I know that the 2nd Amendment is sacrosant to many socially-conservative Americans, but it's actually a difficult concept to understand the purpose of, if you aren't raised with it, or simply obsessed with guns for their own sake.

Most European countries are primarily concerned with foreign enemies, and many have military service, so we tend to associate weapons with wars of invasion. Since the United States hasn't been invaded since the Brits retreated, and hasn't really experienced a real, nation-threating hot war since the Civil War, but the country is highly militarized and drowning in weaponry, I suspect the men have simply redirected their war spirit inland.

Europe, on the other hand, is now in its' second major war within my lifetime. Some Europeans have experienced 3-5 major conflicts, such as involving Romania, Cyprus, and Yugoslavia. And the chaos of life after communism was pretty bad.

We generally don't like shooting other people here, and don't associated it with glamour and fun and being a cowboy, so we just don't do it. Even in European countries where a lot of people own guns, there is hardly anyone being shot. We really do use our hunting rifles to shoot deer, and not our neighbors.

I think Americans think this means that European men are cowards. Remember, when Americans mocked Ukrainian men for not being familiar with guns and being wimpy schmucks?

Well, I don't hear that, anymore.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Second amendment is to guarantee the first amendment (free speech). This allows the citizens to criticize government freely associate with others and petition government for redress of wrongs etc. It also serves as a strong check against government overreach and abuse of force on its citizens.✌️💜

Everyone keeps telling me that, but we have that here, even without the 2nd Amendment.

And Europeans have ovethrown their governments, repeatedly and regularly, including in Western and Central Europe, within my lifetime, without the 2nd Amendment. Sometimes even completely peacefully.

Just finished questioning the bot and it gave me this:

• James Madison (Federalist No. 46):

“The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation… forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition.”

So, the 2nd amendment is preemptive. By disincentivizing oppressive ambitions, government overthrow is not necessary in the first place.

You don't need weapons to effect a change in government.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velvet_Revolution

> So, the 2nd amendment is preemptive. By disincentivizing oppressive ambitions, government overthrow is not necessary in the first place.

The US concentrated 120,000 Japanese descendants (mostly citizens) in camps during WWII. Apparently the disincentive is not very strong.

More guided research (cheating?) from the bot below.

Regarding the Velvet Revolution, communism was already in decline and, crucially, Gorbachev had signaled that it would no longer use military force to keep satellite states in line.

So, the Czechoslovak Communist Party knew Moscow wouldn’t send tanks like in 1968 (Prague Spring). Without that backing, their willingness to violently crack down was weaker.

So peaceful worked but, at least partially, by coincidence.

Also read that during Prague Spring a 20 year old named, Jan Palach, committed suicide by setting himself on fire in protest.

To more directly respond, perhaps the second amendment is about preventing change, rather than effecting it?

Yes, perhaps.

You absolutely do not have freedom of speech in the EU...

You should read our constitution if you’re going to be so critical.

The first amendment is a protection of the right bestowed by God to speak freely.

The second amendment is a protection of the right bestowed by God to carry a weapon.

The government doesn’t give us rights. God does. These amendments are in place so that the government has a harder time taking them away.

The language is “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.”

And

“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.”

Let the government try to come lock me up for a meme that I put online. We blasting at the door. People going to jail for posting stuff. In America let them come try that. Hahahaa

Thats why we have guns.

I'd rather go to jail for a couple of years, than go down in a hail of bullets for posting a meme.

Imagine thinking you can hold off a militarized police force from taking you down in your own home with a couple of handguns and rifles.

"Strength often lies in unity and resilience, not just firepower. There are many ways to stand your ground and protect what matters most. 💪🏡 #CommunityStrength"

American Gun owners also don't like shooting people... We also actually hunt with most of them...

Sort of. Americans have guns to commit suicide-by-cop, mostly.

I wish I were actually joking. 😏

Most American gun deaths are suicides and many of the police shootings involve men who attack the police or instigate a confrontation in order to get shot. Arguably less-gruesome than jumping in front of the train, but... yeah.

American guns are mostly used by Americans to kill themselves. And hunt deer.

I think most American guns are used to have fun at the range primarily with the added benefit of protection when you might need it most. It's also extremely hard to quantity the number of crimes and murders that are stopped by people with guns because they aren't a statistics since they stopped the crime from happening in the first place.

This is deranged thinking. That's not most owners, that's most gun deaths. The best case in self defense is not having to use the gun in the first place. You are WAY off base.

