Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

sadolph

gun control bs.

Recommended Posts

Better yet, riddle me this-----why is that my Mom, my sis, my brother and myself all went to the same schools in the South Bay beach area over here, beginning after WWII and ending in 1986, without ever ONCE hearing of a school shooting? And during an era where 'gun control' rules & regs were probably one tenth as stringent as they are today? Which, coincidentaly, was also during the Golden Days of California, where a responsible, caring parent could walk right into a Sears & Roebuck, a K-Mart, a JC Penny, a Coast Auto store or a Montgomery Ward with his kid, pick a firearm of his choice right off the shelf, pay the cashier and walk right back out to their car with it. Fuking amazing, si como no?

 

So what the hell do YOU think has happened to the last two generations of your contemporaries?....

 

 

You really are living in the past aren't you. And people trust you with a gun? Fucking scary!

 

 

So you'll agree then that the last two generation of kids are fuked up? Coddled too much by touchy-feely liberal parents & teachers who think that Little Jonny can do no wrong? Or who can't separate Real Life from Hollywood Unreality?

 

Good, now you're getting it....

 

I've never disputed that. A reflection of the society they live in. Kids emulate adults, and usually NOT their parents.

 

Problem is that there are way too many guns laying around for them to get their hands on, and use those guns to kill.

 

I have trouble believing so many guns were found at schools in the US this year. (in a recent post). Is that really true?

 

Do you mean the blue ink? If you refer to the recent multiple gun incidents in US schools, take it up with Scripps Howard News Services, source listed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better yet, riddle me this-----why is that my Mom, my sis, my brother and myself all went to the same schools in the South Bay beach area over here, beginning after WWII and ending in 1986, without ever ONCE hearing of a school shooting? And during an era where 'gun control' rules & regs were probably one tenth as stringent as they are today? Which, coincidentaly, was also during the Golden Days of California, where a responsible, caring parent could walk right into a Sears & Roebuck, a K-Mart, a JC Penny, a Coast Auto store or a Montgomery Ward with his kid, pick a firearm of his choice right off the shelf, pay the cashier and walk right back out to their car with it. Fuking amazing, si como no?

 

So what the hell do YOU think has happened to the last two generations of your contemporaries?....

 

 

You really are living in the past aren't you. And people trust you with a gun? Fucking scary!

 

 

So you'll agree then that the last two generation of kids are fuked up? Coddled too much by touchy-feely liberal parents & teachers who think that Little Jonny can do no wrong? Or who can't separate Real Life from Hollywood Unreality?

 

Good, now you're getting it....

 

I've never disputed that. A reflection of the society they live in. Kids emulate adults, and usually NOT their parents.

 

Problem is that there are way too many guns laying around for them to get their hands on, and use those guns to kill.

 

I have trouble believing so many guns were found at schools in the US this year. (in a recent post). Is that really true?

 

Do you mean the blue ink? If you refer to the recent multiple gun incidents in US schools, take it up with Scripps Howard News Services, source listed.

 

Your post 174. I'm not suggesting it's not true, even though I asked the question. I just have trouble believing that so many kids take guns to school. I live in a non gun totin' society so find it difficult to understand kids being able to play with real guns, let alone take them to school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's obscene.

 

 

Johnny, run it by us. How and when did your country control private gun ownership?

What was the backlash?

We assume your bad guys still have guns. How does that sort out over there?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A curiosity question. About 15k people a year commit suicide with a firearm. Is that number mixed in with with the homocides?

 

I'd bet it is.

 

Firearm Murder rate per 100: 4.14

Firearm Suicide rate per 100: 5.71

Accidental Deaths per 100: .23

 

That's the US.

 

My remarks earlier comparing us to other developed nations did not take into account suicide rate because, frankly, people will kill themselves whether they use a gun, a noose, a pill or a blade.

 

Therefore you are still 2.6 times more likely to be murdered or accidentally killed by a firearm in the united states than in any of the other G8 countries.

