another school shooting in U.S. of A. :(

[keysersoze]

Dang! I would swipe my oozie for a pound of punto rojo!

Your knowledge of Hispanic food exceeds your knowledge of Israeli weaponry.

Uzi

[race aficionado]

Your knowledge of Hispanic food exceeds your knowledge of Israeli weaponry.

Uzi

Too much punto rojo perhaps.

[BDunnell]

That's why we're Americans, not just in name, but in attitude.

An attitude that, I have to tell you, is hardly well-liked the world over. It's also, I feel, rather presumptuous for you to suggest that there is an 'American attitude' as though this is somehow shared by all your countrymen.

That's why we're Americans, not just in name, but in attitude. That attitude was born partially in England's treatment of the colonies. (Also see India, Kenya, etc.)

That attitude was born partially in England's treatment of the colonies. (Also see India, Kenya, etc.)

Something of zero practical relevance now.

It also probably has a lot to do with why we had to pull England's bacon out of the fire a couple of times.

Er, what?

So, because you hold one (unrealistic) idealistic stance, the rest of the world must fall into step with you or you're not going to play? Rigid thoughts and behaviors are nice in a text book and idealism sometimes has it's day for a bit, but in the end pragmatism rules the world.

If so, pragmatism has, in the vast majority of countries, still allowed people to go about their lives in suitable safety without the need to bear arms.

[Mintexmemory]

That's why we're Americans, not just in name, but in attitude. That attitude was born partially in England's treatment of the colonies. (Also see India, Kenya, etc.) It also probably has a lot to do with why we had to pull England's bacon out of the fire a couple of times.

Now I'm a bit of a reverse isolationist, I think we should just seal off the US and let them resolve the gun ownership issue without external interference - will the last man standing please send an e-mail to let the rest of us know when to come and disarm him
May I correct 2 glaring inaccuracies though
Britain's treatment of their colonies in the 20th C cannot be said to be analogous to the response in the late 18th C when tax-dodging entrepreneurs thought up a wizard jape to get richer - form a new country. As I see it the US has been ploughing this furrow ever since!

As for 'pulling our bacon out of the fire' a couple of times - so you blinking well should have, in return for us not intervening on the side of the Confederacy!
The standard British reply to this old chestnut contains the words: late, self-interest, seeking allies to legitimise its own interests, expensive reparations, historically anti-British and Ol Joe Kennedy. Feel free to arrange these words in a set of phrases that accurately represents US popular attitudes towards Britain through the late 19th and first half of the 20th Centuries.

[chuck34]

BDunnel, I have been away from this for a while. I come back and see nothing has changed. You keep going on about how the attitudes of Americans about guns are "alien" to you, and how you don't understand how people can "live in fear", etc.

Why can't you see that your attitude is utterly alien to us? That we think it is incomprehensible that you live in such fear of guns that you must beg your governments to take them away from you? Why can't you see that despite some great tragedies, that LEGAL gun ownership in this country is completely safe, that the chances of this sort of tragedy happening is less than the chances of being struck by lightning? Why is it so hard for you to allow us to live our lives? Why must you force your morals on us?

[Starter]

An attitude that, I have to tell you, is hardly well-liked the world over.

Ask me if I care how well we are liked or not. I'm pretty sure I won't lose any sleep over it no matter whether we're liked or not.

Something of zero practical relevance now.

True, but failure to know and understand history leads to many missteps, both in a micro and macro sense.

If so, pragmatism has, in the vast majority of countries, still allowed people to go about their lives in suitable safety without the need to bear arms.

Well duh, that's what we've been trying to tell you for lo these many pages now. One size does not fit all and we do what we need to do for our time and society. We fully understand you're happy the way you are. Good for you. Please note that no one over here is lobbying for you to change to our way. (Hint, hint)

[Starter]

Now I'm a bit of a reverse isolationist, I think we should just seal off the US and let them resolve the gun ownership issue without external interference - will the last man standing please send an e-mail to let the rest of us know when to come and disarm him

Thank you. I'll buy that. We'll be able to pull all our troops and aid programs home and save a whole bunch of tax money.

May I correct 2 glaring inaccuracies though
Britain's treatment of their colonies in the 20th C cannot be said to be analogous to the response in the late 18th C when tax-dodging entrepreneurs thought up a wizard jape to get richer - form a new country. As I see it the US has been ploughing this furrow ever since!

I was referring to the insurrections which followed the rather heavy handed rule of the Empire.

As for 'pulling our bacon out of the fire' a couple of times - so you blinking well should have, in return for us not intervening on the side of the Confederacy!

You should have done that, as your factories didn't "cotton" to the idea of paying more for raw materials. Or was it your fondness, as a nation, for our home grown drug tobacco?

The standard British reply to this old chestnut contains the words: late, self-interest, seeking allies to legitimise its own interests, expensive reparations, historically anti-British and Ol Joe Kennedy. Feel free to arrange these words in a set of phrases that accurately represents US popular attitudes towards Britain through the late 19th and first half of the 20th Centuries.

It's our entrepreneurial spirit. Invest in something now for huge returns later.

[nigelred5]

I for one live absent of fear in my own very well protected home....
As far as our American attitude... Many of us really could care less what folks think of our attitude or our laws. Our laws are OUR laws, no one elses and that is what matters to us. Personally I wish we would mind our own damn business more often, if others would do the same. I feel no obligation what so ever to amend our laws to pander to outside interests so outsiders feel safe. We'll decide what makes us feel safe and how we we accomplish that within our laws. Unfortunately, when a country has been attacked, not everyone is going to like the response.

[BDunnell]

BDunnel, I have been away from this for a while. I come back and see nothing has changed. You keep going on about how the attitudes of Americans about guns are "alien" to you, and how you don't understand how people can "live in fear", etc.

Why can't you see that your attitude is utterly alien to us? That we think it is incomprehensible that you live in such fear of guns that you must beg your governments to take them away from you? Why can't you see that despite some great tragedies, that LEGAL gun ownership in this country is completely safe, that the chances of this sort of tragedy happening is less than the chances of being struck by lightning? Why is it so hard for you to allow us to live our lives? Why must you force your morals on us?

Why can't I see any of this? Because nothing anyone has said will ever change my view of guns. And because, when all is said and done, it is very easy for many a European to feel a sense of moral superiority over many a gun-toting American, a breed most vividly represented by the likes of anthonyvop, someone with whom any right-minded person ought almost always to find themselves in disagreement.

As for the last two sentences of the quote above, you seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that I have some sort of authority over you, when all I'm doing is voicing an opinion with which you happen to disagree. This is not a case of 'forcing my morals on you'. It's merely a suggestion that lives might better be lived without guns.

[BDunnell]

Many of us really could care less what folks think of our attitude or our laws.

You mean 'couldn't care less', surely?

Personally I wish we would mind our own damn business more often, if others would do the same.

And there's part of the problem in any such discussion. For an American to be critical of others merely for making suggestions relating to domestic matters will always bring about accusations of hypocrisy given the recent record of your country under successive administrations of both colours.

I feel no obligation what so ever to amend our laws to pander to outside interests so outsiders feel safe.

Any perceptive citizen or commentator ought always to consider, rather than reject out of hand on grounds of tradition, examples of policy from elsewhere.

Unfortunately, when a country has been attacked, not everyone is going to like the response.

What relevance does that have here?