US Universal Healthcare FTW

the end of america by humon

  • Dannyl
  • March 24, 2010, 3:32 am
You might be interested

Comments

Reply Attach
  • 5

    Yay! More taxes! Oh, wait.... crap.

    • Ertrov
    • March 24, 2010, 5:02 pm
    Reply
  • 4

    It's not something useful. If a person doesn't work enough to pay their own medical bills, they aren't worth my time.

    • ingram
    • April 1, 2010, 4:33 pm
    Reply
  • 3

    "America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
    Abraham Lincoln
    We just lost one big one right now

    Reply
  • 3

    At least your taxes are going to something truly worthwhile. Try and be happy with that.

    • Dannyl
    • March 24, 2010, 5:19 pm
    Reply
  • 3

    Amen.

    Reply
  • 3

    For gods sake I didn't mean it literally. You don't need a gun to be free, it's as simple as that.

    Reply
  • 3

    I agree with Dannyl. What the hell are you talking about?? Yes, the right to bear arms is one enumerated freedom in the Bill of Rights. So is the right to freedom of religion, press, expression, etc. Are you saying without guns we lose all the rest? If that's true, wtf kind of country are we living in?

    I'm sorry that I am tending to be more harsh than usual, I am just getting increasingly fed up with people saying nonsensical things without backing, and expecting to be taken seriously, to the point that they take violent action. It is annoying beyond belief.

    Reply
  • 3

    Not being able to afford it aside, it seems like it's only viewed as such a bad thing because it's a new concept to get used to in the States. All nation states are basically socialist because they're about pooling resources for the greater safety of everyone, which is true of all societies from superpowers to tribal villages.

    Is it any more unconstitutional than having a socialised system of defence, a socialised police service or a socialised fire service? You pay taxes and anyone who's home catches fire gets it put out, instead of a system where anyone who cant afford to pay insurance to a private fire fighting company just gets their home incinerated.

    • Ruleb
    • April 13, 2010, 2:16 am
    Reply
  • 2

    the only ones being taxed to death are the ones who make over 200,000 a year. and Dannyl is right, at least the taxes are going towards something productive

    Reply
  • 2

    The republicans didn't vote one single time during the health reform at all. That's more stubborness than anything. Don't get me wrong, I'm a republican, but I have to give props for the democrats for trying to take over congress.

    Reply
  • 2

    agreed D':

    • ember
    • March 25, 2010, 4:54 pm
    Reply
  • 2

    Wow you're just so stupid. Of course I know you have a Bill of Rights, I was taking the piss out of you because you're too retarded to spell it properly.

    And you don't have to have guns to have freedom. And that is exactly the problem that I was pointing out in my first comment, you think that your way is the ONLY way to have freedom, and you're too afraid to change even slightly even if it's for the better incase it makes you, as above, a freedom-hating Communist hippie-Nazi. I'm not saying you're way of doing things is wrong, or that it doesn't give you freedom, but it's not the only way to get freedom.

    Reply
  • 2

    Our rights pretty much are the same because the US Bill of Rights takes its name from and is largely (but not entirely) based on the English Bill of Rights : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689

    Which includes the right to own arms for defence. That's since been changed admittedly but didn't your own government once decide not to 'trust you' with alcohol? (the 18th amendment). I know it didn't last long but maybe one day we'll own guns again. I hope not but I am interested in what 30.06 you have? a Garand?

    • Ruleb
    • March 26, 2010, 1:47 pm
    Reply
  • 2

    finally we got universal health care! and to all u people saying that guns=freedom thats just bullshit, im an american and just because we have the right to bear arms doesnt make us anymore free than other free countries, it just means we can own a gun

    Reply
  • 2

    Americans, taxes aren't all bad. Look around you.
    1269689279508 - us universal healthcare ftw

    Government involvement isn't EVIIIIL COMMUINISM FROM HELL. fuckin' hell.


    socialism for the mothetrfucking win.

    Reply
  • 2

    What I think is hilarious about your post is that your entire personal attack on me rests on calling me academic in nature. If that is truly such a frustrating thing for you: someone wanting an education, maybe you should stop having political debates... because having a stake in one REQUIRES an education. And hopefully a goddamned good one.

    I admit that my "world" is well-insulated, sure. My family is fairly well off.... but who are you to claim otherwise? And what does that have ANYTHING to do with what we are discussing? The fact that I am "well-insulated" makes my support of HEALTH CARE FOR THE POOR and those unable to pay worth something. I'm not some middle class asshole who would rather have a slightly lowered tax than SAVE LIVES. My god.

    And please, give examples for what you speak. Because it doesn't seem to hurt pretty much everywhere I look. But oh wait, analyzing evidence is something that requires input from the world of Academia. So I guess you can't bring yourself to do it.

    Go read a goddamn book.

    Reply
  • 2

    Nicely handled. The only issue i have with that Logos was that you weren't specific in the book that he should read. He's probably picking up Stephanie Meyer right now...

    • Dannyl
    • March 30, 2010, 6:08 am
    Reply
  • 2

    @the post starting 'in the US guns = freedom'

    "only threw education will you understand."

    Dayum. Well played, sir, well played.

    Dannyl, I think we've just been shut down.

    Reply
  • 2

    Hahaha, and that's why I love you, sir.

    Reply
  • 2

    @if you have never been hunting

    that's just not true. You don't need to do something to know about it. I know rape is wrong and i will tell people it is wrong even though i've never raped anyone.

    You tell everyone about world war 2 but you weren't even alive during it. You're argument against this will be that you have been in the miltary so you know something about it. My argument against that will be that i have fired a hunting rifle so i know something about hunting. We will then come to a stalemate because, as usual, you will not ever admit when someone is correct unless they agree with you. The end.

    • Dannyl
    • March 30, 2010, 7:11 am
    Reply
  • 2

    Care to rephrase so that statement actually makes sense?

    Reply
  • 2

    Oh my... a damned jackass heard from.

    • ingram
    • April 1, 2010, 4:35 pm
    Reply
  • 2

    To the contrary. i'm not religious. If God exists, he's (in my opinion, i don't want to incite a riot and don't care to argue) kind of a dick. Just sayin'.

