11th State to become Constitutional Carry. -Most "shall

>>33084744
European here

I didn't even think this was a real state, why is half the state named after German cities and the other half British cities?

>>33084781
Gee, it's almost as if America was founded and settled by people with British and German ancestry.

>>33084781
Who the fuck do you think set up burgerland? Bunch of Spaniards, French, Brits, and smatterings from other eurotrash locations

>>33084744
Vermont is pretty based too

>>33084744
>-LOWEST MURDER RATE IN THE COUNTRY
Check your privilege!

>>33084781
>why is half the state named after German cities and the other half British cities?
maybe because we're literally a country made up of descendants of european immigrants

>>33084781\
>
I didn't even think this was a real state, why is half the state named after German cities and the other half British cities?

Cause the people who got tired of your bullshit moved here?

Just guessing, since my kin are Acadian/Indian.

>>33084793
>>33084799
>>33084816
Yes, but why is a state called New Hampshire got both cities named after British and German cities. Why didn't they lynch each other?

The whole state is named after the English county of Hampshire, why would they allow a bunch of krauts to name their cities.

>>33084913
Serious question? Because if youre a US citizen its pretty easy to figure out.

NH was a British colony until we had enough of their shit. The British named towns were settled early by the British, The Germans came later and settled.

>>33084913
Cause britfags weren't the only ones living there. Jew York has a bunch of cities named after native American names for the area. Last time I checked, we slaughtered them. But we keep the names anyway.

It's burgerland man, we don't question it, any more than we do our use of the imperial measurements system

>>33085019
>>33085031
Were the early settlers of those cities/towns all British or all German or did they have mixed cities/towns. I'm genuinely curious as different states seem to go from one extreme to another with their city names.

The original New England states were mostly British (being British colonies). But you have to remember that the American south east was French, west was Spanish. Germany came aboard a lot of British ships with the religious settlers cause of the loose acceptance of Christian denominations at the time.

After that, came influxes during the 1800s. Chinks for the rail road, Guedos during the Italian government shit. Mick's during the famine, etc

>>33084744
Allowing German immigration was America's first mistake, and it has been downhill ever since. I say this as a fourth generation Polish-American.

>>33085126
>Allowing German immigration was America's first mistake

Ben Franklin Pls.

>>33085062
We have a good amount of French as well but I don't think they were here that early. We are overwhelmingly English. My Mothers maiden name is Smith and my last name is still spelt the old English way.

>>33085126
Yeah, we should've imported more Slavs like the Polish.

If you're a WASP on the eastern seaboard then chances are you're from England. Deep South is mainly Northern England and Scotland, with the NE being Southern English.

This is the real reason of the low crime rate. Blacks can't afford it, it's the furthest point from Mexico and Catholicism is excluded because of this. The German population are the only non whites around, and most of those Anglicized.

Mass and NY are, as you would expect, ratcatcher central which explains their Orwellian living.

>>33085339
>German population
>not white
Are you actually retarded?

>>33085196
I had this argument a few years ago.

I don't think people who weren't here in the 1700s should be able to celebrate Independence Day. Hell, blacks and Indians should be able to - at least they were around. But if you're called O'Connor or Giuliani or Marquez or Rakowski or Schwarz or Ling Ping then you showed up long after all the work was done, and usually because you were a convict/draft dodger/Jew/whatever back home in Euroland/Mexico/Asia.

Nothing personal but it's how it is. I don't celebrate Cinco De Mayo or Patricks Day, so don't celebrate my holiday.

>>33084744
As someone who grew up in NH for 18 years, it has nothing to do with the guns. People think its just some hick state- which is true the more north you get but otherwise a non-issue.

It has everything to do with the fact that NH is rich as all hell, its economy is a monster compared to Maine or Vermont and its the place to go for anyone who makes good money in Mass, and is also the place to buy your cars, booze and other expenses to avoid sales tax. As a result, NH has disgustingly overfunded school systems and a very educated populace as a result. But no big cities, none- theres no place for crime to hide (manchester is tiny, really). The south is full of rich cities and suburbs that are too rural for gangbangers.

If you dont believe me, look up the driving safety of the state. Less fatalities there too compared to the rest of the country. You dont get that from gun laws, you get that from good roads and a functioning driver ed program.

I remember firing a shitty 22 rifle when I was 13 under the responsible and careful supervision of an educated as fuck adult. There was no flash to it and he kept them locked up. People didnt carry their guns around, there was no gun culture unless you went looking for it.

What you should be looking at is American gun deaths vs other countries, we still have one of the highest rates in the first world, and inter comparing states is the dumbest contrast you could ever use in any case. Unless you just have some shitty agenda and arent actualy trying to figure out whether guns increase or decrease violence.

>>33085604
>Unless you just have some shitty agenda and arent actualy trying to figure out whether guns increase or decrease violence.
I think we should be honest about this. The gun-violence narrative is being dictated to us, and they can always pull the "privilege" card when the facts don't support them. There is also no way to measure non-events, like how many crimes are deterred because of guns. We can only lose, which is why they choose this narrative. If we remove all emotion from the situation, the purpose of an armed populace is to prevent tyranny. That is also something which can't be proved, like crime deterrence. It does stand to reason that it is true, but most of the voting public is not swayed by reason. Like it or not, the most persuasive argument is ethos, ie. 'Merica! Gun control doesn't work because gun-owners see that the Democrats (associated with people who commit crime) are trying to disarm Republicans (history as peaceful, responsible citizens). As long as the Democrats are the ones trying to take the guns, it will never work. Therefore--and maybe counter-intuitively, Republicans are the biggest threat to gun rights.

>>33084744
>-Most "shall not be infringed" laws in the country
>-LOWEST MURDER RATE IN THE COUNTRY

It's because it's one of the whitest states in the country.

Guns help with lowering murder rate tho, and obviously 2A rights are a good thing.

>>33085949
>it's one of the whitest states in the country.
It's only because you have functional institutions and a self-reliant culture, you fucking hick!

>>33084913
because they were American, not British or German.