alanschu

No doubt Stilletos give a +1 to Attack and +1 to Defense.

At least you learned something actually applicable to reality with that one.

Hahaha Though I don't typically hear of muggings and whatnot taking place without at least the threat of a weapon being present. Unless maybe the guy was a tank. The thing is, despite my sleight frame, a gun could still make me an effective mugger. With a knife, maybe. Though I suspect that if I was to take a random sample of a thousand people, I'd get more people attempting some sort of retaliation had I had a knife rather than a pistol.

Because I expect a group of individuals (say a family) to act at least somewhat selfishly, for their own needs. I do not expect government to act selfishly on its behalf, but rather on behalf of the people they represent. Hey, my Aunt (a French teacher) spoke French with her exchange student from France when they were alone, so it's not like it's impossible. Since only my brother spoke French (and our exchange student was fluent in English), we spoke English. Also, since the only language I know fluently is English, if I were to decide to become an exchange student, I'd request that my hosts be proficient in English. If the host country I was interested in didn't have anyone that met that criteria, I'd look elsewhere. Just like how a Spanish speaking immigrant (illegal or legal) can find places in the United States where people know Spanish. In any case, it's the people that a person interacts with that will determine the need for whether or not someone will learn a language, not the government. If someone works and lives with people that predominantly speak a different language, they will learn that language, as people are inherently social creatures. I'm sure some don't. I'm sure some legal immigrants don't either. Many foreigners do see America as "The Land of Opportunity" though. And given subsections of society in the United States (and Canada) that sprout up reflecting (and preserving) various minority cultures, it's easier for them to take advantage of said opportunities. I know that when I go to Chinatown, I no longer expect English to be the primary language spoken, despite Chinese being none of the two official languages of Canada. Now Guard Dog commented about how he's fine with people doing their own thing outside of government interactions, in allowing people to behave this way will only lead to a situation where a government agency will conclude that it's best to offer multilingual service. Refusing to do so could be doing a diservice to the community that the government is trying to serve. And yes, it is selfish. You were expecting people to behave in a different way? That would certainly explain why cultural segments of cities sprout up so frequently. Chinatowns, Little Italies, and so on. How is it a strawman? It's simply a situation where a concession would be made. And it's still an issue of scale and circumstance. If the host family was multilingual and happened to know English as well, it's actually not unreasonable that interactions with them would occur in English (especially since I have seen it happen). I was kind of all over the place as I posted this message, so hopefully it's coherent and I didn't leave any unfinished sentences lying around.

I think it would be wise to temper thine expectations a few notches.

Since I have actually had a gun pointed at my face by a criminal who is now doing hard time for that act I can tell you that the experience was very overrated and not all that fearsome. And I'm sure everyone in the world reacts just the same as you in that situation. If that's the case, why do criminals bother using guns period? All the need are their fists.

Let me turn this around then, would the Nazis have been able to effectively keep the Jews in line in concentration camps if the Jews were armed to the teeth? First off, what exactly are you "turning around?" I've not stated any opinion on gun control, and the text of mine that you quoted had nothing to do with gun control, but rather was addressing Hades' comments that the weapon type is irrelevant, but only the intentions matter, since if someone wants to do something, they'll do it. I call bull****, because if a criminal really wants to do commit a crime, in almost any situation he'll be better equipped with a handgun than he will with his bare fists. For you to "turn this around" on my point, you'd have to be talking about the gun being less effective of a tool than the knife. To answer your question, no, they wouldn't. In fact, you could have brought up that the Gun Control Laws in Nazi Germany allowed for such a thing to happen. If you'd like, you could also bring up the hypothesis that part of the reason why Germany initially overlooked Switzerland was that its armed population (in combination with the unfavourable Alps) would have made it a bitch to take. Although this would be irrelevant, as I doubt that Jewish prisoners inside concentration camps would be "armed to the teeth."

Haha, give him the MVP because Evil Rex is what won it for the Colts? :D

If it were the truth of it, then I wouldn't have called it a simplistic view. It wasn't "simplistic" in the Occam's Razor sense, but simplistic in that it's not wholistic. A criminal can have all the desire to commit a crime he wants, but if he's less equipped than the other person, it's a stupid ass thing to do. If they break into a house and have a 100% chance of getting a fat score with no chance of getting caught, then they will do it. If breaking into a house means swimming across a piranha infested moat, dealing with lions in the front yard, the chances of them attempting the crime may be somewhat less than 100%. If all the bad guys are armed with nothing but their fists, and all the good guys have guns and are trained in their use, only the most desperate of bad guys are going to try to do anything, because the odds are stacked against them. Since I'd hate to see Godwin's Law not be correct, do you think that the Nazis would have been able to so effectively keep the Jews in line in concentration camps if they were only armed with knives. The gun has an increased ability to main and kill someone compared to a knife, especially in the hands of an assailant that is not particularly well trained in either. I don't know about you, but as an unarmed person, I'm more afraid of someone waving a gun in my face than I am of someone waving their fists in my face.

