UK going down the toilet too, eh Harry?

'We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you':
What man holding bloody cleaver said after 'hacking soldier
in Help For Heroes T-shirt to death just yards from Woolwich
barracks'

'It was a blue Vauxhall. Then two black guys got out of the car
dragging a white guy across the road towards the wall. One of
the guys had a knife that looked about a foot long and a
machete and the other bloke had a gun.

'They started slashing him up with the knife and hitting him in
the stomach with the machete. I don't think it took long before
he was dead. There were people passing by who were screaming
and running away. I've never seen anything like it.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/...81_634x436.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/...07_634x330.jpg

'It is hard to comprehend the shocking and horrific scenes we have seen
this afternoon on a busy street as Londoners went about their day as
normal. We have launched a murder investigation.'

Theresa May tonight called a meeting of the Government's emergency Cobra
committee in response to the machete and knife attack on the man who was
wearing a Help for Heroes T-shirt.

The Home Secretary said she had been briefed on the killing by the head
of MI5 and police later confirmed they were treating the incident as a
possible terror attack.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/...37_634x418.jpg

Full story:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...or-attack.html

Yes. There was news coverage of it on the CBC this afternoon.

After the murder, one of the attackers talked to a camera crew for a minute or two until the police showed up, so they have him on tape caught red handed (literally) with a meat cleaver and knife in his bloody hands.

I think it's terrible. This was a deliberate unprovoked attack and murder on a public street. A literal drive-by, but with a knife and meat cleaver instead of a gun. It's just shocking and disturbing to see something like this or even learn of it.

"nestork" wrote in message
...

Yes. There was news coverage of it on the CBC this afternoon.

After the murder, one of the attackers talked to a camera crew for a
minute or two until the police showed up, so they have him on tape
caught red handed (literally) with a meat cleaver and knife in his
bloody hands.

I think it's terrible. This was a deliberate unprovoked attack and
murder on a public street. A literal drive-by, but with a knife and
meat cleaver instead of a gun. It's just shocking and disturbing to see
something like this or even learn of it.



We must ban knives and meat cleavers to prevent future drive-by knifings and
cleaverings

nestork wrote:

I think it's terrible. This was a deliberate unprovoked attack and
murder on a public street. A literal drive-by, but with a knife and
meat cleaver instead of a gun. It's just shocking and disturbing to
see something like this or even learn of it.

Don't dismiss this as an unprovoked attack, as a criminal act.

Moozlems who emmigrate to the west are a growing cancer within our
societies. They harbor deep-seated ideas about how they are supposed to
interact with non-believers. Like most believers of fictional people or
supernatural gods, they believe their immortal soul is on the line, and
when you believe that, you can and will do anything here in the real
"meat space" if you have been sufficiently brainwashed. The cult of
islam has taken that brainwashing to probably the most extreme among all
religions on earth.

Any moozlem that you meet that seems to be on an even keel and makes
mild statements about how actions such as this killing are not a true
reflection on islam is lying. Deep down they don't really believe what
they tell you - they know that they are being judged by ala and they
know they are in a war with non-believers, and they all want to win that
war. Some of them are just more active combatants than others.

On May 23, 5:01*am, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:
"nestork" wrote in message

...



Yes. *There was news coverage of it on the CBC this afternoon.

After the murder, one of the attackers talked to a camera crew for a
minute or two until the police showed up, so they have him on tape
caught red handed (literally) with a meat cleaver and knife in his
bloody hands.

I think it's terrible. *This was a deliberate unprovoked attack and
murder on a public street. *A literal drive-by, but with a knife and
meat cleaver instead of a gun. *It's just shocking and disturbing to see
something like this or even learn of it.

We must ban knives and meat cleavers to prevent future drive-by knifings and
cleaverings

That would be an overreaction. All that should be banned are the
"assault knives and cleavers"
No cook or butcher needs such things.

Harry K

On Thursday, May 23, 2013 7:42:39 AM UTC-7, Harry K wrote:
On May 23, 5:01*am, "Attila Iskander"

wrote:

"nestork" wrote in message



...







Yes. *There was news coverage of it on the CBC this afternoon.



After the murder, one of the attackers talked to a camera crew for a

minute or two until the police showed up, so they have him on tape

caught red handed (literally) with a meat cleaver and knife in his

bloody hands.



I think it's terrible. *This was a deliberate unprovoked attack and

murder on a public street. *A literal drive-by, but with a knife and

meat cleaver instead of a gun. *It's just shocking and disturbing to see

something like this or even learn of it.



We must ban knives and meat cleavers to prevent future drive-by knifings and

cleaverings



That would be an overreaction. All that should be banned are the

"assault knives and cleavers"

No cook or butcher needs such things.



Harry K

Only plastic knives made in China should be allowed.

On Thursday, May 23, 2013 5:02:03 AM UTC-7, Home Guy wrote:
nestork wrote:



I think it's terrible. This was a deliberate unprovoked attack and

murder on a public street. A literal drive-by, but with a knife and

meat cleaver instead of a gun. It's just shocking and disturbing to

see something like this or even learn of it.



Don't dismiss this as an unprovoked attack, as a criminal act.



