Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Scelly9]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/26/montreal-casseroles-student-protests

Really? COME ON MONTREAL.

[GlyphGryph]

Just in time for Memorial Day: yahoo.com commenters being assholes by calling disabled veterans "tax leeches."

I could only find one guy doing that. Mind you, he posted under 5 different names, but it was pretty clearly the same guy. Most of the comments seemed to be overwhelmingly supporting of the vets and pissed at the gov. over it.

[penguinofhonor]

why hello there china

oh, what?

you've been watching our human rights violations?

wait, no, we're supposed to be the good guys

this is almost as embarrassing as the time South Africa legalized gay marriage before us

[ChairmanPoo]

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-impact-almost-half-vets-seek-disability-160656481.html

Just in time for Memorial Day: yahoo.com commenters being assholes by calling disabled veterans "tax leeches." Nope, turns out all those wars weren't worth it and have an enormous cost we still haven't fully realized. Frankly anyone who ever read a history book knows wars are expensive (and many other undesirable things). So all that "support our troops" was just crap as proven by us not providing the funding when the check cometh due.... Where did people think the term "war chest" came from? Nobody else on my street has a flag out.... I hope they enjoy their day off.... I can't even comprehend this completely irrational hatred of any type of government spending when it reaches into vet affairs. Shit, even Ayn Rand said the military was a legitimate government function and she's pretty much the Queen Libertarian.... I sorta hope this is just evidence of Yahoo.com being overwhelmingly trollololols rather than what people really feel.

wait, let me get this straight: the same people who advocated military adventures in the first place are now loath to support the people who paid the butcher's bill for them?

[justinlee999]

For me most of the Yahoo commenters are condemning war, not complaining about the tax vets themselves.
Some are even lamenting about how badly war vets are treated in the US.

[Nadaka]

why hello there china

oh, what?

you've been watching our human rights violations?

wait, no, we're supposed to be the good guys

this is almost as embarrassing as the time South Africa legalized gay marriage before us

I only read the first first part before I got annoyed when it was complaining about crime and "rampant gun ownership". I don't know if the rest of the article has merit or not. But that isn't a good way to start an article.

[Twi]

why hello there china

oh, what?

you've been watching our human rights violations?

wait, no, we're supposed to be the good guys

this is almost as embarrassing as the time South Africa legalized gay marriage before us

I only read the first first part before I got annoyed when it was complaining about crime and "rampant gun ownership". I don't know if the rest of the article has merit or not. But that isn't a good way to start an article.

The rest of it seems to be more sensible: stuff about the Occupy movement, internet censorship, prison population, the influence of money in American politics, that thing that lets people be declared enemies or whatever and be held indefinitely. In no particular order.
But yeah. Starting with the most questionable 'problem' on the list? Bad idea.

[Dutchling]

I only read the first first part before I got annoyed when it was complaining about crime and "rampant gun ownership". I don't know if the rest of the article has merit or not. But that isn't a good way to start an article.

You mean even in China you can't just own a gun legally if you want? I can imagine that being quite embarassing to read as an American.

edit:fixed the author in the quote

[Nadaka]

I only read the first first part before I got annoyed when it was complaining about crime and "rampant gun ownership". I don't know if the rest of the article has merit or not. But that isn't a good way to start an article.

You mean even in China you can't just own a gun legally if you want? I can imagine that being quite embarassing to read as an American.

No. It is insulting. When you talk about rights and then complain about people being allowed to own something.

[penguinofhonor]

It's definitely a difference in viewpoint, and a difference in their philosophy of what a government is supposed to do for its citizens.

The United States prioritizes the right to keep and bear arms over the protection of citizens' lives and personal security and exercises lax firearm possession control, causing rampant gun ownership.

They see gun violence as a problem that the government could easily control, and they think that if the government is allowing and encouraging a problem to hurt and kill its citizens, that's a human rights violation. I might disagree with calling it that specifically, but I see their point.

[Sheb]

Nadaka, there seems to be a cultural problem here. Around most of the world, the right to own gun is seen more or less like the right to kick puppies. Yes, it's technically a "right", but the less people actually use that right, the better, and we'd be much better of if no-one did. Gun ownership as a right is really an american thing.

[Nadaka]

Nadaka, there seems to be a cultural problem here. Around most of the world, the right to own gun is seen more or less like the right to kick puppies. Yes, it's technically a "right", but the less people actually use that right, the better, and we'd be much better of if no-one did. Gun ownership as a right is really an american thing.

As long as you hold the concept of ownership of material as valid, the right to own a gun is universal.

I believe that the more people who exercise the right to own a weapon, the better. It provides perspective on the fragility of life. It provides an equalizer in the face of a physically superior threat. It provides the opportunity to hunt. Legal gun ownership does not increase crime. I really don't see any way in which a disarmed populace is in any way "better". Easier to oppress and victimize? yes. But that is a far cry from being "better".

[Skyrunner]

The concept of ownership of material? May I ask what that is?
I honestly don't know here.

[Sheb]

Nadaka, wide availability of guns turn crime into much more dangerous crime. Or so it's seen in most of the world. (Because I don't want this to spiral into a gun control argument we had tons of them). From anyone's point of view, but the americans, having a lot of gun is a bad thing, because it's the police's job to protect you, they're supposed to have a monopoly on violence, and having everyone being able to kill someone by the press of a button isn't good. You may not agree with this view, but it's widely held outside the US.

[Nadaka]

The concept of ownership of material? May I ask what that is?
I honestly don't know here.

Can a person own a thing?
What kind of thing can a person own?

Ownership of material is a subset of the concept of ownership property. It includes material goods. Physical objects that can be moved, transported and transferred VS land that can be occupied and used in place. Some concepts of ownership include one or the other, but most include both.