This is the "aweseome" thing about gun control.

That's too simplistic of a viewpoint. A gun is a very effective tool. Such an effective tool that it allows formations of scrawny weaklings decimate armies of muscular professional men-at-arms. If you could snap your fingers and magically (I say magically because this IS impossible) make it so that it was impossible for every person that has any criminal intent from possessing a handgun, while still allowing those that do not have criminal intent to use handguns, you'd see a decrease in crime. If I see a law-abiding citizen holding is .45 Colt 1911 and I am looking on robbing someone and all I have is a knife, I am not going to pick the guy with the pistol unless I can find a different way to get an advantage. Or I'd go for someone else that I feel is less capable of defending themselves. As a different example, if I'm looking on breaking into a house, and I see that every house has a moat with piranhas swimming in them, lions guarding the lawn and so on, I'm probably not going to try to rob any of those houses, because the risk involved is way too high. Especially if I myself don't have a weapon to deal with them.

Least restrictions, lowest crime. The funny thing was that after doing this, I realized that the information was essentially useless, but I figured I'd post it specifically to see if anyone would draw any conclusions on it, even though I stated straight up that "After doing all of it, I realize that it doesn't really say anything, but since I did it, I figured I might as well post it." I wasn't expecting that it'd be you though :sad: I figured it'd be the District of Columbia one that was brought up, but I guess not.

You didn't answer the question, which leads me to believe you are just being argumentative. And you didn't really answer mine The question was asked in response to your question, since it provided an alternative viewpoint of the perspective. I was also hoping that it would demonstrate the notion that I do not feel the two were compatible situations. The situations will still exist even with just legal immigration, unless you severely curtail immigration. Which, ironically, I think would be going against part of the values of the United States. I suppose that would depend (since I like to make things fun and interesting in an argumentative way). First off, if I was an exchange student, I'd likely be an exchange student because I want to learn more about the host country's culture, and part of the best way to learn about it would be to experience it. If I was someone that wasn't particularly willing to adapt, I probably wouldn't be looking for a temporary opportunity to learn abroad. Having said that, I'd be surprised if the host family didn't offer any concessions in my favour either. You can also look at it the other way as well. If you were a host family, would you force the exchange student to do everything your way? Assuming your family had a tradition of going to a Christian Church every Sunday, would you force your Hindu exchange student to do the same? The problem with the example posed in your question is that your scale is too small. It's possible for someone that does not know how to speak English very well to still go to parts of America and integrate themselves very nicely. Even a legal immigrant could still struggle reading English Only government documents that are often laced with obscure legalese that many ESL people would not be accustomed to. Another problem with the example would be whether or not the role of the government is equivalent to the role of the host family in the student exchange situation. Part of the reason why my own family took part in the student exchange program with our local High School was to get a perspective of Canadian Culture from a different part of the country. He was from Amos, Quebec. If we weren't willing to make concessions for the Quebecer coming here in certain ways, we probably would never have been accepted. Heck, we probably wouldn't have even gotten involved in the program to begin with. I suppose the government can do the same thing with immigration, if they feel that their culture or whatever is in danger. Though IMO the thing that I find fascinating about American (and even Canadian) culture is the fact that it's a sum of the plethora of cultures that make it up.