Moozlems who emmigrate to the west are a growing cancer within our

societies. They harbor deep-seated ideas about how they are supposed to

interact with non-believers. Like most believers of fictional people or

supernatural gods, they believe their immortal soul is on the line, and

when you believe that, you can and will do anything here in the real

"meat space" if you have been sufficiently brainwashed. The cult of

islam has taken that brainwashing to probably the most extreme among all

religions on earth.



Any moozlem that you meet that seems to be on an even keel and makes

mild statements about how actions such as this killing are not a true

reflection on islam is lying. Deep down they don't really believe what

they tell you - they know that they are being judged by ala and they

know they are in a war with non-believers, and they all want to win that

war. Some of them are just more active combatants than others.

Any bad speller that you meet that seems to be on an even keel and makes
mild statements about how actions such as this bad spelling are not a true
reflection on public education is lying. Deep down they don't really believe what they tell you - they know that they are being judged by The Great Proofreader and they know they are in a war with good spellers, and they all want to win that war. Some of them are just more active combatants than others.

I guess we could rewrite this about politicians, too?
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..
..
wrote in message ...

Any moozlem that you meet that seems to be on an even keel and makes
mild statements about how actions such as this killing are not a true
reflection on islam is lying. Deep down they don't really believe what
they tell you - they know that they are being judged by ala and they
know they are in a war with non-believers, and they all want to win that
war. Some of them are just more active combatants than others.

Any bad speller that you meet that seems to be on an even keel and makes
mild statements about how actions such as this bad spelling are not a true
reflection on public education is lying. Deep down they don't really believe what they tell you - they know that they are being judged by The Great Proofreader and they know they are in a war with good spellers, and they all want to win that war. Some of them are just more active combatants than others.

That, pressure cookers, pots, pans. I guess all
food preparation would have to be in government
run centers, then?
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..
..
"Attila Iskander" wrote in message ...

We must ban knives and meat cleavers
to prevent future drive-by knifings and
cleaverings

Ban high capacity meat cleavers with
pistol grips, black anodizing, and.....
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..
..
wrote in message ...
On Thursday, May 23, 2013 7:42:39 AM UTC-7, Harry K wrote:

That would be an overreaction. All that should be banned are the
"assault knives and cleavers"
No cook or butcher needs such things.



Harry K

Only plastic knives made in China should be allowed.

Home Guy wrote:

nestork wrote:

I think it's terrible. This was a deliberate unprovoked attack and
murder on a public street. A literal drive-by, but with a knife and
meat cleaver instead of a gun. It's just shocking and disturbing to
see something like this or even learn of it.

Don't dismiss this as an unprovoked attack, as a criminal act.

Moozlems who emmigrate to the west are a growing cancer within our
societies. They harbor deep-seated ideas about how they are supposed to
interact with non-believers. Like most believers of fictional people or
supernatural gods, they believe their immortal soul is on the line, and
when you believe that, you can and will do anything here in the real
"meat space" if you have been sufficiently brainwashed. The cult of
islam has taken that brainwashing to probably the most extreme among all
religions on earth.

Any moozlem that you meet that seems to be on an even keel and makes
mild statements about how actions such as this killing are not a true
reflection on islam is lying. Deep down they don't really believe what
they tell you - they know that they are being judged by ala and they
know they are in a war with non-believers, and they all want to win that
war. Some of them are just more active combatants than others.

There are essentially three types of muslims:

1. Active militant terrorists

2. Passive supporters of the active militant terrorists

3. Those pretending to be muslim to avoid being murdered by types 1 & 2.

On Wed, 22 May 2013 19:18:36 -0400, Home Guy wrote:

UK going down the toilet too, eh Harry?

'We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you':
What man holding bloody cleaver said after 'hacking soldier
in Help For Heroes T-shirt to death just yards from Woolwich
barracks'

'It was a blue Vauxhall. Then two black guys got out of the car
dragging a white guy across the road towards the wall. One of
the guys had a knife that looked about a foot long and a
machete and the other bloke had a gun.

'They started slashing him up with the knife and hitting him in
the stomach with the machete. I don't think it took long before
he was dead. There were people passing by who were screaming
and running away. I've never seen anything like it.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/...81_634x436.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/...07_634x330.jpg

'It is hard to comprehend the shocking and horrific scenes we have seen
this afternoon on a busy street as Londoners went about their day as
normal. We have launched a murder investigation.'

Theresa May tonight called a meeting of the Government's emergency Cobra
committee in response to the machete and knife attack on the man who was
wearing a Help for Heroes T-shirt.

The Home Secretary said she had been briefed on the killing by the head
of MI5 and police later confirmed they were treating the incident as a
possible terror attack.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/...37_634x418.jpg

Full story:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...or-attack.html

On the TV CBS News they said it took the police 20 minutes to respond.

Ashton Crusher wrote:

'They started slashing him up with the knife and hitting him in
the stomach with the machete. I don't think it took long before
he was dead. There were people passing by who were screaming
and running away. I've never seen anything like it.

On the TV CBS News they said it took the police 20 minutes to
respond.

Did anyone listen to Mike Savage last night?

Here, give this a listen:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0y8v...35&index= 102

In his own words:

---------------------
They were dismembering him - these two animals. These two animals who
the liberals invited in under asylum. These two animals on welfare.
These two animals who were allowed into into England while I, Mike
Savage, a legitimate member of the American media - is still banned from
entering the United Kingdom while animals like this are roaming the
streets with butcher knives and machettes and welcome by the liberal
establishment in merry old England.

