logo Sign In

Virginia Tech shooting — Page 3

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: lordjedi
Originally posted by: sean wookie
I don't think they represent the religion it's that how fuck up some of these people are. I guess I worded that post wrong. And then there is hate against atheist and alike people. I don't really have a problem with religion just when it gets in the way with peoples politics.


Whoa, what? How does that blog have anything to do with politics?


You don't think they'd make a blog like that if it wasn't for politics do you?

http://dustinland.com/dlands/dland.virginiatech.media.jpg

Also comic.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: sean wookie
Originally posted by: lordjedi
Originally posted by: sean wookie
I don't think they represent the religion it's that how fuck up some of these people are. I guess I worded that post wrong. And then there is hate against atheist and alike people. I don't really have a problem with religion just when it gets in the way with peoples politics.


Whoa, what? How does that blog have anything to do with politics?


You don't think they'd make a blog like that if it wasn't for politics do you?


Yeah. Why does it have to be political? They are religious nuts, they really believe this crap, regarless of politics.

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Post link
One things the wacko gun control freaks will not admit is that if somebody had been armed on that campus, Cho Seung-Hui could have been taken out quicker thus causing less deaths. I know that I carry my gun everywhere I go and if this were to happen wherever I am, I would do everything I could to take out the gunman.

In the Journal of American College Health Volume 51 Number 2 I read an article titled "Guns and Gun Threats At College" written by Matthew Miller M.D., David Hemenway PhD, and Henry Wechsler PhD. This article, which was published in 2002, states that over 10,000 students were polled at 119 4 year colleges which showed that only 4.3% of those polled admitted to having a functional gun at college. That number is terrible to me and should be more around 30%-40%. If more did hve guns the chances would be better that this nut could have been safely whacked way before he got to victim #10. However, these gun control nuts would want 4.3% taken to 0% and have any chances our students have taken away in the next shooting event, how sad these idiots think this way.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Master Sifo-Dyas
Originally posted by: JediSage
This is amusing coming from societies that live as quasi-police states. Tehee. It's really surprising how the bush administration's trend towards establishing a police state in their "war on terror" suddenly seems to have originated from europe.


Hmm...they are getting ready to make holocaust denial a crime punishable by 3 years in jail. They are taking children away from their parents in Germany because they were being home schooled. The bible is going to be outlawed as hate speech in Europe. Sounds like the beginnings of a police state to me!

And the general media drift certainly isn't "It's Charleton Heston's fault!". Go throw rocks at Michael Moore for that one...


Not now it isn't the "general drift", but for most of the late 90's it was, and I won't be surprised if it is again. Michael Moore's not the only asshole in the "media" who blame other people for the criminal misuse of an inanimate object.
Nemo me impune lacessit

http://ttrim.blogspot.com
Author
Time
Post link
32 people killed by the same person is indeed a lot, but isn't 32 about the average number of people that are killed every single day by guns in the US?
Fez: I am so excited about Star Whores.
Hyde: Fezzy, man, it's Star Wars.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: JediSage
Hmm...they are getting ready to make holocaust denial a crime punishable by 3 years in jail. Yeh, anti-nazi laws - what a crazy idea (especially in germany)! I fail to see how you can perceive this as "new" development. The laws that can get you in jail for that kind of thing are in place for a long time here in germany.

They are taking children away from their parents in Germany because they were being home schooled. Yep. Germany is a country were going to school is obligatory by law. As with the other thing you mentioned above, it's been that way for long long time. Nothing new here either.

The bible is going to be outlawed as hate speech in Europe.
Ok, and the pope will join the Dalai Lama in his exile.

Sounds like the beginnings of a police state to me!
Sounds more like you should check your sources of information.


Don't think the media only report bullshit when it comes to discussing american gun control laws. And please don't act like it's "those other countries" that have issues and your own hasn't.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
32 people killed by the same person is indeed a lot, but isn't 32 about the average number of people that are killed every single day by guns in the US?


Americans sure are irresponsible with guns, one reason why I support gun control. Why does any one watch Fox News? It is just about the most baised of news channels.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: ferris209
One things the wacko gun control freaks will not admit is that if somebody had been armed on that campus, Cho Seung-Hui could have been taken out quicker thus causing less deaths. I know that I carry my gun everywhere I go and if this were to happen wherever I am, I would do everything I could to take out the gunman.

