Ah, shit happens. No problem.

I never chose to ignore anything.
Did you even read my message?

My bad, i'm just a little tired of all this fanboy crap going through funnyjunk right now.

Ah, shit happens. No problem.

"OH MAN, I'M ADDICTED TO CRACK, BETTER JUST PUT THE CRACK DOWN AND NEVER SMOKE IT AGAIN, THAT'LL BE EASY. YEAH I'LL JUST DO THAT"

You really don't understand what addiction is do you.

You would notice a big difference in believes (not religious believes in particular). Both sides of the ocean are raised by the media. Take the word "Socialism" for example. The media use that as a very negative word, and whenever someone tried to change some of America's politics, they would just scream something like that without many people knowing what it was. Because of how much it was used, the new generation actually looked it up, and now there are more people supporting it in the States than ever. Just something I found funny. Other differences are that the police here often don't even carry weapon, where normal people can get a permit for it in the states. The people support different sides in the middle east. America has a pretty big history when it come to railroads, where we don't even have normal roads.

There are a lot of differences between the people in Europe and America, and within EU. There are so many different views. It's silly to compare.

But that doesn't make you superior. I understand democratic socialism perfectly and have read a large amount of material on Karl Marx and his theory of communism, alienation, utopia, and human nature seeing as politics is my area of study. I do not agree with it. The concept itself is flawed. Socialism is a term coined by Marx himself and it relies too much on his own theory of human nature IMO. Socialism is a proven fail, as well as communism, because human greed ALWAYS gets in the way. You can not change that. You will never have 100% of people on board and you need that for communism to work. Also "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money" - Margaret Thatcher. If you know anything of her, she was a remarkable woman and forever changed Great Britain for the better. Do not argue with policy that works. America's Capitalist economy is starting to become a thing of the past, which is sad. Due to that, our country is slowly deteriorating and it shows (still better than Norway that hardly ever gets mentioned outside of its own borders) but while capitalism reigned free of harsh government regulations and was controlled by a strong union workforce instead, it offered great incentive for work, which allowed people to be successful on their own terms, boosted employment, and GDP. That is what makes a country successful. Not its record of carbon footprints. So stop being so proud about your country's Environmental policies, and wake up to realize that trade and production helps the world, feeds mouths, and improves morals. Your liberal idea of utopia is absurd and unrealistic. Go with a system that works and maybe you will avoid ending up like North Korea when a greedy government official comes along. End rant.

I think I stated that this doesn't make us better. Also, I don't think you know what democratic socialism is. It has proven itself to be the best system, by far, for now. Pure capitalism simply doesn't work, and benefit no one. You need democracy. With democracy come some form of socialism. In any advancing cultures, you have capitalism.

Margaret Thatcher was the woman that has fucked Scotland the hardest. No other person is so much hated and loved as her.

Democratic Socialism work pretty much like this: You have somewhat high taxes, to cover roads, education, health and preferably transportation (also welfare++). Those who earn more pat a higher % of taxes. This give those born poor, not only the opportunity to study and work their way up, but also take chances building companies and following their idea. The rich stay rich, whilst the poor have the opportunity to work their way up, creating more rich people. The system is of course a lot more than that. The best part about this is that the system carries itself, and is part of why we barely noticed to crack in 2008.

In America you don't have the same option, because of the number of illegal immigrants + more. It is bettering, slowly, but it will take a lot of time. The important thing is to get people jobs. There is enough work for everyone. There are solutions out there, but hard to manage. For now, those born poor will stay poor, and those born rich will stay rich, and in power.

You don't have to explain Democratic Socialism to me... It's an elementary concept. I am baffled by the fact that you have no idea about my grasp of this concept as shown by my previous comment. I am a firm believer in not having a government entitled safety net or welfare. Anyone can guarantee themselves a life worth living. They just have to get off their asses. You are not educated enough on this subject to argue it with me seeing as you probably have not even read about Marx or his ideal communism, so just stop. Btw its called new money. Read the Great Gatsby motherfucker. Opportunity is available to anyone.

Opportunity is not available to anyone. I know next to everything about Marx' philosophy. I know of several people that didn't have time for school, because they had to work two jobs to get enough money to provide for their family. A system where the people, not the rich, are in charge is better*. It is easier to work your way up in Democratic Socialism. However, if you have a start capital and something to fall back on, you can get higher, faster in the US. You don't have to listen to me, you just have to watch the results. Democratic Socialism is the system that has been the 2nd most beneficial for the common man in history, so far. 3rd being more capitalistic.

