Far from being a kiddo. I would also like a source.

www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/85-002-x2007003-eng.pdf

Have fun.

Rural areas have the highest homicide rates here because people get drunk and kill each other with their fucking guns. It's only in Quebec really that it gets violent in the cities, but that's because of the NATURE of the city: there's always some crazy shit happening, either with the mafia or with culture clashes.

That is old for one, 2005. And two, it isn't like that in most other parts of the world. I realize you LIVE in Canada, but you simply must accept that it isn't like that everywhere. Statistically, where you find a high amount of people in a constricted environment, you find more crime.

That isn't to say there won't be exceptions.

I was using Canada as an example. My source proves my point.

Why is it people have a fascination with waiting for bad things to occur and THEN reacting. Why can't we prevent bad things from happening? The point is to as best as possible stop anything like that from happening in the first place.

The Japanese would have invaded the West Cost of the United States if not for the amount of civilians holding guns. If your civilians have guns and your military has guns, you can fight off an invading force. It is a deterrent in itself.

The Japanese didn't invade the west coast because they lacked the prowess to do so. They couldn't capture and hold the islands they had once the United States took them from her.

Stockpiling weapons won't prevent shit. Organizing yourselves, creating democratic councils, direct democracy... those things will prevent a tyrannical regime from sprouting. Not fully automatic weapons.

You should look over your history better.

"Stockpiling weapons won't prevent shit. Organizing yourselves, creating democratic councils, direct democracy... those things will prevent a tyrannical regime from sprouting. Not fully automatic weapons. "

Number one, no one is calling for citizens to stock pile weapons.

Number two, yes, to fight tyranny you must be organized.

Number three, creating democratic councils...this was attempted before the U.S. Revolution occurred (and in many if not most other similar scenarios in world history)...notice it didn't work out to well for the U.S.
A "tyrannical regime" still sprouted and guess what? We fought them back with weapons. We had a smaller army. An army that could not have possibly won the war alone. We won because of militiamen. Citizens, armed with weapons that matched the British's own and together we took our freedom.
And from this event and history of others like it, our founding fathers crafted the Constitution giving us the right to do so again when the time comes again.

Democratic councils were not formed within the thirteen colonies because they were not yet a sovereign nation.

The french also helped. England had exhausted herself fighting against the french a few years earlier, too. There were many factors that helped in the war, not just armed civilians.

And what happens when a country invades you? What happens when your government eventually turns tyrannical? You will have to depend on other countries to come and save your ass in time because your people are defenseless. And don't give me that paranoia shit. History since the dawn of time proves you wrong. In the 20th century alone, 170 million people have been killed by their own governments. That is Canada's entire population multiplied by 4. That is almost a third of the U.S population. 170,000,000 people that trusted their government. That relied upon them. That would have never though for a second that their Government was up to no good. Oh and here is the kicker...before these mass killings occurred, gun restrictions and bans were passed to disarm the people.

Canada's army is not big enough to do that.

We can find guns. Buy in bulk ex soviet if revolution were to occur. Obviously, until the world is standardized, you can buy weapons like that in bulk easy.

Cuba was overthrown with a group of no more than 300 or so revolutionaries. Canada's army as it stands won't be able to fight back a huge invading force, and good luck to our government trying to kill everyone within our own borders. We're not warmongers with this huge surplus of weaponry.

In times of revolution people can STEAL weapons. This is how many revolutionaries, against all odds, prevailed.

Why is it people have a fascination with waiting for bad things to occur and THEN reacting. Why can't we prevent bad things from happening? The point is to as best as possible stop anything like that from happening in the first place.

The Japanese would have invaded the West Cost of the United States if not for the amount of civilians holding guns. If your civilians have guns and your military has guns, you can fight off an invading force. It is a deterrent in itself.

The Japanese didn't invade the west coast because they lacked the prowess to do so. They couldn't capture and hold the islands they had once the United States took them from her.

Stockpiling weapons won't prevent shit. Organizing yourselves, creating democratic councils, direct democracy... those things will prevent a tyrannical regime from sprouting. Not fully automatic weapons.

You should look over your history better.

