By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - NEW EU TREATY EU PRESIDENT!!!

KruzeS said:
cAPSLOCK said:

**Absolute, unbridged freedom of speech. As they tell you day 1 in civil liberties law: you're either in favor of freedom of speech precisely for the people you find reprehensible (neo nazis, KKK, holocaust deniers, dickheads in general), or you're not in favor of freedom of speech.

Right. And the communists in hysteric cold war america where given a great deal of freedom - speech, association, you name it. They didn't even actually need to be communists, just look like communists (for some random definition of looking like a communist).

Besides let's not forget that the now mostly historic laws forbidding Nazi hate speech in Germany probably date back to the time it was administered by, you guessed it, the US of A. The fact that some countries in Europe to this day bare the scars of either wars fought on our own soil, and/or not so distant dictatorial regims, doesn't devalue the freedoms we enjoy now, thank you very much.


Oh we've had our idiots, no question about that. One of the strengths of the constitution is its ability to weather things like that and get right back on track. Trust me, reading through civil liberties and constitutional law we've dealt with a LOT worse. Almost universally, however anything that went into the courtroom under the First Amendment got knocked up to the Supreme Court, where it was struck down. 

There's a lot to the power play between the 3 branches and it shifts over time. Some of it is actually really interesting to read. If you look through legal history you're going to be hard pressed to find anyone sitting on the SC who ruled against the First Amendment. 

What you're thinking of is a time when legislature was flexing its muscle and passing stupid laws willy nilly. The best way to get rid of a bad law is to enforce it to the letter. So you enforce it harshly, it eventually gets to the SC, and it's struck down with a 9-0 decision, which is the court's way of saying "don't ever pass a law like that again."  The courts are reluctant to flex their muscle, striking something down directly, but they have the power to do so.

I  appreciate that countries have their freedoms, but I really love living in a country where anyone can be a complete and total crackpot idiot, say whatever they want, and they're not going to get thrown in jail for it. It's the principal of the government not interfering with your life, even if you choose to flush it down the toilet on something stupid like neo-naziism. 

That's mostly a paternalist vs libertarian argument, roughly those 2 schools of thought. I personally lean toward libertarian (not the crazy kind) because governments are mostly stupid and incompetent.  I'd rather have no parent than an incompetent one.

Wow, wall of text. My undergrad was philosophy (political philosophy and logic especially) and I'm almost through law school specializing in Constitutional law. So all this politics stuff is like porn for me.  Sorry if I offended, I didn't mean it.  It's just that now that I'm getting to the point where I'm starting to understand how the system works,  I'm  happy with it and wouldn't want to live anywhere else.



Around the Network
KruzeS said:
cAPSLOCK said: (...)

You seem not to realize that owning guns is perfectly legal in a lot, if not most, of european countries, as long as you have a license for them.

In my country, in particular, you most certainly can go hunting on hunting reserves, and own guns for that; you can also keep a gun at home, or at work, or where ever for personal protection. Having a license to carry a loaded gun outside, in your vehicle, etc, requires stricter procedures (training, etc - and a more burdensome license), but is perfectly doable, or otherwise it wouldn't be feasible for private security guys, etc, which it is.

So, no, it is not your constitutionally blessed right to carry a gun on the street, locked, loaded and ready to fire. It is also not your constitutional right to shoot anyone who invades your private property to get a strayed football, or someone who threatens you with a chopstick (as that would be considered excess legitimate defense). And yes, the government does regulate guns, and you have to license them. But you can still have them, if you love them that much. It's a balance, and most europeans certainly find the one we have pretty reasonable.


You only need a license for hand guns or concealed carry here. Rifles of any type you can get over the counter if you want. 

Our laws work very differently, but if someone breaks into your home, depending on where you live, if your judgment finds it hostile, you can shoot them. Most of it falls under what's called Castle Doctrine here, and even it varies wildly from state to state. I think in Texas it's legal if they look at you funny from out on the sidewalk--on the other side of the street.