We have to take our start boost into consideration. Because of our oil, I like to point to Sweden instead of Norway. They use basically the same system, but don't have the same amount of money.

*Opinion

Your problem is that you are comparing the idea of pure practiced "prefect" socialism to impure imperfect capitalism that is currently being practiced. If you know anything about socialism and world history, you would know that all socialist empires prosper for a short amount of time and then fail miserably.

Democratic Socialism is not Socialism, or Communism. I'm comparing the current systems. Capitalism suck. Communism suck. Socialism suck. Every ism suck. Both the US and Scandinavia have a mixture of different ideologies even though we are slightly more red. Socialism may not work, but you know as well as I that pure capitalism may be what works the least.

The only country that doesn't use capitalism to a big degree is North Korea. Even China, who are communistic, are practically capitalists. Democratic Socialism is a term often used concerning a system where a capitalistic system are used with high taxes as well.

The high taxes eliminate production. How do you expect industry to thrive under those conditions?

Just mathematically speaking, it's much more efficient. The system is made so everyone will move to a higher class. This doesn't punish the rich or the industry one bit. However, it makes it expensive for tourists when they travel here, as the prices on everything are quite high. People and businesses also get some of what they tax back, depending on a lot of stuff.

There are several parties fighting for lower taxes (the one fighting for the lowest, of the bigger parties, happens to be the same party that got founded to fight for lower alcohol and tobacco prices, so yeah). Most of the people who vote for those parties doesn't realize that the prices in the stores will rise according to the tax reductions, and ultimately make the value of NOK drop a little. Høyre (one of the parties|translates to right, as in opposite of left) is also behind the only time I've seen open corruption here.

I want to add that this high taxes would not be a good option for the States, as of now. I have several ideas that could build up to this, but I would have to get much power and experts for any of it to work. The only action that could easily, and without much planning, improve the US' economy would be to cut the military budget.

Also where are you from exactly?

Norway

I was just wondering what sort of environment your ideals would stem from.Have you ever visited the U.S.?

I will this summer. Only a couple of weeks, but I'll travel more in the future.

Sounds good just remember to find out for yourself what a people are like and don't listen to someone subjectively feeding you information to shift your ideals to theirs.

I try not to take a stand in anything before I know as much as possible. I don't think anyone can convince me that Democratic Socialism is the best way to go, no matter how hard they show their views down my throat.

Exactly, you can't listen to what anyone says now'a days without stepping back and looking at the big picture to make a coherent decision.

the biggest difference is that the politicians over here are far more selfish and cuntish than those in most of the rest of the world. I saw an episode of the Daily Show where John Oliver interviewed American politicians and then interviewed Australian politicians (I don't remember the speciffic people), mostly about gun control. he first asked an American politician how they would measure success as a politician, without skipping a beat they answered "getting re elected". the Australian politician asked the same question answered something along the lines of "doing what they truly believe is in the best interest of the people". it made me ashamed to call myself an American.

I find that politicians tend to have a universality to their greed and corruptibility, mostly due to party systems (not necessarily two-party) in the western nations and the legality of some sort of lobbying system. Their are always one or two good politicians that you can pull from any country but a large portion tend to support their "constituents".

the particular example i was talking about was Australia enacting substantial gun reform, many politicians effectively ended their political careers to do what they knew was right. That would never happen in America. Because a vast majority of American politicians are selfish ignorant cunts

I actually saw that one, and that is what I was talking about with the effect that parties have on a politician and his decision making practices. But you also have to realize that the media will only show you the sides they want you to see( the best and the worst) of either side just to push their own ideals.

so what is the other side to this story? did Australia not actually enact major gun reform at the cost of many peoples' political careers? did that not actually result in an 80% drop in gun related crime? are american politicians not, even now, vehemently opposing even the minutest ammount of reform on gun laws? I mean, for fuck sakes, why the fuck would anyone have opposition to fucking backround checks. shit makes me so pissed off sometimes

I agree with you on the background checks, but what i was saying is that their are, although few, U.S. politicians who fight for what they believe. Also the point of that episode was to skew your view to near complete gun restriction like in Australia. You just have to be subjective and realize that Australia is a completely different place from the U.S. and adverse gun laws will most likely show varying results.

