BF2S Forums Inmate hunger strike

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:

You wouldnt need self defence if you didnt have such a high crime rate.

Again you are happy to deal with the event after it has happened whereas the rest of us would like to prevent it happening in the first place.

And again you have more people in prison than we have in flats. Therefore we can assert that all of America lives in jail same as all of UK lives in flats amirite?

So far I have never needed self defense, I am merely prepared and allowed if I do need it.

You keep saying that and I am still waiting to hear your miracle solution. Could it be, there isn't one, and I am merely adapting to the realities of life in the US? Freedom to choose over the protective custody of the nanny state?

Could be, we probably have more home owners than you have people in your country as well, I dunno what your point is.

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

No Dilbert,I have acknowledged the points made about the USA's fallen status in the world.

But you have a  greater risk of being a victim than I do because in my country I am allowed to defend myself.

WRONG

All the statistical trends indicate this is not the case.

lowing wrote:

Something you really gotta get over, most of us will never be a victim of crime, and we will live our entire lives without having any run in with the judicial system or criminals.

WRONG

The vast majority of people will be the victim of some form of crime at some point in their lives.

lowing wrote:

I just go to work, come home to my 3000 sq ft home with 4 bedrooms a theater room, 2 full kitchens ( gotta have a kitchen next to my theater room, screw walking all the way back upstairs for a snack) in my acre country mountain setting. On week ends we might go shooting or rc plane flying, maybe take a weekend trip to some historical town ( we love staying in hotels as well) Talk about a quality life. What a "bizarre" way to live.

Tell me, how hard is it to turn around in one of those "flats" or living right below someone else?

I just go to work, come home to my 750 sq ft home situated 1 minutes walk from the local supermarket and tube station, with bars, clubs and pubs 2-5 minutes walk away - tell me, how many local ammenities can you walk to? On weekends I might hop across the channel to relax in the country in my 8000 sq ft house in France in 4 acre country setting, maybe take a trip to a historical town (one with actual history, more than about 50 years old) or to a vinyard or nice restaurant - or just sit outside and have a barbecue.

But of course the US is the only place in which one can have a high quality of life and of course the quality of life elsewhere cannot compare - because lowing says so.

ummm what stats? If you do not have the means of self defense, ( I don't really cite calling a cop and hope he shows up) a means of self defense.

Ummm - all of them.

Any like for like comparison of an unarmed person living in Europe and an armed person living in the US will show the person in the US is more likely to be a victim of violent crime.

lowing wrote:

Was kinda sorta talking about some sort of violent crime, sorry.

Fair enough. You probably meant to take it further than that with your definition though, because even getting into a fight that you didn't start is effectively being a victim of violent crime...

lowing wrote:

I can not walk to any amenities, except our pool in our sub-dvision, and wouldn't have it any other way.

Well that's shit, how do you go out and get drunk?

Being able to do my shopping and be home inside 10 minutes is nice too.

lowing wrote:

I am not rich, hence my point, MOST Americans have homes ( not flats) and a piece of land with a great deal of them more than 8 acres. Tell me, how rich do you have to be to own a home on 8 acres in France? Here in the states, it is middle class and quite common place. This is where my quality of life comes into play.

I'm not rich. I earn a very average wage. Yet I can afford all these things comfortably. I would dispute the fact that most Americans have more than 8 acres - sounds like a stat you've pulled out of your arse, since most Americans live in a urban environment with substantially higher costs for land. 8 acres in Manhattan might cost a fair bit, just as if you want to buy a proper house in London it'll cost you around $1M.

lowing wrote:

I will say, I do envy the history that surrounds you, but hey, I can not help our mere 250 year old history, which was last week compared to what you enjoy.

Indeed. My house in France is Napoleonic. Built in 1802. My house in London is a bit newer, merely Victorian.

lowing wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Jesus Christ you are using the size of houses as an argument about quality of life. Literally retarded.

Nope, I am using elbow room and tranquility and comparative luxury with very little concern for the rest of you as my yard stick. Sorry, shoulda been more clear.

Elbow room and tranquility? In a post directed at Dilbert? Australians have quite a lot of elbow room, or didn't you realise that? Also, you can't compare a rural American setting to an urban one elsewhere - a suitable comparison for somewhere like London in the US would be New York, which I imagine is exceedingly tranquil and where everyone lives in 8 acre estates...

