This country, that is ... ever increasing examples of aberrant behavior
makes you wonder:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081128/...wal_mart_death

Here's hoping the security camera's were working and can be used to
prosecute these idiots, who are arguably more despicable than the terrorists
in India who have motives relatively more noble, by comparison, than sheer,
unmitigated, selfish, consumer greed exhibited here.

Really ****ing hard to believe ... I should have just gone to Canada in
1967.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Swingman" wrote in message
Here's hoping the security camera's were working and can be used to
prosecute these idiots, who are arguably more despicable than the
terrorists
in India who have motives relatively more noble, by comparison, than
sheer,
unmitigated, selfish, consumer greed exhibited here.

Really ****ing hard to believe ... I should have just gone to Canada in
1967.

Hmmm. Not sure that would make much difference. Maybe not price riots at
stores, but we have our own set of idiots up here that should be shot and
****ed on. More than once, I've seen Leaf's fans or some other sports fans
marching up Yonge Street, smashing store windows and looting everything on
the way.

There's a number of advantages living close to downtown Toronto, but then
there's the times I've felt like going out with a baseball bat to crack
people in the kneecap (mostly under 30 years of age) for looting their way
up the street using mob mentality as the sole excuse.

The police would like to put cameras up in all the popular tourist
destinations and then the privacy idiots emerge and swarm around like bees
complaining about lack of privacy. Yet, they're the first ones to scream
about lack of police protection when someone rips them or their business
off.

This whole damned world is screwed up worse than I could ever have imagined.

"Upscale" wrote:

More than once, I've seen Leaf's fans or some other sports fans
marching up Yonge Street, smashing store windows and looting
everything on
the way.

As in soccer (their football) fans across the pond, especially in the
UK.

Lew

"Swingman" wrote

This country, that is ... ever increasing examples of aberrant behavior
makes you wonder:


The "aberrant behavior" is just normal holiday shopping madness. And this
sort of thing has happened at walmart before. Which is why I will not go
near any of those mob type of sales. Women, in particular, become a
frenzied mob when their are limited bargains available. I wonder what the
evolutionary biologists would say about this.

There was a case locally, a few years ago, in a parking structure at a mall.
The season was Christmas and parking was scarce. A parking space opened up
and a woman driving her car darted into the spot. There was another woman,
carrying packages, walking by. She got run over. The individual who ran her
over ran into the mall to go shopping, leaving her victim laying on the
cement with packages scattered.

Witnesses ran to her aid and called the police and the medics. Sho was
transported to a hospital and the police waited for the hit and run driver.
She came out of the mall and became very indignant when placed under arrest.
Her explanation, "Parking was hard to find and she got in my way."

These kinds of holiday madness events occur every year. Sad to say, but that
is the way it is.

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
marching up Yonge Street, smashing store windows and looting

As in soccer (their football) fans across the pond, especially in the
UK.

What I'd like to see is a significant portion of a mob arrested and hit with
really severe fines or imprisonment appropriate to the crime and then have
their pictures and names plastered in the local newspaper. Not five or six
arrests like usually happens, but 100-200 arrests, enough to make people
think twice about using mob mentality to steal or destroy.

On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 15:25:54 -0600, "Swingman" wrote:

This country, that is ... ever increasing examples of aberrant behavior
makes you wonder:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081128/...wal_mart_death

Here's hoping the security camera's were working and can be used to
prosecute these idiots, who are arguably more despicable than the terrorists
in India who have motives relatively more noble, by comparison, than sheer,
unmitigated, selfish, consumer greed exhibited here.

Really ****ing hard to believe ... I should have just gone to Canada in
1967.


The frenzy is worldwide, so you'll see it in Canada too. Many more
deaths in car accidents near malls and heart attacks due to the
shopping craze. I avoided stores today.

In article ,
Upscale wrote:
The police would like to put cameras up in all the popular tourist
destinations and then the privacy idiots emerge and swarm around like
bees complaining about lack of privacy. Yet, they're the first ones to
scream about lack of police protection when someone rips them or their
business off.

