Guns on boats equals 5 years jail time

[alha]

Originally Posted by Vipe6

To me weapons are weapons, wether they're guns, machetes or swords. No one civilian should be carrying any of them. Of course a machete is normally used as a tool (as is an axe). I'm also not opposed to carrying a gun when for instance living in the forrests in canada. Man is a vulnerable creature compared to a bear for instance. But there can be absolutely no reason for me to carry a firearm in New York or any other big city that has no dangerous animals except our own species. If europeans get by without carying firearms but the us is constantly shocked by mass shootings, isn't it time to think? I recently heard some republican fool say that le bataclan in paris would have ended up differently if people would have had guns. Indeed it would heve been very different. Who would have known who was a terrorist and who a civilian? Terrorists usually do not paint the word terrorist on their forehead, police would have had immense difficulty in distinguishing the both.

I'm sorry, I can't help myself... I believe that the thought of that republican fool, (of which there are many, and just as many democrats as well) was that if the (some, any?) people were armed, it would never have become a literal shooting gallery at that concert, with people as sitting ducks. They would have taken action against the shooters, and I believe many lives would have been saved.

The problem as I see it, in general, is that when sh*t breaks out (which seems to be happening more frequently these days, and as France as well as other places on that side of the pond show, not just the US), seconds can count, and police (in general) are at best minutes away, if not longer. I think that is often the crux of the issue for many people who support that position. The police can't be everywhere, all the time. And on boats, as I understand it with my (admittedly) limited knowledge, they are often times no where to be found. I think that may be the point of many of the posters on the pro side.

[rognvald]

Originally Posted by SpiritofGlenans

Thought Roosevelt, Stalin and Churchill met at Potadam (that's just west of Berlin) in 1945, to settle on "spheres of influence" in post-war Europe? Didn't the Soviets unsuccessfully claim control over Greece and Austria?
Towards the end of the war, Churchill wanted the Allies to isolate pockets of German resistance in North-Western Europe so as to leave themselves free to break through to Berlin and further east, thus preventing further westward incursion by the Soviets, but Roosevelt preferred to advance slowly on a broad front and let the Russians take the punishment. The British even kept captured German formations intact and their materiel stored in good condition, so as to re-activate them in a possible war against the Soviet Union. It was the lack of geopolitical "street-smarts" on Rooseveldt's part that left Russia in such an advantageous position that the Cold War ensued.

Glenans,
Greece and Austria were of no consequence when you consider that Russia claimed Ukraine, Turkmen, Armenia, Latvia, Estonia, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Uzbekistan, Kazakstan, Belorussia, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Moldavia, Kurdistan, Lithuania . . . whew, I'm running out of breath . . . did I miss one? And they missed Greece and Austria? However, in regards to your second statement, I would wholly agree. Roosevelt, in my opinion, was our great American Fraud. He was outmaneuvered and intellectually crushed by Stalin and Europe suffered for over 40 years under communism. He was directly responsible for the Cold War because he was weak-kneed and a bad negotiator. Thus Spake Zarathrustra.

[Vipe6]

Originally Posted by morven55

Please answer the question. Your hateful rants need some substance. No backpedalling allowed.

The people of the US have been continually berated by you and I, for one, want to know why. Specifically. You have made the claims, now it's time to back it up. Of course, that would require moral courage, which you seemingly do not possess.

But please answer the question...

Btw, I never berated the american people. Could you tell me why you are so itchy about criticism on your country? I believe a lot of good things come from the us, some of your films are actually pretty good (most of them are **** but some are very good), you have some great authors. My major gripe is the insistence of americans that everyone should do things their way.

[SpiritofGlenans]

Wow, I've actually got to the end, I thought it was going to continue expanding faster than I could type

[Sailing55]

This thread has not devolved into a gun debate as much as it has become a forum for the expression of hatred toward my country, and therefore the people in it.

I have travelled in many parts of the world and have never come face to face with the hatred expressed here today. Is it because you do not have the moral courage to tell me how much you hate my country to my face, but rather express it here anonymously?

It would never even occur to me to make such remarks about another persons country. It certainly does not say much for your self respect...

It must be toxic to be so full of poison...

[Iaangus]

WOW, so much hatred, so much hypocrisy. Real cruisers are more friendly aren't they?

[Muckle Flugga]

Originally Posted by K_V_B

I know of a lot of states that claim a monopoly on violence, however I don't know of any state that actually has it. It seems that almost everywhere the market for violence is dominated by private parties...

Try Singapore.

[denverd0n]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

When I go shopping there's 1 post and 1 reply.
I come back from shopping and there's 130 posts...
Gun thread!

Yep. Another one goes off the rails when people (on both sides of this debate) believe that their attitude is the one and only correct way to think.

Grow up! All of you!

