CreateDebate


Gypsee's Waterfall RSS

This personal waterfall shows you all of Gypsee's arguments, looking across every debate.
1 point

You aren’t that different from those who fail. Your situation might be worse because you don’t see it. You have just enough to pretend to be happy and feel like you are making progress. When in reality you aren’t. I will always be heaps richer than you are and no matter how much you try you won’t reach me. Do you want to know why? Because you still think this game is fair. and that the success comes through hard work and positive attitude. It isn’t. It is about stepping on others and making sure they stay down. It is not in my interest that men like you get rich. Who else will I have to protect me from the lower repressed classes who want my head cut off?

1 point

Let me rephrase your argument:

The Americans invaded Palestine. The US = Israel. The US has only brought war and death in Palestine.

1 point

We just don’t want federal holidays for white men. They have enough.

1 point

Both sides are stupid but I do want to bring up something that might be an issue very soon.

What about the people who identify as non binary?

Originally, the purpose of separating biological men and women in sports was to assure that each person gets to play in the «  corresponding » physical category.

We all know that there are women with similar physical strength as certain men and inversely.

Wouldn’t it make more sense to categorize sports by muscle mass (for example) or some other physical indicator that takes out gender in sports.

2 points

I’m intrigued by the reasoning behind math being racist. Someone please amuse me.

2 points

There are much bigger chances that the 7 armed men will end up shooting each other.

1 point

Of course men would say « women should fight back ». Of they would say «well, if it were me I would fight back ».

God. This is why men don’t live very long... Because they think with their freakin’ dick.

Gypsee(347) Clarified
2 points

Wow I thought you were done! I think I will end this here because I feel like I am arguing with a bad lawyer.

I mistakenly embarked on this ship hoping we will discuss the nuances of the law and its many contradictions on the subject of gun ownership, right to self-defense and where the police (government) stands in all of this. But you just keep stating the obvious. It’s ok. I thank you for taking the time to answer me.

Good day

1 point

Which of course is silly because by arming people you only create an increased need for self-defence which wouldn't be there otherwise.

Yessss!

Many Americans who spend a lot of time abroad (especially in Europe) eventually reach the point where they no longer understand the United States and have no desire to return there.

I never understood the US... I never felt like it is the country I should live in. I do not hold a lot of its values. I have lived in Europe. I didn’t stay because I didn’t feel it either. But yes, definitely don’t see myself living in the US anymore.

3 points

There have been cases where a person shooting at cops plead self defense and eventually won. The only way to do that is if you can show you had no way of knowing it was a cop. The idea being that the officer is trying to effect an arrest, which they have the authority to do and you can fight it in court.

The fact that the person is or isn’t a cop shouldn’t be a condition to whether your self-defense is valid or not. But as you stated, if you can demonstrate you be don’t know the person was a cop you can legally shoot.

My point stands though: the US presents as a land where self-defense is a natural right and that through the right to bear arms, that right is protected. But you still can’t shoot a cop when a cop can shoot you. so we are all born with the right to self defense.... except when the threat is presented by a cop. In that case your right to self defense is taken away?

Did you leave the US for another country? Or are you a Sovereign Citizen within the geographic borders of the US? If you're in another country, do you like those people more?

Haha, I left the US as a law abiding citizen. I left to live in another country. The truth it took me 10 years. I lived in 2 counties before being where I am now.

The country I live in now has many flaws and its share of idiots ( like all places) but the people fundamentally have less hate in their hearts.

Gypsee(347) Clarified
1 point

No need to apologize.

if you suppose that the right to bear arms stems from your right to defend yourself, logic and fact quickly bring us to a place that makes no sense ( at least that doesn’t make sens for me) making the initial statement absurd.

2 points

Oh and last point:

I don’t understand why one is willing to put their tax money in assuring the defense of their country through the military and cops ( group of people who are trained to kill to protect ) but not willing to put their tax money to assure the health of their country through doctors and nurse ( a group of people who are trained to save and bring back life )

Is invasion a higher probability than being sick?

1 point

HAHA like the West is the leading example of women’s rights...

And what is the West?

Gypsee(347) Clarified
1 point

Oh and I sound a little agressive. I don’t mean that you should leave. You haven’t stated anywhere that you wouldn’t sacrifice for your society.

1 point

Sure, a gun on the ground isn’t a threat at all. But a cop having a gun is a person holding a force that could lead to serious injury or death. Non? Why could we not respond the same way when faced with a person holding a force that could lead to death?

My point being, isn’t the point of allowing EVERYONE to bear arms a way to assure that everyone EQUALLY has a right to self defense ?

clearly, there is a hierarchy in our right to self defense. There is natural hierarchy. But I’m not talking about the natural hierarchy. I’m talking about the hierarchy the law imposes. In a gun fight, cop vs civilian. Both have guns. The law will protect the cop under the right to self defense if they kill the civilian. But the law will not defend the right to self defense were the civilian to kill the cop.