Well, the UK has, I am told, more security cameras per head of population,
than any other country in the world but we still have many problems.

Due to "human rights" it seems the thugs have more rights than the
victims. There seem to be regular reports in the newspapers of public
spirited people trying to make a stand and being banged up by the courts
while the offenders get off scot free. We, as householders, have no rights
to protect our property and can do little in self defence.

I don't have a problem with cameras but I do object to UK government plans
to monitor all internet traffic.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...il-992268.html

--
Stuart Winsor

Don't miss the Risc OS Christmas show
http://rickman.orpheusweb.co.uk/mug/show08/MUGshow.html

On Nov 28, 2:25*pm, "Swingman" wrote:
This country, that is ... ever increasing examples of aberrant behavior
makes you wonder:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081128/...wal_mart_death

Here's hoping the security camera's were working and can be used to
prosecute these idiots, who are arguably more despicable than the terrorists
in India who have motives relatively more noble, by comparison, than sheer,
unmitigated, selfish, consumer greed exhibited here.

Really ****ing hard to believe ... I should have just gone to Canada in
1967.

--www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

Of course it's worth saving, but I think it'll take a major "paradigm
shift" (sorry) regarding economic growth, personal values and birth
control. Not bloody likely, eh? The love of money, and that amazing
effect that our gonads (and religion) can impose, are some of the
culprits. One of the worst things: fear of other cultures' mixing, or
just their proximity, in our societies! Tom

tom wrote:

On Nov 28, 2:25Â*pm, "Swingman" wrote:
This country, that is ... ever increasing examples of aberrant behavior
makes you wonder:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081128/...wal_mart_death

Here's hoping the security camera's were working and can be used to
prosecute these idiots, who are arguably more despicable than the
terrorists in India who have motives relatively more noble, by
comparison, than sheer, unmitigated, selfish, consumer greed exhibited
here.

Really ****ing hard to believe ... I should have just gone to Canada in
1967.

--www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

Of course it's worth saving, but I think it'll take a major "paradigm
shift" (sorry) regarding economic growth, personal values and birth
control. Not bloody likely, eh? The love of money, and that amazing
effect that our gonads (and religion) can impose, are some of the
culprits. One of the worst things: fear of other cultures' mixing, or
just their proximity, in our societies! Tom

Say what? The only left talking point you missed was re-distributive
change.

Aside from greed, the rest of your rant has no application to the problem
discussed.

Overpopulation caused people to trample someone?

Economic growth caused people to stampede?

Religion caused people trying to get to a sale to act like a mob?

Xenophobia caused people to do this?


A cogent argument that unbridled greed along with lack of moral and
religious underpinnings led to the kinds of behaviors observed could be
made here; your talking points don't seem to even address the problem.


--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

"Stuart"


Well, the UK has, I am told, more security cameras per head of population,
than any other country in the world but we still have many problems.

Due to "human rights" it seems the thugs have more rights than the
victims. There seem to be regular reports in the newspapers of public
spirited people trying to make a stand and being banged up by the courts
while the offenders get off scot free. We, as householders, have no rights
to protect our property and can do little in self defence.

I don't have a problem with cameras but I do object to UK government plans
to monitor all internet traffic.

I'm not surprised. Years ago, when I lived the UK (early 60's), it was
always surprising to me that when anyone was stopped on the street, one of
the two 'Bobbies' who did the stopping would walk off a few yards with his
walkie-talkie, and, in two minutes knew who owned your house, what you paid
in taxes, whether your telly license was up to date, where you worked, how
much you made, and what your blood type was.

Still, since my oldest daughter is married to a POME and lives in Sheffield,
I am partial to the country.

You guys always seem to be about 5 to 10 years ahead of us in cultural and
social issues, both good and bad, from TV programs to privacy issues.
Besides, there is nothing more pitiful/shameful on earth than the **** poor
attempts our TV industry makes to mimic even the BBC's programming.

