in gun related crimes were acquired illegally. The concept behind the 2nd amendment was to guarantee the populace that when tyrannical government were ever to evolve that we had the means to replace them and instill a new government. Just like what happened back in 1776. Since that time guns and hunting have become our heritage. It is an activity that a majority of US citizens participate in.
As in my original post, I think the answer is with better rearing of children in the home. I would even venture a guess as moral decay having a greater impact on violent gun crime than the 2nd amendment.
Also you state that gun crime is going down, well what better way to encourage this trend then to take away the guns.
Second paragraph, if you cant cite legitimate sources then you have no grounds to make an argument.
Last you say that we have our guns because they have a deep traditional heritage that has become part of our heritage, if my memory serves me right wasn't slavery part of our heritage and, it certainly was an activity that alot of members like to participate in, but does that make it just? I think we all know the answer to that one.
In conclusion I agree with you in that parents should take higher responsibility when it comes to guns, however we cannot currently implement such laws as they would be nearly impossible to enforce. So it is logical to say if we cannot enforce the familial aspect then we must enforce(ban) the gun aspect.
you say that like its a bad thingCougar wrote:
The force of the toilet seat slamming down on your balls creates a pressure that shoots semen through your inner tubes with such force that it cleans them. When this force hits the prostrate, it clears any blockage that may be there and the pressure continues through to the penis. Once the pressure reaches the penis, you may or may not piss blood and chunks of grey stuff and some people are really into that kind of thing.=KOKS=BETREZHEN wrote:
why does it feel sooo good to slam my nuts in the toilet seat??
why does it feel sooo good to slam my nuts in the toilet seat??
2142 beta sucked and 2142 demo sucks.
By the way a demo is supposed to be a demonstartion of the finished product which makes all these bugs/disconnects inexcusable
By the way a demo is supposed to be a demonstartion of the finished product which makes all these bugs/disconnects inexcusable
file planet subscription 1 hour
Mekstizzle wrote:
Graphic wrote:
Motherland ftw
38 as a sniper on either sharqi or mashtur(dont know how to spell)
its not high because I dont play in vehicals alot
its not high because I dont play in vehicals alot
omz rate me plz!
43798404
43798404
crap sorry its just betrezhen the =koks= is my clan tagUzique wrote:
User above has no stats apparently :[
look like a good pilot nice spm
sniper rifles could use a little work
sniper rifles could use a little work
hmm I used to play there but only karkand get stupid with all the whoreing(medic,nade,armor,spawn)
my advise: move on
my advise: move on
power vs force by David Hawkins I cant as of right now find the time to read it.
Me and my friend =koks= plimp6969 where in some server talking on squad chat
I say "well thats assuming he knew where u where"
you where kicked for saying ass
I say "well thats assuming he knew where u where"
you where kicked for saying ass