If each person's health becomes the responsibility of society, there will be a whole host of things that society can justify barring individuals from, for the sake of their health.

That is possible. And that is currently what is happening all over the world including the US. In order to spare the health others , people’s liberties are taken away. We all hate it. It is annoying. Thank goodness I’m not In the US because I would really hate limiting my liberties for Americans. And to be honest, the reason I left the US is because I would NEVER sacrifice anything for a society like the US. I hate them all. Profoundly. I left because why be part of a society if you can’t sacrifice something for its survival. Might as well be a lone wolf...

Being a lone wolf isn’t a bad thing by the way. I’m just annoyed by the preaching of individualism. Just leave. Leave to live with your family, off the grid. Do not call yourself American or part of a society because we can never truly assure individual liberty when you are part of a society. It doesn’t work that way.

1 point

If one must defend thier self or others from a lethal aggressor, then a lethal offensive act my be the most effective form of self defense. That's why cops have guns.

What qualifies as a lethal agression? And what do we do with people who rely on lethal offensive only ? All cops have guns. All gun are lethal threats. All cops are potential lethal aggressors. Why isn’t it a natural right to respond to a cop with the same lethal threat?

And on the side, as I feel that this debate wants call to talk about universal healthcare. I understand that universal healthcare cannot be a natural individual right because it depends on others taking care of you.

But can’t it be a natural social right ? I don’t know if that exist but the way I see it, as a society, we ( society ) have the right to survival. And the survival of a society depends on each person’s health. Otherwise the society will not survive. think about the ongoing pandemic. The limitations of individual liberty (I will admit annoying and frustrating) were to ensure the survival of our society.

Gypsee(347) Clarified
1 point

Yup, survival is work in the US.

If you don’t work you can’t survive. Unless you are stupid rich. I. In that case survival isn’t an issue

Gypsee(347) Clarified
1 point

Yeah... look at Apple. Most of the engineering is done abroad in Asia and Europe. I think Steve Job even said that the technology jobs aren’t ready to come back to the US. The US has the image of being behind all the technology but not really. Americans know how to make profits from good ideas. Ahhh that’s the game in this world. Money. Not the idea.

I mean we would expect from the most innovative country in the world to find a vaccine for covid. Right ?

But they didn’t. With all those Americans putting out patents every day, NO ONE decided to figure out ways to rapidly produce medical equipment OR find a vaccine. No. Americans come up with ideas like intelligent mirrors or magnetic liquid eyeliner so that you can easily stick your eyelashes.

Gypsee(347) Clarified
2 points

God I’m reading myself and realizing that maybe I am glass of wine too far. I like the subject, so if I need to clarify more just tell me. I will take the time to clarify.

Gypsee(347) Clarified
2 points

Sooo you agree with me?

The original argument to which I asked clarification is sarcasm ?

Innovation requires money.Money is what motivated people to be creative and to take risks. Money is needed to cover the expenses of prototypes and tests.

Innovation requires creativity as well. I would look at companies like Apple and Google and see the percentage of Americans they have. I don’t expect them to have that much. In technology innovation the US pay to import creative minds.

Where Americans are really freakin good though is with business. And business is a part of innovation. Because in a capitalist world, no innovation can go without business.

Anyway I am rambling. All of that to say, I wouldn’t go on to say that Americans are Innovative technology leaders because most of their engineers aren’t American. But they are Innovation leaders because of how good they are in business. It is not for nothing that people travel to the US from abroad just to get an MBA.

Gypsee(347) Clarified
1 point

Just to clarify. I agree that the US is leader with innovation. That is not disputable.

But I disagree with the link between hard work and innovation.

Gypsee(347) Clarified
2 points

Yes, I have to say that my first 2 years in school were intensive and boring groundwork... working as an engineer is way more fun than studying to be one.

Although I don’t think I would have minded just doing math for the rest of life... living in my own abstract and logical world...

Gypsee(347) Clarified
2 points

As an engineer in R&D, my life is hard work and passion but I that definitely isn’t the heart of any of my innovations.

Hard work isn’t for innovation. Hard work is for endurance. Hard work is for survival. Innovation is successfully implementing creative ideas. creativity is about solving some problem in a new way.  Hard work, in the way described in the debate title, will not bring you to innovation.

So for me the innovative culture of the US does not stem from the hard work culture.

Gypsee(347) Clarified
2 points

There are anarchists too!

And politics... pfff That is all distraction. The real fuck faces are the billionaires getting rich of your misery.


1 of 16 Pages: Next >>

Results Per Page: [12] [24] [48] [96]