Buriram Expats
Buriram Province - General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: nookiebear on December 25, 2012, 06:55:36 AM
-
Now 2 firefighters shot to death............Yet we will still have the usual suspects who will still support the right to be armed..........Sad,RIP............
-
So sad; women, children and now those who risk their lives to save people. A sick country that knows what the cure is and refuses medicine.
http://news.sky.com/story/1029743/us-bullet-demand-hits-unprecedented-levels
-
nono They go around the world shooting people so if they decide to shoot there own in there country whats the difference.
They think they are the worlds police force.
Feel sad for those who are victams but the septics think its there right.Maybe when some of these pro gun brigade lose a family member they will alter there views.
-
It's not just guns it's safety in general. The USA has the worst road safety record of the developed world and in terms of health & safety I've seen so many accidents due to putting money first. Don't start me on friendly fire either. Yes, they will tell the world what to do but when challenged they can't handle critisism. I'm not a fan of Piers Morgan but I support everything he said on TV to tge NRA chairman.
-
Yup, another crazy:
Spengler was found with multiple guns, which were not legal for him to possess because of a manslaughter conviction from 1981. He spent 17 years in prison for the death his grandmother. He killed her with a hammer.
So we have a criminal illegally possessing guns. How do we stop criminals from possessing guns?
What country has found a way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals?
-
Any comments from my No1 fan,P F BROWN??
-
Urleft- if you go down that avenue then I will bury you. Anyone can buy a weapon in the USA. Criminal checks are one thing but there's plenty of evidence of people with mental, drug and alcohol problems legally buying weapons.
Try to see this for what it is and not an anti-American stance. It is one thing having such a shameful record, it's another seeking to try to defend it.
-
Bury away.
I am not defending this scumbag's actions. But the typical reaction from this is to try to take the guns from law abiding citizens.
And guns are being confiscated from Law abiding citizens as we banter here:
A recent call came into to Steve Quail, A Radio Host, about another Veteran, in Ohio, who was raided by the police, and had all his guns confiscated. As the story reveals, this man has never had a criminal record, being a Christian, and coming from a Christian home where his father is a Pastor. The Miami County Ohio Sheriff’s Department came in on August 22nd, approximately 5:30 p.m., and produced a warrant for the seizure of the property. There were 7 Sheriff’s at this man’s home, and “The deputies confiscated one .45 caliber pistol, one .380 caliber pistol, a 12 gauge shotgun, two AR-15 rifles, and a stripped AR-15 lower receiver” (Quail, 2012)
The reasoning that was behind this charade was given by this explanation, “…Defendant shall not possess, use, carry, or obtain any deadly weapon and shall turn over all deadly weapons in defendant’s possession to the law enforcement agency that serves this order. Any law enforcement agency is authorized to take possession of deadly weapons pursuant to this paragraph and hold them in protective custody until further court order…” (Quail, 2012). Since there weren’t any violations by this unnamed man, or by his guns of this unnamed man, then how can this reasoning be used, and why is he called a defendant if no crimes have been committed?
http://www.copblock.org/20066/veteran-raided-disarmed-ordered-to-take-mental-evaluation/ (http://www.copblock.org/20066/veteran-raided-disarmed-ordered-to-take-mental-evaluation/)
-
Being a Christian is irrelevant, I don't understand why that was brought up. Quite simply, there is no need for so many weapons and such powerful weapons. People with no criminal record have boasted to have as many as 16 types of guns in their homes. Why?
It's basically down to attitude and we, in Europe have a different perspective. I just irritates me when Americans try to relate the need or justification for weapon with freedom, a hideous excuse.
-
As an x soldier I've seen the damage a high powered rifle does and don't understand why you would be allowed them in your home... A simple 9mm would deter anybody from breaking into your house.. They definitely need to ban the purchase of high velocity rifles in the home..
-
Just who are you to say what I don't need?
It irritates me that people like you put arbritary limits on things you don't agree with.
Why do people need more that vehicle per driver? More than 3 bottles of beer per drinker? More than 1 butcher knife per food preparer?
And yes it is the same, more people are killed from vehicles and alcohol than guns.
And why does a someone need a lmborghini?
And is being Christain irrelevant? There is a massive effort to destroy Christians, as another thead says, Have a Merry Christmas, not happy holidays. Being a Jew should have been irrelevant in the Germany in 30's/40's, are Christains now the Jews replacement?
It starts with taking rights away a step at time out of reasonableness. Like business owners cannot even decide if they want to let people smoke in their business, the GVT has made it illegal (and I am a non-smoker).
So you have no right to limit me from my God given rights because you think I have no need.
-
Very strange response, relating weapons to collecting other items.
Religion has nothing to do with the subject and being religious Isnt a credible reference. As for your reference to Germany, Adolf Hitler a Catholic and the present Pope was am member of Hitler youth.
And yes, the only thing more dangerous than an American with a weapon is an America with a vehicle - FACT.
To quote Peirs Morgan - you do not have a credible defence to this argument. Just keep posting the same deflecting crap.
-
Any comments from my No1 fan,P F BROWN??
From his earlier comment, he's thrown the towel in!
-
He must be good, he's a Christian...
-
:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
(http://ttag.zippykidcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/David-Horsey-cartoon-courtesy-latimes.com_.jpeg)
-
Wouldn't This Be The Perfect Christmas Card For The National Rifle Association smilenod
(http://crooksandliars.com/files/vfs/2012/12/santasleigh.jpg)
-
Again, what makes you so specical that you can say what I need or don't need?
Maybe I need that high powered rifle to keep coyotes from killing sheep on my 2000 acre ranch, maybe I need that high capacity magazine as part of my championship quick shoot match.
-
Urleft- in order to have a debate you must respond with a reasoned response. A reasoned response, which conflicts with the established statement is known as an argument - a connected series of statements with the intention of establishing a proposition.
Just coming on here and showing hideous pictures, in particular equating the USA to Israel backfires on you (excuse the pun).
You devalue your case when you simply seek to defend what is indefensible and defend your corner, simply because it is your corner.
When you post such things all you do is confirm what seems to be typical American insularity.
"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt." Mark Twain.
-
Being a Christian is irrelevant, I don't understand why that was brought up. Quite simply, there is no need for so many weapons and such powerful weapons. People with no criminal record have boasted to have as many as 16 types of guns in their homes. Why?
It's basically down to attitude and we, in Europe have a different perspective. I just irritates me when Americans try to relate the need or justification for weapon with freedom, a hideous excuse.
I have been asking what makes you the authority to decide what is needed?
-
No one referred to making decisions, only opinions and suggestions which leads to debate- something you keep failing at.
Keep trying, keep coming back, if you don't improve at least you will still amuse.
-
LOL, you state something as fact, then when I call you it you first ignore it, then make fun of me, and now finally at least acknowledge it is your opinion.
So far as debate, I finally got you to acknowledge (after how many posts?) your statement was opinion, not fact. Seems +1 to me.
Who posted the first picture? An which picture I posted was hideous and untrue?
And my basic premise in all this is why should I as a Law Abiding citizen give up my rights because some crazed individual killed people in a GUN FREE ZONE.
-
Again, what makes you so specical that you can say what I need or don't need?
Maybe I need that high powered rifle to keep coyotes from killing sheep on my 2000 acre ranch, maybe I need that high capacity magazine as part of my championship quick shoot match.
What do they do in other countries where guns are outlawed, to protect their livestock?
Why, when so many innocent people are killed by people using guns, are gun shooting competitions necessary - or even allowed?
[/quote]
"And my basic premise in all this is why should I as a Law Abiding citizen give up my rights because some crazed individual killed people in a GUN FREE ZONE. " [/quote]
Unfortunately, Urleft, there are now so many non - Law Abiding Citizens, that for the safety and protection of the remaonder, new laws need to be introduced.
-
I don't make fun of you, you make fun of yourself. Posting a picture that states ''carrying a gun is better than carrying a policeman'' deserves all the ridicule that can be mustered. It provokes people to take the law into their own hands and the majority won't be as proficient with a weapon as you.
As stated, you have yet to come up with a reasoned response and the example I quoted above is just one example where you have brought ridicule upon yourself.
You're not getting any better at this and it's taking you longer to respond and the response lacks substance.
I have stated that it is a fact that the USA has the worst road safety record of the developed world but if you need me to publish evidence of what is common knowledge then you are more ignorant and insular than I first thought.
If wit was shit you'd be constipated.
If you're in a hole stop digging.
-
Why is the US so much more violent than Europe? (http://americablog.com/2012/12/why-is-the-us-more-violent-than-other-countries-who-see-same-movies-and-video-games.html)
It ain't rocket science whistle
-
It's called democracy...
-
Jamie,
So who is supposed to protect the people? I am prepared to protect myself. As far as carrying a policman, that is classic satire, too bad you failed to understand it.
I don't have time to look for it right now, but I posted the total amount of roads and vehicles in the US on another posting (I think is was another of Nookie's (who speaks for everyone) posts). Hard to compare apples (amount of vehicles/roads in US) to raisins (# of vehicles/roads in other countries).
In this specific case of killing firemen there is a crazed individual that illegally had guns (FACT). So by definition, he was a criminal (before the shooting). Should this individual/incident be used as a basis to take away my rights to own guns? Also note the Sandy Hill lunatic did not obtain his guns legally.
What more gun laws would have stopped these killings?
As an aside, as a Veteran there is an unaccountable Govenment bureaucrat that can abitrarily take away my Guns right without a judge having to preside and me being able to defend myself until after the fact: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/3/change-on-veterans-gun-rights-lights-fire/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/dec/3/change-on-veterans-gun-rights-lights-fire/)
-
There is no justification for taking the law into your own hands. I cannot see any need for an individual to keep a weapon at home. If there is a problem or threat of attack then it's up to the police.
If you want to shoot and be a member of a gun club, then ok, good but keep the weapons secure at the club not at home. If you honestly believe that you need a weapon at home for safety then that says a lot about the country you live in.
As for road safety- the USA is indeed lacking in many ways. It is far too easy to get a driving licence and even easier to keep on which is in contrast to UK/.EU. It is also far to easy to become a driving instructor and again, easy to remain one with no accreditation, no register and no monitoring of standards. I could go on but I really shouldn't need to. And I don't want to digress from the original theme.
More innocent civilians have been killed by guns in Chigaco in the past ten years than soldiers in Afghanistan. If that doesnt tell a story nothing will.
-
There is no justification for taking the law into your own hands. I cannot see any need for an individual to keep a weapon at home. If there is a problem or threat of attack then it's up to the police.
Again you are stating this as a fact, when it is really your opinion.
An lucky for this 12 year old girl, your opinion is worthless in the US: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/home-girl-12-shoots-robber-breaking-home-17524596
Home Alone Girl, 12, calls 911, but when they didn't arrive in time, shot the robber. I guess by your view it would be better if she was killed or raped rather than having justification for taking the law into her own hands.
-
Hideous.
It could have been all so wrong, so easy to disarm the girl and kill her.
Again, a weak argument. The thought of a 12 year old with a weapon defies belief.
-
Hideous.
It could have been all so wrong, so easy to disarm the girl and kill her.
Again, a weak argument. The thought of a 12 year old with a weapon defies belief.
LOL, it is hard to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person. Jamie, and you are literally and figuratively unarmed.
I give you facts, you give opinions and disbelief. I hope for your sake reality never confronts you. It is obviously not worth continuing this discussion as you are clearly unprepared.
Good luck to you.
-
''There are none so blind as those that do not wish to see.''
I'm not disputing this fact. I'm questioning such a young child having access to a weapon. You quote one instance because it suits your argument but you fail to see the bigger picture that everyone has been pushing; weapons are far too easily available in the USA.
I could refer to the young black lad who was shot by the part-time security guard in Florida several months ago, just because he looked suspicious. A weapon, if used, should be the last resort not, as it seems in many cases in the USA the first thing to do.
Your country has a gun culture that is killing more and more innocent Americans and if you can't see that it's because you don't want to.
You have still failed to produce a coherent argument. Quoting small individual cases to justify a mass of weapons is illogical.
-
Hooray for the 1st amendment. Opine away at your leisure gentlemen; as there will never be a conclusive end to this discussion.
-
I will agree with that Starman...as there are none so blind...
-
One man killed 35 people in my country , you will remember this it happened in tasmania, in someways australia can thank that man, reason been THE GUN LAWS WERE CHANGED FOREVER, and so they should have been, i agree with many that have said WHY do you need a gun at home ,some have said to defend themselves from what another person with a gun, ringing ooo or 911 and someone attends quickly is a better situation, i dont know statics here in australia, but it seems not that many shootings , i agree you will never keep them getting into the wrong hands , all in all i think many lives would be saved and much heartache avoided by CHANGING THE GUN LAWS IN AMERICA.
-
And then there is the do as I say, not as I do crowd that tell the rest of us how to live and then do something else:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/23/School-Obama-s-Daughters-Attend-Has-11-Armed-Guards-Not-Counting-Secret-Service (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/23/School-Obama-s-Daughters-Attend-Has-11-Armed-Guards-Not-Counting-Secret-Service)
Some interesting news has broken in the wake of the latest push for gun control by President Obama and Senate Democrats: Obama sends his kids to a school where armed guards are used as a matter of fact.
The school, Sidwell Friends School in Washington, DC, has 11 security officers and is seeking to hire a new police officer as we speak.
But protecting the rest of our children is not worth the risk of armed guards. The "Gun Free Zone" is protection enough.
-
Just out of curiosty urleft how many guns do you own .
-
Just out of curiosty urleft how many guns do you own .
Remington 12 Gauge w/ extra slug barrel
WWII Jap 7.7mm bolt action rifle (my uncle got in during the war)
Remington 22. Cal Rifle
20 ga shot gun
Glock .40 cal pistol
Ruger .357 pistol
Berretta .25 cal semi-auto pistol
RWS .177 cal air rifle
.177 Air pistol
Daisy BB pistol
So that would make 10. Have some plans to get more, specifically some Over Under shotgun set for Trap/Skeet. And I would love to have the .50 Cal Sniper rifle, but can't justify the expense, yet.
-
Can't even go put a fire out in the US and fireman get shot....when will they learn....
-
I would also interested to know , in australia if you own a gun and not many do as i have said , those who have registered gun or guns have to have a safe to put them into , is that the law there , and do you have to have all the guns you own registered with anyone.
-
Can't even go put a fire out in the US and fireman get shot....when will they learn....
If only they had declared it a Gun Free Zone then this never would have happened.
Or maybe the US should use the Norway model of July 2011, or maybe the UK Combria plan. Too bad there was not more gun control.
-
Obama's children are protected at no expense to him. Are yours?
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
I would also interested to know , in australia if you own a gun and not many do as i have said , those who have registered gun or guns have to have a safe to put them into , is that the law there , and do you have to have all the guns you own registered with anyone.
It depends on which state you live in. Connecticut has some of the strictest gun laws and they did not help in this case. In Hawaii (where I live) all guns are registered (handgun, hunting guns, semi-auto rifles, shotguns, etc.) with the State of Hawaii. Any responsible gun owner should have a safe to store the guns securely (I have two).
BTW a friend of mine from work went to the Honolulu police station to register a gun purchased before the Connecticut school shooting (14 day mandatory waiting period, even though he owns multiple firearms) and the line was three hours long. All (and I mean all) the gun stores in Hawaii are sold out of AR-15 type semi-automatic rifles, probably in anticipation of some type of ban. I believe this is happening throughout the USA.
-
And then there is the do as I say, not as I do crowd that tell the rest of us how to live and then do something else:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/23/School-Obama-s-Daughters-Attend-Has-11-Armed-Guards-Not-Counting-Secret-Service (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/23/School-Obama-s-Daughters-Attend-Has-11-Armed-Guards-Not-Counting-Secret-Service)
Some interesting news has broken in the wake of the latest push for gun control by President Obama and Senate Democrats: Obama sends his kids to a school where armed guards are used as a matter of fact.
The school, Sidwell Friends School in Washington, DC, has 11 security officers and is seeking to hire a new police officer as we speak.
But protecting the rest of our children is not worth the risk of armed guards. The "Gun Free Zone" is protection enough.
I guess Obama and most liberals believe that their children are worth protecting with armed guards, but parents that cannot afford 1 million Baht per year to send their children to the best private schools deserve what they get.
Liberal ideas get people killed.
-
I have stated that it is a fact that the USA has the worst road safety record of the developed world but if you need me to publish evidence of what is common knowledge then you are more ignorant and insular than I first thought.
So using your logic cars should be illegal in the USA, or maybe roads should be illegal?
-
Yup, another crazy:
Spengler was found with multiple guns, which were not legal for him to possess because of a manslaughter conviction from 1981. He spent 17 years in prison for the death his grandmother. He killed her with a hammer.
So we have a criminal illegally possessing guns. How do we stop criminals from possessing guns?
What country has found a way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals?
Maybe we need to make it more illegal for him to have the guns that he had illegally to begin with. The way to stop criminals from possessing guns is to take all the guns away from the law abiding citizens (who actually follow the current gun laws). It is so simple that it is stupid, or is it so stupid that it seems simple?
Why are Europeans so against the ability for someone (who is legally able, capable, and trained) to be able to own a gun for self defense? I don't get it.
-
Why is the US so much more violent than Europe? (http://americablog.com/2012/12/why-is-the-us-more-violent-than-other-countries-who-see-same-movies-and-video-games.html)
It ain't rocket science whistle
It Is To Urleft!!
-
Certain people cannot see the wood for the trees,at least it livened the forum up somewhat
-
Could CNN host Piers Morgan have been addressing our old pal Urleft when he said 'You are an unbelievably stupid man aren't you.You have absolutely no coherent argument.You don't actually give a damn about the gun murder rate in America'..........
-
Perhaps our old pal Urleft is among the 31,000 blockheads who have signed a petition to get Piers Morgan deported............Guess he should have stuck to taking prohibited photos of 'frozen turkeys' in Makro's
-
I would also interested to know , in australia if you own a gun and not many do as i have said , those who have registered gun or guns have to have a safe to put them into , is that the law there , and do you have to have all the guns you own registered with anyone.
Would someone from the usa be able to answer my question please
-
Why is the US so much more violent than Europe? (http://americablog.com/2012/12/why-is-the-us-more-violent-than-other-countries-who-see-same-movies-and-video-games.html)
It ain't rocket science whistle
It Is To Urleft!!
Thank you as I am probably the closest thing this forum has to a Rocket Scientist, having worked 30 years in the Rocket City as an Engineer.
Tipping a few Nookie, you're riled up today?
I never said I don't care about the murder rate, my issues are with infringements on my rights. For example, how do you feel about the ban on smoking in your business? Should you as the business owner have the say on whether customers can smoke in your establishment? I personally believe that decision should be yours, not forced on you by the GVT. It took 40 years of slow incremental steps to get to that ban, but the activists achieved it.
As far as Piers Morgan, my basic response is Who? Don't really care either way if he gets deported, however, as with me, if you are a guest in a foreign country, be careful what you say, you can be deported.
-
Why is the US so much more violent than Europe? (http://americablog.com/2012/12/why-is-the-us-more-violent-than-other-countries-who-see-same-movies-and-video-games.html)
It ain't rocket science whistle
The difference is that in the US we have Wacko citizens that kills 10s of people, as opposed to Europe which has wacko governments that kill thousands of millions (at a time).
-
Ahab My logic isn't in question. I'm talking about roads or cars I stated poorly trained drivers. If you want to challenge that make a new post and I will provide the info.
-
I never said I don't care about the murder rate, my issues are with infringements on my rights. For example, how do you feel about the ban on smoking in your business? Should you as the business owner have the say on whether customers can smoke in your establishment? I personally believe that decision should be yours, not forced on you by the GVT. It took 40 years of slow incremental steps to get to that ban, but the activists achieved it.
BUTTTTTTTT Why should i be sitting in mr nookiebears cafe , having a meal and breathing your smoke , smoking is banned in all restaurants outside shopping centres which are under cover,public transport etc etc,in australia, i dont mind the person smoking that is your right.
-
Ahab My logic isn't in question. I'm talking about roads or cars I stated poorly trained drivers. If you want to challenge that make a new post and I will provide the info.
You will get no argument from me about poorly trained drivers. Everyone with a driver's license at one time had to pass a test and show some level of driving skill. Many people are just stupid and many of those that are stupid also drive.
-
I should have been a fisherman..............Urleft would get tired of being thrown back in!!
-
Why is the US so much more violent than Europe? (http://americablog.com/2012/12/why-is-the-us-more-violent-than-other-countries-who-see-same-movies-and-video-games.html)
It ain't rocket science whistle
The difference is that in the US we have Wacko citizens that kills 10s of people, as opposed to Europe which has wacko governments that kill thousands of millions (at a time).
History Lesson...... party15
Two studies have been conducted that attempt to number the natives Indians killed by the United States. The first of these was sponsored by the United States government, and while official does not stand up to scrutiny and is therefore discounted (generally); this estimate shows between 1 million to 4 million killed. The second study was not sponsored by the US Government but was done from independent researchers. This study estimated populations and population reductions using later census data. Two figures are given, both low and high, at: between 10 million and 114 million Indians as a direct result of US actions. Please note that Nazi Holocaust estimates are between 6 and 11 million; thereby making the Nazi Holocaust the 2nd largest mass murder of a class of people in history.
the US we have Wacko citizens
smilenod
-
I wonder what our American friends would think of a suggestion I heard from an Aussie recently - to tax weapons and ammunition beyond that of the basic wage earner? This would bring in much needed taxation as well as pay for the medical care needed when these situations occur. I would suggest a 20% tax on weapons and 30% on ammunitions.
Or does that inflict on you so-called freedom, or is that socialism :-/
-
I'm an American.
I own guns, both for sport and self protection. I also enjoy shooting as a hobby.
I really don't give a flying fcuk what all the "foreigners" think about our gun laws.
If you're not complaining about "our" gun laws, you're complaining about something else of "ours"!
-
Fair point. However, if America didn't stick its nose into the business of other countries and interfere with the running of their governments or regimes then perhaps you wouldn't have to much criticism. But until then, if you dish it out, you have to receive it. And that includes Neanderthal attitudes.
-
I would also interested to know , in australia if you own a gun and not many do as i have said , those who have registered gun or guns have to have a safe to put them into , is that the law there , and do you have to have all the guns you own registered with anyone.
As an gun owner in NSW Australia. Different rules for different states.
Guns owned 5 off
22 CZ classic rifle
Walther SP22 handgun
223 remington 700 rifle
H&R tamer 410 shotgun
357 686 smith & wesson
as for safe has to 6mm thick because i own pistols
my safe weight 300kg, holds 48 rifles, has multi point locking and is bolted to the floor and wall.
Guns registered with firearms registry a branch of the NSW police force
I also have a license to use or touch a firearm. i must be licensed for the type of gun and reason of use and can only use it for said purpose.
in my case hunting, target
Pistols in NSW can only be used on a target....
-
Thank you mytle_71 nice to know that Australia has rules, But i would like to know what the story is in America, WHAT RULES DO YOU HAVE FOR OWNING A GUN , do you have to store them in a safe , do you have to be registered or can anyone just go out and buy a gun .
-
It is truly sad about those poor kids, and all the other such incidents in the USA, but i must say the laws of a sovereign state are a matter for its own government and its citizens. during this debate i have seen many great points brought up...such as... the God given right to own guns...cant really remember that part of the bible, but i'm sure it must be there. i can also understand the offence of the suggestion that a 9mm is enough to protect a home......bringing the retort of why do people drive Lamborghini's? as the case for assault weapons ....to answer that simply is, it has to do with the size of their penis. i guess assault weapons have the same effect for the owner.
i am not against guns, i see no need for an assault rifle in the home, but if the law allows this i have no issue but refer to above comment on sports cars. By the way....Any Freedom should be responsibility not a right.
-
I'm an American.
I own guns, both for sport and self protection. I also enjoy shooting as a hobby.
I really don't give a flying fcuk what all the "foreigners" think about our gun laws.
If you're not complaining about "our" gun laws, you're complaining about something else of "ours"!
You will understand that foreigners dont acrually give a flying fcuk about your gun laws. Thay would care even less if all the gun-toting Yanks shot tne fcuk out of each other. What foreiners find incredulous is the wolf-crying over civil liberties in the face of continuing atrocities caused as a result of (what appears to be) lax gun controls.
-
I'm an American.
I own guns, both for sport and self protection. I also enjoy shooting as a hobby.
I really don't give a flying fcuk what all the "foreigners" think about our gun laws.
If you're not complaining about "our" gun laws, you're complaining about something else of "ours"!
You will understand that foreigners dont acrually give a flying fcuk about your gun laws. Thay would care even less if all the gun-toting Yanks shot tne fcuk out of each other. What foreiners find incredulous is the wolf-crying over civil liberties in the face of continuing atrocities caused as a result of (what appears to be) lax gun controls.
The above post is so unlike you Co Co !!!
Have you turned your spell check off :laugh:
-
The above post is so unlike you Co Co !!!
Have you turned your spell check off :laugh:
Have to agree with you sao baht.
Why worry about all this nonsense when you are on your hols?
Maybe he's had a bad day!
-
Just who are you to say what I don't need?
It irritates me that people like you put arbritary limits on things you don't agree with.
Why do people need more that vehicle per driver? More than 3 bottles of beer per drinker? More than 1 butcher knife per food preparer?
And yes it is the same, more people are killed from vehicles and alcohol than guns.
And why does a someone need a lmborghini?
J
And is being Christain irrelevant? There is a massive effort to destroy Christians, as another thead says, Have a Merry Christmas, not happy holidays. Being a Jew should have been irrelevant in the Germany in 30's/40's, are Christains now the Jews replacement?
It starts with taking rights away a step at time out of reasonableness. Like business owners cannot even decide if they want to let people smoke in their business, the GVT has made it illegal (and I am a non-smoker).
So you have no right to limit me from my God given rights because you think I have no need.
Just another brainwashed yank that thinks the bigger the gun the bigger his dick will look.... Absolutely no need for military weapons in the home and that's a fact... Sooner or later that 2 nd amendment will be changed to the outlaw of those weapons....
-
Can't even go put a fire out in the US and fireman get shot....when will they learn....
If only they had declared it a Gun Free Zone then this never would have happened.
Or maybe the US should use the Norway model of July 2011, or maybe the UK Combria plan. Too bad there was not more gun control.
Little dick syndrome must be bad in your home
-
Just another brainwashed yank that thinks the bigger the gun the bigger his dick will look.... Absolutely no need for military weapons in the home and that's a fact... Sooner or later that 2 nd amendment will be changed to the outlaw of those weapons....
Written with true ignorance, must have your bain in your little head.
A colt .45 pistol is a military weapon, and it is great for home protection. A 45 with stop a perp in his tracks while not having the velocity or penetration to go through him and endanger other people. It is on my want list, but my .40 cal Glock serves nicely and is easier to carry concealed.
And the Sandy School incident was not done with a military weapon, just something that looked like one, but without all the capabilities (e.g., fully automatic).
I can think of a case where a military weapon is needed in the home, where the house in on a US Mexico border town and the preps are coming with AK-47's (provided by Obama). Then I damn sure would want several military weapons for protection.
So your FACT is not a Fact, just a another worthless opinion.
-
I have no love for guns and find peoples obsession with them quite disturbing. Guns take out much of the skill and fear in killing. They are designed to do maximum damage with minimum effort. One crazy person with very few guns can cause a massive amount of death and destuction.
America recently spent alot of money, effort and lives invading a country on the grounds of weapons of mass destruction. What determins a weapon of mass destruction?
26 killed in a matter of minutes by one person whom had easy access to weapons most US citizens consider the norm! Sounds like a weapon of mass destruction to me!