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:

Show me an 8 acre house in Manhattan or drop your stupid flat argument. The vast vast majority of people "over the pond" live in houses not flats. For many years we have been trying to encourage apartment blocks like you have so many of in the US but people here dont like them so instead we have "urban sprawl"

Stop being so ignorant.

Hard to have 8 acres in Manhattan even for the rich. But most Americans that choose the suburbs can also afford the suburbs. We do not need to be rich to be land owners or home owners. We have a choice. Are you telling me you choose to live on top of one another but have a choice and can afford land and homes in your countryside? Wow, and you call me ignorant?

Macbeth wrote:

I am Macbeth not Dilbert

This was the post:

http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pi … 3#p3589013

lowing wrote:

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:

Show me an 8 acre house in Manhattan or drop your stupid flat argument. The vast vast majority of people "over the pond" live in houses not flats. For many years we have been trying to encourage apartment blocks like you have so many of in the US but people here dont like them so instead we have "urban sprawl"

Stop being so ignorant.

Hard to have 8 acres in Manhattan even for the rich. But most Americans that choose the suburbs can also afford the suburbs. We do not need to be rich to be land owners or home owners. We have a choice. Are you telling me you choose to live on top of one another but have a choice and can afford land and homes in your countryside? Wow, and you call me ignorant?

That's exactly what we're telling you.

I do it.

Almost 20% of the population of the UK live in London. House prices in London are massively, massively higher than anywhere else in the country. Anyone who owns a home in London could sell it and buy a very nice house in the country with plenty of land - because the house they live in is worth so much more than a house in the countryside.

Choosing to live in a more urban environment is exactly that, a choice (perhaps not for the very poor, but the same is true to an even greater extent in the US, where poverty is at much higher levels).

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

No Dilbert,I have acknowledged the points made about the USA's fallen status in the world.

But you have a  greater risk of being a victim than I do because in my country I am allowed to defend myself.

WRONG

All the statistical trends indicate this is not the case.

lowing wrote:

Something you really gotta get over, most of us will never be a victim of crime, and we will live our entire lives without having any run in with the judicial system or criminals.

WRONG

The vast majority of people will be the victim of some form of crime at some point in their lives.


I just go to work, come home to my 750 sq ft home situated 1 minutes walk from the local supermarket and tube station, with bars, clubs and pubs 2-5 minutes walk away - tell me, how many local ammenities can you walk to? On weekends I might hop across the channel to relax in the country in my 8000 sq ft house in France in 4 acre country setting, maybe take a trip to a historical town (one with actual history, more than about 50 years old) or to a vinyard or nice restaurant - or just sit outside and have a barbecue.

But of course the US is the only place in which one can have a high quality of life and of course the quality of life elsewhere cannot compare - because lowing says so.

ummm what stats? If you do not have the means of self defense, ( I don't really cite calling a cop and hope he shows up) a means of self defense.

Ummm - all of them.

Any like for like comparison of an unarmed person living in Europe and an armed person living in the US will show the person in the US is more likely to be a victim of violent crime.

lowing wrote:

Was kinda sorta talking about some sort of violent crime, sorry.

Fair enough. You probably meant to take it further than that with your definition though, because even getting into a fight that you didn't start is effectively being a victim of violent crime...

lowing wrote:

I can not walk to any amenities, except our pool in our sub-dvision, and wouldn't have it any other way.

Well that's shit, how do you go out and get drunk?

Being able to do my shopping and be home inside 10 minutes is nice too.

lowing wrote:

I am not rich, hence my point, MOST Americans have homes ( not flats) and a piece of land with a great deal of them more than 8 acres. Tell me, how rich do you have to be to own a home on 8 acres in France? Here in the states, it is middle class and quite common place. This is where my quality of life comes into play.

I'm not rich. I earn a very average wage. Yet I can afford all these things comfortably. I would dispute the fact that most Americans have more than 8 acres - sounds like a stat you've pulled out of your arse, since most Americans live in a urban environment with substantially higher costs for land. 8 acres in Manhattan might cost a fair bit, just as if you want to buy a proper house in London it'll cost you around $1M.

lowing wrote:

I will say, I do envy the history that surrounds you, but hey, I can not help our mere 250 year old history, which was last week compared to what you enjoy.

Indeed. My house in France is Napoleonic. Built in 1802. My house in London is a bit newer, merely Victorian.

lowing wrote:

Nope, I am using elbow room and tranquility and comparative luxury with very little concern for the rest of you as my yard stick. Sorry, shoulda been more clear.