    Reply
  • 2

    Logos... We've been over this I believe. You either don't believe me, or I am wrong. I know I'm right, but I'm not trying to convince you. I'll explain:

    When communists started invading the democratic party, they developed a new word because the ideas of communism was not appealing and was associated with dictators. So they developed a new word "progressivism." This nice words sounds great because who can be against, "A person who actively favors or strives for progress toward better conditions, as in society of government" as you so posted.

    The problem with that definition is: What is the operational definition of "better." Progressives idea of better conditions is socializing the country, making sure everyone is taken care of by the government, etc. I however don't believe that the government's job it to take care of people. That's our own personal responsibility. Though don't get me wrong, I am not entirely against some social programs designed to help people when they hit a rough patch, although, I still believe there are alternatives.

    So my point is, just because you want to progress towards something better, doesn't mean anything. EVERYONE wants to progress towards something better. But when the term "progressive" is used, it's used to really describe a type of progress that moves towards government control, government regulation, government interference, etc. I don't think that more government in my life will make conditions better. Yes, it might for the poorest of the poor, but it will in turn bring down those who have worked hard to make a nice life and prepare for their and their kids futures. Over time, these progressive reforms will drag the upper class down and the lower class up until we are all equally middle to lower-middle class.

    I am not against progress, unless that progress is for socialized reforms.

    • leeish
    • April 2, 2010, 10:54 pm
    Reply
  • 2

    I highly doubt it will reduce the deficit. Govt programs don't reduce deficits. Look at amtrak. Has there been a year since it has been made that it has even made a profit or broke even? Plus is it even constitutional? Can the federal govt force me to buy something or pay a fine?

    Reply
  • 2

    I'd understand all of these comments if i knew a fucking thing about politics

    • noodle
    • April 12, 2010, 8:13 pm
    Reply
  • 2

    I'm not trying to bash you but why would you say he is a dick?

    Reply
  • 2

    i think the movie "sicko" has a pretty good perspective on healthcare

    • DooBuR
    • April 13, 2010, 4:00 am
    Reply
  • 2

    Sicko was made by a self admited spin doctor.

    Reply
  • 2

    sounds like a gate way drug to me. and we all know that gate way drugs lead to harder drugs.

    Reply
  • 2

    jofu is correct. you must buy or the goverment will tax your ass.

    Reply
  • 2

    @ Johnecash: You really need to stop posting. it seems like every time you do you get roughly 85% of the people here pissed at you. For someone who says they were in the USMC, you're attitude sucks.

    The military is not for everyone. Calling those who don't enlist lazy not only proves your narrow mindedness, but also shows how much of a dumbass you are.

    As for guns and freedom, I find it kind of sad that you attribute your level of freedom with your ability to own a firearm. You make it sound like the 2nd amendment is the only thing in the Bill of Rights worth mentioning.

    Important part here: Don't you EVER generalize about the culture of the US. There are more people here that don't give a shit about guns than those who do, and this is coming from a guy who wrote a paper on why gun control has gotten out of hand.

    More important parts: Resorting to your mom jokes....well, you've certainly reached a new low.

    and btw: gateway drugs aren't "gateway" for everyone. I smoke pot, and I will never go beyond that. I know what hard drugs will do to you, and I'm not stupid enough to risk it.

    Honestly, just stop posting. No one wants to deal with your shitty attitude.

    Reply
  • 1

    idiotic... universal health care fill help more uninsured Americans than it will do any harm. Naturally it is going to cost... What doesn't? Just try to denigh medical help for someone in need and you'll better understand that this was a big "must do".

    Reply
  • 1

    Actually agree with you, though it took a few attempts to understand what you were saying. I assume you misunderstood the post and were trying to argue again :)

    • Dannyl
    • March 24, 2010, 4:15 am
    Reply
  • 1

    Good post I am for the system tho, It will be messy i think they didnt do it how they should have

    Reply
  • 1

    yes well said america!

    Reply
  • 1

    i love this series of comics. there all hilarious

    Reply
  • 1

    the awesome part is it ONLY TOOK 17 YEARS to get ......

    Reply
  • 1

    Deny, I think.

    • jokin
    • March 24, 2010, 3:55 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    He made fun of me because I was in school saying I was gonna be the first to graduate maybe he should go back.

    Reply
  • 1

    I usually don't pay much attention to American politics but this one has intrigued me. Why such opposition to social health care?

    I've heard a few arguments on TV but they all seem to be based on rhetoric and motivation for opposition rather than a real argument why its a bad thing.

    • MdmGnr
    • March 24, 2010, 8:49 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Yay taxes implemented in 2018 that go towards saving lives and reducing the general deficit by over 100 billion! Yay paying less for people for which we ALREADY pay for! Yayyyy!

    YAY for democrats growing some balls! YAYYYYY!

    Yay for common fucking sense.


    Sorry for the harshness/bluntness of my post. I have just been at the end of my rope politically recently... too many death penalty debates in philosophy class : ).

    Reply
  • 1

    The best thing about the health care bill is now when the Republicans will take control of the house

    Reply
  • 1

    See just look at you, you call me a child and then go to the your mum jokes again. You're such a shining beacon of maturity.

    Reply
  • 1

    Who's the douche who made a refernce to the Ammendment?

    Reply
  • 1

    It's not taking over Congress, it's growing some balls. After a consistent stream of negativity from the Republican side of Congress, I highly doubt they gained any support whatsoever from America at large. For instance, Rep. Alan Grayson is winning not only the Dem. Primary in his state, but also the Rep. Primary. Because people like initiative, not repetition of negative comments.

    I highly doubt this bill will have a negative effect on the Dem's majority.

    Reply
  • 1

    No. Freedom is freedom. Guns are a side-product of our militaristic beginnings that morphed into a perceived cushion of individual power. In order to keep the masses happy, the original Constitution had to be amended to include the right for silly American gun owners to continue to own their useless toys. I'm not saying that right should be omitted, I'm just saying that guns and freedom are entirely different.

    Reply
  • 1

    +3 lol!!!

    Reply
  • 1

    just throwing it out there we dont have universal health care and that bill will never pass

    Reply
  • 1

    so you are sayting that 2/3 of amercians are aginst it and that wont efect the dem. party at all?

    Reply
  • 1

    and where does the money come from. my taxes.

    Reply
  • 1

    it did pass

    Reply
  • 1

    not universal the thing that really changed was passed is if u dont have health care u will be fined

    Reply
  • 1

    Explain your logic. Are you therefore claiming that other countries are not free?