In the Journal of American College Health Volume 51 Number 2 I read an article titled "Guns and Gun Threats At College" written by Matthew Miller M.D., David Hemenway PhD, and Henry Wechsler PhD. This article, which was published in 2002, states that over 10,000 students were polled at 119 4 year colleges which showed that only 4.3% of those polled admitted to having a functional gun at college. That number is terrible to me and should be more around 30%-40%. If more did hve guns the chances would be better that this nut could have been safely whacked way before he got to victim #10. However, these gun control nuts would want 4.3% taken to 0% and have any chances our students have taken away in the next shooting event, how sad these idiots think this way.

Well, living in a country with pretty tight gun control laws, I have to say that these did not help to prevent the school shootings over here.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Master Sifo-Dyas
Originally posted by: JediSage
Hmm...they are getting ready to make holocaust denial a crime punishable by 3 years in jail. Yeh, anti-nazi laws - what a crazy idea (especially in germany)! I fail to see how you can perceive this as "new" development. The laws that can get you in jail for that kind of thing are in place for a long time here in germany.

And laws like this make it easy for governments to put entire lists of words or phrases on the jail-time list. Politicians in the U.S. want climate change "deniers" equivocated with holocaust deniers. A big slippery slope.

They are taking children away from their parents in Germany because they were being home schooled.
Yep. Germany is a country were going to school is obligatory by law. As with the other thing you mentioned above, it's been that way for long long time. Nothing new here either.

Yeah, it's obligatory here as well. The difference is that the rights of a child's parents are not subservient to the state. I can home school my child here and not be thrown in jail or have my children taken from me. MY rights come first here, not the state.

The bible is going to be outlawed as hate speech in Europe. Ok, and the pope will join the Dalai Lama in his exile.


It won't be long, relatively speaking, I'm sure. Christians are being persecuted everywhere.

Sounds like the beginnings of a police state to me!
Sounds more like you should check your sources of information.


That's weird considering you agreed with almost everything I said.

Your argument about the laws being in Germany for a "long long time" do not lend credibility to the laws themselves. An unjust law is an unjust law.

Don't think the media only report bullshit when it comes to discussing american gun control laws.


It does.

And please don't act like it's "those other countries" that have issues and your own hasn't.


No. Of course EUROPE doesn't have any issues. We all know America is the great evil of the world.
Nemo me impune lacessit

http://ttrim.blogspot.com
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: JediSage
No. Of course EUROPE doesn't have any issues. We all know America is the great evil of the world.
If that's how your mind is set, then be my guest. Just don't expect me to share it.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: JediSage
This is amusing coming from societies that live as quasi-police states.
Can you explain this in a bit more detail?
Originally posted by: JediSage
MY rights come first here, not the state.
Please refress my memory and tell me what rights Americans have concerning euthanasia, abortion, gay marriage, drugs. Stuff like that.
Originally posted by: sean wookie
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
32 people killed by the same person is indeed a lot, but isn't 32 about the average number of people that are killed every single day by guns in the US?


Americans sure are irresponsible with guns, one reason why I support gun control. Why does any one watch Fox News? It is just about the most baised of news channels.

Generally speaking I wouldn't say Americans are irresponsible with guns. I think most are very responsible. I just wanted to point out this happens every day but normally it's spread all over the country and not on one place with one killer.
Fez: I am so excited about Star Whores.
Hyde: Fezzy, man, it's Star Wars.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: lordjedi
Originally posted by: C3PX
I like how the European articles complained about machine guns being legal in America, when this guy didn't even have one.


And machine guns have been illegal in America since sometime in the 70's. The other semi-automatic rifles that you might see from time to time are just that, semi-automatic.

There's a shooting range in Nevada (near Las Vegas) where you can shoot an Uzi, but to my knowledge, you can't own an Uzi in any state. I may be wrong on that though, living in California tends to make one think that anything "bad" is banned everywhere.


Yeah, you're completely wrong. In most other states you just need the proper transfer fees and other requirements to own an automatic weapon. You dipshits from California seem to have a tendency to provide information based more on the goings on in your own ridiculous state than actual facts.

