“That the rest of the civilised world can see the insanity of the Americans’ bizarre fetish with guns makes their blind and stupid obstinacy on the issue even more perplexing. The US is blighted by its crazy idealism, fundamentalism and a chronic incapacity to think pragmatically about the greater good. Just an insane country.” – Commentator Mr. Denmore, beneath Why the gun lobby is winning [via economist.com] [h/t Tony]
“That the rest of the civilized world can see the insanity of the Americans’ bizarre fetish with freedom makes their blind and stupid obstinacy on the issue even more perplexing. The US is blighted by its crazy idealism, fundamentalism and a chronic incapacity to think pragmatically about the will of the King. Just an insane country.” – Some British Newspaper Guy in 1776
That’s a win.
Bingo. 240 years of sour grapes makes for a lot of whine.
Nailed it. I like to refer to them as “our British cousins twice removed – forcibly.”
And someone should ask this dipsh*t about all the privately-owned American guns we “crazy idealists” sent to Britain at the start of WWII for their Home Guard, when Hitler was working on invading them – you know, after the British Army’s retreat from Dunkirk when they left most of their guns behind for the Nazis? The American guns they outlawed after WWII, collected, and dumped in the ocean or imbedded in concrete sidewalks? Next time Germany wants to take over Europe, they can have it.
Tell that to Winston Churchill. As someone who spent time on the island, all our parking lots combine are bigger than the whole of Britain.
Winston’s mother was an American. While Churchill was very, very British, he had far more affection for his mother’s country of origin than the modern British elite.
Well then, since we are so horrible according to this jerkoff we shouldn’t look to see his sorry ass around these parts ever. Right?
Also, the next time your country is about to be overrun by another country, you shouldn’t be asking us for help, right?
Again I say, the formerly great British Empire lost most of their good men in the wars that consumed the country in the last century. This is what they’re left with. Pity, really.
UK can demonstrate their convictions, here, simply pull out of NATO and go it alone. Even better, get all your fellow wimps together and throw the US out, so we have to go it alone. Please. It is so yesterday that we continue to spend our money and blood defending these snotty pukes. Listening to the screams when some tiny country invades them and murders Parliament and the royal family, would be amazing. “Why isn’t America rescuing us again?”
“Why isn’t America rescuing us again?”
Better yet, why are the British not rescuing themselves? Answer: they cannot rescue themselves without firearms.
Which is why, before Lend-Lease got fully underway (THANK YOU! for my Savage-made Enfield, BTW, many years later), the plucky but unarmed Brits accepted loans of firearms from thousands of US citizens who lent their own personal firearms, often with notes scribbled and tucked inside the buttstock with return instructions, should fortune make return possible under the circumstances. You’re bloody welcome….
Did any of those personal gun loans ever make their way back to the US?
It would be interesting to see what messages, if any, came along with the guns…
Geoff, after using our rifles to save their worthless asses, the limey wankers melted them down and kept the steel.
Yeah, and when the average American infantryman goes to war he has historically been a much better shot than his European counterparts. In WWII the typical American draftee could outshoot a British regular.
Not True, suggest reading “On Killing” until recently only about 10% of soldiers actually placed well-aimed shots. Today it’s about 90% and why were very effective when we engage our enemies. Your local Jahidist will confirm this.
And neither does it disprove what I said. Today’s infantryman uses optics. In WWII, it was open sights and 10% under the stress of combat is pretty damn good.
Erm, no. As someone who’s been there, anyone who’s been there for that matter, will tell you 90% of US soldiers these days do not take “well aimed shots”, our “shot per kill ratio” may be higher than in the past due to better marksman ship training, but to just throw out 90% like that is just not true. That is not to say the US soldier is not well trained, but it simply excludes things like suppressive fire, which is what most of the shooting is.
In past wars most soldiers never fired their weapons at all. I think that’s what the 10% statistic refers to. Now the training and indoctrination (not always a bad thing) of soldiers is better and more engage the enemy.
That conclusion was debunked in the 1990 by the Army.
The study that On Killing draws on for that 10% figure, S.L.A. Marshall’s “Men Against Fire,” has been pretty much discredited. We have no real idea what percentage of men aimed, or what have you- though, the killers, filler and fodder principle certainly applies.