What's also intriguing is that it took police 20 min. to arrive. Do you
know why it took police 20 min. to arrive in England? Because they have
no weapons. It was only when they found the special police unit trained
to shoot and kill that the police arrived. Do you blame the police for
not arriving on a scene when you have two animals with butcher knives
and machettes in their hands and they don't have any guns - the police -
would you be willing to show up without a weapon? I wouldn't.

Cameron - what ever his name is - the great Cam-er-on was in France
enjoying a nice dinner when he said "We have suffered these attacks
before" said so-called Prime Minister David Cameron - the alleged
conservative. "We have suffered these attacks before, we have always
beaten them back" he said. "We will not be cowed, we will never
buckle". Oh how Churchillian of him.

I was sick all day from this story. This is a 20 year-old boy in a
t-shirt walking back to army barracks, hit by a car by these two
animals, knocked to the pavement, and then butchered in the street. His
head cut off, and dismembered in the street. His body then thrown in
the gutter by these vermin. These throw-backs, these sub-humans. And
England brings them in under asylum, puts them on welfare, and I Michael
Savage to this day still not permitted to enter the United Kingdom - I
was banned in 2009, it's now 2013, I'm still not let into the country.

The fact of the matter is west is dying in front of our eyes. The
western nations have a sort of - "political AIDS". Now if you study the
disease called AIDS as I have - remember who you're listening to - one
of my most popular books was published in 1986 titled "maximum immunity"
when the AIDS epidemic was at a peak here in America, and I studied the
immune system from the point of view of a populist trying to write about
it. And as you well know AIDS operates where a retro-virus enters the
body and attacks your defense cells and permits opportunistic infections
to arise. That's basically a thumb-nail sketch of what the AIDS disease
is.

Wouldn't you say that the liberals are the retro-virus that have
destroyed our defense cells? The liberals have destroyed out military's
ability to fight islamic extremism - not only abroad but domestically.
Every time a policeman or a soldier tries to stop such an attack he's
called a racist. That's called AIDS. That's called political AIDS in
other words they've neutralized - to make it simple for you - they've
neutralized our white blood cells. Liberalism - I've told you - is like
a virus. Only the virus has now metasticised throughout the west. And
the opportunistic infection of radical islam is spreading like the
cancer that it is.

I'm fuming today.

We have a rogue government. We have a rogue government in the United
States of America - a group of gansters functioning as though they were
a group of guerrillas like Fidel Castro who took over a legitimate
nation and are bankrupting it. They sent Lois Lerner what ever her name
is of the IRS she takes the fifth amendment like the mafioso in the
congressional hearing. Lerner takes the fifth amendment, and then walks
out with her fithy dirtbag lawyers, showing her fat behind to congress.
If that's not contempt of congress I'd like to know what is.

Now we all have contempt of congress because they have no guts. THEY
HAVE NO GUTS! She should have been arrested on the spot. She did not
have the right to plead the fifth amendment once she stated she's
innocent. She waived her rights to the fifth amendment. She exhibited
contempt of congress. Yet she got up with her stinking skirt and her
lawyers got up with their stinking pants and they walked out on congress
as though they were god almights. This is the country I'm living in?

This is the country I'm living in when a low-life backroom dirtbag
female lawyer like her can get up and spit in the face of my congress?
This is the country I'm living in?
If the IRS came to audit you and you got up and said "I refuse to answer
on the grounds that I might incriminate myself even though I'm innocent"
do you know what would happen to you? The US Marshalls would arrest you
before you got to the door.

Why is this Lerner character not arrested? Why is she not cited with
contempt of congress.

Why is Marco Rubio working as a front man for the new world order
amnesty gang? Why is Pawn Hannity still glorifying Marco Rubio as a
champion of conservative causes?
------------------------

Some other points he made:

- Ft. Hood murder spree still being called "workplace violence" instead
of islamic terrorism.

- Why does "Pawn" Hannity continue to present Marco Rubio as a
conservative?

- How many of these 30 million immigrants will be muslims carrying
machettes who hate america Mr. Rubio? Mr. Durban? Mr. Linsey Gram?

- NY Post drops story within 10 min of posting the story.

"Ashton Crusher" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 22 May 2013 19:18:36 -0400, Home Guy wrote:

UK going down the toilet too, eh Harry?

'We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you':
What man holding bloody cleaver said after 'hacking soldier
in Help For Heroes T-shirt to death just yards from Woolwich
barracks'

'It was a blue Vauxhall. Then two black guys got out of the car
dragging a white guy across the road towards the wall. One of
the guys had a knife that looked about a foot long and a
machete and the other bloke had a gun.

'They started slashing him up with the knife and hitting him in
the stomach with the machete. I don't think it took long before
he was dead. There were people passing by who were screaming
and running away. I've never seen anything like it.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/...81_634x436.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/...07_634x330.jpg

'It is hard to comprehend the shocking and horrific scenes we have seen
this afternoon on a busy street as Londoners went about their day as
normal. We have launched a murder investigation.'

Theresa May tonight called a meeting of the Government's emergency Cobra
committee in response to the machete and knife attack on the man who was
wearing a Help for Heroes T-shirt.

The Home Secretary said she had been briefed on the killing by the head
of MI5 and police later confirmed they were treating the incident as a
possible terror attack.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/...37_634x418.jpg

Full story:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...or-attack.html

On the TV CBS News they said it took the police 20 minutes to respond.



