Guns vs crime in Brazil

[Cyrus]

Those guys in Brazil must not have heard of the benefits of handguns in combatting crime.


CNN Report

[MMMMMM]

Brazil would have an extremely high crime rate with or without guns. I have Brazilian friends from the 80's and they have told me much about how things are in Brazil. Corruption is rampant and crime is rampant and if you are rich you can basically get away with anything there, even murder.

Brazil has also long had more restrictive gun laws than the United States. Same with Russia. Guess those gun laws didn't do much to stop gun crime there, though, eh, Cyrus? Both Brazil and Russia have long had both more restrictive gun laws AND higher gun crime/violent crime rates than the USA.

Of course now that Lula, a Far Leftist, has been elected in Brazil, the government has begun going about confiscating guns. Typical commie-type behavior throughout history. When the guns get pretty well confiscated that's when governments generally start arresting, imprisoning and murdering dissidents. How blind does one have to be to not see this historical pattern in far left governments?

[Cptkernow]

No pattern of arresting/torturing/killing dissedents by rightist governments in South America. (Often backed by the good ol US of A).

[MMMMMM]

Obviously both Left and Right governments have done it; I said Leftist governments because: 1) Brazil has moved sharply left recently and Cyrus' post referred to Brazil, and 2) Communist governments have BY FAR the worst records in history for slaughtering people. Nothing even comes close to the USSR's and Red China's records for slaughter--nothing.

Funny, too, that you should pick up so defensively like that on something that was both relevant to Cyrus' post, and quite appropriate to mention in the larger historical picture;-)

Take a look at history and you will see clearly that Leftist governments have engaged in by far the most slaughter. It isn't even close. Red China and the USSR slaughtered between 80-100 million of their own people. That doesn't even count deaths in war, or the atrocities of other communist governments in Southeast Asia.

When will people wake up? Apparently, never. That's why Ray Zee and Zeno have more wisdom in their little fingers than all the Leftists in the world possess in their combined cerebral cortexes;-)

Leftism cannot be implemented without granting government near-totalitarian powers. It is an oxymoron to have a Leftist government without overwhelming centralized power. And that inevitably leads to eventual and overwhelming tyranny.

[Cyrus]

There are, as usual, numerous things wrong with your arguments. One of them is that they are irrelevant! This is not about right-wing versus left-wing but about the relation of handgun availability to crime, in general.

Brazil has only recently elected someone who is not from the right-wing of politics, namely Lula. He is a populist more than anything else. He will not do any of the things his opponents accuse him of or fear. Such as the much-needed land reform. Or stopping the destruction of the rainforest. Or cracking down on private death-squad armies financed by the oligarchy.

The item I posted was about guns. It had a funny side to it too! Brazil declared an amnesty for whomever handed over illegally held guns. So a Brazilian woman hands over some thousand guns!

So relax. Your rage makes you miss some funny sights...

"Leftism cannot be implemented without granting government near-totalitarian powers. It is an oxymoron to have a Leftist government without overwhelming centralized power. And that inevitably leads to eventual and overwhelming tyranny."

you must mean "communism". Leftism as a term does not exist outside the fevered paranoia of extreme rightwingers such as yourself (who are also ignorant of political philosophy and just spout off terms straight from the tabloids or WorldNetDaily).

There are a lot of things to be said about humanity's latest (i.e. last two hundred years') fad, capitalism, a lot of them good, some of them worryingly bad - but I just don't think you have the capability or the even keel to be the opposite part in such a debate.

So...

How about them [insert favorite spots team here] huh ?

[MMMMMM]

"There are, as usual, numerous things wrong with your arguments. One of them is that they are irrelevant!"

So what's wrong, or irrelevant, about pointing out that Brazil has long had more restrictive gun control laws than the USA, yet has also had higher crime?

"This is not about right-wing versus left-wing but about the relation of handgun availability to crime, in general."

So I am out of line making a more general observation? Pardon moi, then.

Brazil has only recently elected someone who is not from the right-wing of politics, namely Lula. He is a populist more than anything else."

Is he a communist or isn't he? Is he a populist communist?

" He will not do any of the things his opponents accuse him of or fear. Such as the much-needed land reform. Or stopping the destruction of the rainforest. Or cracking down on private death-squad armies financed by the oligarchy."

If you say so.

"The item I posted was about guns. It had a funny side to it too! Brazil declared an amnesty for whomever handed over illegally held guns. So a Brazilian woman hands over some thousand guns!"

I noted that too, it might have been on WorldNet Daily.

"So relax. Your rage makes you miss some funny sights..."

No rage that I can detect at this time. Maybe, though, you are not only psychic, but prescient as well...


