jump to content
my subreddits
more »
Want to join? Log in or sign up in seconds.|
[-]
use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
subreddit:subreddit
find submissions in "subreddit"
author:username
find submissions by "username"
site:example.com
find submissions from "example.com"
url:text
search for "text" in url
selftext:text
search for "text" in self post contents
self:yes (or self:no)
include (or exclude) self posts
nsfw:yes (or nsfw:no)
include (or exclude) results marked as NSFW
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
this post was submitted on
2,307 points (86% upvoted)
shortlink:
reset password

worldnews

unsubscribesubscribe13,419,770 readers
4,959 users here now

Filter out dominant topics:

Welcome!

/r/worldnews is for major news from around the world except US-internal news / US politics

Worldnews Rules

Disallowed submissions

  • US internal news/US politics
  • Editorialized titles
  • Misleading titles
  • Editorials, opinion, analysis
  • Feature stories
  • Non-English articles
  • Images, videos or audio clips
  • Petitions, advocacy, surveys
  • All caps words in titles
  • Blogspam (if stolen content/direct copy)
  • Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr
  • Old news (≥1 week old) articles
See the wiki for details on each rule

Disallowed comments

  • Bigotry / Other offensive content
  • Personal attacks on other users
  • Memes/GIFs
  • Unlabeled NSFW images/videos
  • URL shorteners
See the wiki for details on each rule
Continued or outstandingly blatant violation of the submission or commenting rules will result in you being temporarily banned from the subreddit without a warning.
Please don't ever feed the trolls.
Downvote, report and move on.