[alha]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

This is getting further and further from cruising, but he's actually right. The Germans were broken and in full retreat before Rokossovsky's and Zhukov's armies by the time D-Day happened in June, 1944. All of the fighting on the Western Front, including all of the bombing, produced less than 10% of German casualties. It is generally agreed by historians today that the strategic bombing of German cities had little military effect. The Soviets did beat the Germans, and our role in it is highly exaggerated (for Cold War propaganda purposes, probably). The most significant thing we did was not any of the fighting, but providing about 10% of the materiel which the Soviets used, through Lend-Lease, including useless items like our crappy Sherman "Ronson" tanks, but also some crucial items like our superb Studebaker trucks (Soviet forces nearly fully motorized versus Germans using mostly horses for transport -- hugely important in the outcome), and, oddly, gasoline (Soviets second biggest oil producers in the world at the time, but no refining capacity). Occasionally our bombing had some significant effect (destruction of Ploesti oil complex in Romania; bombing of shipyards), but mostly we bombed residential neighborhoods (killing 300,000 civilians and rendering millions homeless), which had no effect on the war. German military production increased continuously throughout the war despite the bombing.

So yes, the Soviets -- Soviet blood and Soviet industrial capacity -- won the European part of WWII, not quite single-handed, but close. We won the war in the Pacific, however. These are historical facts.

Interesting take on it, and I am not trying to minimize the contributions of the soviets in any way, they paid a hellacious price, much much much more than we did, by an order of magnitude. I believe that although the bombing raids weren't nearly as precise as they were advertised at the time they happened during the war, the effect on morale of the German people by mid-late 1943 was significant(how can killing 300,000 civilians and rendering millions homeless not have any effect on it?), and made them disperse the production of many things, which made the whole process horribly inefficient, thereby hastening the end of the war (we could produce way more, way faster, there was no possibility that they could keep up with us).

But again, Russia paid a horrible price for the war, though I believe that your conclusion that they won the war almost but not quite singlehandedly is a bit of a stretch, there was a lot more going on than just the eastern front. It was more significant to Hitler at the time (I believe he was thinking of their vast resources for one thing), but he was expending his resources in Africa, the north Atlantic, and even building the 'Impenetrable Wall' around the coast of France. Basically, in the simplest terms, trying to do way too much, with not nearly enough. Hubris, plain and simple. All in all, a great conversation, on a sailing forum at that!

[Vipe6]

Originally Posted by morven55

This thread has not devolved into a gun debate as much as it has become a forum for the expression of hatred toward my country, and therefore the people in it.

I have travelled in many parts of the world and have never come face to face with the hatred expressed here today. Is it because you do not have the moral courage to tell me how much you hate my country to my face, but rather express it here anonymously?

It would never even occur to me to make such remarks about another persons country. It certainly does not say much for your self respect...

It must be toxic to be so full of poison...

I think you confuse hatred with criticism. It is not because a person criticises your country's behaviour toward the outside world that one hates your country. To me your words are telling me much about how you feel towards others. But if criticism equals hatred for you son be it. There must be some reason why some people in the us are so touchy, maybe deep down you know we are right?
If you criticised europe for instance, I would never think that you would hate us.

[Blue Crab]

"Originally Posted by Vipe6
Yeah right, try and come up with something new for a change. That phrase is old and hollow. Police in the uk do not carry guns, still they do a better job than the police in the us.

By Rognvald: Vipe,
This is changing, as we speak, with the ubiquitous terrorism/violent crime in England and throughout Europe as well as the recent violent refugee crimes. And, to compare a country of roughly 50 million, England, with the US--300 million is patently absurd."

Yep. Things change alright. This next year of Europe-watching should tell some tales. We'll probably have to go and make things liveable again when all the liberalism works itself out.

And speaking of cruising, Cruzan is hard to beat!

[rognvald]

"So yes, the Soviets -- Soviet blood and Soviet industrial capacity -- won the European part of WWII, not quite single-handed, but close. We won the war in the Pacific, however. These are historical facts." Dockhead

Dockhead,
Did you ever hear of a beach called Normandy? Who led the invasion there that pushed the Germans out of France and Belgium and built the road with the blood, sweat and tears of US soldiers like my father and uncles to Germany and the end of the war?

[Lizzy Belle]

What I don't understand ...

Some people want to bring guns on board, others don't (me being on of them).
So how about everybody decides for themselves?

I honestly do not understand, AT ALL, why people are trying to convince others that their choice should be everybody's choice, no matter what that choice is.

Why is it that both sides will forget they are usually decent and friendly human beings and get their knickers in a twist over what someone else, who they may never even meet, carries on their boat?

[Skuzzlebutt]

my second ex husband from hell was a nra member and advocate of world guns. he decided to make , in my boat i was building in 1990, a gun chamber safe for keeping his colt 45 s and other items of mass destruction.

Oh, it's a woman. Ye might know ....

[Freemind]

Originally Posted by Iaangus

WOW, so much hatred, so much hypocrisy. Real cruisers are more friendly aren't they?

I sure hope so. It's been a long while since I've been to Europe, but people seemed friendly then.
I certainly wish the folks that hate us so much would send back all the money we have sent them over the years.
I'm wondering if there is a forum for cruisers from the USA only.