It seems a bit odd that the USA are happy to drag the rest of the world into waring conflicts outside its own borders but very reluctant to act on its own failings.
Regarding the responcible owner keeping unloaded guns in a locked safe for protection against intruders. In the event of an agressive intruder entering your house, do you, 1. Call the police before you go to your locked gun cabinate? 2. Get shot whilst attempting to get to your cabinet? 3. Unlock the cabinet then get shot whilst loading your gun hence giving criminal access to all your guns? 4. Or keep a gun in an irresponcible manner, in every room loaded ready to for action to be used or played with by any person that happens upon them?
Fact is in most cases the unloaded gun in the locked cabinet in some part of the house will not be accessable and ready for use when needed.
Arguements for God given rights! Who's god? Thats what most of the conflicts in the world are about ffs!
Arguements about rights passed on from the war of independance. A war fought by the colonists for a "United" States of America. The USA is looking pretty ununited at the moment with those that want a different society without guns in every house. These people are Americans too but the gun squad camp seem to show little tolerance for there fellow countrymans wishes. Perhaps its time to move forward instead of holding onto rights laid down 200 odd years ago when life in America was very different to today!
At the end of the day it is America's problem but it does have a responcibility to take action to protect its citizens and foreign visitors which it clearly cannot do with its present day lifestyle policies.
-
I never said I don't care about the murder rate, my issues are with infringements on my rights. For example, how do you feel about the ban on smoking in your business? Should you as the business owner have the say on whether customers can smoke in your establishment? I personally believe that decision should be yours, not forced on you by the GVT. It took 40 years of slow incremental steps to get to that ban, but the activists achieved it.
BUTTTTTTTT Why should i be sitting in mr nookiebears cafe , having a meal and breathing your smoke , smoking is banned in all restaurants outside shopping centres which are under cover,public transport etc etc,in australia, i dont mind the person smoking that is your right.
Obviously you missed the point where I am a non-smoker. I personally avoid places that are full of smoke.
What I think is that it should be Nookie's right to define whether is business will be smokefree, just have non-smoking areas, or no restrictions at all. Should be up to him on how to balance it to maximize his customers.
I am also glad that public areas are smokefree so I don't have to beathe that crap, but I was talking about private business.
-
The above post is so unlike you Co Co !!!
Have you turned your spell check off :laugh:
Have to agree with you sao baht.
Why worry about all this nonsense when you are on your hols?
Maybe he's had a bad day!
Had (another) great day :-). Fat fingets, mobile keys and Angkor geer are not a good recipe for accurate typing moneysmile
-
Just another brainwashed yank that thinks the bigger the gun the bigger his dick will look.... Absolutely no need for military weapons in the home and that's a fact... Sooner or later that 2 nd amendment will be changed to the outlaw of those weapons....
Written with true ignorance, must have your bain in your little head.
A colt .45 pistol is a military weapon, and it is great for home protection. A 45 with stop a perp in his tracks while not having the velocity or penetration to go through him and endanger other people. It is on my want list, but my .40 cal Glock serves nicely and is easier to carry concealed.
And the Sandy School incident was not done with a military weapon, just something that looked like one, but without all the capabilities (e.g., fully automatic).
I can think of a case where a military weapon is needed in the home, where the house in on a US Mexico border town and the preps are coming with AK-47's (provided by Obama). Then I damn sure would want several military weapons for protection.
So your FACT is not a Fact, just a another worthless opinion.
keep rubbing your guns up and down while repeating Im a big boy now, Im a big boy now .. Repeat til satisfied.. make sure you do this exercise 10 times aday
-
I have no love for guns and find peoples obsession with them quite disturbing. Guns take out much of the skill and fear in killing. They are designed to do maximum damage with minimum effort. One crazy person with very few guns can cause a massive amount of death and destuction.
America recently spent alot of money, effort and lives invading a country on the grounds of weapons of mass destruction. What determins a weapon of mass destruction?
26 killed in a matter of minutes by one person whom had easy access to weapons most US citizens consider the norm! Sounds like a weapon of mass destruction to me!
It seems a bit odd that the USA are happy to drag the rest of the world into waring conflicts outside its own borders but very reluctant to act on its own failings.
Regarding the responcible owner keeping unloaded guns in a locked safe for protection against intruders. In the event of an agressive intruder entering your house, do you, 1. Call the police before you go to your locked gun cabinate? 2. Get shot whilst attempting to get to your cabinet? 3. Unlock the cabinet then get shot whilst loading your gun hence giving criminal access to all your guns? 4. Or keep a gun in an irresponcible manner, in every room loaded ready to for action to be used or played with by any person that happens upon them?
Fact is in most cases the unloaded gun in the locked cabinet in some part of the house will not be accessable and ready for use when needed.
Arguements for God given rights! Who's god? Thats what most of the conflicts in the world are about ffs!
Arguements about rights passed on from the war of independance. A war fought by the colonists for a "United" States of America. The USA is looking pretty ununited at the moment with those that want a different society without guns in every house. These people are Americans too but the gun squad camp seem to show little tolerance for there fellow countrymans wishes. Perhaps its time to move forward instead of holding onto rights laid down 200 odd years ago when life in America was very different to today!
At the end of the day it is America's problem but it does have a responcibility to take action to protect its citizens and foreign visitors which it clearly cannot do with its present day lifestyle policies.
You have covered quite a few topics here; however, I certainly agree with your first paragraph; I have not love for guns, either.
The American 'Bill of Rights' was not an American original, nor did they originate with the American Revolution. They were copied from England; with the 2nd amendment originating from the Glorious Revolution of 1688, where the King of England wanted to prohibit Protestants from being armed. Much easier to control, that way.
Many Americans would love to go back to the days of Thomas Jefferson; keeping our concerns, troops and money on our side of the oceans. However, between world events, the UN and the crazies of the world attempting to annihilate various groups they don't agree with, the USA has been called on, again and again, to serve as the worlds policemen; a chore which is impossible and unappreciated.
Recent gun outrage in the USA forces the focus on firearms; in the opinion of many, an equal or larger focus should be turned toward the government guided decline of mental healthcare and the closing of facilities over the past 20 plus years. I, myself, have to ask how is it possible these nutcase shooters had access to firearms; how are ex-con's able to acquire an arsenal? If you or I are trying to work with a mentally challenged person, we would likely expose the person to some other activity; not put a gun in their hand. Violent video games are certainly not a plus, either.
The USA is attempting to deal with their problems. At this point, outlawing firearms in the USA would only take away the guns of law abiding citizens. As much as I dislike firearms, I am forced to stay out of mall's, buildings and other places where firearms are not allowed. Guess I'll just stay home.
When I am in Thailand, I've noticed the internet shops are filled with Thai teens engrossed in violent video games. I keep wondering how long before atrocities such as the recent shooting outrages in the USA start showing up in Thailand. Some will say they already have begun. Am hoping the USA won't be blamed for that, too.
-
[keep rubbing your guns up and down while repeating Im a big boy now, Im a big boy now .. Repeat til satisfied.. make sure you do this exercise 10 times aday
When I fired my 8 incher it was a great bang.
-
I have no love for guns and find peoples obsession with them quite disturbing. Guns take out much of the skill and fear in killing. They are designed to do maximum damage with minimum effort. One crazy person with very few guns can cause a massive amount of death and destuction.
America recently spent alot of money, effort and lives invading a country on the grounds of weapons of mass destruction. What determins a weapon of mass destruction?
26 killed in a matter of minutes by one person whom had easy access to weapons most US citizens consider the norm! Sounds like a weapon of mass destruction to me!
It seems a bit odd that the USA are happy to drag the rest of the world into waring conflicts outside its own borders but very reluctant to act on its own failings.
Regarding the responcible owner keeping unloaded guns in a locked safe for protection against intruders. In the event of an agressive intruder entering your house, do you, 1. Call the police before you go to your locked gun cabinate? 2. Get shot whilst attempting to get to your cabinet? 3. Unlock the cabinet then get shot whilst loading your gun hence giving criminal access to all your guns? 4. Or keep a gun in an irresponcible manner, in every room loaded ready to for action to be used or played with by any person that happens upon them?
Fact is in most cases the unloaded gun in the locked cabinet in some part of the house will not be accessable and ready for use when needed.
Arguements for God given rights! Who's god? Thats what most of the conflicts in the world are about ffs!
Arguements about rights passed on from the war of independance. A war fought by the colonists for a "United" States of America. The USA is looking pretty ununited at the moment with those that want a different society without guns in every house. These people are Americans too but the gun squad camp seem to show little tolerance for there fellow countrymans wishes. Perhaps its time to move forward instead of holding onto rights laid down 200 odd years ago when life in America was very different to today!
At the end of the day it is America's problem but it does have a responcibility to take action to protect its citizens and foreign visitors which it clearly cannot do with its present day lifestyle policies.
You have covered quite a few topics here; however, I certainly agree with your first paragraph; I have not love for guns, either.
The American 'Bill of Rights' was not an American original, nor did they originate with the American Revolution. They were copied from England; with the 2nd amendment originating from the Glorious Revolution of 1688, where the King of England wanted to prohibit Protestants from being armed. Much easier to control, that way.
Many Americans would love to go back to the days of Thomas Jefferson; keeping our concerns, troops and money on our side of the oceans. However, between world events, the UN and the crazies of the world attempting to annihilate various groups they don't agree with, the USA has been called on, again and again, to serve as the worlds policemen; a chore which is impossible and unappreciated.
Recent gun outrage in the USA forces the focus on firearms; in the opinion of many, an equal or larger focus should be turned toward the government guided decline of mental healthcare and the closing of facilities over the past 20 plus years. I, myself, have to ask how is it possible these nutcase shooters had access to firearms; how are ex-con's able to acquire an arsenal? If you or I are trying to work with a mentally challenged person, we would likely expose the person to some other activity; not put a gun in their hand. Violent video games are certainly not a plus, either.
The USA is attempting to deal with their problems. At this point, outlawing firearms in the USA would only take away the guns of law abiding citizens. As much as I dislike firearms, I am forced to stay out of mall's, buildings and other places where firearms are not allowed. Guess I'll just stay home.
When I am in Thailand, I've noticed the internet shops are filled with Thai teens engrossed in violent video games. I keep wondering how long before atrocities such as the recent shooting outrages in the USA start showing up in Thailand. Some will say they already have begun. Am hoping the USA won't be blamed for that, too.
Cant remember the world calling on the USA to be its policeman. Step up and be counted when needed yes! Regarding the Iraqi war that did not happen. The UN was asking for time and restraint whilst the Americans fabricated weapons of mass destruction, panic and urgency as a excuse to invade. Stupidly the British and others got sucked in.
Have to agree with you on the video games and also share the worry of how easily guns are used in Thailand.
Supprised at some of the main posters on here with there my guns bigger than your gun attitude. Grow up ffs!
-
Cant remember the world calling on the USA to be its policeman. Step up and be counted when needed yes! Regarding the Iraqi war that did not happen. The UN was asking for time and restraint whilst the Americans fabricated weapons of mass destruction, panic and urgency as a excuse to invade. Stupidly the British and others got sucked in.
Have to agree with you on the video games and also share the worry of how easily guns are used in Thailand.
Supprised at some of the main posters on here with there my guns bigger than your gun attitude. Grow up ffs!
After two World Wars where the US had to get involved because the other counties (especially in Europe) were going Wacko, the leadership decided to be proactive rather that reactive. So basically the US became the world's policemen to stop the Wacko Europeans from trying to take over the world, and it expanded from there.
-
Really Urleft. is that how it all happend in your head eh!!!! You seem to group people without much knowledge of geography or world affairs. Do you honestly believe you and people like you do your country any justice with your outspoken opinions?
What happens if the law is changed and guns are banned. Will you comply?
Are you living in the USA or Thailand now Urleft?
-
Are you living in the USA or Thailand now Urleft?
I think he's living in Cloud Cuckoo Land redman
-
Really Urleft. is that how it all happend in your head eh!!!! You seem to group people without much knowledge of geography or world affairs. Do you honestly believe you and people like you do your country any justice with your outspoken opinions?
What happens if the law is changed and guns are banned. Will you comply?
Are you living in the USA or Thailand now Urleft?
Yes, I am living in the US and Thailand now, I have residences in both and am able to travel between them at will. The multi-entry Visa is great.
As far as changing the laws, it is not that easy. They have to change the constitution, which is very difficult. Until the constitution is changed, the 2nd Admendment rules.
As far as world affairs, I have lived in the US, Europe, Central American, the Middle East, and now Aisa. I have experienced it first hand. And what I really love about Thailand is the freedom to do things, you open a business and then do the paperwork, what a great way to do things. Unfortunately the US has followed Europe's lead and stifles new business.
I want people to be free despite the wackos out there. It seems you think I am one of these wackos for wanting people to be free. Luckily, what you think has no impact on my actions.
-
Hey Nookie.
What do you think of my opinion on smoking in private businesses? You seem always ready to comment other things, what about something affects you directly?
-
Cant remember the world calling on the USA to be its policeman. Step up and be counted when needed yes! Regarding the Iraqi war that did not happen. The UN was asking for time and restraint whilst the Americans fabricated weapons of mass destruction, panic and urgency as a excuse to invade. Stupidly the British and others got sucked in.
Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was a fact at the time; some of these weapons were used on the Kurds, if memory serves. What happened to the stock piles remains to be seen. Syria, perhaps? Buried someplace, just as Britain buried planes in Burma?
When there is a natural disaster in another part of the world, the USA is always among the first to provide help, supplies and money. Same is true when 'someone should do something' to save lives in a problem area somewhere. Most Americans would agree, it's about time to let some other country handle the issues.
Iraq; I, for one American, was very much against going into Iraq. vWhether it is that country or some other, it takes someone like a Saddam Hussein to control it; I understand many countries think 'someone should do something' when masses of people are being wiped out or some dictator somewhere is doing something unpopular (according to our way of thinking), but am sick & tired of the USA being called on to police the situation, (whether that issue is fact or just what we have been led to believe).
To get back to the shooting innocent people in the USA, more supervision of mentally handicapped would be useful & helpful.
You may have read elsewhere, a NY newspaper printed a list of names and address's of gun permit holders. Many people strongly object; some think it advertises to burglars which houses to hit or to stay away from. To me, it my provide a flag that an excon or a nutcase neighbor needs attention before they have a chance of 'going off'. And, reducing the number of rounds in a magazine from 30 to only 15 is ridiculous.
-
Ban Assault Vehicles.
-
Funny how you avoid the questions you don't like and this leads me to believe you would rather keep your guns than comply with a change in the law should it happen.
Think you will find Thailand has many rules and farrangs owning guns is a big no no. As for everybody and the rest of the world being wacko I think you need to take a long close look at yourself. As far as your actions are concerened I think they concerne many!
-
two world wars....thanks USA...for turning up late, since the last world war some 60 odd years ago...how has it been being the moral watch dog for the world...whats the victory count...lets not really worry about central american conflicts against drug lords etc...Korea...draw....Vietnam...loss....Somalia...lets not mention..no oil reserves.....Iraq (1)..flop not finished.... but protected the almighty oil...Iraq (2) weapons of mass distraction..victory for Halliburton, for the people 0... Afghanistan...well what can we say...history may be a good place to start...Alexander the great couldn't hold it...the British couldn't take it at their height of power....the Russians couldn't control it and withdrew....what do we really think the outcome there will be? The sheriffs badge is looking rusty!!!
-
Are you living in the USA or Thailand now Urleft?
I think he's living in Cloud Cuckoo Land redman
1000%
-
Hey Nookie.
What do you think of my opinion on smoking in private businesses? You seem always ready to comment other things, what about something affects you directly?
Why change the subject??
However ,I support the banning of smoking here in the restaurant,the area near the cooking has no smoking signs which were placed there by local Government Health Officials.
-
two world wars....thanks USA...for turning up late, since the last world war some 60 odd years ago...how has it been being the moral watch dog for the world...whats the victory count...lets not really worry about central american conflicts against drug lords etc...Korea...draw....Vietnam...loss....Somalia...lets not mention..no oil reserves.....Iraq (1)..flop not finished.... but protected the almighty oil...Iraq (2) weapons of mass distraction..victory for Halliburton, for the people 0... Afghanistan...well what can we say...history may be a good place to start...Alexander the great couldn't hold it...the British couldn't take it at their height of power....the Russians couldn't control it and withdrew....what do we really think the outcome there will be? The sheriffs badge is looking rusty!!!
It is looking a bit rusty. All the more reason for some other country to step up for awhile!
-
Funny how you avoid the questions you don't like and this leads me to believe you would rather keep your guns than comply with a change in the law should it happen.
Think you will find Thailand has many rules and farrangs owning guns is a big no no. As for everybody and the rest of the world being wacko I think you need to take a long close look at yourself. As far as your actions are concerened I think they concerne many!
Thought I mentioned I am a law abiding citizen. I have passed a complete FBI background investigation, never been arrested, and the US has me listed as an official "Trusted Traveler".
And while I have not stated on this thread, my main personal views are that as long as you are not hurting anyone, inflicting yourself on me, or causing my taxes to diverted to your lazy ass, I really don't care what you do. And hope you enjoy doing it.
I can see the cause for concern as I am self-sufficient and want to keep my rights, scary.
-
Thank you mytle_71 nice to know that Australia has rules, But i would like to know what the story is in America, WHAT RULES DO YOU HAVE FOR OWNING A GUN , do you have to store them in a safe , do you have to be registered or can anyone just go out and buy a gun .
Hello urleft you seem to be the one with knowledge about firearms , can you answer this above question , you partly answered saying about the fbi etc , are the laws for guns different in each state, which state has the most guns out of interest, or any other american can provide an answer pleaseeeeeeeeee/quote]
-
Thank you mytle_71 nice to know that Australia has rules, But i would like to know what the story is in America, WHAT RULES DO YOU HAVE FOR OWNING A GUN , do you have to store them in a safe , do you have to be registered or can anyone just go out and buy a gun .
Hello urleft you seem to be the one with knowledge about firearms , can you answer this above question , you partly answered saying about the fbi etc , are the laws for guns different in each state, which state has the most guns out of interest, or any other american can provide an answer pleaseeeeeeeeee/quote]
As you mentioned, each state has its own laws.
Alabama, my state of residence is fairly free. Pretty much buy what you want, easy to get a concealed weapons permit, and no requirement for a safe. As someone mentioned, an unloaded gun in a safe is pretty useless for protection. Safes are used mainly to keep the weapons safe, especially classic and specilized weapons.
A fairly good indicator on strict gun laws is to look at the state by state election results. If the state went for Obama it will usually have very strict guns laws (like in Conn where the school shooting occurred), if it went for Romney it probably has lax gun laws, like Alabama.
Also, hunting is a good indication, lots of allowed hunting, lax gun laws. State population, low population, lax gun laws.
As far as buying, you have to be approved on a national regester. When I bought my last pistol, I was in and out of the store in about 20 minutes, approval took about a minute.
-
Are you living in the USA or Thailand now Urleft?
I think he's living in Cloud Cuckoo Land redman
Just because someone disagrees with your opinion does not make someone Cuckoo. It seems like when one cannot support their opinion the usual reaction is to call someone a name. URLEFT has stated his opinion how about countering with why you think he is wrong. Calling names is rather immature, it would be better to clearly state why you think he is wrong.
-
I have no love for guns and find peoples obsession with them quite disturbing. Guns take out much of the skill and fear in killing. They are designed to do maximum damage with minimum effort. One crazy person with very few guns can cause a massive amount of death and destuction.
America recently spent alot of money, effort and lives invading a country on the grounds of weapons of mass destruction. What determins a weapon of mass destruction?
26 killed in a matter of minutes by one person whom had easy access to weapons most US citizens consider the norm! Sounds like a weapon of mass destruction to me!
It seems a bit odd that the USA are happy to drag the rest of the world into waring conflicts outside its own borders but very reluctant to act on its own failings.
Regarding the responcible owner keeping unloaded guns in a locked safe for protection against intruders. In the event of an agressive intruder entering your house, do you, 1. Call the police before you go to your locked gun cabinate? 2. Get shot whilst attempting to get to your cabinet? 3. Unlock the cabinet then get shot whilst loading your gun hence giving criminal access to all your guns? 4. Or keep a gun in an irresponcible manner, in every room loaded ready to for action to be used or played with by any person that happens upon them?
Fact is in most cases the unloaded gun in the locked cabinet in some part of the house will not be accessable and ready for use when needed.
Arguements for God given rights! Who's god? Thats what most of the conflicts in the world are about ffs!
Arguements about rights passed on from the war of independance. A war fought by the colonists for a "United" States of America. The USA is looking pretty ununited at the moment with those that want a different society without guns in every house. These people are Americans too but the gun squad camp seem to show little tolerance for there fellow countrymans wishes. Perhaps its time to move forward instead of holding onto rights laid down 200 odd years ago when life in America was very different to today!
At the end of the day it is America's problem but it does have a responcibility to take action to protect its citizens and foreign visitors which it clearly cannot do with its present day lifestyle policies.
You have covered quite a few topics here; however, I certainly agree with your first paragraph; I have not love for guns, either.
The American 'Bill of Rights' was not an American original, nor did they originate with the American Revolution. They were copied from England; with the 2nd amendment originating from the Glorious Revolution of 1688, where the King of England wanted to prohibit Protestants from being armed. Much easier to control, that way.
Many Americans would love to go back to the days of Thomas Jefferson; keeping our concerns, troops and money on our side of the oceans. However, between world events, the UN and the crazies of the world attempting to annihilate various groups they don't agree with, the USA has been called on, again and again, to serve as the worlds policemen; a chore which is impossible and unappreciated.
Recent gun outrage in the USA forces the focus on firearms; in the opinion of many, an equal or larger focus should be turned toward the government guided decline of mental healthcare and the closing of facilities over the past 20 plus years. I, myself, have to ask how is it possible these nutcase shooters had access to firearms; how are ex-con's able to acquire an arsenal? If you or I are trying to work with a mentally challenged person, we would likely expose the person to some other activity; not put a gun in their hand. Violent video games are certainly not a plus, either.
The USA is attempting to deal with their problems. At this point, outlawing firearms in the USA would only take away the guns of law abiding citizens. As much as I dislike firearms, I am forced to stay out of mall's, buildings and other places where firearms are not allowed. Guess I'll just stay home.
When I am in Thailand, I've noticed the internet shops are filled with Thai teens engrossed in violent video games. I keep wondering how long before atrocities such as the recent shooting outrages in the USA start showing up in Thailand. Some will say they already have begun. Am hoping the USA won't be blamed for that, too.
Cant remember the world calling on the USA to be its policeman. Step up and be counted when needed yes! Regarding the Iraqi war that did not happen. The UN was asking for time and restraint whilst the Americans fabricated weapons of mass destruction, panic and urgency as a excuse to invade. Stupidly the British and others got sucked in.
Have to agree with you on the video games and also share the worry of how easily guns are used in Thailand.
Supprised at some of the main posters on here with there my guns bigger than your gun attitude. Grow up ffs!
If the UN had been around at the beginning of WWII it would have been asking for time and restraint while Hitler was taking over Europe. The UN is a useless entity, no it is worse than useless because many countries think that it can prevent conflict. It cannot and does not.
-
In todays news paper
-
Jamie,
I don't have time to look for it right now, but I posted the total amount of roads and vehicles in the US on another posting (I think is was another of Nookie's (who speaks for everyone) posts). Hard to compare apples (amount of vehicles/roads in US) to raisins (# of vehicles/roads in other countries).
Err - not quite true. I posted the numbers which clearly showed that there is a major issue in the US for road deaths as well as gun deaths.
http://www.buriramexpats.com/forum/index.php/topic,3916.msg31654.html#msg31654
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
Not only do people in the USA like to kill themselves with guns as compared to the UK (10.27 per 100k v .46 for England and Wales)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate
They also like to kill themselves with their cars too (12.3 per 100K v 3.6)
Interesting to see that there is a massive difference between the two ratios - 10.27 / 0.46 for gun related deaths compared with 12.3 / 3/6 for traffic related deaths. I wonder why that is ?
http://www.buriramexpats.com/forum/index.php/topic,3916.msg31656.html#msg31656
So with 10 times as many vehicles, a vast amount of roads, you can expect to have more accidents.
To which you never gave a satisfactory reply about the differnces in the two ratios (between car realated death and gun related deaths and you only defended the number of car related deaths due to the number of cars in the US.
Maybe this is also for the same reason and you could not admit that ??
-
Question for urleft, lets have an honest answer please , with a simple YES or NO, would you agree if the gun laws were changed, as in harder to get a license, have to store weapons in a safe, cannot have high powered rifles , WOULD there be less DEATHS in the usa.
-
Question for urleft, lets have an honest answer please , with a simple YES or NO, would you agree if the gun laws were changed, as in harder to get a license, have to store weapons in a safe, cannot have high powered rifles , WOULD there be less DEATHS in the usa.
No.
My reasoning is like the start of this thread, the perp illegally had the guns, what more laws would have stopped him?
-
If stiffer laws had been in place his mother would not have had the guns he so easily had access too.......! Why do all gun pro people not want to admit the obviouse?
-
Unfortunately, Urleft, there are now so many non - Law Abiding Citizens, that for the safety and protection of the remaonder, new laws need to be introduced.
Did you actually read what you wrote?
We need new laws because lawbreakers are not following the laws. What kind of twisted logic is that? New laws will make lawbreakers suddenly begin following these laws?
And law abiding citizens are denied, and made even more defenseless.
-
If stiffer laws had been in place his mother would not have had the guns he so easily had access too.......! Why do all gun pro people not want to admit the obviouse?
What is obvious to me is that new laws will just make it harder on law abiding citizens, which means taking rights away from me.
My solution is to make it easier on law abiding citizens and get rid of gun free zones. Back when I was in 7th and 8th grade I went to a school where they had a gun club, students would bring there guns to school, often with ammo so they could go hunting afterwards. And we had zero school shootings.
-
I read that most gun pro Americans want to bring back open carrying of side arms throughtout America. Do you agree with this Urleft and why?
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmRN00KbCr8&feature=player_detailpage
-
I read that most gun pro Americans want to bring back open carrying of side arms throughtout America. Do you agree with this Urleft and why?
Yes. When I grew up in the 60's it was common to see pick up trucks with gun racks in the rear window sporting 2 rifles.
I've been to Arizona which has open carry, and it was rare to see. It surprised me 1st time I saw a guy riding a Harley with a pistol stapped to his side.
I think initially some would do it, but after the novelty wore off, they would stop. I personally prefer concealed carry.
-
So "yes" you agree with open carrying although you prefer concealed carrying. You did not answer why you agree with open carrying.
-
I think initially some would do it, but after the novelty wore off, they would stop. I personally prefer concealed carry.
Why do you urleft, or anyone need to carry guns outside? I can understand for home protection, but not in cars, shopping malls etc!
-
Why do you urleft, or anyone need to carry guns outside? I can understand for home protection, but not in cars, shopping malls etc!
Because a lot of crime occurs outside the home, such as the Sandy School. Imagine the difference if one of the teachers had carried a gun that day.
http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top_stories/story/Man-uses-concealed-weapon-to-stop-stabbing-spree/zdZzsT6hNk2Q9tJtkKq3VA.cspx (http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top_stories/story/Man-uses-concealed-weapon-to-stop-stabbing-spree/zdZzsT6hNk2Q9tJtkKq3VA.cspx)
Man uses concealed weapon to stop stabbing spree, police say he likely saved lives
-
Urleft you really dont answer my question, i am asking you personally if you think there would be less deaths in the usa if the gun laws were stricter, i am not concerned about some guy getting hold of a gun illegally,if the laws were change to make it harder to own guns do you think there would be less deaths . YES or NO
-
No I don't think there would be less deaths with stricter gun laws. They would probably increase as more and more law abiding citizens are disarmed.