HARMY RULES

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: sean wookie
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
32 people killed by the same person is indeed a lot, but isn't 32 about the average number of people that are killed every single day by guns in the US?


Americans sure are irresponsible with guns, one reason why I support gun control. Why does any one watch Fox News? It is just about the most baised of news channels.


Riiight, that'll fix it. So the person is irresponsible, yet we should ban the gun? Why not jail the person? When someone is caught with a DUI, they don't ban the car, they fine the person or send them to jail. Why are guns different? More people die each year in drunk driving related accidents than by guns. That's a fact.

You know what else is a fact? The punishment for a felon to even touch a firearm is an automatic 25 years to life prison sentence. That means that if you're a felon and you even handle a gun, you're suppose to go to jail. So you'd think that if a felon walks into a gun store, handles some firearms, and then fills out the background check that they'd prosecute them. You'd be wrong. In states that have waiting periods, the buyer is simply turned down. In states that have instant checks, I don't even think there's been a case of a known criminal trying to purchase a gun (at least none I've read about). It would be pretty stupid for a felon to walk into a gun store in Arizona and attempt to buy a gun, especially since all the employees are usually armed.

Arnie: It depends on how you define killed. Yes, there are a lot of gun deaths each day. There are suicides, murders, accidents, self defense, and others. Millions of lives are saved each year through self defense uses of firearms. Hundreds or thousands are killed each year by suicide and murder. But if they didn't have a gun, they'd just use a different weapon, like a bat, crowbar, knife, or whatever else they could get their hands on.

Fox News is no less biased than CNN or any other local news channel. I sometimes find I have to get my news from 3 or 4 different places in order to get all the facts. Local news and CNN both have a tendency to leave out key details. Fox News does it as well sometimes, which is why I get news from other sources as well.

Just because you don't want to use your rights to defend yourself and your family, don't remove mine. If you don't like guns and don't want them around or want to be around them, fine. But don't try to take mine away.

EDIT: Regarding laws in Germany, even I agree with most of those laws. This is a country that tried to take over the world twice. Therefore a lot of things people can do in other countries are outright banned there. It's not because they're a "police state", it's because they don't even want to take a chance of history repeating itself...again.
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Rob
Originally posted by: lordjedi
Originally posted by: C3PX
I like how the European articles complained about machine guns being legal in America, when this guy didn't even have one.


And machine guns have been illegal in America since sometime in the 70's. The other semi-automatic rifles that you might see from time to time are just that, semi-automatic.

There's a shooting range in Nevada (near Las Vegas) where you can shoot an Uzi, but to my knowledge, you can't own an Uzi in any state. I may be wrong on that though, living in California tends to make one think that anything "bad" is banned everywhere.


Yeah, you're completely wrong. In most other states you just need the proper transfer fees and other requirements to own an automatic weapon. You dipshits from California seem to have a tendency to provide information based more on the goings on in your own ridiculous state than actual facts.


Way to be an asshole. We're not dipshits, we just live under mostly totalitarian gun control laws.

Since you fail to mention the "other requirements" and almost seem to treat it lightly, here's some links to Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act

The second one is more important since it shows exactly what is required to own an automatic weapon. It's not exactly an easy process. It requires extensive background checks, high fees ($200), photographs, fingerprints, written permission from the ATF before moving the weapon across state lines. In other words, unless you're a firearms collector, you probably aren't going to own any automatic weapons. It's a major pain in the ass and it's not worth it to most people.

So yeah, I was wrong (I said I might be), but that doesn't change the fact that it's not easy to own an automatic weapon in any state.
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: lordjedi
Arnie: It depends on how you define killed. Yes, there are a lot of gun deaths each day. There are suicides, murders, accidents, self defense, and others. Millions of lives are saved each year through self defense uses of firearms. Hundreds or thousands are killed each year by suicide and murder. But if they didn't have a gun, they'd just use a different weapon, like a bat, crowbar, knife, or whatever else they could get their hands on.