But ... do us a favor and try to keep that sharia bull**** on that side of
the ocean!

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

On Nov 28, 4:25*pm, "Swingman" wrote:
This country, that is ... ever increasing examples of aberrant behavior
makes you wonder:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081128/...wal_mart_death

Here's hoping the security camera's were working and can be used to
prosecute these idiots, who are arguably more despicable than the terrorists
in India who have motives relatively more noble, by comparison, than sheer,
unmitigated, selfish, consumer greed exhibited here.

Really ****ing hard to believe ... I should have just gone to Canada in
1967.

--www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

Yea, I read the responses from many of this group, and they are all
missing the point.
What Swingman talks about is greed. NOT alcohol-induced sports-****s
who were never really 'right' anyway.
MY interpretation of Swingman's post is about the demon GREED. NOT out-
of-control OVER-enthusiastic loons.
..
..
I am at a loss of words. All I can hope for is that the death of that
Walmart employee was some freak of circumstance...but my heart tells
me that it was more sinister than that. It WAS about somebody willing
to leave a path of destruction to get what they wanted. Devil-be-
damned. The killer(s) would make nice KBR(Haliburton) employees.

On Nov 28, 4:25*pm, "Swingman" wrote:
[snipped to amplify my incessant desire to throw my hands up in the
air and screaming: DOESN'T ANYBODY THINK ANYMORE???"

Really ****ing hard to believe ... I should have just gone to Canada in
1967.

Most went back home when amnesty was announced.
In the meantime, I would have fed and clothed you and given you a warm
place to sleep.
Just long enough until you had an opportunity to sort out what was
troubling you.
There *IS* a difference between a coward and a conscientious
objector.
..
..
..
I will never understand what that difference is.

Subject

As this is being typed the news is coming in that gunman have entered
a Toys-R-Us store in Palm Desert, Ca (about 100 miles east of downtown
L/A), and are shooting up the place.

Too early for casualty reports.

The mess in India continues.

What the hell is this world coming to?

Lew

On Nov 28, 5:17*pm, "Lew Hodgett" wrote:
"Upscale" wrote:
More than once, I've seen Leaf's fans or some other sports fans
marching up Yonge Street, smashing store windows and looting
everything on
the way.

As in soccer (their football) fans across the pond, especially in the
UK.

Lew

There is a whole ****load of difference between runamuk sports-****s
and greedy killers.

"Robatoy" wrote

I will never understand what that difference is.

Absolutely no shame in that ... why? Because you never know when that may
change, and in the blink of an eye. It could happen tomorrow.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in news:4P%Xk.1638$us6.1484
@nwrddc01.gnilink.net:

Subject

As this is being typed the news is coming in that gunman have entered
a Toys-R-Us store in Palm Desert, Ca (about 100 miles east of downtown
L/A), and are shooting up the place.

Too early for casualty reports.

The mess in India continues.

What the hell is this world coming to?

Lew

I believe that in order to be allowed to have a firearm, one should have
to pass examinations in firearm safety, mental stability, and have never
been convicted of any crime or tresspass with violent overtones,
including sale of a firearm to unauthorized person(s). Anyone who fails
any such exam should be entered onto a blacklist.

The right to bear arms should not be extended to those not qualifying.

Hey, my opinions are mine!!
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Swingman wrote:
[snippage throughout]
Still, since my oldest daughter is married to a POME and lives in Sheffield,
I am partial to the country.

Is that one of these?

POME Palm Oil Mill Effluent
POME Prisoner Of Mother England
POME Product Of My Environment
POME Philosophy of Mathematics Education (journal)
POME Point of Market Entry
POME Point of Main Effort
POME Principles of Motion Economy
POME Prisoner of Her Majesty of England

miswired minds...
jo4hn

Han wrote:

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in news:4P%Xk.1638$us6.1484
@nwrddc01.gnilink.net:

Subject

As this is being typed the news is coming in that gunman have entered
a Toys-R-Us store in Palm Desert, Ca (about 100 miles east of downtown
L/A), and are shooting up the place.