    How are guns related to freedom? How is there no freedom without guns?

    Don't just say stuff.

    • Dannyl
    • March 30, 2010, 5:53 am
    Reply
  • 1

    Poopiteepoop, you are now my friend.

    Reply
  • 1

    Yeah unfortunately this site is becoming overrun with the people i like to call 'Youtube commenters'

    • Dannyl
    • March 30, 2010, 6:10 am
    Reply
  • 1

    MikeyNinja... 1/5th of our economy is not a change every so slightly... it's a big change. My beef with the HC bill is that it:
    a.) Forces people to purchase insurance or pay a fine. (First time in American history that you are fined for not making a purchase) That is not freedom.
    b.)Is an attempt at redistributing wealth because the liberals who passed it have said it themselves, The rich are too rich.
    c.)It's going to bankrupt the insurance companies because they are going to be forced to accept people that are so high risk they can't make money off of them. They will no longer be profitable and will go under.

    The rich also work their asses off to get rich. I think everyone should be able to get medical care. I just don't think taxing and forcing other to pay for it is the way to go.

    • leeish
    • March 30, 2010, 6:12 am
    Reply
  • 1

    Oh, moving up in the world I see. Moving on to sexism, derogatory gender reversal, and personally attacking our main legislative body.




    I am thoroughly impressed by your cogency of argument.

    Reply
  • 1

    Come on Logos... that was a good one. You can't REALLY be a fan of Pelosi. I mean... really. She's pretty scary.

    • leeish
    • March 30, 2010, 6:24 am
    Reply
  • 1

    That hasn't explained anything. You've just repeated yourself. How are you not free without guns? What are you not free to do? Other than kill things.

    • Dannyl
    • March 30, 2010, 6:30 am
    Reply
  • 1

    She may not be my favorite person of all time, but I see absolutely no reason to insult her in anyway. Why is she "pretty scary?"

    Reply
  • 1

    Like I said, the right to bear arms is one enumerated freedom. But how does that equate it to freedom itself?

    Reply
  • 1

    One word... botox.

    • leeish
    • March 30, 2010, 2:57 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Ah, yes. Thus she's scary. Makes sense?

    Reply
  • 1

    I really don't think you are being honest by saying that looking at her doesn't scare you. Do you ever see people on the street that just freak you out. All of her botox and plastic surgery just makes her scary looking.

    • leeish
    • March 31, 2010, 4:58 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    And I respectfully disagree, but I was just making sure it wasn't political : ).

    Reply
  • 1

    hey, it was late... and an old guy was tired...

    Reply
  • 1

    ok where do i sign if i want to kick obama in the twat and nancie in the nads

    Reply
  • 1

    thought you quit the site dude, glad to see you didnt

    Reply
  • 1

    :) Politically... progressive ideals are much more scary than her botox could ever be, but that's just a matter of opinion.

    • leeish
    • April 1, 2010, 9:37 am
    Reply
  • 1

    Why are progressive ideals scary?


    progressive - us universal healthcare ftw

    Reply
  • 1

    quit?!?! never... I had a slight account glitch and had to do some business out of town... So it just turned out to be a "too busy" week to come out and play.

    Reply
  • 1

    If you would like to get off topic and discuss how much of an asshole I am then please make a new thread. I would like to stat on the topic at hand.
    Not once in human history has a gun, knife, car, plane, hammer or any other tool ever killed some one. It's always the person using tthe tool. A hun is not good or bad. That part depends on the person using the gun.
    To adress your question what is the point of guns? That is a broad question with many differnt answers. A gun is art, it's a beautiful blend of enginering, chemistry and just a dash of black majic for kick.
    I challanger you, no I bed you please go try and hunt. Kill your furst buck, drink his blood and become one with mother earth. Remember what it is to be a man, harvest you own proteen. It is good for you to let the savage out now and again. Go back to your roots it's In YOU.

    Reply
  • 1

    "Remember what it is to be a man."

    "It is good for you to let the savage out now and again."

    "A gun is art"

    This is the epitome of America's underlying problem. Too many of our citizens view themselves as renegade badasses who won't listen to rhyme or reason, just go with their gut/savage instincts/inborne feelings. Which means they don't listen to reason, cling on to horrific prejudices, and fight tooth and nail against positive change while branding it a moral and human necessity.

    All of what you said is bullshit, and I hope you know that. Guns DO kill people. People using guns ALSO kill people. Whether or not you want to attempt to employ semantics to mask the danger a gun poses, it won't work. Guns are made for killing and destruction. Period.

    Killing and destruction does not equate to freedom. I realize some was necessary for the acquisition of said ideal. But the two things are not equivalent in any way, shape, or form.

    Reply
  • 1

    "Government programs don't reduce deficit. Look at amtrak." What doesAmtrak have to do with anything? Please clarify...

    And yes, it is constitutional. This is because "The Congress shall have power To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States,"

    and, "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers."

    General Welfare includes the independent power of preserving the health of the nation, thus Congress may make all laws necessary to promote it.

    Reply
  • 1

    But to force me to buy something? That is not a tax.

    Reply
  • 1

    Also Amtrak was created by the government to provide something. It is always losing money so we have to pay for the losses in taxes. Government can not do things that break even.

    Also, finding a doctor who accepts medicare is getting harder to find because the doctors are not being properly compensated from the govt for the appointment of the medicare patient.

    Government is not the answer. Personal responsibility is.

    Reply
  • 1

    The tax is to aid those who can't afford healthcare.

    • Dannyl
    • April 5, 2010, 11:50 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Did you know that around 98% of "poor" people in the US have a tv. Wouldn't the poor people that have a tv be able afford Heath care but just don't have their priorities strait. Also as I said it is unconstitutional and in addition we just can't afford it. In 1990 Medicare was predicted to cost only 12 billion dollars but it actually ended up costing over 100 billion dollars.

    Reply
  • 1

    I could buy a CRT TV for about £5 - £10 nowadays.

    You can't just assume what other people can afford. I think you said somewhere you came from a relatively privilaged household, not to knock you (i did too) but you can't just say it's their fault unless you've been in the situation.

    Also you're doing the same thing as Johnecash and concentrating on those few who are just too lazy to pay for healthcare. What about the people who have health problems and thus just can't get insured? What would they do without this bill?