It is more to urge you to do something. After talking to a lot of you, I do feel like people in my country are more civilized. Then I remember that we have those people here as well, only that I rarely are around them. The uneducated people scream the loudest, do they not?

That is very true, the American population is woefully misrepresented overseas by the more ignorant population, you would hardly notice a difference between the average European, and the average American.

You would notice a big difference in believes (not religious believes in particular). Both sides of the ocean are raised by the media. Take the word "Socialism" for example. The media use that as a very negative word, and whenever someone tried to change some of America's politics, they would just scream something like that without many people knowing what it was. Because of how much it was used, the new generation actually looked it up, and now there are more people supporting it in the States than ever. Just something I found funny. Other differences are that the police here often don't even carry weapon, where normal people can get a permit for it in the states. The people support different sides in the middle east. America has a pretty big history when it come to railroads, where we don't even have normal roads.

There are a lot of differences between the people in Europe and America, and within EU. There are so many different views. It's silly to compare.

But that doesn't make you superior. I understand democratic socialism perfectly and have read a large amount of material on Karl Marx and his theory of communism, alienation, utopia, and human nature seeing as politics is my area of study. I do not agree with it. The concept itself is flawed. Socialism is a term coined by Marx himself and it relies too much on his own theory of human nature IMO. Socialism is a proven fail, as well as communism, because human greed ALWAYS gets in the way. You can not change that. You will never have 100% of people on board and you need that for communism to work. Also "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money" - Margaret Thatcher. If you know anything of her, she was a remarkable woman and forever changed Great Britain for the better. Do not argue with policy that works. America's Capitalist economy is starting to become a thing of the past, which is sad. Due to that, our country is slowly deteriorating and it shows (still better than Norway that hardly ever gets mentioned outside of its own borders) but while capitalism reigned free of harsh government regulations and was controlled by a strong union workforce instead, it offered great incentive for work, which allowed people to be successful on their own terms, boosted employment, and GDP. That is what makes a country successful. Not its record of carbon footprints. So stop being so proud about your country's Environmental policies, and wake up to realize that trade and production helps the world, feeds mouths, and improves morals. Your liberal idea of utopia is absurd and unrealistic. Go with a system that works and maybe you will avoid ending up like North Korea when a greedy government official comes along. End rant.

I think I stated that this doesn't make us better. Also, I don't think you know what democratic socialism is. It has proven itself to be the best system, by far, for now. Pure capitalism simply doesn't work, and benefit no one. You need democracy. With democracy come some form of socialism. In any advancing cultures, you have capitalism.

Margaret Thatcher was the woman that has fucked Scotland the hardest. No other person is so much hated and loved as her.

Democratic Socialism work pretty much like this: You have somewhat high taxes, to cover roads, education, health and preferably transportation (also welfare++). Those who earn more pat a higher % of taxes. This give those born poor, not only the opportunity to study and work their way up, but also take chances building companies and following their idea. The rich stay rich, whilst the poor have the opportunity to work their way up, creating more rich people. The system is of course a lot more than that. The best part about this is that the system carries itself, and is part of why we barely noticed to crack in 2008.

In America you don't have the same option, because of the number of illegal immigrants + more. It is bettering, slowly, but it will take a lot of time. The important thing is to get people jobs. There is enough work for everyone. There are solutions out there, but hard to manage. For now, those born poor will stay poor, and those born rich will stay rich, and in power.

You don't have to explain Democratic Socialism to me... It's an elementary concept. I am baffled by the fact that you have no idea about my grasp of this concept as shown by my previous comment. I am a firm believer in not having a government entitled safety net or welfare. Anyone can guarantee themselves a life worth living. They just have to get off their asses. You are not educated enough on this subject to argue it with me seeing as you probably have not even read about Marx or his ideal communism, so just stop. Btw its called new money. Read the Great Gatsby motherfucker. Opportunity is available to anyone.

Opportunity is not available to anyone. I know next to everything about Marx' philosophy. I know of several people that didn't have time for school, because they had to work two jobs to get enough money to provide for their family. A system where the people, not the rich, are in charge is better*. It is easier to work your way up in Democratic Socialism. However, if you have a start capital and something to fall back on, you can get higher, faster in the US. You don't have to listen to me, you just have to watch the results. Democratic Socialism is the system that has been the 2nd most beneficial for the common man in history, so far. 3rd being more capitalistic.