"Stockpiling weapons won't prevent shit. Organizing yourselves, creating democratic councils, direct democracy... those things will prevent a tyrannical regime from sprouting. Not fully automatic weapons. "

Number one, no one is calling for citizens to stock pile weapons.

Number two, yes, to fight tyranny you must be organized.

Number three, creating democratic councils...this was attempted before the U.S. Revolution occurred (and in many if not most other similar scenarios in world history)...notice it didn't work out to well for the U.S.
A "tyrannical regime" still sprouted and guess what? We fought them back with weapons. We had a smaller army. An army that could not have possibly won the war alone. We won because of militiamen. Citizens, armed with weapons that matched the British's own and together we took our freedom.
And from this event and history of others like it, our founding fathers crafted the Constitution giving us the right to do so again when the time comes again.

Democratic councils were not formed within the thirteen colonies because they were not yet a sovereign nation.

The french also helped. England had exhausted herself fighting against the french a few years earlier, too. There were many factors that helped in the war, not just armed civilians.

Don't use that bs. The government will not turn Tyrannical. And if Canada is invaded, then guess what. Canada has a military too. And your statistics talk about multiple countries, most of which probably are nowhere near as large, or have nowhere near as much population as Canada or the USA. Gun restrictions have been passed in many countries without the government turning tyrannical, and the chances of a country like the US or Canada having governments turning tyrannical are extremely low.

The chances are low. But eventually it will happen. I don't want my children's, children to have to live through such times if they do not have too. Less than half of 1% of the population die by gun violence, I think we live in pretty peaceful times.

comparing the US to canada is like comparing the US to the UK
most gun crime happens in cities, and is gang-related.

Ok then, you still have less metropolitan areas than the U.S and in the areas that are metropolitan in Canada, your violent crime rates go up significantly.
Not to mention, there are many places in the world where guns are heavily regulated, but crime is still higher in ratio to the United States.
And to further my argment, U.S. crime rates have gone significantly down since the early 1990's and guess what, we have a lot more guns than we did then.

Guns are used 100,000 to 2.5 million times a year by LAW ABIDING CITIZENS in the U.S. to prevent crime. Even at the lowest number, it is nearly 10 times the amount of homicides that occur each year (8-12 thousand).

Another fact - since Washington D.C banned guns, crime has gone up.
Another fact - The majority of these mass shootings occur in GUN FREE zones.
Another fact - Most of these mass shootings toxicology reports and medical records indicate that the perpetrators were taking Anti Depressant SSRI's.
Another fact - with around 80 million legal gun owning Americans, less than 1% of them are responsible for violent crime.
Another fact - Taking guns away from law abiding citizens will solve nothing. It will just make them defenseless against criminals, foreign invaders, or an oppressive Government.

Actually they do not. Not in Canada.

Most gun violence occurs in rural areas here. Get yer facts straight, kiddo.

Far from being a kiddo. I would also like a source.

www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/85-002-x2007003-eng.pdf

Have fun.

Rural areas have the highest homicide rates here because people get drunk and kill each other with their fucking guns. It's only in Quebec really that it gets violent in the cities, but that's because of the NATURE of the city: there's always some crazy shit happening, either with the mafia or with culture clashes.

That is old for one, 2005. And two, it isn't like that in most other parts of the world. I realize you LIVE in Canada, but you simply must accept that it isn't like that everywhere. Statistically, where you find a high amount of people in a constricted environment, you find more crime.

That isn't to say there won't be exceptions.

I was using Canada as an example. My source proves my point.

We only required gun Licensing since 1972. We've been banning & restricting guns guns since the 20's, but the most significant was also in 1972. Since then, gun violence has been decreasing significantly.

And what happens when a country invades you? What happens when your government eventually turns tyrannical? You will have to depend on other countries to come and save your ass in time because your people are defenseless. And don't give me that paranoia shit. History since the dawn of time proves you wrong. In the 20th century alone, 170 million people have been killed by their own governments. That is Canada's entire population multiplied by 4. That is almost a third of the U.S population. 170,000,000 people that trusted their government. That relied upon them. That would have never though for a second that their Government was up to no good. Oh and here is the kicker...before these mass killings occurred, gun restrictions and bans were passed to disarm the people.

