Quote:
We've already got the "society as a whole" concept in place, you've seen how well that works. For that to work you have to disregard people on the individual level and worry only about the masses and not care if a single individual gets killed because their amount is insignificant.


Rubbish. Less people die in the UK, are we more or less for the individual??

Quote:
That's how things are. The courts have stated for decades when it comes to the police that their job isn't to protect individuals, only to enforce the laws and protect society as a whole. That means you're on your own.


Yeah, but if you have 100% freedom, ie youre in anarchy, you are going to be on your own, or join forces with others. But at the end of the day, you are probably going to die.
In iraq the people are basically on their own and they die.
Go down the scale, less people die if they are less on their own. Why, because dealing with a problem on mass works better than dealing with it individually.

Quote:
Rosie has stated, publicly in fact, something along the following: "I think there should be a law in America stating that nobody can own a gun. Only the police should have guns. If you own a gun then you go to jail."


So what? That doesnt exist, she is a target, so she needs protection.

Quote:
Better to have a "safe" environment, than a place where you CAN defend yourself?


Theoretically speaking, which would you prefer, a place with no guns and no crime, or a place with guns and a 50% chance you will get mugged when leaving your home, and a 1% chance you will be murdered????

Quote:
Clinton was also a draft dodger.


So what? If you want to go to war there is probably something wrong with you. Being a soldier is important for defence, but in the end, most do not really want to get killed for their country.

Quote:
What the @#%$?!


I have no idea!!!