 

I'm intrigued by the notion that these objects are inherently dangerous, and if only those objects didn't exist there would be less danger in the world.

 

I have several of those "dangerous objects". I have competition pistols, rifles and shotguns for a variety of sports. None of them have ever killed anyone. None of them have ever been *pointed* at anyone. None of them are left laying around for children to pick up and take to school.

 

So, precisely how would taking them away from me reduce "danger" for someone else?

 

I'd note that more people die in an average year - sailboat racing - than have ever died in the history of organized shooting sports. Not even counting all the cruisers, recreational sailors, etc. Clearly, if "objects" are the problem, making sailboats "not exist", would make the world safer, right? Let's work on that.

 

Feh. Wesley, I though you were more capable of objective, critical thought than you have displayed here... An "object" is only as safe - or as dangerous - as the person using it. Just like a butter knife, a ferrari, or a vat of acid.

 

I understand that everything's relative sled and I recognize that. I know that the spectrum of risk varies between responsible and irresponsible. I know you weren't the one driving around drunk while waving the gun that discharged and sent a bullet through a wall and before thunking into the bedframe 3 inches from my good friends head. I know that It was not your target pistol (sidenote: some of the most enjoyable times I've spent at a range were with a .22 target pistol) that was "borrowed" and used to kill what is now 3 students at the high school in Ohio.

 

But the fact of the matter is that somewhere in the country there are people who aren't responsible or respectfully fearful of guns like you and your target shooting buddies are. These are the people who, despite their good intentions, mess up and allow slugs to go where they shouldn't. Does that make all gun owners fuckups? No. Does it mean that we should be scared of the potential for mistakes to happen? Yes. I'm not scared by those who are responsible, you are model gun owners who should be praised for setting a good example by treating them safely and limiting your collection to simply what you need for your hobby. That said; no amount of training or social engineering for those who aren't like you is ever going to make me feel safe because people slip through the cracks and wingnuts happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Better yet, riddle me this-----why is that my Mom, my sis, my brother and myself all went to the same schools in the South Bay beach area over here, beginning after WWII and ending in 1986, without ever ONCE hearing of a school shooting? And during an era where 'gun control' rules & regs were probably one tenth as stringent as they are today? Which, coincidentaly, was also during the Golden Days of California, where a responsible, caring parent could walk right into a Sears & Roebuck, a K-Mart, a JC Penny, a Coast Auto store or a Montgomery Ward with his kid, pick a firearm of his choice right off the shelf, pay the cashier and walk right back out to their car with it. Fuking amazing, si como no?

 

So what the hell do YOU think has happened to the last two generations of your contemporaries?....

 

 

You really are living in the past aren't you. And people trust you with a gun? Fucking scary!

 

 

So you'll agree then that the last two generation of kids are fuked up? Coddled too much by touchy-feely liberal parents & teachers who think that Little Jonny can do no wrong? Or who can't separate Real Life from Hollywood Unreality?

 

Good, now you're getting it....

 

Pretty sure I bought my Ruger Black Hawk at a gas station/ convenience store in West Salt Lake that had a gun counter in 1984. Is that so long ago? Jesus I guess it is!

 

 

And how many murders and armed robberies have you committed since that day?.....

 

Quite a few actually. But when the anger and rage builds to the point I want to kill someone I prefer to strike them 3 times hard in the temple with a 12 oz. ball peen hammer. The pistol is only used for jackrabbits and coyotes. (ok, that is murder technically, but they are only critters). This once again is proof that if someone is mad enough, even ball peen hammers dont kill people. People kill people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm intrigued by the notion that these objects are inherently dangerous, and if only those objects didn't exist there would be less danger in the world.

 

I have several of those "dangerous objects". I have competition pistols, rifles and shotguns for a variety of sports. None of them have ever killed anyone. None of them have ever been *pointed* at anyone. None of them are left laying around for children to pick up and take to school.

 

So, precisely how would taking them away from me reduce "danger" for someone else?