We have to take our start boost into consideration. Because of our oil, I like to point to Sweden instead of Norway. They use basically the same system, but don't have the same amount of money.

*Opinion

Your problem is that you are comparing the idea of pure practiced "prefect" socialism to impure imperfect capitalism that is currently being practiced. If you know anything about socialism and world history, you would know that all socialist empires prosper for a short amount of time and then fail miserably.

Democratic Socialism is not Socialism, or Communism. I'm comparing the current systems. Capitalism suck. Communism suck. Socialism suck. Every ism suck. Both the US and Scandinavia have a mixture of different ideologies even though we are slightly more red. Socialism may not work, but you know as well as I that pure capitalism may be what works the least.

The only country that doesn't use capitalism to a big degree is North Korea. Even China, who are communistic, are practically capitalists. Democratic Socialism is a term often used concerning a system where a capitalistic system are used with high taxes as well.

The high taxes eliminate production. How do you expect industry to thrive under those conditions?

Just mathematically speaking, it's much more efficient. The system is made so everyone will move to a higher class. This doesn't punish the rich or the industry one bit. However, it makes it expensive for tourists when they travel here, as the prices on everything are quite high. People and businesses also get some of what they tax back, depending on a lot of stuff.

There are several parties fighting for lower taxes (the one fighting for the lowest, of the bigger parties, happens to be the same party that got founded to fight for lower alcohol and tobacco prices, so yeah). Most of the people who vote for those parties doesn't realize that the prices in the stores will rise according to the tax reductions, and ultimately make the value of NOK drop a little. Høyre (one of the parties|translates to right, as in opposite of left) is also behind the only time I've seen open corruption here.

I want to add that this high taxes would not be a good option for the States, as of now. I have several ideas that could build up to this, but I would have to get much power and experts for any of it to work. The only action that could easily, and without much planning, improve the US' economy would be to cut the military budget.

Also where are you from exactly?

Norway

I was just wondering what sort of environment your ideals would stem from.Have you ever visited the U.S.?

I will this summer. Only a couple of weeks, but I'll travel more in the future.

Sounds good just remember to find out for yourself what a people are like and don't listen to someone subjectively feeding you information to shift your ideals to theirs.

I try not to take a stand in anything before I know as much as possible. I don't think anyone can convince me that Democratic Socialism is the best way to go, no matter how hard they show their views down my throat.

Exactly, you can't listen to what anyone says now'a days without stepping back and looking at the big picture to make a coherent decision.

the biggest difference is that the politicians over here are far more selfish and cuntish than those in most of the rest of the world. I saw an episode of the Daily Show where John Oliver interviewed American politicians and then interviewed Australian politicians (I don't remember the speciffic people), mostly about gun control. he first asked an American politician how they would measure success as a politician, without skipping a beat they answered "getting re elected". the Australian politician asked the same question answered something along the lines of "doing what they truly believe is in the best interest of the people". it made me ashamed to call myself an American.

I find that politicians tend to have a universality to their greed and corruptibility, mostly due to party systems (not necessarily two-party) in the western nations and the legality of some sort of lobbying system. Their are always one or two good politicians that you can pull from any country but a large portion tend to support their "constituents".

the particular example i was talking about was Australia enacting substantial gun reform, many politicians effectively ended their political careers to do what they knew was right. That would never happen in America. Because a vast majority of American politicians are selfish ignorant cunts

I actually saw that one, and that is what I was talking about with the effect that parties have on a politician and his decision making practices. But you also have to realize that the media will only show you the sides they want you to see( the best and the worst) of either side just to push their own ideals.

so what is the other side to this story? did Australia not actually enact major gun reform at the cost of many peoples' political careers? did that not actually result in an 80% drop in gun related crime? are american politicians not, even now, vehemently opposing even the minutest ammount of reform on gun laws? I mean, for fuck sakes, why the fuck would anyone have opposition to fucking backround checks. shit makes me so pissed off sometimes

I agree with you on the background checks, but what i was saying is that their are, although few, U.S. politicians who fight for what they believe. Also the point of that episode was to skew your view to near complete gun restriction like in Australia. You just have to be subjective and realize that Australia is a completely different place from the U.S. and adverse gun laws will most likely show varying results.

I know the country I am in is better than most others. I'm quite lucky that got it this easy. I admit I feel national superiority, but as person, you couldn't be more wrong.