    • Dannyl
    • April 6, 2010, 6:47 am
    Reply
  • 1

    WTF!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This gotta be one of the first things dannyl said that I agreed with. But only partially.

    If we force these insurance companies to accept all these people won't that raise costs. Insurance is like a casino. If all of the people in the casino hit the jackpot then won't the casino close? Then govt will have to bail them out and that leads us closer to socialism which doesn't work. So we should work on fixing things we already have.

    Reply
  • 1

    Careful, the world might explode if that continues.

    This is something i've thought about to myself. America's version of Government Healthcare is different to most countries. Where the UK pays for all healthcare (NHS FTW) yours basically just makes it so that everybody has to buy health insurance, and will help anyone who can't buy it. The big hole in this one is that the insurance companies can just increase their costs and milk both their old customers and their new customers/the government. To me your new healthcare seems like a half-way point. It's not enough

    • Dannyl
    • April 6, 2010, 6:56 am
    Reply
  • 1

    Well dannyl I'm pleased that we can find some middle ground. I know we need reform but what we are doing won't work.

    We don't just need to give everyone things but there are times when people are really in need of help and I'm not opposed to govt programs to help people when they really need it but in our system is is overused.

    But as I said before government is not the answer.

    Reply
  • 1

    Imma let Dannyl continue this for a little bit. I have a large physics research project due very soon... I'll be back in a few days! Go my British brother in crime.

    Reply
  • 1

    Our healthcare system need reformation but not complete government takeover. We need to fix what we already have. What we have done is kind of like adding an addition to a house that already has termites. The termites won't just go away thy will spread into the addition and just make the problem worse along with you spending more of your money.

    won't this just drive up costs? If the insurance companies lose they won't just sit back and let their companies fail they will raise all prices to compensate for it.

    Reply
  • 1

    There was no government takeover. Now back to Thermodynamics : ).

    Reply
  • 1

    @leeish

    That response was amazing. What you said was true. Extremists just slapped the name "progressive" on themselves to make it sound good when it wasn't. Just like when George W. Bush slapped the name the "patriot act" on that bill.

    Reply
  • 1

    Ok I guess your right...Some govt committee deciding what health care I receive, that everyone's health care is rationed by the govt, the govt having direct access to individual's personal bank accounts for involuntary funds transfers. No none of that is a govt takeover...I'm sorry.

    Reply
  • 1

    I can agree with that. George Bush was a progressive republican, just like McCain. Just as bad as progressive democrats. Republicans just take us to the same spot a little bit slower. Progressives overreach in times of crisis when they otherwise couldn't. It's sickening.

    • leeish
    • April 11, 2010, 7:43 am
    Reply
  • 1

    Amen. I found a new great friend.

    Reply
  • 1

    All we need to do now is convince Logos385

    • leeish
    • April 12, 2010, 8:07 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Isn't that unconstitutional? I'm no expert on it but thats unprecedented. And the govt can't make you buy something.

    Reply
  • 1

    We can't afford it and it's unconstitutional

    Reply
  • 1

    When you find out let me know I wanna be next in line.

    Reply
  • 1

    How many people have actually read the Bill? Just curious.

    Reply
  • 1

    i agree, but i'm sure you wouldn't be robbed as quick if the robber knew you owned a gun

    • DooBuR
    • April 13, 2010, 3:56 am
    Reply
  • 1

    What about the people that around turned away from hospitals because they don't have insurance? or they get a disease that isn't covered by their insurance?

    • DooBuR
    • April 13, 2010, 3:57 am
    Reply
  • 1

    Sorry I didn't see the replies until now. You have to realize that your entire assessment relies on the presupposition that Communists have successfully infiltrated the Democratic Party. Where on earth are you getting that?

    Reply
  • 1

    o it is but in 2014 if you make under 20,000 a year you will be fined around 750 under 40,000 around 1,400 and if you make over 40,000 you will be fined 2% on your income

    Reply
  • 1

    i have and it makes me want to sit in the corner and cry

    Reply
  • 1

    Whats the next step for the "make the rich pay for everyone elses crap agenda"? Make them pay for everyone's internet.

    http://www.sharenator.com/We_Should_Feel_Sorry_for_Kids_Without_Broadband/

    It's beginning to be very comfortable to be poor. Free health care, free food, subsidized housing, soon we'll all have free internet. The incentive to work is going down the shitter.

    • leeish
    • April 13, 2010, 4:40 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    But this forces individuals to purchase something with my own money. That's unconstitutional. And how is the matter of being able to afford it not important?

    Reply
  • 1

    A hospital can't turn you away for an emergency.

    Reply
  • 1

    This bill is an attrocity.

    Reply
  • 1

    Reasonably expanding coverage for those who do not have it, forbidding insurance companies to deny coverage to children with pre-existing conditions, and providing health insurance assistance to small businesses is an atrocity??

    WHAT?!

    Reply
  • 1

    Further increasing our attrocious deficit and the govt determining how a citizen can spend their OWN money.

    That's the attrocity.

    Reply
  • 1

    Our deficit will not be increased by this. It will decrease the deficit.

    But either way, taxes exist in order to pay for governmental services. Are you saying you're against taxation altogether?

    Reply
  • 1

    Of course I'm not against taxes. But what was the last govt entitlement program that reduced the deficit.

    Also the insurance companies are gonna die. So then we will bail them out and spend more money.

    Reply
  • 1

    But we do need tax reform also.

    Reply
  • 1

    Sorry I was thinking more of universal/social health care in the style of our NHS which is what I thought MdmGnr was talking asking about opposition to. I'm not too up to date on what ever this half measure that got introduced is, but half-measures generally suck so I can believe it's unconstitutional.

    I only put being able to afford it aside because I'm completely ignorant about the state of the US economy and couldn't argue on it, not because I thought it was unimportant.

    • Ruleb
    • April 14, 2010, 4:09 am
    Reply
  • 1

    Ok thank god. I was begining to believe you were that irrational. But yes our deficit is out of control. If we don't quit spending soon were gonna be in big trouble.

    Reply
  • 1

    well see we wont have to bail them out because the gov will let them die and then here would be only ne option left left gov controled healthcare and logosyou said that giving some one insurnce with a prexting condtion is right that is really bad acctuly look at it from a bussnies view some one will pay you only about 10000 dollar and you have to pay over 100,000,000 dollars on them that is wrong

    Reply
  • 1

    Weichert- that's exactly our difference. You are looking at it from a business standpoint, and I hold a human perspective.