-
I THINK YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN A POLITICIAN.
-
Why do you urleft, or anyone need to carry guns outside? I can understand for home protection, but not in cars, shopping malls etc!
Because a lot of crime occurs outside the home, such as the Sandy School. Imagine the difference if one of the teachers had carried a gun that day.
http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top_stories/story/Man-uses-concealed-weapon-to-stop-stabbing-spree/zdZzsT6hNk2Q9tJtkKq3VA.cspx (http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top_stories/story/Man-uses-concealed-weapon-to-stop-stabbing-spree/zdZzsT6hNk2Q9tJtkKq3VA.cspx)
Man uses concealed weapon to stop stabbing spree, police say he likely saved lives
When it is permissible to carry guns outside, then nobody knows the intention (if any ) of the gun carrier,
If all guns were banned outside, it would be easier to apprehend and disarm the carrier.
I had a gun pointed at me in Jomtien some 16/17 years ago, by a temporary resident in my soi. He had poisoned my dogs and shot the soi dogs. I involved the police, but as you all know the police are corrupt and nothing happened.
However he saw me a few days later in a very quiet part of the soi and threatened me. I was fortunate in being able to kick the gun out of his hand, and retrieve it befor him. He scarpered.
2 days later I heard he was knocked down by a car in Bangkok and died.
Good fcuking riddance!
-
Why do you urleft, or anyone need to carry guns outside? I can understand for home protection, but not in cars, shopping malls etc!
Because a lot of crime occurs outside the home, such as the Sandy School. Imagine the difference if one of the teachers had carried a gun that day.
http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top_stories/story/Man-uses-concealed-weapon-to-stop-stabbing-spree/zdZzsT6hNk2Q9tJtkKq3VA.cspx (http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top_stories/story/Man-uses-concealed-weapon-to-stop-stabbing-spree/zdZzsT6hNk2Q9tJtkKq3VA.cspx)
Man uses concealed weapon to stop stabbing spree, police say he likely saved lives
When it is permissible to carry guns outside, then nobody knows the intention (if any ) of the gun carrier,
If all guns were banned outside, it would be easier to apprehend and disarm the carrier.
I had a gun pointed at me in Jomtien some 16/17 years ago, by a temporary resident in my soi. He had poisoned my dogs and shot the soi dogs. I involved the police, but as you all know the police are corrupt and nothing happened.
However he saw me a few days later in a very quiet part of the soi and threatened me. I was fortunate in being able to kick the gun out of his hand, and retrieve it befor him. He scarpered.
2 days later I heard he was knocked down by a car in Bangkok and died.
Good fcuking riddance!
Instant Karma!
Unfortunately,Keith would allow people like that to legally carry guns.
There are too many trigger-happy fcukers - especially in the States - who believe they have the 'right' to shoot first and ask questions later. What if you make an error of judgement or have a case of mistaken identity - mai bpen rai I suppose.
Defending your own property is one thing - but carrying guns in public is a step too far for me.
-
Why do you urleft, or anyone need to carry guns outside? I can understand for home protection, but not in cars, shopping malls etc!
Because a lot of crime occurs outside the home, such as the Sandy School. Imagine the difference if one of the teachers had carried a gun that day.
http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top_stories/story/Man-uses-concealed-weapon-to-stop-stabbing-spree/zdZzsT6hNk2Q9tJtkKq3VA.cspx (http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top_stories/story/Man-uses-concealed-weapon-to-stop-stabbing-spree/zdZzsT6hNk2Q9tJtkKq3VA.cspx)
Man uses concealed weapon to stop stabbing spree, police say he likely saved lives
When it is permissible to carry guns outside, then nobody knows the intention (if any ) of the gun carrier,
If all guns were banned outside, it would be easier to apprehend and disarm the carrier.
I had a gun pointed at me in Jomtien some 16/17 years ago, by a temporary resident in my soi. He had poisoned my dogs and shot the soi dogs. I involved the police, but as you all know the police are corrupt and nothing happened.
However he saw me a few days later in a very quiet part of the soi and threatened me. I was fortunate in being able to kick the gun out of his hand, and retrieve it befor him. He scarpered.
2 days later I heard he was knocked down by a car in Bangkok and died.
Good fcuking riddance!
Instant Karma!
Unfortunately,Keith would allow people like that to legally carry guns.
There are too many trigger-happy fcukers - especially in the States - who believe they have the 'right' to shoot first and ask questions later. What if you make an error of judgement or have a case of mistaken identity - mai bpen rai I suppose.
Defending your own property is one thing - but carrying guns in public is a step too far for me.
I believe he was legally entitled to carry a gun in Thailand too
After a breakin at my home in 1987, a Police Officer offered to sell me his gun for home protection for 6000bt. I declined. He told me it was quite OK to shoot an intruder, BUT if I shot him, I had to tell the Police it was the wife!
I suspect that if any burglar was shot in Thailand, his friends and brothers would ensure that my days were numbered!
-
It would appear most Americans have an anethnitised view of guns due to them being common place in society for so long. America has to be one of the few countries where people have historically open carried guns in peace time.
Humans being what they are do get into day to day conflicts and what should be at most a bloody nosed fist fight can so easily take a totally different and tragic turn when guns are to hand. Urleft assumes everybody to be responcible and level headed, well that aint how life is.
If America chooses to carry on with its gun culture then so be it. Tourists and business can choose to stay away, media can restrict reporting miserable events to the rest of the world and we can wish you all to have a nice day.
A trend I have noted from this and other similar threads is that gun pro Americans moving abroad insist on taking their gun pro culture with them. This usually falls outside the law making their actions illegal. It would therefore be safe to assume gun prohibative laws have little meaning to these people.
-
Well reasoned post Alan. If there was a 'like' or 'thanks' button on this forum I would have clicked it.
-
Sometimes these subjects hit a little close to home.A short time ago ,a group of 5 young locals took refuge in our backyard,hiding from another armed group in hot pursuit.Not a nice place to find yourself in any country.Hope you all have a safe and Happy New Year
-
If I assumed everyone was reponsible and level headed, I never would have gotten a concealed weapons permit.
And if the perps out there know there are armed people around, they are less likely to take action, why else are they going wacko in "Gun Free Zones", because they know the victims will be defenseless.
But my primary concern is the taking away of my existing rights because of what criminals (that are already ignoring existing gun laws) are doing.
-
Keith. I don't think for 1 minute that a lot of people would have a problem with arming your self with a pistol in your own home.. I'd like one here in Thailand myself but high powered rifles have no place in the family home.... I think a lot of ppl agree with you about being armed in your property but a rifle is a bit excessive..
-
I think Keith and most of us Brits (who have not been brought up with gun culture) will differ in the extent to which gun ownership should be allowed.
I worry about the readinesswith which Keith taught his wife to hit the X - thankfully Keith had never met Nick's assailant :-)
To me, the rights of the umarmed individual must come before the rights of any armed individual.
-
Keith. I don't think for 1 minute that a lot of people would have a problem with arming your self with a pistol in your own home.. I'd like one here in Thailand myself but high powered rifles have no place in the family home.... I think a lot of ppl agree with you about being armed in your property but a rifle is a bit excessive..
Right now I cannot think of a need for a high powered rifle in Thailand, however in America, I can think of several, usually associated with hunting. For example the wild pig population in America is getting out of control, high powered rifles are needed to get rid of these herds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pslzMze9rNk
I would still like to have a .50 cal sniper rifle because I think its neat. I once conducted a .50 cal range where they gave me 20,000 rounds of ammo for 130 people, I personally put about 2000 rounds down range. But I have no pratical use for such a weapon, even in America. But it would wow my gun buddies.
And to Ray's comment, what rights are different between and armed individual and an unarmed person? To me it should be none. Both have a right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. If the armed individual is a law abiding citizen, there should be no issue, but if he is a criminal, it would not matter what gun laws were in place.
-
It was around 9 years ago, when I was mugged by a couple of armed thugs in downtown Atlanta, Georgia. I was with a couple of work mates and walking back to our hotel (2 blocks away), after having a late dinner and a couple of drinks.
These 2 looked like they came out of "central casting" for a movie, or a news report! A pair of young black guys, wearing baggy, low rider jeans, and dark hooded sweatshirts. They came scurrying toward us from a side street with their guns drawn..."gimme' your wallets mofo's, etc.". We continued walking on and then heard the crack of a gun, when one of the punks fired a round into the air (I guess?). We froze as the guys jumped ahead of us and pointed their guns directly at us. They got our wallets and money and began taunting us with "let's cap their @sses anyway, and such..."! We just started walking away quickly then, to their continued taunts. And scared shitless, made it back to our hotel. (Police report, but no action or remedy..."welcome to Atlanta", one officer said)
Within the next few months, there was a series of 2 or 3 convenience store robberies in my home city (Las Vegas). The assailants shot the clerks after getting the cash, and in one case, shot two innocent customers. (later saying, "they didn't want witnesses")
Then, just a short time after that horror subsided, some nut-bag went into a supermarket that I shop in, during the middle of the day, and started shooting people with a pump action shotgun. This place is only 1/2 mile from my home, and in a decent neighborhood. Two people were killed and 3 or 4 more injured, before the police arrived and the guy surrendered! (mental case)
Of the three cases, only the nut-bag with the shotgun, had a legally owned weapon. The other lowlifes were obviously using stolen or illegally acquired guns.
Nonetheless, that did it for me! I decided I didn't want to be killed by some fruitcake while shopping for groceries, or gunned down by thugs in a 7-11 some night when I needed some smokes!
I already owned one handgun and a couple of hunting rifles, but I went to the local "Gun Store" (police owned and operated), and purchased a compact "carry" weapon. Signed up for the concealed carry permit course. I then attended the classroom session, demonstrated my knowledge of safety and ability, on the range...and applied for the permit.
It took around 90 days for the Sheriff's Dept to complete the background checks etc., and finally issue the concealed permit. It's renewable every 60 months, and you have to go through the whole process again.
The "carry" gun, is now like my American Express card...I never leave home without it!
-
Thats a terrible turn of events Pablo and just goes to show what gun culture does for society. Maybe American gun culture is to far down the line for hope of change for a safe and civilised society in which to live peacefully without fear.
I do however fail to understand how carrying that gun changes things for you in the particular situations you have discribed. When you were mugged the guys came at you guns raised. Had you drawn your gun the situation would have turned lethal and you would have endangered yourself and your friends. Its a terrible and frightening situation that no one should have to suffer but all you lost was your wallets!
Regarding Urlefts nice video and his wish to rid America of all its wild boar and own sniper riffles to impress his mates... Sad!
-
A trend I have noted from this and other similar threads is that gun pro Americans moving abroad insist on taking their gun pro culture with them. This usually falls outside the law making their actions illegal. It would therefore be safe to assume gun prohibative laws have little meaning to these people.
Most of the pro gun Americans that have commented on threads like this are responsible, legal owners of guns. I could still be pro gun if I move to Thailand, but if the laws there do not allow for me to legally have a gun I will follow the law. This is the point that many cannot or will not recognize and that is that most Americans follow the gun laws (everywhere). If I will follow the gun laws in Hawaii, you can bet that I will follow them in Thailand where the penalties (and prisons) are much harsher.
The thing that I don't understand is why the anti gun side is so against anyone even having a remote chance of protecting themselves and their family from harm. You guys seem to cherish being absolutely helpless and depending on someone else for your safety. Here in America there is a saying "when seconds count the police are minutes away". I don't think it is unreasonable if someone was breaking into my house that I should be able to retrieve a legally owned firearm, than I have been trained to use, then call the police and make sure that no harm comes to my family in the minutes that it takes for the police to arrive.
To me this seems very reasonable, I respect others opinions on this topic but I think it is wrong to assume that because someone is "pro guns" while living in the USA that we will immediately start breaking the gun laws of a foreign country as soon as we move there. I and the vast majority of gun owning Americans follow the laws, and it is nonsensical to think that we would not follow the laws of a foreign country. If I cannot legally own or possess a gun in Thailand, I will not own own/possess a gun in Thailand. That does not make me any less "pro gun" or change the way I think about the right to self protection. It just means that I cannot have a gun while living in Thailand.
-
Urleft you really dont answer my question, i am asking you personally if you think there would be less deaths in the usa if the gun laws were stricter, i am not concerned about some guy getting hold of a gun illegally,if the laws were change to make it harder to own guns do you think there would be less deaths . YES or NO
I will answer your question the answer is probably no. Most of the gun violence in the USA is done by people that don't follow the existing laws. So the answer to people not following the already strict laws (such as in Connecticut) is to make even stricter laws? Great idea why didn't we do that before? How about a law that it is illegal to shoot children, or your mother, or than you cannot bring a firearm to a school. The fact is that even is you totally banned the private ownership of guns in the USA and then confiscated every gun in the USA you would still have people that would not follow the existing laws or people that are mental. The numbers would likely be less, but this scenario will not happen in the USA in our life times.
-
Its about time for another shooting spree!!
-
As a non American I am not familiar with the gun laws, but have learnt a fair bit from this thread. It appears that everyone may own one or more guns, which do not have to be confined to the home, but may be taken outside (presumably in a concealed manner) subject to an easily obtained permit. That is of course with the exception of designated Gun Free Zones
I think similar laws exist in Thailand, with many bars, restaurants and clubs diplaying notices refusing admission to those toting guns. I would suggest that since money is not so freely available in Thailand there are considerably less gun owners as a proportion of the population. Nevertheless they exist, and regularly we read in the Bangkok Post of shoot-ups.
I believe changes to the gun laws in America have to be made in stages and my first priority would be to prevent all guns being taken away from the home. Keep them at home, and protect your family and property if you so wish. No need to tote exotic guns/rifles etc round the town to impress friends and others! If you have extensive acres of land and want to keep the coyotes at bay, then OK -it is your property. But the wild boar population is not your concern if they are not on your property - let the proper folk deal with them. And if your buddies want you to assist them, on their land, let them supply the guns -not require you to bring your own.
With all guns legally eliminated from the streets, it would be far easier for the police and authorities to monitor the situation. They already stop and frisk likely looking troublemakers. Find a gun on a person outside, and that would mean a minimum jail sentence (5 years maybe). Anyone caught with a gun used in anger or in a threatening way should perhaps receive the ultimate penalty.
Simplistic maybe, but food for thought A start has to be made somewhere!
-
A trend I have noted from this and other similar threads is that gun pro Americans moving abroad insist on taking their gun pro culture with them. This usually falls outside the law making their actions illegal. It would therefore be safe to assume gun prohibative laws have little meaning to these people.
Most of the pro gun Americans that have commented on threads like this are responsible, legal owners of guns. I could still be pro gun if I move to Thailand, but if the laws there do not allow for me to legally have a gun I will follow the law. This is the point that many cannot or will not recognize and that is that most Americans follow the gun laws (everywhere). If I will follow the gun laws in Hawaii, you can bet that I will follow them in Thailand where the penalties (and prisons) are much harsher.
The thing that I don't understand is why the anti gun side is so against anyone even having a remote chance of protecting themselves and their family from harm. You guys seem to cherish being absolutely helpless and depending on someone else for your safety. Here in America there is a saying "when seconds count the police are minutes away". I don't think it is unreasonable if someone was breaking into my house that I should be able to retrieve a legally owned firearm, than I have been trained to use, then call the police and make sure that no harm comes to my family in the minutes that it takes for the police to arrive.
To me this seems very reasonable, I respect others opinions on this topic but I think it is wrong to assume that because someone is "pro guns" while living in the USA that we will immediately start breaking the gun laws of a foreign country as soon as we move there. I and the vast majority of gun owning Americans follow the laws, and it is nonsensical to think that we would not follow the laws of a foreign country. If I cannot legally own or possess a gun in Thailand, I will not own own/possess a gun in Thailand. That does not make me any less "pro gun" or change the way I think about the right to self protection. It just means that I cannot have a gun while living in Thailand.
May I just remind you of this Ahab.
International News clippings / Re: Gun Culture in USA
« on: December 17, 2012, 07:39:56 AM »
Quote from: Alan on December 17, 2012, 06:19:39 AM
Quote from: Ahab on December 17, 2012, 02:58:34 AM
Or this?
Safe? What message of normallity does this send to these kids? Ahab you gave me all the pridictable answers I expected. So how you gunna live in Thailand without your guns?
I think it would be more normal to get used a teacher with a firearm than to be killed by a Palestinian terrorist that would like nothing more than to get into a classroom full of Jewish school children with a gun. Normal is being alive. Alan do you ever think that my answers were "predictable" because they were logical. I will live just fine in Thailand, my wife will have a gun and it will be kept in the house (locked in a gun safe) and just like in the USA we will hopefully and probably never have to use it.
-
No disrespect to Ahab's wife, -or anyones for that matter, but the mere thought of Isaan jungle bunnies with guns is rather worrying!
-
Thai women "fly off the handle" very quickly, and in the heat of the moment will grab anything readily available to attack (usually their husband). Most times the best they can find is a knife. That's bad enough, but if a loaded gun were available, I genuinely believe they would shoot without realising what they were doing. They seem to have a mental block when in a rage, and find it hard after the event to recall what they did and why. Too late in some cases!
I have been attacked with a knife in my home on 2 occasions by 2 separate Thai wives -who for 99.9% of the time are/were the gentlest of Thai women! And in case you are wondering - no mia noi was the cause!
-
No disrespect to Ahab's wife, -or anyones for that matter, but the mere thought of Isaan jungle bunnies with guns is rather worrying!
I am thinking of 'arming' my Jungle Bunny!
-
You actually married the same type twice!!!!!! screwy I think you genralise or have that magnetic attraction Nick.
Your missing the point though, the gun is registered with the wife but purchased at the wishes of Ahab.
-
I thought of you Nookie when I referred to Jungle Bunnies! :)
-
Thai women "fly off the handle" very quickly, and in the heat of the moment will grab anything readily available to attack (usually their husband). Most times the best they can find is a knife. That's bad enough, but if a loaded gun were available, I genuinely believe they would shoot without realising what they were doing. They seem to have a mental block when in a rage, and find it hard after the event to recall what they did and why. Too late in some cases!
I have been attacked with a knife in my home on 2 occasions by 2 separate Thai wives -who for 99.9% of the time are/were the gentlest of Thai women! And in case you are wondering - no mia noi was the cause!
Reading your last paragraph & knowing you ,I can perhaps understand why!
-
Where is Urleft today........Still got his head stuck in the sand
-
You actually married the same type twice!!!!!! screwy I think you generalise or have that magnetic attraction Nick.
Your missing the point though, the gun is registered with the wife but purchased at the wishes of Ahab.
I think all Thai women are capable of fighting with whatever is available. We are all potential magnets Alan.
Regardless of who the gun is registered to (and a farang cannot legally own a gun in Thailand) it will be in the home and available for use by the wife should she see fit to use it for any purpose.
-
Reading your last paragraph & knowing you ,I can perhaps understand why!
Perhaps you ought to live a bit more dangerously Nookie! Gets the adrenalin flowing!
-
Reading your last paragraph & knowing you ,I can perhaps understand why!
Perhaps you ought to live a bit more dangerously Nookie! Gets the adrenalin flowing!
FFS Nick I fell off the chair when I read that!!
-
You actually married the same type twice!!!!!! screwy I think you generalise or have that magnetic attraction Nick.
Your missing the point though, the gun is registered with the wife but purchased at the wishes of Ahab.
I think all Thai women are capable of fighting with whatever is available. We are all potential magnets Alan.
Regardless of who the gun is registered to (and a farang cannot legally own a gun in Thailand) it will be in the home and available for use by the wife should she see fit to use it for any purpose.
Not sure if a farang not being able to own a gun is true (true for retirement and marriage visa's), but what if you attain permanent residence status in Thailand? Not sure, but in any case I will follow the law where I live.
-
P. Nick as a general guideline after your wife or significant other stabs you once, you should probably end the relationship (or hid all knives and always eat out).
-
Ahab
Thanks for your concern, but I was not harmed on either occasion
The first time it was the living room window whilst on the 2nd occasion it was the kitchen table.
I have to admit that I was largely responsible. Derogatory remarks about the begging monks don't go down to well with the Thais! wildman
-
Just to clarify my point of view as some are getting confussed. I do not like guns but can agree to gun ownership for protection on your property in countries where that is needed. I never needed or felt the need for this in the UK and yes that is something to cherrish Ahab. I think one or two guns maybe exceptable for protection purposes but multiple weapons are not justifiable.
Whilst keeping weapons on your property unloaded and secured in a locked safe cannot easily be to hand for the purpose you intended rendering them useless. To quote Ahab "when seconds count the police are minutes away" So are properly secured unloaded guns!
Keeping a gun or guns in a unseccured location in your house gives you access when needed but breaks most country laws and comes with its own risks and problems.
Being able to carry guns outside of your property promotes gun culture and theirefore gun crime. Open carrying in a civilised society has no place in this age.
Guns are widely available in Thailand and carried by more than most expats probably realise. I personnally know many Thais that carry concealed weapons but I also know the problems this brings to Thailand. Large groups of young teenagers with booze in their bellies are to be avoided. Soon enough the new year fair at Buriram and elsewhere will claim more young victims shot all to easily over some stupid arguement. Thats what happens when guns are accepted into society.
The Americans may view us Brits and Eropeans as odd, defenceless maybe even weak which is a huge misunderstanding if they do. Disputes happen but are rarely fatal. We respect our way of life and each other enough not to need guns. Our laws have been fierce enough to keep guns out of mainstream use for public and therefore criminals although sadly that is slowly changing. Saying that the laws are changing also allowing severe use of force rather than reasonable use of force to protect yourself and family in your home. This has always been lacking in the UK and I am pleased to see this law change. It does not automatically allow use of firearms as these remain fiercely restricted.
Weapons were openly carried in Britain, Europe and most of the world. This was in a different age when lawlessness was common and authority weak. Laws and authority were introduced and crime fell to allow people to live the way they do today and in most places those laws excluded weapons. America chose a different path to most and that is reflected in the problems that accurr far to regularly. Change is never easy. It can and has been done but initially change needs to be wanted. Many Americans want change and why would anybody not want to live in a safe gun free society?
-
Ahab
Thanks for your concern, but I was not harmed on either occasion
The first time it was the living room window whilst on the 2nd occasion it was the kitchen table.
I have to admit that I was largely responsible. Derogatory remarks about the begging monks don't go down to well with the Thais! wildman
Good to hear. Have a Happy New Year.
-
Not sure if a farang not being able to own a gun is true (true for retirement and marriage visa's), but what if you attain permanent residence status in Thailand? Not sure, but in any case I will follow the law where I live.
I have PR status, and I don't think I receive any benefits other than not having to sort out my visa annually and do 90 day reporting. They do say that it is easier to obtain a work permit (but I don't want one), admission to National parks etc should be at the Thai price, but invariably I have to persuade them that I am entitled. And when I leave the country I need 2 re-entry permits at double the cost!
Can however queue up at the Thai Immigration desk at Suvarnabhumi. Last time I did that it was longer than the farang line!!!
Never heard that I could own a gun -although never asked.
Wishing everone a Happy New Year, and lets hope we don't get ourselves into situations where guns become an option.
-
Urleft talks of his rights (god given or otherwise) being taken away. Any rights that we humans think we have should not necessarily be for life, but only for such time as they are deemed relevant.
Easy street parking becomes prohibited as more vehicles use the roads.
Speed limits are introduced to lower the accident rate
So as more and more crime is committed with guns, it is only correct that in the interests of the population at large, certain restrictions are introduced.
If this impinges of urlefts god given right to own and tote his guns around American cities and towns, then tough. It is a concession he should make and acceopt for the well being of his fellow countrymen.
-
Well at least AHAB agrees somewhat that they "most likely be less", deaths. Has been an interesting post sorry to see jamaw banned , made some very good points , after its all said and done and from reading from start to end, i think americans should have there rights to own guns changed, for the good of the country, make the license system 10 times harder, this wont stop criminals , it dosent in australia, but the average personin australia does not own a gun,all my mates dont have,if i shot someone that robbed my house and walking out with my video player i would be in serious trouble , if he died i could be up for murder, i hope for the sake of the America that the laws are changed in your life time.
-
Regarding Urlefts nice video and his wish to rid America of all its wild boar and own sniper riffles to impress his mates... Sad!
Admin removed my posting on my buddies and gun handling for some reason, probably to do with Jamie.
However, all my gun buddies are extensively trained on weapons. One was on the USMC Rifle Team. We all appreciate fine weapons. The .50 Cal sniper rifle is a fine weapon, but with a $8000 price tag. This weapon became available after we all retired from the military so none of us has every fired it, but we all would love to try it out, especially the Jarhead.
When we exchange weapons, the guy giving it clears the weapon, the receiving guy then double checks and visually inspects that the barrel. The only exception to this is when are on the firing range, we can hand over a loaded weapon saying like "There's a round in the chamber, 4 left in the magazine".
Rule 1: Treat every weapon as if it is loaded, never point it at a person unless you are prepared to shoot them.
So far we have zero accidents between us.
And I never said the goal was to rid America of wild pigs, however, there is a serious increase in the wild pig population such that states are allowing wild pigs to be hunted during night with special optics, no bag limit, and no closed season. I have a lifetime hunting and fishing license in Alabama, so it is within my rights to take advantage of the hunting if I so choose. The pigs are destroying crops, meancing peoples, and are a dangerous problem. The Discovery Channel has a series called the "Pig Bomb", about the exploding wild pig population, and Alabama is right in the middle of it.
What is sad is people trying to take away my rights because they don't agree with what I do. There are several individuals on the forum that I think do some sad things, like cheat on their wives, but that is up to them. You don't like me having weapons because I may go wacko and come after you? I can do the same thing in a car, and a lot more people are killed by cars.
-
Urleft...........cars AND guns can cause double the problem. And cars have more social benefit to the population.
-
Fortunately, most of us agree to differ in a friendly way. But at the end of the day, our views carry absolutely no weight, and probably those of our American members also fall on deaf ears.
Congress and the Senate will end up doing what they want or are paid to do!
-
Urleft talks of his rights (god given or otherwise) being taken away. Any rights that we humans think we have should not necessarily be for life, but only for such time as they are deemed relevant.
Easy street parking becomes prohibited as more vehicles use the roads.
Speed limits are introduced to lower the accident rate
So as more and more crime is committed with guns, it is only correct that in the interests of the population at large, certain restrictions are introduced.
If this impinges of urlefts god given right to own and tote his guns around American cities and towns, then tough. It is a concession he should make and acceopt for the well being of his fellow countrymen.
Yes, and I am talking about America's demographics. For example, Alabama which is roughly the size of Germany has a population of 5 million, as opposed to 81 million in Germany. This means there is vast open land, a lot of it publically available for sale. One my fellow soldiers was a rancher in Wyoming, but he told me his place was rather small at 7000 acres, big guys have 50,000 + acres.
America is hugh compared too Europe, probably 10 times the land mass with about 1/3 the population.
However, I will grant you a point that as the population centers in America grow, gun restrictions increase, and so does crime.
-
I think all Thai women are capable of fighting with whatever is available. We are all potential magnets Alan.
Sorry I have to disagree with that one Nick.
I have been married 8+ years and never ever have me or my wife been physically violent to each other ( even though we have had a few rows ) or have any of my friends.Yes, you here of fights between married couples but to tar all Thai women with the same brush is unjust.It's a bit like saying all men are wife-beaters after a few beers,though some are ,most are not!!
-
Urleft...........cars AND guns can cause double the problem. And cars have more social benefit to the population.
And cars cause more pollution and use more resources. And how often do you encounter an idiot on the road that should not be driving?
