«12. . .1,0081,0091,0101,0111,0121,0131,014. . .3,4813,482»
I would like to point out that most if not above 95% of gun owners in Australia are farmers, who need then to kill animals, we also have limits on what type of guns you can own, banned examples are any sort of rocket laauncher, assault rifle and basically anything that isn't a regular rifle
Gee, really?
I suppose it is super easy for biracial people to get by. After all, everybody decides that since you're half, they can just round up and you're them! Golly you're right, I've never known a day of racism in my life.
/s. And I'm not even black. It gets much worse the darker your skin color.
But just to indicate I have some, doubtless by your standards incredibly vague understanding of racism, on every occasion I've had to spend time in Australia (admittedly, two of the three times I've made the singularly bad choice to be on the Gold Coast during schoolies, which, by the way, as national traditions go is terrible, unless promoting alcoholism, violence, and general ill-behavior is seen as a public good in Australia - which, I suppose, makes sense considering half of you started out as Prisoners of Her Majesty), I've had the quite lovely opportunity to have been told to '[expletive] off back to China with the rest of them' (admittedly, my Indian friend received far worse invective), and in the two aforementioned cases, been attacked by your charmingly inebriated-at-11-am countrymen for having the temerity to play football in a public park, which, of course, is a shockingly gross violation of public morals by anyone's standards. Although to be fair, I suppose they might simply have thought they were just joining us in Australian football, what with its customary violence and particularly low standards for scoring.
Also, 'mong'? 'Eejit? 'Feckin'? I mean, one, the first of those, I'm pretty sure, is a contraction of 'mongoloid', which has gone the way of the dinosaurs as a medical term and is now generally an insult, which, y'know, not cool, I just said that, and the rest of them I suppose I question why you need to type phonetically unless you want to emphasize just how 'strayan you are.
To conclude: if you wish to define 90% of Americans as 'eejits of the highest order', then I suppose I will define 90% of Australians as violent alcoholics without the good sense to move somewhere that doesn't want to kill them half the time, or the work ethic to keep a shop open past 8pm on a weekend.
Who are also idiots of an even higher order, since they can't even spell 'idiot'.
Incidentally, if you would prefer a civil discourse without insults aimed at you, your country, and your countrymen being bandied about quite so casually, I generally prefer to be less hostile. But doubling down on a completely unfounded insult is not the way to go about having a polite conversation.
Yeah. Several of those same restrictions apply in America. You can't own an explosive weapon, you can't own an automatic weapon (that wasn't purchased in or prior to...1985? I think?), and what spends a lot of time under contention is what constitutes a 'regular rifle'. Some people think it should be your stereotypical bolt-action '03 Springfield that people should be allowed to tote. Others are of the opinion that as long as there's no fire selector, you should be able to walk around with an M16 (sold as the contentious AR-15, which is seeing a big uptick in the amount of attacks linked to it, probably because we sensationalize the hell out of these attacks and half these people shooting up schools are nihilists who want 15 seconds of infamy).
Of course, the real gun violence problem is handguns, primarily because they're concealable (facilitating their use in generally gang-related street violence, although in several cases they were used in mass shootings) and relatively inexpensive (meaning a lot of people have them, meaning they're relatively accessible). But since, despite a continually downward trend in crime rates, the people of this country are convinced by mass media that we've never been less safe, everybody and their mother wants a handgun for 'self defense'.
So, no, Australia's gun laws are, when compared to those of several other countries, remarkably lax (which, as I noted above and you seemed not to have noticed, is likely because half the stuff in the country wants you dead). It's only when compared to the ludicrously and insanely lax gun laws of America that Australia appears restrictive.
Apparently the universe wants this to stop, because no matter what I do, I can't reply how I Wanted to.
I Do have a few (okay, a Lot) of, shall we say, criticisms, about your quote and a desire to..educate, but I am willing to let it end. I was..a bit out of line too.
Greater Balticia and to everyone else that likes to bash on the US from time to time. The United States of America is nation founded by the expansionist, the persecuted, the opportunistic, the scholarly, the ignorant, the hopeful, and the realist. The US has done horrible things, but it has also done acts of wonder that no nation can recreate for the next 500 years. The US may stumble, it may fall, but it has gotten back up saying, “We could do better”.
