|
An opinion on gun control
On 12/26/2012 2:34 PM, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:16:50 -0700, "Steve B" wrote: A .380 in the pocket is better than a .380 in the truck. Love my little KelTec 3AT. Small enough to carry in any pocket, and not arouse any suspicion whatsoever. It does poke small holes vs. 45 cal, and all that nonsense, but just a couple of days ago, a PO was killed by a .380. I'll take my chances when I take my wimpy little pistol. And when I want more confidence, I just put on my .357 on a Safariland paddle. The muzzle blast from that one is enough to stop every person in the room, and that is 360 degrees from direction of muzzle. Kinda like a stun grenade in an enclosed room. Don't know, I never had the balls to try it in a closed room. Might blow the glass out. Steve I've said before, my .357 "barks over here and bites over yonder." Back when I had a 9mm Browning Hi-Power, I put some military surplus Czechoslovakian submachine gun ammunition in and the damn thing kicked like a 44 magnum and sounded like a howitzer going off. It didn't hurt the pistol but the stuff had corrosive Berdan primers which necessitated cleaning after fighting off herds of zombies. ^_^ TDD |
An opinion on gun control
|
An opinion on gun control
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:43:34 -0500, wrote:
The Michigan Militia could take Canada. .... that right there is funny as all git-up. Good one |
An opinion on gun control
On Dec 26, 8:24*pm, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 12:07:54 -0500, wrote: Cowardice of gun owners? Hum, no fertilizer shortage in The U.K. I see. ^_^ TDD Cowardice in that they attack the weak and undefended. Which is why the weak and undefended need to arm themselves, you stupid git! And then become part of the problem. No point in giving in to mental illness. We have seen where it leads. |
An opinion on gun control
On Dec 26, 8:34*pm, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:16:50 -0700, "Steve B" wrote: A .380 in the pocket is better than a .380 in the truck. Love my little KelTec 3AT. *Small enough to carry in any pocket, and not arouse any suspicion whatsoever. *It does poke small holes vs. 45 cal, and all that nonsense, but just a couple of days ago, a PO was killed by a .380. I'll take my chances when I take my wimpy little pistol. *And when I want more confidence, I just put on my .357 on *a Safariland paddle. *The muzzle blast from that one is enough to stop every person in the room, and that is 360 degrees from direction of muzzle. *Kinda like a stun grenade in an enclosed room. *Don't know, I never had the balls to try it in a closed room. *Might blow the glass out. Uneducated, as I thought. 360 degrees takes you right back to where you were dopey. I assume you meant 180? |
An opinion on gun control
On Dec 26, 8:40*pm, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:18:39 -0700, "Steve B" wrote: "harry" wrote Rubbish. You Have had gun massacres from day one in The USA. I assume you have run out of indians and now must massacre one another. You have been massacring people in other countries, even Canadians in 1812. It's a national problem as well as a personal problem. A bit like the Roman empire. Collapsing in violence, depravity and corruption. ***** I figure we have a lot of time left if we start with the Canadians next. Who would miss them? Steve I think harry believes Napoleon was burning the Capitol when he was really in France? *I'm confused. I've noticed you're pretty confused. Early onset of dementia. I wonder how far down that path you've progressed? Hey,there's a thought. I wonder if these masscrists have early onset dementia? |
An opinion on gun control
"Home Guy" wrote in message ... wrote: After Newtown, another 20 kids were killed in cars by the following Tuesday but I don't see anyone banning cars. No, but what you do see is this: 1) To legally drive a car, you must have a valid driver's license. That alone doesn't stop someone from getting in a car and driving it, but police with probable-cause can stop any car and ask to see if the driver is licensed. There will be legal and financial consequences if the driver is not licensed. These consequences will be significant if property dammage, injury or death of a person is involved. A significant number of individuals still drive without licenses, training or testing. If you check you'll find that driving is not a protected right under US law. 2) To operate a motor vehicle, the vehicle must be insured against property dammage and personal injury. That alone doesn't stop someone from getting in a car and driving it, but police with probable-cause can stop any car and ask to see if the car is insured. There will be legal and financial consequences if the car is not insured. These consequences will be significant if property dammage, injury or death of a person is involved. Uninsured motorist are and have been a significant problem for years. 