-
Sao baht- I said Thai women were all CAPABLE of fighting - not that they all did! Subtle difference.
Incidentally both of my problems arose AFTER 8 years - so take care!
-
Urleft...........cars AND guns can cause double the problem. And cars have more social benefit to the population.
And cars cause more pollution and use more resources. And how often do you encounter an idiot on the road that should not be driving?
And some of those idiots on the road probably have a gun in the dash, and would likely use it should you make a point of telling them the error of their ways!
-
I have driven well over 1 million kilometers in the US, and never had a weapon brandished at me.
And I have never brandished a weapon while driving.
-
I am hoping no one here ever finds themselves in a safe, 'no guns allowed' place (like Big C in Buriram) with their family when, out of nowhere a crazed looney runs in with a gun & plenty of ammo he has stolen, found, made or ??? and starts shooting innocent people. I would bet no one in Big C would have a gun to stop the carnage; I would also bet no BiB would come running in to return fire. Can't happen? Yeah; ok! If you say so.
I spent 17 years as a Sheriffs Office Captain in the USA; we 'tried' to train for the unexpected. And similar Swat tactics with a drug house. The unexpected can, and will, happen.
As a non-Brit & a non-Aussie there is no way I would even attempt to fathom the confusing news & events taking place in those places; I know just enough history and other details of these friendly countries to get myself in trouble and sometimes have to guess at the meaning of their citizens statements 'whilst' (is that really a word?) we all are speaking 'English'. It is very obvious a non-American might not 'get' the current situation in the USA, regarding 'Gun Outrage'.
True, there are a lot of guns in the USA. Banning them would only take in the ones from honest, law abiding citizens - the good guys. The bad guys would not turn theirs in. However, at this point in time, the issue at hand is NOT how many guns are in the hands of honest, law abiding citizen. The issue is mentally deranged; ex-con's; and others who can NOT obtain guns legally. Please take another look; the places where these 'outrages' have taken place recently DO NOT allow guns! A deranged person enters the place and begins his own personal virtual video game of killing people. Since no one else has a gun, (because guns are banned in these malls/buildings), the shooter takes a horrible toll; then ends the game by clicking on the 'esc' button when approaching police sirens are heard. In the case of the recent fire fighters murders, the ex-con bought weapons from an illegal source (who had a very ASEAN sounding name). Serious charges are pending; but, a little to late!
In several recent situations (which the media doesn't get headlines from) there was a good guy on scene who had a gun, the 'esc' button was clicked before much damage could be done.
Nick said - "Wishing everone a Happy New Year, and lets hope we don't get ourselves into situations where guns become an option." I am hoping you don't find yourself in a situation where a gun is the ONLY option and you DON'T have one; which is the very reason I am staying out of malls & buildings in the USA where guns are NOT allowed. Although I strongly dislike guns, I am a licensed gun owner; I do not want to expose my loved ones to places where only the bad guys can do damage. As I said before, guess I'll just stay home. Obviously, we can't even go to a theater anymore, because of the threat of a bad guy with a gun, and where good guys with a gun are not allowed.
Lastly; I would like to see mental institutions return in the USA; stronger mental illness assistance; much stronger requirements for obtaining a weapons permit; much stronger penalties for making weapons available to ex-cons and mentally unstable folks. In the meantime, will continue to make plans for my retirement in Thailand where we have to watch out for cars, trucks and buses doing 120+km/p/h (in the wrong lane), scooters with 5 passengers, chickens, dogs and who knows what else. Have a great weekend, and Happy New Year. I will be watching those 'other' football games for the next few days, at home.
-
BillH52 makes some very valid points.
The US situation is clearly beyond most of us that are not Americans and probably many Americans too, so I think I will hang up my hat, and just look in from time to time.
-
That was a cogent analysis from Bill. However, I have 2 observations:-
1) We will NEVER, I repeat NEVER, see such an incidentin Big C - at least not by a Thai
2) Thank God I dont live in the USA. To have to fear a visit to the mall is beyond anything I consider to be acceptable.
-
That was a cogent analysis from Bill. However, I have 2 observations:-
1) We will NEVER, I repeat NEVER, see such an incidentin Big C - at least not by a Thai
2) Thank God I dont live in the USA. To have to fear a visit to the mall is beyond anything I consider to be acceptable.
I hope you are right CoCo.
My biggest fear in Malls etc is the possibility of terrorists bombing the place, due largely to the likely presence of their main enemy - Americans - and other infidels.
-
http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/american-guns/videos/new-series-premiere.htm
-
http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/american-guns/videos/new-series-premiere.htm
Cancellation
On December 17, 2012, Discovery announced the cancellation of the series. Discovery said the decision had been made earlier, it was only announced in December. A spokesperson said "Discovery Channel chose not to renew the series and has no plans to air repeats of the show." The Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting is thought to have played a part in the decision to not even broadcast repeats of the series
Well done Discovery love5
-
Thanks for the update, Alan
I have informed my farcebook friend who poster this out ofdate (& inappropriate) info.
Happy New Year
p.s. It IS being shown in Thailand for those interested!
-
Here's another Yank show set for the chop :blink:
(http://www.crescentpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/AllAmerican-Muslim.jpg)
-
I think all Thai women are capable of fighting with whatever is available. We are all potential magnets Alan.
Sorry I have to disagree with that one Nick.
I have been married 8+ years and never ever have me or my wife been physically violent to each other ( even though we have had a few rows ) or have any of my friends.Yes, you here of fights between married couples but to tar all Thai women with the same brush is unjust.It's a bit like saying all men are wife-beaters after a few beers,though some are ,most are not!!
Concur with you Nick. I have been married for almost twenty years, we have had some arguments (but really not very many), and she or I have never laid a hand (or anything else) on each other.
-
I think all Thai women are capable of fighting with whatever is available. We are all potential magnets Alan.
Sorry I have to disagree with that one Nick.
I have been married 8+ years and never ever have me or my wife been physically violent to each other ( even though we have had a few rows ) or have any of my friends.Yes, you here of fights between married couples but to tar all Thai women with the same brush is unjust.It's a bit like saying all men are wife-beaters after a few beers,though some are ,most are not!!
Concur with you Nick. I have been married for almost twenty years, we have had some arguments (but really not very many), and she or I have never laid a hand (or anything else) on each other.
???
-
Not sure if a farang not being able to own a gun is true (true for retirement and marriage visa's), but what if you attain permanent residence status in Thailand? Not sure, but in any case I will follow the law where I live.
I have PR status, and I don't think I receive any benefits other than not having to sort out my visa annually and do 90 day reporting. They do say that it is easier to obtain a work permit (but I don't want one), admission to National parks etc should be at the Thai price, but invariably I have to persuade them that I am entitled. And when I leave the country I need 2 re-entry permits at double the cost!
Can however queue up at the Thai Immigration desk at Suvarnabhumi. Last time I did that it was longer than the farang line!!!
Never heard that I could own a gun -although never asked.
Wishing everone a Happy New Year, and lets hope we don't get ourselves into situations where guns become an option.
Hey Nick congratulations on your PR status.
-
I think all Thai women are capable of fighting with whatever is available. We are all potential magnets Alan.
Sorry I have to disagree with that one Nick.
I have been married 8+ years and never ever have me or my wife been physically violent to each other ( even though we have had a few rows ) or have any of my friends.Yes, you here of fights between married couples but to tar all Thai women with the same brush is unjust.It's a bit like saying all men are wife-beaters after a few beers,though some are ,most are not!!
Concur with you Nick. I have been married for almost twenty years, we have had some arguments (but really not very many), and she or I have never laid a hand (or anything else) on each other.
???
In a violent manner party6 party6
-
]Hey Nick congratulations on your PR status.
Thanks Ahab, but the congrats are some 22 years late! :)
-
Better late than never.
-
A few have said that they will not go into malls and shopping centres because they are gun free zones, well if it dosent infringe on your RIGHTS change the law , all forests you can have guns, every where else is a GUN FREE ZONE, WE ARE BANGING OUR HEADS AGAINST A BRICK WALL TRYING TO CONVINCE THOSE IN AMERICA, that less guns are LESS DEATHS .
-
A few have said that they will not go into malls and shopping centres because they are gun free zones, well if it dosent infringe on your RIGHTS change the law , all forests you can have guns, every where else is a GUN FREE ZONE, WE ARE BANGING OUR HEADS AGAINST A BRICK WALL TRYING TO CONVINCE THOSE IN AMERICA, that less guns are LESS DEATHS .
Unfortunately, some seem to genuinely believethat more guns = less deaths.
That, to me, is a major issue for America to deal with.
-
There is talk on putting armed guards, or even arming teachers.
Several years ago I was trying to move to Florida, there was a High School Position available for Mathmatics. Under the soldiers to teachers plan I applied as I have a BS in Math. I was denied because I did not have a teaching certificate and there was no waiver process for experience/time served in the Military. I provided formal instruction to Soldiers for over 20 years, but because I did have official "teachers certificate" I was unqualifed.
But on the other side of the coin, who would want a "scary" "sad" individual like me to instruct their children and would ready to protect them if needed.
BTW, the Libs such as Bloonberg want to keep schoold defenseless, here is his plan:
-
If your gun laws where better your schools would be safer.. I dont understand how you can be so blind to the fact.. I give up anyways its like talking to fergie
-
If your gun laws where better your schools would be safer.. I dont understand how you can be so blind to the fact.. I give up anyways its like talking to fergie
wasn't aware that you knew the Black Eyed Peas, Toffo :-)
-
party14
-
There is talk on putting armed guards, or even arming teachers.
Several years ago I was trying to move to Florida, there was a High School Position available for Mathmatics. Under the soldiers to teachers plan I applied as I have a BS in Math. I was denied because I did not have a teaching certificate and there was no waiver process for experience/time served in the Military. I provided formal instruction to Soldiers for over 20 years, but because I did have official "teachers certificate" I was unqualifed.
But on the other side of the coin, who would want a "scary" "sad" individual like me to instruct their children and would ready to protect them if needed. Well said my American brother in arms. Do I see anyone else standing up to defend the children and the innocent and put their lives at risk for the privilege to do so and right to do the natural thing. Were have all the men with balls went? RonTexas said that.
BTW, the Libs such as Bloonberg want to keep schoold defenseless, here is his plan:
-
Certainly got some mileage out of thsi one!!!!!How long before the next outrage,,,,,,,,,,
-
deleted, posted wrong
-
If your gun laws where better your schools would be safer.. I dont understand how you can be so blind to the fact.. I give up anyways its like talking to fergie
You are I are actually agreeing, I voted to change the gun laws in America, I want them to be better.
We disagree over what is better. I think better would be letting law abiding citizens have the ability to protect themselves, you want more of their rights restricted or removed making them more of a victim.
An Armed Person is a Citizen; An Unarmed Person is a Subject
By Michael McCullough on January 29, 2007 6:40 PM | No Comments | No TrackBacks
Contrary to the belief of many of our fellow citizens, the purpose of the United States Constitution is not to grant us rights. Our rights, given to us by our Creator, are inalienable. The purpose of the Constitution is to limit the powers of the federal government. Look at the language of the Bill of Rights. It is chock full of “shall not” and “shall make no;” all of which refer to the United States government.
Our explicit rights, that is, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are contingent wholly upon our implicit right: the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The intent of the Second Amendment is to preserve and guarantee, not grant, a pre-existing right; again, the right of the people to keep and bear arms......
http://www.mcculloughsite.net/stingray/2007/01/29/an-armed-person-is-a-citizen-an-unarmed-perso.php (http://www.mcculloughsite.net/stingray/2007/01/29/an-armed-person-is-a-citizen-an-unarmed-perso.php)
-
The 2nd amendment was adopted more than 200 years ago - December 15, 1791 to be precise.
Surely it is now time to reconsider what your ancestors thought was correect at the time.
-
The 2nd amendment was adopted more than 200 years ago - December 15, 1791 to be precise.
Surely it is now time to reconsider what your ancestors thought was correect at the time.
An interesting article here..... The Second Amendment: Wrong Centerpiece for the Gun Debate (http://blogcritics.org/politics/article/the-second-amendment-wrong-centerpiece-for/)
-
FFS ,some people ,ONE in particular, must be as thick as bricks!
-
Gunman's neighbor arrested in connection with firefighter ambushBy CNN Staff
December 29, 2012 -- Updated 0200 GMT (1000 HKT)
Gunman's neighbor arrestedSTORY HIGHLIGHTS
NEW: The woman was a neighbor of the gunman who ambushed firefighters
Dawn Nguyen of Rochester, New York, faces charges of filing a falsified business record
Nguyen's attorney was not immediately available to comment
New York (CNN) -- The gunman who ambushed and killed two unsuspecting firefighters as they battled a blaze in upstate New York couldn't buy his weapons legally so he allegedly got his neighbor's daughter to purchase them for him, said U.S. Attorney William Hochul.
Dawn Nguyen of Rochester, New York, faces charges over allegedly lying when she purchased an AR-15 rifle -- a .223-caliber weapon -- and 12-gauge shotgun that the gunman had with him during the attack.
Authorities say she told the gun dealer that she planned to be the owner of the weapons, but had instead purchased them on June 7, 2010,for gunman William Spengler.
"It is absolutely against federal law to lie relating to the acquisition of firearms," said Hochul, who said Spengler indicated in a suicide note that he had gotten the weapons from the neighbor.
Dispatcher told firefighter: 'Brother, hang tight'
Nguyen, 24, was "turned ... over to ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) agents to be processed at the federal level, and arraigned by a federal magistrate this afternoon," according to state police Investigator James Newell.
Firefighters honor fallen comrades Spengler, 62 -- who had been convicted of killing his grandmother decades ago -- used the same type of weapon employed in the recent assault on Sandy Hook Elementary School, which left 26 people dead, including 20 children. As a convicted felon, Spengler was not allowed to legally possess weapons.
Autopsy shows suspect died of self-inflicted wound
"He was equipped to go to war," Webster Police Chief Gerald Pickering said. The gunman was found dead of a self-inflicted gunshot wound hours later.
In his possession were three firearms, including two .223-caliber Bushmaster rifles and a Mossberg 12-gauge shotgun. While Nguyen's charges involve two weapons, authorities indicated the possibility of additional charges regarding the third weapon.
Nguyen's attorney was not immediately available for comment. If convicted, she could face up to 10 years in jail and $250,000 fine.
CNN's Kristina Sgueglia and Laura Ly contributed to this report.
-
Urleft will pay the fine!!
-
Urleft will pay the fine!!
Why would I pay the fine? I think it was pretty stupid (and criminal) for her to buy the weapons for another individual.
Now if someone had illegally brought a weapon into Sandy Hook GUN FREE ZONE and took out the prep, I would be donating to their fine.
-
I see the poll is running at 21 -1.........Any guesses who the 1 might be??
-
I see the poll is running at 21 -1.........Any guesses who the 1 might be??
e
Tough one that. Any clues?
Is Jones the Rice in the frame?
-
I see the poll is running at 21 -1.........Any guesses who the 1 might be??
Italian Tony :wacko:
Just Joking, feeling kinda sporty tonight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsprhDlEnEA
-
I see the poll is running at 21 -1.........Any guesses who the 1 might be??
Well it's not me, I voted yes.
-
'US Can Learn From Australia's Gun Laws'
Former Oz PM John Howard who introduced tough laws after 35 people were shot dead says now is the time for America to act.6:45am UK, Sunday 30 December 2012
By Jonathan Samuels, Australia Correspondent
When Martin Bryant massacred 35 people with semi-automatic weapons at a tourist spot in Tasmania in 1996, then-Australian prime minister John Howard reacted swiftly by pushing for tough new national gun laws.
Just 12 days after the shootings at Port Arthur, legislation was agreed which banned most people from owning rapid fire rifles and shotguns.
In a government buyback scheme more than 600,000 weapons were handed in and destroyed.
There have been no mass killings since.
Neil Noye was the local Mayor at the time. Speaking to Channel 9 about the recent US killings he said: "It's devastating and my thoughts and prayers go out to those families because I know exactly what they are going through.
"John Howard brought the gun laws in. Some people hated him and some people loved him, but I think that was a good thing."
Now US President Barack Obama is facing the same dilemma after the Newtown school massacre in Connecticut that killed 20 children and six adults.
The 1996 massacre in Tasmania sparked anti-gun protests
While the gun lobby is far more powerful in the US and gun ownership culturally embedded through the constitution, the conservative Mr Howard says now is the time to tackle the politically sensitive issue.
"It will be difficult but it can be done," Mr Howard, who had only been in the job two months when the Port Arthur killings happened, told Sydney's Daily Telegraph.
Speaking earlier this year after another US gun massacre, Mr Howard noted: "If I hadn't done something I would have been squandering the moral authority I had as a newly-elected prime minister."
Australian MP Andrew Leigh has studied and written about the effects of the legislation.
"One in three American households has a gun, and that has terrible consequences when a teenager gets depressed or a family dispute gets out of control," he said.
"There are Australians who wouldn't be walking the streets if it wasn't for the gun buyback. It saved about 200 lives a year it continues to make Australia a safer place today."
The politician believes America can learn a great deal from the Australian experience and says the US "can recognise that you can have both - you can have that culture of sport shooting that Americans prize so dearly but without the tragic gun violence that plagues so many American lives every year".
In 2009 in Australia there were 0.1 gun murders per 100,000 people compared to 3.2 per 100,000 in the US, according to the most recent data from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.
Philip Alpers, an analyst on gun violence at the University of Sydney who worked on weapons control in the US for four years, admits drawing parallels between Australia and US is difficult.
"Culturally we are very different. The automatic Australian reaction after Port Arthur was that we need to pull back on gun ownership - fewer guns are better. Howard had a groundswell of public support on his side," he said.
"In the US, reaction over the past few years has increasingly been, more guns make us safer. Guns are confused with freedom and opinion is so polarised that it might be impossible for Obama to do anything."
Not everyone in Australia has been convinced by the legislation.
The Australian government bought back guns and destroyed them
Colourful independent MP in rural Queensland, Bob Katter, said: "You can ban all the guns in the world but those sort of people find some other way of doing it.
"You create a morbid fascination when you ban them and I think that has a lot to do with some of these terrible incidents that are occurring."
The Sporting Shooters Association of Australia, which lobbied against the Howard laws, says gun death rates were falling anyway.
It points to an independent report by the Melbourne Institute in 2008 which contradicts claims that fewer guns mean fewer homicides and suicides.
"There is little evidence to suggest that it had any significant effects on firearm homicides and suicides," the Melbourne study concluded, referring to the National Firearms Agreement.
Australia still has gun crime of course, especially amongst Sydney's biker gangs, but since Port Arthur no Australian shooting has made global headlines.
Unlike in America guns aren't entwined in Australia's culture, but changing gun laws was still a brave move, as politicians in Washington know all too well.
TBWG buriram_united sawadi
-
I see the poll is running at 21 -1.........Any guesses who the 1 might be??
'twasn't me either.
I'm all for loosening (changing) the laws, just a little.
Could use me one of those RPG launchers/ammo...and maybe a few "claymore's" to hang around the front of the house. :o
-
It bloody frightning
I see the poll is running at 21 -1.........Any guesses who the 1 might be??
Well it's not me, I voted yes.
OMG, Its bloody frightening innit!!!!
-
.
-
So the Aussies banned guns, and so far have successfully avoided a mass killing incident, but find increases in violent crimes, sometimes more that 40%. And you call that successful?
AUSTRALIA: MORE VIOLENT CRIME DESPITE GUN BAN
April 13, 2009
It is a common fantasy that gun bans make society safer. In 2002 -- five years after enacting its gun ban -- the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.
Even Australia's Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:
•In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
•Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
•Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
Moreover, Australia and the United States -- where no gun-ban exists -- both experienced similar decreases in murder rates:
•Between 1995 and 2007, Australia saw a 31.9 percent decrease; without a gun ban, America's rate dropped 31.7 percent.
•During the same time period, all other violent crime indices increased in Australia: assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
•Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
•Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
•At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31.8 percent: rape dropped 19.2 percent; robbery decreased 33.2 percent; aggravated assault dropped 32.2 percent.
•Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women.
While this doesn't prove that more guns would impact crime rates, it does prove that gun control is a flawed policy. Furthermore, this highlights the most important point: gun banners promote failed policy regardless of the consequences to the people who must live with them, says the Examiner.
Source: Howard Nemerov, "Australia experiencing more violent crime despite gun ban," D.C. Examiner, April 8, 2009.
For text:
http://www.examiner.com/x-2879-Austin-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m4d8-Australia-experiencing-more-violent-crime-despite-gun-ban (http://www.examiner.com/x-2879-Austin-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m4d8-Australia-experiencing-more-violent-crime-despite-gun-ban)
-
We have shootings all the time in Australia
A MAN has been charged over a shooting at a Gold Coast shopping centre that left a man with a gunshot wound to his hand.
The 25-year-old victim was shot when a fight broke out among a group of men in the car park of the Crestwood Plaza shopping centre at Molendinar on October 19.
Read more: http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/national/man-charged-over-shopping-centre-shooting/story-e6frfku9-1226545548664#ixzz2GaVPIdoy
A MAN is in critical condition after being shot in Sydney's south west.
The 21-year-old was found with a wound to his stomach after police were called to Green Valley Rd, Busby, about 11.15pm last night (Sunday) following reports of a shooting.
The man was treated by ambulance paramedics before being taken to Liverpool Hospital where police say he is critical but stable.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/man-shot-in-stomach-in-sydneys-south-west/story-e6frg6n6-1226545615410
It is understood a man shot dead at Punchbowl in Sydney's south west overnight has a family connection to another murder victim from the same suburb.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-19/man-shot-dead-in-sydney/4435076
POLICE have seized a gun from a northwestern Sydney home targeted in one of two drive-by shootings as they investigate involvement by an outlaw bikie gang.
Several people were inside the home in the Cherrybrook street when it was hit with multiple bullets about 5.30am (AEDT) on Tuesday.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/shot-fired-at-southwest-sydney-home/story-fn3dxiwe-1226539290998
-
self explanatory
-
Self explanatory indeed, but said over 200 years ago just as the 2nd amendment was promulgated more than 200 years ago.
Times change, people change, and at the very least 200 year old laws should be reconsidered and modified if thought necessary for todays needs,
-
So the Aussies banned guns, and so far have successfully avoided a mass killing incident, but find increases in violent crimes, sometimes more that 40%. And you call that successful?
AUSTRALIA: MORE VIOLENT CRIME DESPITE GUN BAN
April 13, 2009
It is a common fantasy that gun bans make society safer. In 2002 -- five years after enacting its gun ban -- the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.
Even Australia's Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:
•In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
•Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
•Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
Moreover, Australia and the United States -- where no gun-ban exists -- both experienced similar decreases in murder rates:
•Between 1995 and 2007, Australia saw a 31.9 percent decrease; without a gun ban, America's rate dropped 31.7 percent.
•During the same time period, all other violent crime indices increased in Australia: assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
•Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
•Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
•At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31.8 percent: rape dropped 19.2 percent; robbery decreased 33.2 percent; aggravated assault dropped 32.2 percent.
•Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women.
While this doesn't prove that more guns would impact crime rates, it does prove that gun control is a flawed policy. Furthermore, this highlights the most important point: gun banners promote failed policy regardless of the consequences to the people who must live with them, says the Examiner.
Source: Howard Nemerov, "Australia experiencing more violent crime despite gun ban," D.C. Examiner, April 8, 2009.
For text:
http://www.examiner.com/x-2879-Austin-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m4d8-Australia-experiencing-more-violent-crime-despite-gun-ban (http://www.examiner.com/x-2879-Austin-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m4d8-Australia-experiencing-more-violent-crime-despite-gun-ban)
True and without all this we would never be able to then watch 'Underbelly'
-
Self explanatory indeed, but said over 200 years ago just as the 2nd amendment was promulgated more than 200 years ago.
Times change, people change, and at the very least 200 year old laws should be reconsidered and modified if thought necessary for todays needs,
[
/quote] I do think human nature changes that much at all. There will always be individuals and governments ready to abuse the defenseless. Hence there will always be a need for free people to defend themselves. That is if you wish to remain free.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-Dw6EwX7oM
-
^^^^ L.A. Gun buyout and the shock and horror of these "launchers".....what a joke! 555
Some non-reusable used up hollow tubes that someone nicked from the trash bin, before leaving the service. Totally worthless!
Might as well have put up a worn out pair of combat boots for the media to super-hype and sensationalize....about the same level of DANGER. 5555
I mean, do you think if someone really had an actual, serviceable RPG laucher, they'd be showing up at a police weapons buyback? 555
-
Self explanatory indeed, but said over 200 years ago just as the 2nd amendment was promulgated more than 200 years ago.
Times change, people change, and at the very least 200 year old laws should be reconsidered and modified if thought necessary for todays needs,
The founding fathers wisely chose to call it the Bill of Rights, no the Bill of NEEDS.
-
Unfortunately in recent times the wrong people seem to have taken it as their right to arm themselves.
-
Unfortunately in recent times the wrong people seem to have taken it as their right to arm themselves.
And other wrong people disarm law abiding citizens making them victims.
-
Enough I think of stupidity, happy new year every one
-
Happy New Year to ALL
-
Happy New Year to ALL
Well said, Nooks! and the same to you and all members
-
Happy New Year to ALL
Well said, Nooks! and the same to you and all members
I'll drink to that too.
-
Enough I think of stupidity, happy new year every one
Unfortunarely the stupidity continues...
Just reading about the 74 year old landlord who shot dead his two tenants over rent and snow clearing disputes.
Some might see this action as an extreme method of concluding a minor row - but, hey no, we musn't infringe the gunrights of individuals like this - that would just not do.
It is every Americans right to possess a firearm. Never mind that occasionally some old fcuker like this decides to become judge jury and executioner.
It is a small price to pay for freedom!
You reap what you sow.
-
That will be music to Urleft's ears!!
-
Where is he today?.......Perhaps taking photo's in Makro's!!
-
Stupidity is doing it the UK way:
In 2009 a former soldier, Paul Clarke, found a bag in his garden containing a shotgun. He brought it to the police station and was immediately handcuffed and charged with possession of the gun. At his trial the judge noted: "In law there is no dispute that Mr. Clarke has no defence to this charge. The intention of anybody possessing a firearm is irrelevant." Mr. Clarke was sentenced to five years in prison.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323777204578195470446855466.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323777204578195470446855466.html)
-
Stupidity is doing it the UK way:
In 2009 a former soldier, Paul Clarke, found a bag in his garden containing a shotgun. He brought it to the police station and was immediately handcuffed and charged with possession of the gun. At his trial the judge noted: "In law there is no dispute that Mr. Clarke has no defence to this charge. The intention of anybody possessing a firearm is irrelevant." Mr. Clarke was sentenced to five years in prison.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323777204578195470446855466.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323777204578195470446855466.html)
Urleft,,,,,,,,,,,,Happy New Year
-
And Gun laws are just what dictators want:
-
Stupidity is doing it the UK way:
In 2009 a former soldier, Paul Clarke, found a bag in his garden containing a shotgun. He brought it to the police station and was immediately handcuffed and charged with possession of the gun. At his trial the judge noted: "In law there is no dispute that Mr. Clarke has no defence to this charge. The intention of anybody possessing a firearm is irrelevant." Mr. Clarke was sentenced to five years in prison.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323777204578195470446855466.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323777204578195470446855466.html)
Urleft,,,,,,,,,,,,Happy New Year
Thanks Paul, and you too, wish you best.
-
In Mr Clarke case - NOBODY DIED!
Stupid is as stupid does Forrest....
-
In Mr Clarke case - NOBODY DIED!
Stupid is as stupid does Forrest....
No, but a man was denied his freedom for trying to follow the law, but I guess that is OK by you.