A classic example of "Call 911 and Die"..

Yeah, I think it's kind of stupid the British police DON'T have guns. What are they supposed to do if the criminals they're trying to arrest DO have guns.

Here in Canada, any hunter can have a rifle, you have to have a darn good reason and no criminal record to legally own a hand gun, and every cop has his service revolver, and that makes some kinda horse sense to me.

"nestork" wrote in message
...

Yeah, I think it's kind of stupid the British police DON'T have guns.
What are they supposed to do if the criminals they're trying to arrest
DO have guns.


Sweet talk them I would guess.

Here in Canada, any hunter can have a rifle, you have to have a darn
good reason and no criminal record to legally own a hand gun, and every
cop has his service revolver, and that makes some kinda horse sense to
me.


Over 100 years ago, getting a gun in the UK was as easy as walking into a
store, choosing the one you wanted, paying for it and walking out. A great
many people in the UK were armed, to the point that the police didn't need
to be.
But then in those days, the citizens were expected to join the "hue and cry"
and either stop the criminal themselves, or assist the authorities in doing
so.
IN the last 100 years, the citizens were disarmed, crime consequently soared
and now the police need to be armed. They have also been told to mind their
own business and let they authorities take care of things
We can see what that has resulted in. - ALL NOT GOOD !.

In Canada, handguns have been incrementally restricted over the last 80+
years. The restrictions have had NO EFFECT on reducing or even controlling
crime, or keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. The very argument that
disarming the law-abiding to avoid criminal use of guns is not even close to
"horse sense".

On May 24, 1:32*am, nestork wrote:
Yeah, I think it's kind of stupid the British police DON'T have guns.
What are they supposed to do if the criminals they're trying to arrest
DO have guns.

Many of them do have guns. Like the ones that responded
to this incident and shot both of the muslim scum.





Here in Canada, any hunter can have a rifle, you have to have a darn
good reason and no criminal record to legally own a hand gun, and every
cop has his service revolver, and that makes some kinda horse sense to
me.

--
nestork

I see. So, while you think the Britts should arm every
cop, you also think a person needs a darn good reason
to have a pistol in their own house. Is wanting to be
able to protect yourself a good enough reason?

" wrote:

Many of them do have guns. Like the ones that responded
to this incident and shot both of the muslim scum.

Um, it appears not.

Listen to Mike Savage's radio show from two nights ago. He repeatedly
makes the point that it took 20 minutes for ARMED police to show up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0y8v...35&index= 102

Gun control isn't about crime reduction. It's about controlling the (now unarmed) section of the population.
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..
..
"Attila Iskander" wrote in message ...

Over 100 years ago, getting a gun in the UK was as easy as walking into a
store, choosing the one you wanted, paying for it and walking out. A great
many people in the UK were armed, to the point that the police didn't need
to be.
But then in those days, the citizens were expected to join the "hue and cry"
and either stop the criminal themselves, or assist the authorities in doing
so.
IN the last 100 years, the citizens were disarmed, crime consequently soared
and now the police need to be armed. They have also been told to mind their
own business and let they authorities take care of things
We can see what that has resulted in. - ALL NOT GOOD !.

In Canada, handguns have been incrementally restricted over the last 80+
years. The restrictions have had NO EFFECT on reducing or even controlling
crime, or keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. The very argument that
disarming the law-abiding to avoid criminal use of guns is not even close to
"horse sense".

OK, let's say I hear someone late at night walking around in my house (if I had a house). Yes, ideally, I would like to have a hand gun in my hand when I go to confront them. However, I understand that a hunting rifle would be nearly as effective in that situation, whereas no burglar is going to be lurking around the neighborhood while carrying a hunting rifle because that would draw attention to him and people would call the police. So, I still have the upper hand if I have a hunting rifle in my house for protection, even if I never hunt. And, I understand that loosening the laws to make it easier for me to own a handgun will also make it easier for any burglar that breaks into my house to own a handgun. I prefer the status quo. I'd prefer the situation where I have a hunting rifle against an unarmed burglar to one where we both have hand guns.

On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:39:40 +0200, nestork
wrote:

So, I still have the upper hand if I have a hunting rifle in my
house for protection, even if I never hunt.

Moose ****. Not if the intruder knows how to take your weapon without
firing a shot.

And, I understand that
loosening the laws to make it easier for me to own a handgun will also
make it easier for any burglar that breaks into my house to own a
handgun.

What a ****ed up law. That law should read to kill him dead where he
stands. This is no negotiations in my house.

I prefer the status quo. I'd prefer the situation where I
have a hunting rifle against an unarmed burglar to one where we both
have hand guns.

I'll take that rifle from you.

Unarmed bandit? I'd take a Bowie knife to that fight.

On May 24, 9:18 am, "
wrote:


I see. So, while you think the Britts should arm every
cop, you also think a person needs a darn good reason
to have a pistol in their own house. Is wanting to be
able to protect yourself a good enough reason?

When our police, who are supposed to be well trained in self defense
and in good physical condition, feel safe enough to walk around
without having a weapon, then the citizens may feel safe enough
also.
I have never seen a policeman, active or retired, that didn't
think they
needed a weapon for their own safety. Such is the culture we live
in .