Elbow room and tranquility? In a post directed at Dilbert? Australians have quite a lot of elbow room, or didn't you realise that? Also, you can't compare a rural American setting to an urban one elsewhere - a suitable comparison for somewhere like London in the US would be New York, which I imagine is exceedingly tranquil and where everyone lives in 8 acre estates...

Funny how my life is consistently on the minority side of all these stats  you guys like to mention. I am "dull" and oh so very average, yet I never seem to make it any of your stats.

You certainly sound dull. But by no means average.

lowing wrote:

Didn't say most Americans have more than 8 acres, I said owning 8 acres is middle class status and is common place and affordable for most middle class. What they choose to do is different.

As it is here. Just not in London or any other city. If any middle class family living in London decided to sell their home they could get a house with 8 acres in the countryside (so long as it wasn't anywhere near London).

lowing wrote:

Dunno the stats but I am willing to bet most Americans live in the suburbs and not the big city.

Well you'd be very wrong. It's about 80% urban, 20% rural.

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/census … /cps2k.cfm

lowing wrote:

Wasn't talking to Dilbert nor about Australia

Really? Bizarre way to write a post then, starting it with "No Dilbert,I have acknowledged the points made about the USA's fallen status in the world." and ending it with "Tell me, how hard is it to turn around in one of those "flats" or living right below someone else?"

I find it very difficult to interpret that post in any other way.

lowing wrote:

Tell me, and be honest, did you obtain your houses with no assistance from inheritance or family because 8000 sq ft on 8 acres is far and beyond anything average middle class Americans can afford.

4 acres, not 8 (more like 3.5 tbh). It's a family project - parents bought it (for next to nothing) when me and my brother were very young, we've spent our lives doing the place up and making it nice (it was horrific initially, but now it's nice). Not a huge outlay at any stage, but now after many years of hard work, me and my brother have a nice holiday home.

lowing wrote:

But you have a  greater risk of being a victim than I do because in my country I am allowed to defend myself.

No, I have a lower risk because there's less crime here, I'm allowed to defend myself too, just as you are.

No 28 of 2003-Criminal Law Consolidation (Self Defence) Amendment Act 2003 [1] In July 2003, the Rann Government (SA) introduced laws allowing householders to use "whatever force they deem necessary" when confronted with a home invader. Householders who kill or injure a home invader escape prosecution provided they can prove they had a genuine belief that it was necessary to do so to protect themselves or their family.

I think you'll find that would suit you better than many US states.
Not wearing a gun on my hip doesn't make me less safe, just as having a gun on your hip doesn't magically make you bullet or knife-proof, since very few criminals here have guns. The Police are armed to the teeth though which makes for a very unfair fight.

Not everyone outside America lives in a flat, although a lot of people in America clearly do, no idea what point you're making TBH.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-07-16 06:57:58)

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

lowing wrote:

But you have a  greater risk of being a victim than I do because in my country I am allowed to defend myself.

No, I have a lower risk because there's less crime here and the likelihood of a perp having a gun is miniscule.

Beastiality is still a crime.

All New Zealanders are criminals.

Jaekus wrote:

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

No, I have a lower risk because there's less crime here and the likelihood of a perp having a gun is miniscule.

Beastiality is still a crime.

All New Zealanders are criminals.

Adelaiders too.

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

No Dilbert,I have acknowledged the points made about the USA's fallen status in the world.

But you have a  greater risk of being a victim than I do because in my country I am allowed to defend myself.

WRONG

All the statistical trends indicate this is not the case.

lowing wrote:

Something you really gotta get over, most of us will never be a victim of crime, and we will live our entire lives without having any run in with the judicial system or criminals.

WRONG

The vast majority of people will be the victim of some form of crime at some point in their lives.


I just go to work, come home to my 750 sq ft home situated 1 minutes walk from the local supermarket and tube station, with bars, clubs and pubs 2-5 minutes walk away - tell me, how many local ammenities can you walk to? On weekends I might hop across the channel to relax in the country in my 8000 sq ft house in France in 4 acre country setting, maybe take a trip to a historical town (one with actual history, more than about 50 years old) or to a vinyard or nice restaurant - or just sit outside and have a barbecue.

But of course the US is the only place in which one can have a high quality of life and of course the quality of life elsewhere cannot compare - because lowing says so.

ummm what stats? If you do not have the means of self defense, ( I don't really cite calling a cop and hope he shows up) a means of self defense.