3) The safety of cars, like many consumer products, are constantly being improved with the application of technology and gov't mandates. The design of the occupant compartment, air bags, ABS brakes, stability control, etc. I have an 1853(?) muzzel loader. There have been signifant improvements in that technology. (hint there is no safty) I also have a WWII M1 which likewise has had signifant improvements in subsiquent designs. There is a safty but you can get a bad case of M1 thumb if you're not paying attention. 4) If an injury or death happens as a result of some deficiency or fault in a consumer product (such as a car), the manufacturer can be held liable by a court of law. That liability still applies what does not apply in either case is when the appliance is operated in accordance with the intended purpose. If a car you are operating runs over someone's foot you can be sued as can the car manufacture. The case against you will survive summery the case against the car manufacture won't. Now tell me if any of the above applies to personal firearms, their owners, and the companies that make them. Just did. |
An opinion on gun control
"harry" It's you are the stupid one. Thick as pitch comes to mind. Owning a gun is no defence against getting shot. Any aggressor can choose his time and place. {{ There is some truth to what you say but my owning a gun does improve the odds in my favor. I'm reminded of the weeks following Katrina where we had do-bads from out of town the came with the intend of looting and were not opposed to home invasions. Several years back my 100# daughter got the drop on a 250# do bad that broke into her apartment. After she called 911 and advised she had the drop on the do bad it took LEO a half hour to get there. And BTW the do bad did chose the time and place. |
An opinion on gun control
On Dec 26, 8:43*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:12:15 -0800 (PST), harry wrote: I figure we have a lot of time left if we start with the Canadians next. |
An opinion on gun control
"harry" wrote in message ... On Dec 23, 3:54 am, Tony Hwang wrote: Attila Iskander wrote: "Tony Hwang" wrote in message ... Hmmm, Are you going to arm your self with assault rifle and 200 rounds magazine or drum? "Assault rifles" are and have been strickly controlled since 1934 (They are machine guns don't ya know...) You have to jump through all kinds of hoops with the Feds and local police and pay a $200 tax before you can get one. If one the other hand you are babbling your ignorance about "assault weapons" then you are talking about CERTAIN SEMI-automatic (single shot to single trigger pull) rifles that have certain cosmetic features like a bayonet lug that magically turn them into "assault weapons" while changing NOTHING about how they operate, or anything else about their performance. Owning a 200 round magazine or drum is really a novelty item that you would only use for fun but not for serious shooting They have a NASTY habit of jamming at the worst moments. Smart shooters stick with what the firearm was designed to use normally You know wackos will come there with such a weapon with mass killing power in short time. And ??? What ?? All I need is just one shot to stop them And then what ? I am not against owning fire arm, first step should be banning the ownership of assault type automatic weapons and high capacity magazines/clips. LOL Are you really this ****ing stupid ? IN the same sentence you declare, you're OK with owning firearms but let's just ban firearms And owning a gun is one thing using it properly and well is another, how many owners are like that? Just about most who own them The seem to be much better qualified to using their guns properly than car drivers with all the training and licensing they go through... Let's see Gun owners with about 330,000,000 guns, have about 600 deadly accidents a year, about a thousand injuries, and property damage that is so low as to be negligible. Car owners with about 300,000,000 cars have over 43,000 deaths, injuries in the millions and property damage in the Billions Maybe you should worry more about car owners. Are always ready for surprise attack? If teachers are armed can they concentrate on teaching or be on the look oiut for the sudden danger? If you carry, you don't become a defact security guard It's much closer to carrying an umbrella in case it rains. IMO, the more gun, the more possibility of trouble. No thanks no gun for me or my family. Apparently stupidity is a requirement for hoplophobia. I feel sorry for your defenseless family. Hopefully your defective genes will stop with you and yours. Empty cart rattles most!!! In my 55 years driving, I never had road accident. i handled so many different weapons light and heavy in the service. Trained as sniper, sharp shooter in boot camp. Never missed assigned target, never had fire arm accident. When I was done working overdes, I did not choose to live in the states for obvious reason. I never regret that decision yet. Good people can defend themselithout using weapons. Only cowards needs weapons.