Barack Obama

I was very excited to hear that he won, Obama!!!! (:

lets no forget that they said that he was inexperienced, he'll probably do alright, i hope.

Celebration time Obama! Obama-bama-Mama! dodododo dodo do do OBAMA!

Everyone seems so positive about this, I hope he pulls "it" off too whatever it is. If he just walks in and pulls America out of all wars, and turns the economy around etc in 4 years what the hell is it going to say about the republicans and the entire American population?! It will mean they went to war for no reason, they didn't know what they were doing, you ruined the entire worlds economy, and you were being run by idiots that YOU were stupid enough to vote in. You may as well of voted in a chimpanzee 8 years ago!

Thats the best point about this election, is that if he does do it all, then it just shows you are learning from your mistakes, and you are voting in someone who might actually change the world for the good without resorting to war. Hopefully he will do everything he said he would, and America will become a force for good instead of a bumbling maniac.

People like Itachi and their family are clearly stuck in the dark ages, and the idiots in south of America, should just be castrated because they are an abomination to the human race.

Anyone who is unhappy with their new president because "Uh caynt owwn nain guuns nemores, hyuck!" shouldn't be allowed to vote! Just because your old man has owned a gun since he was 10, it doesn't mean he isn't a fucking idiot who deserves to pay higher tax! Any nation that gives their country "the right to own firearms" and then says "But don't shoot anybody" is asking for trouble, and and if any of your voters/presidents had any sense it would be the first rule they would abolish.

You guys are all brainwashed from a young age that your forefathers were these incredible men of genius who created the rules of your country to be followed to the letter. What is being forgotten is that some of those rules are so out dated and medieval they should be abolished, and the only people opposing the change are the ones who still think it is 1787, back then of course it made sense to be allowed firearms because a country as vast as America couldn't possibly be policed effectively and defending yourself was a matter of kill or be killed. Now 221 years later it is not the same scenario, and if guns were outlawed and removed there would be no need to carry them! However you treat the constitution like a bible, and act like it should never be changed. Theres probably lots more in there that doesn't make sense any more.

It'll take a LOT more than a change of president for the world to stop thinking some Americans are fucking stupid. Though everywhere else has their major flaws too. The only difference is America are the only "super power" on earth capable of destroying everyone else with their imbecile presidential choices.

Guns will never be outlawed in the USA. It will never happen. There are way to many hunters in the USA going on turkey and deer shoots. Plus it is very much a hobby for many in the same fashion as archery is used by others. I am a gun owner myself. As a single woman I keep a gun in my house for protection. I don't carry it around and it is kept safe and sound. But if someone decides to break into my house by breaking a window or door in, then darn skippy I would not be afraid to use it.

And if you killed them you would be jailed for manslaughter!!!!!! Thats why it is a joke of a law!

In the year 2008 people do not need to hunt, there is no actual reason why people have to go out and hunt their food. They might like to, but then people hunt here and yet we don't all own guns because we have some warped idiotic belief it makes us safe. People should need to own hunting licenses and be strictly held to tight places where they can carry out the sport and where the guns can only be used there etc. Outside of hunting as a sport, there is no other reason to have a gun, and being a hunter is a very thin reason to warrant one.

The worst thing you see is these skin headed freaks with an IQ of 12 who own better weapons than a lot of American troops in Iraq have, and all they do with them is meet up in open places and fire them wildly into the air, or walk around bullying people and generally being fucked in the head. Those cunts who planned to assassinate Obama were shown in a picture of them holding a gigantic weapon on their shoulder as if they thought they looked awesome.

Is there some idiots that have guns? sure...but the percentage compared to people that own guns in a safe manner is pretty small. The fact is the people who have no respect for human life will still be killers with or without guns. It is fine if you don't want to live in a country that does not allow gun ownership. But in the USA, it is not thought of in such a negative light as you by most. One recent story around here that happened is a lady was raped in her home. She reports it. The rapist is not yet caught but attempts to break into her house a few days later. Cops stop by and can't find anyone so they leave. A few hours later the rapist returns and breaks into her house. She shoots him. She will not be charged with manslaughter. If a person is shot in self defense, there is no manslaughter charge. And as far as I am concerned this woman was completely in the right. You only see the negative and biggest stories because that is what is heard the loudest and is the most interesting to the world media. You only get to see the skin heads. I am a career minded straight edged person. I would bet if you ran into me on the street that you would have no idea that I am a gun owner.
And we do have to get hunting licenses around here. It is not like people can go out in their backyard and start shooting rabbits. You get a hunting license and go to your designated hunting zone. I don't hunt personally as I have no interest in it but I know a lot of people that do it every hunting season. But I do like going to the shooting range on occasion and shooting at targets.

Killing someone in self defense is still usually an offense as far as I know, but I am more than willing to be shown where I am wrong because its just something I thought was true. Surely you could just kill anyone you liked and then say they came at you with a knife (planted after shooting) etc?

The USA has a self defense law that varies by state...but the general rundown is that if a person feels that they're under threat for bodily injury, you have the right to defend yourself. Typically, a person breaking into a personal residence with someone in the house is an automatic "threat" to the well being of the person who owns said residence.
I live in Missouri, where the law was recently changed to state...
"People in homes, as well as car and truck drivers, will have wide discretion in the use of deadly force against intruders. People will be immune from criminal and civil actions for killing or injuring someone if it is in self-defense or in defense of other people.

It allows the use of deadly force against anyone who illegally and forcibly enters a dwelling or vehicle if the owner “had reason to believe” that a crime was occurring or had occurred. People no longer will be required to retreat from an intruder before using deadly force.

The change will not apply during instances when the intruder is a law enforcement officer or when the resident or driver is committing such felonies as murder, robbery or rape."