 

I'd note that more people die in an average year - sailboat racing - than have ever died in the history of organized shooting sports. Not even counting all the cruisers, recreational sailors, etc. Clearly, if "objects" are the problem, making sailboats "not exist", would make the world safer, right? Let's work on that.

 

Feh. Wesley, I though you were more capable of objective, critical thought than you have displayed here... An "object" is only as safe - or as dangerous - as the person using it. Just like a butter knife, a ferrari, or a vat of acid.

 

Unconvincing. Doesn't ring truly.

And Wesley is quite rational. Reduce the threat, duh.

We don't want or need firearms or dynamite laying all about the homes for the same reasons.

 

WIth cars, due to need and want, I say let's take our chances.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm intrigued by the notion that these objects are inherently dangerous, and if only those objects didn't exist there would be less danger in the world.

 

I have several of those "dangerous objects". I have competition pistols, rifles and shotguns for a variety of sports. None of them have ever killed anyone. None of them have ever been *pointed* at anyone. None of them are left laying around for children to pick up and take to school.

 

So, precisely how would taking them away from me reduce "danger" for someone else?

 

I'd note that more people die in an average year - sailboat racing - than have ever died in the history of organized shooting sports. Not even counting all the cruisers, recreational sailors, etc. Clearly, if "objects" are the problem, making sailboats "not exist", would make the world safer, right? Let's work on that.

 

Feh. Wesley, I though you were more capable of objective, critical thought than you have displayed here... An "object" is only as safe - or as dangerous - as the person using it. Just like a butter knife, a ferrari, or a vat of acid.

 

Unconvincing. Doesn't ring truly.

And Wesley is quite rational. Reduce the threat, duh.

We don't want or need firearms or dynamite laying all about the homes for the same reasons.

 

WIth cars, due to need and want, I say let's take our chances.

 

 

So you have no desire to own a firearm for home/personal defense?.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<SNIP>

And Wesley is quite rational. Reduce the threat, duh.

We don't want or need firearms or dynamite laying all about the homes for the same reasons.

 

WIth cars, due to need and want, I say let's take our chances.

 

 

 

And therein lies the crux of the discussion - who am I to say what you should or shouldn't have or want? Who are you to tell me the same?

 

Shouldn't we instead define appropriate behaviors that we can expect reasonable people to follow, and address those who step beyond those behaviors?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's obscene.

 

 

Johnny, run it by us. How and when did your country control private gun ownership?

What was the backlash?

We assume your bad guys still have guns. How does that sort out over there?

 

We've never had that "got to have a gun" obsession in this country.

 

Years ago, after a gun massacre (in Tasmania - Port Aurthur) the federal government did a buy back of guns and a lot of people sold their guns to the govt because they just did not need them. Someone even came up with an old 3" canon. Now all guns have to be registered & you need a license to own one, and you must have a lock up for it. More than that I don't know because I've never felt the need to own a gun.

 

Sure, bad guy have guns. Always will. There are so few guns around that kids will have dificulty even seeing a gun outside a museum or on a cop. I honestly don't know anyone who has a gun (or admits to it).

 

In cities & town, we don't need a gun. People on the land have a legitimate use for a gun. We do not have any dangerous animals in the wild (except crocs, and they are protected)

 

This might help you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's obscene.

 

 

Johnny, run it by us. How and when did your country control private gun ownership?

What was the backlash?

We assume your bad guys still have guns. How does that sort out over there?

 

We've never had that "got to have a gun" obsession in this country.

 

Years ago, after a gun massacre (in Tasmania - Port Aurthur) the federal government did a buy back of guns and a lot of people sold their guns to the govt because they just did not need them. Someone even came up with an old 3' canon. Now all guns have to be registered & you need a license to own one, and you must have a lock up for it. More than that I don't know because I've never felt the need to own a gun.