It's Greater Balticia's constant belittling of the U.S. is what ticked me off.
Hello everyone!
Hello
I would say it was a nation built on not wanting to pay taxes for the British troops defending them
That's not exactly accurate.
"They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."
--------------------------------
"(Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels... "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"
----------------------------------------
"And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy." As Ibn Kathir puts it in his tafsir on this passage, "Allah commands Muslims to prepare for war against disbelievers, as much as possible, according to affordability and availability."
---------------------------------
"So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them."
According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence at the time of Muhammad was to convert to Islam: prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars. The popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack. Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months). The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by Muhammad and posed no threat. Once the Muslims had power, they violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert.
-------------------------
Islam has many peaceful verses, I don't doubt.
But the verse I just stated above are examples of violent quotes in the quran. And no, the verses are not about self defense. They are bout the non-believers, and how they should be dealt with. This is how people get radicalized. Islamic terrorism is a thing, but not just for the west. For Muslims too. Everyday, many moderate Muslims are killed by those like ISIS. Muslims are also sufferers of Islamic Terrorism.
You are correct, the police would probably arrive in 3-5 mins. But a lot can happen in that amount of time.
Sure, a gun is not a necessity, but it is a right. And I have the right to own one. Just like I have the right to free speech.
I own them mainly because they're fun to shoot :P
No... they were trying to take the colonies for themselves. By taxing them.
The colonies were very capable of defending themselves.
I guess the way I see it, generally speaking, someone who's trying to burgle your house is not interested in killing or injuring you. It's something that might happen incidentally as a result of being seen by you, but the best case scenario is in-and-out without being seen. Any weapons they bring aren't intended to be used, they're intended as insurance against any weapons you may have (and in the case of a crowbar or something, as an ancillary tool to do the job with), and the risk of bringing said weapons must be weighed against the risk of getting caught with them.
In game theoretic terms, if you are unlikely to own a gun, they are unlikely to need a gun, and won't bring one. As the risk of you owning a progressively larger gun increases, however, the risk to them can only be ameliorated by bringing a progressively larger gun themselves. It's a particularly low-level form of MAD, is what I'm trying to suggest.
As for the argument that it's a right - sure, you have a right to own firearms of a certain type. That's not really disputed. But just like the right to free speech specifically leaves out cases in which exercising that free speech is more harmful to others than it is beneficial to yourself (libel, defamation, hate speech, etc.), so too should there be limitations on people's ability to own firearms. Which is where I think your point about 'fun to shoot' becomes very useful in contrasting with your earlier point about 'right to self defense'.
If the primary function of a firearm is that it is meant to assist and enable your self-defense, the dividing line between 'more harmful to others than beneficial to yourself' swings very heavily in towards the right of that spectrum. In contrast, if it's merely a fun toy you use to go out to the gun range on weekends, that line swings back towards the left of that spectrum. Examining the trends of gun ownership in this country, relatively small numbers of people own relatively large numbers of guns - suggesting that it's not a tool for self-defense but a toy for enthusiasts, which is the position I tend to approach gun ownership in this country from. Particularly since the 'defense against tyranny' narrative strikes me as patently ridiculous, to the extent that the only way it seems even marginally viable is the patently absurd Red Dawn-style scenario.
The problem is that gun manufacturers stand to lose vast sums of money if guns are treated as 'fun toys' and not 'critical tools'. And so there's a massive PR hearts-and-minds campaign about convincing enthusiasts that it is not just a toy, but an essential tool that, if taken away, would constitute a massive infringement of their rights, in the form of the NRA. This has been alarmingly, ridiculously successful, which is why we have the problem we do.
All of this combined suggests to me that we as a society need to seriously reexamine the narrative we have around guns. If we decide that their place is 'fun toy', we should regulate accordingly - perhaps not to the extent of a Kinder Surprise and ban it, but certainly to the minimum extent we would regulate, oh, cars, where you need to be certified as understanding the basic principles of the road, and purchase some form of insurance should you cock it up - particularly since cars already fall very heavily towards the 'tool' side of the spectrum. And if we decide their place is 'critical tool', well, I guess we won't change anything, really.
