流浪枪手

我人当自强，少纷争，左手选票右手枪

国旗还能打多久？

流浪枪手
2023年 11月 19日 20:34
797 次阅读(639 来自论坛) / 33 条评论
也许有些人认为无论谁当总统，美国仍就是美国，生活不会在短期内改变，那么长期呢？枪手真的不相信会有华裔希望自己的子女，甚至是孙子女，将要在在男女同厕的学校里度过童年。这里的说法还是比较委婉，其实那帮人做出来更加不堪。如果知道它们心里在想什么，真的是再也看不了那些个油头粉面。

枪手在这个坛子里回帖，挑起了一个关于国旗的话题。不知道别人怎么想，枪手总觉得既然在这个国家里生活的几十年，总希望她繁荣昌盛，而不是土崩瓦解。下面的图片来自以前的博客，欢迎朋友们发表自己的见解！博文的文字部分都删掉了，为了突出重点。

图片

图片

图片

图片

枪手以己度人，几乎肯定各位都希望生活在平静安宁的环境，不说铸剑为犁，起码应该手枪更多是用来打靶休闲。只可惜这美好的愿望，似乎可能永远离我们而去。近来的疫情加上骚乱，更有国际政治上的原因，把我们在美华裔，步步推向风口浪尖。感受到周围朋友的心情，仿佛此时此国，此地此景，没有枪真的是不行！

图片

此博文来自论坛版块：美国新闻（USA News）

共 33 条评论

  1. 流浪枪手
    流浪枪手[博主]

    fortyNiner 写了： 2023年 11月 21日 16:39 Look at Australia.

    The president-elect of Argentina said he's going to let people have guns, if I remember it right. Actually I hope he can eventually do it. It will be nice to have someone else to run an experiment for us at no cost.
    确实阿根廷新当选总统挺有意思的，值得拭目以待。希望能成为南美的Kennesaw。
    评论
  2. fortyNiner
    fortyNiner

    Look at Australia.

    The president-elect of Argentina said he's going to let people have guns, if I remember it right. Actually I hope he can eventually do it. It will be nice to have someone else to run an experiment for us at no cost.
    流浪枪手 写了： 2023年 11月 21日 16:34 那我再退一步，承认美国不应该全面拥枪，支持限枪禁枪，你觉得会有什么效果？多长时间会有效果？
    又回到原来的问题，做为华裔的我，此地此国，此时此刻，应不应该拥枪？再贴一次照片，应该很有代表性
    图片
    评论
  3. fortyNiner
    fortyNiner

    That's the obligation of you gun owners. By the way, how are you going to train the babies and toddlers? If/since you fail, the other approach should be adopted. BTW, your "average ppl" include the 99+% of gun owners. Don't exclude them from your group. Without them, you are the teeny tiny minority, and consequentially most likely you even don't have the rights to own your toys.
    lexian 写了： 2023年 11月 21日 16:29 Then your logical next step should be to advocate gun ownership and training - like the brave ppl here on the gun board; not abolish gun ownership because average ppl can’t use it effectively.
    评论
  4. 流浪枪手
    流浪枪手[博主]

    fortyNiner 写了： 2023年 11月 20日 22:11 >>美国应该不应该全民拥枪？
    My answer to that is No.

    Stats shows that in places where more people have guns, there are mot homicides and other crimes. You have a good intention and want to use guns for defense, but facts show that guns are very ineffective for good guys to use for defense, and on the other hand they are much more effective for criminals to use to kill. As a result, more people die from guns. The reason? 只有千日做贼，那有千日防贼.
    那我再退一步，承认美国不应该全面拥枪，支持限枪禁枪，你觉得会有什么效果？多长时间会有效果？
    又回到原来的问题，做为华裔的我，此地此国，此时此刻，应不应该拥枪？再贴一次照片，应该很有代表性
    图片
    评论
  5. lexian
    lexian

    Then your logical next step should be to advocate gun ownership and training - like the brave ppl here on the gun board; not abolish gun ownership because average ppl can’t use it effectively.
    评论
  6. fortyNiner
    fortyNiner

    You cannot tell the difference? Do you think civilians are the same as cops and soldiers? Do you think civilians, toddlers and babies included, can carry their guns all the time like what they do in the police stations? Also, we all know that cop will use their guns to shoot, and you gun owners, 99+% will not. For 99+% of gun owners, their guns are their toys or dildos that they can bluff with. Are you the 99+% or the other 1-%?
    The fact is, you and I have seen, thousands times each year, more criminals rob and kill people in states with higher gun ownership. Don't tell me you have not seen that.
    lexian 写了： 2023年 11月 21日 15:55 Well, when was the last time you see someone trying to rob a police station? Beside in a movie that is. And tell my why?
    评论
  7. lexian
    lexian

    fortyNiner 写了： 2023年 11月 21日 15:51 >> It’s primarily to deter.
    Then how come in states with highest gun ownership, this has not happened? And the opposite has happened? Are you sure it's not a typo? Did you mean to type "attract" when you typed "deter"?
    Even the most vehement gun advocate on this board, jhe123, has given up on "guns deter crimes". He now changes to something like "when I face a criminal, I have a better chance to survive with my gun."
    Well, when was the last time you see someone trying to rob a police station? Beside in a movie that is. And tell my why?
    评论
  8. fortyNiner
    fortyNiner