On Fri, 24 May 2013 07:18:28 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On May 24, 1:32*am, nestork wrote:
Yeah, I think it's kind of stupid the British police DON'T have guns.
What are they supposed to do if the criminals they're trying to arrest
DO have guns.

Many of them do have guns. Like the ones that responded
to this incident and shot both of the muslim scum.



You call arriving 20 minutes later a "response"? I'd call it waking
up from a nap.





Here in Canada, any hunter can have a rifle, you have to have a darn
good reason and no criminal record to legally own a hand gun, and every
cop has his service revolver, and that makes some kinda horse sense to
me.

--
nestork

I see. So, while you think the Britts should arm every
cop, you also think a person needs a darn good reason
to have a pistol in their own house. Is wanting to be
able to protect yourself a good enough reason?

On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:39:40 +0200, nestork
wrote:


[_2_ Wrote:
;3067436']
I see. So, while you think the Britts should arm every
cop, you also think a person needs a darn good reason
to have a pistol in their own house. Is wanting to be
able to protect yourself a good enough reason?

OK, let's say I hear someone late at night walking around in my house
(if I had a house). Yes, ideally, I would like to have a hand gun in my
hand when I go to confront them. However, I understand that a hunting
rifle would be nearly as effective in that situation, whereas no burglar
is going to be lurking around the neighborhood while carrying a hunting
rifle because that would draw attention to him and people would call the
police. So, I still have the upper hand if I have a hunting rifle in my
house for protection, even if I never hunt. And, I understand that
loosening the laws to make it easier for me to own a handgun will also
make it easier for any burglar that breaks into my house to own a
handgun. I prefer the status quo. I'd prefer the situation where I
have a hunting rifle against an unarmed burglar to one where we both
have hand guns.

that makes no sense. If your preferred situation is that you will
have a rifle then you can rest assured the criminal will have a
handgun even if it means he gets it illegally, that's what makes him a
criminal. And while you are trying to get the barrel of your gun
pointed in the right direction he will have fired off several rounds
from his handgun killing you. While a rifle would be better then
nothing for defense, a rifle for close quarter shooting is just plain
stupid.

"nestork" wrote in message
...

[_2_ Wrote:
;3067436']
I see. So, while you think the Britts should arm every
cop, you also think a person needs a darn good reason
to have a pistol in their own house. Is wanting to be
able to protect yourself a good enough reason?

OK, let's say I hear someone late at night walking around in my house
(if I had a house). Yes, ideally, I would like to have a hand gun in my
hand when I go to confront them. However, I understand that a hunting
rifle would be nearly as effective in that situation,

No it wouldn't
Given the choice, I would go for a handgun or shotgun
Problems with a hunting rifle a
A hunting rifle is WAY TOO LONG to be handled safely in a building
It exposes you to having the rifle grabbed
It's also typically way more powerfull than you want to use with the
risk of a bullet going though multiple wall and even leaving the building.


whereas no burglar is going to be lurking around the neighborhood
while carrying a hunting rifle because that would draw attention to him
and people would call the police.

That has GOT to be the MOST STUPID argument ever.
A burglar is a CRIMINAL
Are you silly enouhg to presume that a burglar would not carry a handgun
that is easily concealed while walking around the neighborhood ?



So, I still have the upper hand if I have a hunting rifle in my
house for protection, even if I never hunt.

Except that in Canada, your rifle is locked away and the ammo is also locked
away.
Are you going to tell the burglar to hold a few minutes so you can get your
gun and load up ?
Remember what happened with Parasiris in Laval a few years back
The police broke into his home in the middle of the nigh using a no-knock
warrant that not only was unjustified, but actually flawed ?


And, I understand that
loosening the laws to make it easier for me to own a handgun will also
make it easier for any burglar that breaks into my house to own a
handgun.

That would only hold if you are silly enough to imagine that a burglar would
1) go trhough the legal process to get one
2) instead of just getting one on the black market, as criminals are
currently ALREADY DOING.


I prefer the status quo.

Not surprising considering the naive and silly arguments you have used to
justify it.


I'd prefer the situation where I have a hunting rifle against
an unarmed burglar to one where we both have hand guns.



Criminals have no problems getting handguns on the black market.
And they get them far more easily than you do.
The very fact that homeowners like you are disarmed is the very reason that
hot burglaries are more popular in Canada, Australia and the UK than in the
US

Please educate yourself BEFORE you come back to spout more ignorant nonsense
http://davekopel.org/2a/LawRev/LawyersGunsBurglars.htm

On Fri, 24 May 2013 07:31:28 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote:

"nestork" wrote in message
...

Yeah, I think it's kind of stupid the British police DON'T have guns.
What are they supposed to do if the criminals they're trying to arrest
DO have guns.


Sweet talk them I would guess.

They only arrest the victims, so it probably works.

Here in Canada, any hunter can have a rifle, you have to have a darn
good reason and no criminal record to legally own a hand gun, and every
cop has his service revolver, and that makes some kinda horse sense to
me.


Over 100 years ago, getting a gun in the UK was as easy as walking into a
store, choosing the one you wanted, paying for it and walking out. A great
many people in the UK were armed, to the point that the police didn't need
to be.

It wasn't 100 years ago that the same was true here.

But then in those days, the citizens were expected to join the "hue and cry"
and either stop the criminal themselves, or assist the authorities in doing
so.
IN the last 100 years, the citizens were disarmed, crime consequently soared
and now the police need to be armed. They have also been told to mind their
own business and let they authorities take care of things
We can see what that has resulted in. - ALL NOT GOOD !.