Too early for casualty reports.

The mess in India continues.

What the hell is this world coming to?

Lew

I believe that in order to be allowed to have a firearm, one should have
to pass examinations in firearm safety,
Kind of like the literacy tests in the south?

mental stability, and have never
been convicted of any crime or tresspass with violent overtones,
including sale of a firearm to unauthorized person(s).

It's already illegal for anyone who has been judged incompetent, been
convicted of a felony (including sale of a firearm to unauthorized persons)
to possess a firearm.


Anyone who fails
any such exam should be entered onto a blacklist.

Have you heard of the National Instant Background Check? Before
purchasing a firearm, that database is consulted and if any of the
conditions stated above, plus a few more such as outstanding restraining
orders, arrest (not necessarily conviction) for domestic violence, and
several others are encountered, the sale is refused.


The right to bear arms should not be extended to those not qualifying.


Wouldn't it be better if California had more liberal carry laws in which
the gunmen (already committing an illegal act) didn't know who might be
armed and put a stop to their mayhem?



Hey, my opinions are mine!!

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

In article ,
Han wrote:

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in news:4P%Xk.1638$us6.1484
@nwrddc01.gnilink.net:

Subject

As this is being typed the news is coming in that gunman have entered
a Toys-R-Us store in Palm Desert, Ca (about 100 miles east of downtown
L/A), and are shooting up the place.

Too early for casualty reports.

The mess in India continues.

What the hell is this world coming to?

Lew

I believe that in order to be allowed to have a firearm, one should have
to pass examinations in firearm safety, mental stability, and have never
been convicted of any crime or tresspass with violent overtones,
including sale of a firearm to unauthorized person(s). Anyone who fails
any such exam should be entered onto a blacklist.

The right to bear arms should not be extended to those not qualifying.

Hey, my opinions are mine!!

Yes, your opinions are yours *S*.

Criminals don't have sensitivity training, weapons training, scruples,
morals..yadda, yadda.

Sooo.. MY idea, is that in order to be equal to the enemy, one must
think and behave like one. IOW, get a gun when you can, to hell with
regulations. The biggest fear I have, is a government that tries to
disarm its population. What COULD they be up to?

If I am to believe that I have nothing to fear, then nobody should fear
my .50 calibre. It is in good, safe, well-trained hands.
I take care of my stuff, you take care of yours.

And if you know what you're doing, a .50 calibre can take out an Apache
helicopter, talking to it won't work. G

"Robatoy" wrote

SNIP

And if you know what you're doing, a .50 calibre can take out an Apache
helicopter, talking to it won't work. G

Seems to me that it would all depend upon what the poiny thing in your arms is saying and whether or not what is being said is having an impact upon the object of your dissertation.

Also seems to me a .50 could make real believers out of most miscreants.

P D Q (G)

Han wrote:
"Lew Hodgett" wrote in
news:4P%Xk.1638$us6.1484 @nwrddc01.gnilink.net:

Subject

As this is being typed the news is coming in that gunman have
entered
a Toys-R-Us store in Palm Desert, Ca (about 100 miles east of
downtown L/A), and are shooting up the place.

Too early for casualty reports.

The mess in India continues.

What the hell is this world coming to?

Lew

I believe that in order to be allowed to have a firearm, one should
have to pass examinations in firearm safety, mental stability, and
have never been convicted of any crime or tresspass with violent
overtones, including sale of a firearm to unauthorized person(s).
Anyone who fails any such exam should be entered onto a blacklist.

Under Federal law no person who has been convicted of a felony or been
adjudicated criminally insane is allowed to own a firearm, so you
pretty much have what you want.

It used to be that being committed would be a block, but the courts
struck that down.

Passing examinations in order to exercise a right has a very bad
reputation in the US, where such tests were used to bar minorities
from voting.

The right to bear arms should not be extended to those not
qualifying.