"Leftism cannot be implemented without granting government near-totalitarian powers. It is an oxymoron to have a Leftist government without overwhelming centralized power. And that inevitably leads to eventual and overwhelming tyranny."

"you must mean "communism". Leftism as a term does not exist outside the fevered paranoia of extreme rightwingers such as yourself (who are also ignorant of political philosophy and just spout off terms straight from the tabloids or WorldNetDaily)."

Define it as you wish. I believe Leftism does exist and that Communism is the most polar extreme of it.

"There are a lot of things to be said about humanity's latest (i.e. last two hundred years') fad, capitalism, a lot of them good, some of them worryingly bad - but I just don't think you have the capability or the even keel to be the opposite part in such a debate."

Who said anything about debate? Anyone today who thinks there is anything much to debate regarding which system is clearly and vastly superior, is totally and permanently out to lunch in a rubber dinghy in the Sea of Okhostk.

"So...

How about them [insert favorite spots team here] huh ?"

I think they suck.

[natedogg]

cyrus: Leftism as a term does not exist outside the fevered paranoia of extreme rightwingers such as yourself

It's funny how leftists hate to be called leftists? I always wonder why.

natedogg

[Gamblor]

refers to nothing more than change.

Rightism prefers the status quo.

Nothing to do with ideologies.

[nothumb]

[ QUOTE ]
That's why Ray Zee and Zeno have more wisdom in their little fingers than all the Leftists in the world possess in their combined cerebral cortexes;-)


[/ QUOTE ]

I think Ray and Zeno are both pretty sharp guys, definitely bigger poker minds than myself, quite possibly more knowledgeable in other subjects as well.

But I could smoke their pinky fingers on the SATs, and I'll even spot them 5 minutes.

I would appreciate if you would define "leftist" a little better. I consider myself to be somewhere on the 'left' but probably not in any category commonly described here. You are usually much more specific than this.

I assume you probably meant communist/socialist.

I think there are a number of reasons (beyond the authoritarian, Leninist readings of Marx that pass for Marxism these days) that the worst human rights violations (in terms of sheer numbers) have so far been committed by socialist states. Some of them have to do with 'leftism' and some don't. I don't think we can attribute these brutal, inexcusable circumstances to Leftist ideologies, however; rather, those who have perpetrated them ceased to be 'socialists' or any other form of legitimate left-wing political types when they murdered their own people. Still, the vulnerability of left-wing revolutionary governments to these hacks is of great concern.

BTW, where do we put the Holocaust on this scale? In terms of sheer numbers it is not as successful as Stalinism when it comes to genocide, the motive was perhaps even more sinister.

I haven't read through this thread yet, so if anyone brought this up already, my bad.

[MMMMMM]

"I assume you probably meant communist/socialist."

Pretty much, and those who strongly lean in that direction even if they aren'ty official party members.

"I think there are a number of reasons (beyond the authoritarian, Leninist readings of Marx that pass for Marxism these days) that the worst human rights violations (in terms of sheer numbers) have so far been committed by socialist states. Some of them have to do with 'leftism' and some don't. I don't think we can attribute these brutal, inexcusable circumstances to Leftist ideologies, however; rather, those who have perpetrated them ceased to be 'socialists' or any other form of legitimate left-wing political types when they murdered their own people. Still, the vulnerability of left-wing revolutionary governments to these hacks is of great concern."

I believe we can attribute much of the brutality of communist regimes to Leftist ideology itself, in a peculiar way. Why? Because in order to implement communist ideology, overwhelming power and control must be given to centralized government. This inevitably leads to the problems mentioned.

The further to the left policies go, the greater central power is required to implement and enforce those policies. Socialism requires greater centralized power and control than USA-style capitalism, and Communism requires greater centralized power and control than Socialism.

Agreed, some of the fault for historical problems lies with certain individuals. Don't ignore the old saw, though: Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. While this platitude is an oversimplification, it is easy to see that corruption is a common attribute of humans and that vesting overweening power in certain positions will lead to abuses of power. Along similar lines, granting central governenmt too much power will create corruption, and those seeking power and the power to abuse power will be attracted to leadership positions in any overwhelmingly strong central government. Since Communism cannot exist without an overwhelmingly strong central authority, I believe that implementing Communist ideology inevitably leads to the sort of abuses mentioned. This is one of the hidden ways in which the ideology itself is fatally flawed.

"BTW, where do we put the Holocaust on this scale? In terms of sheer numbers it is not as successful as Stalinism when it comes to genocide, the motive was perhaps even more sinister."

Hitler turned out to be far less successful at mass murder than either Stalin or Mao. Agreed, the motive was twisted and sinister.


Check out The Museum Of Communism, if you wish:

http://www.gmu.edu/departments/econo...m/musframe.htm