I don't even know where to begin with the other tripe you've said. I guess I'd start by saying what is the greatest threat to your property, to your basic human rights? It's not foreign governments if you already have a government that pretends to own you.

Anyone who thinks guns are inherently violent, that self defense is not important, yes, is very weak and is likely to be trampled upon.

Says person so scared of his government that his online persona is a strip of bacon.

Look, I prefer to live as bacon and to die as a man, standing up for my right to not be aggressed upon. I'm not so much scared as I am doing what is morally right: doing my part to protect myself and everyone else from the tyranny of the state. Something you obviously don't fully understand. I swear someone stole your nsec or something.

You're the one who is deranged.

I am multiple times less-likely to be shot or arrested, by a criminal or my own government, here in Germany, than in the USA.

The best case in self-defense is _the other person not having a gun_.

And how do you propose we get the all the guns that are currently out there.

You don't. I don't think you can actively reverse it.

But gun ownership is steadily declining, with the numbers mostly propped-up by marketing them to women, or selling one person more guns than he could ever shoot. Also, the population is aging, so crime should trend down. Hunting is falling out of favor as a sport, as well.

I think a lot of the guns will just decay from disuse or be given up to buy-backs, when people find one in their deceased uncle's belongings.

The push for gun culture is mostly a marketing campaign by the manufacturers and I think their local, civilian market is going to shrink and their foreign, military market is going to grow. You can make a lot more money selling rifles and amunition to the Danish or Japanese armies than to Joe Sixpack. Americans were being encouraged to buy so many guns because _someone_ needed to buy one.

There's a push for gun culture? Based.

No, sorry, it was a phase.

I presume you are significantly more likely to be assaulted by means other than guns in Germany than in the USA, as well. That's how that tends to work. I never expected you to be so indoctrinated into phony beliefs.

There are of course other factors at play like culture and the efficacy of police.

My point.

No, this was not the point you were making. I'm talking about aspects other than gun culture, which you conflate with admiration of violence or of aggression and presented as the key component. I reject that characterization.

There is little chance of my being assaulting by anyone other than a romantic partner, here. But he's less likely to shoot me, that is true.

Great so you can get knifed instead. I for one prefer death by a gun. Knives wig me out. But whatever floats your boat in the fascist utopia your compatriots have erected over there.

knives are dangerous as fuck. They can do a lot of damage very quickly.

a GSW from a 9mm, the most common handgun round, is likely survivable as long as it didn't go directly through your brainstem.

If choosing between a slice through the abdomen with a shot, take the shot and hobble to the nearest ER rather than bleed out on the subway.

_The other person not having a gun_ is also the best case for a murderer, or a monopolist. Somehow this slips through the cracks in your argument. Might want to think about that.

You are, again, missing the fact that my town hasn't had a single homicide or murder in 50 years.

That's your town. I didn't know what your little esoteric town was or any details about it. This is empirical reality, of course there are intricate nuances. Duh.

Your reasoning for why this is the case is faulty and could not accurately be applied in a general sense.

It's the same for most towns, here. The entire country had 214 murders, in 2023. Baltimore alone, had more.

Mass immigration added about 100/year more, for a few years, but now the rate is lower than before the borders opened.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1045508/number-of-murders-in-germany/

The figures appear too low to me

That's murder. All homicide, to the widest definition, (Tötungsdelikte) was 2858 in 2023, including things like car accidents, shaking babies, and late abortions.

That's harder to directly compare, internationally, as the categories and laws don't align. A lot of American abortions would be prosecuted as homicide, in Germany, and would be in the 20k+ range.

They appear too low because our feeling of safety has declined faster than the numbers rose. It is simply much worse, when a guest kills you, than when a local kills, you. It adds insult to injury because they are ostensibly here, to seek safety.

Also, foreign criminalism has replaced native criminalism, which has been declining due to the aging population.

What has nearly doubled, is rape and sexual assault. That's the big one. But it's still more than twice as high, in the USA.

That's a drastic reduction since the peak in the 1940's.

This doesn't address my point.

The county has had 0 murders and homicides. The big city nearby had 8, mostly domestic violence.

Well that's good!! I'm keeping my guns, I'm not hurting anybody, and the government is not taking my shit. GFY.

“For now.”

You’re like the Thanksgiving day turkey, your life is fine, until one day your government decides you’re an unfavorable and they black bag you, torture you, and cremate you.