Canada's army is not big enough to do that.

We can find guns. Buy in bulk ex soviet if revolution were to occur. Obviously, until the world is standardized, you can buy weapons like that in bulk easy.

Cuba was overthrown with a group of no more than 300 or so revolutionaries. Canada's army as it stands won't be able to fight back a huge invading force, and good luck to our government trying to kill everyone within our own borders. We're not warmongers with this huge surplus of weaponry.

In times of revolution people can STEAL weapons. This is how many revolutionaries, against all odds, prevailed.

Why is it people have a fascination with waiting for bad things to occur and THEN reacting. Why can't we prevent bad things from happening? The point is to as best as possible stop anything like that from happening in the first place.

The Japanese would have invaded the West Cost of the United States if not for the amount of civilians holding guns. If your civilians have guns and your military has guns, you can fight off an invading force. It is a deterrent in itself.

The Japanese didn't invade the west coast because they lacked the prowess to do so. They couldn't capture and hold the islands they had once the United States took them from her.

Stockpiling weapons won't prevent shit. Organizing yourselves, creating democratic councils, direct democracy... those things will prevent a tyrannical regime from sprouting. Not fully automatic weapons.

You should look over your history better.

"Stockpiling weapons won't prevent shit. Organizing yourselves, creating democratic councils, direct democracy... those things will prevent a tyrannical regime from sprouting. Not fully automatic weapons. "

Number one, no one is calling for citizens to stock pile weapons.

Number two, yes, to fight tyranny you must be organized.

Number three, creating democratic councils...this was attempted before the U.S. Revolution occurred (and in many if not most other similar scenarios in world history)...notice it didn't work out to well for the U.S.
A "tyrannical regime" still sprouted and guess what? We fought them back with weapons. We had a smaller army. An army that could not have possibly won the war alone. We won because of militiamen. Citizens, armed with weapons that matched the British's own and together we took our freedom.
And from this event and history of others like it, our founding fathers crafted the Constitution giving us the right to do so again when the time comes again.

Democratic councils were not formed within the thirteen colonies because they were not yet a sovereign nation.

The french also helped. England had exhausted herself fighting against the french a few years earlier, too. There were many factors that helped in the war, not just armed civilians.

Don't use that bs. The government will not turn Tyrannical. And if Canada is invaded, then guess what. Canada has a military too. And your statistics talk about multiple countries, most of which probably are nowhere near as large, or have nowhere near as much population as Canada or the USA. Gun restrictions have been passed in many countries without the government turning tyrannical, and the chances of a country like the US or Canada having governments turning tyrannical are extremely low.

The chances are low. But eventually it will happen. I don't want my children's, children to have to live through such times if they do not have too. Less than half of 1% of the population die by gun violence, I think we live in pretty peaceful times.

i happen to be what people call a ''nazi'' skinhead
i hang out with a certain people because of where i live it's the only way not to get butt fucked by gangs of blacks or arabs (basically everyday life out here is much like life in american prison)
i do what i do for self-defense, i don't beleve in racial superiority,nor do i judge people by the color of their skin, however i do have a helthy sence of ethnical pride and the only people that disgust me are wiggers

THANKS
great stuff

i actually like NS oi,punk,hatecore and black metal
fuck me right?

If you like it "just for the sound" then you are everything that is wrong with punk rock.

I could care less about the metal subgenres.

If you're actually a Nazi then I hate you even more.

i happen to be what people call a ''nazi'' skinhead
i hang out with a certain people because of where i live it's the only way not to get butt fucked by gangs of blacks or arabs (basically everyday life out here is much like life in american prison)
i do what i do for self-defense, i don't beleve in racial superiority,nor do i judge people by the color of their skin, however i do have a helthy sence of ethnical pride and the only people that disgust me are wiggers

that's really cool
are there more japanese 80s punk bands :D?

Yes!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=pv7-ziKfbIQ
www.youtube.com/watch?v=AptqWI4Sov0
www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7RHnWSx6a8
www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6_mFOwjxZw

And my favourite from this batch: www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHTKVJXpmB4

THANKS
great stuff

I like to think it is. It was released for record store day a few years back to a very limited run. It is a good covers album but I wouldn't say it's my favorite album.
If it's your all time favorite album then I don't think you should feel bad about spending money on that album no matter how expensive it is.