In which case it becomes a privilege and not a right.

Hey, my opinions are mine!!

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"Han" wrote in message

I believe that in order to be allowed to have a firearm, one should have
to pass examinations in firearm safety, mental stability, and have never
been convicted of any crime or tresspass with violent overtones,
including sale of a firearm to unauthorized person(s). Anyone who fails
any such exam should be entered onto a blacklist.

The right to bear arms should not be extended to those not qualifying.

Hey, my opinions are mine!!
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Plenty of laws exist. The problem is that people don't always obey the
law. Making more laws won't help in that situation.

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 00:59:17 +0000, Han wrote:

I believe that in order to be allowed to have a firearm, one should have
to pass examinations in firearm safety, mental stability, and have never
been convicted of any crime or tresspass with violent overtones,
including sale of a firearm to unauthorized person(s). Anyone who fails
any such exam should be entered onto a blacklist.

Good idea in principle, Han, but I doubt it'd keep any firearms out of the
possession of criminals. All it would do is penalize the honest citizen.
Anyone who knew they couldn't pass the exam would just get a gun on the
black market.

On Nov 28, 4:28*pm, Mark & Juanita wrote:
tom wrote:
On Nov 28, 2:25*pm, "Swingman" wrote:
This country, that is ... ever increasing examples of aberrant behavior
makes you wonder:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081128/...wal_mart_death

Here's hoping the security camera's were working and can be used to
prosecute these idiots, who are arguably more despicable than the
terrorists in India who have motives relatively more noble, by
comparison, than sheer, unmitigated, selfish, consumer greed exhibited
here.

Really ****ing hard to believe ... I should have just gone to Canada in
1967.

--www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

Of course it's worth saving, but I think it'll take a major "paradigm
shift" (sorry) regarding economic growth, personal values and birth
control. Not bloody likely, eh? The love of money, and that amazing
effect that our gonads (and religion) can impose, are some of the
culprits. One of the worst things: fear of other cultures' mixing, or
just their proximity, in our societies! Tom

* Say what? *The only left talking point you missed was re-distributive
change.

* Aside from greed, the rest of your rant has no application to the problem
discussed.

* Overpopulation caused people to trample someone?

* Economic growth caused people to stampede?

* Religion caused people trying to get to a sale to act like a mob?

* Xenophobia caused people to do this?

* A cogent argument that unbridled greed along with lack of moral and
religious underpinnings led to the kinds of behaviors observed could be
made here; your talking points don't seem to even address the problem.

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough
Think about it, neighbor. It's all (not just the stampede) about
money, power, real estate and culture. Religion had nothing to do with
this Christmas sale, of course(smirk). Perhaps one might trample
someone to get that special toy for his or her progeny. Gonads, that
is. Legacy. Culture. And the general question of "Should it be saved"
needs to address it's (Whatever "it" may be, still being unspecified)
leading problems. So think globally. However, I'm thinking about a big
sailboat, and leaving anyway. Vote Libertarian! So very far right, I
appear left. Nomex donned. Tom

I previously wrote:

Subject

As this is being typed the news is coming in that gunman have
entered a Toys-R-Us store in Palm Desert, Ca (about 100 miles east
of downtown L/A), and are shooting up the place.

Too early for casualty reports.

The mess in India continues.

What the hell is this world coming to?

................................................. ..........
The reports are in.

Seems two women got into a "cat" fight, hair pulling, the whole bit,
inside the store.

The men accompanying the women were each packing heat (Just what you
need to go to the toy store) which they pulled out and shot and killed
each other as the fight escalated..

Darwin rules.

Lew

"Swingman" wrote in message
But ... do us a favor and try to keep that sharia bull**** on that side of
the ocean!

Yeah, well it's up here in Canada and has been approved in one or more
places from what I've heard. And, I too think that it's out of place
alongside Canadian law. I don't profess to know the finer details about
Sharia law, but every time I read or hear about it, the topic seems to be
something to do with a woman getting ripped off in some way.