My arguments are for keeping my rights and enjoying my life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Yours are for taking away my rights.
And with the UK's great gun laws, how is this happening:
Gun crime soars by 35%
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-154307/Gun-crime-soars-35.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-154307/Gun-crime-soars-35.html)
I guess we will just have to disagree.
-
Stupidity is doing it the UK way:
In 2009 a former soldier, Paul Clarke, found a bag in his garden containing a shotgun. He brought it to the police station and was immediately handcuffed and charged with possession of the gun. At his trial the judge noted: "In law there is no dispute that Mr. Clarke has no defence to this charge. The intention of anybody possessing a firearm is irrelevant." Mr. Clarke was sentenced to five years in prison.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323777204578195470446855466.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323777204578195470446855466.html)
Urleft,
Your link does not point to the article about Paul Clarke.
This is the correct article
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1236976/Soldier-given-suspended-sentence-handing-shotgun-police-given-award-instead.html
and if you care to read it he got a suspended 12 month prison sentence for 12 months.
Apparently he waited 4 days to hand the gun in and this is what the judge said about that ....
'I understand you were once a soldier, and you in particular ought to have appreciated the danger posed by such a weapon and should have asked the police to come and collect it right away.'
Finally the standard sentence is 5 years but due to the unusal aspect of this case it was reduced to the above.
Happy New Year
Mike
-
No, but a man was denied his freedom for trying to follow the law, but I guess that is OK by you.
My arguments are for keeping my rights and enjoying my life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Yours are for taking away my rights.
And with the UK's great gun laws, how is this happening:
Gun crime soars by 35%
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-154307/Gun-crime-soars-35.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-154307/Gun-crime-soars-35.html)
I guess we will just have to disagree.
Urleft,
First of all I guess you agree now that Paul Clarke was not denied his freedom trying to follow the law as you stated above.
Secondly the increase in gun crime figures in the UK a worrying trend over the last few years. At at total of 9,974 gun crimes this is staggering in UK terms - the worst for nearly 20 years. It is also staggering that the homicide rate by firearms increased by 32%. Your article states this is 23 cases, so in total approx 98 cases of homicide by Firearm.
This equates to 98 cases in one whole year.
Below is a link for gun crime in the US.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state#data
This shows that there was only 8583 homicides by firearm in 2011 in the US.
Nearly 100 times as many homicides by firearm in the US than the UK - Take into account the population diff (US 320M, UK 65M this comes done to approx 20 times as many -or am I missing something ???
You should note that I, personally, am not for taking your rights away or any other Americans rights away - it is not for me to decide or judge.
However I do find it amazing that the American population feels safer to live in a society with a high availability of firearms that a society with zero or a very low availability of firearms.
Happy New Year
Mike
-
Enough I think of stupidity, happy new year every one
Unfortunarely the stupidity continues...
Just reading about the 74 year old landlord who shot dead his two tenants over rent and snow clearing disputes.
Some might see this action as an extreme method of concluding a minor row - but, hey no, we musn't infringe the gunrights of individuals like this - that would just not do.
It is every Americans right to possess a firearm. Never mind that occasionally some old fcuker like this decides to become judge jury and executioner.
It is a small price to pay for freedom!
You reap what you sow.
Thank fcuk it doesn't snow here tooooooooooo often!
-
All people in democratic countries with democratically elected governments have rights covering all manner of things.
These rights need to be constantly reviewed to ensure they are in accord with current trends and above all the views of the population.
The right given to bear arms was introduced more than 200 years ago, and was no doubt at that time a very popular move. How does the American population feel about this now? Is there still a majority who want the law to allow the bearing of arms, not just to protect property, but also to be allowed to be carried on the person? Or would the majority vote for changes and restrictions in the gun law? In a democratic society, the views of the people should be listened to and discussed by the lawmakers.
Throughout this thread, whilst many differing views have been expressed, it has been clear that Urleft is only concerned about HIS rights, and has paid little or no attention to the rights of the American population at large to have their views heard and considered.
-
Throughout this thread, whilst many differing views have been expressed, it has been clear that Urleft is only concerned about HIS rights, and has paid little or no attention to the rights of the American population at large to have their views heard and considered.
That may be true but he has still remained polite, unthreatening so deserves his right to speak on BE here with us unlike many ex-members. I have never met the man incidently or do I agree with his viewpoint. Lets try not to be Judge Judy and Executioner. party14
-
Throughout this thread, whilst many differing views have been expressed, it has been clear that Urleft is only concerned about HIS rights, and has paid little or no attention to the rights of the American population at large to have their views heard and considered.
That may be true but he has still remained polite, unthreatening so deserves his right to speak on BE here with us unlike many ex-members. I have never met the man incidently or do I agree with his viewpoint. Lets try not to be Judge Judy and Executioner. party14
Well said Nobby.
Urleft has maintained his composure and decorum throughout, despite the assaults and blatant rudeness of some .
Some interesting statistics out today show that Thailand has the 3rd highest gun homicide rate in the world, and the highest number of gun owning people in SE Asia. The figures are not surprising under the circumstances.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255671/Stephen-Ashton-British-tourist-22-shot-dead-crossfire-Thai-New-Years-Eve-beach-party.html#ixzz2GlgM0y8r
-
It would be interesting to see how many of those homocides here in Thailand were caused through excessive alcohol intake
-
It would be interesting to see how many of those homocides here in Thailand were caused through excessive alcohol intake
True or Road related or Police personell related
-
Throughout this thread, whilst many differing views have been expressed, it has been clear that Urleft is only concerned about HIS rights, and has paid little or no attention to the rights of the American population at large to have their views heard and considered.
That may be true but he has still remained polite, unthreatening so deserves his right to speak on BE here with us unlike many ex-members. I have never met the man incidently or do I agree with his viewpoint. Lets try not to be Judge Judy and Executioner. party14
IMO this is what forums are about. You will always get opposing views and BE is a medium to express those views.
I can never agree with Keith's sekfish view about 'rights'. Freedom comes with responsibility and too many people are incapable of that.
Yes, I would certainly sacrifice mine, and othets freedoms, if it made the world a safer place.
I believe URleft's arguments are flawed as evidenced by selective reportage - the Clarke case being a classic example of only quoting the facts that fit one's poibt of view.
For me, more guns = more violence = more deaths.
Gun laws wete introduced to avoid wild west situations occuring and I would say that, per se, the UK isa safer place to be than the USA.
Keith's view that it is better to arm his wife is not one I can share. She is Thai and frankly I wouldn't let any Thai loose even wth a pop gun let alone a loaded weapon! That said, I respect the fact that Keith is only doing his best to protect his family as he sees fit.
We will never agree but we will always be able to share a glass of cider :-)
-
I believe a bottle of Jamesons is on the table should CoCo win Urleft over! :)
-
For me, more guns = more violence = more deaths.
I don't think anyone can disagree that this is most certainly the case in Thailand, although Thailand is not the subject of this thread.
-
For me, more guns = more violence = more deaths.
I don't think anyone can disagree that this is most certainly the case in Thailand, although Thailand is not the subject of this thread.
John Lott would disagree with you:
http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less-Crime-ebook/dp/B003S9W5HQ/ref=dp_kinw_strp_1 (http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less-Crime-ebook/dp/B003S9W5HQ/ref=dp_kinw_strp_1)
His book, More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws, Third Edition (Studies in Law and Economics) discribes his research.
-
I believe a bottle of Jamesons is on the table should CoCo win Urleft over! :)
I think CoCo will take that bottle to his grave
-
Probably -but it will be empty for sure!
-
One reason I love Thailand is the freedom. You want to open a local business, you do so and fix the paperwork later. And the paperwork is not that bad. In the US (and I have heard the same about the UK), it is a nightmare to open a business with all the hoops the GVTs (city, state, federal) force you to comply, before you open. And unaccountable GVT employees make up new requirements all the time.
When I grew up in the 50s/60s America was a different place. People would be like Thailand and have businesses (eg. gas station stores) where they lived. That type business is almost totally extinct in the US as people being sued out of business, house and home became common place.
Freedoms are be taken away daily, hell, you can't even make a 75 watt incandencent light bulb in the US anymore. What total crap is that?
So I am not willinging to give up my rights for that some say are the "Greater Good". To me that is a excuse to expand GVT control of the people. Some other data:
http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2012/07/the-ultimate-gun-rights-article/ (http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2012/07/the-ultimate-gun-rights-article/)
In fact, research by economist and author John Lott and Bill Landes shows that states that allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed handguns enjoy a 60 percent decrease in multiple-victim public shootings and a 78 percent decrease in victims per attack.
On my view of rights being taken away:
http://theshinbone.com/awban.2.htm (http://theshinbone.com/awban.2.htm)
What the judiciary calls “arms,” Obama and his congressional allies call “assault weapons.” That’s not by accident. It’s a conscious, incremental step toward outlawing the ownership of firearms altogether. If that sounds paranoid, then ask yourself what else the president might have had in mind when he said on Meet the Press that “something fundamental in America has to change” where gun ownership is concerned.
This is how politicians proscribe an object or activity without having popular support for doing so. They don’t attempt to pass an outright prohibition, but instead indirectly regulate it out of existence. The American people would never have supported a ban on incandescent light bulbs, for instance, so no such thing was proposed. The way Congress did it was to pass new efficiency standards that were not realistically attainable. Likewise, Obama’s mandate to double fuel efficiency standards by 2025 is a means of preventing the manufacture of certain larger, heavier vehicles, without having to face the controversy that would arise from explicitly forbidding it.
How many of you have heard about the "Assault Weapons" ban, how it needs to be reinstated? Do any of you know what an Assualt Weapon is? It is a rifle that looks military, but can only fire one bullet at a time for each trigger pull. Fully automatic weapons have been mostly illegal (can obtain with special permit) for over 50 years. Banning assualt rifles is just another incremental step towards disarming law abiding citizens.
-
I believe a bottle of Jamesons is on the table should CoCo win Urleft over! :)
I think CoCo will take that bottle to his grave
I think even the Jameson distillery would not be a sufficient incentive. .....
Belief is admirable but intransigence leaves you myopic.
People, especially the scholars, can pontificate as much as they like but the fact remains - violence breeds more violence. Anyting dangerous in the wrong hands causes death.
I wish everyone a happy and safe New Year.
-
Throughout this thread, whilst many differing views have been expressed, it has been clear that Urleft is only concerned about HIS rights, and has paid little or no attention to the rights of the American population at large to have their views heard and considered.
That may be true but he has still remained polite, unthreatening so deserves his right to speak on BE here with us unlike many ex-members. I have never met the man incidently or do I agree with his viewpoint. Lets try not to be Judge Judy and Executioner. party14
Thank you Nobby.
-
I believe a bottle of Jamesons is on the table should CoCo win Urleft over! :)
I hate to admit it, but it would be wasted on me. I don't have the taste buds to appreciate fine whiskeys (wines). I have tried most Jamesons to include a $200 bottle of special reserve, and it was just another whiskey to me.
-
I will pretend to be won over for a 30 year old bottle of Glenfiddich.
-
Voters in Switzerland will go to the polls on Sunday to decide on proposals aimed at restricting gun ownership.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12414841
At least the Swiss are doing more than just talking about it.
-
Voters in Switzerland will go to the polls on Sunday to decide on proposals aimed at restricting gun ownership.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12414841 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12414841)
At least the Swiss are doing more than just talking about it.
Believe it or not, I support letting the voter decide about 75%.
The reason I don't support it 100% is because of how the question on the vote could be phrased:
Question 1: Do you support taking away the rights of US Citizens to support a gun free environment?
Question 2: Do you support restricting guns for being available to people to perform mass killling at schools?
I believe most US citizens would vote NO on question 1, but maybe a majority would vote YES question 2, even though they are almost the same question.
I completely distrust my Government. I vote no on anything that could infrindge on my rights or increase taxes.
-
I somehow doubt that if voters in the USA were asked to decide, the questions would be phrased as suggested. Nevertheless they would attract a No from Urleft as they would obviously be reducing his "rights"
It would be interesting to know what the Swiss voters were asked to vote on. One for Sao baht to investigate perhaps!
-
Voters in Switzerland will go to the polls on Sunday to decide on proposals aimed at restricting gun ownership.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12414841
At least the Swiss are doing more than just talking about it.
The Americans will hardly talk about it!
-
Voters in Switzerland will go to the polls on Sunday to decide on proposals aimed at restricting gun ownership.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12414841 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-12414841)
At least the Swiss are doing more than just talking about it.
Believe it or not, I support letting the voter decide about 75%.
The reason I don't support it 100% is because of how the question on the vote could be phrased:
Question 1: Do you support taking away the rights of US Citizens to support a gun free environment?
Question 2: Do you support restricting guns for being available to people to perform mass killling at schools?
I believe most US citizens would vote NO on question 1, but maybe a majority would vote YES question 2, even though they are almost the same question.
I completely distrust my Government. I vote no on anything that could infrindge on my rights or increase taxes.
No offence to anyone but I think the average voter in most countries are too stupid to be allowed to vote, democracy is a nice idea, but a poor design to get good results out of a society.
-
No offence to anyone but I think the average voter in most countries are too stupid to be allowed to vote, democracy is a nice idea, but a poor design to get good results out of a society.
Couldn't agree more. Half the people in Isaan only vote in elections because they are paid to vote. They never watch the news, nor read newspapers, and have no interest whatsoever in government. Give them 300/500bt, and they will eat out of your hand!
-
No offence to anyone but I think the average voter in most countries are too stupid to be allowed to vote, democracy is a nice idea, but a poor design to get good results out of a society.
...as is recently evidenced by the reelection of O'bumma, in America.
-
No offence to anyone but I think the average voter in most countries are too stupid to be allowed to vote, democracy is a nice idea, but a poor design to get good results out of a society.
...as is recently evidenced by the reelection of O'bumma, in America.
i think the voting in of George W Bush for a second time illustrated to the world the intellect of the average voter in the US, to the great pondering of the rest of the world apart from comedians whose life was made easier for the following 4 years.
by the way im not saying the average voter in Australia is any smarter.
-
Although most countries have universal suffrage, I wonder whether it would be better to require all voters to have a minimum educational standard.
If that were the case in Thailand, I am sure Thaksin, his sister and their cronies would not have had a look in.
Thai cabinet ministers not only have to be 30+, but have an approved University Degree (available in Kaosan Road!!!)
I well recall when the UK joined the EU donkeys years ago following a referendum. Most housewives only concern was what the price of butter would be.
-
A benevolent dictator may be the go, didn't hurt Singapore .
-
I well recall when the UK joined the EU donkeys years ago following a referendum. Most housewives only concern was what the price of butter would be.
Was that after they had been watching Marlin Brando's ' Last Tango in Paris' ???
-
No offence to anyone but I think the average voter in most countries are too stupid to be allowed to vote, democracy is a nice idea, but a poor design to get good results out of a society.
...as is recently evidenced by the reelection of O'bumma, in America.
i think the voting in of George W Bush for a second time illustrated to the world the intellect of the average voter in the US, to the great pondering of the rest of the world apart from comedians whose life was made easier for the following 4 years.
by the way im not saying the average voter in Australia is any smarter.
I couldn't agree with you more re The George W Bush 2nd reign,,,,,Aussies tend to be thicker than the Yanks!!
-
No offence to anyone but I think the average voter in most countries are too stupid to be allowed to vote, democracy is a nice idea, but a poor design to get good results out of a society.
...as is recently evidenced by the reelection of O'bumma, in America.
i think the voting in of George W Bush for a second time illustrated to the world the intellect of the average voter in the US, to the great pondering of the rest of the world apart from comedians whose life was made easier for the following 4 years.
by the way im not saying the average voter in Australia is any smarter.
I couldn't agree with you more re The George W Bush 2nd reign,,,,,Aussies tend to be thicker than the Yanks!!
we may be thicker bro...but still 2nd best country to be born in...lol
-
Might have come top if you didn't have her from Wales as the boss
-
Might have come top if you didn't have her from Wales as the boss
Ahhh the Red hair menace, any country is more than the sum of its leaders.....and thank god for that cause we have a Taffy bloodnut that is banned from Mcdonald restaurants as there is a one red headed clown company policy knuppel2
-
Might have come top if you didn't have her from Wales as the boss
I doubt it Nick!
-
No offence to anyone but I think the average voter in most countries are too stupid to be allowed to vote, democracy is a nice idea, but a poor design to get good results out of a society.
...as is recently evidenced by the reelection of O'bumma, in America.
i think the voting in of George W Bush for a second time illustrated to the world the intellect of the average voter in the US, to the great pondering of the rest of the world apart from comedians whose life was made easier for the following 4 years.
by the way im not saying the average voter in Australia is any smarter.
I couldn't agree with you more re The George W Bush 2nd reign,,,,,Aussies tend to be thicker than the Yanks!!
we may be thicker bro...but still 2nd best country to be born in...lol
Where is Eric 2012 when he's needed!
-
No offence to anyone but I think the average voter in most countries are too stupid to be allowed to vote, democracy is a nice idea, but a poor design to get good results out of a society.
...as is recently evidenced by the reelection of O'bumma, in America.
i think the voting in of George W Bush for a second time illustrated to the world the intellect of the average voter in the US, to the great pondering of the rest of the world apart from comedians whose life was made easier for the following 4 years.
by the way im not saying the average voter in Australia is any smarter.
I couldn't agree with you more re The George W Bush 2nd reign,,,,,Aussies tend to be thicker than the Yanks!!
we may be thicker bro...but still 2nd best country to be born in...lol
Where is Eric 2012 when he's needed!
Looking for an Aussie to bite Nookie? Lol
-
Woman hiding with kids shoots intruder
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/woman-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder/nTm7s/ (http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/woman-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder/nTm7s/)
LOGANVILLE, Ga. —
A woman hiding in her attic with children shot an intruder multiple times before fleeing to safety Friday.
The incident happened at a home on Henderson Ridge Lane in Loganville around 1 p.m. The woman was working in an upstairs office when she spotted a strange man outside a window, according to Walton County Sheriff Joe Chapman. He said she took her 9-year-old twins to a crawlspace before the man broke in using a crowbar.
But the man eventually found the family.
"The perpetrator opens that door. Of course, at that time he's staring at her, her two children and a .38 revolver," Chapman told Channel 2’s Kerry Kavanaugh.
The woman then shot him five times, but he survived, Chapman said. He said the woman ran out of bullets but threatened to shoot the intruder if he moved.
"She's standing over him, and she realizes she's fired all six rounds. And the guy's telling her to quit shooting," Chapman said.
so here is a woman that if gun laws prevented her from having a gun, would probably dead.
And note that 6 shots did not kill the prep, what if there had been a 2nd guy? Would a gun with a 20 round magazine been better for her?
-
Woman hiding with kids shoots intruder
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/woman-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder/nTm7s/ (http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/woman-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder/nTm7s/)
LOGANVILLE, Ga. —
A woman hiding in her attic with children shot an intruder multiple times before fleeing to safety Friday.
The incident happened at a home on Henderson Ridge Lane in Loganville around 1 p.m. The woman was working in an upstairs office when she spotted a strange man outside a window, according to Walton County Sheriff Joe Chapman. He said she took her 9-year-old twins to a crawlspace before the man broke in using a crowbar.
But the man eventually found the family.
"The perpetrator opens that door. Of course, at that time he's staring at her, her two children and a .38 revolver," Chapman told Channel 2’s Kerry Kavanaugh.
The woman then shot him five times, but he survived, Chapman said. He said the woman ran out of bullets but threatened to shoot the intruder if he moved.
"She's standing over him, and she realizes she's fired all six rounds. And the guy's telling her to quit shooting," Chapman said.
so here is a woman that if gun laws prevented her from having a gun, would probably dead.
And note that 6 shots did not kill the prep, what if there had been a 2nd guy? Would a gun with a 20 round magazine been better for her?
with respect Urleft, i dont think anyone on this post objected to personal protection in the home, or maybe even out of the home, a 12 or 15 shot mag semi auto pistol still sneaks into the acceptable but i think the objection comes from the strange desire in the USA for stock piling assault rifles etc..which seem to be the cornerstone of every massacre, often the owners are the parents of these sick kids that are the perpetrators ...but do not put them under lock and key separating rifle and ammo.
im sorry but i cannot see this story as an argument for the right to own assault rifles. (maybe she will trade in the .38 revolver & pick up a 40 caliber Glock)
-
Woman hiding with kids shoots intruder
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/woman-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder/nTm7s/ (http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/woman-hiding-kids-shoots-intruder/nTm7s/)
LOGANVILLE, Ga. —
A woman hiding in her attic with children shot an intruder multiple times before fleeing to safety Friday.
The incident happened at a home on Henderson Ridge Lane in Loganville around 1 p.m. The woman was working in an upstairs office when she spotted a strange man outside a window, according to Walton County Sheriff Joe Chapman. He said she took her 9-year-old twins to a crawlspace before the man broke in using a crowbar.
But the man eventually found the family.
"The perpetrator opens that door. Of course, at that time he's staring at her, her two children and a .38 revolver," Chapman told Channel 2’s Kerry Kavanaugh.
The woman then shot him five times, but he survived, Chapman said. He said the woman ran out of bullets but threatened to shoot the intruder if he moved.
"She's standing over him, and she realizes she's fired all six rounds. And the guy's telling her to quit shooting," Chapman said.
so here is a woman that if gun laws prevented her from having a gun, would probably dead.
And note that 6 shots did not kill the prep, what if there had been a 2nd guy? Would a gun with a 20 round magazine been better for her?
with respect Urleft, i dont think anyone on this post objected to personal protection in the home, or maybe even out of the home, a 12 or 15 shot mag semi auto pistol still sneaks into the acceptable but i think the objection comes from the strange desire in the USA for stock piling assault rifles etc..which seem to be the cornerstone of every massacre, often the owners are the parents of these sick kids that are the perpetrators ...but do not put them under lock and key separating rifle and ammo.
im sorry but i cannot see this story as an argument for the right to own assault rifles. (maybe she will trade in the .38 revolver & pick up a 40 caliber Glock)
Didn't kill him with 6 rounds.. Maybe she should spend some time on the range ha
-
The way its writen and all with Walton Sheriff ta boot. Sounds like a rootin tootin jackanory story to me. Gun squad are getting desperate by the looks of it...........Waltons, Nite jim bob oldmanwithstick.
-
with respect Urleft, i dont think anyone on this post objected to personal protection in the home, or maybe even out of the home, a 12 or 15 shot mag semi auto pistol still sneaks into the acceptable but i think the objection comes from the strange desire in the USA for stock piling assault rifles etc..which seem to be the cornerstone of every massacre, often the owners are the parents of these sick kids that are the perpetrators ...but do not put them under lock and key separating rifle and ammo.
im sorry but i cannot see this story as an argument for the right to own assault rifles. (maybe she will trade in the .38 revolver & pick up a 40 caliber Glock)
What is your definition of an assault rifle?
-
Courtesy of Merriam Webster
assault rifle
noun (Concise Encyclopedia)
Military firearm that is chambered for ammunition of reduced size or propellant charge and has the capacity to switch between semiautomatic and fully automatic fire. Light and portable, yet able to deliver a high volume of fire with reasonable accuracy at modern combat ranges of 1,000–1,600 ft (300–500 m), assault rifles have become the standard infantry weapon of modern armies. Their ease of handling makes them ideal for mobile assault troops crowded into personnel carriers or helicopters, as well as for guerrilla fighters engaged in jungle or urban warfare. Widely used assault rifles are the U.S. M16, the Soviet Kalashnikov (the AK-47 and modernized versions), the Belgian FAL and FNC, and the German G3.
Regardless of terminology, the point I think most people are making is that a basic handgun/pistol would be acceptable for home protection, but nothing more. The specifics of a handgun/pistol would have to be left to the experts.
-
with respect Urleft, i dont think anyone on this post objected to personal protection in the home, or maybe even out of the home, a 12 or 15 shot mag semi auto pistol still sneaks into the acceptable but i think the objection comes from the strange desire in the USA for stock piling assault rifles etc..which seem to be the cornerstone of every massacre, often the owners are the parents of these sick kids that are the perpetrators ...but do not put them under lock and key separating rifle and ammo.
im sorry but i cannot see this story as an argument for the right to own assault rifles. (maybe she will trade in the .38 revolver & pick up a 40 caliber Glock)
What is your definition of an assault rifle?
"My" definition is a automatic/ semi automatic rifle.....any take on the Armour-lite or Kalashnikov type weapons especially....... a single pistol or two in the home i can find understandable for protection, especially if living in a violent society.......by the way this is my definition...not from a dictionary...and im sure will differ from yours.
-
Courtesy of Merriam Webster
assault rifle
noun (Concise Encyclopedia)
Military firearm that is chambered for ammunition of reduced size or propellant charge and has the capacity to switch between semiautomatic and fully automatic fire. Light and portable, yet able to deliver a high volume of fire with reasonable accuracy at modern combat ranges of 1,000–1,600 ft (300–500 m), assault rifles have become the standard infantry weapon of modern armies. Their ease of handling makes them ideal for mobile assault troops crowded into personnel carriers or helicopters, as well as for guerrilla fighters engaged in jungle or urban warfare. Widely used assault rifles are the U.S. M16, the Soviet Kalashnikov (the AK-47 and modernized versions), the Belgian FAL and FNC, and the German G3.
Regardless of terminology, the point I think most people are making is that a basic handgun/pistol would be acceptable for home protection, but nothing more. The specifics of a handgun/pistol would have to be left to the experts.
These are already illegal and have been for over 50 years.
And by this definition, an assualt rifle has not been used in any of the mass killings.
-
I have absolutely no knowledge of guns of any type. A rifle (assault or otherwise) is clearly not a handgun!
-
sort of still fits in with my definition.....dont ya think....and you asked me what my definition was......
-
By the way...is there really a need for semi automatic or auto rifles in hunting....if it is a safety thing so a unarmed creature charges its assailant...surely a bolt action rifle would make the hunter a bit more of a "game Hunter"
-
I don't understand the definition but, to me, a simple hand gun would be an acceptable firearm per adult SOLELY for home protection.
I see no necessity for the general public to carry firearms outside the home.
Whilst I would have concerns about non-military/police carrying guns, I would be open to a debate about trained personnel having them in specified public locations i.e. schools or malls.
It just doesn't sound right - but is something worthy of discussion
-
sort of still fits in with my definition.....dont ya think....and you asked me what my definition was......
No, you said:
"but i think the objection comes from the strange desire in the USA for stock piling assault rifles etc..which seem to be the cornerstone of every massacre, often the owners are the parents of these sick kids that are the perpetrators"
No law abiding citizens are stock piling Assualt Rifles as these weapons are already illegal.
-
By the way...is there really a need for semi automatic or auto rifles in hunting....if it is a safety thing so a unarmed creature charges its assailant...surely a bolt action rifle would make the hunter a bit more of a "game Hunter"
First, Rifles that will continue to fire as long as the trigger is held (and ammo available) are automatic rifles (machine guns) and are not legal for hunting.
2nd, Depends on what you are hunting. If you are hunting feral pigs where there is no limit on how many you can take, a semi-automatic rifle is optimum, especially when outfitted with night scopes and a high capacity magazine.
-
Whilst there is considerable disagreement between us, we have nevertheless learnt quite a lot over the past couple of weeks about assorted guns. Thanks urleft for educating us. Not sure however I will put that education to use -a bit like Thai drivers!
-
sort of still fits in with my definition.....dont ya think....and you asked me what my definition was......