    Jofus- Why do you think insurance companies will die? What leads you to believe that?

    Social programs that work: http://evidencebasedprograms.org/wordpress/

    Scroll down.

    Reply
  • 1

    well they will die out because of my point they cant make a profit with a huge profit loss like that

    Reply
  • 1

    Logos- if the insurance companies are forced to accept anyone they can't make a profit.

    Also they don't make insanly high profits either. 3.4%.

    http://www.usnews.com/money/blogs/flowchart/2009/08/25/why-health-insurers-make-lousy-villains.html

    Reply
  • 1

    what a long debate

    Reply
  • 1

    thats what she said....

    Reply
  • 1

    @logos

    sorry for it taking a month

    Communists may bot have invaded but socialists have and that's just another word for Marxism.

    Reply
  • 1

    All the ones I saw said something about socialism.

    (I am on the mobile version of the ssite so it may have screwed it up)

    Reply
  • 1

    Any one who is: Fat, Old, alcoholic, drug addicted, ugly, a smoker, criminal, fast food junkie etc should have to pay for their own healthcare.

    Reply
  • 1

    OFC. My grandma is old AND ugly. :>

    Reply
  • 1

    Yes, it involves economic socialism, but is not the same. That was my point, they are not equivalent.

    Reply
  • 1

    But when govt has that much power, it could be great. That is as long as the people in power are good people. But what happens when someone who isn't so great gets in power. They have the means to transform our govt into tyranny.

    Reply
  • 1

    That's true about any governmental system.

    Reply
  • 1

    But with a smaller govt it is harder for them to do harm

    Reply
  • 1

    And harder for them to be watched? You are simply touting the classical, known worries of any governmental system. This is no longer an argument about Universal Health Care, Socialism, and whatever else, it is a useless discussion of known problems with the idea of "government" as a whole.

    Reply
  • 1

    Yes it's amazing how a debate changes into something else.

    Reply
  • 1

    The point wasn't that they have a TV, that was just an example. The point is a lot of people are just poor because the government allows them to be. So they won't work, and they'll spend welfare money on things that aren't important. These are moochers, and should not get more freebies.

    • Ertrov
    • May 19, 2010, 5:44 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    But it's not just a simple fluid topic, it's a degradation of our discussion into baseless attacks on the idea of government itself, having nothing to do with any of the claims you have been making/we've been discussing relating socialism, universal health care, etc. It just seemed like this change was in response to you being unable to continue supporting your position.

    Reply
  • 1

    *insurance

    • Ertrov
    • May 19, 2010, 5:46 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    We never said we hate all taxes. Just ones we don't think are right. And we are not a socialist country. If someone doesn't like the basic structure of our government even though we want to keep it, they can get the hell off our land. No one said you have to live here.

    • Ertrov
    • May 19, 2010, 5:48 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    and let's continue this somewhere else thanks :) sorry, just trying to keep the debate on one track

    • Ertrov
    • May 19, 2010, 5:51 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    Go to London, and have a gun with you. Then tell me you have the same freedoms we do.

    • Ertrov
    • May 19, 2010, 5:52 pm
    Reply
  • 1

    But it is part of a pattern of an increase in size if govt.

    Reply
  • 1

    What is the antecedent to "it?"

    Reply
  • 1

    It really does comes off as though you guys hate all taxes, and I wasn't saying America is socialist I was simply stating my prefered choice in gorvernment.

    And thirdly: "If someone doesn't like the basic structure of our government even though we want to keep it, they can get the hell off our land. No one said you have to live here." What are you even talking about? I'm not American and I don't live there

    Reply
  • 1

    Are you refering to the increase in size of the govt?

    Reply
  • 1

    You said "But it is a part of a pattern of an increase in size of govt." What is the "it?"

    Reply
  • 1

    Well let's also bash the people who had outrageous claims on their attacks on Prestident Bush.

    http://tvnewslies.org/html/george_w__bush_-_world_s_leadi.html

    ps. Sorry this took me a couple of months to reply to. Just so you know this comment is in reference your comment on the comment on pelosi having balls.

    Reply
  • 1

    The health care bill.

    Reply
  • 1

    And that would make sense, because right now those who lean more left are in power, which is a direct result of the majority of America wishing them to be. : )

    Reply
  • 1

    I don't understand. My only action here was to ask someone to stop unnecessary bashing. Is that cause for alarm?

    Reply
  • 1

    No of course not. His comment about pelosi having man parts was quite innapropriate. But I just wanted to make sure we didn't forget how people were disrespecting the last president. Like the example if people calling him a terrorist based on false claims. The article I posted was just one of the first I found unfairly attacking our previous president. I just had to make sure there was no double standard.

    Reply
  • 1

    But shouldn't the politicians in power try to do what is best for our country? Not just nessecarily what the people want.(if the American people wanted the health care bill is debatable because of the contents and how it was pushed through). They should do what is best for the country.

    Reply
  • 1

    Of course not : ).

    I do my best to not bash, but to focus on issues themselves. As you do as well

    Reply
  • 1

    And I believe they are doing what is best for our country. They believe they are doing what is best for our country. The majority of people I know believe they are doing what is best for our country.

    Reply
  • 1

    Well that's where we disagree. I don't think this is what is better for our country

    Reply
  • 1

    Ok. Now we are down to the meat of it : ).

    So, if this is not what you think is best, you attempt to get someone elected next time 'round. That's how our political system works: every 4 years we have an open election in order to ensure anyone tyrannous/detrimental to our nation does not remain in any sort of control. Also, we have an impeachment possibility, but Obama has done nothing that would warrant such action.

    For example, I hated what Bush was doing, but I only got riled up 4 years after his election and then 4 years after his re-election. Because that's when it mattered. I accepted that, due to our founding fathers, constitution, political system, etc., often the people I do not like are going to be running the country. That's the reality of America. And while you may not support the health care bill, the majority of Americans did, and the majority of our leaders did as well.

    Reply
  • 1

    Wether or not the majority of Americans supported this bill just depends on where you look. I'd say it was right a an even split. Anyone with 1/2 a brain will tell you we need health care reform.

    But maybe we should fix what we have already before adding more govt.

