Guest Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 just wondering is the queen or any political figures of your countries have armed security of any kind? -- im willing to bet they do -- what makes them any different or special that you dont get the same protection if you want -- obama just signed lifetime armed secret service protection for his and bush's family's for life -- what makes him any better than anyone else in this country why can he have armed security but not allow law abiding citizens arm themselves for security It doesn't make them more important. It just appreciates that some people are a bigger target than others so the security risk is more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Because Russia isn't a developed country. Sure they are my friend just some nations are more tend to crime thats it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBR Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 It doesn't make them more important. It just appreciates that some people are a bigger target than others so the security risk is more. risk? what risk guns are banned why would they need the protection Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 risk? what risk guns are banned why would they need the protection Risks of being attacked or killed - thought that was obvious. I'm not even 100% sure they're even armed all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Risks of being attacked or killed - thought that was obvious. I'm not even 100% sure they're even armed all the time. Is it possible to kill some one with out a gun? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBR Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Risks of being attacked or killed - thought that was obvious. I'm not even 100% sure they're even armed all the time. they are armed -- the queen and family have armed security just about all the time -- they even have armed security standing outside their bedroom at night -- why should you not have the same rights or same right to secure yourself Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Is it possible to kill some one with out a gun? Obviously not as your mother tried to strangle you at birth and all it resulted in was brain damage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 they are armed -- the queen and family have armed security just about all the time -- they even have armed security standing outside their bedroom at night -- why should you not have the same rights or same right to secure yourself Right, wasn't sure as I seem to recall Prince Charles have someone run at him once in Australia with a starter pistol and his guard stand in front of him. It was claimed the guard was unharmed and genuinely thought that the attacker was armed with a gun. As for the question you need to take it up with your local police and see if they're happy to give you an armed guard. I'm ok with the fact that political people and world leaders piss more people off than me so might need guarding more than me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Obviously not as your mother tried to strangle you at birth and all it resulted in was brain damage. english twat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 english twat Lol - you know I like you really Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 they are armed -- the queen and family have armed security just about all the time -- they even have armed security standing outside their bedroom at night -- why should you not have the same rights or same right to secure yourself Except for the minor royals. They should fend for themselves like anyone else - no one would even know who they are lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 they are armed -- the queen and family have armed security just about all the time -- they even have armed security standing outside their bedroom at night -- why should you not have the same rights or same right to secure yourself What are our views on the President and other members of the government having armed security? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMATycoon Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 just wondering is the queen or any political figures of your countries have armed security of any kind? -- im willing to bet they do -- what makes them any different or special that you dont get the same protection if you want -- obama just signed lifetime armed secret service protection for his and bush's family's for life -- what makes him any better than anyone else in this country why can he have armed security but not allow law abiding citizens arm themselves for security We. Don't. Need. To. Jesus H Christ. Why do you keep going on about arming ourselves for security? Name one situation that's actually even remotely likely to happen, where I need a gun for my security. Why do you keep ignoring direct questions anyway? Why is America right and every other country wrong? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 We. Don't. Need. To. Jesus H Christ. Why do you keep going on about arming ourselves for security? Name one situation that's actually even remotely likely to happen, where I need a gun for my security. Why do you keep ignoring direct questions anyway? Why is America right and every other country wrong? If some one attacks you with a knife you need a gun? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBR Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 We. Don't. Need. To. Jesus H Christ. Why do you keep going on about arming ourselves for security? Name one situation that's actually even remotely likely to happen, where I need a gun for my security. Why do you keep ignoring direct questions anyway? Why is America right and every other country wrong? im not saying we are right and your wrong at all -- nothing to the sort -- all i asked is why if guns are banned and you have no need to arm yourselves or defend yourself then why does your queen and family members have armed security -- as for yourself im not saying you need to be armed or protection at all -- as far as i know you never leave the house and are locked up tight i dont know -- im not judging other countries for what they do like other countries judge us -- im just simply asking why so much armed protection for them if guns or crime is not a problem im not judging any country or saying other countries are wrong -- america isnt right -- america has a government are wrong all the time and lie to get what they want -- our government has a history of lying to achieve their needs or wants we choose to arm ourselves so we arent a victim of crime -- you yourself say you have been jumped and beat up twice by a gang of guys -- i have yet to ever be jumped and beat up by a gang of guys or be a victim of a crime period such as robbery or mugging -- attempts have been made but didnt happen cause of one reason i was armed and i have stopped several crimes i have seen in the process of happening cause of being armed -- could i have stopped those crimes from happening not being armed? maybe but most likely not i would of just ended up a victim -- i guess the major difference between our cultures is you see no problem being a victim of crime as long as you live -- we dont see or take being a victim of a crime period Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBR Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 in the end it is a clash of cultures -- i mean honestly thats why there even is an america -- most our ancestors left from over there cause of king george -- came here and violently formed america Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grasman Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 im not saying we are right and your wrong at all -- nothing to the sort -- all i asked is why if guns are banned and you have no need to arm yourselves or defend yourself then why does your queen and family members have armed security -- as for yourself im not saying you need to be armed or protection at all -- as far as i know you never leave the house and are locked up tight i dont know -- im not judging other countries for what they do like other countries judge us -- im just simply asking why so much armed protection for them if guns or crime is not a problem im not judging any country or saying other countries are wrong -- america isnt right -- america has a government are wrong all the time and lie to get what they want -- our government has a history of lying to achieve their needs or wants we choose to arm ourselves so we arent a victim of crime -- you yourself say you have been jumped and beat up twice by a gang of guys -- i have yet to ever be jumped and beat up by a gang of guys or be a victim of a crime period such as robbery or mugging -- attempts have been made but didnt happen cause of one reason i was armed and i have stopped several crimes i have seen in the process of happening cause of being armed -- could i have stopped those crimes from happening not being armed? maybe but most likely not i would of just ended up a victim -- i guess the major difference between our cultures is you see no problem being a victim of crime as long as you live -- we dont see or take being a victim of a crime period You are aware that foreign secret agencies and terrorist organisations have these high profile people on their hit list. That hasn't got much to do with local gun access, other than the more guns the locals have, the more the reason for heavily armed security for high profile people, as more gun access would automatically mean more petty criminals walk around armed, criminals who otherwise aren't armed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timmy Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 im not saying we are right and your wrong at all -- nothing to the sort -- all i asked is why if guns are banned and you have no need to arm yourselves or defend yourself then why does your queen and family members have armed security -- as for yourself im not saying you need to be armed or protection at all -- as far as i know you never leave the house and are locked up tight i dont know -- im not judging other countries for what they do like other countries judge us -- im just simply asking why so much armed protection for them if guns or crime is not a problem im not judging any country or saying other countries are wrong -- america isnt right -- america has a government are wrong all the time and lie to get what they want -- our government has a history of lying to achieve their needs or wants I think that comment shows exactly what you don't understand about the UK. I'm 44 and I've had my youth and all the scrapes with danger that go with it. I grew up in a rough area and certainly didn't or don't "never leave the house" "locked up tight". EDITED BORING DETAILS OUT - drugs, fighting, gangs, etc, etc. But, Ive never touched or seen a gun. As far as I know I've never been in the same room as one. I've never seen a cop with a gun. You just don't understand this. I'm sure you will say "knives instead", but that never happened either. There was a comment somewhere here about a guy from Iceland saying that it's cool to be a young man and be able to go out and fight with no guns around. I wouldn't be proud of that now, but he has a good point IMO. THAT is freedom. EDIT: I didn't mean to come across as a guy who thinks he is a Hardman, or a veteran of gang fights (at least not how they are understood now). I was just trying to say that I've been around, not hidden indoors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timmy Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Double post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 You are aware that foreign secret agencies and terrorist organisations have these high profile people on their hit list. That and any idiot that wants to make a name for themselves. Like I tried to explain to Humors, it isn't impossible to get hold of a gun in the UK. If a person is desperate enought they could get hold of a firearm. However, it is difficult and means someone can't get hold of one just like that if they feel they need one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBR Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 I think that comment shows exactly what you don't understand about the UK. I'm 44 and I've had my youth and all the scrapes with danger that go with it. I grew