Arrest the victims and those who speak out against the perps.

In Canada, handguns have been incrementally restricted over the last 80+
years. The restrictions have had NO EFFECT on reducing or even controlling
crime, or keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. The very argument that
disarming the law-abiding to avoid criminal use of guns is not even close to
"horse sense".

Sure it controlling crime. It made a whole new class of criminals.

On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:39:40 +0200, nestork
wrote:


[_2_ Wrote:
;3067436']
I see. So, while you think the Britts should arm every
cop, you also think a person needs a darn good reason
to have a pistol in their own house. Is wanting to be
able to protect yourself a good enough reason?

OK, let's say I hear someone late at night walking around in my house
(if I had a house). Yes, ideally, I would like to have a hand gun in my
hand when I go to confront them. However, I understand that a hunting
rifle would be nearly as effective in that situation, whereas no burglar
is going to be lurking around the neighborhood while carrying a hunting
rifle because that would draw attention to him and people would call the
police.

Your understanding is wrong. A sawed-off shotgun is arguably better
but also quite illegal. Burglars don't carry weapons at all. They
can't afford to be caught with them. They'd rather prey on the
defenseless but aren't too bright.

So, I still have the upper hand if I have a hunting rifle in my
house for protection, even if I never hunt.

Better than a feather duster but not nearly as good as a handgun.

And, I understand that
loosening the laws to make it easier for me to own a handgun will also
make it easier for any burglar that breaks into my house to own a
handgun.

Utter nonsense.

I prefer the status quo.

You prefer to be defenseless. Understood. I prefer otherwise. You
can stay where you are and STFU.

I'd prefer the situation where I
have a hunting rifle against an unarmed burglar to one where we both
have hand guns.

You're an idiot, too. You don't have that choice.

On May 24, 8:39*am, nestork wrote:
[_2_ Wrote:

;3067436']
I see. *So, while you think the Britts should arm every
cop, you also think a person needs a darn good reason
to have a pistol in their own house. * Is wanting to be
able to protect yourself a good enough reason?

OK, let's say I hear someone late at night walking around in my house
(if I had a house). *Yes, ideally, I would like to have a hand gun in my
hand when I go to confront them. *However, I understand that a hunting
rifle would be nearly as effective in that situation, whereas no burglar
is going to be lurking around the neighborhood while carrying a hunting
rifle because that would draw attention to him and people would call the
police. *So, I still have the upper hand if I have a hunting rifle in my
house for protection, even if I never hunt. *And, I understand that
loosening the laws to make it easier for me to own a handgun will also
make it easier for any burglar that breaks into my house to own a
handgun. *I prefer the status quo. *I'd prefer the situation where I
have a hunting rifle against an unarmed burglar to one where we both
have hand guns.

--
nestork

Terribly illogical thinking...

consider these points....

1) most burglars (in the US) break into unccompied homes...they fear
encountering an armed occupant
2) a hunting rifle is not the correct firearm to use in home
3) attempting to "clear" a home by yourself is bad idea
4) if you think there is someone in your home....call 911, stay on the
line, put yourself in a defensible position (hopefully, with a
firearm) & wait

This whole discussion is stupid because it presumes that every burglar is going to have a hand gun.

That's BS.

I have had several burglaries in my building over the past 25 years, and the few times that the culprits were ever confronted, they relied on their ability to outrun the tenant or myself to get away. If they had a handgun, then they certainly didn't even show it; let alone threaten to use it. And, in both cases where the persons who broke in or were trying to break in were confronted, neither the tenant nor myself felt in any danger because as soon as we started going after them, they ran away.

You guys watch too much TV. Or, maybe you live in more affluent neighborhoods where people have plenty of money and jewellery scattered around their homes just for the taking. Obviously, that kind of easy pickings is going to attract a higher class of burglar; one who's clean and sober and will save his money to buy a hand gun. Where I live, your average house burglar is drug addict looking to steal anything he can sell to buy more drugs. If they ever did have a gun, they'd have sold it to buy drugs too.

On Fri, 24 May 2013 13:42:33 -0700, Oren wrote:

On Fri, 24 May 2013 17:39:40 +0200, nestork
wrote:

So, I still have the upper hand if I have a hunting rifle in my
house for protection, even if I never hunt.

Moose ****. Not if the intruder knows how to take your weapon without
firing a shot.

And, I understand that
loosening the laws to make it easier for me to own a handgun will also
make it easier for any burglar that breaks into my house to own a
handgun.

What a ****ed up law. That law should read to kill him dead where he
stands. This is no negotiations in my house.

I liked the sign I saw a couple of weeks ago.

silhouette of person pointing a gun at you

"WE DON'T CALL 9-1-1"


I prefer the status quo. I'd prefer the situation where I
have a hunting rifle against an unarmed burglar to one where we both
have hand guns.

I'll take that rifle from you.

Unarmed bandit? I'd take a Bowie knife to that fight.

On Fri, 24 May 2013 16:29:48 -0700, Ashton Crusher
wrote:

On Fri, 24 May 2013 07:18:28 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On May 24, 1:32*am, nestork wrote:
Yeah, I think it's kind of stupid the British police DON'T have guns.
What are they supposed to do if the criminals they're trying to arrest
DO have guns.