The thing is, they already owned the colonies. They were British Crown Colonies. They didn't need to take them for themselves, they already owned them. It's a bit like if Guam rebelled and the US beat down the rebels, then saying that the US was trying to take Guam for itself - it already owned it. The only reason we call the founding fathers 'revolutionaries' and not 'rebels' is because they won.
And the major reason they won was because France was very happy to bankrupt itself to spite the British. Which then led to the French Revolution, so, kinda rough for them, really.
Incidentally, the reason for said taxation was that the British had just concluded a war (well, sort of, even though it was merely one theater in the larger Seven Years War) to defend its colonies against the French ones (and their Native allies), and were in a rough financial spot. Obvious answer, tax the people they'd just spent all that money on.
Said people got kind of salty, largely because just like all rich people throughout history, they are fundamentally opposed to taxation. And if you're of the impression that the founding fathers were dirt poor, do ask yourself why they attached minimum land ownership requirements to being able to vote. Seems a bit weird for a bunch of poor people to actively work to disenfranchise themselves, but maybe that's just me.
Buck and Koegal fought hard, and this time they had the advantage. The Ridge they were on led outside of the trees, and overlooked an open area.
Buck and Koegel could see every insurgent coming at them. Buck, looking through the scope of his BR-55, killed 5 insurgents, switched to his S-2 sniper rifle, and downed three more.
After about ten minutes of just killing,Buck said "Koegel, we are low on ammo!" Just as Buck was speaking, 4 AV-22 Sparrowhawk VTOLs flew out of the clouds, and began firing on the insugents, missiles and lasers exploding, killing 30 insurgents.
7 Falcon helicopters landed, and more Azuran SSTs came out looking for Buck and Koegel's exact location.
OOC: I was making a post also lol
IC:
Two RPGs flew in and launched Koegel into the air, he got right back up and killed the insurgents who fired the rockets. "Reaper-04 QRF is 1 minute out, we got two ME-640s coming in to take off some of the heat ETA 40 seconds". "Roger that targets will be highlighted with smoke". said Koegel as he grabbed a red smoke grenade and tossed it as far as he could. Buck and Koegel then heard the sound of jets followed by the sound of auto cannon fire. Massive groups of insurgents where torn to bits by the first pass of the 640s. The ME-640s made another pass opening fire again with their autocannons and dropping 500 pound bombs. Just as the ME-640s flew away to refuel and rearm the sound of helicopter blades begun to grow. Two AAX Ravens appeared from the side of the mountains and made their way to the ongoing battle. "Visual on multiple hostiles are we cleared to engage?" asked the gunner of the AAX Raven. A large group of insurgents begun to panic and then ran away at the sight of the approaching gunships. "Roger that Raptor- 2 0 You're clear to engage" replied the voice on the other end of the radio. Immediately the AAX Ravens opened fire with their 30mm cannons and rocket pods. Two VB02s then also flew in and fast roped down Allouxians soldiers and I.G. operators. "Raptor to base relay to the Azurans that Reaper-04 is 50 meters to the east of them, we're gonna make another pass then rtb to refuel and rearm" said the pilot as he turned around the AAX Ravens allowing the gunner to open fire again killing dozens of insurgents.
Buck frantically looked for his flare gun. He found it in his pack and fired it in the air. The Azuran SSTs immediately saw it, and made their way over. 15 SSTs eventually found Buck and Koegel.
" Name's Grant. Gentlemen, let's get you the hell of of here!" Commander Grant said. He, and his 15 SSTs led Buck and Koegel to the Falcon helicopters.
Koegel limped to the Falcon using his rifle as a cane once onboard with Buck he collapsed and went unconscious, his body has been pushed to it's limits. The medics onboard begun to operate on him and stabilized Koegel enough to under go surgery once they made it back to base. While the Falcons took off the Allouxian soldiers on the ground begun their mission to recover the bodies of the rest of Reaper-04 and the other SSTs killed in action.
Cote azure
Let's make a new type of ammo to be used universally by the W.S.A. kinda like how NATO uses 5.56
How about 6.24 W.S.A.
Also, sorry about not answering your question 
Casmaru, the Autumn War came first followed by WW1 or "The Great War".
«12. . .1,0081,0091,0101,0111,0121,0131,014. . .3,4813,482»
Advertisement
