Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Should I move to Australia if Obama wins?

Page 7 of 11 [ 176 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Should I move to Australia if Obama wins?
Yes. 34%  34%  [ 46 ]
No. 41%  41%  [ 55 ]
I just wanna see the results. 25%  25%  [ 33 ]
Total votes : 134

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

07 May 2009, 1:12 pm

Dox47 wrote:
Sand wrote:
I cannot dispute any of your considerations and wholeheartedly agree that if I were in a situation that required a gun to save my life or stop violence to save other's lives I would surely appreciate having a weapon for defense. But the sharp edge of decision rests upon my confidence in myself or others to act sensibly and with a minimum of passion. I find it difficult to ascertain whether I could do this under extreme emotional pressure, not to speak of the intelligence or the mental balance of whoever goes looking for trouble. Legality, under these circumstances has a very minor part to play if at all. As I pointed out, the factors involved in brutality are not totally calculable and the psychology of participants is pretty much chaotic and these are the crucial factors in violent encounters.


I emphasize the legal guidelines for the use of deadly force so much because they are quite stringent and clear cut, and they provide a useful template for planning ahead for how one might handle a given situation. Remember, I don't want to have to draw my gun, whatever the result it's going to be a huge hassle for me that I'd much rather avoid if possible, and by the letter of the law I can't draw until I really need to in order to prevent serious harm from being done, so I use that standard as my own benchmark. I can't speak for everyone who carries, but concealed pistol license holders like myself have to have at least a passing familiarity with the law and some instinct for planning ahead, so I don't think my system it too uncommon amongst our ranks.

Sand wrote:
One additional point. In a situation in New York City which involved the death of a fellow going home after a bachelor's party where undercover policemen were involved the fatality seemed to occur because there was the hint of a firearm in a car that was trying to escape the scene. No firearm was displayed but it is evident that the victim assumed he was being attacked by criminals and even the brief display of a gun would have unleashed a huge amount of police firepower to horrible effect. Arms, in this case would have made the situation immensely worse.


Any worse than not having a gun did? That was a nasty incident that I'm only passingly familiar with, but IIRC the police shot into a fleeing car after failing to properly identify themselves. I don't see how if the guy was himself armed could have made it any worse for him, maybe worse for the cops since they might have had to deal with return fire, but the guy wouldn't have ended up any more dead. If anything, this would seem to strengthen my argument that it's not practical or wise to rely on the police for protection, they are OK at catching crooks after the fact, but are only fair to middling at preventing the crime in the first place, and the psychological effects of their work lead to things like this happening.


This more or less clearly emphasizes my essential point that it is not the weapons themselves that necessarily cause horrible events but the psychology of the individuals interacting. The repeated defensive slogan of the gun community that guns do not kill, people do, puts aside the fact that possessing a gun radically changes the psychology of misinterpretation of intentions. You seem perfectly confident that you are totally competent to be cool headed in a horrendous interaction and even if I accepted that there is no way that current gun licensing procedures guarantees that competence in the general public.



lau
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Age: 77
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,798
Location: Somerset UK

07 May 2009, 8:03 pm

ed wrote:
lau wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
...
Well, I guess the previous 5 pages of me eviscerating the fallacies of the anti-gun movement don't count as argument...

You have done no such thing. All you have done is present some opinions - nothing fact-based. Other, that is, than making the obvious statement that, in a violence-loving culture, the man with the biggest gun wins.


It is the responsibility of those who want to change the status-quo to present the facts... those of us who want to keep the current system then get a chance to refute those facts, show them to be either false or irrelavent.

Indeed. Read the thread title. This thread is about people moving from the USA to Australia. Quatermass remarked that he did not want anyone to move to Australia with a gun. Equivalently, I would not want anyone who felt a gun was as essential item of their apparel to move to the UK. The facts I presented have not been addressed. My "status quo" is to live in a country where firearms are rare - where all offensive weapons are essentially illegal. I'd like to keep it that way.


_________________
"Striking up conversations with strangers is an autistic person's version of extreme sports." Kamran Nazeer


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

08 May 2009, 2:56 am

Sand wrote:
This more or less clearly emphasizes my essential point that it is not the weapons themselves that necessarily cause horrible events but the psychology of the individuals interacting. The repeated defensive slogan of the gun community that guns do not kill, people do, puts aside the fact that possessing a gun radically changes the psychology of misinterpretation of intentions. You seem perfectly confident that you are totally competent to be cool headed in a horrendous interaction and even if I accepted that there is no way that current gun licensing procedures guarantees that competence in the general public.