Ummm - all of them.

Any like for like comparison of an unarmed person living in Europe and an armed person living in the US will show the person in the US is more likely to be a victim of violent crime.

lowing wrote:

Was kinda sorta talking about some sort of violent crime, sorry.

Fair enough. You probably meant to take it further than that with your definition though, because even getting into a fight that you didn't start is effectively being a victim of violent crime...

lowing wrote:

I can not walk to any amenities, except our pool in our sub-dvision, and wouldn't have it any other way.

Well that's shit, how do you go out and get drunk?

Being able to do my shopping and be home inside 10 minutes is nice too.

lowing wrote:

I am not rich, hence my point, MOST Americans have homes ( not flats) and a piece of land with a great deal of them more than 8 acres. Tell me, how rich do you have to be to own a home on 8 acres in France? Here in the states, it is middle class and quite common place. This is where my quality of life comes into play.

I'm not rich. I earn a very average wage. Yet I can afford all these things comfortably. I would dispute the fact that most Americans have more than 8 acres - sounds like a stat you've pulled out of your arse, since most Americans live in a urban environment with substantially higher costs for land. 8 acres in Manhattan might cost a fair bit, just as if you want to buy a proper house in London it'll cost you around $1M.

lowing wrote:

I will say, I do envy the history that surrounds you, but hey, I can not help our mere 250 year old history, which was last week compared to what you enjoy.

Indeed. My house in France is Napoleonic. Built in 1802. My house in London is a bit newer, merely Victorian.


Elbow room and tranquility? In a post directed at Dilbert? Australians have quite a lot of elbow room, or didn't you realise that? Also, you can't compare a rural American setting to an urban one elsewhere - a suitable comparison for somewhere like London in the US would be New York, which I imagine is exceedingly tranquil and where everyone lives in 8 acre estates...

Funny how my life is consistently on the minority side of all these stats  you guys like to mention. I am "dull" and oh so very average, yet I never seem to make it any of your stats.

You certainly sound dull. But by no means average.

lowing wrote:

Didn't say most Americans have more than 8 acres, I said owning 8 acres is middle class status and is common place and affordable for most middle class. What they choose to do is different.

As it is here. Just not in London or any other city. If any middle class family living in London decided to sell their home they could get a house with 8 acres in the countryside (so long as it wasn't anywhere near London).

lowing wrote:

Dunno the stats but I am willing to bet most Americans live in the suburbs and not the big city.

Well you'd be very wrong. It's about 80% urban, 20% rural.

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/census … /cps2k.cfm

lowing wrote:

Wasn't talking to Dilbert nor about Australia

Really? Bizarre way to write a post then, starting it with "No Dilbert,I have acknowledged the points made about the USA's fallen status in the world." and ending it with "Tell me, how hard is it to turn around in one of those "flats" or living right below someone else?"

I find it very difficult to interpret that post in any other way.

lowing wrote:

Tell me, and be honest, did you obtain your houses with no assistance from inheritance or family because 8000 sq ft on 8 acres is far and beyond anything average middle class Americans can afford.

4 acres, not 8 (more like 3.5 tbh). It's a family project - parents bought it (for next to nothing) when me and my brother were very young, we've spent our lives doing the place up and making it nice (it was horrific initially, but now it's nice). Not a huge outlay at any stage, but now after many years of hard work, me and my brother have a nice holiday home.

Yeah I am, not much excitement in my life outside being a father, (I don't need to go out and get drunk) my kids lives is what my life is all about now and I will not have it any other way, I have no real problems in my life, and the ones I do have, I manage them without any help from anyone else, if that means I am not average, I can live with that with pride.

Not sure you can survive in Manhattan on a middle class income. If you can in London, you are doing better than us.

suburbs do not equal rural.

I am well aware that most of Australia is desolate waste land, but yes you did catch me there.


Thought that had to be something like that, because what you described is the ownership of a rich person here. Any history to your house other than being built in 1802? Sincerely interested in hearing about it.

lowing wrote:

I am well aware that most of Australia is desolate waste land, but yes you did catch me there.

You haven't been to Australia have you?

There's nothing good about covering your country with sprawling concrete ghettos, and we prefer wildlife to saggers.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-07-16 07:05:41)

Jay wrote:

The shower in my new apartment is ridiculously tiny

See, Americans do live in apartments.

Kangaroos are so cool. I would love to have one as a pet.