No, you said:
"but i think the objection comes from the strange desire in the USA for stock piling assault rifles etc..which seem to be the cornerstone of every massacre, often the owners are the parents of these sick kids that are the perpetrators"
No law abiding citizens are stock piling Assualt Rifles as these weapons are already illegal.
you asked what my definition of assault rifles were, wake up to yourself...i know what i said and under my definition its semi auto and automatic rifles...... including .22 semi auto rifles..... there are no need for them in private life...and no argument so far can make me change my mind,
i know what auto and semi auto means...have owned rifles, shot guns and a 9mm pistol in the past, now in Australia we generally go after feral pigs with dogs and a big knife.....some with compound bows.....they are "Game" Hunters
-
What is happening is that Politians and the Media are using peoples ignorance of weapons to incite them into abitarily banning weapons.
The term "Assualt Rifles" is used by both, but they do not mean machine guns that continue to fire while ammo is available and the trigger is held. And as shown on this forum, many here think that is what they are talking about. Automatic weapons are already illegal, and have been for over 50 years.
The Assult Rifle term as used by politians, activists and media are a named group of guns that only fire semi-automatically, but look military. These weapons are not even used by the military. If enacted, it basically ban a rifle for how it looks and a citizen can buy continue to legally buy a rifle with more capability than the "Assault Rifle".
-
sort of still fits in with my definition.....dont ya think....and you asked me what my definition was......
No, you said:
"but i think the objection comes from the strange desire in the USA for stock piling assault rifles etc..which seem to be the cornerstone of every massacre, often the owners are the parents of these sick kids that are the perpetrators"
No law abiding citizens are stock piling Assualt Rifles as these weapons are already illegal.
you asked what my definition of assault rifles were, wake up to yourself...i know what i said and under my definition its semi auto and automatic rifles...... including .22 semi auto rifles..... there are no need for them in private life...and no argument so far can make me change my mind,
i know what auto and semi auto means...have owned rifles, shot guns and a 9mm pistol in the past, now in Australia we generally go after feral pigs with dogs and a big knife.....some with compound bows.....they are "Game" Hunters
You are completely entitled to your view.
However, I am trying to understand on where you come up with:
"but i think the objection comes from the strange desire in the USA for stock piling assault rifles etc..which seem to be the cornerstone of every massacre, often the owners are the parents of these sick kids that are the perpetrators"
Where is it documented that Americans are stock piling assault rifles (i.e., machine guns), and when has an Automatic Rifle (machine gun) last been used in a massacre?
-
sort of still fits in with my definition.....dont ya think....and you asked me what my definition was......
No, you said:
"but i think the objection comes from the strange desire in the USA for stock piling assault rifles etc..which seem to be the cornerstone of every massacre, often the owners are the parents of these sick kids that are the perpetrators"
No law abiding citizens are stock piling Assualt Rifles as these weapons are already illegal.
you asked what my definition of assault rifles were, wake up to yourself...i know what i said and under my definition its semi auto and automatic rifles...... including .22 semi auto rifles..... there are no need for them in private life...and no argument so far can make me change my mind,
i know what auto and semi auto means...have owned rifles, shot guns and a 9mm pistol in the past, now in Australia we generally go after feral pigs with dogs and a big knife.....some with compound bows.....they are "Game" Hunters
You are completely entitled to your view.
However, I am trying to understand on where you come up with:
"but i think the objection comes from the strange desire in the USA for stock piling assault rifles etc..which seem to be the cornerstone of every massacre, often the owners are the parents of these sick kids that are the perpetrators"
Where is it documented that Americans are stock piling assault rifles (i.e., machine guns), and when has an Automatic Rifle (machine gun) last been used in a massacre?
ok i relent not assault rifles i was wrong....what about USA's fascination with guns and stock piling of semi automatic assault "like" weapons that never would be adjusted to fully automatic buttslap......semi auto weapons were used in these assaults...for the more efficient kill. semantics over "assault" rifles is not an argument that i feel i need to continue with, it is a plot the NRA loves so they can continue to have the right to bear arms...and the right to harm bears.
-
Bushmaster .233 a very popular weapon in the USA sold through many outlets including Walmart ....semi automatic...looks innocent enough.
i know its FOX news that i got it from but they say the most popular rifle sold in USA today is the AR-15...the semi auto version of the military M-16.
-
Urleft you may be right that i was speaking without a true source of facts, there are enough documentaries, news clippings etc out there to make a generalization. when Obama was elected...gun sales/ applications increased, sadly after the latest massacre the applications again went through the roof...several news sources have stated...feel free to look at any. i don't think any source will say different, people wanting to get more in case the weapon is legislated against...if that is not stockpiling then i'm wrong. my comment was more of what i think/ believe that this thread was all about....although this source "gunpolicy.org" is from 2009 it seems to be a Swiss government backed site i'm sure there is a degree of accuracy.
-
Yet another3 plus the gunmen shot dead........Where??,,,,in the USA of course!
-
Would you have thrown a pie at the gunman?
-
Would you have thrown a pie at the gunman?
if he had no gun would he be a pieman...not a gunman?
so the answer is more guns to a more unstable society....?
-
You will never stop crazies from obtaining guns. The best you can hope for is the ability to defend you and yours. Good luck with that pie!
-
You will never stop crazies from obtaining guns. The best you can hope for is the ability to defend you and yours. Good luck with that pie!
i do hear ya...but please take the time to download the PDF files i put earlier...compares USA...AUST...GB...even Thailand...i know it wont change anybodies mind...but it is interesting..
by the way...love Pie thumbup
-
Bushmaster .233 a very popular weapon in the USA sold through many outlets including Walmart ....semi automatic...looks innocent enough.
i know its FOX news that i got it from but they say the most popular rifle sold in USA today is the AR-15...the semi auto version of the military M-16.
I may take one if it was given to me, but I would never buy one. I carried an M-16 for over 3 years, hated the rifle as it was hard to clean.
I would much rather have an M-14.
Yup people are buying it as it is their right.
-
ok i relent not assault rifles i was wrong....what about USA's fascination with guns and stock piling of semi automatic assault "like" weapons that never would be adjusted to fully automatic......semi auto weapons were used in these assaults...for the more efficient kill. semantics over "assault" rifles is not an argument that i feel i need to continue with, it is a plot the NRA loves so they can continue to have the right to bear arms...and the right to harm bears.
Thanks Mate party4
Now to what weapons are legally used for:
- Home protection
-Self Protection ourside of the home
-Business Protection
-Recreational shooting (e.g., skeet, trap, target, profiency).
- Competitive shooting.
- Hunting
- Varmit control
- Herd reductions (e.g., pig killing)
- Euthanasia
- Funerals (21 gun salute)
- Collectors
- Other (e.g., drill teams)
I am sure I have missed some, but with all these legal uses, there can be a lot of call for different weapons and capabilities.
Who is to say what is needed and not needed?
-
Urleft you may be right that i was speaking without a true source of facts, there are enough documentaries, news clippings etc out there to make a generalization. when Obama was elected...gun sales/ applications increased, sadly after the latest massacre the applications again went through the roof...several news sources have stated...feel free to look at any. i don't think any source will say different, people wanting to get more in case the weapon is legislated against...if that is not stockpiling then i'm wrong. my comment was more of what i think/ believe that this thread was all about....although this source "gunpolicy.org" is from 2009 it seems to be a Swiss government backed site i'm sure there is a degree of accuracy.
I nevery debated that guns were not being stock piled, Obama has been the best gun saleman ever.
What I was debating against was that Assualt Rifles (machine guns) were being stock piled. Yup a bushmaster is one of the weapons being stockpiled, but it is neither a military weapon, or a machine gun, but the media calls it an Assault Rifle because of the way it looks, not its capabilities.
-
Would you have thrown a pie at the gunman?
A pie killed Ernie bigcry bigcry bigcry
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8e1xvyTdBZI
-
Urleft you may be right that i was speaking without a true source of facts, there are enough documentaries, news clippings etc out there to make a generalization. when Obama was elected...gun sales/ applications increased, sadly after the latest massacre the applications again went through the roof...several news sources have stated...feel free to look at any. i don't think any source will say different, people wanting to get more in case the weapon is legislated against...if that is not stockpiling then i'm wrong. my comment was more of what i think/ believe that this thread was all about....although this source "gunpolicy.org" is from 2009 it seems to be a Swiss government backed site i'm sure there is a degree of accuracy.
I nevery debated that guns were not being stock piled, Obama has been the best gun saleman ever.
What I was debating against was that Assualt Rifles (machine guns) were being stock piled. Yup a bushmaster is one of the weapons being stockpiled, but it is neither a military weapon, or a machine gun, but the media calls it an Assault Rifle because of the way it looks, not its capabilities.
mate please check out the PDF files i put earlier..one relates to Assault Rifles are legal in the USA if registered...its Swiss could be wrong...but i did try get some facts together. i still think its only semantics about whether a AR-15 is a assault rifle....its a killing not hunting weapon as far as i am concerned, and you agree that they are being stockpiled.
-
Bushmaster .233 a very popular weapon in the USA sold through many outlets including Walmart ....semi automatic...looks innocent enough.
i know its FOX news that i got it from but they say the most popular rifle sold in USA today is the AR-15...the semi auto version of the military M-16.
I may take one if it was given to me, but I would never buy one. I carried an M-16 for over 3 years, hated the rifle as it was hard to clean.
I would much rather have an M-14.
Yup people are buying it as it is their right.
it is also the right in some countries to marry a 9-12 year old girl...they are still doing it as this is their right.
doesn't make it smart....or moral in the 21 century
-
How will you answer to your maker and you and yours when all you have is a pie for defense?
-
mate please check out the PDF files i put earlier..one relates to Assault Rifles are legal in the USA if registered...its Swiss could be wrong...but i did try get some facts together. i still think its only semantics about whether a AR-15 is a assault rifle....its a killing not hunting weapon as far as i am concerned, and you agree that they are being stockpiled.
Promise I will get to them in the next few days.
However, there are other legal uses for the AR-15 other than killing. I would be willing to wager that US Public has fired over 1 million rounds (probably way higher) through AR-15s, and less than 100 rounds have been used for killing.
Now if I were going into a close combat situation, I would want a high capacity shotgun loaded with 00 buckshot.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_biiE4USjFQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_biiE4USjFQ)
-
mate please check out the PDF files i put earlier..one relates to Assault Rifles are legal in the USA if registered...its Swiss could be wrong...but i did try get some facts together. i still think its only semantics about whether a AR-15 is a assault rifle....its a killing not hunting weapon as far as i am concerned, and you agree that they are being stockpiled.
In some of my earlier posts I put that Automatic Weapons can be legally acquired, but it is such a pain in the ass that of all my gun buddies, none has one, even though we could all probably pass steps 1-3.
What is required to legally obtain an Machine Gun:
http://www.class3weaponslicense.com/197/automatic-weapons-permit (http://www.class3weaponslicense.com/197/automatic-weapons-permit)
Automatic Weapons Permit
Posted on January 4, 2012 by admin
I have had a couple of people contact me at class 3 weapons license looking for an “automatic weapons permit” and the answers can sometimes be confusing. I have tried to explain to people that there is no such thing as an automatic weapons permit, just a tax stamp that you need to buy before purchasing the firearm. That being said, it isn’t that easy. We at class 3 weapons license have tried to put together a short list of the items that you will need to handle in order to complete the sale.
If you are interested in getting a Federal Firearms License or Class 3 Weapons License, then check out our main page.
1.The very first step you need to complete is getting the local Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) to sign off on a form 4. Most LEO’s will know what this is immediately and you can usually gauge whether or not they will give you an automatic weapons permit. It seems that smaller, rural sheriffs are more inclined to sign off than big city cops, but you can try multiple locations if needed. You can get around this step by creating a NFA trust as seen here.
2.Make sure your record is clean. If you are a convicted felon, owe child support or have any kind of firearm violations, you will not receive an automatic weapons permit. Don’t even think about trying to fudge on this one, and don’t try to get someone else to purchase the tax stamp for you as this will mean jail time for both of ya.
3.Be prepared to have the local LEO perform a background check on anyone applying. This can range from mild to extremely stringent. Today, most LEO’s don’t want to put a stamp of approval on someone that may cause problems down the road. Make sure you are open and honest with any investigations.
4.Get your money together, because you are going to need it. With the NFA act, you can not purchase new automatic weapons and this severely limits the supply of them. You will probably need 5000 dollars to purchase a bottom of the line automatic weapon and the cost can go dramatically higher. You will also need to spend 200 dollars on your tax stamp.
5.Find a class 3 weapons dealer that will sell you what you want and complete the purchase. You will need the specifics from the weapon to fill in the forms. After gathering all the information, complete the form 4 and submit it to the BATFE along with 2 fingerprint cards and pictures. The BATF will let you know when your automatic weapons permit has been accepted or denied and then you can complete the purchase with your class iii dealer.
As a reminder, you need to educate yourself on the laws regarding your automatic weapons permit. For example, who can shoot it, crossing state lines, selling, lending or willing your firearm. These are all things you need to research before beginning the process and obtaining your automatic weapons permit.
Automatic weapons can be great fun and bring your shooting to a whole new level, but obtaining one of these is not for the faint of heart. You will need a clean record, a lot of money and some help with all the paperwork. Instead of an automatic weapons permit, you may have better luck with a federal firearms license or class iii weapons license.
-
Now if I were going into a close combat situation, I would want a high capacity shotgun loaded with 00 buckshot.
Got me my Benelli M2 Tactical, with pistol grip and ghost-ring night sights, sittin' in the corner of my bedroom.
Only 6 shots between reloads...but with 00 buck, that should be plenty.
http://www.benelliusa.com/shotguns/benelli-m2-tactical.php
-
Now if I were going into a close combat situation, I would want a high capacity shotgun loaded with 00 buckshot.
Got me my Benelli M2 Tactical, with pistol grip and ghost-ring night sights, sittin' in the corner of my bedroom.
Only 6 shots between reloads...but with 00 buck, that should be plenty.
http://www.benelliusa.com/shotguns/benelli-m2-tactical.php
Nice to have a man understand what is being said.
-
Rodger That!
-
Would you have thrown a pie at the gunman?
A pie killed Ernie bigcry bigcry bigcry
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8e1xvyTdBZI
Who drove the fastest Milkcart in the West!!
-
Who drove the fastest Milkcart in the West!!
Two Ton Ted from Teddington throw the pie !!! mhihi
-
This guy gives gun owners a bad name.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xwkk7e_alex-jones-vs-piers-morgan-1776-will-commence-again-if-you-try-to-take-our-firearms-full-interview_news
Do some Americans really think they need guns to defend themselves from attack from their own government ? They do know they can vote them out right ?
And if the 'Government' did attack it's citizens, how would their AR-15's, etc. stand up to attack helicopters, tanks and cruise missles.
If you have to arm yourself against your own government, there is something seriously wrong with either you or your country.
unbelievable
-
And before anyone calls me a gun-hating tree hugger, this is may latest rifle below.
Although I must admin, i enjoy a good hug.
-
This guy gives gun owners a bad name.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xwkk7e_alex-jones-vs-piers-morgan-1776-will-commence-again-if-you-try-to-take-our-firearms-full-interview_news
Do some Americans really think they need guns to defend themselves from attack from their own government ? They do know they can vote them out right ?
And if the 'Government' did attack it's citizens, how would their AR-15's, etc. stand up to attack helicopters, tanks and cruise missles.
If you have to arm yourself against your own government, there is something seriously wrong with either you or your country.
unbelievable
I really don't know how Piers kept his calm in that interview. Unbelieveable is all I can say.
-
Oh No not more.........2 women are shot dead in a Sheriff's office in Florida!!!!!
-
This guy gives gun owners a bad name.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xwkk7e_alex-jones-vs-piers-morgan-1776-will-commence-again-if-you-try-to-take-our-firearms-full-interview_news
Do some Americans really think they need guns to defend themselves from attack from their own government ? They do know they can vote them out right ?
And if the 'Government' did attack it's citizens, how would their AR-15's, etc. stand up to attack helicopters, tanks and cruise missles.
If you have to arm yourself against your own government, there is something seriously wrong with either you or your country.
unbelievable
I really don't know how Piers kept his calm in that interview. Unbelieveable is all I can say.
I was impressed with Piers; and he was able to get a bit in edgewise that would make even a hardcore think twice, maybe.
-
Fox Affiliate Thoroughly Debunks Piers Morgan’s Gun Homicide Statistics
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/01/10/fox-affiliate-thoroughly-debunks-piers-morgan-s-gun-homicide-statisti (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/01/10/fox-affiliate-thoroughly-debunks-piers-morgan-s-gun-homicide-statisti)
Swann said, “The stat that Piers Morgan was continuing to cite, one that Great Britain which banned guns about fifteen years ago had only 35 gun-related murders in 2011 compared to the United States which had 11,000. Let’s start there because that number is not correct.”
Swann then broke down the FBI crime statistics for 2011 showing that there were 12,664 homicides in the U.S. Of those, 8,583 were caused by firearms.
“But of those,” said Swann, “400 are listed as justifiable homicide by law enforcement, 260 justifiable homicide by private citizens.” ....
But that’s just the beginning, because what anti-gun media members such as Morgan completely ignore is the differing crime rates relative to the population.
“The U.S. has the highest gun ownership rate in the world, an average of 88 guns per 100 people,” Swann stated. “That puts it first in the world for gun ownership.”
If there was a significant correlation between gun ownership and homicide, America should therefore be one of the highest nations in the world in terms of gun-related murders per fixed number of people.
Not so said Swann. “Honduras, El Salvador, and Jamaica have higher rates. So do 24 other countries. The U.S., despite being number one in gun ownership is number 28 in gun homicide with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people.”
But here’s where it really gets interesting.
“The UK has the second highest overall crime rate in the EU,” Swann said. “The UK has the fifth highest robbery rate, the fourth highest burglary rate. But more importantly, the EU named Britain as the most violent country in the EU.”
Swann noted that in the UK, there are 2,034 violent crimes per 100,000 people. By contrast, there are 466 violent crimes per 100,000 here in America.
“We’re not even in the top ten,” Swann said.
This means that Britain’s violent crime rate is over five times that of the U.S.
Not surprisingly, Morgan chooses to ignore this statistic.
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/01/10/fox-affiliate-thoroughly-debunks-piers-morgan-s-gun-homicide-statisti#ixzz2HgTTXgZB (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/01/10/fox-affiliate-thoroughly-debunks-piers-morgan-s-gun-homicide-statisti#ixzz2HgTTXgZB)
-
Big difference in violent crimes to getting killed by a gun...at least your alive not dead like if you lived in the U.S
-
Might I suggest that many violent crimes in the USA go unreported, and are dealt with personally by the people concerned. Hence the high homicide rate.
In the UK, the police are invariably involved.
-
Might I suggest that many violent crimes in the USA go unreported, and are dealt with personally by the people concerned. Hence the high homicide rate.
In the UK, the police are invariably involved.
You are almost correct here. Most of the unreported crimes involve attempted robbery, rape, other and the would be victim used a gun to end the confrontation. Then because of the likihood of nothing being done or the possiblity of the victim charged with some kind of crime, these go unreported.
-
Fox Affiliate Thoroughly Debunks Piers Morgan’s Gun Homicide Statistics
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/01/10/fox-affiliate-thoroughly-debunks-piers-morgan-s-gun-homicide-statisti (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/01/10/fox-affiliate-thoroughly-debunks-piers-morgan-s-gun-homicide-statisti)
Swann said, “The stat that Piers Morgan was continuing to cite, one that Great Britain which banned guns about fifteen years ago had only 35 gun-related murders in 2011 compared to the United States which had 11,000. Let’s start there because that number is not correct.”
Swann then broke down the FBI crime statistics for 2011 showing that there were 12,664 homicides in the U.S. Of those, 8,583 were caused by firearms.
“But of those,” said Swann, “400 are listed as justifiable homicide by law enforcement, 260 justifiable homicide by private citizens.” ....
But that’s just the beginning, because what anti-gun media members such as Morgan completely ignore is the differing crime rates relative to the population.
“The U.S. has the highest gun ownership rate in the world, an average of 88 guns per 100 people,” Swann stated. “That puts it first in the world for gun ownership.”
If there was a significant correlation between gun ownership and homicide, America should therefore be one of the highest nations in the world in terms of gun-related murders per fixed number of people.
Not so said Swann. “Honduras, El Salvador, and Jamaica have higher rates. So do 24 other countries. The U.S., despite being number one in gun ownership is number 28 in gun homicide with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people.”
But here’s where it really gets interesting.
“The UK has the second highest overall crime rate in the EU,” Swann said. “The UK has the fifth highest robbery rate, the fourth highest burglary rate. But more importantly, the EU named Britain as the most violent country in the EU.”
Swann noted that in the UK, there are 2,034 violent crimes per 100,000 people. By contrast, there are 466 violent crimes per 100,000 here in America.
“We’re not even in the top ten,” Swann said.
This means that Britain’s violent crime rate is over five times that of the U.S.
Not surprisingly, Morgan chooses to ignore this statistic.
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/01/10/fox-affiliate-thoroughly-debunks-piers-morgan-s-gun-homicide-statisti#ixzz2HgTTXgZB (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/01/10/fox-affiliate-thoroughly-debunks-piers-morgan-s-gun-homicide-statisti#ixzz2HgTTXgZB)
great points.....there are higher rates of murder in violent 3rd world countries.....28 on the list of gun related murders...any other first world nations higher than the USA..?
actually Urleft you did say that you would check out the links i put...it does have a comparison of Murder by gun rates per 100,000 of the USA, AUSTRALIA and GB.....im sure you will be pleased...the US wins by miles.
yes GB does have a lot of violent crime....soccer hooligans....thank god they don't have guns hey...or it would be the murder rate and not the violent crime rate that would be up.
anyway mate im sure no one is changing anybodies mind, and i enjoy a debate buttslap party4 love it
-
It's not just the soccer hooligans in the UK. There are large numbers of immigrant youths battling each other, who should be immediately deported at the first sign of trouble ------just as we farang here in Thailand would be!
-
It's not just the soccer hooligans in the UK. There are large bumbers of immigrant youths battling each other, who should be immediately deported at the first sign of trouble ------just as we farang here in Thailand would be!
no offence intended Nick, same issue in Australia....and with indigenous communities....just a statement about if guns were freely available in GB...it wouldn't be violent crime anymore...it could well be homicide.
-
great points.....there are higher rates of murder in violent 3rd world countries.....28 on the list of gun related murders...any other first world nations higher than the USA..?
actually Urleft you did say that you would check out the links i put...it does have a comparison of Murder by gun rates per 100,000 of the USA, AUSTRALIA and GB.....im sure you will be pleased...the US wins by miles.
yes GB does have a lot of violent crime....soccer hooligans....thank god they don't have guns hey...or it would be the murder rate and not the violent crime rate that would be up.
anyway mate im sure no one is changing anybodies mind, and i enjoy a debate buttslap party4 love it
Yes I reviewed them. What exactly does the PDF on Automatic weapons have to do with homicide rates? When was the last time a legal US registered machine gun was used in a homicide?
-
great points.....there are higher rates of murder in violent 3rd world countries.....28 on the list of gun related murders...any other first world nations higher than the USA..?
actually Urleft you did say that you would check out the links i put...it does have a comparison of Murder by gun rates per 100,000 of the USA, AUSTRALIA and GB.....im sure you will be pleased...the US wins by miles.
yes GB does have a lot of violent crime....soccer hooligans....thank god they don't have guns hey...or it would be the murder rate and not the violent crime rate that would be up.
anyway mate im sure no one is changing anybodies mind, and i enjoy a debate buttslap party4 love it
Yes I reviewed them. What exactly does the PDF on Automatic weapons have to do with homicide rates? When was the last time a legal US registered machine gun was used in a homicide?
there should be three PDF...one on automatic...the other on ownership...the next on murder by gun rates,....i apologize im not up with any technology...if i have posted only one...i will try to get the others up.
-
great points.....there are higher rates of murder in violent 3rd world countries.....28 on the list of gun related murders...any other first world nations higher than the USA..?
actually Urleft you did say that you would check out the links i put...it does have a comparison of Murder by gun rates per 100,000 of the USA, AUSTRALIA and GB.....im sure you will be pleased...the US wins by miles.
yes GB does have a lot of violent crime....soccer hooligans....thank god they don't have guns hey...or it would be the murder rate and not the violent crime rate that would be up.
anyway mate im sure no one is changing anybodies mind, and i enjoy a debate buttslap party4 love it
Yes I reviewed them. What exactly does the PDF on Automatic weapons have to do with homicide rates? When was the last time a legal US registered machine gun was used in a homicide?
mate only one of the 3 PDF's have to do with automatic weapons(legal ownership).....one is a gun related death rate comparison with Australia, GB, and the USA...with the USA at 2.98 per 100,000....Aust at .1 and GB at .03...per 100,000.
-
great points.....there are higher rates of murder in violent 3rd world countries.....28 on the list of gun related murders...any other first world nations higher than the USA..?
actually Urleft you did say that you would check out the links i put...it does have a comparison of Murder by gun rates per 100,000 of the USA, AUSTRALIA and GB.....im sure you will be pleased...the US wins by miles.
yes GB does have a lot of violent crime....soccer hooligans....thank god they don't have guns hey...or it would be the murder rate and not the violent crime rate that would be up.
anyway mate im sure no one is changing anybodies mind, and i enjoy a debate buttslap party4 love it
Yes I reviewed them. What exactly does the PDF on Automatic weapons have to do with homicide rates? When was the last time a legal US registered machine gun was used in a homicide?
mate only one of the 3 PDF's have to do with automatic weapons(legal ownership).....one is a gun related death rate comparison with Australia, GB, and the USA...with the USA at 2.98 per 100,000....Aust at .1 and GB at .03...per 100,000.
Yes, I know, I looked at all 3. But I trying to take it point by point.
You are doing the typical liberal attack method of posting information that is misleading, expecially to those that don't understand that the American "Assualt Gun Ban" has nothing to do with machine guns. You tried to divert me when I wanted your definition of "Assault Weapons" and had to finally back down on what you had said. Here, you post 3 PDFs, one has to do about legal automatic weapon ownership in America, implying that Americans are using legal automatic weapons to commit crimes while Australia have a complete ban has none. So I want you to provide what specific crimes have been done using any legal machine guns in America?
So answer the question, I will get to the others later.
-
great points.....there are higher rates of murder in violent 3rd world countries.....28 on the list of gun related murders...any other first world nations higher than the USA..?
actually Urleft you did say that you would check out the links i put...it does have a comparison of Murder by gun rates per 100,000 of the USA, AUSTRALIA and GB.....im sure you will be pleased...the US wins by miles.
yes GB does have a lot of violent crime....soccer hooligans....thank god they don't have guns hey...or it would be the murder rate and not the violent crime rate that would be up.
anyway mate im sure no one is changing anybodies mind, and i enjoy a debate buttslap party4 love it
Yes I reviewed them. What exactly does the PDF on Automatic weapons have to do with homicide rates? When was the last time a legal US registered machine gun was used in a homicide?
mate only one of the 3 PDF's have to do with automatic weapons(legal ownership).....one is a gun related death rate comparison with Australia, GB, and the USA...with the USA at 2.98 per 100,000....Aust at .1 and GB at .03...per 100,000.
Yes, I know, I looked at all 3. But I trying to take it point by point.
You are doing the typical liberal attack method of posting information that is misleading, expecially to those that don't understand that the American "Assualt Gun Ban" has nothing to do with machine guns. You tried to divert me when I wanted your definition of "Assault Weapons" and had to finally back down on what you had said. Here, you post 3 PDFs, one has to do about legal automatic weapon ownership in America, implying that Americans are using legal automatic weapons to commit crimes while Australia have a complete ban has none. So I want you to provide what specific crimes have been done using any legal machine guns in America?
