Guns or butter?
-
Each nation has only a limited amount of GDP. Of which this GDP, can used for either military goods(guns) or civilians products(butter). Personally, look at history(inter-war period)and the disastrous consequences that followed I haven't really been supportive a budget that over-emphasizes social welfare at the expense of military. At the same time, there are others such as socialists,who believe spending for civilian purposes such as health-care and education should precedence of military spending. What would your opinion be?
-
butter makes you fat..
guns kill you..
i'd rather be fat than dead
-
i knw countries go to war over salt....but butter..?
-
Both are important...
-
food
clothes
a place to sleep
transport
these are the 4 major NEEDS of the people on a very basic level.
if cannot provide, the garmen can go die already. -
guns that fire tasty butter at the enemy....
enemy will eat the tasty butter....
then all die off heart attack...
hmm...dunno whether supersoaker can fire melted butter... -
Someone taking intro to economics?
-
with the screwed up ecosystem we have these days, your guess is as good as mine.Originally posted by alexkusu:i knw countries go to war over salt....but butter..? -
No la. Just that my class having a lil discussion in the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shootings. My teacher was commenting that gun laws in the US will be tightened but not completely banned. He was saying something to the extent that because the arms industry in the US is so massive, the income could actually be used to fund social causes and if firearms were to be banned in the US it could have a adverse effect on US society.Though that was very unique, selling guns to buy butter.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Someone taking intro to economics? -
Last I checked, as long as we live in a flawed world where greed and paranoia exists... we need guns.
What's the point of having butter if you can't defend it? -
The Arms trade is HUGE in the US. Ever watched the movie, Lord of War? Its not totally fiction I dare say.Originally posted by fallin:No la. Just that my class having a lil discussion in the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shootings. My teacher was commenting that gun laws in the US will be tightened but not completely banned. He was saying something to the extent that because the arms industry in the US is so massive, the income could actually be used to fund social causes and if firearms were to be banned in the US it could have a adverse effect on US society.Though that was very unique, selling guns to buy butter. -
tell your professor .....Tannnn..............Wrong answer. The right to bare arms has nothing to do with Arm trade.Originally posted by fallin:No la. Just that my class having a lil discussion in the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shootings. My teacher was commenting that gun laws in the US will be tightened but not completely banned. He was saying something to the extent that because the arms industry in the US is so massive, the income could actually be used to fund social causes and if firearms were to be banned in the US it could have a adverse effect on US society.Though that was very unique, selling guns to buy butter.
There are lobby on both side to and for arms. Its implication for this amendment came from the experience guard against british imperialist. During the time of this amendment the United States does not have a regular arm.
Remember until now all marines are volunteers to be a marine.
The implcation of this amendment is the final defence within the united States in case there is a Evil power that sit in the government or a foreign invasion into the United States. Its citizen and either rise up and over throw the government just like what they did to the Brit or protect the home and family. -
there were still militia org in the us that fielding huge array of weaponry, the fed didnt do anything about them. ...but gun owners in US were mature enough not to use the weapon for crime. Its the teenage with pump up tetosteron that they worried. Ho to limit weapon so that it wont reach these people.
-
Was reading this article in the ST about some ex-American resident who supposed to solution to all gun crimes was to disarm the whole of American soceity and the military as well!
A nice solution, but I wonder how it can pratically be applied in American without giving up much of what they are about.
Passing laws just won't cut it given the current state of things, sure you'll remove the guns from the law-abiding people and cut down on the number of accidential and heat-of-the-moment-homocide deaths but that still leaves out the outlaws who would hold onto their weapons at most costs.
To remove the weapons from these dudes, you would have to take it by force, or impose extremely harsh firearm laws ala. Singapore where life terms and death penalties are imposed for firearms.
This of course, would be contary to most Americans.
And of course, the take the guns from outlaws and to keep it that way require considerable firepower, as well as curtailing a lot of the freedoms that the Americans like so much.
So yeah, it'll be a great world where everybody would think like that dude and all disarm and hate guns... but this simply isn't our world.
Oddly enough, other countries have gun ownership but their gun deaths are far lower then America if you account for all the population and percentage of gun ownership. So does the fault lie with guns or the mentality of the people who own them?
I don't know, but if I ever lived in America I would get a gun, simply because if you are forced to defend yourself most likely it would be from a gun. Better to be alive then to have pacifist ideas that can't defend what matters to you. -
GUNS OR BUTTER?
Definitely guns.
But if...
GUNS OR CHAR KWAY TEOW?
Then, might have to think hard. -
Same, I'd be one of them weapon collectors if I stayed there.
In fact, we have no right to tell them to ban guns. The issues at hand is beyond the comprehension of many Singaporeans. The right to form a militia, the right to bear arms, these are issues born from their independance movement, and have been socialised into every American that these are God-given rights. -
thing is that the right to bear arms in order to do that, has been hijacked by those who want guns for the sake of guns..
since it's a right, many have abused it for their own ends... forgetting the noble cause of the right...Originally posted by LazerLordz:Same, I'd be one of them weapon collectors if I stayed there.
In fact, we have no right to tell them to ban guns. The issues at hand is beyond the comprehension of many Singaporeans. The right to form a militia, the right to bear arms, these are issues born from their independance movement, and have been socialised into every American that these are God-given rights. -
Originally posted by the Bear:
pun intended?
thing is that the right to bear arms in order to do that, has been hijacked by those who want guns for the sake of guns..
since it's a right, many have abused it for their own ends... forgetting the noble cause of the right... -
True, no one has any rights to tell the Americans anything.Originally posted by LazerLordz:In fact, we have no right to tell them to ban guns. The issues at hand is beyond the comprehension of many Singaporeans. The right to form a militia, the right to bear arms, these are issues born from their independance movement, and have been socialised into every American that these are God-given rights.
But these people live everyday with the fear of their kid being shot dead at school. That's pathetic.
Is that right to bear firearms really more important than being alive?
I love firearms, but I would sacrifice the right to own firearms for the right to walk along the street without being shot. -
not really.. the abuse the right to bear arms.. unfortunately, no one abuses The Right (Winged)Originally posted by fallin:pun intended?
-
-
Ask them.Originally posted by moca:True, no one has any rights to tell the Americans anything.
But these people live everyday with the fear of their kid being shot dead at school. That's pathetic.
Is that right to bear firearms really more important than being alive?
I love firearms, but I would sacrifice the right to own firearms for the right to walk along the street without being shot.
Like I said, we won't be able to understand their psyche. -
in the past, they needed guns mainly for their survival. remember that before mordern america happened, they existed in rural areas with wild animals. then guns were for protection.
somehow it got written into their constitution. -
not just for hunting, but to make sure that they shall not be oppressed by a foreign power again.Originally posted by beavan:in the past, they needed guns mainly for their survival. remember that before mordern america happened, they existed in rural areas with wild animals. then guns were for protection.
somehow it got written into their constitution. -
I hear you there! If the choice came down to guns or Hainanese Chicken Rice, I'd have to think hard, really hard.....Originally posted by moca:GUNS OR CHAR KWAY TEOW?
Then, might have to think hard.