Again, a lot of this ultimately boils down to what goes on inside the courtroom here. The general rule of thumb in this country is "the less regulation, the better." I like that a lot from a philosophical standpoint, I don't want to be regulated in my private life. Different strokes for different folks, I guess. 



ismael said:
wauuu, that would be...strange, people speaking different lenguages living in one "country"
Uhm?!@!?!? 

 



Bursche said:
StanGable said:
If you are a true Christian then you'll know this is bad. Its sad to know that the beginning of the end of world is being led by Europe with their move to one monetary unit and now the union of all these countries. :(

This isnt the left behind series. Revelations could end up that way, but that is one of MILLIONS of possibilities Revelations can be interpreted.

 

I believe this to be bad. EU is fine as an economic unity, but once it starts to become political, there will be a lot of controversy. Who is to decide what makes up what? Will new boundaries be made, creating each nation as a state or will it be a confederacy of sorts? And how will a new President be elected and will resentment happen if a German is picked over a Frenchman, or an Italian, or whatever. I dont see this as plausible and could very well just lead to an internal conflict. Europe doesnt exactly have the best record of inter-European relations.

 


 I assume you're referring to the World Wars and the centuries of relatively low-key conflicts that preceeded it. Those wars are one of the principle driving forces behind the EU. Europe witnessed first-hand the devastation of total war on a scale which is little more than an academic concept in the rest of the world. Children in Europe grow up surrounded by war memorials and unexploded ordinance.

 The EU is meant to ensure that such an event doesn't happen a third time. The purpose is to build as many links of understanding between European nations as possible, to develop a network of co-dependancy and tolerance that would make military conflict within the EU incomprehensible.



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

kitler53 said:
ismael said:
wauuu, that would be...strange, people speaking different lenguages living in one "country"

 

Canada manages just fine. besides, it won't be too long before English is the common tongue around the world. xD

English practically already is the common langauge around the world.  Like half the world speaks it I think. 



PC Gamer
Around the Network
cAPSLOCK said:
konnichiwa said:
cAPSLOCK said:
kitler53 said:
i like this, it brings us one step closer to a world government and i like that idea. with any luck maybe the EU will absorb the USA and then we'll have a check and balance on our leadership.

 

*Superchunk, it probably wouldn't start out with our Bill of Rights. We're the only country that has freedom speech (except death threats on the president, for obvious security reasons) and expression**. No way would the EU allow us to have guns, either.

 


In the first place why do you want a gun for?


Well, when I used to spend my summers and some winters on a farm, they were extremely handy for hunting, target shooting, getting rid of rabid animals, and it was a good thing to have growing up. I learned a lot about responsibility from my summers at my grandparent's farm. It's something my children will learn, also. It's great for teaching someone to be responsible. I've never, out of many many children I've been around, seen a kid grab a real gun and play Rambo, it's an extremely sobering experience and they take it very, very seriously.

Second, one of the primary reasons for our 2nd Amendment was to protect the people against the tyranny of government, the ultimate check and balance against the system. A bit archaic of a thought nowadays with tanks and helicopters, but the fact remains that it's power in the hands of the people.

Third, I'm a responsible gun owner with extensive training, and an exemplary military record.

Fourth, there's a lot of bad and unfair images that along with owning guns. I've found on the whole gun owners are very mentally stable and extremely responsible people.

Fifth, criminals are their own category and by definition fit outside the rule of law and the general citizen.

Sixth, for some people it's a means of personal protection. I personally don't prescribe to this idea, but a lot of people do.

It's one of those features of our country, it's in our Bill of Rights, it's just as important to a lot of people as the First and Fourth Amendment. I know most countries don't let their citizens have arms, and personally I don't care. I don't live there and they can not have guns all they want, as long as they keep that in their country and keep it out of mine.