 

Sure, bad guy have guns. Always will. There are so few guns around that kids will have dificulty even seeing a gun outside a museum or on a cop. I honestly don't know anyone who has a gun (or admits to it).

 

In cities & town, we don't need a gun. People on the land have a legitimate use for a gun. We do not have any dangerous animals in the wild (except crocs, and they are protected)

 

This might help you.

 

JS - riddle me this: If there are laws on the books that say cars may not exceed 65MPH on the public highways, then why are cars built that have that capability? Shouldn't we place limiters on the autos so that they aren't capable of exceeding posted speed limits? Wouldn't that reduce overall fuel consumption, and the polluting byproducts of combustion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<SNIP>

Very well said, I enjoy having a voice of reason to discourse with.

 

Like I said earlier, this is a dangerous world. Things happen that are out of our control. Cancer, freak accidents, all very sad and tragic. If there's something we can do to limit the likelihood of something tragic happening then isn't it our duty, as fellow human beings who treasure life, to do everything in our power to mitigate that risk? We set speed limits, search for and punish drunk drivers severely, have developed chemotherapy, have instituted a police force whose main job is to regulate and enforce driving laws to make the roads safer. In reality how different is enforcing stricter gun laws from setting a speed limit? I don't want to take your right to own a weapon and protect yourself but I want to limit the excessiveness of it. Surely it's a persons right to be able to drive, but we limit how fast that they may legally do so. How is this different?

 

I agree that it's helpful to also fix the cause of the problem; mentally unstable children and it should be part of a two pronged approach to control. Help them understand safety and remove the avenues for causing hurt should that training fail (because face it, you won't be 100% successful with teaching safety).

 

I look forward to your response.

 

 

Wes -

 

The simple answer is that as humans, we CAN'T eliminate all risk in life, and to think that we even should is problematic. What we *should* do, is to make ourselves aware of risk, and learn how to mitigate that risk. Using your traffic law analogy - we already have sufficient statutes to govern gun acquisition, ownership and use. My premise is that for someone who has decided to ignore existing laws, that new laws, and more restrictions aren't going to deter that individual from their chosen behavior - it may mean that the individual chooses a different implement, but, it won't deter them from the behavior.

 

Addressing your point that "we should do something" (paraphrased) - I agree, but, I want us to spend the limited resources we have doing something that will actually move us closer to the desired goal, and I'm not convinced that the approach of limiting access to the implement impacts the behavior or behavioral causes at all. Lookin' at something completely different - Cocaine and Marijuana are illegal in most of the country - how has that illegality impacted the behaviors that drive consumption?

 

 

Bringing it back home - how 'bout sailing? What is the good to society? Isn't sailing a selfish indulgence? It's risky - people drown, it costs money to rescue them, and then there's the environmental impact of those boats cruddin' up the shorelines when they're lost/abandoned. Who needs it? The answer is NOBODY, but - people enjoy the activity, and as such, at least according to what I understand of our inalienable rights, they should be permitted to engage in it. Now - should someone use their sailboat as a weapon - that behavior and the individual perpetrating that behavior indeed should be addressed - but, I don't think it's reasonable to suggest that sailboats should be outlawed.

 

Your approach, taken to an absurd conclusion, ends w/all of us tube-fed sitting in a padded room going nowhere doing nothing but looking at a screen - and I daresay that most folks wouldn't want to live like that.

 

Wes - as I said earlier, I understand your position, and don't fault you for wanting to do something to improve the situation. I just don't think that continually increasing restrictions addresses the real problem, which is "WHY" someone does something, and how to provide an effective deterrent to undesirable behavior.

 

AGITC,

 

I would argue that what we have clearly isn't enough. If our statues governing acquisition is enough then how did the student at Virginia Tech (clinically diagnosed as mentally unstable btw) walk into a gun shop and buy the handgun which killed my peers?

