221954 Bullies, 4137 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 31 to 40 of 42
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 5 LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. DAYoung is offline
    DAYoung's Avatar

    Crouching Philosopher, Hidden Philosopher

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, AUS
    Posts
    6,269

    Posted On:
    5/13/2006 6:45am

    supporting member
     Style: n/a (ex-Karate)

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by CNagy
    I don't believe the UN will be the precursor to the World Government. Personally, I think the European Union will solidify into something more than a confederacy (they are moving towards a federal system bit by bit, the Euro was a big step, if all of the other countries would drop their currency and play along) and then it is just a matter of getting the United States, China, or maybe Russia to bind itself to the Union before it becomes a World Union. It probably won't happen in this lifetime.
    "In spite of everything, it seemed we were swiftly moving towards the concept of a world federation dominated by the United States, with English as its common language. Of course, the prospect of being governed by fucking idiots was somewhat disagreeable; but it wouldn't be the first time after all." - Houellebecq
    Martial Arts and Philosophy: Beating and Nothingness
    click here to order on Amazon

  2. Wounded Ronin is offline
    Wounded Ronin's Avatar

    ...is THE PENETRATOR

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,814

    Posted On:
    5/14/2006 6:10pm

    supporting member
     Style: German longsword, .45 ACP

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by CNagy
    In the end, the United Nations is weak, and ineffectual. Their mandates are, at best, suggestions that have little to no enforcability, relying on countries to play along or relying on the Big Bad USofA to force people to play ball. For example, read through the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and tell me how well it is being enforced across the world.

    Any movement from the UN to disarm the world will end up being something of the following:

    Dear United States,

    Look, we don't like guns and we think you should get rid of them. You don't really have to if you don't want to, and you'll probably use this as an excuse to intervene in a third world country where you have interests and no motives as of yet, but we'd really like you to stop using guns.

    Sincerely,
    United Nations

    PS. Can you supply most of the funding for our gun banishing program? We're a little strapped for cash right now.

    Pretty much. That's why I think that those of you which are so afraid of the UN are pretty much a bunch of loonies. The UN only has as much power as the member states are willing to give it at the moment and the US has a tremendous degree of influence in the UN system. Honestly, guys, some of you are disappointing me with your vapid conspiracy theories.
    “nobody shoots anybody in the face unless you’re a hit man or a video gamer.” - Jack Thompson
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Th...%28attorney%29
  3. Wounded Ronin is offline
    Wounded Ronin's Avatar

    ...is THE PENETRATOR

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,814

    Posted On:
    5/14/2006 6:21pm

    supporting member
     Style: German longsword, .45 ACP

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Don Gwinn
    It's not a comparison. You said the U.N. is not targeting American gun owners. In point of fact, they are. I merely laid out the facts which show this to be true. I can't help it if you find it annoying that I'm so often correct.

    IANSA is a U.N.-run NGO. It is dedicated to eradicating private gun ownership. In the words of its head, Rebecca Peters, it believes that I and every other American shooter have to "Get a new hobby." Well, screw her. That's not up to her.

    Brazil was supposed to be Peters' and IANSA's big victory; they were going for a domino theory in which they would knock over key nations into the gun-ban column and others which would otherwise have resisted would follow slavishly.

    Didn't work. But that doesn't mean they don't have to take the blame for trying.

    From where I sit, the U.N. is an expensive way to ensure that nothing gets done. Its "human rights" advocacy too often becomes anti-semitism or anti-Americanism. It's a little on the stupid side. It has often been said in America that we should demolish the U.N. building and put in two whorehouses and a 7-11, which would be far more useful.

    And what you don't understand is the concept of relevance. IANSA is simply not a very important branch of the UN. Considering how much influence the US has in the UN and how much funding the UN draws from the US IANSA is never going to succeed in pushing through something that is that politically unpopular in the US.

    See, the most important branches of the UN are the ones that get the most funding and influence the world the most. An example would be UNICEF. UNICEF is well liked around the world and is responsible for life-saving humanitarian interventions around the world, including the creation and distribution of oral rehydration powders which were able to save the lives of many infants afflicted by severe diarreah. Another example would be the UNFPA which is very active in the distribution of condoms and repoductive health materials around the developing world.

    The fact is that you're ignoring the major departments of the UN with international recognition and instead focusing on one which is largely irrelevant.

    Add its irrelevancy onto the fact that the UN has very little power over the US, and to the fact that small arms proliferation in conflicts in the developing world always has been a much bigger priority to the international community than first-world hobbyists, and I see you flying off the ground, losing touch with reality, and putting tremendous importance on something that is insignificant.

    The problem with your point of view is that you're confusing what someone says they want to do with what they can and will do. You're so eager to believe your asinine scare story that you're ignoring the realities of the current world political situation.
    “nobody shoots anybody in the face unless you’re a hit man or a video gamer.” - Jack Thompson
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Th...%28attorney%29
  4. Don Gwinn is offline
    Don Gwinn's Avatar

    BJJ wins again!

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Virden, IL
    Posts
    3,569

    Posted On:
    5/14/2006 7:30pm

    supporting member
     Style: Guns

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    The UN only has as much power as the member states are willing to give it at the moment and the US has a tremendous degree of influence in the UN system.
    Perhaps I've been unclear. I understand this perfectly well, and I like the U.N. much better this way. I intend for them to stay ineffectual.