    Reply
  • 1

    We aren't adding more government... all we are doing is fixing what we have using the powers granted by the US Constitution. There's no addition at all.

    Reply
  • 1

    I'm sorry I slightly mispoke. I didn't really mean more govt but just expanding govts reach on our daily lives.

    Reply
  • 1

    where can i get more if these

    Reply
  • 0

    denigh?

    Reply
  • 0

    SO funny +3

    • peace
    • March 25, 2010, 2:37 pm
    Reply
  • 0

    You're all so caught up in the idea that America is the founder of freedom etc. that you don't realise that the rest of the civilized world have the same freedoms you do. But you're so desperate to protect these freedoms believing if you waver ever so slightly you'll all become communists you end up shooting yourselves in the foot.

    Reply
  • 0

    it's not taxes it's national health insureants

    Reply
  • 0

    love it lol, funny how the american is fat in the comic seems a bit to real

    Reply
  • 0

    Part of being an American is our guns. I own a bolt action browning with a nikon scope I payed 800 for. This thing kicks like a mule but you can hit a 6 inch target at 400 yards. That's a hard shot without a bipod.

    Reply
  • 0

    logos35: What kind of Kool-aid are they selling in your school's cafeteria? I suggest you stop drinking it, pull your head out of your ass, quit living in your well insulated little world of Academia and realize that Big Government has ruined the personal initiative of every country that has experienced it.

    Reply
  • 0

    As for the Democrats growing some balls, I think it's more a case of Pelosi sharing hers.

    Reply
  • 0

    And still i have no idea what the opposition is to the bill.

    BTW, 400yds with a scope getting a six inch grouping is poor. Army requirements are to get a 5 rnd group within 3 inches at 300 yds. This is with a 1.5x sight. A bit of practice and anyone can get it.

    • MdmGnr
    • March 27, 2010, 2:50 am
    Reply
  • 0

    I won't ever try and take your guns. And yes, I'm scared of guns. Cuz' they can kill people. Killing people/killing animals/killing is their intended purpose... they SHOULD scare people.

    I will never try and take your guns, but don't ever try and demean MY freedom by equating it to firearms. The two are completely separate, completely unrelated.

    Reply
  • 0

    love it

    • Dannyl
    • March 27, 2010, 11:27 am
    Reply
  • 0

    @ the post starting 'in the US guns = freedom'

    you cannot possibly compare a car and a gun. a car can be dangerous but that is not it's purpose. it is a mode of transport. a gun is there to kill people.

    How does hunting make you respect nature? You're just killing creatures for your own entertainment. You do not need the food from hunting. You do it because you enjoy it.

    • Dannyl
    • March 30, 2010, 5:59 am
    Reply
  • 0

    @ Logos

    I know right? I laughed quite loudly at work when i read that. Got some odd looks.

    • Dannyl
    • March 30, 2010, 6:13 am
    Reply
  • 0

    It is part of freedom but not all of it. Just like freedom of speech. you can not have freedom without it. freedom is made of many diffrent parts. loose any one and you loose freedom.

    Reply
  • 0

    I've already answered that. Cars are designed for transport, not killing. They're completely different and cannot be compared. Also i actually sold my car just over a week ago because i didn't feel i need it. I walk everywhere or take public transport if i need to.

    In regards to you saying i don't leave the house, or atleast not as often as you. That's just you making assumptions.

    Gardening is completely different to hunting and killing animals with a gun. The meat that i purchase does not come from an animal that is shot. They are killed in a humain a way as possible.

    I agree it is part of life, humans are omnivores so it's natural that we would eat other animals. However as a civilised society we are able to raise the animals in a comfortable way and kill them with a minimum of pain. I consider that more respectful than hunting and killing them. Particularly when a lot of kills wont include a direct shot to the head and thus an instant kill without pain.

    • Dannyl
    • March 30, 2010, 6:52 am
    Reply
  • 0

    I think guns are totally unnecessary in everyday life. Yeah i think i'd be scared of somebody who bought a gun for themselves. I'd be concerned because there is only one purpose a gun serves and that is to kill. Anybody who wants something like that is worth fearing.

    I have no interest in hunting, i've done clay pigeon shooting when i was younger because my dad took me. I didn't enjoy it.

    • Dannyl
    • March 30, 2010, 7:00 am
    Reply
  • 0

    If you have never been hunting then you speak about something you know nothing about. Never forget you are part of the food chain. You are the TOP of the food chain. Never shoot what you will not use. if you shoot it, you eat it.

    Reply
  • 0

    You're now just changing the ideas completely. You're also getting desperate so you're resorting to trying to insult and demean me. I'm off, i'm going to consider myself the winner here just like you'll consider yourself the winner. Either way i can't stay as i've got studying to do after work.

    • Dannyl
    • March 30, 2010, 7:18 am
    Reply
  • 0

    funny how you enjoy speaking for me. i don't put words in your mouth. i would humbly ask you don't put them in mine. when i want to insult you i insult you. asking if you have combat experiance is an insult? i am sorry by trying to explain things in a way you can understand you find it insulting but that was not my objective. i think you read into it a little too much. thats why i asked you to stop putting words in my mouth.

    Reply
  • 0

    Who said that old lady could sit down to protest?

    Reply
  • 0

    oh my... a damned church group heard from

    Reply
  • 0

    nijas ain't real... just sayin'

    Reply
  • 0

    wrong!!! Haahahahahah don't make bets you can't back up.

    Reply
  • 0

    your "amen" just a tad religious... just sayin'

    Reply
  • 0

    Whats the point in guns? Most people dont use them, unless they like to kill other people. And you're a real asshole. You know that don't you?

    • Goober
    • April 1, 2010, 12:33 pm
    Reply
  • 0

    Name one time in history a gun has killed anyone. It's always the person pulling the trigger. I am sorry you have forgoten your place in this world. You say gettin rid of guns would be good. I am happy I do not live in your chastieyed world. It is my culture to hunt. I have stalked bucks with bo and arrow made our traditional way but the marine Corp has shown me what one man and a rifle can do. This is my culture. I would advise you to attemp to respect it. Unless you are hitler

    Reply
  • 0

    Hahahahaha. I'm sorry, but that was laughable.

    As I said before, guns kill people. But this part of the argument is pointless, as I also just said.