 

So since you clearly feel, like me, that something needs to be done what is your plan for using our limited resources to safeguard lives? Behavioral training may work but how do you suggest we change our society to show that violence is bad? We've already failed at making videogames safer, the media is growing ever more violent by the day, etc. Aren't gun owners already required to take a class outlining safe use and storage of firearms? If not do you think they should? How effective would you say that would be? I and my peers spent a whole year of high school sittin gin health class to teach us abuot the dangers of drugs but someone from my graduating class died of a heroin overdose two weeks ago and his girlfriend, who I also went to school with, is charged with his murder because she lied to paramedics about what they were doing so they couldn't help him in time. They knew the dangers of drug use as well as I did but they chose to flaunt those safety regulations anyways and now two young, promising lives are ruined because of it. Society has condemned drug abuse in the same way that you suggest we should treat gun violence but I don't see what good that has done.

 

I agree that regulations are unfortunate and that taken to extreme ends they can be wrong but I'm just not seeing the alternative.

 

I enjoy this discussion with you and look forward to another reasonable and respectful reply.

W.

 

My dad is 84 and his mind is slipping a little but he did something and said something that is along your lines of your thinking.

 

He doesn't drink and had a cabinet full of hard liquor that had been around a long time. More than he needed, eh.

 

He took it all out and dumped it down the drain and now at every opportunity tells people of how he saved someone's life by doing this. He removed the possibility of that liquor getting into the wrong hands or to someone who cannot control their urge to consume vast quantities of the stuff and cause them or someone else harm.

 

Sounds pretty weird right?

 

Wes?

 

Sounds totally logical to me.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's obscene.

 

 

Johnny, run it by us. How and when did your country control private gun ownership?

What was the backlash?

We assume your bad guys still have guns. How does that sort out over there?

 

We've never had that "got to have a gun" obsession in this country.

 

Years ago, after a gun massacre (in Tasmania - Port Aurthur) the federal government did a buy back of guns and a lot of people sold their guns to the govt because they just did not need them. Someone even came up with an old 3' canon. Now all guns have to be registered & you need a license to own one, and you must have a lock up for it. More than that I don't know because I've never felt the need to own a gun.

 

Sure, bad guy have guns. Always will. There are so few guns around that kids will have dificulty even seeing a gun outside a museum or on a cop. I honestly don't know anyone who has a gun (or admits to it).

 

In cities & town, we don't need a gun. People on the land have a legitimate use for a gun. We do not have any dangerous animals in the wild (except crocs, and they are protected)

 

This might help you.

 

JS - riddle me this: If there are laws on the books that say cars may not exceed 65MPH on the public highways, then why are cars built that have that capability? Shouldn't we place limiters on the autos so that they aren't capable of exceeding posted speed limits? Wouldn't that reduce overall fuel consumption, and the polluting byproducts of combustion?

 

Yes.

 

But cars weren't designed & built to kill.

 

Guns are designed & made to kill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

what a pussy. Swear to frikken gawd - he's had the New England School indoctrination shoved where the Sun don't shine.

 

I need a beer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

So since you clearly feel, like me, that something needs to be done what is your plan for using our limited resources to safeguard lives? Behavioral training may work but how do you suggest we change our society to show that violence is bad? We've already failed at making videogames safer, the media is growing ever more violent by the day, etc.

 

 

You've got some questions to answer yourself before AGITC should feel obliged to respond to that. Please see my posts recently and provide your plan of action.

 

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

And Wesley is quite rational. Reduce the threat, duh.

We don't want or need firearms or dynamite laying all about the homes for the same reasons.

 

WIth cars, due to need and want, I say let's take our chances.

 

I've asked you and LH for some plans and specifics over the past day or so. In deference to your legitimate concerns, would you care to address the question?

 

Sorry my present web access doesn't allow me to cite the exact post(s).