So answer the question, I will get to the others later.
mate, the automatic PDF was in reference to you stating " These are already illegal and have been for over 50 years.
And by this definition, an assault rifle has not been used in any of the mass killings. "...which i gather you meant automatic weapons have been made illegal for 50 years..this was not the case...they have to be registered.
secondly..i have stated that i was wrong about the "definition" of assault weapons...but the use of assault TYPE weapons such as AR15, bushmaster .233 in these massacres cannot be overlooked...and the "stock piling of them " which you have admitted.
Australia have banned semi automatic rifles...not just automatic rifles
by the way i am considered quite conservative in Australia in fact probably right wing, just because i do believe in gun control does not make me liberal or liberal minded.......i believe the average human in most countries are not clever enough to drive or even vote with a modem of common sense...why the hell would i want them armed.
as i have stated many times it is up to the people of the USA...it is their right to ignore history, common sense and statistics...and maybe they are too far down the track to change.
-
mate, the automatic PDF was in reference to you stating " These are already illegal and have been for over 50 years.
OK, so that PDF only has to do with my statement automatic weapons being illegal. What happened here was in a previous posting that was deleted by Admin (in banning a guy) I had stated "Automatic Weapons are already illegal (except by special license)." I did not care to get into the >0.1% of registered automatic weapons in the US since I had already mentioned it. My bad for expecting my earlier post to be there.
However, can we basically agree now that Fully Automatic Weapons (machine guns) are not involved in gun crime in America? I would also recommend avoiding the us "Assault Gun or Weapon" unless it is part of a reference.
Therefore, the only PDFs I need to be concerned are the 2nd two, is that correct?
-
mate, the automatic PDF was in reference to you stating " These are already illegal and have been for over 50 years.
OK, so that PDF only has to do with my statement automatic weapons being illegal. What happened here was in a previous posting that was deleted by Admin (in banning a guy) I had stated "Automatic Weapons are already illegal (except by special license)." I did not care to get into the >0.1% of registered automatic weapons in the US since I had already mentioned it. My bad for expecting my earlier post to be there.
However, can we basically agree now that Fully Automatic Weapons (machine guns) are not involved in gun crime in America? I would also recommend avoiding the us "Assault Gun or Weapon" unless it is part of a reference.
Therefore, the only PDFs I need to be concerned are the 2nd two, is that correct?
yes mate....although under my definition an assault rifle can be a semi auto rifle ...i will bow to correct terminology which was the first question asked of me. its all good...you guys love your weapons, i've known for years that smoking kills, damages health and i kept doing it at a rate of 40-60 smokes a day...i gave up 12 days ago...working in Borats country...believe me im thinking about registering an AK-47....lol
-
Lightning Storm water pistol
Soak your opponents that are even about 25 feet away
Comes with blaster
Fully automatic for maximum speed
For ages 6 and up
4 AA batteries required but not included
Instruction manual included
This will sort the men out from the boys.
-
I heard Urleft is the 'sole' distributor in Isaan!
-
I have watched this debate with some interest for the past month. Perhaps we could all acknowledge that it is lawful in USA to carry weapons, so the views expressed here are opinions from individuals that will never be resolved. I guess that's what a forum is all about.
As an Aussie, I remember the furore in 1996 when the Govt announced the "Gun Buy Back Scheme." Cost the Aussie taxpayer around $400,000,000
It has been deemed as only a partial success at best, as many gun owners simply chose to ignore the scheme. There is a short link worth reading. http://guncontrol.org.au/1998/07/gun-buy-back/
Non Aussies will perhaps not know this, but the scheme was a very rapid response to a deadful mass shooting in Tasmania in 1996. 35 people killed, 21 wounded. The single offender used a Colt AR-15 semi auto rifle.
The next generation of Australians have grown up knowing that private weapons are not available, so it's not really a big deal in Australia. IMHO. There are avenues available for recreational shooters to legally own weapons, but it's very strictly controlled as you may imagine.
Perhaps USA could have a Referendum on the issue ? Seems a very democratic way to sort a hugely devisive topic.
I have no opinion on the rights of Americans to carry weapons. It's their Constitutional right, and I respect that. However, as an Aussie that simply can't own a gun .... then that is no big deal for me. Didn't change my life at all.
-
yes mate....although under my definition an assault rifle can be a semi auto rifle ...i will bow to correct terminology which was the first question asked of me. its all good...you guys love your weapons, i've known for years that smoking kills, damages health and i kept doing it at a rate of 40-60 smokes a day...i gave up 12 days ago...working in Borats country...believe me im thinking about registering an AK-47....lol
Super, it is nice to find common ground. If we every meet I will buy you a cold one.
That being said I must ask for your indulgence as I am currently involved in the most important project of my life and my down times seems to be fleeting the last few weeks.
But I will get to your other 2 PDFs, hopefully in next 2 weeks.
Cheers Mate.
-
yes mate....although under my definition an assault rifle can be a semi auto rifle ...i will bow to correct terminology which was the first question asked of me. its all good...you guys love your weapons, i've known for years that smoking kills, damages health and i kept doing it at a rate of 40-60 smokes a day...i gave up 12 days ago...working in Borats country...believe me im thinking about registering an AK-47....lol
Super, it is nice to find common ground. If we every meet I will buy you a cold one.
That being said I must ask for your indulgence as I am currently involved in the most important project of my life and my down times seems to be fleeting the last few weeks.
But I will get to your other 2 PDFs, hopefully in next 2 weeks.
Cheers Mate.
Ya never know mate...back in LOS start of Feb...would crack a cold one with ya no dramas. party12
-
Ya never know mate...back in LOS start of Feb...would crack a cold one with ya no dramas. party12
LOL, interesting comment, no dramas.
Not from me, I even found and shook Nookies hand (yes I washed both my hands thoroughly afterwards).
I am about as laid back as they come. Just ask Mel from the Swan.
-
Ya never know mate...back in LOS start of Feb...would crack a cold one with ya no dramas. party12
LOL, interesting comment, no dramas.
Not from me, I even found and shook Nookies hand (yes I washed both my hands thoroughly afterwards).
I am about as laid back as they come. Just ask Mel from the Swan.
No dramas, just something I say like all good, or cool bananas. Mel is a good guy met him last time around start of December. Actually one of my tasks on feb is to find Nookies place.
-
No dramas, just something I say like all good, or cool bananas. Mel is a good guy met him last time around start of December. Actually one of my tasks on feb is to find Nookies place.
Good luck at that as Nookie is technology challanged on providing a map to his place.
I offered to do it for him, and even told him how to do it with Google, but still no map.
So the Swan is my bar of choice as I can find it, and Mel gets rid of shitheads.
-
No dramas, just something I say like all good, or cool bananas. Mel is a good guy met him last time around start of December. Actually one of my tasks on feb is to find Nookies place.
Good luck at that as Nookie is technology challanged on providing a map to his place.
I offered to do it for him, and even told him how to do it with Google, but still no map.
So the Swan is my bar of choice as I can find it, and Mel gets rid of shitheads.
So MEL gets rid of shitheads..Sounds like he still has a few left...
-
No dramas, just something I say like all good, or cool bananas. Mel is a good guy met him last time around start of December. Actually one of my tasks on feb is to find Nookies place.
Good luck at that as Nookie is technology challanged on providing a map to his place.
I offered to do it for him, and even told him how to do it with Google, but still no map.
So the Swan is my bar of choice as I can find it, and Mel gets rid of shitheads.
Apologies Urleft,I thought it was already done.
-
No dramas, just something I say like all good, or cool bananas. Mel is a good guy met him last time around start of December. Actually one of my tasks on feb is to find Nookies place.
Good luck at that as Nookie is technology challanged on providing a map to his place.
I offered to do it for him, and even told him how to do it with Google, but still no map.
So the Swan is my bar of choice as I can find it, and Mel gets rid of shitheads.
So MEL gets rid of shitheads..Sounds like he still has a few left...
I thought both the farang bars ,The Swan & Paddys shared them!!!!!!
-
No dramas, just something I say like all good, or cool bananas. Mel is a good guy met him last time around start of December. Actually one of my tasks on feb is to find Nookies place.
Good luck at that as Nookie is technology challanged on providing a map to his place.
I offered to do it for him, and even told him how to do it with Google, but still no map.
So the Swan is my bar of choice as I can find it, and Mel gets rid of shitheads.
So MEL gets rid of shitheads..Sounds like he still has a few left...
I thought both the farang bars ,The Swan & Paddys shared them!!!!!!
Are there enough in Buriram to go round ?
-
No dramas, just something I say like all good, or cool bananas. Mel is a good guy met him last time around start of December. Actually one of my tasks on feb is to find Nookies place.
Good luck at that as Nookie is technology challanged on providing a map to his place.
I offered to do it for him, and even told him how to do it with Google, but still no map.
So the Swan is my bar of choice as I can find it, and Mel gets rid of shitheads.
So MEL gets rid of shitheads..Sounds like he still has a few left...
???WTF???
-
No dramas, just something I say like all good, or cool bananas. Mel is a good guy met him last time around start of December. Actually one of my tasks on feb is to find Nookies place.
Good luck at that as Nookie is technology challanged on providing a map to his place.
I offered to do it for him, and even told him how to do it with Google, but still no map.
So the Swan is my bar of choice as I can find it, and Mel gets rid of shitheads.
So MEL gets rid of shitheads..Sounds like he still has a few left...
I thought both the farang bars ,The Swan & Paddys shared them!!!!!!
Are there enough in Buriram to go round ?
Plenty,even more when Batman & Robin hit town!!
-
No dramas, just something I say like all good, or cool bananas. Mel is a good guy met him last time around start of December. Actually one of my tasks on feb is to find Nookies place.
Good luck at that as Nookie is technology challanged on providing a map to his place.
I offered to do it for him, and even told him how to do it with Google, but still no map.
So the Swan is my bar of choice as I can find it, and Mel gets rid of shitheads.
So MEL gets rid of shitheads..Sounds like he still has a few left...
I thought both the farang bars ,The Swan & Paddys shared them!!!!!!
Hope you have not forgotten Bamboo Bar .I have been in a few times recently some strange boys in there.
-
Yes I refuse to give up any more rights (on anything).
I voted for more special taxes to fix the roads, I was ready for gas price increase. However, now there is not enough money to fix the roads. Why? Because other programs "borrowed" the road tax money and the money is no longer available.
I voted to save the wetlands by increasing taxes on hunters and fishermen. But this money is no longer available as has been borrowed by other GVT programs.
My Gun rights were resticted in 1934, what did I get for limiting my rights? My gun rights were further resticted in 1968, but what did I gain as gun owner? More "sensenible gun laws" were enacted in 1986. Gun Free zone restricting my right to protect myself were started in 1990, The Brady bill restricting more of my right was inacted in 1993, The look like military weapons ban (assault weapons) was enacted in 1994. What did the gun owner get for giving up his rights?
Enough is enough. These have not worked and only restricted my rights. I will not vote for any gun restrictions or targeted taxes as these are all liberal shit to take away the rights of law abiding Americans and get more GVT control.
Sensible, common sense, reasonable (ect.) control is all BS. It is about control, not fixing the problem.
I refuse to vote for any tax increase or restiction on my rights for any reason.
-
thought this was an appropriate picture, peace out..Merica
-
Question for urleft, do you feel safe in thailand .
-
Yes I refuse to give up any more rights (on anything).
I voted for more special taxes to fix the roads, I was ready for gas price increase. However, now there is not enough money to fix the roads. Why? Because other programs "borrowed" the road tax money and the money is no longer available.
I voted to save the wetlands by increasing taxes on hunters and fishermen. But this money is no longer available as has been borrowed by other GVT programs.
My Gun rights were resticted in 1934, what did I get for limiting my rights? My gun rights were further resticted in 1968, but what did I gain as gun owner? More "sensenible gun laws" were enacted in 1986. Gun Free zone restricting my right to protect myself were started in 1990, The Brady bill restricting more of my right was inacted in 1993, The look like military weapons ban (assault weapons) was enacted in 1994. What did the gun owner get for giving up his rights?
Enough is enough. These have not worked and only restricted my rights. I will not vote for any gun restrictions or targeted taxes as these are all liberal shit to take away the rights of law abiding Americans and get more GVT control.
Sensible, common sense, reasonable (ect.) control is all BS. It is about control, not fixing the problem.
I refuse to vote for any tax increase or restiction on my rights for any reason.
I don't know why you give a shit Keith - you live in Thailand. Ironically, a country where you have no fcuking rights at all.
Sure, there are few restrictions either (on the face of it) but I would like to see how your 'rights' get on the moment you, or any Farang, is found by the BiB with one of your pop guns in your hand.
-
Question for urleft, do you feel safe in thailand .
I grew up in Detroit, Pittsburgh, Cincinati and Chicago, I learned a sense of awareness of when to be extremely careful in the certain areas. I have yet to feel personally threatened in Thailand.
However, I was monitoring the border conflict with Cambodia and was prepared to more to safer areas if required.
-
Yes I refuse to give up any more rights (on anything).
I voted for more special taxes to fix the roads, I was ready for gas price increase. However, now there is not enough money to fix the roads. Why? Because other programs "borrowed" the road tax money and the money is no longer available.
I voted to save the wetlands by increasing taxes on hunters and fishermen. But this money is no longer available as has been borrowed by other GVT programs.
My Gun rights were resticted in 1934, what did I get for limiting my rights? My gun rights were further resticted in 1968, but what did I gain as gun owner? More "sensenible gun laws" were enacted in 1986. Gun Free zone restricting my right to protect myself were started in 1990, The Brady bill restricting more of my right was inacted in 1993, The look like military weapons ban (assault weapons) was enacted in 1994. What did the gun owner get for giving up his rights?
Enough is enough. These have not worked and only restricted my rights. I will not vote for any gun restrictions or targeted taxes as these are all liberal shit to take away the rights of law abiding Americans and get more GVT control.
Sensible, common sense, reasonable (ect.) control is all BS. It is about control, not fixing the problem.
I refuse to vote for any tax increase or restiction on my rights for any reason.
I don't know why you give a shit Keith - you live in Thailand. Ironically, a country where you have no fcuking rights at all.
Sure, there are few restrictions either (on the face of it) but I would like to see how your 'rights' get on the moment you, or any Farang, is found by the BiB with one of your pop guns in your hand.
Because I still own a house in Alabama and if I could every get my TG a visa, I would take her there to see where we want to live. I still pay US Income Tax, property taxes, vehicle taxes, Alabama state income tax, Social Security Tax, Medicare Tax, etc. So I have a vested interests in the US.
And last time I looked, my visa was Non-Immigrant, as you say, I have very little rights in Thailand, but then I'm not trying to change this country's politics.
-
Yes I refuse to give up any more rights (on anything).
I voted for more special taxes to fix the roads, I was ready for gas price increase. However, now there is not enough money to fix the roads. Why? Because other programs "borrowed" the road tax money and the money is no longer available.
I voted to save the wetlands by increasing taxes on hunters and fishermen. But this money is no longer available as has been borrowed by other GVT programs.
My Gun rights were resticted in 1934, what did I get for limiting my rights? My gun rights were further resticted in 1968, but what did I gain as gun owner? More "sensenible gun laws" were enacted in 1986. Gun Free zone restricting my right to protect myself were started in 1990, The Brady bill restricting more of my right was inacted in 1993, The look like military weapons ban (assault weapons) was enacted in 1994. What did the gun owner get for giving up his rights?
Enough is enough. These have not worked and only restricted my rights. I will not vote for any gun restrictions or targeted taxes as these are all liberal shit to take away the rights of law abiding Americans and get more GVT control.
Sensible, common sense, reasonable (ect.) control is all BS. It is about control, not fixing the problem.
I refuse to vote for any tax increase or restiction on my rights for any reason.
I don't know why you give a shit Keith - you live in Thailand. Ironically, a country where you have no fcuking rights at all.
Sure, there are few restrictions either (on the face of it) but I would like to see how your 'rights' get on the moment you, or any Farang, is found by the BiB with one of your pop guns in your hand.
Because I still own a house in Alabama and if I could every get my TG a visa, I would take her there to see where we want to live. I still pay US Income Tax, property taxes, vehicle taxes, Alabama state income tax, Social Security Tax, Medicare Tax, etc. So I have a vested interests in the US.
And last time I looked, my visa was Non-Immigrant, as you say, I have very little rights in Thailand, but then I'm not trying to change this country's politics.
I agree Urleft that you have every right back in the USA, where is your right to take your wife home......a more important right than guns....good on ya but I would be more focused with that......more love than guns....I say fu&k Aust as I refuse to pay when I have less rights there than an immigrant legal or not....more power to ya
-
I agree Urleft that you have every right back in the USA, where is your right to take your wife home......a more important right than guns....good on ya but I would be more focused with that......more love than guns....I say fu&k Aust as I refuse to pay when I have less rights there than an immigrant legal or not....more power to ya
The right to take my wife to the US is controlled by the US GVT, and it is broken. Which is exactly why I refuse to willingly give up any of my existing rights to the GVT.
Are you really implying that if I give up my gun rights I would be able to get her a visa?
There is a website for people like you: www.liberalLogic101.com (http://www.liberalLogic101.com)
-
I agree Urleft that you have every right back in the USA, where is your right to take your wife home......a more important right than guns....good on ya but I would be more focused with that......more love than guns....I say fu&k Aust as I refuse to pay when I have less rights there than an immigrant legal or not....more power to ya
The right to take my wife to the US is controlled by the US GVT, and it is broken. Which is exactly why I refuse to willingly give up any of my existing rights to the GVT.
Are you really implying that if I give up my gun rights I would be able to get her a visa?
There is a website for people like you: www.liberalLogic101.com (http://www.liberalLogic101.com)
No I'm not, and never implied.....I would think its a more worthy topic my brother
-
The "revolution" has begun....5555
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/15/ore-sheriff-says-wont-enforce-new-gun-laws/
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84ptFVq22PY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zw0vnAo_mjA
-
Thank god a local sheriffs opinion on constitutional right still outweighs the legislative position...lets not have elections...bahahahahahaha.........WTF
-
Aust still has a non political head of state...through the executive council the USA is headed for anarchy in the name of gun rights
-
Simple platforms breed simple people!!!!
-
Question for urleft, do you feel safe in thailand .
I grew up in Detroit, Pittsburgh, Cincinati and Chicago, I learned a sense of awareness of when to be extremely careful in the certain areas. I have yet to feel personally threatened in Thailand.
However, I was monitoring the border conflict with Cambodia and was prepared to more to safer areas if required.
URLEFT have you ever been threatened in the usa with a gun .
-
Question for urleft, do you feel safe in thailand .
I grew up in Detroit, Pittsburgh, Cincinati and Chicago, I learned a sense of awareness of when to be extremely careful in the certain areas. I have yet to feel personally threatened in Thailand.
However, I was monitoring the border conflict with Cambodia and was prepared to more to safer areas if required.
URLEFT have you ever been threatened in the usa with a gun .
Good Question RUFUSREDTAIL.
It would be interesting to see how many members here have ever been threatened with a gun in their own country ? and relate that to the Gun law situation in that country.
-
Question for urleft, do you feel safe in thailand .
I grew up in Detroit, Pittsburgh, Cincinati and Chicago, I learned a sense of awareness of when to be extremely careful in the certain areas. I have yet to feel personally threatened in Thailand.
However, I was monitoring the border conflict with Cambodia and was prepared to more to safer areas if required.
URLEFT have you ever been threatened in the usa with a gun .
Good Question RUFUSREDTAIL.
It would be interesting to see how many members here have ever been threatened with a gun in their own country ? and relate that to the Gun law situation in that country.
I have about had enough with these threads.
However, to the question, I cannot say either way as I was accosted in the Canal Zone (Panama) with a loaded weapon threatening to shoot me. This was US Territoritory at the time. Does this meet the US criteria?
I have also been threatened with guns in Afghanistan and Iraq.
As far the direct US, I have never had anyone accost me with a loaded gun (other than police). But I have been around loaded weapons in the US putting, observing, or supervising over 1 million rounds at targets.
-
One problem with the reporting on the Sandy Hook incident is that it cannot even be readily confirmed whether an AR-15 (so called Assault Rifle) was used in the shooting.
There is not a clear report from the GVT as to what really happened:
http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495#50208495 (http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/50208495#50208495)
You have a major news network saying only handguns were used.
What is the truth? Is it handguns or so called Assault rifles?
-
read and heed.
-
It is not the American government that is killing its own people, but unfortunately some of the American people themselves.
If the American people are unable to control themselves, then the government must attempt to do it on their behalf.
-
Unortunstely, some Americans demand unrestricted freedom over drink, guns and dope. Then they go and abuse all three together.
-
I think another voting category should be added to this poll.
i.e. "Who gives a fcuk?"
-
Unortunstely, some Americans demand unrestricted freedom over drink, guns and dope. Then they go and abuse all three together.
is it the dope and drink that is confusing your spelling?
-
It is not the American government that is killing its own people, but unfortunately some of the American people themselves.
If the American people are unable to control themselves, then the government must attempt to do it on their behalf.
good luck with that
-
I think another voting category should be added to this poll.
i.e. "Who gives a fcuk?"
if you don't then don't read it. go away
-
I think another voting category should be added to this poll.
i.e. "Who gives a fcuk?"
What's the point of adding your suggested category?
If they don't give a fcuk, they wouldn't be reading the thread, nor would they vote!
Whatever ones views, it is not just an interesting thread, but very relevant to todays problems. If everyone thought the same, there would be no discussion.
-
It is not the American government that is killing its own people, but unfortunately some of the American people themselves.
If the American people are unable to control themselves, then the government must attempt to do it on their behalf.
go figure
-
It is not the American government that is killing its own people, but unfortunately some of the American people themselves.
If the American people are unable to control themselves, then the government must attempt to do it on their behalf.
go figure again. the attachment did not take
-
It is not the American government that is killing its own people, but unfortunately some of the American people themselves.
If the American people are unable to control themselves, then the government must attempt to do it on their behalf.
attempt is the operative word here
-
It is not the American government that is killing its own people, but unfortunately some of the American people themselves.
If the American people are unable to control themselves, then the government must attempt to do it on their behalf.
attempt is the operative word here
why do you have a picture of a yorkshire man on that quote lol
-
aye up it's Sharpey thumbup
-
It is not the American government that is killing its own people, but unfortunately some of the American people themselves.
If the American people are unable to control themselves, then the government must attempt to do it on their behalf.
attempt is the operative word here
I do not know who he is or where is from. He speaks the truth because I know where I am from.
why do you have a picture of a yorkshire man on that quote lol
-
I wonder if the Americans on Buriram Expats are a true reflection of that country?
What does "go figure" actually mean?
It sounds a pointless expression.
-
This is from my hometown in Alabama:
http://whnt.com/2013/01/16/madison-sheriff-gun-control-laws-that-violate-constitution-wont-be-enforced/ (http://whnt.com/2013/01/16/madison-sheriff-gun-control-laws-that-violate-constitution-wont-be-enforced/)
Madison Co. Sheriff: Gun Control Laws That Violate Constitution Won’t Be Enforced
HUNTSVILLE, Ala.(WHNT) – A sweeping set of gun control proposals laid out by President Obama on Wednesday is adding more fuel to a growing national debate, and one local lawman is raising concerns that the proposed legislation is unconstitutional.
Madison County Sheriff Blake Dorning told WHNT News 19 that his office will not enforce new gun control legislation if he feels those laws violate the Second Amendment. Dorning said he has serious doubts about President Obama’s latest proposals, stating that any gun laws which do pass would have to be in line with the U.S. Constitution and Alabama state law in order to be enforceable.
“The federal authorities can try to enforce it,” said Dorning. “I’m the Sheriff of Madison County. I took a constitutional oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America, to defend the Constitution of the State of Alabama, even if it takes my life. That is my position.”
Sheriff Dorning is the latest in a chorus of lawmen from across America who are saying they may not enforce new gun control legislation. President Obama’s call for a new assault weapons ban and 10-round magazine limit were the headlines in what some say are the most stringent gun control measures ever. The President cannot get the two major revisions unless Congress signs off, but Sheriff Dorning said even if they do, Washington is not his final authority.
“As long as you are a law-abiding citizen, then I don’t see a problem with law-abiding citizens being able to arm themselves however they so choose,” said Dorning, who pledged to ignore any law that would call for the confiscation of assault weapons or any other firearm. “Our people in our communities and homes need not fear that the Sheriff of Madison County or his deputies would come to their homes and make an attempt to disarm them. It will not happen under my watch.”
-
I wonder if the Americans on Buriram Expats are a true reflection of that country?
What does "go figure" actually mean?
It sounds a pointless expression.
You can trust that that we are the best of the best. Before you comment on Americans, perhaps you should learn a little first. If you do not know then figure it out or "go figure".
-
I thought that might wake up the red necks :-)
-
I thought that might wake up the red necks :-)
that was a typical evasive post.
-
This is from my hometown in Alabama:
http://whnt.com/2013/01/16/madison-sheriff-gun-control-laws-that-violate-constitution-wont-be-enforced/ (http://whnt.com/2013/01/16/madison-sheriff-gun-control-laws-that-violate-constitution-wont-be-enforced/)
Madison Co. Sheriff: Gun Control Laws That Violate Constitution Won’t Be Enforced
HUNTSVILLE, Ala.(WHNT) – A sweeping set of gun control proposals laid out by President Obama on Wednesday is adding more fuel to a growing national debate, and one local lawman is raising concerns that the proposed legislation is unconstitutional.
Madison County Sheriff Blake Dorning told WHNT News 19 that his office will not enforce new gun control legislation if he feels those laws violate the Second Amendment. Dorning said he has serious doubts about President Obama’s latest proposals, stating that any gun laws which do pass would have to be in line with the U.S. Constitution and Alabama state law in order to be enforceable.
“The federal authorities can try to enforce it,” said Dorning. “I’m the Sheriff of Madison County. I took a constitutional oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America, to defend the Constitution of the State of Alabama, even if it takes my life. That is my position.”
Sheriff Dorning is the latest in a chorus of lawmen from across America who are saying they may not enforce new gun control legislation. President Obama’s call for a new assault weapons ban and 10-round magazine limit were the headlines in what some say are the most stringent gun control measures ever. The President cannot get the two major revisions unless Congress signs off, but Sheriff Dorning said even if they do, Washington is not his final authority.
“As long as you are a law-abiding citizen, then I don’t see a problem with law-abiding citizens being able to arm themselves however they so choose,” said Dorning, who pledged to ignore any law that would call for the confiscation of assault weapons or any other firearm. “Our people in our communities and homes need not fear that the Sheriff of Madison County or his deputies would come to their homes and make an attempt to disarm them. It will not happen under my watch.”
I would be more worried that a public official believes that he cann make his own mind up on what laws he will enforce and those he won't. What are his qualifications to judge whether something is constitutional and what is not?.......surely he should do the job he is paid to do.... Leave it for the NRA etc to fight it out in court. It's bloody anarchy slapfight
-
This is from my hometown in Alabama:
http://whnt.com/2013/01/16/madison-sheriff-gun-control-laws-that-violate-constitution-wont-be-enforced/ (http://whnt.com/2013/01/16/madison-sheriff-gun-control-laws-that-violate-constitution-wont-be-enforced/)
Madison Co. Sheriff: Gun Control Laws That Violate Constitution Won’t Be Enforced
he is not acting on his own mind. he is acting on the people that elected him. it is called the American way. you should try it.
HUNTSVILLE, Ala.(WHNT) – A sweeping set of gun control proposals laid out by President Obama on Wednesday is adding more fuel to a growing national debate, and one local lawman is raising concerns that the proposed legislation is unconstitutional.