(they are usually mentally unsecure, that is why) Illogical debates produce nothing progressive. Exactly so. {{{ I know a place in west Texas close to the Mexican border where you can stay for free. Only requirement no weapons. You can have a phone but how much good that will do is in question as LEO is at hour away at best. You can call me any time to remined me just how much you don't need a weapon. Just leave a list of next of kin in your pocket as the LEO will need that in short order. |
An opinion on gun control
On Dec 26, 8:50*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 12:34:07 -0800, Oren wrote: On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:16:50 -0700, "Steve B" wrote: A .380 in the pocket is better than a .380 in the truck. Love my little KelTec 3AT. *Small enough to carry in any pocket, and not arouse any suspicion whatsoever. *It does poke small holes vs. 45 cal, and all that nonsense, but just a couple of days ago, a PO was killed by a ..380. I'll take my chances when I take my wimpy little pistol. *And when I want more confidence, I just put on my .357 on *a Safariland paddle. *The muzzle blast from that one is enough to stop every person in the room, and that is 360 degrees from direction of muzzle. *Kinda like a stun grenade in an enclosed room. *Don't know, I never had the balls to try it in a closed room. *Might blow the glass out. Steve I've said before, my .357 "barks over here and bites over yonder." I had a range in my basement in Maryland (back when it was still the free state). I agree the blast from any "magnum" is awesome. Without hearing protection you will quickly have irreversible hearing damage. Fired in the hallway the 29 Smith was like getting hit in the face with a wet towel. That Dirty Harry stuff, shooting in a concrete hall is bull****. Shshsh. Most Americans believe all the dirty Harry crap. Clint is their hero. Which is quite amazing really, I had a go with a magnum in Australia so even I know you are right. |
An opinion on gun control
On Dec 26, 10:28*pm, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 13:43:32 -0500, wrote: On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 10:12:15 -0800 (PST), harry wrote: On Dec 26, 5:18*pm, "Steve B" wrote: "harry" wrote Rubbish. You Have had gun massacres from day one in The USA. I assume you have run out of indians and now must massacre one another. You have been massacring people in other countries, even Canadians in 1812. It's a national problem as well as a personal problem. A bit like the Roman empire. Collapsing in violence, depravity and corruption. ***** I figure we have a lot of time left if we start with the Canadians next. |
An opinion on gun control
On Dec 27, 7:10*am, "NotMe" wrote:
"harry" It's you are the stupid one. Thick as pitch comes to mind. Owning a gun is no defence against getting shot. Any aggressor can choose his time and place. {{ There is some truth to what you say but my owning a gun does improve the odds in my favor. *I'm reminded of the weeks following Katrina where we had do-bads from out *of town the came with *the intend of looting and were not opposed to home invasions. Several years back my 100# daughter got the drop on a 250# do bad that broke into her apartment. *After she called 911 and advised she had the drop on the do bad it took LEO a half hour to get there. And BTW the do bad did chose the time and place. If nobody had a gun, there would be no issue. Americans can't grasp the fact that even illegal gun ownership here is insignificant. Virtually no-one is interested in owning a gun in the UK. We have more intellectual pursuits. |
An opinion on gun control
On 12/27/2012 1:32 AM, harry wrote:
On Dec 27, 7:10 am, "NotMe" wrote: "harry" It's you are the stupid one. Thick as pitch comes to mind. Owning a gun is no defence against getting shot. Any aggressor can choose his time and place. {{ There is some truth to what you say but my owning a gun does improve the odds in my favor. I'm reminded of the weeks following Katrina where we had do-bads from out of town the came with the intend of looting and were not opposed to home invasions. Several years back my 100# daughter got the drop on a 250# do bad that broke into her apartment. After she called 911 and advised she had the drop on the do bad it took LEO a half hour to get there. And BTW the do bad did chose the time and place. If nobody had a gun, there would be no issue. Americans can't grasp the fact that even illegal gun ownership here is insignificant. Virtually no-one is interested in owning a gun in the UK. We have more intellectual pursuits. With all the radical Islamists allowed into The U.K. you can be morally superior in the knowledge that you eschew owning an evil gun to defend yourself with while some Muslim wacko cuts your head off because it thinks you somehow offended Islam. It's so enlightened of you to give away your cities to throngs of thugs who have no compunction about obeying any laws restricting any weapons which they use on you modern, superior, ultra-civilized people. Your sacrifice to civility will be a great source of pride for those visiting your grave site and monument. ^_^ TDD |
An opinion on gun control
On 12/27/2012 2:32 AM, harry wrote:
If nobody had a gun, there would be no issue. Americans can't grasp the fact that even illegal gun ownership here is insignificant. Virtually no-one is interested in owning a gun in the UK. We have more intellectual pursuits. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...of-Europe.html |
An opinion on gun control
On 12/27/2012 7:41 AM, Winston Churchill wrote:
On 12/27/2012 2:32 AM, harry wrote: If nobody had a gun, there would be no issue. Americans can't grasp the fact that even illegal gun ownership here is insignificant. Virtually no-one is interested in owning a gun in the UK. We have more intellectual pursuits. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...of-Europe.html SHHHHH! You'll give Harry a stroke, he can't handle the truth. ^_^ TDD |
An opinion on gun control
On 12/27/2012 08:41 AM, Winston Churchill wrote:
On 12/27/2012 2:32 AM, harry wrote: If nobody had a gun, there would be no issue. Americans can't grasp the fact that even illegal gun ownership here is insignificant. Virtually no-one is interested in owning a gun in the UK. We have more intellectual pursuits. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...of-Europe.html Right - if you make guns really really hard to get people will just move to knives, socks full of quarters, whatever. Tendency towards violence is somewhat independent of weapon ownership. I would ask if you wanted to ban sharp knives but we're already moving in that direction! (I'm in the US not the UK) nate -- replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel |
An opinion on gun control
On Dec 27, 2:32*am, harry wrote:
On Dec 27, 7:10*am, "NotMe" wrote: "harry" It's you are the stupid one. Thick as pitch comes to mind. Owning a gun is no defence against getting shot. Any aggressor can choose his time and place. {{ There is some truth to what you say but my owning a gun does improve the odds in my favor. *I'm reminded of the weeks following Katrina where we had do-bads from out *of town the came with *the intend of looting and were not opposed to home invasions. Several years back my 100# daughter got the drop on a 250# do bad that broke into her apartment. *After she called 911 and advised she had the drop on the do bad it took LEO a half hour to get there. And BTW the do bad did chose the time and place. If nobody had a gun, there would be no issue. Americans can't grasp the fact that even illegal gun ownership here is insignificant. Virtually no-one is interested in owning a gun in the UK. We have more intellectual pursuits.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You weren't interested in arming yourselves against Hitler either. How well did that work out and who had to save your asses? |
An opinion on gun control
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 23:32:50 -0800 (PST), harry
wrote: On Dec 27, 7:10*am, "NotMe" wrote: "harry" It's you are the stupid one. Thick as pitch comes to mind. Owning a gun is no defence against getting shot. Any aggressor can choose his time and place. {{ There is some truth to what you say but my owning a gun does improve the odds in my favor. *I'm reminded of the weeks following Katrina where we had do-bads from out *of town the came with *the intend of looting and were not opposed to home invasions. Several years back my 100# daughter got the drop on a 250# do bad that broke into her apartment. *After she called 911 and advised she had the drop on the do bad it took LEO a half hour to get there. And BTW the do bad did chose the time and place. If nobody had a gun, there would be no issue. First of all that's not possible. If you have a way to do this, let us know and we get rid of, say, all cocaine, just as a demonstration. Once that happens, we'll talk. Americans can't grasp the fact that even illegal gun ownership here is insignificant. Of course you can discount your dead. To you they probably are insignificant. OTOH, it's heartwarming to know that you care more for us. Virtually no-one is interested in owning a gun in the UK. You speak for everyone, of course. We have more intellectual pursuits. Like slobbering over the Queen and the Bitchess of whatever's baby. |