There's no such thing as a guaranteed anything, and to expect 100% perfect judgment in high stakes situations is simply not realistic. Even so, lawfully armed civilians are involved in far less questionable shooting than the police are, despite obvious training and experience differentials. The thing to remember is that the legally armed civilian has gone to quite a bit of trouble and expense to acquire a gun, acquire the equipment to carry it unobtrusively, and the permit to carry it legally, this is not a person in general that is prone to rashness or acting without thinking. To my knowledge, no one tracks defensive gun use, and even if someone did it would be very difficult to do accurately, since "flashing" a gun is so often sufficient to end a violent situation and in those cases the police are not often called. I'd be willing to bet that in the US alone the number of such "saves" outnumber the gun murders by a significant number, possibly even statistically negating the death toll, though it's unfortunately impossible to prove either way.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


ascan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,194
Location: Taunton/Aberdeen

08 May 2009, 1:21 pm

lau wrote:
The facts I presented have not been addressed. My "status quo" is to live in a country where firearms are rare - where all offensive weapons are essentially illegal. I'd like to keep it that way.

But they're not rare, lau. If you include shotguns with firearms, there are around 700,000 people who legally have one, although those are held for sporting, or vermin control purposes, mainly. Furthermore, illegal weapons are widely available in all major cities. It's very easy to get one, so I've been informed. My own opinion is that I'd feel safer if I could legally hold a gun for defensive purposes. Perhaps that's because I've lived in a big city, and seen the kind of scum who are out there, and what they can do to you. I wonder if you've lived isolated from that kind of thing. Certainly your location, age, and income suggest that's likely.



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

08 May 2009, 2:16 pm

ascan wrote:
lau wrote:
The facts I presented have not been addressed. My "status quo" is to live in a country where firearms are rare - where all offensive weapons are essentially illegal. I'd like to keep it that way.

But they're not rare, lau. If you include shotguns with firearms, there are around 700,000 people who legally have one, although those are held for sporting, or vermin control purposes, mainly. Furthermore, illegal weapons are widely available in all major cities. It's very easy to get one, so I've been informed. My own opinion is that I'd feel safer if I could legally hold a gun for defensive purposes. Perhaps that's because I've lived in a big city, and seen the kind of scum who are out there, and what they can do to you. I wonder if you've lived isolated from that kind of thing. Certainly your location, age, and income suggest that's likely.


I've lived for over 40 years in New York City when at times, the crime rate was very high. I never needed nor wanted a gun.



ascan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,194
Location: Taunton/Aberdeen

08 May 2009, 4:01 pm

Sand wrote:
I've lived for over 40 years in New York City when at times, the crime rate was very high. I never needed nor wanted a gun.

I suppose that depends which part of New York you lived in, Sand. But interesting, nevertheless. Some people seem to look at the rest of humanity through rose-tinted spectacles, you know. Often that type of person is of a liberal persuasion, fairly affluent, and appears to think no harm will come to them if they treat others with respect. They're oblivious to the fact that a very small, but still significant, minority of people out there will stick a knife in you, or kick your head to a bloody pulp just for fun. A legally-held gun would provide peace of mind that you had some power over your own destiny.



Haliphron
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,980

08 May 2009, 5:59 pm

Ragtime wrote:
Clearly, America will no longer be my favorite country with a socialist at its helm,
so Australia, with its conservatism still relatively intact, is looking more and more appealing.
I mean, our economy is doing bad enough without a neophyte small-business-punitive-taxor at the helm.



You're in for an UNPLEASANT Surprise if you actually follow through with moving down there. Australia is moving ever towards the left, and it is certainly more left-wing than the US. I guess you conservatives are showing your true colors by turning your back on America just because you dont like the current president. :roll:

BTW, can one of you aussies explain to me Why Australia is still a commonwealth an not a fully independent republic?



MR_BOGAN
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Mar 2008
Age: 126
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,479
Location: The great trailer park in the sky!

08 May 2009, 6:46 pm

Haliphron wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Clearly, America will no longer be my favorite country with a socialist at its helm,
so Australia, with its conservatism still relatively intact, is looking more and more appealing.
I mean, our economy is doing bad enough without a neophyte small-business-punitive-taxor at the helm.