We do have lots of after action reports, and the large number of dead German bodies from both US and German sources from various infantry encounters that disprove Marshall’s thesis.
I yield to that statement. Giving less rigorous methods of analysis at the time. The result of the work is through review, a better training method enabled our war-fighters to be more effective than the past. Leading to using less of them to accomplish national goals.
That stat has been pretty thoroughly debunked in recent years.
Some stats smell too good/bad to be true – and usually are.
Then how come, 14 years later, the local jihadists are still kicking our ass?
Because IEDs don’t miss and they knew when we were leaving.
Are you using “kicking our ass” in the same way many people use it when describing the Vietnam war? That war were we slaughtered the NVA and VC like cattle?
The Republic DNC branch installed a mindless sitting state senator to the highest government position of the land. He parroted his party line that all the coin used to fight and contain the greatest threat to mankind could be better used for social programs here in the “Homeland”. He’s bowed, honoring a Arab King and now authorized Iran to build the most destructive weapon on earth controlled by an Oligarchy that has no reservations about destroying a country or inflicting pain & suffering on humanity to further their quest for money and control of their people. The fact that Iran is now on a path, to obtaining a thermonuclear bomb will create a new arms race in the Middle East where leaders with infantile intelligence, and wanting to settle petty scores with tribes have access to the most powerful destructive device.
A recollection of history, if we’re still here fifty years from now, will ask why and no good answer will present.
They are?
Reply to MK10108
The Republic DNC branch installed a mindless sitting state senator to the highest government position of the land. He parroted his party line that all the coin used to fight and contain the greatest threat to mankind could be better used for social programs here in the “Homeland”.
Probably could. Best offense is a good defense. Not saying HOW it’s being spent is the best use, but I’d much prefer money be spent on people than bombs.
He’s bowed, honoring a Arab King and now authorized Iran to build the most destructive weapon on earth controlled by an Oligarchy that has no reservations about destroying a country or inflicting pain & suffering on humanity to further their quest for money and control of their people. The fact that Iran is now on a path, to obtaining a thermonuclear bomb will create a new arms race in the Middle East where leaders with infantile intelligence, and wanting to settle petty scores with tribes have access to the most powerful destructive device.
Where’s the evidence that Iran is getting close to a HYDROGEN bomb? The ONLY thing I hear people talk about is them getting an ATOMIC bomb; colloquially meaning a fission bomb, not a fusion bomb. And are you ready for the draft to take out Iran? Because a 78 million person, well-armed, well-trained, fervent opponent is, at this point, well beyond the capabilities of our all volunteer force. It’s more than Afghanistan and Iraq put together.
A recollection of history, if we’re still here fifty years from now, will ask why and no good answer will present.
Because we don’t see Iran being able to deliver a nuke to the homeland (missiles, and that kind of distance are HARD) and so going into a full-scale draft war isn’t worth it?
Fallout carried by the jetstream could be a muther…
Marco, I do not know the source of the original quote, but it was : “The best DEFENSE is a good OFFENSE.” I’m also not sure how or when or who started reversing that, but it’s just silly.
Any study of military history will show that while it takes a significant advantage in offensive personnel and equipment to be successful, in only a very few case has any static defense failed to be breached by a determined enemy.
D-Day
Berlin
Iwo Jima
Okinawa
To name only a few more recent examples. And all of Europe is littered with breached castle ruins.
239 years and counting, and the Red Coats still don’t understand why We the People hold these truths to be self-evident. Sad that the British haven’t figured out what it means to be “subject” instead of a free individual.
I’ve spent a considerable of time studying systems of ethics, both religious and secular, their context in history, and their relationships to various atrocities. One theme that keeps coming back again and again is that the most immoral acts in history have occurred when real, concrete harms to actual living individuals, almost always with state sanction, have been justified by appeals to some intangible good to some hypothetical or ill-defined higher order, such as “the greater good”.
How’s that crime rate that’s 7X higher than “insane” America’s workin’ out for you there Mr. Brittish guy?
Oh, come on. You know the only crime stats that matter to anyone are firearms-related. It’s perfectly ok to be stabbed, bludgeoned or strangled – but if you’re shot, it’s a tragedy.
They deride our insanity but yet a good portion of them end up coming here in droves in order to make money.
