The reason western culture was able to spread across the globe, and
dominate it for so long, is complicated, but can be summed up quickly.

The Med.

The Mediterranean Sea enabled anchient societies to trade with
otherwise idolated people. It allowed long distance ship travelling to be
developed.

The main reason Europeans became dominant is because trade thrived.
The Med was the ideal setting , and the roman Empire further joined the
lands with roads.

The landscape helped establish shipping, and the desire for further trade
fueled further exploration.

Had the people in the area been content, with no NEED for trade or
travel, no exploration woudl have been accomplished. the need for
trade fueled the need for exploration.

Nobody doubts the Chinese had the technology to explore and colonize
– but when you’re talking about sailing across the Pacific… they had no
reason TO do it. Asia is a far larger landmass. There weren’t as many
different, isolated cultures stacked on top of each other like they were
surrounding the Med.

Europeans had more reason to expand, and dominate the trade routes,
and colonize. China could have done it, but they had little reason to.

There is no doubt that China will be here in year 3000 pretty much
occupied by the same people and culture as the one that invented the
compass, paper, silk and gunpowder. There is no guarantee that the
UK, US, Germany or Russia will still be around or be inhabited by the
same white race of today.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Who cares?

America isn’t nation of a single white culture/race. It doesn’t matter
what people look like, they’ll still be American. Lots of Hispanics are
coming in. Sooooo…. Doesn’t make the country any less American
than it is.

Unlike other nations, America, Canada and Australia do not really have
a distinct genetic component to their people. It sets them apart from
other, older, ethnically distinct nations.

Comparing incidents in the US and britain is not fair, since America varies
so much. Britain is equivilant in size to a state.

In the large cities, there’s a heck of a lot more gang and drug violence.
This means a lot more dead cops. In most rural areas, it never happens.
The parts of th ecountry where there is th egreatest amount of gun
ownership – the rural and suburban counties in the south and west – gun
violence is very low. Excepting drug users killing their fellow drug users,
you hear of very little violent crime. Certainly, nobody’s home gets broken
into while they’re at home. It’s sucide for criminals.
Criminals know which areas are places you don’t go to commit crime.
Places where over 90% of the homeowners own several guns are not safe
to rob. It’s a great deterrant.

In some of the big cities, like San Fancisco, they have a different culture
alltogether – they rely on the police, and abhor guns. they just passed a
ban on guns. You will see violent crime rise in San Fransisco shortly. by
March, every legal gun owner in Sanfransisco must turn in their guns, whil
the cirminals get to keep theirs…cause they ignore the law. It’s going to be
a free for all.

Bizzare – keep them out of the cops hands in order to keep them off the
streets. Hey, if it works over there, that’s fine. The idea that a cop could
be entrusted to enforce the law without a weapon seems a bit optimistic to
me. You’re basically trusting the criminal to not disobey the gun laws.

Again, different cultures.

Just a couple examples of what I keep…

http://www.zorabellarose.com/Chameleonpics/daddyveiled.JPG
http://www.zorabellarose.com/Chameleonpics/Alittlederi.JPG

Euro trip was funny. I love the part when they get robbed,
and all they have is a few dollars. They say “what the heck
can we buy with only $XX American???” the next scene
shows them being served a huge feast in an upscale restraunt.
They tip the waiter a nickel, and he slaps his boss, telling him
he’s going to start his own business…

Of course, the movie was probably written before the Euro
eclipsed the dollar. Regardless, it’s a standing joke that
American money is prized in foreign countries. Pretty funny.

Violence in America is over emphasized. the bad areas are
where the violence is rampant. The rest of the country is
pretty much as safe as it gets. A general rule is whereever
there is government housing projects, drugs or large
concentrations of welfare recipiants, there will be higher crime.

In other areas, overall violent crime in the US is very low. It’s
not like going to the great smokey mountains is the same as
going into Camden NJ… Anyone visiting the US from abroad
woul be really stupid if they ended up in one of these areas.
Even in NYC, the tourist places are pretty well removed form
the bad spots… except the bronx zoo…

I find the idea of the majority of police being unarmed ridiculous.
Criminals are, by definition, breakers of the law – why should they
be expected to have enough respect for a cop to just give up
without a fight? You have to expect them to try to resist, fight
back, or escape if possible. Especially violent felons, who have
nothign to lose, since they’re going away for a long time if they’re
caught.

If you think arming police will make criminals become more well
armed, then you’re giving in to criminals. Limiting what you do
based on how you percieve criminal’s will react – it’s ludicrous.
It’s as if you’ve prematurley capitulated to the demands of
crooks – God forbid we make them angry.

Have them react to the police, not vice versa. Keep criminals on
the defensive, NOT the men and women putting their lives on the
line for us.

Keeping police unarmed is a ruse. Who are you fooling? If the
cops are unarmed, you can maintain the fantasy that crime is less
of a threat. The moment you’ve got all your police armed with
guns, that utopian illusion of percieved safety is shattered.

Firearms are as much an invention of man as snares. The onyl
way we’re able to kill megafauna is with tools. A stick with a
point on the end is as much an invention of man as a rifle. Both
take skill to use.

Part of the thrill of hunting is th eskill it takes. That’s why bow
hunting is very popular. You have to get the deer closer, and it’s
still harder to get a good shot.

Other people take this to an even greater level. One that, one
day, I would like to do. Constructing your own recurved bow.
That takes a lot of time and skill – but it’d be worth it. Hunting
with soemthing that you built yourself woudl be cool…