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<SNIP>

Aren't gun owners already required to take a class outlining safe use and storage of firearms? If not do you think they should? How effective would you say that would be? I and my peers spent a whole year of high school sittin gin health class to teach us abuot the dangers of drugs but someone from my graduating class died of a heroin overdose two weeks ago and his girlfriend, who I also went to school with, is charged with his murder because she lied to paramedics about what they were doing so they couldn't help him in time. They knew the dangers of drug use as well as I did but they chose to flaunt those safety regulations anyways and now two young, promising lives are ruined because of it. Society has condemned drug abuse in the same way that you suggest we should treat gun violence but I don't see what good that has done.

 

I agree that regulations are unfortunate and that taken to extreme ends they can be wrong but I'm just not seeing the alternative.

 

I enjoy this discussion with you and look forward to another reasonable and respectful reply.

W.

 

I think you're really close to the point in describing your OD'd highschool acquaintance - some people will behave contrary to good sense and laws, and without regard to consequences. Heroin in ANY form is illegal as far as I know, so how did they get it? Do we need more laws governing the manufacture/possession/use of narcotics? I'd say that we've got plenty of those, and that we spend an inordinate amount of money on their enforcement. Still, people hurt themselves and others by engaging in this illegal activity. So - how are more laws/restrictions going to help?

 

Put quite simplistically, the point is that unless you address the underlying human behavior factors - the implement is irrelevant. It's my contention that laws controlling the availability/use of MANY implements of destruction are already well established, but, that the people who'd misuse those items don't care about those laws. The ONLY thing that may work is a complete and total confiscation - and if we do that for guns, what's to stop motorcycles, parachutes, deep fat fryers, lawn darts or Hookah pipes from bein' next? After all - we're only takin' those things away to help, right?

 

In my humble opinion, the only thing that works is to remove the incentive for the undesired behavior. That approach, while generally effective, isn't something that can be implemented quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Are you high? Of course it's a direct outcome of the availability of a gun.

 

 

OK, this is important. When my pop was a kid (1940's, and there was a war on) he and his buds could get on a school bus with a rifle, turn it in to the gym teacher, shoot during gym class, and take the bus home with it. And no one got hurt.

 

I'm not about to advocate that kids go back to packing rifles for gym class, not with the inbred lack of personal responsibility from which we in the current age suffer in this country. My question is - if availability is the issue, why were there no school shootings (or not on any scale that I can determine) and why do we have them now, when it's a whole lot more difficult to purchase a firearm than it was in the earlier half of the 20th century?

 

How did my elders keep from shooting each other up over parking spaces and where the neighbor's dog takes a crap, back when I was half your age and people could buy a handgun or a rifle out of the back of a magazine? More important, how is it that the Swiss REQUIRE that every man of age keep a fully-automatic weapon and a store of ammunition in the home, and they don't have public murders left and right? May be - just may be - their culture doesn't permit the sort of shit we do here. They actually rear their children into adults.

I remember taking my .22 Marlin Bolt rifle to 7th grade show-n-tell. No one died, the school didn't go into lock down, no one freaked out. Surprisingly, gun technology hasn't changed hardly a fraction in 40 years - you could buy the exact same AR-15s with 30 round mags, automatic handguns, etc back then.

 

What changed??? It's people who changed - not the guns. Guns were dangerous and plentiful back then. They were MUCH easier to get - you could walk into any Ace hardware store and buy any gun you wanted. People are the one's who've changed in the past 30-40 years.... People are the problem, not the tool.

 

 

So, so, so what you're saying, Jeff....is that...maybe,just maybe...we need.....stricter....people control laws?... :lol:

 

That's the shot {Pun inadvertent}. Determine which kids are liable to commit these shootings, then give them mind altering psychotropic drugs to controls them. (I can't believe this hasn't already been tried)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Are you high? Of course it's a direct outcome of the availability of a gun.

 

 

OK, this is important. When my pop was a kid (1940's, and there was a war on) he and his buds could get on a school bus with a rifle, turn it in to the gym teacher, shoot during gym class, and take the bus home with it. And no one got hurt.