You’re not actually safe or fine, you just think you are.

“Is that Nostr server you’re hiding under the floorboards?”

But this is always the case.

So, stay armed

Many gun deaths are suicides, this is true.

The vast majority of the rest and blacks and Mexicans.

“Suicide by cop,” or even cop shootings, are incredibly rare.

your view of Americans having guns as being for glamour, fun and being a cowboy is so narrow.

The landmass of the USA is vast. In certain parts of the country, calling the police in an emergency means nothing because they aren't going to show up in time to do anything meaningful. Not for their lack of commitment to the duty of protect and serve, but literally because the time it takes to travel the distance.

The 24 hr gas station owner getting robbed at 3am doesn't have a panic button to summon police that will arrive in a timely manner. He needs to have a means to defend himself and his business.

The woman getting stalked by her physically abusive ex-husband can finally sleep at night cuz she has a handgun in her nightstand.

The family man who can't afford to move his family into a safer neighborhood has to arm himself so he can protect his loved ones in the event the local meth heads decide to hit up their house for whatever god forsaken reason.

Maybe Europeans feel more settled in their societies because established government has a long history. They're used to being ruled over. The British monarchy has been around for 1000 years, for example.

The United States, a nation with barely any history, is still pioneering and hasn't shed that "you can't tell me what to do, mom!" attitude towards government. We fought a whole war about it.

We need the guns to protect ourselves because no one is coming to save us from ourselves but ourselves.

Well said! (coming from me as a European who is now a U.S. citizen and armed)

This is the same reason a lot of Europeans in isolated or rural areas own guns. Most of Europe is empty, after all.

That doesn't change the fact that we don't have the same sort of glorification of violence. That's purely cultural and a peace dividend. It's tangible over there. Even growing up on Army bases and all of my German male relatives being in the Bundeswehr or serving military duty did nothing to prepare me for the gun-fervor I witnessed in the States.

The people in Finnland aren't gun slingers. They are just glad to have a reprieve from fighting the Russians. Sarah Palin can see Russia from her house, I know, but when is the last time Anchorage was overun?

I don't think we glorify violence like you think we do...

Y'all be like

No... This is very cringe and irregular.

^

Y'all like

XD

I don't do instragram models. You gotta follow them around and take pictures of them everywhere so they can show off their boobies to other men while you watch. I think there is a term for that?

Instagram models, (pretty ladies) will do a lot for the attention of middle-aged single men.

IMO I don't think it's glorifying violence. Lot's of guys like to show off the firearms themselves, more of a materialistic thing. It's also a really fun (and expensive) hobby. It's more of a fuck around and find out. I don't know any man that truly wants to have to pull their weapon. Lot's of talk, but I think every man is (or should be) terrified of having to make that decision.

This is what Europeans think American Gun owners are like. What most of them are actually like:

https://video.nostr.build/3b7ac860c3105f29106d4d68bdb553cb768e2b74c9f841c13a791d12812797ab.mp4

For all my fellow gun nuts out there: This was my first USPA event. So I was more focused on the process and accuracy than the speed. So I took things slow the first few courses to focus on safety. Speed came later. "Slow is smooth, and smooth is fast"

#gunstr

Awesome stuff. Now we just have to get you in the weight room a bit 🤙

I do guns because I can't pack on weight. 😂 No time. I eat plenty.

I'm just saying that does make for a smaller target. You're tactically slim

It's just in my name.

they don't call the gun the great equalizer for nothing 😆

Someone is humble enough to post a video of learning to better defend himself and you want to cut down his physique? That’s a dick move for sure.

i mean.. if y’all haven’t figured it out yet, she is rizful because the need for conflict and attention 🤷

but u do u ❤️

I’m confused?

This was in 2017. I'm much faster now. 😎

Still weigh the same though. And I don't take offense. I know I'm smoll.

Good stuff. I’ve got some extra pounds you’re welcome to anytime 🚁😂

Being a dick is that dudes whole brand.

Right on, great mentality and bravo on focusing on basics.

Best take away for USPA is how to be safe with your gun.

dang y'all uspa courses are nice.

It's a gun club called pinetuckey. Uspsa just uses their range. It is really nice though. But the downside is it's about 40 minutes away from town. They got this and a nice skeet shooting place and everything.

https://pinetucky.com/

dang that's nice. I'm in a blue state so our gun ranges are few and far between.

Move to GA. We will welcome you with open arms. On a side note, I really enjoyed seeing your posts about your new baby. I love babies. More people is always gy. And you seem like a great mom.

that makes me so happy to hear. raising the next generation is hard work, but rewarding.

I loved my time visiting GA when I went for a work trip once. So friendly and welcoming 😁

That’s a mighty big paintbrush your paintin’ with ma’am.

I dont see the violence in the picture. I do however see guns and beautiful women.

would you say these photos are a glorification of sex too?

Sex and guns are very entertwined, in the American psyche. Probably because of Hollywood movies and characters like Lara Croft.

Before Trump's first election, Twitter was nearly overrun with pictures of sexy women with fake boobs, holding big guns and flags. I complained and absolutely everyone said that this is quintessential Americana, and then they muted me for being a prude and a commie. LOL

No I think you're on Twitter too much. The only people there intertwined to or cringy far right Americans that are perpetually online.

what kind of gun fervor did you witness while you were here? I'm curious what you saw as an outsider.

I wouldn't say we have a glorification of violence. It's more like glorification of the gun object. People get excited about a 50cal Barrett in the same way they get excited about a 1,064 horsepower Corvette ZR1.

I used to hang out in the country with kids whose dads owned tanks and Humvees. They had entire arsenals, with basements full of munition. Ostensibly to protect themselves against the federal government, but mostly they just liked accumulating this stuff. It was a hobby, like collecting classic cars.

Dude down the street in Maryland accidentally blew himself up. He had seemed so normal and then his house went poof.

Wow, that is definitely the exception, not the rule. You knew some incredibly wealthy and privileged people. That isn't representative of the average gun owning American. I can see why you have a skewed perspective about gun culture in the US.

Obviously, they are extreme examples, but outlayers reveal the overall tendency. Every culture has outliers in some general direction.

They weren't wealthy. I just lived in the country, in the 1990s, where people had large properties and lots of land was just empty. People bought up retired Army equipment, after Desert Storm, and drove it around and target-shot.

It's all subdivisions for Austin, now, and full of left-wing software developers drinking green smoothies.

Peace? Europe caused 2 World Wars.

Peace, 😂.

Enough with your peaceful socialism; it will come a day when Europe turns communist.

Then you will pray to have guns.

Wer lesen kann, ist im Vorteil.

„Lesen? Meinst du so wie du Mein Kampf liest?“

did you know Palin never said that? That was a Saturday Night Live TV skit, and now people think she said it in real life - same as the Trump "drink bleach to cure covid" supposed quote

Yes, I am old enough to remember the sketch. But the reference was 🤌🏻

https://youtu.be/noSw5iZ8fLA?si=7yywQxTITIkoZ6Bp

If you have a right you should keep it bc lately governments keep rights away.

I'm not suggesting that they give up the 2nd Amendment. That's just how they roll, like how we like to drink too much booze and drive too fast.

I'm questioning the effectiveness of it.

How could an experiment be designed to measure the effectiveness (computer simulation )? That one way to think about it. Another way and I would say it's more kid like is to use your gut. For example, if we were playing a simulation game like Civilization and you had the option to allow guns like 2nd amendment or not like Europe what would you choose? I would choose to allow guns. Why? Because I have an exptation of my citizens to act morally and I also know my country is likely to be invaded (almost always happens). By trusting my citizens and arming them as the supreme omnipotent leader I would expect better security for my nation. Militias could be formed more quickly. It takes time to distribute guns and if the opposing general is serious that is precious time that can be exploited. In ending while I'm Christin I'll quote Lao tzu "By not trusting the people you make them untrustworthy"

False dichotomy.

Europe allows guns and Europeans have some of the highest gun ownership rates per capita. Men in Bavaria are _more likely to own a gun_ than men in many areas of the US, and most men over 40 here have had military or police service.

Wikipedia says, "Countries that guarantee a right to keep and bear arms include Albania, Czech Republic, Guatemala, Mexico, Switzerland, the United States and Yemen." Switzerland and the Czech Republic don't have the problems the Americans do. They're some of the safest countries on the planet with miniscule homicide rates.

The Falkland Islands, Britain, has 62 guns per 100 people. That is more than one gun per adult male. There was been one gun murder there since 1980.

The 2nd Amendment results in Americans having a warped relationship with deadly weapons because they see them primarily as toys or political symbols. Americans own half of the world's civilian guns.

You actually don't need that many people owning guns to fight a professional army because armies are rather small, in comparison to the entire population. Germany has 1.4 million gun owners, in comparison to 182k active service members.

That's why the UK government nearly crapped their pants when a bunch of ethnic Brits marched downtown armed with FLAGPOLES.

Americans are just crazy but we like it that way. Now we have such a history and culture you can't take the guns away. We need to create better citizens. With Christ and Love it's possible.

I'm not American, I'm originally European, and I currently live in a country where guns are banned. Technically you can get guns here, but it's a hard process that may take a decade and results in you losing the right of privacy in your own home, so my reply isn't from the perspective of an American.

The purpose of guns from an American perspective is to guarantee that the final political power always rests with the ordinary citizen, not with the government.

Here in Japan I don't have to fear some criminal is going to shoot me (nor stab me, or throw acid at me, or anything of the sort), violent crimes do happen of course, but they are incredibly rare.

I still believe, however that American gun culture is something every country should aspire to emulate; not because it makes daily life safer in the short term, but because it makes long-term political survival possible.

The Japanese state is polite, efficient [though too bureaucratic], and overwhelmingly non-violent, but it is also a black-box sovereign. If tomorrow a Diet majority decided to impose an unjust law the citizen has no last-resort leverage.

In the United States the Second Amendment is a constitutional declaration that legitimacy flows upward from the people, not downward from the crown, the party or the bureaucracy. The rifle in the closet says: “We can still say no, even if every other mechanism has failed.”

That veto power is deliberately expensive to exercise, nobody wants war, but the existence of the veto changes the calculus of every actor inside the system. A would-be autocrat must ask: "Will my police, my judges, my neighbours pull the trigger for me, or will they refuse and, worse, shoot back?" The uncertainty alone keeps the ceiling lower than it otherwise would be.

The system is not perfect of course, but I'd rather have it than not.

We can see that it doesn't work.

America is basically a shithole country, and has the most powerful military on Earth. Life there has gotten increasingly terrible, since I was a child, and nobody has done anything about it except buy more guns and smoke more weed.

I agree to a point. America IS a shithole country. And believe me you would find it hard to find someone more against weed (and drug culture in general) than I am.

But I don't think the 2nd amendment is the issue

I do because it is a sort legislative idol. Quick, what is the 3rd Amendment about? Or the 7th? Yeah, I also have no idea. Even the 1st is probably a mystery to most people.

It's the US equivalent to the UK's perplexing attachment to the dysfunctional NHS and the way Germany cowtows to Israel.

It made a lot of sense, at one point, and now it's just there and everyone thinks it has magical powers to protect them from Evil.

The Constitutional Amendments don't protect you. God protects you.

I think that if I were American I'd be able to tell you!

But good point, i completely agree with everything else you said!

lol yes. there are more bike lanes in a lot of cities tho

Had the most powerful military...

Still do, cuz of the nuclear arsenal.

The 2nd amendment was written with foreign and domestic governments in mind.

Europe used to have more gun rights, and more recently had more free speech. That is the trend; the fewer gun rights that you retain, the sooner you will lose all other rights.

Once you are disarmed, you are no longer a citizen.

The UK is not Europe.

UK is the best example of gun confiscated followers by the loss of civil liberties.

It’s a slow erosion but all of Europe has fewer gun owned by civilians and civil liberties have declined.

Does your post refer to a specific country?

What conflict was Romania in your lifetime??

Romania was involved in the Moldovan war, in the 90s.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnistrian_War

The principle is simple, and based on natural law. You are born into this world, and have a right to defend yourself. The state cannot grant this right. It can make it that much more difficult to defend yourself. There is nothing cowboy about defending your life.

Looking at data in big cities in Germany, US would you, as a woman, feel safe today walking all neighborhoods at any time of day? Remember that guns are an equalizer for more the vulnerable and weaker against those who would cause harm.

As for the a foreign state invasion, it is an incredibly more complex thing to discuss. Would an armed with butter knifes & pretzels, or armed with AKs and RPGs populace be easier to roll over?

The Taliban provide a clue.

https://youtu.be/1W6oYynRrRk?list=RD1W6oYynRrRk

We just watched a largely-unarmed populace get invaded by Russia and they're still fighting back, three years later.

More older European men have had professional-quality military training than Americans have, and they're bringing back mandatory service, in the majority of countries that paused it. Or already have.

There are multiple conversations conflated into one here.

Most people in Europe can attain a firearm, but choose to not do so. That is because the crime rate here is low.

Most big German cities are safer than most big US cities, and I feel comfortable walking around them day and night. I take the public transportation everywhere. There are better and worse neighborhoods, but even the worst ones are also surprisingly safe.

Most American women are afraid to even walk around in the suburbs. That's one major reason that so many are so fat. They're prisoners in their McMansions. And you can hardly walk around in the country because everything is private and fenced in and the owners will shoot you.

America is a gigantic open-air prison, where people lock and fence themselves in.

Women are not necessarily a match for a man, even if she has a gun. Her best bet is to just live in a country that is safer, overall. Like Denmark.

most rational humans become calmer, and have very well regulated emotional control if they choose to be armed every day - there won't be emotional outbursts - if a situation arises, it is all about de-escalation, avoiding anything that could lead to even a minor altercation...

its why Bruce Banner does everything he can to avoid any situation that could lead to violence - he knows he will win, and someone will get hurt

not everyone is rational, but most people I deal with who chose to be armed, operate this way -

America has not been invaded so why does it have a gun culture? You just answered your own question. Governments are history’s largest killers, that’s why citizens must be able to make the cost of tyranny too high.

America is a shit hole? You’re crazy now, life here is awesome.

I beg to differ on that. We've been invaded since at least Bush by unlawful immigration.

The problem in America is not the guns, much as the guns are not a problem in heavily armed European countries. The problem lies elsewhere, perhaps culture?

In America the problem is implanting the idea in kids heads with “active shooter drills” training.

The true purpose is one reason and one reason alone. To shoot tyrants and their order followers. The War for Independence was NOT about tea taxes. It began when the order followers came to confiscate the militia's armory. And its secondary purpose, shoot anyone else attempting to harm you or others.

You totally misunderstand 2A on multiple points:

1) “no invasion”: most of American history, especially during the “cowboy” era and before, consisted of NUMEROUS frontier conflicts with native Americans. Americans had DOMESTIC threats on their border just as much as Europe had for this time period. Besides the natives, the USA also fought the English in Canada (they literally burnt down our capital in the war of 1812), and then the Mexican American war. It has actually only been since the world war period that America has had no formal “armed forces” threat on their borders. However, I would argue that with foreign cartels like Tran de Aragua taking over whole apartment complexes and the tranny miltantism on our home front, the “peaceful” nature of our domestic situation is really more of a propaganda piece to TAKE our second amendment more so than it is any truth.

2) “but Europeans see invasion”: the Japanese said it themselves—“America cannot be invaded because there is a gun behind every blade of grass”. How much of Ukraine did Putin and the Russians take before the international campaign to send them weapons to fight back? Did you know that, like most other Europeans, Ukrainians weren’t allowed to have their own weapons until AFTER Putin invaded. How far do you think his men could have marched if every granny and farmer the whole way to Kiev was armed the way Americans are? Answer—not very, and it would have been so costly as to have totally changed the dynamic of the invasion. At the bare minimum, it would have denied the Russians the advantages of speed that was critical to their decision to invade in the first place.

3) But, of course, why is it that even under Biden, the most corrupt president of my lifetime, we didn’t get an “online safety act” and Americans being jailed for calling out Biden’s invasion the way the English and other Europeans are? Why is it that THIS has gotten THIS far in Germany, but not the USA?

The reason is because they have to “frogs in the pot” is instead of just dropping the hammer in the USA. Obviously, the USA has tolerated WAY too much overreach. But our politicians have to slowly inch the decline to serfdom or Americans would explode and kill them all.

Meanwhile I got English and Irishmen begging me to teach them how to make cheap approximations of real guns (musket era stuff) to take their countries back from the brink.

Aren’t there stabbings in Europe like every day?

Europe is always at war. Maybe you need more to stop it

That's why the EU and the Euro were invented. To give us a common currency, ability to change residency, and a common court system and parliament.

europeans pay a small price to live in a gun free zone:

to have a bloody fuckin war every 40 years or so

by the way, bloody fuckin wars are usually being excluded from statistics too, how convenient?

Not the one I quoted. The Global Peace Index takes both crime and conflict into account.

I don't know why it took nearly a day for many of your comments to display, but I hope I at least managed to ♥️ them all.

I see you, now. 🫂

Primal says this note has only 18 responses because they only count top-level replies. Had no idea so many people had replied.