An awfully strong belief in "tradition". It seems a lot of the tradition questions lay its eggs in the religious basket, which I guess is an acceptable way of portraying it, but not quite perfect.

True. But it's an acceptable test nonetheless to get a general idea.

I pretty much answered no to all the religious questions which gave me that. Lol.

@meratrix Do you wish to elaborate on that stance?

If your method of conducting whether it should be legal or not is based off arbitariness then that's not really a good position to hold.

Hash and opium are naturally grown.

Many things are manufactured that is good for you.

So both sides of that coin is just... Bad.

It seems like your opinion on this is more based off popular culture / widespread appeal more so than reason.

Which is fair.

As long as you recognise it.

Hippies.

He's talking about hippies.

It'll lower gang violence, not common violence.

If gang violence is a non issue then obviously it's useless, but if it's the biggest concern then it's paramount. (Of course other drugs play a huge role too so just taking one off the list isn't going to do THAT much)

But despite all the positivity there's also serious health concern that gets ignored by the weed community.

I was gonna watch some hentai but yea sure why not.

Plebs.

How is that communist?

That's why I'm asking. Lol.

Being scientifically progressive is very different from the "Social progressive"

You're all weak as fuck.

I'm European so that's normal.

"The market adjusts itself" is like saying god will help you.
My country's proven itself capable of keeping a strong market whilst the state makes sure the companies don't go too far. So I'm a social democratic on that front.

The globalist marker is mostly because I don't inherently have a problem with programs such the EU and open borders but I also still believe in nationalism. That's not something that can be erased.
Although because it bases its survey off the amount of different questions and not the strong-ness of my feelings of the matters it considers me a globalist.

Example, I would consider Catalonia to be free state should it want to.

EU Project's open borders.
Or Nordic Council.

Yes.

It's an awkward use of word IMO.

I even voted Neutral on that.

To be honest we kinda already have that partly.

There really isn't any jobs where you don't make enough to make a living.

Or just vote neutral.

Because it's vague.

Sure.

We need to eradicate religion.

Stalin was a mong though.

It's not really that big of a deal in europe but america has serious religious issues that needs solving.

A lot more secular.

They're on the same level as radical islam.

Yes.

Persecuting anyone is a bad thing.

*coughs* Self proclaimed socialists of america *coughs*

There are certain schools that teach creationism as equal to evolution.

Sure, it's not ISIS levels of nuttery.
But it's about as religious nutjob you get.

Fair.
But it still doesn't make it any less of a problem.

Right.
I might've used some overly harsh words, Brian.
But it's a threat to the fundamentals of western society values still.

It's something that needs to be looked at seriously.

And quickly too.

Is it? Because it was recently put into a bunch of states.

Not the other way around.

It might've been in Louisiana.

Gonna have to look it up again.

Lol

Now who's on the wrong side of the fence?
It not being related to national security doesn't make it any less of a problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_and_evolution_in_public_education_in_the_United_States#Development_by_state
There also seems to be way more states than I initially thought.

Shit. Then why not give up all your rights then.

It's easier to secure the nation if no one has any rights.

I conceded the point that it's not a comparison to radical islam.

@OppoQuinn the Democratic Party of the south. Yes. The Republican Party used to be the northern progressive one.

Mass knifing?

One's a tool.

A gun is not a tool. It has one purpose.

So in what way can you use a gun then?

So you're undermining your own point by making a different statement.

Hunting and defense are both using the gun for killing.

No, it's not. Not even close.

I never made that statement.

I never made that statement either.

You made the, apologise the rudeness, but. Retarded statement that a gun can be used as a tool. Which it cannot.
Comparing them to knives, which are tools. Is not the same comparison.
If you're comparing them to swords? Sure. Then we can compare it.

I never made any statement on whether guns should be banned or not.

You just made that implication because you're trying to defend guns using retarded logic that you cannot see your own faulty arguements.

Yes it was Jek. A knife wasn't. A sword was.

Different countries have different laws on this.

Length of blade, concealment, etc.

It varies. There's no one answer.
But you can compare all the numbers and use the common denominator if you want.

In Switzerland it's legal to own guns.
Guns are not considered tools.

I mean we're statistically more civilised.

Either way, Jek. No one is trying to tell you you shouldn't have guns.
But for the love of sense. Stop trying to defend "A gun is a tool"

Because that's literally retarded.

*sighs*

It can be used *as* a weapon. But it isn't inherently a weapon.

As if that somehow proves your point, but go on.

Things made for killing are weapons by default.

You're trying to argue that because you don't use your sword to cut down people it was never made for cutting down people to begin with.

There is.

Most kitchen knives are made to cut meat but not necessarily cleave through a man.
A cleaver is made to cleave the bone in meat on a table but it's horrible to try to cleave down an actual person. For that you have *larger* and generally sharper *weapons* made.

Also generally known as. Here it comes. Swords.

Swords are weapons.

Guns are made for killing, they're inherently weapons.

You're literally not helping your cause here mate.

Your logic is so far out of the window it's not even funny.

@radeon
Dude.
Again. You're jumping to conclusion. If you want to have a genuine discussion, sure. But you've proven yourself way too screechy and immature for that by now.
But you're making the assumption I'm anti-gun based off the fact that I'm trying to call a gun a weapon.

Facts over fantasy.
This is what americans can't understand. Your politics are in shambles because of it.

#NotAllAmericans

There are certain designs which are inherently banned because they're distinctly considered a weapon. Regardless of length.

"If I can't get a definite answer if only some of them are or all them are. None of them are."

Sure, Vertigo. But you can still look at something before the fact and look at which is easier or made for stabbing.

A trench knife is not made for cutting fucking steak though is it?

*Divert discussion*