You can actually point to what is better than in many other places. The country might be better, the people isn't. You can take your political correctness and fuck away.

The way you wrote the comment implied that the people in your country are more civilized, which I highly doubt.

It is more to urge you to do something. After talking to a lot of you, I do feel like people in my country are more civilized. Then I remember that we have those people here as well, only that I rarely are around them. The uneducated people scream the loudest, do they not?

That is very true, the American population is woefully misrepresented overseas by the more ignorant population, you would hardly notice a difference between the average European, and the average American.

You would notice a big difference in believes (not religious believes in particular). Both sides of the ocean are raised by the media. Take the word "Socialism" for example. The media use that as a very negative word, and whenever someone tried to change some of America's politics, they would just scream something like that without many people knowing what it was. Because of how much it was used, the new generation actually looked it up, and now there are more people supporting it in the States than ever. Just something I found funny. Other differences are that the police here often don't even carry weapon, where normal people can get a permit for it in the states. The people support different sides in the middle east. America has a pretty big history when it come to railroads, where we don't even have normal roads.

There are a lot of differences between the people in Europe and America, and within EU. There are so many different views. It's silly to compare.

But that doesn't make you superior. I understand democratic socialism perfectly and have read a large amount of material on Karl Marx and his theory of communism, alienation, utopia, and human nature seeing as politics is my area of study. I do not agree with it. The concept itself is flawed. Socialism is a term coined by Marx himself and it relies too much on his own theory of human nature IMO. Socialism is a proven fail, as well as communism, because human greed ALWAYS gets in the way. You can not change that. You will never have 100% of people on board and you need that for communism to work. Also "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money" - Margaret Thatcher. If you know anything of her, she was a remarkable woman and forever changed Great Britain for the better. Do not argue with policy that works. America's Capitalist economy is starting to become a thing of the past, which is sad. Due to that, our country is slowly deteriorating and it shows (still better than Norway that hardly ever gets mentioned outside of its own borders) but while capitalism reigned free of harsh government regulations and was controlled by a strong union workforce instead, it offered great incentive for work, which allowed people to be successful on their own terms, boosted employment, and GDP. That is what makes a country successful. Not its record of carbon footprints. So stop being so proud about your country's Environmental policies, and wake up to realize that trade and production helps the world, feeds mouths, and improves morals. Your liberal idea of utopia is absurd and unrealistic. Go with a system that works and maybe you will avoid ending up like North Korea when a greedy government official comes along. End rant.

I think I stated that this doesn't make us better. Also, I don't think you know what democratic socialism is. It has proven itself to be the best system, by far, for now. Pure capitalism simply doesn't work, and benefit no one. You need democracy. With democracy come some form of socialism. In any advancing cultures, you have capitalism.

Margaret Thatcher was the woman that has fucked Scotland the hardest. No other person is so much hated and loved as her.

Democratic Socialism work pretty much like this: You have somewhat high taxes, to cover roads, education, health and preferably transportation (also welfare++). Those who earn more pat a higher % of taxes. This give those born poor, not only the opportunity to study and work their way up, but also take chances building companies and following their idea. The rich stay rich, whilst the poor have the opportunity to work their way up, creating more rich people. The system is of course a lot more than that. The best part about this is that the system carries itself, and is part of why we barely noticed to crack in 2008.

In America you don't have the same option, because of the number of illegal immigrants + more. It is bettering, slowly, but it will take a lot of time. The important thing is to get people jobs. There is enough work for everyone. There are solutions out there, but hard to manage. For now, those born poor will stay poor, and those born rich will stay rich, and in power.

You don't have to explain Democratic Socialism to me... It's an elementary concept. I am baffled by the fact that you have no idea about my grasp of this concept as shown by my previous comment. I am a firm believer in not having a government entitled safety net or welfare. Anyone can guarantee themselves a life worth living. They just have to get off their asses. You are not educated enough on this subject to argue it with me seeing as you probably have not even read about Marx or his ideal communism, so just stop. Btw its called new money. Read the Great Gatsby motherfucker. Opportunity is available to anyone.

Opportunity is not available to anyone. I know next to everything about Marx' philosophy. I know of several people that didn't have time for school, because they had to work two jobs to get enough money to provide for their family. A system where the people, not the rich, are in charge is better*. It is easier to work your way up in Democratic Socialism. However, if you have a start capital and something to fall back on, you can get higher, faster in the US. You don't have to listen to me, you just have to watch the results. Democratic Socialism is the system that has been the 2nd most beneficial for the common man in history, so far. 3rd being more capitalistic.