You're in for an UNPLEASANT Surprise if you actually follow through with moving down there. Australia is moving ever towards the left, and it is certainly more left-wing than the US. I guess you conservatives are showing your true colors by turning your back on America just because you dont like the current president. :roll:

BTW, can one of you aussies explain to me Why Australia is still a commonwealth an not a fully independent republic?


I think they had a big debate about becoming a republic years a go. The older generations still want to part of the commonwealth.

I think that their really isn't a problem with being in the commonwealth. :shrug:


_________________
Dirty Dancing (1987) - Trailer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qU8CmMJf8QA


Haliphron
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,980

08 May 2009, 9:44 pm

MR_BOGAN wrote:
Haliphron wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Clearly, America will no longer be my favorite country with a socialist at its helm,
so Australia, with its conservatism still relatively intact, is looking more and more appealing.
I mean, our economy is doing bad enough without a neophyte small-business-punitive-taxor at the helm.



You're in for an UNPLEASANT Surprise if you actually follow through with moving down there. Australia is moving ever towards the left, and it is certainly more left-wing than the US. I guess you conservatives are showing your true colors by turning your back on America just because you dont like the current president. :roll:

BTW, can one of you aussies explain to me Why Australia is still a commonwealth an not a fully independent republic?


I think they had a big debate about becoming a republic years a go. The older generations still want to part of the commonwealth.

I think that their really isn't a problem with being in the commonwealth. :shrug:



Well regretably Australia does NOT have a Bill Of Rights(unlike the USofA). They also have a growing problem with crime, much of it violent, though I hear NZ is actually more violent than Australia. Have you ever been to south auckland MR_BOGAN?



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

09 May 2009, 12:12 am

ascan wrote:
Sand wrote:
I've lived for over 40 years in New York City when at times, the crime rate was very high. I never needed nor wanted a gun.

I suppose that depends which part of New York you lived in, Sand. But interesting, nevertheless. Some people seem to look at the rest of humanity through rose-tinted spectacles, you know. Often that type of person is of a liberal persuasion, fairly affluent, and appears to think no harm will come to them if they treat others with respect. They're oblivious to the fact that a very small, but still significant, minority of people out there will stick a knife in you, or kick your head to a bloody pulp just for fun. A legally-held gun would provide peace of mind that you had some power over your own destiny.


Peace of mind does not come from carrying a gun. People intent on sticking a knife in you do not confront you with a knife and present you with an opportunity to decide whether or not to shoot them. They come upon you suddenly and overpower you and either stick you or not depending upon many things. I frequently passed through most of the worst crime ridden sections of the city and stayed away from situations that might in any way indicate danger. And never had to debate with myself as to whether or not to draw or display a gun. The problems with violence are over 90 percent psychological. I do not confront people. And undoubtedly I may be lucky.



ascan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,194
Location: Taunton/Aberdeen

09 May 2009, 3:34 am

Sand wrote:
People intent on sticking a knife in you do not confront you with a knife and present you with an opportunity to decide whether or not to shoot them. They come upon you suddenly and overpower you and either stick you or not depending upon many things. I frequently passed through most of the worst crime ridden sections of the city and stayed away from situations that might in any way indicate danger. And never had to debate with myself as to whether or not to draw or display a gun. The problems with violence are over 90 percent psychological. I do not confront people. And undoubtedly I may be lucky.

You've made an important point about confrontation, with which I don't disagree. If you look at how England was, say, 30 years ago, then I think the firearm licencing situation, and policing were sensible. Now however, I don't. The police are generally ineffective unless they're smashing your door down to arrest you for thought crime, or kidnapping your kids to be cared for by the state on the behest of some crackpot social worker. Defending yourself from an increasingly violent criminal element is difficult.



MR_BOGAN
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Mar 2008
Age: 126
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,479
Location: The great trailer park in the sky!

09 May 2009, 4:01 am

Haliphron wrote:
MR_BOGAN wrote:
Haliphron wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Clearly, America will no longer be my favorite country with a socialist at its helm,
so Australia, with its conservatism still relatively intact, is looking more and more appealing.
I mean, our economy is doing bad enough without a neophyte small-business-punitive-taxor at the helm.



You're in for an UNPLEASANT Surprise if you actually follow through with moving down there. Australia is moving ever towards the left, and it is certainly more left-wing than the US. I guess you conservatives are showing your true colors by turning your back on America just because you dont like the current president. :roll:

BTW, can one of you aussies explain to me Why Australia is still a commonwealth an not a fully independent republic?


I think they had a big debate about becoming a republic years a go. The older generations still want to part of the commonwealth.