Or to escape to freedom. The guy who taught my concealed carry class is former British Army, and one of the local county deputies, whom I met in a gun shop, was a former London policeman. I guess he wanted to be able to defend himself from thugs if need be. Neither is interested in moving back.
The greater good???
Sounds like something out of the Communist manifesto.
Who gets to decide what is “The greater good”?
Paul in Texas
The greater good
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUpbOliTHJY
🙂
Doing FMS’s work, son!
Ah, dang, someone beat me to it!
The greater good.
Haha. Typical collectivist British attitude.The good of the whole are more important than the rights of the individuals. Given that I have a good guess what his solution is – he’s a statist to boot.
To us, Mr. Denmore is bizarre, blind and filled with stupid obstinacy on the issue of personal freedoms and individualism. The UK is blighted with surveillance cameras and disarmed cops ready to tax you for carrying a tire thumper (for good reason or not). I guess the UK “window tax” was for the greater good too. They were definitely thinking pragmatically about that one.
“– he’s a statist to boot.”
Worse than that – he’s a subject. He has no rights other than those granted by his government, and he is beholden to that government for everything he considers his. His subservience is so deeply ingrained he can’t imagine why anyone would wish for anything different, so he sees our freedom and self-reliance as some bizarre “fetish” to be stamped out.
Except these idiots are also incapable of understanding that “society” is comprised of individuals, thus if it’s bad for individuals, it’s bad for society.
The individual vs. the collective. The People vs. the State. The more collectivists say that history is on their side, that the collective will eventually win out, that the entire civilized world is arranged against us, the more our opponents make me think of the Borg (yeah, SF geek here). Resistance is futile, they say. The line is drawn here, we say, from sea to shining sea.
I can live with that.
Check out the world’s hellholes–nine times out of ten it was the Brits that left them in a mess. Iraq? Iran? Palestine? Pakistan? Afghanistan? Yemen? Check ’em all, and that’s just for starters. Nigeria, Kenya, …
But they lecture us.
That is unfair. Anti-Colonialism forced a premature withdrawal by the UK. Most of those countries would have benefited from another generation British rule. You can blame the Eisenhower administration for pushing the anti-Colonialist movement.
The “premature withdrawal” you speak of was occasioned by Britain’s belated realization that they were no longer an Empire and were unable to deal with the messes they had created.
I think have reversed cause and effect. The UK lost its Empire because it withdrew not the other way around.
After WW II the Brits could not afford their Empire any more. Actually after WW I, but they managed to maintain the illusion for another generation. And yes, after WW II the world concensus was definitely in favor of decolinization.
On the other hand, the Brits did more than all the other major colonial powers to try to prepare their colonies for independence, including setting up democratic institutions and teaching good governance. Unfortunately, in a lot of places it didn’t really stick, but in some places it did. The world’s second most populous nation (India) is still a democracy, even if a pertty turbulent one. Hong Kong and Singapore are tremendous success stories, with more economic freedom than the USA. Malaysia does OK. The “white” colonies (Australia, Canada and NZ) are fine. In the Middle East Jordan is among the best governed states in the area (grading on a curve).
Yes, most of Britain’s ex-colonies in Africa are a mess – just like the ex-colonies of Belgium, Germany, France and Portugal – because Africa is a mess.
Another generation. You could make that claim indefinitely. I’m sure some said and some still say the same about the USA.
They didn’t just cave to political pressure, they knew they physically couldn’t hold on the Empire if they tried. They did try in Egypt, and lost. They also saw what happened to French indochina. They knew it would be a costly and expensive venture, (not long after WW2) that was simply not worth it. It would have been better for a slower end to Empire sure, but they were in no real position to hold by force.
I’m pretty sure French Indochina had more to do with the, uh, French.
Uh, other countries pay attention to what happen to each other, uh, uh uh.
You know not what you speak. Check the lineup of countries that were colonized by England, France, and Spain and it becomes clear that the lucky ones were colonized by England. The reason….the establishment of common law. French and Spanish ex-colonies are typically characterized by graft and corruption.
Yep. Pretty much the English ruled their colonies under the notion of “enlightened despotism” while the other European countries viewed their colonial holdings as, essentially, property. However, this seem to ebb and flow from country to country, and some even tried to reverse that policy and make the colonial governments more inclusive of the natives they ruled over (France in Algeria, Portugal with Angola, etc) but too often these results were late and well after the initial insurgency erupted.