Many of them do have guns. Like the ones that responded
to this incident and shot both of the muslim scum.



You call arriving 20 minutes later a "response"? I'd call it waking
up from a nap.

"Could you ask him to go away?"

http://seattle.cbslocal.com/2013/05/...o-budget-cuts/

On May 23, 3:58*pm, wrote:
On Thursday, May 23, 2013 5:02:03 AM UTC-7, Home Guy wrote:
nestork wrote:

I think it's terrible. *This was a deliberate unprovoked attack and

murder on a public street. *A literal drive-by, but with a knife and

meat cleaver instead of a gun. *It's just shocking and disturbing to

see something like this or even learn of it.

Don't dismiss this as an unprovoked attack, as a criminal act.

Moozlems who emmigrate to the west are a growing cancer within our

societies. *They harbor deep-seated ideas about how they are supposed to

interact with non-believers. *Like most believers of fictional people or

supernatural gods, they believe their immortal soul is on the line, and

when you believe that, you can and will do anything here in the real

"meat space" if you have been sufficiently brainwashed. *The cult of

islam has taken that brainwashing to probably the most extreme among all

religions on earth.

Any moozlem that you meet that seems to be on an even keel and makes

mild statements about how actions such as this killing are not a true

reflection on islam is lying. *Deep down they don't really believe what

they tell you - they know that they are being judged by ala and they

know they are in a war with non-believers, and they all want to win that

war. *Some of them are just more active combatants than others.

Any bad speller that you meet that seems to be on an even keel and makes
mild statements about how actions such as this bad spelling are not a true
reflection on public education is lying. *Deep down they don't really believe what they tell you - they know that they are being judged by The Great Proofreader and they know they are in a war with good spellers, and they all want to win that war. Some of them are just more active combatants than others.

Heh Heh.
He knows the FBI/MI5/6 has tags out for anyone mentioning Muslim,
Allah, Terrorist etc on the internet.
He believes his deliberate misspelling will bamboozle them.

On May 23, 6:44*pm, "Pete C." wrote:
Home Guy wrote:

nestork wrote:

I think it's terrible. *This was a deliberate unprovoked attack and
murder on a public street. *A literal drive-by, but with a knife and
meat cleaver instead of a gun. *It's just shocking and disturbing to
see something like this or even learn of it.

Don't dismiss this as an unprovoked attack, as a criminal act.

Moozlems who emmigrate to the west are a growing cancer within our
societies. *They harbor deep-seated ideas about how they are supposed to
interact with non-believers. *Like most believers of fictional people or
supernatural gods, they believe their immortal soul is on the line, and
when you believe that, you can and will do anything here in the real
"meat space" if you have been sufficiently brainwashed. *The cult of
islam has taken that brainwashing to probably the most extreme among all
religions on earth.

Any moozlem that you meet that seems to be on an even keel and makes
mild statements about how actions such as this killing are not a true
reflection on islam is lying. *Deep down they don't really believe what
they tell you - they know that they are being judged by ala and they
know they are in a war with non-believers, and they all want to win that
war. *Some of them are just more active combatants than others.

There are essentially three types of muslims:

1. Active militant terrorists

2. Passive supporters of the active militant terrorists

3. Those pretending to be muslim to avoid being murdered by types 1 & 2.

Yep. That about sums it up.

On Sat, 25 May 2013 06:32:37 +0200, nestork
wrote:


Attila Iskander;3067848 Wrote:

Please educate yourself BEFORE you come back to spout more ignorant
nonsense.


This whole discussion is stupid because it presumes that every burglar
is going to have a hand gun.


It doesn't presume that at all. The FACTS are that if the buglers know
the homeowner is likely to be unarmed they are far more likely to
burglarize the place while you are home. If you are home then there
is obviously more chance you will get hurt by the burglar. Because
you personally have not been hurt has nothing to do with this issue.


That's BS.

I have had several burglaries in my building over the past 25 years, and
the few times that the culprits were ever confronted, they relied on
their ability to outrun the tenant or myself to get away. If they had a
handgun, then they certainly didn't even show it. And, in both cases
where the persons who broke in or were trying to break in were
confronted, neither the tenant nor myself felt in any danger because as
soon as we started going after them, they ran away.

You guys watch too much TV. The people I confronted were a couple of
natives that looked like they were homeless, and would have drank a gun
before they went to all the trouble of breaking into a washing machine
for it's stash of quarters.

"nestork" wrote in message
...

Attila Iskander;3067848 Wrote:

Please educate yourself BEFORE you come back to spout more ignorant
nonsense.
++++++
++ Start UNsnip
++
++ Criminals have no problems getting handguns on the black market.
++ And they get them far more easily than you do.
++ The very fact that homeowners like you are disarmed is the very reason
++ that hot burglaries are more popular in Canada, Australia and the UK
++ than in the US
++
++ Please educate yourself BEFORE you come back to spout more
++ ignorant nonsense
++ http://davekopel.org/2a/LawRev/LawyersGunsBurglars.htm
++
++ Stop UNsnip
++++++





This whole discussion is stupid because it presumes that every burglar
is going to have a hand gun.


That's YOUR presumption


That's BS.