"Robatoy" wrote in message
What Swingman talks about is greed. NOT alcohol-induced
sports-****s who were never really 'right' anyway.

Not as much as one might think, at least not the two times I've witnessed
it. Sure, there were the alcohol induced segments of people doing the smash
and grabs, but for the most part, it's been perfectly sober citizens using
the mob mentality as an opportunity to steal.

I call that greed. Maybe you're talking about a different type?

"Robatoy" wrote in message
There is a whole ****load of difference between runamuk
sports-****s and greedy killers.

Not really since a significant portion of the mob grows as it moves and many
use the crowd simply as a means to steal.

If you suddenly came upon a swarm of people running to a hole in the wall of
a bank and scooping up handfuls of cash, would you be tempted to do the
same, even for a split second? I'm willing to admit that I'd seriously
consider it before discarding the idea.

Obviously, it's never happened to me so I can't say for sure what I'd do
under those circumstances, but I hope I'd resist the temptation.

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 00:59:17 +0000, Han wrote:

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in news:4P%Xk.1638$us6.1484
@nwrddc01.gnilink.net:

Subject

As this is being typed the news is coming in that gunman have entered
a Toys-R-Us store in Palm Desert, Ca (about 100 miles east of downtown
L/A), and are shooting up the place.

Too early for casualty reports.

The mess in India continues.

What the hell is this world coming to?

Lew

I believe that in order to be allowed to have a firearm, one should have
to pass examinations in firearm safety, mental stability, and have never
been convicted of any crime or tresspass with violent overtones,
including sale of a firearm to unauthorized person(s). Anyone who fails
any such exam should be entered onto a blacklist.

The right to bear arms should not be extended to those not qualifying.

Hey, my opinions are mine!!

Extend that to drivers license too. Road rage is more dangerous with more
horse power than any gun and fools can take out groups with one aim and
action. There are a lot of dummies with keys. Fewer carry loaded guns
wherever they go. If they do carry a gun, if sober it might be better to
run you over. That might fly as an accident in court.

A shooting always looks like malice.

Mark & Juanita wrote in
:

Han wrote:

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in
news:4P%Xk.1638$us6.1484 @nwrddc01.gnilink.net:

Subject

As this is being typed the news is coming in that gunman have
entered a Toys-R-Us store in Palm Desert, Ca (about 100 miles east
of downtown L/A), and are shooting up the place.

Too early for casualty reports.

The mess in India continues.

What the hell is this world coming to?

Lew

I believe that in order to be allowed to have a firearm, one should
have to pass examinations in firearm safety,
Kind of like the literacy tests in the south?

No, ability to use the instrument desired in a manner that is safe to the
user and others. I have no objection to people having guns if they are
used and stored in a safe manner. Well, I still think it would be a
little too easy for an "accident", but US law says apparently that you
are allowed a firearm.

mental stability, and have never
been convicted of any crime or tresspass with violent overtones,
including sale of a firearm to unauthorized person(s).

It's already illegal for anyone who has been judged incompetent, been
convicted of a felony (including sale of a firearm to unauthorized
persons) to possess a firearm.


Anyone who fails
any such exam should be entered onto a blacklist.

Have you heard of the National Instant Background Check? Before
purchasing a firearm, that database is consulted and if any of the
conditions stated above, plus a few more such as outstanding
restraining orders, arrest (not necessarily conviction) for domestic
violence, and several others are encountered, the sale is refused.

Yes, I have heard of the NIBC. Also, that it is easily circumvented in
some states/cases. That's why I think a license is a good thing.

The right to bear arms should not be extended to those not
qualifying.


Wouldn't it be better if California had more liberal carry laws in
which the gunmen (already committing an illegal act) didn't know who
might be armed and put a stop to their mayhem?

No, I don't think we should have multiple participants in a shootout.
This case is a good example. Do you really want 10 other people to pull
out handguns and start shooting at each other in a crowded department
store?