The English were also quick to learn from previous mistakes, particularly colonies with a majority white constituency. It is argued that after England lost the United States during the Revolutionary War, England was more willing to grant self rule to Canada and Australia when they demanded it later on. They figure it’s best to give up a little control than losing all of it.
A good number of us Brits move to the US and buy guns.
We refer to those people that lawfully immigrate and then integrate into society as “Americans.”
Only if they quit talking funny.
Careful – some people consider a Texas accent to be “talking funny”. (Not me! I like Texans – spent 2 years at Ft. Hood with the 1st Cav, and met a bunch of really great folks in the smaller towns around the post.)
We probably ought to bear in mind that this clown and the regime over there do not necessarily speak for ‘the man in the street’ or the folks out in the sticks. Just as our ass-hats in media, government and academia do not speak for us. Just imagine them watching or listening to Shannon Watts or the late Sara Brady and believing that’s how we all think.
But the trend is for the man on the street to believe this nonsense after a generation or two. When it’s presented as fact and “common sense” in media long enough without challenge, the masses start to think of it as fact and common sense.
Agreed. And not only in the media, but the thorough indoctrination that has taken place in the public education system since the Glorious Sixties and even before that. Now none of this stuff is even questioned, and if we do question it, they look at us like we’re flat-earthers or lunatics. And as recently as fifty years ago, THEY would have been the lunatics.
Precisely.
Dear Newspaper Guy,
Your native language today isn’t German or Russian? You’re welcome.
Signed,
‘merica
As many of you know, before WWII was declared, Churchill sent an urgent request to the US for small arms as they faced the Nazi’s Operation Sea Lion. In addition to Roosevelt sending some WWI surplus rifles and small artillery pieces, the NRA collected donations of over 7,000 privately owned guns and sent them to England. Churchill later wrote:
“When the ships from America approached our shores with their priceless arms special trains were waiting in all the ports to receive their cargoes. The Home Guard in every county, in every town, in every village, sat up all through the night to receive them…. By the end of July we were an armed nation…. a lot of our men and some women had weapons in their hands.”
Very interesting. Thanks for that!
At the conclusion of hostilities the Brit government collected all those arms, and instead of returning them to their donors melted them down for scrap. Don’t confuse me with the facts, guns are BAD!
After the outbreak of war in September of 1939, my grandfather sent his .38 caliber Iver Johnson revolver to the NRA for donation to the British cause. It was respectfully returned, with ammunition, in the fall of 1949.
In earnest: who cares what journalists from other countries think?
Seriously! Especially countries that we have:
1. Kicked their @$$3$ in wars.
2. Saved their @$$3$ in wars.
We have to care because they are selling the western world on the idea that individuals should not have access to guns and that it is a “human rights” issue.
The UN was not successful in getting the U.S. to sign off on their civilian disarmament policy but that doesn’t mean that they won’t keep trying…. or that they won’t keep pushing the issue to the point that the rest of the world tries to sanction us until we “see the light” and ditch our weapons in order to be part of their harmonious collective.
There is so much gun shame in other cultures that in Germany for example, most men won’t talk about hunting with people they don’t know. In the UK it’s so bad that they actually have to travel to Germany to hunt or even do target practice.
The people who have the most to benefit from disarmament are the ultra wealthy elite who are concerned that the people could eventually turn against them. Remember that it was Plato, when commenting about why the people wouldn’t rise up against a philosopher king (tyrant), said – “the people will have been disarmed”.
That is something that has already happened in most countries and what’s worse the people are applauding it.
+1
What’s insanity is relying on the state to come save you when they are minutes away when something is happening to you in seconds. It’s nice to know that when a crazed terrorist wants to behead someone in this country, that person can put a stop to them with a few hollow points.
We do think about the the greater good – the greater good of the individual, which by extension is the greater good for all. A morally idealistic man can think no other way. But pragmatism, unfettered by moral ideals, produces only misery and mass graves.
Can someone please explain to me why people are so insecure that they need acceptance and reassurance from other countries?