We have to take our start boost into consideration. Because of our oil, I like to point to Sweden instead of Norway. They use basically the same system, but don't have the same amount of money.

*Opinion

Your problem is that you are comparing the idea of pure practiced "prefect" socialism to impure imperfect capitalism that is currently being practiced. If you know anything about socialism and world history, you would know that all socialist empires prosper for a short amount of time and then fail miserably.

Democratic Socialism is not Socialism, or Communism. I'm comparing the current systems. Capitalism suck. Communism suck. Socialism suck. Every ism suck. Both the US and Scandinavia have a mixture of different ideologies even though we are slightly more red. Socialism may not work, but you know as well as I that pure capitalism may be what works the least.

The only country that doesn't use capitalism to a big degree is North Korea. Even China, who are communistic, are practically capitalists. Democratic Socialism is a term often used concerning a system where a capitalistic system are used with high taxes as well.

The high taxes eliminate production. How do you expect industry to thrive under those conditions?

Just mathematically speaking, it's much more efficient. The system is made so everyone will move to a higher class. This doesn't punish the rich or the industry one bit. However, it makes it expensive for tourists when they travel here, as the prices on everything are quite high. People and businesses also get some of what they tax back, depending on a lot of stuff.

There are several parties fighting for lower taxes (the one fighting for the lowest, of the bigger parties, happens to be the same party that got founded to fight for lower alcohol and tobacco prices, so yeah). Most of the people who vote for those parties doesn't realize that the prices in the stores will rise according to the tax reductions, and ultimately make the value of NOK drop a little. Høyre (one of the parties|translates to right, as in opposite of left) is also behind the only time I've seen open corruption here.

I want to add that this high taxes would not be a good option for the States, as of now. I have several ideas that could build up to this, but I would have to get much power and experts for any of it to work. The only action that could easily, and without much planning, improve the US' economy would be to cut the military budget.

Also where are you from exactly?

Norway

I was just wondering what sort of environment your ideals would stem from.Have you ever visited the U.S.?

I will this summer. Only a couple of weeks, but I'll travel more in the future.

Sounds good just remember to find out for yourself what a people are like and don't listen to someone subjectively feeding you information to shift your ideals to theirs.

I try not to take a stand in anything before I know as much as possible. I don't think anyone can convince me that Democratic Socialism is the best way to go, no matter how hard they show their views down my throat.

Exactly, you can't listen to what anyone says now'a days without stepping back and looking at the big picture to make a coherent decision.

the biggest difference is that the politicians over here are far more selfish and cuntish than those in most of the rest of the world. I saw an episode of the Daily Show where John Oliver interviewed American politicians and then interviewed Australian politicians (I don't remember the speciffic people), mostly about gun control. he first asked an American politician how they would measure success as a politician, without skipping a beat they answered "getting re elected". the Australian politician asked the same question answered something along the lines of "doing what they truly believe is in the best interest of the people". it made me ashamed to call myself an American.

I find that politicians tend to have a universality to their greed and corruptibility, mostly due to party systems (not necessarily two-party) in the western nations and the legality of some sort of lobbying system. Their are always one or two good politicians that you can pull from any country but a large portion tend to support their "constituents".

the particular example i was talking about was Australia enacting substantial gun reform, many politicians effectively ended their political careers to do what they knew was right. That would never happen in America. Because a vast majority of American politicians are selfish ignorant cunts

I actually saw that one, and that is what I was talking about with the effect that parties have on a politician and his decision making practices. But you also have to realize that the media will only show you the sides they want you to see( the best and the worst) of either side just to push their own ideals.

so what is the other side to this story? did Australia not actually enact major gun reform at the cost of many peoples' political careers? did that not actually result in an 80% drop in gun related crime? are american politicians not, even now, vehemently opposing even the minutest ammount of reform on gun laws? I mean, for fuck sakes, why the fuck would anyone have opposition to fucking backround checks. shit makes me so pissed off sometimes

I agree with you on the background checks, but what i was saying is that their are, although few, U.S. politicians who fight for what they believe. Also the point of that episode was to skew your view to near complete gun restriction like in Australia. You just have to be subjective and realize that Australia is a completely different place from the U.S. and adverse gun laws will most likely show varying results.