Judging by the fact that crime still happens, I am wondering if allowing you to kill intruders has really had much of an effect, surely it just serves to make them more cunning, more lethal and the only benefit other than obviously surviving, would be to keep prisons from becoming too overcrowded. Surely if being killed was a deterrent then there wouldn't be many rapes or thefts, if I was in the position where I wanted to steal to make drug money or cater for my family, and I was at risk of being shot I think I would be more likely to murder and flee than to not steal at all (after all these people are stealing because they think they have no other choice) in which case it could be creating a higher likelihood of a death from a petty crime than there normally would be.

Most criminals are not smart people. If they were all that smart, they would not be breaking into people's homes or trying to car-jack somebody. Whether there are guns or not, there will still be a chance of people breaking into my house if my house is picked as the one they decide to go for. I have been burgled once already when I was not home. If someone decides to break into my home while I am there, I would rather have the defense of a gun to scare them off or kill them if I have to....I just don't think a frying pan would have the same effect (sarcasm). I certainly hope that I never have to live through that experience by having to kill someone in self defense but I will if I feel it has come down to a my life or their life situation. I would rather have that protection if a situation should occur.

Yeah, I get why you have it etc. But if I broke into your house and saw you holding a gun, I would probably be shooting you myself. Thieves may not be the brightest but they usually have the street smarts to get in and out of houses and make a living from it. It encourages people to carry guns whilst they rob, so its like a vicious cycle. Here when people get burgled you don't really hear about them being killed in the process, or the burglar being killed. I'd hazard to guess more people would get killed by robbers than as robbers.

Whereas if I am in my house, and I don't have a gun, they will just shake my hand if they run into me?

From the NRA site...
The number of new guns rises by about 4.5 million every year. There are 250+ million privately-owned firearms in the United States.
Since 1991, the nation’s total violent crime rate is down 38 percent. (Murder is down 43 percent; rape, 29 percent; robbery, 46 percent; and aggravated assault, 35 percent.) Violent crime dropped every year from 1991-2004, to a 30-year low; increased slightly in 2005 and 2006; and decreased to nearly the 2004 level in 2007. Every year since 2002, the violent crime rate has been lower than anytime since 1974. Every year since 1999, the murder rate has been lower than anytime since 1966. States with RTC laws, compared to the rest of the country, have lower violent crime rates on average: total violent crime by 24 percent, murder, 28 percent; robbery, 50 percent; and aggravated assault, 11 percent.


Just fyi..."RTC" means right to carry.

Well if they weren't expecting to be shot on site they would be less likely to be carrying a weapon and therefore would take what they could and get out or flee the second they see you. Where as if they get the jump on you, take you by surprise they will take you hostage because they have a gun, or shoot you if you pull your gun out on them. Most normal people would hesitate before shooting someone too, a criminal would probably be less likely to wait.

Rapists deserve anything they get (done to them in revenge, not what they can gain sexually), but something disarming like a tazer would be more suitable, one of those volt guns that fires into the person and electrocutes them to the ground. That way he gets the punishment he deserves and the world is safer anyway because there is 1 less gun on the streets. Its not just a matter of "Oh I will keep it in my bag just in case" it is there to be found by anyone, a kid, a robber who breaks in whilst you sleep and helps himself to your firearm whilst he is at it, someone in an argument who takes things to far, the possibilities for that gun killing someone are endless.

Basically in the state of Missouri if a person breaks into my home, I have the right to shoot them. It is sometimes called a "castle doctrine". I usually hate wikipedia but I am to lazy to find the official data and this seems a fair representation of it from what I can tell.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine_in_the_US

Basically, the laws are set as ground for criminals to know that if you enter a residence, you stand the chance of being killed. So it is best to not even try to enter a home uninvited. If someone enters my home, I have no idea their meaning for being there. I am not going to ask them if they are there to rape me or rob me or murder me or whatnot. If the person runs away after realizing I am there, I would not shoot them in the back. To be honest, I don't know if Missouri would allow that to happen legally. I would have to read more about that portion of the law. It can be read here if you want to find out for me until I have time to read the whole thing. ;)
learntocarry.com/docs/CastleDoctrine.html

RB, to be honest I don't know much about tazers. I have never used one. But my understanding is that they don't have a long range and if an attacker is wearing thick clothing such as a winter coat or whatever the taser has a high likelihood of not taking effect or the attacker can pull the tazer out prior to it shocking them. Also, I am not certain but I thought they were a one shot deal. If you miss, then oops...

Yeah thats true, one shot and your boned if it misses. That part didn't come to mind when I suggested it. Its a tough call really, and I know I would be livid if someone broke into my house etc. But I just don't see how owning a gun helps anyone, thieves wont stop because they know someone has a gun, they will try and outdo the gun with a better one, or find ways around being shot.

Where at in MO do you live, Anonymity?

Saint Louis area

If you're anywhere near East St. Louis then a firearm is necessary! I'm pretty much anti-gun, but that's a nasty part of the city!

I live about an hour and a half from STL. :)

okay fine he won im not happy about it but he won. He shoudl probably stay away form the south meaning any where south of the mason-dixon line. I can allready bet that in georgia they will kill him in alabama louisiana (sorry if i spelled it wrong) kentucky tennesee texas florida and viginia he will be killed. Sorry. And it doesn't matter how much of the country voted for him what matters is that there are racists out there who will kill him just for his skin color. Doesn't matter how good he might be but they will still kill him. Once again 2012 republicans will take over again and hopefully Palin will lead us to victory cause abortion is wrong. And obama stands for abortions.

first off bring the expense report on palin before you make claims. Second off one man messing up doesn't mean everyone who believes the same things he does will mess up. Untill we see that things will never change for the better.