Hey, my opinions are mine!!

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Larry Blanchard wrote in
news
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 00:59:17 +0000, Han wrote:

I believe that in order to be allowed to have a firearm, one should
have to pass examinations in firearm safety, mental stability, and
have never been convicted of any crime or tresspass with violent
overtones, including sale of a firearm to unauthorized person(s).
Anyone who fails any such exam should be entered onto a blacklist.

Good idea in principle, Han, but I doubt it'd keep any firearms out of
the possession of criminals. All it would do is penalize the honest
citizen. Anyone who knew they couldn't pass the exam would just get a
gun on the black market.

I guess I am still too much of a 60's idealist ...
(see X-face)

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

Han wrote:
Mark & Juanita wrote in
:

Han wrote:

"Lew Hodgett" wrote in
news:4P%Xk.1638$us6.1484 @nwrddc01.gnilink.net:

Subject

As this is being typed the news is coming in that gunman have
entered a Toys-R-Us store in Palm Desert, Ca (about 100 miles
east
of downtown L/A), and are shooting up the place.

Too early for casualty reports.

The mess in India continues.

What the hell is this world coming to?

Lew

I believe that in order to be allowed to have a firearm, one
should
have to pass examinations in firearm safety,
Kind of like the literacy tests in the south?

No, ability to use the instrument desired in a manner that is safe
to
the user and others.

You've missed the point. If one has to pass examinations then the
examinations can be used in a discriminatory or unreasonably
restrictive manner--in parts of the US they were used to prevent
minorities from voting--the tests were designed in such a manner that
the scoring was a judgment call, and in the judgment of the scorers no
black person was literate no matter what answere he gave while any
white person was literate even if he couldn't read. In parts of the
US there have been requirements for such examinations to be taken in
order to be allowed to own a firearm. The tests were given very
rarely in unexpected places with no prior announcement and the number
of applicants allowed at any given session was very small--in effect
the only people who were allowed to own firearms were those who had
enough political influence to be informed by word of mouth.

I have no objection to people having guns if
they are used and stored in a safe manner. Well, I still think it
would be a little too easy for an "accident", but US law says
apparently that you are allowed a firearm.

Accidental shootings in the US are quite rare. More people die in
bicycle accidents than in firearms accidents, but we place no
restriction on the ownership of bicycles (and we should--an amazing
number of bicyclists don't seem to be aware that they are expected to
obey traffic laws).

mental stability, and have never
been convicted of any crime or tresspass with violent overtones,
including sale of a firearm to unauthorized person(s).

It's already illegal for anyone who has been judged incompetent,
been convicted of a felony (including sale of a firearm to
unauthorized persons) to possess a firearm.


Anyone who fails
any such exam should be entered onto a blacklist.

Have you heard of the National Instant Background Check? Before
purchasing a firearm, that database is consulted and if any of the
conditions stated above, plus a few more such as outstanding
restraining orders, arrest (not necessarily conviction) for
domestic
violence, and several others are encountered, the sale is refused.

Yes, I have heard of the NIBC. Also, that it is easily circumvented
in some states/cases. That's why I think a license is a good thing.

Oh, how is it "easily circumvented"? The only manners I am aware of
by which it has been "circumvented" are straw man sales, which are
felonious crimes, and private party transactions which are not
regulated mainly because Congress knows damn well that trying to
regulate them has about as much likelihood of success as an attempt to
herd cats.

A requirement for a license would not prevent either class of sale.

Further, according to the US Constitution and to the US Supreme Court,
the ownership of firearms is a right, it is not a privilege, and so is
no more subject to licensing than is free speech.

The right to bear arms should not be extended to those not
qualifying.


Wouldn't it be better if California had more liberal carry laws in
which the gunmen (already committing an illegal act) didn't know
who
might be armed and put a stop to their mayhem?

No, I don't think we should have multiple participants in a
shootout.
This case is a good example. Do you really want 10 other people to
pull out handguns and start shooting at each other in a crowded
department store?