 

I'm not about to advocate that kids go back to packing rifles for gym class, not with the inbred lack of personal responsibility from which we in the current age suffer in this country. My question is - if availability is the issue, why were there no school shootings (or not on any scale that I can determine) and why do we have them now, when it's a whole lot more difficult to purchase a firearm than it was in the earlier half of the 20th century?

 

How did my elders keep from shooting each other up over parking spaces and where the neighbor's dog takes a crap, back when I was half your age and people could buy a handgun or a rifle out of the back of a magazine? More important, how is it that the Swiss REQUIRE that every man of age keep a fully-automatic weapon and a store of ammunition in the home, and they don't have public murders left and right? May be - just may be - their culture doesn't permit the sort of shit we do here. They actually rear their children into adults.

I remember taking my .22 Marlin Bolt rifle to 7th grade show-n-tell. No one died, the school didn't go into lock down, no one freaked out. Surprisingly, gun technology hasn't changed hardly a fraction in 40 years - you could buy the exact same AR-15s with 30 round mags, automatic handguns, etc back then.

 

What changed??? It's people who changed - not the guns. Guns were dangerous and plentiful back then. They were MUCH easier to get - you could walk into any Ace hardware store and buy any gun you wanted. People are the one's who've changed in the past 30-40 years.... People are the problem, not the tool.

 

 

So, so, so what you're saying, Jeff....is that...maybe,just maybe...we need.....stricter....people control laws?... :lol:

 

That's the shot {Pun inadvertent}. Determine which kids are liable to commit these shootings, then give them mind altering psychotropic drugs to controls them. (I can't believe this hasn't already been tried)

 

The whole group, many thousands, or just make examples of a few? Since they are mostly quiet and withdrawn, you could start in the library...

 

You seem a likely parent, let's start with your kids. Better yet, let's start with you.

 

Yeh! That's it! Identify all the NOZYs and snip them before they can breed! I like that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what a pussy. Swear to frikken gawd - he's had the New England School indoctrination shoved where the Sun don't shine.

 

I need a beer.

 

If I had my 12oz ball peen hammer i'd steal Wes' laptop, bring it out in to a field, smash it 9 times, and video the whole thing and post it on his own facebook so Mustang could see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

that would be mean and cruel and earn you quite a few free beers at the club of your choice....

 

LH has a few issues to work on. My guess is that he doesn't know Switzerland mandates a "gasp" fully automatic assault rifle in every home. With ammo on the spot. I've been to the armorers shops in Swizzy. The SIG's are a work of art - wrong caliber but a work of art.

 

edited to add:

 

I'm still looking for a good BBQ sauce recipe - as long as it starts with tabasco...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

So LH has been typing now for at least 20 minutes. It should be good. I hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And maybe we need to start regulating golf ball retreivers....

 

Two 71-year-old men have been arrested and charged with child abuse after they were accused of striking a teenager with metal golf ball retrievers.

 

Ronald E. Richardson and Donald E. Nieto were arrested after a video of them striking the 15-year-old was shown to law enforcement by the father of the teenager, according to the Okaloosa County Sheriff's Office arrest reports.

 

The incident, which took place early Saturday afternoon at Shalimar Pointe Country Club, began after a group of four teenagers blew an air horn at golfers teeing off at the ninth hole, the report stated.

 

According to Richardson, he and Nieto went to approach the teenagers, but they ran off.

 

The 15-year-old eventually returned because he had left his jacket behind. When he did, the two men "responded by striking (the teenager) with the golf ball finder to keep him from being able to pick up his jacket," the report stated.

 

Richardson said he hit the teen three or four times on "his back side area … and maybe on his arm."

 

He added that the teenager did not threaten him or make him feel in danger.

 

Nieto initially denied hitting the teenager with the golf ball retriever until he was shown the video shot by another one of the teenagers at the scene, his arrest report stated.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what a pussy. Swear to frikken gawd - he's had the New England School indoctrination shoved where the Sun don't shine.

 

I need a beer.