Mr.Denmore, other countries might be shaking their heads at us but they are doing that as they are getting pushed around. I might not fall into the ” civilized” category, but I am fine with who I am and what I do and I am more than comfortable with the fact that I am better suited to defend that which I hold dear. If you are happy to have the cops show up in time to draw a chalk outline around you or your family just so you could be remembered as a civilized snob, I won’t hold that against you
Because the masses become conditioned to believe it.
It’s such a shame what has happened to that nation.
It is. And it is exactly where we are headed unless we return to the constitution.
You are right. It is being approached the same way that they approached smoking, through marketing campaigns and brainwashing.
My son was just born in August of last year and if things keep going the way they are his could be the last generation with any kind of right to protect themselves without having to hide in a corner, wet themselves, and wait for the (often corrupt or incompetent) cops to show up.
Sadly true.
+1
It’s easy to question the utility of rights you’ve never had or cared to excersise. Why does anyone need freedom of speech, I’ve never talked that much anyway?
I would say the Brits exhibit a similar blindness about their NHS.
Unless killing patients through neglect / incompetence / bureaucracy and burning their bodies for heat is the goal.
Meanwhile, the Scots have put a man in jail for four months for singing a song on his way to a soccer game.
http://reason.com/archives/2015/04/06/scotland-the-brave-new-world
And that’s why we have guns.
Wow. That’s almost as bad as arresting a woman for posting a gun selfie on Facebook.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/04/johannes-paulsen/woman-arrested-for-posting-gun-selfie-in-facebook/
“Fear smothers rational debate. It is meant to.”
I find that closing comment about the NRA’s rhetoric hilarious, coming from the “LOOK AT THIS BABY” crowd.
Americans are, on average, a pretty independent people. The country was founded on the ideas of individualism, and that hasn’t gone away despite the best efforts of fools like the commentator above. Gun ownership is the logical outgrowth of that mentality. What people so quickly forget is that it’s easy to champion collectivism when you are on the receiving end of benefits; let’s talk when you are the one being asked to sacrifice “for the greater good” and see how you feel about it then.
People who make comments under online articles are stupid.
Posting an article commenting on an online comment is even worse.
Posting an online comment on an online comment on an article commenting on an online comment is the worst. 😀
“That the rest of the civilised world can see the insanity of the Americans’ bizarre fetish with guns makes their blind and stupid obstinacy on the issue even more perplexing. The US is blighted by its crazy idealism, fundamentalism and a chronic incapacity to think pragmatically about the greater good. Just an insane country.”
So said the caged bird to the free bird. Can Stockholm Syndrome exist when you were born into captivity, or is it considered something else? I suppose we can just call it being a subject. Lets talk about being civilized and antiquated but I don’t think the ones still paying homage to a king or queen should be doing the lecturing.
Here’s how bad it is in the UK. Their leader eats a hot dog with fork. Damn, probably puts ketchup on it too.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/british-pm-david-cameron-caught-eating-hot-dog-knife-fork-n337046
There’s a very, very good reason why a politician eats a hot dog with a fork.
As Michelle Bachmann found out.
http://doylez.com/img/michele-bachmann-going-for-votes.jpg
Anyone notice that all the former or current monarchies have extremely high rates of terrorism? We fight to be free, they fight and even beg to be subjects, deny basic freedom and do their damndest to support socialist views in rest of the world.
Sadly the politicians of this world have caved to this insanity of the nanny mentality & convinced a number of people to become subjects and give up the thought of freedom not only in other countries but ours also. Look at Northern Ireland’s struggle for freedom from British rule, called terrorism now by the current PC crowd but doing some of the same things Washington, Jefferson, Adams & the rest of our revered patriots did for the freedoms we enjoy today.
Simple solution we refuse to support these “allies” unless the help us. How many of our citizens died in WWI, WWII, Vietnam plus many smaller incursions supporting monarchies or socialist regimes in the last 100 years & since the 1940s NATO & (formerly SEATO). I think they should be given a taste of our freedoms, once they get a taste likely an increase in LEGAL immigration & support for the way of life we had prior to King Obama taking office. In Short Support FREEDOM, our Constitution and only elected representatives that do the same..
This is just more of the fabricated smear campaign against civilian gun ownership. Some of the weak-mined who lack the ability to analyze the data for themselves are simply repeating the government-sourced rhetoric to disarm civilians.
I figured that quote was from sometime in the 1780-1815 time period. Yay internationalism! Yay holding hands and letting other nations make our policy!