Sticky Posts

a community for
you are viewing a single comment's thread.
[–]MyNthAccountThisWeek -43 points-42 points-41 points  (34 children)
Now the state tried to take them away, which has further been proofen to be the correct choice, by the fact that he shot at police, and people complain about how they police can take weapons away...
Do you not see how that is circular logic? State says man cant own guns because he didnt follow their rules. They send soldiers into his home to take him prisoner. He shoots the people that have come to take his property and imprison him. People say "see!!! He shot at people! He shouldnt have guns". But he wouldnt have shot anyone if they didnt try to take his stuff first....
[–]youngchul 29 points30 points31 points  (10 children)
It is not just his stuff. It's something he was granted permission to hold. He lives in a state, and to be a part of society he has to follow the laws of the state.
The state clearly states he can hold the right to carry a gun if he obliges the gun laws and regular check ups. As he was deemed unfit to keep his gun, his permit was retracted, and he had to hand back the guns. Simple as that.
[–]MustangTech comment score below threshold-12 points-11 points-10 points  (0 children)
It is not just his stuff. It's something he was granted permission to hold
see this is why the right to bear arms is such an important right. without it all other rights are just something you're allowed to hold until you aren't anymore. in this case it's guns, but it could be freedom of the press, religion, race, whatever. you really only own what you can stop someone else from taking
[–]MyNthAccountThisWeek comment score below threshold-43 points-42 points-41 points  (8 children)
He shouldnt need a permit to own whatever the fuck he wants to own. Its insane how many people dont believe in freedom. Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." . I know this is in Germany, the principles of freedom are universal.
[–]whitejaguar 34 points35 points36 points  (0 children)
freedom are universal
So is the right to live, oh wait there are some some countries that still practice the death penalty. How barbaric.
[–]youngchul 18 points19 points20 points  (0 children)
There is a difference between anarchy and freedom.
I enjoy the freedom, of not having to worry about a nut job carrying guns, or the freedom of not having to worry about death penalty, or loads of other freedoms Europeans define as freedom.
[–]semperossim 13 points14 points15 points  (0 children)
It's an awfully different story when the thing he wants to own is capable of killing others with ease, when he's shown that he has no intention of keeping up with the laws. You require testing to obtain a drivers' license, and need to keep up with maintenance of your car in order to make sure it is safe to drive and the driver is competent enough to safely drive it. We have these requirements for items that aren't even manufactured to be lethal weapons, and yet wanting some degree of vetting for those who want to own these weapons means that we don't believe in freedom? Maybe people want to live with freedom from fear that some deranged person is going to use a firearm to hurt others.
[–]jammerlappen 10 points11 points12 points  (0 children)
Whatever he wants to own? Should he be allowed to own a suicide belt for example?
[–]LTerminus 9 points10 points11 points  (2 children)
I would like to own some people, please.
[–]MyNthAccountThisWeek comment score below threshold-10 points-9 points-8 points  (1 child)
People arent objects. Are you really that stupid?
[–]ifrpin 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
He has the freedom to move to the US.
[–]IdBangSouthparkSatan 16 points17 points18 points  (19 children)
He was granted a permit with the understanding he would follow the laws regarding that permit. He did not. He further demonstrated his incapability to follow the laws when shooting police. It's not circular logic if you undedstand anything about permits or contracts.
[–]MyNthAccountThisWeek comment score below threshold-20 points-19 points-18 points  (18 children)
He shouldnt need a permit to own whatever the fuck he wants to own. Its insane how many people dont believe in freedom. Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." . I know this is in Germany, the principles of freedom are universal.
[–]Surkov__ 17 points18 points19 points  (2 children)
He shouldnt need a permit to own whatever the fuck he wants to own. I want to own a few fucking nukes, therefore I should be allowed to have them.
[–]MustangTech comment score below threshold-8 points-7 points-6 points  (1 child)
sure, providing you can afford a nuke, and someone with a nuke is willing to sell to you. since that won't happen your hyperbole is shitty.
[–]rutars 8 points9 points10 points  (0 children)
Someone named Saddam Hussein once tried to own a nuke. Then some Republican president stormed in and violated his rights. /s
[–]IdBangSouthparkSatan 12 points13 points14 points  (2 children)
You're advocating anarchy. It's pretty self-evident why that doesn't work. Benjamin Franklin understood the concept of the social contract as well as anybody - the context of that quote is entirely different. He's actually advocating for the role of government in collective security...
[–]MyNthAccountThisWeek -5 points-4 points-3 points  (1 child)
It's pretty self-evident why that doesn't work.
It isnt. At all.
[–]IdBangSouthparkSatan 12 points13 points14 points  (0 children)
Okay, well you're the one who used a quote about funding for frontier defenses to defend a position of absolute freedom, so I'm not sure you're a great example of rationality.
[–]j8stereo 2 points3 points4 points  (11 children)
He shouldn[']t need a permit to own people.
[–]MyNthAccountThisWeek comment score below threshold-6 points-5 points-4 points  (9 children)
Except those people are humans and also have rights.... Freedom doesnt mean "everybody fend for themselves". Your freedoms end where mine begin. Slavery is wrong because it violates the slaves human rights.
[–]LTerminus 11 points12 points13 points  (6 children)
So you admit there is a point where you don't have the right to infringe upon my rights? Like my right to live safely without mentally unstable people wandering around armed, making claims that laws do not apply to them?
[–]MustangTech -3 points-2 points-1 points  (5 children)
so you'd feel safer with these violent mentally unstable people just wandering the streets as long as they don't have any registered firearms?
it's weird how you think the object is dangerous and not the violent mentally unstable wanderer.
[–]McHonkers 4 points5 points6 points  (4 children)
Well it's atleat good to know they aren't allowed to have a gun. The people are always the problem, that's why you don't give them stuff that makes them even more dangerous.
[–]MustangTech -2 points-1 points0 points  (3 children)
The people are always the problem
too bad you're ignoring the problem, and focusing on problems the "problem" could cause
[–]McHonkers 1 point2 points3 points  (2 children)
Well I'm 100% certain we to tackle the problems which are causing the 'problem' a lot better then most other regions, including the U.S..
[–]j8stereo 7 points8 points9 points  (1 child)
Then you shouldn't have used the words:
whatever the fuck he wants to own.
Think, more than a small amount, before you speak.
[–]The_OtherDouche 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
He proved he couldn't own weapons by not providing the bare minimum of responsibility of owning one. They literally come and just make sure you have proper safety precautions and he refused to comply. It isn't that hard to understand.
[–]838h920 7 points8 points9 points  (0 children)
Do you not see how that is circular logic?
Read what I wrote:
which has further been proofen to be the correct choice
So no, it's not circular logic, because there was a reason before that caused the police to come and confiscate the weapons.
State says man cant own guns because he didnt follow their rules. They send soldiers into his home to take him prisoner. He shoots the people that have come to take his property and imprison him. People say "see!!! He shot at people! He shouldnt have guns". But he wouldnt have shot anyone if they didnt try to take his stuff first....
Because it's the law in Germany. Also they didn't come to imprison him, they came to confiscate the weapons.
And you can use the same logic for literally everything that is unlawful. Like for example when driving without license, when dealing drugs, when killing someone, etc.
Also, those weren't soldiers, but police.
For me it looks like you want to twist the truth, to make it look like that the man was wronged...
[–]ZeugeYeboahs -3 points-2 points-1 points  (0 children)
If there weren't any Jews in Europe, Hitler wouldn't have gassed them.

More from r/worldnews

  Hide
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy (updated). © 2016 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
π Rendered by PID 24953 on app-588 at 2016-10-20 08:46:17.669907+00:00 running f81a676 country code: NL.
Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies.  Learn More
0%
 
10%
 
20%
 
30%
 
40%
 
50%
 
60%
 
70%
 
80%
 
90%
 
100%