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
2,309 points (86% upvoted)
shortlink:
reset password

worldnews

unsubscribesubscribe13,419,799 readers
4,898 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 -19 points-18 points-17 points  (14 children)
See the thing is a lot of people know that human rights are more important than the arbitrary local laws.
[–]MisterMysterios 15 points16 points17 points  (9 children)
And since when is it a human right to own a gun? The American amendmends have nothing to do with human rights. You will not find any legal text, not from the UN, not from the EU, or anyone else that will deem gun-ownership a human right. The right of life (for example not to fear a state-punishment of execution) is a human right for example.
[–]MyNthAccountThisWeek comment score below threshold-11 points-10 points-9 points  (8 children)
If you need a piece of paper to tell you what your rights are then you dont understand freedom. You people would give up all your freedoms just so Big Brother can make you feel safe.
[–]MisterMysterios 5 points6 points7 points  (6 children)
You spoke about human rights. These are a term that can be defined by treaty-law or customary law. What you refer to when you say "You don't need a piece of paper to know your rights" is rather customary law. But there is no practice in the world (outside of the US) that shows that weapon-ownership is a human right.
Maybe you shouldn't try to use a well defined legal term for your argument just to make your scream "Muhh! Freedom! Muhh Murica!" sound legitimit, but stay by your coulors by saying that you are a IRA-fan.
[–]MyNthAccountThisWeek comment score below threshold-8 points-7 points-6 points  (5 children)
Yeah you dont understand personal freedom. Its ok most people dont. Most people also believe in god so nothing surprises me anymore. Ill be over here shooting my shotgun and smoking joints.
[–]MisterMysterios 2 points3 points4 points  (4 children)
Good luck with your 19th century interpritation of freedoms. In other parts of the world, we learned that unrestricted freedom is the same as tyranny, as we seen with Hitler who used his freedoms in the first place to take over Germany, who used rather liberal regulations for his SA to become his private military, who used his unrestricted freedom of speach to create a wave of hatred and spite that rushed him to the top where he was able to install the facist system in the first place. Whenever you cite Nazi-Germany as the example of the opressive state that took away everybodies freedom, you actually refer to someone who used his missused freedoms to archive that.
The only way to learn out of that is to restrict freedoms as moderate as possible. You have only as long freedom as your own freedom does not violate unjustly the freedoms of others - or else you have the freedom to supress and terrorize others which is the poisen we just wanted to get rid of. The only thing that has to be prevented is that the state sizes your freedoms without legitimit reason. They can't size you for a certain opinion, that is also not what is Germany doing (despite what the internet regularly claims)
[–]Unconfidence -1 points0 points1 point  (3 children)
The only valid restriction to freedom is when an exercise of freedom harms or endangers other non-harmful and non-dangerous people.
I dunno if I'd say someone keeping weapons for the specific purpose of shooting armed intruders is harming or endangering anyone who isn't harmful or dangerous.
[–]MisterMysterios 1 point2 points3 points  (2 children)
By giving out tools with the sole prupose to kill or at least hurt (that is basically the defenition of a weapon) that can be used for everything. Cars have at least another use, the one of transportation, and if you use it as a weapon it is a crime. But a weapon can't be used in any other way than as a weapon, so you have to proove that you can be trusted only to use it for a legal purpose.
[–]Unconfidence -1 points0 points1 point  (1 child)
Is there no legal way in which a weapon may be used as a weapon?
If there is, then why should I be required to prove that I will not use the weapon in an illegal way any more than I should be required to prove that I will not use any other items in illegal ways? What makes a gun different from a sword, in that regard? Or a baseball bat?
Why should I have to prove to you that I can be trusted with a gun, or face armed men literally beating me and locking me in a cage? Isn't that more evidence that you all are the ones who can't be trusted with guns and power, that you'd levy physical force on someone else just because you're afraid?
[–]MisterMysterios 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
As a policemen, yes, and if you work in special fields like body guards, but there, you have to go through training and psychological evaluation.
And different to a sword: Nothing, because of that, it is not legal to carry a sword outside of your own home. There, it is okay since it is so large and inpractical that you can't use it that easy. And why that shoudln't be the same with guns? Because when you have a gun, you can shoot a hell lot of people even in the distance, where, with a sword, you have to actually get in close combat, people can easier avoide you than with a gun.
And baseball-bat: Dual use, a baseball bet is used for sports, also, it is more difficult to do kill someone with a baseball bet than a gun. Again, baseball bet demands close combat, also, it is easier to fight against someone with a baseball bet, or to run away from you when you swing it.
And it has nothing to do with being afraid, but with a simple calculation. The weapon-related crimes in Germany are a minor issue, the worst thing you normally see is a knife (again, close combat, with pepper spray to defeat, the wounds can be leathal, but it is rather difficult to do so) because it is pretty difficult to get an illegal gun and even more to carry it around. This is only done for real intense crimes, like during a robery of shops, and even there it is rather rare (of which I was actually once a victim when I worked at a gasstation). There, if the shopkeeper has also a gun,the liklyhood that this ends with all people dead is extreamly high. But in other crimes, it is highly unlikly to ever face a gun, the death-toll of guns are really low - the overall death toll is really low. If we are more liberal with guns, that goes up for all of us.
Also, since germany is quite well populated, police is normally not that far away, so if there is anythign major to happen, they can come and help out.
For further information why the idea of the good guy with a gun can fire horribly back, I would suggest you this nice piece from the US Daily show:
[–]seditious3 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
Every right that every American has is derived from the constitution. Every one. There is no natural law or theistic law in America. And every right, with the possible exception of the third amendment, has limitations.
[–]The_OtherDouche 2 points3 points4 points  (3 children)
Owning a gun isn't a human right.
[–]Unconfidence -2 points-1 points0 points  (2 children)
Is owning anything a human right? Is there a right to property? Because if there is, then there's a strong argument for a right to own weapons.
[–]The_OtherDouche 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
You can own weapons fairly easily, just follow very simple and straightforward laws. Don't want to follow the laws? Don't have a gun. Simple
[–]Unconfidence -4 points-3 points-2 points  (0 children)
Sorry, I live in America. The idea that following the law is in and of itself a good is beyond my comprehension.

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 25062 on app-60 at 2016-10-20 08:53:21.461089+00:00 running f81a676 country code: DE.
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%