I guess I have a serious problem with anyone telling me what I can and cannot do outside the rule of law laid down by the US Constitution and what has been determined via the US courts.

If you want deeper answers, better ones than my person ones, pick up a US civil liberties book and read through the legal history and the opinions of judges deciding the cases. Also, the debates on the constitution, which is a big ole fat 2 volume read that has lengthy arguments between our founders of the US.

The bigger question for me, why do you want me to not have a gun?

Edit: And as the previous poster said, it's none of the government's f'n business what I do with my life or the decisions I make. The government's job is to protect our rights, not them or take them away.  


 Oh....Guns for hunting =/=  Guns like Uzi's.   I can just go to a gun store and buy a hunting gun I can understand that but I don't understand why people want a (example) Uzi for.

If you want to have one you can have one too but with conditions.  I thought like going to a psychiater and he just will see if you have no mental problems and (not sure) if you are in a shooting club.

I don't know how it is in the USA or in the other EU countries.

Answer of your question:   Of course you may have a gun if you are a hunter then it is not a problem at all.

But if you want something like a Uzi then I prefer that the government makes it difficult for you to get one (I prefer to make it very difficult than to make it to very easy) with all those accidents the last years (shooting on schools) it is better to make it difficult imo.

It is true that it is your government's job to protect your rights but it is also your government's job to protect the people and I think making it easy to get a gun is not a good thing.

And what is the difference of the bill of rights and uhm example the rights of the people in the UK?

I am pretty sure freedom of speech is the case in the most EU countries.


I think you should learn more about the laws of Europe(an countries).

ANd I think should learn more about yours. 






I don't agree with him word for word, but cAPSLOCK has made the point.

I'm not so happy-go-lucky about America right now. We haven't been doing a good job of protecting and following the Constitution for the last century or so.



"[Our former customers] are unable to find software which they WANT to play."
"The way to solve this problem lies in how to communicate what kind of games [they CAN play]."

Satoru Iwata, Nintendo President. Only slightly paraphrased.

Revelations talks about this union in the Bible. That is why Christians would not like it and see it as a sign of the end of the world. I am also a strong christian, though I do not denote logic and science. I just do not see anything supporting either side 100% and believe they can coexist. Everyone needs to believe in something as we are Human.

The first 5 of the 7 seals to unlocking tribulation have actually already happened if anyone is interested in hearing my interpretation. I just find prophecy, the supernatural, effect of religion on the mind and culture, as well as evidence of alternate realities and parallel universes fascinating. People fear what they do not know and these days those fears are dealt with by pretending none of it exists, but there is no solid evidence that it does not. It is sad though that much of our passion, imagination, and creativity is stifled by hate and growing dependence on what we "see."



Ickalanda said:
kitler53 said:
ismael said:
wauuu, that would be...strange, people speaking different lenguages living in one "country"

 

Canada manages just fine. besides, it won't be too long before English is the common tongue around the world. xD

English practically already is the common langauge around the world.  Like half the world speaks it I think. 


 The most spoken language will probably be Mandarin (Chinese) and Hindi (India) and I am not sure about Spanish (doesn't South Africa speaks it too?).






clandecyon said:
Revelations talks about this union in the Bible. That is why Christians would not like it and see it as a sign of the end of the world. I am also a strong christian and do not denote logic and science. I just do not see anything supporting either side 100% and believe they can coexist. Everyone needs to believe in something as we are Human.

The first 5 of the 7 seals to unlocking tribulation have actually already happened if anyone is interested in hearing my interpretation. I just find prophecy, the supernatural, effect of religion on the mind and culture, as well as evidence of alternate realities and parallel universes fascinating. People fear what they do not know and these days those fears are dealt with by pretending none of it exists, but there is no solid evidence that it does not. It is sad though that much of our passion, imagination, and creativity is stifled by hate and growing dependence on what we "see."

I believe in the fact that a world without religion is the best.