So stop the BS, by not making any more stupid and ignorant assumptions
I have had several burglaries in my building over the past 25 years, and
the few times that the culprits were ever confronted, they relied on
their ability to outrun the tenant or myself to get away. If they had a
handgun, then they certainly didn't even show it. And, in both cases
where the persons who broke in or were trying to break in were
confronted, neither the tenant nor myself felt in any danger because as
soon as we started going after them, they ran away.


That's nice
So we should ignore crime data and go by your stories ?
How stupid are you actually ?



You guys watch too much TV.

Hardly watch any at all
That 's just more of your ignorant BS


The people I confronted were a couple of
natives that looked like they were homeless, and would have drank a gun
before they went to all the trouble of breaking into a washing machine
for it's stash of quarters.



Again with the stories..
Not every place is like your little backwater
But hey, if that's the only way you can justify your ignorance. go for it.


IN the meantime I would suggest that you actually READ the URL I posted and
that you cut to spout more of YOUR ignorant BS.
Here it is again
This time READ the ****ing URL
++ Please educate yourself BEFORE you come back to spout more
++ ignorant nonsense
++ http://davekopel.org/2a/LawRev/LawyersGunsBurglars.htm
++

In article ,
nestork wrote:

Attila Iskander;3067848 Wrote:

Please educate yourself BEFORE you come back to spout more ignorant
nonsense.


This whole discussion is stupid because it presumes that every burglar
is going to have a hand gun.

Actually I would presume most don't. However, I have seen enough
reports of burglars with guns that I would not be willing to presume
that MINE doesn't. One burglar having is a gun is quite enough reason
for me to not want to take chances.
--
America is at that awkward stage. It's too late
to work within the system, but too early to shoot
the *******s."-- Claire Wolfe

One bullet wound can ruin your entire day.
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..
..
"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message m...


This whole discussion is stupid
because it presumes that every burglar
is going to have a hand gun.

Actually I would presume most don't. However, I have seen enough
reports of burglars with guns that I would not be willing to presume
that MINE doesn't. One burglar having is a gun is quite enough reason
for me to not want to take chances.
--
America is at that awkward stage. It's too late
to work within the system, but too early to shoot
the *******s."-- Claire Wolfe

On Sat, 25 May 2013 07:55:38 -0400, Kurt Ullman
wrote:

In article ,
nestork wrote:

Attila Iskander;3067848 Wrote:

Please educate yourself BEFORE you come back to spout more ignorant
nonsense.


This whole discussion is stupid because it presumes that every burglar
is going to have a hand gun.

Actually I would presume most don't. However, I have seen enough
reports of burglars with guns that I would not be willing to presume
that MINE doesn't. One burglar having is a gun is quite enough reason
for me to not want to take chances.

Shoot first and call the police, later, to clean up the mess. That's
their job (protecting you isn't).

On May 25, 12:32*am, nestork wrote:
Attila Iskander;3067848 Wrote:



Please educate yourself BEFORE you come back to spout more ignorant
nonsense.

This whole discussion is stupid because it presumes that every burglar
is going to have a hand gun.

First, I didn't see anyone make that presumption. Second,
every burglar doesn't need to have a gun, only the one that
enters *your* house is what matters. And why are you limited
to burglaries? In my world, it's not burglaries that are the
cause of most violent confrontations. Have you not heard about
home invasions, nuts high on drugs, ex-boyfriends, ex-husbands,
etc that smash into homes and kill people?





That's BS.

I have had several burglaries in my building over the past 25 years, and
the few times that the culprits were ever confronted, they relied on
their ability to outrun the tenant or myself to get away. *If they had a
handgun, then they certainly didn't even show it. *And, in both cases
where the persons who broke in or were trying to break in were
confronted, neither the tenant nor myself felt in any danger because as
soon as we started going after them, they ran away.

Well, if you confronted a burglar and didn't feel any danger,
then you are indeed either a liar or an idiot. Even if I had a
shotgun and confronted a burglar I would feel in danger. And
it's nice that the ones you encountered ran away. Let's see
how you feel when you encounter one that doesn't just run
away, perhaps because they are high on meth, for example.




You guys watch too much TV. *The people I confronted were a couple of
natives that looked like they were homeless, and would have drank a gun
before they went to all the trouble of breaking into a washing machine
for it's stash of quarters.

--
nestork

Incredibly naive.

Here, lemme tell you how the burglars in my area seem to operate based on what I've heard from family and friends.

They get a newspaper from somewhere and check the classified section for wedding and funeral announcements. That announcement will say who is getting married, where and when, and ditto for funerals. They know that for such occasions, the whole family will be at the wedding or funeral, so that no one will be home. That's especially true if it was a younger person that died tragically. They look up the family's name in the phone book if the addresses aren't in the ad and go break into their house on the day of the wedding or funeral.

Most burglars are drug addicts just wanting to find the money to keep getting high. They're not so much hardened criminals as pathetic people that need help getting off whatever drug they're addicted to. This is the reason why waging a "war on drugs" by imprisoning people in the drug trade (many of whom are addicts) simply doesn't work as well as the programs they have in Holland, Belguim and Denmark where addicts can get medical help to get off their addictions. By removing the addiction, you remove the need for money to feed the addiction, and that removes the need to commit crimes to get that money.

Yep, the gangs that break into jewellry stores or people that rob banks have guns and aren't drug addicts. They're professionals who are in it just for the money. But, they're not the people smashing a basement window to steal an iPod they can sell fast.