While I have no problem with people stating their opinions of our country, why is it that it’s considered impolite to criticism other countries but perfectly acceptable to criticize America as much as possible?
I don’t tell the French to stop participating in quintessentially French activities such as eating cheese and drinking wine, or in this case tell the British to stop partaking in massive state sanctioned surveillance and lack of constitutional rights. Owning a firearm is such a quintessential American thing that is not going away anytime soon just because people without any sort of cultural context think we shouldn’t have them.
Not just owning a firearm, carrying it as well. This includes open carry of long guns and handguns. The regular open carry of long guns is a vital part of the deterrent purpose of the Second Amendment. If they aren’t regularly carried, rest assured that ownership will go by the wayside in time.
“… the rest of the civilised world ”
F*&k You Too! If you are going to open your statement by calling us uncivilized then why would we listen, or even care about, what you have to say on the matter.
At the start of WWII when Britain asked the American citizens to send them our personal firearms and ammo so that Britain could defend itself from invasion they were pretty happy with our love of freedom. They don’t seem to have learned much from that experience.
Remember that while TPTB in Britain today don’t like the private ownership of guns not all the public agree with that policy.
Someone should tell these folks why they don’t need to be armed.
http://news.yahoo.com/ordinary-folk-military-training-over-russia-threat-110741366.html
Perhaps — this says it all:
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/03/02/uk-media-regulator-threatens-rt-bias-airing-anti-western-views/
“Civilised World”. Rome, feeding people to the lions in the colusieum claimed to be “civilised”. As did the brits when they hanged people, including those under 16 for stealing.
I have more in common with the barbarians of the world. Wouldn’t want nor do I seek approval from the brits. They’re the flyover, trailer park bit of Europe.
“Trailer park of Europe.” Good nickname! 😀
De-balled tea-drinking poodles. Did they bark? I wasn’t listening.
Says the country that is struggling to fulfill its NATO treaty obligations and is cutting its armed forces to the point of irrelevancy.
Recap: Mr. Denmore has no compelling fact or reason so he simply hurls insults at us.
He claims that the rest of the world is “civilised” … versus these words that only apply to the United States:
insanity
bizarre
fetish
blind
stupid
obstinacy
perplexing
blighted
crazy
idealism
fundamentalism
chronic incapacity
to think pragmatically
insane country
As Mr. Ben Shapirro stated, the attacks of people like Mr. Denmore are always the same: we are crazy, corrupt, and/or stupid. And therefore we do not qualify as members of the human race, we have no rights or dignity, and we deserve no consideration from “civilised” people … in other words Mr. Denmore and his ilk are arguing in support of the very basis for every atrocity that mankind has ever hurled upon mankind.
There’s no greater compliment than being called “blind and stupid” by a race of inbred idiots that kowtow to a fat old woman who lives in a palace.
David Cameron isn’t old.
Isn’t it amusing that writers for The Economist, as other left-wing Brits, rant about an imagined US obsession with guns. They don’t rant about the locus of murder, the minority ghettos. They can’t even bring themselves to mention them. Surprise. They are like their American left-wing cousins…always eager to attack middle-class America, but unwilling to talk about the real horrors because it might seem….racist. It is as if they think the middle-class suburbs are a war zone.
Since the dawn of class-based political conflict it has always been in the interest of the variously-described upper classes to encourage a violent thieving lowest class…to keep the middle sorts in fear, behaving as the uppers wish. This strategy doesn’t work so well if the middle class can….carry concealed.
The strategy works even less if some of them carry openly and some carry concealed. 😉
Honestly we should have just lat the Nazi’s have that island.
How soon they forget that U.S. servicemen, with the benefit of being able to freely improve their proficiency with said firearms, saved their bacon in two world wars….
Personally, I’m happier as an “idealistic, fundamentalist” not interested in compromise. It’s interesting to note that this same guy who’s judging another country’s business (of which he knows nothing) was probably one who thought we were morons for judging the Taliban or Iraq. Pot = Kettle = black.
Also, I approve of the image of armed America above. Our legs are chicken legs (need more squats) but that V-taper, that mustache, and carrying as many weapons as a ’90s first person shooter protagonist… Best parts of America.
Let the british lapdogs keep yapping.