Example: in 2005 there were 14.860 homicides in the US (got this from wikipedia). In 68% of the cases firearms were used (14.860 x 0.68)/365=27.68 deaths every day. That does not include suicide etc.
How many people do you think Cho Seung-Hui could have killed if he only had a crowbar, a bat or a knife? Fact is, killing is much much easier with a gun. If you end up in a fight and you get out of control people a more likely to get killed if you have access to a gun than other weapons like bats, crowbars and knifes.
Fez: I am so excited about Star Whores.
Hyde: Fezzy, man, it's Star Wars.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: lordjedi
Originally posted by: Rob
Originally posted by: lordjedi
Originally posted by: C3PX
I like how the European articles complained about machine guns being legal in America, when this guy didn't even have one.


And machine guns have been illegal in America since sometime in the 70's. The other semi-automatic rifles that you might see from time to time are just that, semi-automatic.

There's a shooting range in Nevada (near Las Vegas) where you can shoot an Uzi, but to my knowledge, you can't own an Uzi in any state. I may be wrong on that though, living in California tends to make one think that anything "bad" is banned everywhere.


Yeah, you're completely wrong. In most other states you just need the proper transfer fees and other requirements to own an automatic weapon. You dipshits from California seem to have a tendency to provide information based more on the goings on in your own ridiculous state than actual facts.


Way to be an asshole. We're not dipshits, we just live under mostly totalitarian gun control laws.

Since you fail to mention the "other requirements" and almost seem to treat it lightly, here's some links to Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act

The second one is more important since it shows exactly what is required to own an automatic weapon. It's not exactly an easy process. It requires extensive background checks, high fees ($200), photographs, fingerprints, written permission from the ATF before moving the weapon across state lines. In other words, unless you're a firearms collector, you probably aren't going to own any automatic weapons. It's a major pain in the ass and it's not worth it to most people.

So yeah, I was wrong (I said I might be), but that doesn't change the fact that it's not easy to own an automatic weapon in any state.


Time and time again it has been proven that despite the weapon, these nuts will do what they want. As I understand it at present, Seung-Hui used at least one 9mm Glock handgun with what may be several high capacity magazines. Would he have been able to kill more if he had access to a fully automatic weapon? Yes. Would he have killed less people if he would have only limited 10 round magazines? Possibly, but who knows. Could any stiff laws have prevented this? No, I don't think so.

I think that fully automatic weapons should be highly regulated and controlled mainly because I can think of no reason why a regular person should have one. I have been assigned and carried a Heckler & Koch MP5 9mm fully automatic submachine gun. Having fired several thousand rounds through it and trained to use it, I cannot fathom why a regular citizen would need it at all. That said, I do think every decent American needs to own and learn to use some form of handgun, rifle, or shotgun. Having the opportunity to speak with hardened criminals on a regular basis, I have learned every one of them (exempting the few true sociopaths I have met) are greatly fearful of guns and have tried their best to target their victims to someone least likely to have a gun (i.e. women, elderly, late teens) One guy even had performed at least 10 home invasions and when asked how he picked the houses, he stated he targeted people that looked like the would never even consider using a gun. He targeted people driving a Toyota Prius, people displaying multiple religious stickers on their car, people who wore t-shirts proclaiming their liberal tendencies. Simply said, he didn't want to even think of messing with Bubba in a pick-up truck because he could have a gun.

I have also learned in my years of experience that bad guys almost always buy their guns on the unregulated black market. So no matter how many of these Brady bill idiots get up and try to "control guns" they never realize or acknowledge the fact that they cannot control the illegal weapons trade. So by making more laws to prevent gun ownership, you are only undermining the innocent people from defending themselves. In this instance of Virgina Tech, Seung-Hui legally purchased his firearms, but even if he couldn't have bought them at a store, I'm sure he would have sought out an illegal source and gotten much worse than a Glock 9mm and probably got a Tec-9 much like Dylan Klebold carried at Columbine.

I think you need to arm the good to overcome the bad, gun control freaks want to disarm the good and leave them at the mercy of the bad. That is bad policy and stupid.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
Originally posted by: lordjedi
Arnie: It depends on how you define killed. Yes, there are a lot of gun deaths each day. There are suicides, murders, accidents, self defense, and others. Millions of lives are saved each year through self defense uses of firearms. Hundreds or thousands are killed each year by suicide and murder. But if they didn't have a gun, they'd just use a different weapon, like a bat, crowbar, knife, or whatever else they could get their hands on.