An opinion on gun control
On Dec 27, 1:41*pm, Winston Churchill
wrote: On 12/27/2012 2:32 AM, harry wrote: If nobody had a gun, there would be no issue. Americans can't grasp the fact that even illegal gun ownership here is insignificant. Virtually no-one is interested in owning a gun in the UK. We have more intellectual pursuits. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...12573/UK-is-vi... But not killed. Dead is permanent. |
An opinion on gun control
On Dec 27, 2:23*pm, Nate Nagel wrote:
On 12/27/2012 08:41 AM, Winston Churchill wrote: On 12/27/2012 2:32 AM, harry wrote: If nobody had a gun, there would be no issue. Americans can't grasp the fact that even illegal gun ownership here is insignificant. Virtually no-one is interested in owning a gun in the UK. We have more intellectual pursuits. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...12573/UK-is-vi... Right - if you make guns really really hard to get people will just move to knives, socks full of quarters, whatever. *Tendency towards violence is somewhat independent of weapon ownership. *I would ask if you wanted to ban sharp knives but we're already moving in that direction! *(I'm in the US not the UK) Harder to kill people with those weapons. |
An opinion on gun control
On Dec 27, 3:29*pm, "
wrote: On Dec 27, 2:32*am, harry wrote: On Dec 27, 7:10*am, "NotMe" wrote: "harry" It's you are the stupid one. Thick as pitch comes to mind. Owning a gun is no defence against getting shot. Any aggressor can choose his time and place. {{ There is some truth to what you say but my owning a gun does improve the odds in my favor. *I'm reminded of the weeks following Katrina where we had do-bads from out *of town the came with *the intend of looting and were not opposed to home invasions. Several years back my 100# daughter got the drop on a 250# do bad that broke into her apartment. *After she called 911 and advised she had the drop on the do bad it took LEO a half hour to get there. And BTW the do bad did chose the time and place. If nobody had a gun, there would be no issue. Americans can't grasp the fact that even illegal gun ownership here is insignificant. Virtually no-one is interested in owning a gun in the UK. We have more intellectual pursuits.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You weren't interested in arming yourselves against Hitler either. * How well did that work out and who had to save your asses? Dunno what you're talking about. We defeated the Luftwaffe in 1940 because we had the world's best fighter aircraft. We sent you engines/designs to put in your inferior aircraft. Our bombers carried three times the bomb load of yours and were faster. We sunk every capital ship in the German navy. England was in the front line of the fighting. |
An opinion on gun control
On Dec 27, 3:35*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 23:32:50 -0800 (PST), harry wrote: On Dec 27, 7:10*am, "NotMe" wrote: "harry" It's you are the stupid one. Thick as pitch comes to mind. Owning a gun is no defence against getting shot. Any aggressor can choose his time and place. {{ There is some truth to what you say but my owning a gun does improve the odds in my favor. *I'm reminded of the weeks following Katrina where we had do-bads from out *of town the came with *the intend of looting and were not opposed to home invasions. Several years back my 100# daughter got the drop on a 250# do bad that broke into her apartment. *After she called 911 and advised she had the drop on the do bad it took LEO a half hour to get there. And BTW the do bad did chose the time and place. If nobody had a gun, there would be no issue. First of all that's not possible. *If you have a way to do this, let us know and we get rid of, say, all cocaine, just as a demonstration. Once that happens, we'll talk. Americans can't grasp the fact that even illegal gun ownership here is insignificant. Of course you can discount your dead. *To you they probably are insignificant. *OTOH, it's heartwarming to know that you care more for us. Virtually no-one is interested in owning a gun in the UK. You speak for everyone, of course. We have more intellectual pursuits. Like slobbering over the Queen and the Bitchess of whatever's baby. I know only one person with firearms. How many do you know? As head of state, I'd sooner have the Queen rather than the likes of "W", Reagan and Saddam Hussien. |
This thread has now surpassed the 305 post mark.