Many states in the US have "must issue" carry permit laws that state
that anyone who applies for a carry permit must be issued one unless
he is a convicted felon or otherwise prohibited from owning a firearm.
Can you give us an example of _one_ incident in which as a result "10
other people pulled out handguns and started shooting at each other"?

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
Can you give us an example of _one_ incident in which as a result "10
other people pulled out handguns and started shooting at each other"?

Happens in gang fights all the time. One person pulls out a gun and then so
do all the others. But then, they're gangs and that's not what you're
referring to.

However, if you and a dozen friends were all armed and your best friend
pulled out a gun to defend himself, there's a excellent chance you would
too. If you were just walking along and you heard some bullets zip by,
wouldn't your first impulse be to pull out your gun too? If your first
inclination would be to run and hide, then why would you be carrying a gun
in the first place? Face it, if someone is carrying a gun, they they're
prepared to pull it as necessary. When you don't carry a gun, then you're
prepared to take different steps.

Lew Hodgett wrote:
Subject

As this is being typed the news is coming in that gunman have
entered
a Toys-R-Us store in Palm Desert, Ca (about 100 miles east of
downtown
L/A), and are shooting up the place.

Too early for casualty reports.

Two casualties, the guy that drew the gun and the guy that he drew it
on. If the second guy hadn't screwed up then there'd be one.

No "shooting up the place".

The mess in India continues.

What the hell is this world coming to?

About what it always was only between the press and the Internet
things get more sensationalized.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

I think there needs to be far more vigilante justice doled out.

JP

Jay Pique wrote:
I think there needs to be far more vigilante justice doled out.

Not a good idea. That's how the Klan got started.

Armed self defense is not vigilante justice.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"Upscale" wrote in message
...

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
Can you give us an example of _one_ incident in which as a result "10
other people pulled out handguns and started shooting at each other"?

Happens in gang fights all the time. One person pulls out a gun and then
so
do all the others. But then, they're gangs and that's not what you're
referring to.

Like you said...not exactly the topic at hand.

However, if you and a dozen friends were all armed and your best friend
pulled out a gun to defend himself, there's a excellent chance you would
too. If you were just walking along and you heard some bullets zip by,
wouldn't your first impulse be to pull out your gun too? If your first
inclination would be to run and hide, then why would you be carrying a gun
in the first place? Face it, if someone is carrying a gun, they they're
prepared to pull it as necessary. When you don't carry a gun, then you're
prepared to take different steps.

As my father says, "and if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle". You can
make all of the "if" statements you want, but the fact is that it just
doesn't happen.

todd

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Jay Pique wrote:
I think there needs to be far more vigilante justice doled out.

Not a good idea. That's how the Klan got started.

Armed self defense is not vigilante justice.

Oh, sure...run to the worst-case scenario. I'm thinking about more of a
Charles Bronson sort of vigilante. ;-)

todd

"Upscale" wrote
"Swingman" wrote
But ... do us a favor and try to keep that sharia bull**** on that side
of
the ocean!

Yeah, well it's up here in Canada and has been approved in one or more
places from what I've heard. And, I too think that it's out of place
alongside Canadian law. I don't profess to know the finer details about
Sharia law, but every time I read or hear about it, the topic seems to be
something to do with a woman getting ripped off in some way.

Purposely not dignified with a capital letter.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)




--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 16:46:34 -0800 (PST), Robatoy cast forth these pearls
of wisdom...:

On Nov 28, 5:17*pm, "Lew Hodgett" wrote:
"Upscale" wrote:
More than once, I've seen Leaf's fans or some other sports fans
marching up Yonge Street, smashing store windows and looting
everything on
the way.

As in soccer (their football) fans across the pond, especially in the
UK.

Lew

There is a whole ****load of difference between runamuk sports-****s
and greedy killers.

Really? And what would those differences be? The end result in this case
could just as easily happen in the case of runamuck sports-f*cks. In fact
- it has.

--

-Mike-