Madison County Sheriff Blake Dorning told WHNT News 19 that his office will not enforce new gun control legislation if he feels those laws violate the Second Amendment. Dorning said he has serious doubts about President Obama’s latest proposals, stating that any gun laws which do pass would have to be in line with the U.S. Constitution and Alabama state law in order to be enforceable.
“The federal authorities can try to enforce it,” said Dorning. “I’m the Sheriff of Madison County. I took a constitutional oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America, to defend the Constitution of the State of Alabama, even if it takes my life. That is my position.”
Sheriff Dorning is the latest in a chorus of lawmen from across America who are saying they may not enforce new gun control legislation. President Obama’s call for a new assault weapons ban and 10-round magazine limit were the headlines in what some say are the most stringent gun control measures ever. The President cannot get the two major revisions unless Congress signs off, but Sheriff Dorning said even if they do, Washington is not his final authority.
“As long as you are a law-abiding citizen, then I don’t see a problem with law-abiding citizens being able to arm themselves however they so choose,” said Dorning, who pledged to ignore any law that would call for the confiscation of assault weapons or any other firearm. “Our people in our communities and homes need not fear that the Sheriff of Madison County or his deputies would come to their homes and make an attempt to disarm them. It will not happen under my watch.”
I would be more worried that a public official believes that he cann make his own mind up on what laws he will enforce and those he won't. What are his qualifications to judge whether something is constitutional and what is not?.......surely he should do the job he is paid to do.... Leave it for the NRA etc to fight it out in court. It's bloody anarchy slapfight
-
Mr Texas was there meant to be a comment?
-
it is at the top of Ulefts post. should have been at the bottom
-
Thanks mate
-
$
-
Is this the right topic?
-
I like it Candy and thanks for the post. Peace on Earth and good will to all free Men and Women.
-
Shopping in Texas:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vt7FDTpzGvo
-
The Truth
About
Assault
Weapons
http://www.assaultweapon.info/ (http://www.assaultweapon.info/)
-
The Truth
About
Assault
Weapons
http://www.assaultweapon.info/ (http://www.assaultweapon.info/)
If you see what damage a round does in that rifle compared to a 9mm then you would understand why they need to be banned from the home.. Your an x soldier so you obviously know this.. A rifle is not the same as a handgun so please stop telling people it is..
-
The Truth
About
Assault
Weapons
http://www.assaultweapon.info/ (http://www.assaultweapon.info/)
Semantics, one mans truth, or another family tragity ..... Words didn't kill those children hot lead fired from a semi auto killed those children
-
I wonder if the Americans on Buriram Expats are a true reflection of that country?
I think not - but then again I think that non of us are a true reflection of the country we were born / raised / lived in.
If we were we would not live / be planning to live / coming regularly / in/to Buriram.
I think that we are also special people - a bit like Mourhino :o But this is only my very humble opinion.
Mike
-
Semantics, one mans truth, or another family tragity ..... Words didn't kill those children hot lead fired from a semi auto killed those children
Yes, and truth is that gun activists made these DEFENSELESS children unprotected and left them to the mercy of a deranged individual.
Why cannot American Children have the same protection as the school congress and the president use for their children:
-
Come on bro, no other presidents children had protection?, ESP now with the USA involved on many conflicts, not to mention the first black president....that post is bull shit , right wing NRA brain wash drivel .
-
Come on bro, no other presidents children had protection?, ESP now with the USA involved on many conflicts, not to mention the first black president....that post is bull shit , right wing NRA brain wash drivel .
The drivel is in your ignorant post, the school protection depicted are the school's employed guards, NOT the Secret Service (president and family protection) which is in addition to the 11 armed guards.
-
I posted the reason for increased security, post not ignorant, my educated and worldly point of view oldmanwithstick
-
I posted the reason for increased security, post not ignorant, my educated and worldly point of view oldmanwithstick
No, you showed your ignorance.
The armed school guards are not GVT security for Obama, they are part an integral part of the school. They are there to protect all the children of which Obama's Girls are just 2 more. If Obama moved his children to a different school there would still be 11 armed guards at that school.
This is the 2nd time you mouthed off obsuring facts misleading people.
It is looking like you are pushing an agenda rather than trying to have a reasonable discussion based on facts. That Assualt Weapons website backed up what I have been saying, leftests don't care about protecting children, they are just using this latest tragedy to further Gun Control.
As VP Biden told the NRA at this latest conference, the GVT cannot even enforce existing gun control laws, but new ones are needed. This means taking from the law abiding and leaving criminals alone. At least 15 gun laws were broken in the school shooting, how will more unenforced laws keep this from happening?
The Elitists out there follow one set of rules, and control the people with another set.
-
I posted the reason for increased security, post not ignorant, my educated and worldly point of view oldmanwithstick
No, you showed your ignorance.
The armed school guards are not GVT security for Obama, they are part an integral part of the school. They are there to protect all the children of which Obama's Girls are just 2 more. If Obama moved his children to a different school there would still be 11 armed guards at that school.
This is the 2nd time you mouthed off obsuring facts misleading people.
It is looking like you are pushing an agenda rather than trying to have a reasonable discussion based on facts. That Assualt Weapons website backed up what I have been saying, leftests don't care about protecting children, they are just using this latest tragedy to further Gun Control.
As VP Biden told the NRA at this latest conference, the GVT cannot even enforce existing gun control laws, but new ones are needed. This means taking from the law abiding and leaving criminals alone. At least 15 gun laws were broken in the school shooting, how will more unenforced laws keep this from happening?
The Elitists out there follow one set of rules, and control the people with another set.
I do not get the issue with your pic, so his children have additional security provided by school, I'm sure it's paid for and an option for all that can pay for it, given his position and circumstances I can understand why he does it as I stated in earlier posts...... In all societies elites have one set of rules... Zexcept I guess in a perfect socialist society.
Don't know what agenda you are talking about. Perhaps we both do, yours seems to be pro gun, anti Obama that's cool, your first amendment right to" mouth off about".... As for misinformed I'm not sure I am and stand by the earlier posts about Obamas additional security and its justification. I'm sorry if you think I'm misleading people, perhaps you are also.
As I have stated on an earlier post perhaps it is too late for the US with gun control.... As there are already too many there and the gun ownership culture ... Not those exact words but you get the drift.
Would armed guards been able to stop the massacre happening or just changed the venue? Is the USA so far gone as to need armed guards every f@&king where the worry would be is that a loss of right of movement and the loss of feeling safe..... I don't know, if my opinion is mouthing off and yours is pure fact I'm not sure much more can be said...... But I'm in LOS next month and would still gladly have a beer with you, maybe we could talk about something else.
-
But I'm in LOS next month and would still gladly have a beer with you, maybe we could talk about something else.
Cheers mate, sounds good. party4
-
I'm an American, and while I have never owned an AR 15, I don't think that the answer to stopping gun violence has much to do with legislating gun control laws. Canada has more guns per person than the US, so the number of households with guns does not correlate to the number of gun deaths, it's something else. I was amazed to learn that government gun violence research programs have been put on hold for the last 15 or so years. Obama has, by executive order, reinstated the research. Whether it is the NRA buying our legislators, unbridled corporate greed, general paranoia, or something else, only open minded questioning is going to get the answers, and I don't America is capable of rational dialogue at this moment.
-
I'm an American, and while I have never owned an AR 15, I don't think that the answer to stopping gun violence has much to do with legislating gun control laws. Canada has more guns per person than the US, so the number of households with guns does not correlate to the number of gun deaths, it's something else. I was amazed to learn that government gun violence research programs have been put on hold for the last 15 or so years. Obama has, by executive order, reinstated the research. Whether it is the NRA buying our legislators, unbridled corporate greed, general paranoia, or something else, only open minded questioning is going to get the answers, and I don't America is capable of rational dialogue at this moment.
hi there mate, where did you get the information that Canada has more guns per population than the USA?...every document or statistic i have looked up is the opposite..with a 88.8 per 100 gun ownership in the USA and 30.8 for Canada, USA being the highest. just interested on source....
-
GUN POLICY.ORG FACTS
GUN DEATHS USA 32,163 Australia 236
GUN HOMICIDES USA 11,101 Australia 30
With all that has been said about rights , and laws the above figures would you not agree that LESS GUNS means LESS DEATHS,If only one life is saved from changing the law, it should be changed for the better, and soon .
-
Nearly time for another shooting spree in USA!
-
Nearly time for another shooting spree in USA!
Nookie, you mean its a quarter to massacre ?.....mmmm bad taste buttslap
-
Speros,
Concerning more guns per person in Canada than the US, I stand corrected. My source was the Michael Moore film "Bowling for Columbine" his film on gun violence. Maybe it was true at the time, but anyway thanks for the correction.
-
Speros,
Concerning more guns per person in Canada than the US, I stand corrected. My source was the Michael Moore film "Bowling for Columbine" his film on gun violence. Maybe it was true at the time, but anyway thanks for the correction.
no dramas, wasn't trying to correct, just wondered why stats were so different ..... i think Micheal Moore would not be the best source for facts...as accurate as Wikipedia...but generally a source of a good yarn with some basis in truth. all good mate.
-
http://news.sky.com/story/1040544/teenage-gunman-shoots-five-people-dead-in-us
Add another 5 coffins to the list.. several guns and a semi assault rifle
-
http://news.sky.com/story/1040544/teenage-gunman-shoots-five-people-dead-in-us
Add another 5 coffins to the list.. several guns and a semi assault rifle
Very sad, i wonder whether applications for semi auto rifles will go up again as they did with the last shooting massacre? you cant stop a train wreck :(
-
"And now some news from around the world. An American has been detained by Thai authorities, for exercising his God-given rights.
An unnamed source at the U.S. embassy in Bangkok has stated that a draft complaint is being prepared, for delivery to the Thai government. A warning, that economic reprisal's from the U.S. may result, if this type of selective persecution and (yank bashing) is allowed to continue!"
whistle
http://phuketwan.com/tourism/american-accused-firing-handgun-driving-phuket-17467/
-
Nearly time for another shooting spree in USA!
Didn't take long did it!
-
http://news.sky.com/story/1040544/teenage-gunman-shoots-five-people-dead-in-us
Add another 5 coffins to the list.. several guns and a semi assault rifle
So Sad but no doubt we'll have the usual waffle appearing shortly
-
"And now some news from around the world. An American has been detained by Thai authorities, for exercising his God-given rights.
An unnamed source at the U.S. embassy in Bangkok has stated that a draft complaint is being prepared, for delivery to the Thai government. A warning, that economic reprisal's from the U.S. may result, if this type of selective persecution and (yank bashing) is allowed to continue!"
whistle
http://phuketwan.com/tourism/american-accused-firing-handgun-driving-phuket-17467/
He look a 'smug' fcuker doesn't he,,,,,,I think the max sentence for him is 20 years ,,,,perhaps that will remove the 'smirk'
-
A long video but worth a look?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wx9GxXYKx_8&feature=youtu.be
-
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
Benjamin Franklin
-
"And now some news from around the world. An American has been detained by Thai authorities, for exercising his God-given rights.
An unnamed source at the U.S. embassy in Bangkok has stated that a draft complaint is being prepared, for delivery to the Thai government. A warning, that economic reprisal's from the U.S. may result, if this type of selective persecution and (yank bashing) is allowed to continue!"
whistle
http://phuketwan.com/tourism/american-accused-firing-handgun-driving-phuket-17467/
MORON buttslap
-
From the #2 in the GVT representing Obama in Gun Legislation:
Biden to NRA: We ‘don’t have the time’ to prosecute gun buyers who lie on background checks
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/18/biden-to-nra-we-dont-have-the-time-to-prosecute-people-who-lie-on-background-checks/#ixzz2IfSqs3G4 (http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/18/biden-to-nra-we-dont-have-the-time-to-prosecute-people-who-lie-on-background-checks/#ixzz2IfSqs3G4)
So the GVT does not have time to enforce existing gun laws but more laws (enforced only on law abiding citizens) will fix the problem.
-
"And now some news from around the world. An American has been detained by Thai authorities, for exercising his God-given rights.
An unnamed source at the U.S. embassy in Bangkok has stated that a draft complaint is being prepared, for delivery to the Thai government. A warning, that economic reprisal's from the U.S. may result, if this type of selective persecution and (yank bashing) is allowed to continue!"
whistle
http://phuketwan.com/tourism/american-accused-firing-handgun-driving-phuket-17467/ (http://phuketwan.com/tourism/american-accused-firing-handgun-driving-phuket-17467/)
MORON buttslap
I was going to say I was in complete agreement with you, but MORON is too kind a term for him.
There is a saying in the US, "What goes up must come down." In the early 70's I was living in Detroit (murder capital of America), the 1st murder happened at 1 minute after midnight. It was speculated some New Years Celebrator fired his gun into the gun at midnight, a bullet came down and hit someone in the head.
-
"And now some news from around the world. An American has been detained by Thai authorities, for exercising his God-given rights.
An unnamed source at the U.S. embassy in Bangkok has stated that a draft complaint is being prepared, for delivery to the Thai government. A warning, that economic reprisal's from the U.S. may result, if this type of selective persecution and (yank bashing) is allowed to continue!"
whistle
http://phuketwan.com/tourism/american-accused-firing-handgun-driving-phuket-17467/ (http://phuketwan.com/tourism/american-accused-firing-handgun-driving-phuket-17467/)
MORON buttslap
I was going to say I was in complete agreement with you, but MORON is too kind a term for him.
There is a saying in the US, "What goes up must come down." In the early 70's I was living in Detroit (murder capital of America), the 1st murder happened at 1 minute after midnight. It was speculated some New Years Celebrator fired his gun into the gun at midnight, a bullet came down and hit someone in the head.
not sure who is the bigger moron...the guy with the gun or the prick in the embassy .....economic reprisals?...this is not the USA...and laws of the land should be respected...but i will add that this is not confirmed so could just be stirring.
i agree Urleft...but i cant think of a better word without getting banned for bad language madbar
-
'Not Confirmed'............Why was he arrested ?? Because people reported him firing a gun into the air......Come on get real....Police found the gun & countless rounds of ammo in the fcuking car & the pirck says 'I haven't fired it'.......Who do you believe??
-
'Not Confirmed'............Why was he arrested ?? Because people reported him firing a gun into the air......Come on get real....Police found the gun & countless rounds of ammo in the fcuking car & the pirck says 'I haven't fired it'.......Who do you believe??
Nookie i meant not confirmed what the US embassy reaction has been. the guy is a Moron and deserves what he gets.
-
Speros...relax please sir.
I made up the opener with the U.S. embassy crap, kinda' shyt stirring, yes. (sorry)
Nookie...yes, as smug looking mutt for sure!
To all...this guy has to be an absolute moron for sure. Not only a complete disrespect for the laws of a nation in which he is a "visitor"...but also endangering others by firing randomly in the air!
I'm sure that I read a report of some guy in the Phillipines, who did the same thing during the recent New Years celebration. A woman was the receiver of one of the rounds, in her head. And yes she died!
-
Speros...relax please sir.
I made up the opener with the U.S. embassy crap, kinda' shyt stirring, yes. (sorry)
Nookie...yes, as smug looking mutt for sure!
To all...this guy has to be an absolute moron for sure. Not only a complete disrespect for the laws of a nation in which he is a "visitor"...but also endangering others by firing randomly in the air!
I'm sure that I read a report of some guy in the Phillipines, who did the same thing during the recent New Years celebration. A woman was the receiver of one of the rounds, in her head. And yes she died!
good stir...no dramas
-
'Not Confirmed'............Why was he arrested ?? Because people reported him firing a gun into the air......Come on get real....Police found the gun & countless rounds of ammo in the fcuking car & the pirck says 'I haven't fired it'.......Who do you believe??
Nookie i meant not confirmed what the US embassy reaction has been. the guy is a Moron and deserves what he gets.
Thank Fcuk Urleft doesn't work there!
-
'Not Confirmed'............Why was he arrested ?? Because people reported him firing a gun into the air......Come on get real....Police found the gun & countless rounds of ammo in the fcuking car & the pirck says 'I haven't fired it'.......Who do you believe??
A court of law after he has been charged. innocent until proven guilty.
I think the words that should be used untill then are alleged.
maybe some tests to see if the gun has been fired. maybe check if he has some GSR on his hands. He may be lying or telling the the truth but that is up to a judge to decide not us. As we know somethings in Thailand are not always the way they seem
-
Thank Fcuk Urleft doesn't work there!
I was a finalist for the head of TSA operations in Thailand in August, but then came to my senses and realized I didn't want to do anti-terroism operations again.
Decided I would stick to my motto: I can do nothing well.
-
'Not Confirmed'............Why was he arrested ?? Because people reported him firing a gun into the air......Come on get real....Police found the gun & countless rounds of ammo in the fcuking car & the pirck says 'I haven't fired it'.......Who do you believe??
A court of law after he has been charged. innocent until proven guilty.
I think the words that should be used untill then are alleged.
maybe some tests to see if the gun has been fired. maybe check if he has some GSR on his hands. He may be lying or telling the the truth but that is up to a judge to decide not us. As we know somethings in Thailand are not always the way they seem
He did admit to "hiring" a pistol... The illegal possession of a firearm.....guilty!
-
Getting to be a near daily occurance .....3 shot at a campus in Texas,,,,,luckily no fatalaties this time!
-
nookie,,, you must have missed the x policeman that killed 3 of his family yesterday.. was on sky news.. :(
-
...
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
One problem with incremetal gun control is that you end up with stupid shit. Here are 2 examples:
-
One problem with incremetal gun control is that you end up with stupid shit. Here are 2 examples:
100% correct Urleft...best just to ban them all no increment rubbish...well said thumbup..... :P
-
One problem with incremetal gun control is that you end up with stupid shit. Here are 2 examples:
100% correct Urleft...best just to ban them all no increment rubbish...well said thumbup..... :P
In a way I agree with you. The proper way to do it is to do a constitutional change to the 2nd Amendment. So that is what the Gun Control advocates should be trying to do rather than incrementally passing laws of questionable constitutionality.
-
Cute girl in the video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2gCFOtaZPo&feature=player_embedded
-
Very nice of the intruder to knock twice and wait so she had enough time to get the gun from the locked safe in the other room.
So realistic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Mmm the joys if splitting a head open are lost with a gun, so impersonal!!!
-
Rules:
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=FyfkQkchlu4
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...WTF....
-
NEVER HAVE TO WAIT LONG DO WE...........1dead ,2 injured in a shooting in Seattle.......Could they have been Boeing Employees laid off through the grounding of the Dreamliner?
-
Where is Urleft? icon_heart
-
Gone fishing
-
Gone fishing
He's not with me!
-
Interesting Snippet........Urleft has made 1149 posts on BE........1140 OF THEM HAVE BEEN ON THIS THREAD!!
-
The other 9 were quite sensible :-)
-
Perhaps urleft is busy decking out a Nursery for his expected addition to the family thumbup
No point waiting till the last minute
-
It is nice to be missed.
I've about decided to just monitor this thread as we are not going to change each other's opinions.
One issue that has come up as Obama has just said is that Republicans and the NRA refuse to compromise.
1. Compromise means gives and take. What are the Gun Control advocates offering in the way of compromise? They are giving nothing back from what has already been taken.
2. When advocates talk about "sensible" gun control, it is anything but sensible (see reply #414). As I mentioned before, the Assualt Weapons Ban is banning a group of guns because they look scary, not because of any real functionality difference. The word "Assualt" is purposely used to make the ignorant think it is about automatic weapons (Machine Guns).
3. The Gun control advocates goal is to totally ban guns, but they refuse to be open about it and try to do it by changing the 2nd Amendment. We have seen the incremental approach before so a lot of us the are against gun control are just saying no. To quote the Dems "Never let a crisis go to waste." and they are using Sandy Hook to their full advantage.
-
Interesting Snippet........Urleft has made 1149 posts on BE........1140 OF THEM HAVE BEEN ON THIS THREAD!!
And this is reply # 430 of the 1140 posts.
-
The other 9 were quite sensible :-)
Nice One Ray
-
Interesting Snippet........Urleft has made 1149 posts on BE........1140 OF THEM HAVE BEEN ON THIS THREAD!!
And this is reply # 430 of the 1140 posts.
ANd I only scattered a bit of 'ground bait'!
-
Interesting Snippet........Urleft has made 1149 posts on BE........1140 OF THEM HAVE BEEN ON THIS THREAD!!
And this is reply # 430 of the 1140 posts.
ANd I only scattered a bit of 'ground bait'!
You called me (at least twice), so I answered, nothing subtle about it.
-
I am about to head to Marko, any photo requests?
-
??? Where, what or who is Marko? :unsure:
-
I am about to head to Marko, any photo requests?
Yes mate,a picture of the pretty girl that works in the wine section........
-
I am about to head to Marko, any photo requests?
Yes mate,a picture of the pretty girl that works in the wine section........
Too late, already back
-
I am about to head to Marko, any photo requests?
Yes mate,a picture of the pretty girl that works in the wine section........
Are you sure? The wine area is also close to the pharmacy area.
-
I am about to head to Marko, any photo requests?
Yes mate,a picture of the pretty girl that works in the wine section........
tired1
Surely you mean wine SHELF! Pitiful selection
-
I am about to head to Marko, any photo requests?
Yes mate,a picture of the pretty girl that works in the wine section........
tired1
Surely you mean wine SHELF! Pitiful selection
Must really be the Whine section the way you are taking about it.
-
runningdog
-
Spoons
-
Spoons
No wonder so many spoons
-
I am about to head to Marko, any photo requests?
Yes mate,a picture of the pretty girl that works in the wine section........
tired1
Surely you mean wine SHELF! Pitiful selection
The wine selection is pitiful BUT I was referring to the little beauty that works in that area......I guess you wouldn't have noticed her as its a 100% female
-
A gunman who shot and killed a school bus driver before taking a five-year-old boy hostage on Tuesday remains holed up in a bunker at his home in Alabama.
The suspect has been named locally as 65-year-old lorry driver Jimmy Lee Dykes. Local people described him as a survivalist, who hates the government and the authorities.
He had been scheduled to appear in court on Wednesday morning to answer charges he shot at his neighbours last month in a dispute over a speed bump.
http://news.sky.com/story/1045275/arizona-office-shooting-gunman-on-the-run
-
guns dont kill people. people with guns kill people
-
guns dont kill people. people with guns kill people
When a B&E criminal has the gun, that gun is now in your home. Therefore the cartoon is very correct, just fails to mention that the gun was brought into the home illegally and by someone other than the homeowner.
-
And here is another US Gun Outrage. From not only the Presidents home state, but under the Mayor who was Obama's Chief of Staff. Chicago has some of the strictist Gun Control laws in the US:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/chicago-girl-who-performed-for-obamas-inauguration-is-shot-dead/2013/01/30/4e6b9284-6afe-11e2-95b3-272d604a10a3_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/chicago-girl-who-performed-for-obamas-inauguration-is-shot-dead/2013/01/30/4e6b9284-6afe-11e2-95b3-272d604a10a3_story.html)
Chicago girl who was in Washington during Obama inauguration is shot dead
The girl, whom local reports identified as Hadiya Pendleton, died when a gunman opened fire on her and about a dozen other teenagers while they were hanging out at a park in Chicago, according to Chicago Police officer Jose Estrada. An honors student, according to family members, rthe sophomore had finished exams at Dr. Martin Luther King College Prep and went to the nearby park.
What is notworthy of this incident is that it is being reported. The 40+ that have been killed this year (and the 500+ last year) do not make for good reporting as the gun control advocates are in control in Chicago and have been for years. These is an example of what to expect if they get they way at the national level.
-
And here is another US Gun Outrage. From not only the Presidents home state, but under the Mayor who was Obama's Chief of Staff. Chicago has some of the strictist Gun Control laws in the US:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/chicago-girl-who-performed-for-obamas-inauguration-is-shot-dead/2013/01/30/4e6b9284-6afe-11e2-95b3-272d604a10a3_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/chicago-girl-who-performed-for-obamas-inauguration-is-shot-dead/2013/01/30/4e6b9284-6afe-11e2-95b3-272d604a10a3_story.html)
Chicago girl who was in Washington during Obama inauguration is shot dead
The girl, whom local reports identified as Hadiya Pendleton, died when a gunman opened fire on her and about a dozen other teenagers while they were hanging out at a park in Chicago, according to Chicago Police officer Jose Estrada. An honors student, according to family members, rthe sophomore had finished exams at Dr. Martin Luther King College Prep and went to the nearby park.
What is notworthy of this incident is that it is being reported. The 40+ that have been killed this year (and the 500+ last year) do not make for good reporting as the gun control advocates are in control in Chicago and have been for years. These is an example of what to expect if they get they way at the national level.
didn't Chicago have one of the worst murder/gang issues before any of these laws were passed, ill do some home work.
Homicides in Chicago
1965: 395
1974: 970
1990:851
1991: 927
1992: 943
1993: 855
1994: 931
1995: 828
1996: 796
1997: 761
1998: 704
1999: 643
2000: 633
2001: 667
2002: 656
2003: 601
2004: 453
2005: 451
2006: 471
2007: 448
2008: 513
2009: 459
2010: 436
2011: 435
2012: 506
i would say recent spike may have to do with unemployment levels and the economy....Urleft, when were these laws introduced if you don't mind?
-
And here is another US Gun Outrage. From not only the Presidents home state, but under the Mayor who was Obama's Chief of Staff. Chicago has some of the strictist Gun Control laws in the US:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/chicago-girl-who-performed-for-obamas-inauguration-is-shot-dead/2013/01/30/4e6b9284-6afe-11e2-95b3-272d604a10a3_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/chicago-girl-who-performed-for-obamas-inauguration-is-shot-dead/2013/01/30/4e6b9284-6afe-11e2-95b3-272d604a10a3_story.html)
Chicago girl who was in Washington during Obama inauguration is shot dead
The girl, whom local reports identified as Hadiya Pendleton, died when a gunman opened fire on her and about a dozen other teenagers while they were hanging out at a park in Chicago, according to Chicago Police officer Jose Estrada. An honors student, according to family members, rthe sophomore had finished exams at Dr. Martin Luther King College Prep and went to the nearby park.
What is notworthy of this incident is that it is being reported. The 40+ that have been killed this year (and the 500+ last year) do not make for good reporting as the gun control advocates are in control in Chicago and have been for years. These is an example of what to expect if they get they way at the national level.
didn't Chicago have one of the worst murder/gang issues before any of these laws were passed, ill do some home work.
Homicides in Chicago
1965: 395
1974: 970
1990:851
1991: 927
1992: 943
1993: 855
1994: 931
1995: 828
1996: 796
1997: 761
1998: 704
1999: 643
2000: 633
2001: 667
2002: 656
2003: 601
2004: 453
2005: 451
2006: 471
2007: 448
2008: 513
2009: 459
2010: 436
2011: 435
2012: 506
i would say recent spike may have to do with unemployment levels and the economy....Urleft, when were these laws introduced if you don't mind?
I believe it to me more of social and responsibility issues brought about by the welfare state. Liberals (Democrats) are all about "caring" for the poor, helping unwed moms, etc. The side effect is that it pays people not to form a family unit and a great portion of welfare families are single parent (usually mom) where the children grow up without a father. And the "father" feels no need to take care of the family because all those rich people that caused the economic proplems are being made to pay to the support his children (which is liberal fairness).
Chicago has been the Daley machine since the 50's, and it continues, same with Detroit and other major cities.
So I would work at fixing gun violence by revamping the welfare state and stopping the GVT from economically encouraging unwed babies.
It is interesting to note the overlap between where there is the most gun violence and who votes Democrat:
-
no its not very interesting on voting patterns, poor areas, more violent...voting for who they think will help them the most...i would think this pattern would be relative to all first world democracies, how much could it be worse without welfare of some sort.