Does anyone in here feel that further discussion/argument is going to resolve this issue? Put guns in the same bag as abortion and capital punishment. It's a problem with no good solution. And, feeble minds like ours aren't going to find a solution either. Hopefully, in future, technology will provide some solution that we can all live with. PS: The 2012 Nobel Prize in Medicine when to two doctors who were able to produce stem cells from fully differentiated adult cells. This, it is hoped, will end up paving the way to produce stem cells for treating a myriad of medical problems like spinal cord injuries without having to go through that "life begins at conception, and therefore stem cells are people" road block that caused problems for researchers in this field up until now. The problem isn't that researchers as so ethical that they feel that using a stem cell to do anything except create a new life is unethical, it's because abortion is a political football and no politician wants to commit to providing money and grants to researchers who are doing work that the anti-abortionists disapprove of. They're too big a voting block. So, there's no money for research unless you can get around the "using stem cells to repair spinal cords is denying the stem cell the potential of becoming a human being, and that smells just like abortion." argument put forward by the anti-abortionists. They can't use that argument is the stem cell was previously a blood cell. |
An opinion on gun control
|
An opinion on gun control
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 07:57:30 -0800 (PST), harry
wrote: On Dec 27, 3:29*pm, " wrote: On Dec 27, 2:32*am, harry wrote: On Dec 27, 7:10*am, "NotMe" wrote: "harry" It's you are the stupid one. Thick as pitch comes to mind. Owning a gun is no defence against getting shot. Any aggressor can choose his time and place. {{ There is some truth to what you say but my owning a gun does improve the odds in my favor. *I'm reminded of the weeks following Katrina where we had do-bads from out *of town the came with *the intend of looting and were not opposed to home invasions. Several years back my 100# daughter got the drop on a 250# do bad that broke into her apartment. *After she called 911 and advised she had the drop on the do bad it took LEO a half hour to get there. And BTW the do bad did chose the time and place. If nobody had a gun, there would be no issue. Americans can't grasp the fact that even illegal gun ownership here is insignificant. Virtually no-one is interested in owning a gun in the UK. We have more intellectual pursuits.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You weren't interested in arming yourselves against Hitler either. * How well did that work out and who had to save your asses? Dunno what you're talking about. Of course you don't. Too stupid. We defeated the Luftwaffe in 1940 because we had the world's best fighter aircraft. Burning the worlds best gasoline, West Texas light sweet, 108 octane. Your planes wouldn't have flown at all without US gasoline. Let's not even mention your country EATING. We sent you engines/designs to put in your inferior aircraft. The Mustang was not inferior by any stretch. Underpowered with the Merlin but you couldn't make enough of them to be useful. Our bombers carried three times the bomb load of yours and were faster. Too funny. We sunk every capital ship in the German navy. Who cared? Our navy sank every capital ship in the Japanese navy. Our NA presence was to protect your food supply. Go figure. England was in the front line of the fighting. Sucking wind. |
An opinion on gun control
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 08:00:47 -0800 (PST), harry
wrote: On Dec 27, 3:35*pm, wrote: On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 23:32:50 -0800 (PST), harry wrote: On Dec 27, 7:10*am, "NotMe" wrote: "harry" It's you are the stupid one. Thick as pitch comes to mind. Owning a gun is no defence against getting shot. Any aggressor can choose his time and place. {{ There is some truth to what you say but my owning a gun does improve the odds in my favor. *I'm reminded of the weeks following Katrina where we had do-bads from out *of town the came with *the intend of looting and were not opposed to home invasions. Several years back my 100# daughter got the drop on a 250# do bad that broke into her apartment. *After she called 911 and advised she had the drop on the do bad it took LEO a half hour to get there. And BTW the do bad did chose the time and place. If nobody had a gun, there would be no issue. First of all that's not possible. *If you have a way to do this, let us know and we get rid of, say, all cocaine, just as a demonstration. Once that happens, we'll talk. crickets Americans can't grasp the fact that even illegal gun ownership here