Since I wasn't feeling well, woke up at around 11 PM (after sleeping all day), and have nothing better to do, I was bored and went here and here and had some fun. After doing all of it, I realize that it doesn't really say anything, but since I did it, I figured I might as well post it. The number is the rate per 100,000 inhabitants of violent crime. The symbols are based on Gun Laws found at the CNN site, though there are some annotations I didn't bother, since I was getting lazy. Alaska: 566.9 * Alabama: 486.2 * Arkansas: 445.3 * Arizona: 531.7 * California: 621.6 CON, AR Colorado: 334.0 CON Connecticut: 324.7 !%* Delaware: 684.4 CON Florida: 812.0 * Georgia: 504.7 * Hawaii: 243.8 !@%^* Iowa: 266.4 %* Idaho: 252.5 CON Illinois: 656.8 Fooked up, see below Indiana: 349.1 * Kansas: 389.4 *, but not CON Kentucky: 294.5 * Louisiana: 681.1 CON Massachussets: 476.1 #%&*, FC required for rifle purchase Maryland: 786.6 * Maine: 109.6 #%&*, FC required for rifle purchase Michigan: 555.0 %^* Minnesota: 280.8 %* Missouri: 490.0 %, No concealed Handguns Mississippi: 360.9 N/A for Handgun Permit Montana: 240.6 CON North Carolina: 497.6 %* North Dakota: 81.4 CON Nebraska: 327.6 %*, but no concealed Handguns New Hampshire: 175.4 * New Jersey: 383.8 ! with ID, #$ with ID, %&* New Mexico: 757.9 Concealed Weapons Forbidden Nevada: 524.2 CON New York: 553.9 %^&* (New York City is all 8 !@#$%^&*) Ohio: 334.1 Fooked up, see the CNN Link Oklahoma: 497.8 * Oregon: 350.7 CON Pennsylvania: 420.0 * Rhode Island: 297.7 * South Carolina: 804.9 * South Dakota: 166.8 CON Tennessee: 707.2 * Texas: 545.1 * Utah: 255.7 CON Virginia: 281.7 CON Vermont: 113.5 (not a thing! Wow!) District of Columbia: 1507.9 !@#$%^&* Washington: 369.7 * Wisconsin: 236.8 N/A for Handgun Permit West Virginia: 316.5 * Wyoming: 266.5 CON ! - Permit to Purchase Rifles @ - Rifle Registration # - Licensing Owner of Rifle $ - Permit to Carry Rifle %, ^, &, * Same as above, except applied to handguns. CON - Registration required for a concealed weapon AR - Assault Weapons must be registered FC - Firearm Card Required to Purchase Illinois: ID Card required to purchase any gun, Municipal Control throughout. Chicago requires registration

I believe the term you used was something along the lines of not thinking for themselves. I hope you aren't so quick to label all that disagree with you.

Well, the first article was a pleasant surprise. The second article was much more in line with what I expected.

The book should still have references however.