Its in my top two. I love this one and another album almost equally.

Considering it's one of the last copies of this record I've ever seen for sale, I think my actions are justified.

The only overpriced Thing I bought was the Collectors Edition for the latest Re-Pressing of Conquerors War.Cult.Supremacy. But to be Fair, it was to LPs, a Shirt, Patch, great Inlay, LP-Cover as Flag and Poster, for 50 Bucks, so I guess it was k. Most other Stuff I have, I get on Flea-markets, most People don´t even know what they are selling there. 4 Euro for a first Pressing of Iron Maidens Killers...

I know that feel man. I spent $80 on this.

Was it worth it?

There are really two factors for paying a bunch of money for a record: you either really love it, or it's really rare. In my case, it's both.

The record was pressed only 1000 times in 1998 - and only one time. It's one of those great underground hardcore gems.

I like to think it is. It was released for record store day a few years back to a very limited run. It is a good covers album but I wouldn't say it's my favorite album.
If it's your all time favorite album then I don't think you should feel bad about spending money on that album no matter how expensive it is.

Its in my top two. I love this one and another album almost equally.

Considering it's one of the last copies of this record I've ever seen for sale, I think my actions are justified.

I think it was you who missed the point. The subject matter is not important, it is the emotional response to the subject that IS. His point is, if you do not like something, don't associate yourself with it, but have the courtesy to understand that others feel strongly about it and DO like it.

I'm pretty sure if you held up an abortion in a robber's face they'd freak out and run the hell off

Understandable. I'm more into his writings mostly because I am something of an anarcho-communist, but it totally makes sense that his writings wouldn't appeal much to people who don't share his opinions about government.

Jesus Christ, I can barely find enough room to fit all of my "anti-"s.

I myself am an orthodox marxist. I do read a lot of anarcho-communist stuff but my primary influence would be the Situationist International. I call myself a Libertarian Marxist when I want to be 'formal.' I get along more with Anarchists than I do with Leninists and Stalinists, etc.

Ever seen or read anything by Noam Chomsky? The guy writes all about this kind of stuff that you never hear about in day-to-day life. You'd probably like him.

I'm not too into Noam Chomsky. He's kind of the entry-level anarcho-communist kind of guy.

But yeah, I'm into this whole kind of thing. I'm so anti-everything I lose track of the things I'm opposed to.

Understandable. I'm more into his writings mostly because I am something of an anarcho-communist, but it totally makes sense that his writings wouldn't appeal much to people who don't share his opinions about government.

Jesus Christ, I can barely find enough room to fit all of my "anti-"s.

I myself am an orthodox marxist. I do read a lot of anarcho-communist stuff but my primary influence would be the Situationist International. I call myself a Libertarian Marxist when I want to be 'formal.' I get along more with Anarchists than I do with Leninists and Stalinists, etc.

no im saying other nations did attack after a little bit more thought and planning than the ottomans

That again is a statement made completely out of ignorance.

well more proof that muslims/islamics are pretty aggressive....angry enough to charge in where others thought about the pros and cons first

Are you retarded?

Are you saying Rome, or any other nation, hasn't done that kind of thing? What the hell do you call your 'aryan master race" invasion of Europe?

no im saying other nations did attack after a little bit more thought and planning than the ottomans

That again is a statement made completely out of ignorance.

i admit they had good architecture but what epic stuff did carthage do

Occupied Italy, for one thing.

They pushed the Romans back all the way to Rome itself and kept it that way for over 10 years. Not many civilizations at the time had the audacity or the ability to do that.

well more proof that muslims/islamics are pretty aggressive....angry enough to charge in where others thought about the pros and cons first

Are you retarded?

Are you saying Rome, or any other nation, hasn't done that kind of thing? What the hell do you call your 'aryan master race" invasion of Europe?

no im saying other nations did attack after a little bit more thought and planning than the ottomans

That again is a statement made completely out of ignorance.