is insignificant. Of course you can discount your dead. *To you they probably are insignificant. *OTOH, it's heartwarming to know that you care more for us. crickets Virtually no-one is interested in owning a gun in the UK. You speak for everyone, of course. crickets We have more intellectual pursuits. Like slobbering over the Queen and the Bitchess of whatever's baby. I know only one person with firearms. How many do you know? You're a liar. You know of more than that, here. I know hundreds with firearms. Probably 60% of the people I know have firearms. As head of state, I'd sooner have the Queen rather than the likes of "W", Reagan and Saddam Hussien. Of course you love Blair and Maggie, too. You really are a sick pup, harry. |
An opinion on gun control
|
An opinion on gun control
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 16:07:52 +0000, nestork
wrote: This thread has now surpassed the 305 post mark. Isn't it fun? Does anyone in here feel that further discussion/argument is going to resolve this issue? Sure if we can convert a single gun grabber. |
An opinion on gun control
On Dec 27, 2:03*pm, wrote:
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 07:57:30 -0800 (PST), harry wrote: You weren't interested in arming yourselves against Hitler either. * How well did that work out and who had to save your asses? Dunno what you're talking about. We defeated the Luftwaffe in 1940 because we had the world's best fighter aircraft. Yeah, funny if the British did such a smashing job of defeating the Luftwaffe in 1940, they were still killing thousands in London with V1, V2's four years later. And also, apparently Hitler didn't get the message either, because the war went on for another 5 years. We sent you engines/designs to put in your inferior aircraft. Our bombers carried three times the bomb load of yours and were faster. We sunk every capital ship in the German navy. England was in the front line of the fighting. Where the hell were all the boys from the USA that died, you pig ignorant ingrate? The USA lost more lives in WWII than England. That is certainly an anglo spin on history. What you really mean is you made it too expensive for the Luftwaffe to keep bombing London. They were far from defeated. Was the Spitfire better than the ME-262? *I don't think so. You needed bigger bombers because you did not actually attempt to hit anything in particular. Harris was the specialist in carpet bombing civilians at night, not something I would brag about. Capital ships were relics of the last war. You were brought to your knees by the U boat until we gave you destroyers, sailed thousands of Liberty ships with the supplies to keep you from starving and the escort carrier with aircraft to finally shut down the U boat threat. Your attempt to invade Europe ended in disaster. If Goering was not such an arrogant SOB and Hitler had listened to the army, they would have followed you home from Dunkirk and ended the war before the US could save your ass. And maybe they would have barbecued harry's sorry ass too. |
OT, After Newtown, some parents impose (toy) gun control
On 12/27/2012 4:37 PM, Oren wrote:
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 16:07:52 +0000, nestork wrote: This thread has now surpassed the 305 post mark. Isn't it fun? Does anyone in here feel that further discussion/argument is going to resolve this issue? Sure if we can convert a single gun grabber. Hey Oren, you'll love this one: http://www.today.com/moms/after-newt...trol-1C7657757 http://preview.tinyurl.com/c4oc8qd I remember some years ago when a number of moonbat parents gave their little boys dolls because they didn't want their precious little spawn to have the violent tendencies caused by traditional boys toys. The goofy parents were mortified when their little boys tore the arms and legs off the dolls, pointed them at each other and shouted BANG! BANG! YOU'RE DEAD! ^_^ TDD |
OT, After Newtown, some parents impose (toy) gun control
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 18:06:55 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote: On 12/27/2012 4:37 PM, Oren wrote: On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 16:07:52 +0000, nestork wrote: This thread has now surpassed the 305 post mark. Isn't it fun? Does anyone in here feel that further discussion/argument is going to resolve this issue? Sure if we can convert a single gun grabber. Hey Oren, you'll love this one: http://www.today.com/moms/after-newt...trol-1C7657757 http://preview.tinyurl.com/c4oc8qd Saw the story , but never read it. I remember some years ago when a number of moonbat parents gave their little boys dolls because they didn't want their precious little spawn to have the violent tendencies caused by traditional boys toys. The goofy parents were mortified when their little boys tore the arms and legs off the dolls, pointed them at each other and shouted BANG! BANG! YOU'RE DEAD! ^_^ TDD I fired a gun when still in training pants. As a youngster, I say I was better trained than a brit? I still shoot good |