    >> It’s primarily to deter.
    Then how come in states with highest gun ownership, this has not happened? And the opposite has happened? Are you sure it's not a typo? Did you mean to type "attract" when you typed "deter"?
    Even the most vehement gun advocate on this board, jhe123, has given up on "guns deter crimes". He now changes to something like "when I face a criminal, I have a better chance to survive with my gun."
    lexian 写了： 2023年 11月 21日 15:44 Hi wise guy, your logic is simply astonishing- guns is not just used for defense. It’s primarily to deter. Ideally no-one ever have to use it in a defensive situation. Your ratio of every time it’s used in defense, how many is killed such such, is utterly off base and misleading.

    As high crime rate leads to high gun ownership- on the basis of everything else been equal. If you have a state complete abolish gun, then of course no one will ever own a gun no matter how bad the crime is. And I can assure you only the law biding citizens will be stripped of guns. And criminal will still have them.
    评论
  9. lexian
    lexian

    fortyNiner 写了： 2023年 11月 21日 14:53 It's a bad loop.
    If you try to argue that those states have high gun ownership because they have high crime rates, you can see your jerk reaction is not the solution. Why? People don't use their guns for defense. Whenever a gun is used for defense, about 16 people have been killed by criminals with guns, another 30 injured, another 1.3 killed or injured unintentionally, and at least hundreds have become victims of crimes committed with guns but fortunately unhurt physically. Out of these hundreds of people, about 32% are gun owners, but only one of them used his/her gun for defense. How effective is your defense wiht guns?
    However, it's fact that CA, IL, NY and NJ have most of the shithole cities in the US, but thanks to their lowest gun ownership, their overall homicide rates are a lot lower than those states with highest gun ownership. According to you, these four states should have high gun ownership, right? So you can see the opposite of jerk reaction probably will not put you in a bad infinite loop.
    Hi wise guy, your logic is simply astonishing- guns is not just used for defense. It’s primarily to deter. Ideally no-one ever have to use it in a defensive situation. Your ratio of every time it’s used in defense, how many is killed such such, is utterly off base and misleading.

    As high crime rate leads to high gun ownership- on the basis of everything else been equal. If you have a state complete abolish gun, then of course no one will ever own a gun no matter how bad the crime is. And I can assure you only the law biding citizens will be stripped of guns. And criminal will still have them.
    评论
  10. fortyNiner
    fortyNiner

    Do you have problem visiting stores with cctv? Do you choose to go to many many of these "prisons"?
    lexian 写了： 2023年 11月 21日 10:46 You want to live in a prison, it’s your choice.

    I don’t.
    评论
  11. fortyNiner
    fortyNiner

    It's a bad loop.
    If you try to argue that those states have high gun ownership because they have high crime rates, you can see your jerk reaction is not the solution. Why? People don't use their guns for defense. Whenever a gun is used for defense, about 16 people have been killed by criminals with guns, another 30 injured, another 1.3 killed or injured unintentionally, and at least hundreds have become victims of crimes committed with guns but fortunately unhurt physically. Out of these hundreds of people, about 32% are gun owners, but only one of them used his/her gun for defense. How effective is your defense wiht guns?
    However, it's fact that CA, IL, NY and NJ have most of the shithole cities in the US, but thanks to their lowest gun ownership, their overall homicide rates are a lot lower than those states with highest gun ownership. According to you, these four states should have high gun ownership, right? So you can see the opposite of jerk reaction probably will not put you in a bad infinite loop.
    lexian 写了： 2023年 11月 21日 07:51 Wise guy, is high crime leads to high gun ownership or high gun ownership leading to high crime?
    评论
  12. lilyamao
    lilyamao

    lexian 写了： 2023年 11月 21日 10:46 You want to live in a prison, it’s your choice.

    I don’t.
    路上摄像头又不妨碍你在家里干啥

    你又不是不法商人或者抢劫犯
    评论
  13. lexian
    lexian

    You want to live in a prison, it’s your choice.

    I don’t.
    评论
  14. lilyamao
    lilyamao

    lexian 写了： 2023年 11月 21日 07:51 Wise guy, is high crime leads to high gun ownership or high gun ownership leading to high crime?
    你让他们把枪交了，路上十米一个摄像头

    能把猪窝变成文明村
    评论
  15. lexian
    lexian

    fortyNiner 写了： 2023年 11月 21日 00:33 The top 15 states with the highest rape rates are all states with high or medium gun ownership, with one exception of Hawaii. Of course, someone might argue that it's just another coincidence, or they are just not reported in states with low gun ownership.
    https://worldpopulationreview.com/state ... s-by-state
    Wise guy, is high crime leads to high gun ownership or high gun ownership leading to high crime?
    评论
    16. 查看全部评论

评论

流浪枪手简介

业余玩枪，专业流浪；美国剪影，岁月收藏。

博主最新文章

Time: 0.018s | Peak Memory Usage: 1.41 MiB | GZIP: Off

© 2024newmitbbs.com

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