Or better yet, RF should, as a former resident of the island, offer to take the editorial staff of the Economist shooting. He could set them at ease by talking of having crumpets for tea available afterwards.
There’s that loaded word, “fetish.” We have a desire to remain a free people. If that’s a fetish then so be it. Also, discuss ubiquitous open carry or not allowing government to infringe on the right of former felons to keep and bear arms and some of our own commenters will use language similar to “crazy idealism, fundamentalism and a chronic incapacity to think pragmatically about the greater good.” There isn’t really isn’t much of a difference between the thinking of Mr. Denmore and these misguided commenters; it’s only a matter of degree.
https://youtu.be/yUpbOliTHJY
I may not be “civilised” but I am a (mostly) free citizen with rightful liberty. This sort of sentiment is identical to the inconsequential rantings of common left wingers in the US and UK. They may have the loudest voices but truly do not speak for most Americans.
I guarantee you one thing, too, Mr. Denmore. It might be a one in a million attack, but no person will get their head hacked off by a cleaver in the street by anyone let alone a muslim terrorist while I am present. If that makes me un”civilised” barbarian then so be it. I can bet you that I know 100 men and woman that would say and do the same thing. Maybe more. It’s too bad you and your fellow subjects don’t feel the same way.
At some point you Brits will find your balls again. Hopefully, it is before they are jammed down your throat by one of your “new” subjects.
This. He would do more good to worry about his own country, which is in the process of being taken-over from within. You can thank political correctness for that, and since they’re disarmed, there’s not going to be a damn thing they can do about it.
“The greater good”, right outta Hot Fuzz. You can’t make this bleep up!
Isn’t the violent crime rate higher there than it is here? Isn’t it increasing while ours is decreasing? Isn’t the main reason their homicide rate is lower that they only count convictions and not bodies?
Suddenly I don’t feel so uncivilized. On the upside, the appearance of crazy is what protects us from folks like him.
Come civilize us…
Hey Robert, are you piers morgan’s cousin? You sound just like him. We didn’t like him either.
who cares what the brits think of American at least were not doing to be ruled by islam soon.
Meh…You’ll be speaking arabic soon enuf’…
And we think they’re tea crazy
I do love the Brits and enjoy visiting the country. However, life there is lowered to the lowest common denominator ( which is what Obama and the left want here) and everyone shares the pain. There are rich, very very rich and there are poor, lots of poor. Not much left in the middle.
Yep. Class hostility is alive and well in the UK. It’s surprising just how pervasive it is and how completely social class still determines the life course of people in the UK. Every Brit I’ve met who’ve spent time here in Texas are ultimately overwhelmed by the lack of class consciousness here. Most find it liberating in ways they hadn’t expected (like owning a handgun and being able to go shooting whenever they wished). Others, a few, found the whole experience unnerving and couldn’t wait to return to the UK.
[Insert Former Colony]icans with guns are crazy
Link to article seems to be broken. Did it get removed from their website?
Edit: O.K., if you copy-and-paste the shortcut, it works, but clicking on it seems to redirect to another site: http://www. annuaire-affilinet.fr/?sIP=13.7&csts=0&ref=484633&site=12297&type=text&tnb=1&subid=skim71566X1520379Xac7165aaca1213e6cc47d60ba93873e5&diurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.economist.com%2fnews%2funited-states%2f21647627-prevent-gun-deaths-politicians-offermore-guns-why-gun-lobby- winning
Extra spaces added to break the above link.
Brit tears are the best. I particularly love it because we have them to thank for the 2nd Amendment. Their tyranny and statist oppression (which, surprise, hasn’t tapered off in the last two and a half centuries) is what taught us the value of being armed against government. And by saying things like this, they only continue to prove our point. Thanks for the reminder, gov’ner, that people like you exist, and thus I must be vigilant.
Also, why is it that the rest of the world equates “civilized” with “tyrannically oppressed”? The ability for any individual regardless of age, gender, or creed, to defend him or herself against those that would do him or her harm IS civilization. The dark ages of lords and serfs was not.
Who gives a flying fart what the Brits think the whole point is what Americans think about the laws that they chose to be governed by as framed by the very document that gave birth to this country in the first place. If we cared at all what the Brits thought we would still be part of their commonwealth.
Comments are closed.