Well, it happened again.
For a country were guns are totally banned and any form of carry-on weaponry can lead to prison time, Sweden certainly have a lot of shootings.
Isn’t it strange that criminals seem to ignore anti-gun laws?
Very puzzling it is.
While the police, magnificently ineffective as always, tries to find the, according to journalists; fanatic racist homophobic Muslim-hating Nazi right-wing maniac shooter that seem to roam the streets of Malmö, a 16y old got to look down the barrel of a gun in the same city. Probably unrelated to the fanatic racist homophobic Muslim-hating Nazi right-wing maniac shootings, but who knows. The 16y old is still alive and safe by the way.
In Kalmar, also in Southern Sweden, a man who claimed he was wearing a bomb were encircled by police and later surrendered. The guy didn’t really have a bomb, and I was kind of puzzled by that little intermezzo too for a while. I mean, it is illegal to run around town with a bomb isn’t it? So why did the police encircle him? Seem strange to me. If it is illegal, everyone obeys, so in actuality the police didn’t need to be there. In fact, do we actually need the police? At all?
Maybe we need them for stuff like this ?
Now that’s taxpayer money hard at work.
Again, I need to ask, when (not ‘IF’) the next spree occurs, would you rather have people unarmed, unprotected and let the police stop by later to collect body parts or do you want people to be able to defend themselves?
This is what it comes down to you know.
We all know what the soul-suckers of Government will say; they don’t want people to defend themselves. Cannot have self-reliant humans without fear being able to shot back at criminals out there, wouldn’t be in the best interest of the elitists now would it?
This is the difference between armed, and not armed. Please watch.
And if you ever wondered why government don’t won’t you armed, listen to her last sentence.
Yawn, you are always equally predictable in your opinions, and your cherry-picking of facts. Baltimore has 200 killings per year, Sweden has 100. Baltimore has twice the population of Malmö. You do the math and do the reasoning again honestly.
ReplyDeleteI would respect you if you actually admitted that gettign rid of the gunlaws would increase the number of killings, but that it would be a necessary price to pay. What you do now is so intellectually dishonest it's not even wrong.
@The Engineer:
ReplyDeletePredictable? Well, yes, as a libertarian I am. That’s the difference between actually standing for something and having a clear agenda, and the opposite.
And of course Guns are totally legal in Baltimore, right? No restrictions, no obstacles, no registration needed, and no waiting periods…? Actually I think it is probably easier to get a gun legally in Sweden, all you need to do here is to join a club or start hunting. In the US you’ll end up on a terrorist watch list.
In either case, you miss the point, as all do who doesn’t want people to be able to defend themselves. I DON’T CARE WHAT THE STATISTIC SAYS. You can find proof of both sides using statistics and looking at different countries. Take Switzerland for example - guns everywhere and very little violence. Or why not look at the big cities of U.S. like Detroit and Los Angeles with very strict gun-control and compeer those with Dallas and other cities with hardly any control.
So I don’t agree that getting rid of Gun laws would increase killings, we know this not to be so, but even IF I would still arguing people’s right to self-defense.
"I DON’T CARE WHAT THE STATISTIC SAYS."
ReplyDeleteMaybe that's why no one takes you seriously. We who do research cares.
@Maxi
ReplyDeleteIf you care so much, don’t read my crap. There. Problem solved.
I’m not trying to convince you or anyone else about anything, and this post isn’t about statistics so I don’t know why you bring it up.
And I am absolutely sure you’re right, hardly anyone takes me seriously. For 99% of people on this planet reality is regarded as a joke; truth is a punch-line, and facts are only a way to murder chiiildreeen. Except for the occasional death threat and the few already saved, I won’t have any impact whatsoever on anyone. You see I write for one reason in particular – to be able to say “I told you so”, which is exactly what I will do when the next high-school or company shooting has happened.
If people are armed they at least stand a chance, you seemingly don’t want that, and that is something no statistics in the world can change.
God Bless America and the Bill of Rights. The Swedish sheeple have no perception of what it means to be free.
ReplyDelete"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
--Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment (1764).
"I never go anywhere without my mutated anthrax - for duck hunting" :)
ReplyDeleteIts wierd I like the idea behind the American gun laws - I really do. But I don't see the implementation of those ideas as possible in the same way as it was back "ye olden days". I guess in a way I prefer our (Swedens) gun laws in that it minimizes the amount of guns available in society. But I completely understand where the idea of more liberal gunlaws (liberal as in "free") comes from.
But, also don't you think your kind of "cow trading" with the idea freedom? I mean it doesn't seem very progressive to wan't free gun laws but sort of stop at that. Seems like allot of liberterians tend to go to that point and when they get those free gun laws they sort of shy away from further ideals. Like as long as you guys get the guns, you don't really bother with the rest.
(as a disclaimer though: I don't have much insight into the liberterian ideological development... )
It's telling that the same person procaliming Sweden has "a lot of shootings" also doesn't really care how many they are when determining they are many.
ReplyDelete"I DON’T CARE WHAT THE STATISTIC SAYS" that's the nice things about Libertarians and to an even higher degree, Objectivists, you never let yourselves be bothered by the facts. Since the theory is perfect there's really no need to adapt it to the messy place called 'reality'.
ReplyDelete@The Engineer:
ReplyDeleteActually I gave you all several examples. Switzerland, Detroit, Los Angeles. If you read. I could give you more, but that’s beside the point. For every statistic arguing one thing you can find plenty arguing the complete opposite. This post is about what is right, not statistics.
And to pick one sentence out of context and argue against it is pretty juvenile.
And, again, I am not writing to convince you or anyone about anything, I know that is a lost cause. Our views are obviously different. I think people have a right to defend themselves, you don’t. Let’s leave it at that shall we.