Only to those the majority of us like to ignore.

Americans? Slaughtered in masses? I'm sorry I'm gonna have to see some numbers backing this. I mean I understand if you mean the battles around Germany, since trench warfare and meatgrinder tactics, but on the Japan front we basically shoved a battleship and two nukes where the sun don't shine. That took a startlingly inneundo'd turn.
And yeah, America wanted to stay the HELL out of it. Had we not been attacked, we probably would have until things got desperate.

1. A combination of Special and "special", to be fair.
3. I know I wouldn't. Maybe things are different over in Skyrim, but we're usually taught that "If they have a gun, and are using it on people, GET AWAY FROM THEM."
4. I don't think you can answer that without enacting the situation itself. I was going to say a major economist, but then I realized the societal upheaval removing all guns would cause and that throws pretty much any predictive power anyone has out the window.
5. I trust that the US army will defend my country. I don't trust that a particularly psychopathic US army officer won't take advantage of the fact he has a gun and abuse that power.
6. A man has a bomb. A BIG bomb. If you get close enough to tase, boom. What now?
7. Fun fact, run an electric current capable of scrambling a person's nervous system through a person for 2 minutes straight, and they'll probably die regardless of physical fitness. Also no, that is NOT your fault. If someone uses an incapacitation method excessively and in a manner far beyond what's needed to incapacitate, then that is the user's fault.
8. You know why they call things like tasers and beanbag bullets and teargas and all that stuff "less than lethal"? Because they kill people. They're less LIKELY to kill people, and not DESIGNED to kill people, but if you use them, you cannot guarantee that whatever you use them on won't die. Another fun fact, in police duties, taser guns are actually classified as small firearms, because you can KILL people with them. Just like you CAN with a GUN. BUT, police are actually more likely to resort to (and abuse) a taser, because they don't view it as a killing device, even though it is perfectly capable of killing.

Oh yes, let's ask the government to stop being a load of idiotic and/or corrupt politicians, through the use of our government. Voting is a little harder than you think to get things done. Also many Americans are rather stupid and pose more danger than a crazed gunman because they will vote for the corrupt bastards to be put into the high seats of the government.


And that. Damn duh you ninja.

The system is broken! Let's use the system to get rid of itself!
Brilliant.

We do too for the most part, since we don't get broken into. We just like guns in general.

Neither are we, and everyone and their MOTHER could be a crazed gunman since we all have guns. We have more reason to hide and yet we aren't.

They're really only used in places where burglars are serious problems.

I think my Freedom is better than yours.

But then I can be a crazed gunman!

Relevant

Thanks for the entertainment, guys

Fair enough.


Americans got slaughtered, half a million dead. I don't see why USA stayed out of it, Japan and Germany were clearly in the wrong.
Yeah, Americans used Nukes on civilian population centers first, well done.

3. He's why wouldn't you tackle him?
4. Why has it come that far?
5. Then the army will stop him.
6. SWAT.
7. Would a cop sit there for two minutes tazing you? Also the battery is likely to run out after 30 seconds or so.
8. Less lethal than guns, you said it.



And that. Damn duh you ninja.[/quote]

I can't really argue with this, but damn you have a cynical view of your own country.

Power corrupts, what more needs to be said. It is better to secure the means to overthrow and never have to, than have the need but not the means.

"Oh look, he has a valid point here, lets make fun of him 'till he shuts up."
The maturity is impressive.


What I quite clearly said is I would rather be safe, protected and relatively free to do what I want within boundaries than be able to buy a gun and kill twenty people while being scared someone would do the same to me first. I assumed that you were responding to my argument and point like a rational person, not finding fault with my syntax.

It's less cynical and more realistic.
Also, feel free to bring up numbers on both soldiers contributed and soldiers killed on all sides. Because 500k out of what could be 150 million isn't really a slaughter.

How is 500 000 people, from one country out of many, not a slaughter? Do you know what the word means?

1. HE HAS A GUN
2. Guns make surprisingly effective clubs.
3. HE HAS A GUN
4. HE JUST SHOT SOMEONE
5. cycling a bolt is not a terribly slow thing, he might manage to cycle it and shoot you before you reach him.
6. HE HAS A GUN
7. HE JUST SHOT SOMEONE
8. OH GOD I DON'T WANT TO DIE


Noun
- slaughter
1. The killing of animals, generally for food; ritual slaughter (kosher and halal).
2. A massacre; the killing of a large number of people.
3. A rout or decisive defeat.