I think that their really isn't a problem with being in the commonwealth. :shrug:



Well regretably Australia does NOT have a Bill Of Rights(unlike the USofA). They also have a growing problem with crime, much of it violent, though I hear NZ is actually more violent than Australia. Have you ever been to south auckland MR_BOGAN?


Yes NZ is much more violent than Australia, NZ is better. :batman:

Everybody knows that Australians are desended from convicts so of course there is going to be a lot of crime..


_________________
Dirty Dancing (1987) - Trailer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qU8CmMJf8QA


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

09 May 2009, 5:52 am

MR_BOGAN wrote:
Haliphron wrote:
MR_BOGAN wrote:
Haliphron wrote:
Ragtime wrote:
Clearly, America will no longer be my favorite country with a socialist at its helm,
so Australia, with its conservatism still relatively intact, is looking more and more appealing.
I mean, our economy is doing bad enough without a neophyte small-business-punitive-taxor at the helm.



You're in for an UNPLEASANT Surprise if you actually follow through with moving down there. Australia is moving ever towards the left, and it is certainly more left-wing than the US. I guess you conservatives are showing your true colors by turning your back on America just because you dont like the current president. :roll:

BTW, can one of you aussies explain to me Why Australia is still a commonwealth an not a fully independent republic?


I think they had a big debate about becoming a republic years a go. The older generations still want to part of the commonwealth.

I think that their really isn't a problem with being in the commonwealth. :shrug:



Well regretably Australia does NOT have a Bill Of Rights(unlike the USofA). They also have a growing problem with crime, much of it violent, though I hear NZ is actually more violent than Australia. Have you ever been to south auckland MR_BOGAN?


Yes NZ is much more violent than Australia, NZ is better. :batman:

Everybody knows that Australians are desended from convicts so of course there is going to be a lot of crime..


There you have it! Crime is genetic! About time we got back to phrenology.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

09 May 2009, 1:34 pm

Sand wrote:
Peace of mind does not come from carrying a gun.


Maybe not for you, but your opinion is far from universal.

Sand wrote:
People intent on sticking a knife in you do not confront you with a knife and present you with an opportunity to decide whether or not to shoot them. They come upon you suddenly and overpower you and either stick you or not depending upon many things.


You're an expert on the finer points of knife mugging now? Even if the only crime someone might face while going about their business was sudden attack by knife, do you really think that an unarmed man has an advantage over an armed one?

Sand wrote:
I frequently passed through most of the worst crime ridden sections of the city and stayed away from situations that might in any way indicate danger. And never had to debate with myself as to whether or not to draw or display a gun. The problems with violence are over 90 percent psychological. I do not confront people. And undoubtedly I may be lucky.


I hiked the better part of the way around Mount Rainier, among other high altitude hikes, and on every one of them I lugged around a first aid kit that I never had to use. Does that mean that anyone going on a hike should leave their kit behind as dead weight?


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

09 May 2009, 2:17 pm

Dox47 wrote:
Sand wrote:
Peace of mind does not come from carrying a gun.


Maybe not for you, but your opinion is far from universal.

Sand wrote:
People intent on sticking a knife in you do not confront you with a knife and present you with an opportunity to decide whether or not to shoot them. They come upon you suddenly and overpower you and either stick you or not depending upon many things.


You're an expert on the finer points of knife mugging now? Even if the only crime someone might face while going about their business was sudden attack by knife, do you really think that an unarmed man has an advantage over an armed one?

Sand wrote:
I frequently passed through most of the worst crime ridden sections of the city and stayed away from situations that might in any way indicate danger. And never had to debate with myself as to whether or not to draw or display a gun. The problems with violence are over 90 percent psychological. I do not confront people. And undoubtedly I may be lucky.


I hiked the better part of the way around Mount Rainier, among other high altitude hikes, and on every one of them I lugged around a first aid kit that I never had to use. Does that mean that anyone going on a hike should leave their kit behind as dead weight?


I suppose there have been rare serious accidents in the use of a first aid kit but I would feel reasonably safe if someone approached me with one. But I would not feel I could safely amputate a leg or remove my appendix if the occasion arose on a hike around Mt.Rainier. A gun is an instrument of serious surgery, if you look at it that way.



ed
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2004
Age: 82
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,788
Location: Whitinsville, MA

09 May 2009, 2:49 pm

Now Dox47, remember I'm on your side... :D

Just after leaving this topic, I encountered the following news story about the accidental shooting of a 7-year-old boy:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/05 ... oting.html