An opinion on gun control
On Saturday, December 22, 2012 8:25:22 PM UTC-5, Dean Hoffman wrote:
Not mine. This is from Larry Correia. New York Times bestselling author, firearm instructor and former gun shop owner. http://tinyurl.com/catntyr The link leads to Monster Hunter Nation. He has trained some Utah teachers and wants them to be armed at school if they want to be. Part of his comment on gun free zones: Gun Free Zones are hunting preserves for innocent people. Period. Think about it. You are a violent, homicidal madman, looking to make a statement and hoping to go from disaffected loser to most famous person in the world. The best way to accomplish your goals is to kill a whole bunch of people. So where’s the best place to go shoot all these people? Obviously, it is someplace where nobody can shoot back. In all honesty I have no respect for anybody who believes Gun Free Zones actually work. You are going to commit several hundred felonies, up to and including mass murder, and you are going to refrain because there is a sign? That No Guns Allowed sign is not a cross that wards off vampires. It is wishful thinking, and really pathetic wishful thinking at that. Time to get rid of all guns and the second ammendment too. |
An opinion on gun control
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 17:12:18 -0800 (PST), "
wrote: On Saturday, December 22, 2012 8:25:22 PM UTC-5, Dean Hoffman wrote: Not mine. This is from Larry Correia. New York Times bestselling author, firearm instructor and former gun shop owner. http://tinyurl.com/catntyr The link leads to Monster Hunter Nation. He has trained some Utah teachers and wants them to be armed at school if they want to be. Part of his comment on gun free zones: Gun Free Zones are hunting preserves for innocent people. Period. Think about it. You are a violent, homicidal madman, looking to make a statement and hoping to go from disaffected loser to most famous person in the world. The best way to accomplish your goals is to kill a whole bunch of people. So where’s the best place to go shoot all these people? Obviously, it is someplace where nobody can shoot back. In all honesty I have no respect for anybody who believes Gun Free Zones actually work. You are going to commit several hundred felonies, up to and including mass murder, and you are going to refrain because there is a sign? That No Guns Allowed sign is not a cross that wards off vampires. It is wishful thinking, and really pathetic wishful thinking at that. Time to get rid of all guns and the second ammendment too. Troll sco 0/10 |
An opinion on gun control
|
An opinion on gun control
On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 17:12:18 -0800 (PST), "
wrote: Time to get rid of all guns and the second ammendment too. .... and stop adults from wearing diapers |
An opinion on gun control
|
An opinion on gun control
On 12-27-2012 11:07, nestork wrote:
until now. The problem isn't that researchers as so ethical that they feel that using a stem cell to do anything except create a new life is unethical, it's because abortion is a political football and no politician wants to commit to providing money and grants to researchers who are doing work that the anti-abortionists disapprove of. They're too big a voting block. So, there's no money for research unless you can get around the "using stem cells to repair spinal cords is denying the stem cell the potential of becoming a human being, and that smells just like abortion." argument put forward by the anti-abortionists. They can't use that argument is the stem cell was previously a blood But the other side dare not let down their guard against their mortal enemies. Allowing anyone to talk about adult stem cells carries a risk, however slight, of appearing to be willing to negotiate with the anti-choice terrorists. So both sides continue to act like some of us are doing here. -- Wes Groleau He that complies against his will is of the same opinion still. €” Samuel Butler, 1612-1680 |
An opinion on gun control
|
An opinion on gun control
On 12-26-2012 09:21, diy savant wrote:
While I agree that gun deaths are tragic, statistics reveal even more people are killed by distracted motorists that text/talk while driving. Should we ban cell phones? Both types of deaths are overwhelmingly caused by people who watch TV. Mine's packed up and ready to surrender. -- Wes Groleau He that complies against his will is of the same opinion still. €” Samuel Butler, 1612-1680 |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:06 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter