http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm 17k murder per year regularly. I just don't get it. 17k people killed every year in US and it's just statistic. 3k killed by terrorists on 9/11 and it's justification to kill millions and prohibit online gambling. Only 20 people died in columbine and it's justification for all of you not to have gun. Are we penny wise pound folly? Just curious. It's not an ideological question. It's just what's going on? What do we really want to achieve?
Well you can look at it the way you are or you can consider the fact that the government goes after all responsible parties in the case of a murder. If one person is killed and 20 people are involved, the government goes after them. If they show up to take them in and they have guns and a shootout, the government will kill them all. If another 5,000 people show up to fight for the criminals who killed the one person and they want to fight to, they all may die. Terrorists have been, are, and will continue to murder not just people, but totally innocent people to try to scare people into their beliefs and to get what they want. There is a war against the terrorists now and anyone who decides to fight for them are considered enemies. The war isn't just because of 3k people died, that was the rather large straw that broke the camel's back I believe. Now, whether this is the right way to do things or not, if we can really win this and what people consider winning is the basis of many backed anti-war arguments. Regardless, the above is the very simple explanation of this war.
But what does that have to do with us having the right to bare arms? Reseg also you need to look at this on a larger scale meaning we need to take a step back and analyze our policies in that region and make sure its more balanced. Now going into afganistan I can understand but going into iraq because of 9-11 I simply cant. The evidence was a bit to flimsy on that one. As for the OP , unfortnately we arent the only country on earth that tends to look at death as statistics. All major countries do it. You also forgot to mention how we tend to forget to address the problem of overpopulation. I might get bashed by people of my religious faith but china is at least starting to take some logical steps there. This is one of the biggest reasons for war, and we all know thatw ar is fought over control of resources. How long before war is fought over the dwindling food supply which cant possibly grow as the way world population is growing.
Hold up a sec. I'm not personally backing or justifying any of it, just speaking on the majority of the government's point of view on why and what. I was trying to address where the OP said "3k killed by terrorists on 9/11 and it's justification to kill millions" But I shouldn't have singled out that line with a reply. I do feel if the Taliban would have handed over Bin Laden we wouldn't be in either Afghanistan OR Iraq right now. With them protecting him, it gave our government what they felt was enough justification to go to war for it... then into Iraq while we were at it since we were already so dedicated to the "war on terror". I'm not anti-war by any means, but I do feel there are enough pros and cons in the arguments for both sides to be more middle of the road as I am on it. With the phrase: "Only 20 people died in columbine and it's justification for all of you not to have gun." it reminds me of more extreme many times in the Marines 1 person screws up and we all pay. Like when I was stationed in Yuma, AZ and one Marine, while in San Luis, Mexico got in a big bar fight where ending up being taken to jail Suddenly San Luis was off limits for every Marine. It was clearly addressed as a punishment for us all and worded in a way of basically "If you guys can't stay out of trouble then we'll just restrict it". Being in the military and it happening is one thing, but when the government sets restrictions and laws that take freedoms away from people by the actions of few, it's scary thinking of where we could end up.
Here is something to think about. Imagine one person, entity, ideology, religion killed all 17k in the span of a few hours. See the difference? No death is any more or less tragic than another. However, the circumstances that surround events that usher in mass death in a short time? That's where the difference is. I fail to see where "millions" have been killed as a result of the War on Terror? I'd argue millions of lives have been saved.
You always seem to be right on topic man..What would happen if we let them lunatic terrorist groups to act freely? I think this people should put in their mind.
I stand corrected. Millions do die in Iraq though but indirectly. I am just suggesting, more death penalty and less war. That seems to be more on target with those who kill. And far less collateral damage. Now, online gambling is illegal in US under the pretext of preventing funds coming to terrorists. That's way out of target.
Online gambling in the US is illegal because the IRS has not figured out how to monitor, control and tax it accurately. Once they do, the terror argument will cease to exist. On the "millions" comment, I only meant to defray any support of the obvious inference that the US has someone caused these "millions" of deaths, if that number is even accurate.