Booooo, boo boo boo boo boooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Speaking of the Yamato, I finally found her. And her sister ship the Musashi. And about 5 other battleships and heavy cruisers. It was funny, I was making preparations to invade Ponope (Pohnpei) which would give me another land base with which to perform air missions over Truk. Near the northwestern coast of New Guinea, patrol boats spotted a fleet of heavy cruisers heading towards Rabaul. Unfortunately land based bombers from Hollandia and Amboina were unable to find the task force and perform bombing runs. So I sent out CV Saratoga, CV Yorktown, CV Enterprise, and CVL Independence to intercept her. This carrier task force was currently at the Kwajalein Atoll, in the central Marshall Islands, covering transports carrying troops heading to Kwajalein to prepare for the invasion of Ponape Atoll. Since the boats were close to Kwajalein, combined with virtually no Japanese LBA on any of the adjacent Atolls, with another CVTF with 4 Essex-class Carriers in it a few days away, this task force loaded up with Fuel from Kwajalein, and sped away at full speed (31 knots) in an attempt to intercept the cruiser task forces. It involved a large detour around Truk, since intelligence and recon have shown there to be significant air forces stations there. As a precaution, each carrier set its Hellcat wings to contribute 90% of its wing to daily CAP coverage, to ensure the protection of the carriers. Since it was an all cruiser fleet discovered, it was determined that the need for Hellcat escorts would be minimal. As luck would have it, the cruiser fleet was not moving particularly fast, which allowed extra time for the Carrier fleet to intercept it. Unfortunately, it made a sudden turn eastward, towards Rabaul on the East side of New Guinea. My fleet was anticipating an intercept near Guam and the rest of the Mariana Islands. This meant a rather risky venture of heading near both Truk, and Rabaul, in order to intercept the fleet. I decided to take my chances, hoping that the 100+ Hellcats could provide sufficient air coverage. Since numerous Japanese Aircraft carriers have already been sunk, there was little concern that I may run into one. Hence, it was deemed appropriate to pursue, since all bomber squadrons would only be utilized to attack naval vessels, not bases. I was able to get within 120 miles of the Cruiser Fleet, just west of Rabaul, but unfortunately bad weather prevented carrier operations. The next day, recon spotted the fleet in the harbour of Rabaul, which would undoubtedly have large CAP presence, but then some luck happened. Recognizing a big juicy target, the desparate Japanese attempted an airstrike consisting of Nells, Bettys, with Zekes flying escort. The combined flak fire, with many wings of Hellcats flying coverage, decimated the air group. Only a handful of Nells and Bettys were able to get off attacks, none of them hitting. I destroyed over 70 planes in that engagement. Naturally, this made me more confident in getting close to Rabaul. The next day, it was discovered that the fleet of warships had departed north, and was heading between Truk and Ponape. Since my invasion of Ponape was a day away, I could not afford to allow the fleet to provide cover. It was this day that I had my first successul attack on the surface fleet. And to my surprised, instead of just the 7 or so Heavy Cruisers, SB2C Helldivers spotted an additional 7-10 battleships! Recognizing an opportunity to inflict further heavy losses to the Japanese Navy, and effectively eliminate their remaining presence on the sea, Admiral Halsey felt that the invasion of Ponape was going to be successful, and that the presence of 13 US Battleships off the coast represented a combined AA value that would be able to repel any piecemeal attacks from Truk. Land Based P-38Js would also provide air coverage, taking off from Kwajalein. So Halsey took his 4 Essex-class Carriers (Essex, Bunker Hill, Intrepid, and Franklin) south of Ponape, on a perfect intercept course for the fleet of heavy surface ships. I do not think that the Japanese Navy will be able to recover from this blow. Initially attacks were not particularly successful. Hits were scored from bombs and torpedoes, but in only relatively small numbers. By the time Halsey's Task Force arrived however, there was something very wrong with the Japanese Task Force. They had expended all of their Antiaircraft Ammunition. At this point, airstrikes immediately became more effective, and numerous hits with 22" torpedoes and 1000 lb bombs commenced. This picture represents the first significant attack on the Japanese fleet. This picture represents Day 2. In total, the fleet suffered sustained bombing for roughly a week. At one point, PB4Y Liberators out of Kwajalein were able to drop limited payloads on the task force as well. While current intelligence suggests that the bulk of the fleet was able to escape (it seems as though amidst the chaos, some ships were able to outrun the more damaged ships. As far as I'm concerned, they disappeared into the night because after the 7th or 8th day of bombing, there were no more heavy ships to be found, and I know I didn't sink them all. However, the losses were still extreme. At least 4 Battleships were sunk, including the Yamato and her sister ship the Musashi (and the biggest surface ships ever built). Heavy Cruiser losses are estimated at around 5 or 6, with additional Light Cruisers and Destroyers sunk. And these are of confirmed kills. Multiple hits were scored on virtually every ship, so here's hoping some lady luck will send them to the bottom of the ocean due to damages inflicted. In the Southeast Asian front, Allied Forces have finally closed into Malaya. After cutting it off from Siam and Indochina by taking Bangkok sometime ago, heavy land forces have pushed into Malaya at the beginning of December 1943. Just in time for Christmas, Singapore was liberated on December 24th, with only pockets of Japanese resistance remaining in the city. With one more city to Liberate on the penninsula, forces have already begun preparations of the liberation of the Dutch East Indies. The first step will be to take Palembang back, and then lift the yearlong siege of Soerabaja on Java Island. The Chinese also are attempting to move eastward, but have met with stiff Japanese resistance outside of Changsha. Commanders in Singapore are considering the idea of dispatching bomber divisions to provide assistance, but Dutch Leaders insist on liberating Palembang and other parts of the Dutch East Indies first. Some also suggest that additional assistance to China should only be sent in the case of Japenese counterattacks, and that unless that happens, a more stable supply route to China through Indochina (rather than the Burma Road) should be attained. The Japanese Greater Coprosperity Sphere just got a little smaller.

Eddo, you'd be better served posting an actual link where you collected said statistics.

I'm kind of the same way. I've always enjoyed research weapons technologies and seeing some of the innovative ideas that come out.

What happened?

To be honest I'm not really looking forward to anything. Which seems weird. Back to crushing the Japanese.

I enjoyed Die Another Day for what it was. A typical James Bond gadget action movie. I enjoyed Casino Royale, because I actually thought it was a good movie.

Couldn't you apply this same logic to governments? When you are a guest in someone else's house, do you try and force them do things your way? Are governments supposed to force people to act a certain way, or represent the people of the constituency?