Example: in 2005 there were 14.860 homicides in the US (got this from wikipedia). In 68% of the cases firearms were used (14.860 x 0.68)/365=27.68 deaths every day. That does not include suicide etc.
How many people do you think Cho Seung-Hui could have killed if he only had a crowbar, a bat or a knife? Fact is, killing is much much easier with a gun. If you end up in a fight and you get out of control people a more likely to get killed if you have access to a gun than other weapons like bats, crowbars and knifes.


But Seung-Hui would have been taken out much quicker if a Professor or a student had been packing.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
Originally posted by: lordjedi
Arnie: It depends on how you define killed. Yes, there are a lot of gun deaths each day. There are suicides, murders, accidents, self defense, and others. Millions of lives are saved each year through self defense uses of firearms. Hundreds or thousands are killed each year by suicide and murder. But if they didn't have a gun, they'd just use a different weapon, like a bat, crowbar, knife, or whatever else they could get their hands on.

Example: in 2005 there were 14.860 homicides in the US (got this from wikipedia). In 68% of the cases firearms were used (14.860 x 0.68)/365=27.68 deaths every day. That does not include suicide etc.
How many people do you think Cho Seung-Hui could have killed if he only had a crowbar, a bat or a knife? Fact is, killing is much much easier with a gun. If you end up in a fight and you get out of control people a more likely to get killed if you have access to a gun than other weapons like bats, crowbars and knifes.


Hey Arnie I know you want to be a good hippy and all, but you sound like a complete retard.

1. "Getting rid off all of the guns" is a silly and laughable fantasy which is not only juvenile, it's impossible. Guns will ALWAYS be available to criminals no matter what laws are in place. Technology simply cannot be erased, that's a fact. This particular fantasy is no more realistic than getting rid of all "sharp things". If you would like some historical perspective on this read a little bit about prohibition.

2. You do not have the right to decide whether or not I have the right to own a firearm. In theory, the constitution should completely protect me from your abounding fagginess and six year old intellectual capabilities.

HARMY RULES

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Arnie.d
Originally posted by: lordjedi
Arnie: It depends on how you define killed. Yes, there are a lot of gun deaths each day. There are suicides, murders, accidents, self defense, and others. Millions of lives are saved each year through self defense uses of firearms. Hundreds or thousands are killed each year by suicide and murder. But if they didn't have a gun, they'd just use a different weapon, like a bat, crowbar, knife, or whatever else they could get their hands on.

Example: in 2005 there were 14.860 homicides in the US (got this from wikipedia). In 68% of the cases firearms were used (14.860 x 0.68)/365=27.68 deaths every day. That does not include suicide etc.
How many people do you think Cho Seung-Hui could have killed if he only had a crowbar, a bat or a knife? Fact is, killing is much much easier with a gun. If you end up in a fight and you get out of control people a more likely to get killed if you have access to a gun than other weapons like bats, crowbars and knifes.


How many of those were self-defense? How many were gang shootings? I think anyone that's skilled with a weapon can take out a lot of people. So ban the gun and he'll use a sword or long knife. Or maybe he'll just use his car. Or even a bomb. And even if you ban the gun, that's not going to stop him from breaking the law in order to get a gun. The point is, if he really wants to kill people, he's going to figure out a way to do it.

I don't really feel like looking up statistics right now, but I can assure you that firearms are used in self-defense far more than they're used for crime.

BTW, there were 16,972 alcohol related traffic deaths in 2005. Source NHTSA. That's out of a total of 43,200. So there were 118 vehicle related fatalities per day and of those 46 were alcohol related. Well, since the number of vehicle deaths is more than 4 times as great as gun deaths, I think it's time we ban cars. Afterall, if that many people are dying everyday, they're nothing but killing machines.
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: ferris209But Seung-Hui would have been taken out much quicker if a Professor or a student had been packing.
Yes he would have been taken out quicker. One of the first things I wondered was why nobody shot him. I already got my answer in this thread.
Originally posted by: Rob
Hey Arnie I know you want to be a good hippy and all, but you sound like a complete retard.