    I have not forgotten my place in this world... my place is to be educated, further society as a whole, propagate my genes, and then die.

    I never said getting rid of guns would be good. I don't care at all whether you have one, or multiple. However, equating guns to freedom, that ideal, is something I feel it is necessary to dispose of.

    Don't equate me to hitler. Unless you are an insensitive, ignorant bastard.

    I do respect your culture, but please, respect America. We are more than savages with guns. And so is freedom.

    Reply
  • 0

    You call me a shavage then say you respect my culture. Well am I a savage or do you respect my people.
    Also I will ask again as clear as I know how. Can you tell me one story where a gun killed anyone. The gun only does what. YOU tell it to do.

    Reply
  • 0

    so when an illegal immigrant goes to get care at the emergency room i have to pay for it. i am not a wealthy man. i put myself through college with help from the GI bill. no help from anyone. if i can do it anyone can do it. fuck paying for lazy people.

    Reply
  • 0

    In a lot of cases i'd probably agree with you. Like if you were paying taxes to help lazy people go to university or to give them a free home. This is healthcare though, it's a very basic humane right that everybody should be entitled to be cared for if they fall ill. Lazy people are still people.

    As Logos has also pointed out before this just makes more sense. All hospitals are obligated to treat people if they are in severe danger. This has resulted in people who cannot afford or cannot get insurance (because some insurers will not take them on regardless of what they earn. this also includes both lazy people and non lazy people) waiting until they are in grave danger before going to hospital. Those problems could initially have been treated before they got so bad and would have cost less. However because they had to wait until the hospital was forced to treat them they required more treatment. That treatment comes out of tax payer money anyway. This is just a more efficient way of spending your taxes, and it helps people.

    Even if you don't like the lazy people mooching off your hard earned money it shouldn't matter. This bill also forces insurance companies to accept people with existing medical problems (which they did not choose to have) rather than rejecting them outright as a financial risk. So rather than thinking about the lazyass people and getting angry you should be thinking about the people who work hard and contribute to your country and yet still weren't able to get healthcare, even though they could afford it and maybe even earned more than you do.

    Stop concentrating on the bad, there will always be useless dregs of society who will take the money you have worked for. That's why socialism doesn't work. Socialism is the perfect way to run a country. It just doesn't work because people suck and they would take advantage of it and then nothing would actually get done.

    • Dannyl
    • April 6, 2010, 6:41 am
    Reply
  • 0

    "Even if you don't like the lazy people mooching off your hard earned money it shouldn't matter"
    are you crazy man? i am sorry but i don't work to pay for an illegal immigrant to get health care. These taxes are going to be so bad that for every $1.00 i make i only get around $.25-.30. thats fucked up.

    Reply
  • 0

    If you continued reading my sentence my point was that even though a few people will take advantage it still helps people who really need it, and deserve it.

    Also - http://www.sharenator.com/Tax_Rates/

    • Dannyl
    • April 6, 2010, 7:00 am
    Reply
  • 0

    to deserve it you must first do something. i have free health care and will to the day i die. know why? i was in the USMC. i did my my time and i earned my health care. if you want free health care join the military. even after you are gone the military will take care of you. that how you earn it, thats how you deserve it

    Reply
  • 0

    Really? You were in the USMC? Thanks for reminded us. Again.

    So the only way someone could possibly earn free things is to do what you've done? If they haven't been in the armed forces then they are horrible bad bad lazy people who should suffer.

    I'm so so tired of you.

    • Dannyl
    • April 6, 2010, 7:12 am
    Reply
  • 0

    i am very proud of the time i served so i am sure i will remind you several more times. i think people should have to earn things yes. if people want free health care for life there is a way to do it already. if you choose not to join then yes you are LAZY. my point is there is already free health care for those who earn it.
    Dannyl let me ask you one question do you think in life everything should be given to you or do you think people should work for what they want and need?

    Reply
  • 0

    I think the necessary things in life should be given to everyone and everyone should contribute. Just because some people aren't going to contribute doesn't mean everyone shouldn't get what they, as humans, deserve.

    I work, i pay all my taxes, my taxes go towards things that will support me should i need it. I've used the NHS many times, from going to see my GP to having operations. I'm proud that what i pay taxes for helps other people and myself. Only thinking of yourself is selfish (it is, in fact it's the very definition of selfishness). I can look after myself and contribute to looking after other people. It's a good thing, stop resenting it just because it's not your choice, you can't change it. Accept that you are going to be doing this and instead of being so bitter about not getting a choice just be happy that some of your taxes actually go to a good cause.

    Also, you realise that other people's taxes go to your free healthcare right? Don't think you deserve more than anyone else, regardless of what you've done. I'd rather believe in equality.

    • Dannyl
    • April 6, 2010, 11:14 pm
    Reply
  • 0

    at the end of the day you may think what ever you like. its is not your taxes. if you live across the pond then what you think does not matter. your taxes are not in question then. yes i am selfish. i think of myself. when i work out i do it for me. when i enlisted into the USMC i did it for me. when i paid my own way threw college i did it for me. if you don't do it for your self who will? many people seem to feel universal healthcare is a good thing. all i see is the gov screwing me over yet again.

    Reply
  • 0

    Socialism is NOT another word for Marxism. Please, do some research first. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism. Read up.

    Reply
  • 0

    I hope you're joking about the old and ugly parts

    • Dannyl
    • May 18, 2010, 6:05 am
    Reply
  • 0

    I see, so this is all just a giant evil plan to get her inheritance? Genius. Carry on good sir.

    • Dannyl
    • May 18, 2010, 6:18 am
    Reply
  • -1

    Sorry I didn't realize guns = freedom. That pretty much epitomises you.

    Also, I'm pretty sure you don't have a 'bill of wrights' either.

    By the way, well done for acting like a stereotypical ignorant American moron, I'm sure the rest of your countrymen are beaming with pride.

    Reply
  • -1

    I'm not putting your way down, it works, it has worked, you wouldn't be the most powerful country in the world if it didn't. What I'm saying is you needn't be so afraid to change your ways ever so slightly. By assuming that anything new or different will take away your freedoms you're shooting yourselves in the foot.

    And of course I know what the Bill of Rights is, you can tell that from how I said it, well an intelligent person could tell that. It never ceases to amuse me when you call me a child when you constantly act like a 5 year old.