    The problem with your point of view is that you're confusing what someone says they want to do with what they can and will do. You're so eager to believe your asinine scare story that you're ignoring the realities of the current world political situation.
    I don't believe I made any evaluation of "what they can do." If you'd rather have this discussion without me, perhaps you should have it in private. ;)

    I don't have an inane scare story. I'm not afraid of Peters or her organization; I'm simply not going to turn my back on them and pretend they don't exist. Your argument has been used to ignore every loony proposal from Mein Kampf to The Communist Manifesto. What they can do today is less important than what they can do 10, 20 or 30 years from now. Gun owners have learned not to underestimate any common shyster who can get free airtime and column space for her wacky ideas from the biggest media outlets across the industrialized world.
    "What these paranoid Jew activists don't understand is that this Hitler character has no power. His 'party' has about 150 members throughout Germany; what's he going to do? He's simply not relevant."

    Is Ashida Kim relevant? Or 90% of the other nutcases we discuss here? Most aren't; they're threats to very few people in the big picture. But they're loons and what they're doing is wrong, so they get mocked and expose. That's as it should be.
    Last edited by Don Gwinn; 5/14/2006 7:36pm at .
    *********************************************
  5. JohnnyCache is offline
    JohnnyCache's Avatar

    All Out of Bubblegum

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    10,473

    Posted On:
    5/15/2006 12:48am

    supporting memberforum leader
     Style: MMA

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    you know

    I don't think bullshido island is that bad of an idea

    We could have a martial arts army of incredible magnitude.
    There's no choice but to confront you, to engage you, to erase you. I've gone to great lengths to expand my threshold of pain. I will use my mistakes against you. There's no other choice.
  6. Wounded Ronin is offline
    Wounded Ronin's Avatar

    ...is THE PENETRATOR

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,814

    Posted On:
    5/15/2006 7:12pm

    supporting member
     Style: German longsword, .45 ACP

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    OK, Don Gwin, but if you agree that Peters is one of the less relevant areas of the UN, then surely you'd agree it's a bit misleading for someone to say that "the UN wants to take away private handgun ownership in the US and this is some kind of threat" when most of the important things that the UN does involves life-saving humanitarian work in developing countries? It's a pretty serious case of throwing the baby out with a teaspoon of bathwater.

    Besides, if you actually read that organization's website they don't mention banning any and all guns as one of their goals for North America if you actually go and read their blurb on that part of the world, and their overall goals and objectives are focused on the developing world. I think that the issue at hand is being blown out of proportion and conflated with US specific politics and fears re gun control when the UN's focus is more on the developing world and entirely different issues that exist therin.
    “nobody shoots anybody in the face unless you’re a hit man or a video gamer.” - Jack Thompson
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Th...%28attorney%29
  7. Don Gwinn is offline
    Don Gwinn's Avatar

    BJJ wins again!

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Virden, IL
    Posts
    3,569

    Posted On:
    5/15/2006 9:03pm

    supporting member
     Style: Guns

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I'm pretty sure we're now discussing the feasibility of the Bullshido Island concept.

    However, on the old business, I don't care if it's their first priority or not. They would like to keep weapons out of the hands of private citizens, and that's wrong. There are lots of places in the world where weapons in the hands of private citizens are being used for evil purposes, but there are lots of others where it's governments doing the nasty and impertinent deeds to disarmed and unarmed citizens.

    If they aren't my enemy, fine. They can demonstrate it by ceasing to fund IANSA. Otherwise, screw them. I don't care how noble their intentions are. Their actions are foolhardy and dumb.
    *********************************************
  8. Cassius is online now
    Cassius's Avatar

    Moderator

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,969

    Posted On:
    5/16/2006 3:53am

    supporting memberforum leader
     Style: Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by DerAuslander108
    Agreed.

    I can't believe no one listened to George Washington.
    Washington wasn't the only man that argued against entangling alliances.

    I'm not sure it's completely feasable in today's international society, but it's sure as **** something worth shooting for.
    "No. Listen to me because I know what I'm talking about here." -- Hannibal
  9. MEGALEF is offline

    Still digging on James Brown

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Lund, Sweden
    Posts
    1,333

    Posted On:
    5/16/2006 8:49am


     Style: BJJ & Judo (1k)

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    http://www.stopungunban.org/pages/moneytrail
    And if this treaty were ratified in the United States, it would be binding on you and other citizens with the full force of American law—outlawing your guns, extinguishing your hunting, prohibiting your shootings sports, ending your right to self-defense, and destroying our Second Amendment rights forever.
    To me, it seems like that page is just trying to scare people into donating money to the NRA and buy that book.

    Anyway, by the look of things from over here it seems that your freedom is threatened by worse things than "taking our guns away".
  10. Don Gwinn is offline
    Don Gwinn's Avatar

    BJJ wins again!

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Virden, IL
    Posts
    3,569

    Posted On:
    5/16/2006 4:36pm

    supporting member
     Style: Guns

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    They aren't different things. A statist is a statist is a statist.

    One of the things that drives me the most nuts is people who are very upset at the loss of the one or two rights they think are important but couldn't care less about anything else. The NRA, much as I love 'em, has become the Trapshooting Club of the Republican Party recently. The ACLU defends the Bill of Rights with the tenacity of a bulldog on smack--except one. Guess which one?
    *********************************************
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 5 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.