1. "Getting rid off all of the guns" is a silly and laughable fantasy which is not only juvenile, it's impossible. Guns will ALWAYS be available to criminals no matter what laws are in place. Technology simply cannot be erased, that's a fact. This particular fantasy is no more realistic than getting rid of all "sharp things". If you would like some historical perspective on this read a little bit about prohibition.

2. You do not have the right to decide whether or not I have the right to own a firearm. In theory, the constitution should completely protect me from your abounding fagginess and six year old intellectual capabilities.


Well rob, I'm not against guns at all. The right to carry is one of the things I love about America. I even started a thread once to talk about guns. I'm a gun lover. I just gave a few facts about gun related homicides in the US.
And why do you have the impression I want to be a hippy???

Originally posted by: lordjedi
How many of those were self-defense? How many were gang shootings? I think anyone that's skilled with a weapon can take out a lot of people. So ban the gun and he'll use a sword or long knife. Or maybe he'll just use his car. Or even a bomb. And even if you ban the gun, that's not going to stop him from breaking the law in order to get a gun. The point is, if he really wants to kill people, he's going to figure out a way to do it.

I don't really feel like looking up statistics right now, but I can assure you that firearms are used in self-defense far more than they're used for crime.

BTW, there were 16,972 alcohol related traffic deaths in 2005. Source NHTSA. That's out of a total of 43,200. So there were 118 vehicle related fatalities per day and of those 46 were alcohol related. Well, since the number of vehicle deaths is more than 4 times as great as gun deaths, I think it's time we ban cars. Afterall, if that many people are dying everyday, they're nothing but killing machines.

I agree with you.
Fez: I am so excited about Star Whores.
Hyde: Fezzy, man, it's Star Wars.
Author
Time
Post link
I'm not going to read through all this stuff. Just want to say this stuff happens all over the world every day, and every single day is a tragedy. This just hits closer to home. It's a shame we react so much more strongly to this when terrorists in Iraq are blowing up innocent Iraqi civilians, militias throughout Africa are killing and raping, and countless other places throughout the world exhibit death and horror on a much larger scale. But just as our horror was greater for 3,000 people in the World Trade Center than it was for 100,000+ in the Tsunami, this event feels like it's inside the family. Things hit close to home inside the family.

You can try to make the world good or you can try to make it safe. You can take away guns so that it doesn't matter if a person is good or bad, or you can make people good so that you don't have to worry about whether they have a gun or not. I think the first solution is a lot easier, but the second is a lot better.

As I said, I didn't read everything, but I get the sense everyone here wants the world to be a better place. Just some are arguing for the quicker, more practical solution while others are arguing for the harder but more permanent solution. Don't kill each other over it.
If you're going to take forever, then I'm having a hotdog!
Author
Time
Post link
Denial of the Holocaust may be stupid but I don't find anything legaly wrong with it and would that be considered hate speach? If the pictures and the documents don't do it for you, think for yourself. Also would the documents that were made after the human expiramentation be used as scientific evidence or proof now days? I mean could you throw away evidence like that?
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: sean wookie
Denial of the Holocaust may be stupid but I don't find anything legaly wrong with it and would that be considered hate speach? If the pictures and the documents don't do it for you, think for yourself. Also would the documents that were made after the human expiramentation be used as scientific evidence or proof now days? I mean could you throw away evidence like that?


Most countries wouldn't find anything legally wrong with it either. Again, look at it from Germany's point of view. They started two world wars. Their economy was in shambles after both. They were a divided country for some 40 years. Basically, if they have to make some things illegal (shouting "Heil Hitler!", raising their hand in that salute, showing Nazi symbology, the list goes on and on) in order to prevent that from happening again, they're going to do it.

20/20 (I think) did a report on some of those laws years ago. They showed a group of guys in a truck driving through a town shouting "Heil Hitler!" and doing the salute. The people in the town shot at them. No one in that country wants that to happen again...EVER. That is why they have such restrictive laws regarding that stuff. It was not only a terrible time in their history, it was a terrible time in World History.
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
Post link
Arnie and lordjedi, sorry to accuse you fellas of being hippies and/or pickle twisters. I am just so used to all of the homos and burn outs who frequent these boards that I jumped the gun and took your comments out of context.

HARMY RULES

Author
Time
Post link
No one in that country wants that to happen again...EVER.



Are we talking about the shooting or the Holocaust?