    Also, Grammar* Nazi.

    Reply
  • -1

    guns are freedom

    Reply
  • -1

    Part of being American is NOT guns. Part of being violent is, maybe. Maybe part of being a fan of the sport called hunting is. Maybe guns are part of your particular, small community's culture. But it is NOT part of being an American. And never will be.

    Reply
  • -1

    in the US guns = freedom. thats why its #2 on the bill of rights. a gun is a tool. nothing more nothing less. drunk driver and smoking both kill more people in the US than guns do. if you are scared of guns then i would suspect you have never been shown how to handle one. only threw education will you understand that a gun is nothing more than what you make of it. like a car it must be respected or it will kill some one. guns only do what you make them do. nothing more nothing less.
    yes i hunt. more people should. makes you respect nature. there is a reason its called hunting/fishing and not killing/catching.

    Reply
  • -1

    If you don't like guns due to the fact that they can kill let me ask you a question. in the US what kills more people every year? Cars or Guns? Cars kill many more people every year than Guns. But you use a car i am sure. If your worry is the death toll then don't use cars.
    if you don't understand hunting that is your loss. i am sorry that i spend much more time out doors in nature than you do. let me guess its ok to have a steak but only if some one does the dirty work for you? do you think its barbaric to have your own garden too? i do. Nothing is better than the food you grow. No apple will ever be as good as the one that grew on your tree. no fish will ever be as good as the one you pulled in. no duck or quail will ever be as good as the one you shot. no meat will ever be as good as the meat you shot and butchered yourself. trust me i respect the animals i eat a lot more when i kill and clean them myself and you will too. don't be a hypocrite. you are an animal. love mother earth and be part of her. my elders in the Chickasaw have told us many stories about why we should eat these things. they have been placed here on earth for you and me. its part of life.

    Reply
  • -1

    why are you scared of guns? if its due to the fact they can kill people then you must be scared of things that kill people. is this statement true or false. if false please correct.
    have you ever hunted?

    Reply
  • -1

    So i have been in combat before. tell me if you read up on it will you then be ready for combat?
    or let me put it in a way you can understand. if you go read all the cheat books in the world for COD but have never played it online who do you think will be better? Some one who plays it or some one who has never played it but has read up on it.

    Reply
  • -1

    hurray you got it all figured out!

    Reply
  • -2

    You do not have the same right as we do. Hell you thought the bill of rights was something I made up. In this and many other countries guns do = freedom. But that is my culture. Are you trying up put down my culture you racist(racist by YOUR definition not mine)

    Reply
  • -2

    I agree it's not the only way. It is the American way. So stop putting down my coutries culure. We love our guns. Our government trust us enough to own guns. Not so much yours. Nice try acting like you knew about the bill of rights. You welcome for the lession child. I have so many things to teach you about life and why it is not ok to impose your beleifs on my people. We are differnt. Please try and show some respect for other countries. Thank you for showing the world you would rather be a grammer Nazi than admit you don't have a clue about the bill of rights. Thank you for showing the world you would rather argue than debate. You children are so easy to predict it's sad.

    Reply
  • -2

    if you say so. i wold like to see you make the shot with a 100 year old gun that has been passed from father to son. oh yes the army does do it while laying down. but i want you to stand up with no prop while holding a gun that almost weights 18 punds. a shooter understands the diffrence between 400 and 600 yards.

    Reply
  • -2

    IN the US due to our history and our laws you can not have freedom without guns. Guns are not the entire part of freedom, but you can not have freedom without them. for the most part our freedom is defined by the bill of rights. #2 on that list... guns.

    Reply
  • -2

    IN the US due to our history and our laws you can not have freedom without guns. Guns are not the entire part of freedom, but you can not have freedom without them. for the most part our freedom is defined by the bill of rights. #2 on that list... guns.

    Reply
  • -2

    I do not feel like teaching you the American way of life. i am sorry you disagree but to properly teach you i would have to start a lecture that starts back in 1776 and goes on threw today. Guns are an American way of life.
    A more important question is how do you feel about England not trusting her subject with guns?

    Reply
  • -3

    its a shame you would rather ignore a question and attack me than have a debate. so i will give you one last try. you said;
    "you don't realise that the rest of the civilized world have the same freedoms you do"
    my simple question was if you have the same freedoms as we do then you must have the wright to bear arms. so what guns do you have?
    now are you here to debate or to act like a spoiled child? can you answer a simple question or is that beyond you ability?

    also you said;
    "Also, I'm pretty sure you don't have a 'bill of wrights' either."

    i would ask that before you open your mouth you have the smallest idea of what you are talking about. while i did misspell rights, not wrights, i am going to educate you now. following is the US Bill of Rights;

    THE BILL OF RIGHTS
    Amendments 1-10 of the Constitution

    Amendment I
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

    Amendment II
    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

    Amendment III
    No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

    Amendment IV
    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    Amendment V
    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

    Amendment VI
    In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

    Amendment VII
    In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

    Amendment VIII
    Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

    Amendment IX
    The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

    Amendment X
    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

    well there you go. to answer you question in the US freedom=Guns. its in our bill of rights. now as far as i know the UK does not have a bill of wrights. you are not allowed to own fire arms since your government does not trust you. its not an attack on you(though i am sure you little brain will see it that way) but a fact. part of being an American is;
    Amendment II
    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
    so in closing when you say;
    "the rest of the civilized world have the same freedoms you do"
    well you kinda look like an ass who speaks with lots of heart and passion but with very little fact and now you know. Knowing is half the battle.

    Reply
  • -3

    that must be why guns are the 2nd admendment. i understand logos you are scared of the boom sticks. but never try and take my guns.

    Reply
  • -3

    in the US Guns go with freedom. i can say without guns there is no freedom.

    Reply
  • -4

    you have the same freedoms as we do? i never knew you had a bill of wrights...so tell me what guns do you own? i have a 30.06 a 3.08, 12 & 20 gauge and my pride and joy is a knights armorment AR-15. As of now i am saving up for a STG. so what guns do you have?

    Reply
  • -4

    not at all child i am 31 going on 17. i admit my faults now if you could only admit what a liar you are we could start the conversation over. but your pride will not let you admit what a child you are. thats ok since actions speak louder than words.
    ps your moms vag in infected and we might have to put her down. sorry.

    Reply
Related Posts