up in a rough area and certainly didn't or don't "never leave the house" "locked up tight". EDITED BORING DETAILS OUT - drugs, fighting, gangs, etc, etc. But, Ive never touched or seen a gun. As far as I know I've never been in the same room as one. I've never seen a cop with a gun. You just don't understand this. I'm sure you will say "knives instead", but that never happened either. There was a comment somewhere here about a guy from Iceland saying that it's cool to be a young man and be able to go out and fight with no guns around. I wouldn't be proud of that now, but he has a good point. THAT is freedom. in my generation we were same way -- had plenty of fights no guns, knives anything hell most of time you ended up buddies after fighting -- but that isnt the norm now -- it mainly started with street gangs and knifes now has progessed to guns or not even having guns just by sheer numbers they can do crimes -- i loved growing up in my generation -- we had respect for people and guns were plentiful then and shit didnt happen like now days -- also though crime wasnt like it is now or dealing with street gangs who kill you just for fun or to get into a gang (and not killed with a gun) -- i myself would love to live those days again that is and was freedom but its not ideally possible now days ideally banning guns would and could work if we could secure our borders but we cant or better yet our government chooses not too -- as long as drugs flow so freely across for black market guns would be there also cause that would be another cartel money gain -- no doubt it would take probably 30 yrs or so to weed out the guns in existence now (its totally impossible for government to do a buyout or out right confiscate guns right now) but as mentioned i think america has much more of a black market then other countries -- illegal guns are run through the black market now like crazy and if banned it would pick up worse -- cause cartels will give or send their gangs the guns just like they send them the drugs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambo Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Not everybody in this world is physically capable of defending themself. Elderly, women, and even plenty of men are utterly defenseless against the majority of the population out there committing crimes. Rape, kidnapping, burglarys, home invasion, car-jacking, I don't even need to go on after rape. What the hell is a woman suppose to do against a large male assailant that wants to rape her? Lay down, get raped, and live to see another day. The damage done physically and especially pyschologically are perminant. Firearms save and protect a lot of innocent people. The world used to be a place where the biggest baddest man ruled the land and could mount any woman, man, or child that he wanted. Weapons neutralized that or at least evened the playing field. America is the one country in the world that isn't going to get invaded by another country, ever, til a massive collapse of our government. And if it did hasn't anybody ever seen the movie Red Dawn? lol We've gone back and forth about this in private, so you know I agree with most of it. Large-scale genocide wasn't nearly as simple as it is today without mechanical firearms and bombs. The wars were also on a much smaller scale, as 1) there were fewer people in the world and 2) designated battlefields meant civilians weren't hit as hard by the actual battle. Sure, pillaging obviously took place, but compared to carpet bombing them from planes that's pretty soft. We can never remove violence and murder, but we can neuter it. Having a gun is like fighting with all cheat codes activated and makes murder a formality. Everything is just a point and squeeze away. Of course it only takes one place at the wrong time. You could say the same about an airplane engine falling off and hitting me in the head as I'm headed off to brunch or whatever the fuck retards like BrainSmasher think gun control advocates do. That doesn't legitimize something as destructive and game changing as guns. We want to endanger people? What kills more people, guns or pacifism? lol yeah I know, we've been back and forth on subjects like this. I feel the evolution of weapons and the fear of them is what keeps the majority of countries out of war. As for large scale genocide not being as simple as it is now, of course it wasn't because people were hacking each other to bits with dull blades and other random objects, but it never prevented it from happening... and I would rather be carpet bombed because I highly doubt these battles or Conquerors were anything less than barbaric, hacking and slashing and raping anything in their path on a much more massive level than todays wars. Genghis Kahn Alexander The Great Augustus Caesar Atilla the Hun Tamerlane "Timur the Lame" Cyrus The Great Ashoka Charlemagne, King of the Franks Xerxes and the Persians Amalekites and Midianites Battle of Carthage Ancient China European Colonization of America 1804 Haiti Massacre Tupac Amurai II War of the Three Kingdoms (England, Ireland, Scotland) African Holocaust People kill people. End of story. You keep saying that alcohol isn't banned purely because of tax but you keep ignoring my point - how do you even ban alcohol? How do you ban guns? How do you ban cigerrettes? By not selling it. Same as guns. Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner. There's a lot of things that are legal and illegal in the world that don't make sense. It doesn't matter. If nobody had a gun, regardless of their race, you wouldn't need a gun to protect yourself from them. There wouldn't be such an inner city crime problem if there weren't guns. A crackhead or gang banger with a gun shoots someone in a robbery gone bad. A crackhead or gang banger with a knife runs away before the cops show up in a robbery gone bad. Most of us, if not all of us checking this forum out, are men. We're attracted to an MMA game and MMA because we're prolly violent by nature. Most of us are more than capable of defending ourself. Women, Elderly? What the hell are the suppose to do? How do they defend themself against an attacker or prevent themself from being a victim of a crime? There's women out there that could have a 4 foot machete, a gallon of mace, and a taser that could bring down a cow, and still not protect themself from a group of men or a man. Guns are the evolution of weapons. Good or bad, there's nothing that's going to change that. Of course people are gonna use them to kill each other. People use broom sticks, bricks, candle sticks, forks, rocks, and thousands of other random objects to do it. Have can you protect yourself against rape if you dont have firearms? One of the, if not the most, traumatizing experiences a woman could go through. And I guess a man for that matter? What the hell is a woman suppose to do when a man attacks her? Train BJJ, Boxing, Muay Thai, and wrestling? The majority of women are practically defenseless to a mans assault. they are armed -- the queen and family have armed security just about all the time -- they even have armed security standing outside their bedroom at night -- why should you not have the same rights or same right to secure yourself I should be just as entitled to the most reliable use of self defense available, as any other man, woman, or child on this planet. Even if guns were banned, I would feel entitled to own one. Why? Because when it comes to self defense it's like Mannetosen said - it's like fighting with all the cheat codes activated which increases your survival rate. We. Don't. Need. To. Jesus H Christ. Why do you keep going on about arming ourselves for security? Name one situation that's actually even remotely likely to happen, where I need a gun for my security. Why do you keep ignoring direct questions anyway? Why is America right and every other country wrong? Right or wrong is just a matter of perspective. There are no statistics that change this. everybody won't be on the same side of the fence on this subject, and they shouldn't have to be. If you don't feel like you need a firearm to protect yourself congratulations, and I'm happy for you. You know there's countries that allow their parents to sell their children for sex as long as they pay taxes on the income they generate? How about a religeous ban since religeon has been the root to more wars that have resulted in more deaths than we could fathom. im not saying we are right and your wrong at all -- nothing to the sort -- all i asked is why if guns are banned and you have no need to arm yourselves or defend yourself then why does your queen and family members have armed security -- as for yourself im not saying you need to be armed or protection at all -- as far as i know you never leave the house and are locked up tight i dont know -- im not judging other countries for what they do like other countries judge us -- im just simply asking why so much armed protection for them if guns or crime is not a problem im not judging any country or saying other countries are wrong -- america isnt right -- america has a government are wrong all the time and lie to get what they want -- our government has a history of lying to achieve their needs or wants we choose to arm ourselves so we arent a victim of crime -- you yourself say you have been jumped and beat up twice by a gang of guys -- i have yet to ever be jumped and beat up by a gang of guys or be a victim of a crime period such as robbery or mugging -- attempts have been made but didnt happen cause of one reason i was armed and i have stopped several crimes i have seen in the process of happening cause of being armed -- could i have stopped those crimes from happening not being armed? maybe but most likely not i would of just ended up a victim -- i guess the major difference between our cultures is you see no problem being a victim of crime as long as you live -- we dont see or take being a victim of a crime period I don't think everybody should have a gun at all. I think there should be a tighter form of gun control than there is now. More extensive background check, psychological evaluation, etc. But you can't get rid of them entirely or you create an underworld like you did when they tried the alchohol prohibition... and saying that somebody using the "for protection" excuse to own a gun isn't a good one, isn't fair either because you don't know what circumstances or situations that individual has been through that has or would required a firearm for survival or to prevent them from becoming a victim. Never underestimate how crazy and dangerous people are or can get. We're by far the most dangerous mammal on this planet. You look at the majority of serial killers, and none of them used guns. Guns will always result in people's death, and some people will always think the world will be a better place without them, but history will tell you that it wasn't any less dangerous or safe without them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 - i guess the major difference between our cultures is you see no problem being a victim of crime as long as you live - That's a stupid and ignorant statement to make. From what I can gather the main difference is your culture is a shit hole and ours are not. I think the picture in the post also shows the mentality over there. As long as you're alright fuck everyone else. Well maybe that's what the murderers and rapist think - its obviously a problem with society. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambo Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 That's a stupid and ignorant statement to make. From what I can gather the main difference is your culture is a shit hole and ours are not. I think the picture in the post also shows the mentality over there. As long as you're alright fuck everyone else. Well maybe that's what the murderers and rapist think - its obviously a problem with society. Rape Rate per 100,000 population: South Africa Botswaba Sweden Nicaragua Grenada UK (England and Wales) Saint Kitts and Nevis Panama Belgium UK (Northern Ireland) United States Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 Rape Rate per 100,000 population: South Africa Botswaba Sweden Nicaragua Grenada UK (England and Wales) Saint Kitts and Nevis Panama Belgium UK (Northern Ireland) United States What has that got to do with my quote? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.