 

If I had my 12oz ball peen hammer i'd steal Wes' laptop, bring it out in to a field, smash it 9 times, and video the whole thing and post it on his own facebook so Mustang could see it.

 

Make sure he does the fuking laundry first.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I remember taking my .22 Marlin Bolt rifle to 7th grade show-n-tell. No one died, the school didn't go into lock down, no one freaked out. Surprisingly, gun technology hasn't changed hardly a fraction in 40 years - you could buy the exact same AR-15s with 30 round mags, automatic handguns, etc back then.

 

What changed??? It's people who changed - not the guns. Guns were dangerous and plentiful back then. They were MUCH easier to get - you could walk into any Ace hardware store and buy any gun you wanted. People are the one's who've changed in the past 30-40 years.... People are the problem, not the tool.

 

 

So, so, so what you're saying, Jeff....is that...maybe,just maybe...we need.....stricter....people control laws?... :lol:

 

That's the shot {Pun inadvertent}. Determine which kids are liable to commit these shootings, then give them mind altering psychotropic drugs to controls them. (I can't believe this hasn't already been tried)

 

The whole group, many thousands, or just make examples of a few? Since they are mostly quiet and withdrawn, you could start in the library...

 

 

You missed

(I can't believe this hasn't already been tried).

 

You are already doing it. And with 7% of US Kids already being medicated, it's a bit late for any moral squeamishness about the policy.

 

And the current procedure is already identifying 83% of "risk kids" (true story), so it only requires one one surge for to achieve 'mission accomplished'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do you have to have him do your laundry?

 

After I just spent a hundred and twenty bucks upgrading his computer? Hell yeah he better be doing the laundry. AND wiping down the counter tops.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that would be mean and cruel and earn you quite a few free beers at the club of your choice....

 

LH has a few issues to work on. My guess is that he doesn't know Switzerland mandates a "gasp" fully automatic assault rifle in every home. With ammo on the spot. I've been to the armorers shops in Swizzy. The SIG's are a work of art - wrong caliber but a work of art.

 

edited to add:

 

I'm still looking for a good BBQ sauce recipe - as long as it starts with tabasco...

 

Kevin, scroll back to last night to see I'm fully aware of Switzerland's domestic policy on defense. Unlike them however we have not been, historically, under daily threat of being overrun by our neighbors (the reason for the mandated assault rifle).

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that would be mean and cruel and earn you quite a few free beers at the club of your choice....

 

LH has a few issues to work on. My guess is that he doesn't know Switzerland mandates a "gasp" fully automatic assault rifle in every home. With ammo on the spot. I've been to the armorers shops in Swizzy. The SIG's are a work of art - wrong caliber but a work of art.

 

edited to add:

 

I'm still looking for a good BBQ sauce recipe - as long as it starts with tabasco...

 

Kevin, scroll back to last night to see I'm fully aware of Switzerland's domestic policy on defense. Unlike them however we have not been, historically, under daily threat of being overrun by our neighbors (the reason for the mandated assault rifle).

 

 

That fails to address why those weapons aren't responsible for rampant crime, given their penetration throughout the country, more so than even here. Full-auto, no less.

 

Where's the crime? Where are the office and school shootings? That is the issue being asked about.

 

Is there anything we can learn from them?

 

 

We're eagerly awaiting your plan for disarming America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

That fails to address why those weapons aren't responsible for rampant crime, given their penetration throughout the country, more so than even here. Full-auto, no less.

 

Where's the crime? Where are the office and school shootings? That is the issue being asked about.

 

 

We're eagerly awaiting your plan for disarming America.

 

 

Holy counter-liberal-intuitive Batman!!

 

You mean EVERY house has a MACHINE GUN??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're eagerly awaiting your plan for disarming America.

I've already said what I feel the actions taken should be. Quit being a knob about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

We're eagerly awaiting your plan for disarming America.

I've already said what I feel the actions taken should be. Quit being a knob about it.

 

This is rather embarrasing.

 

 

I could have sworn Jokal505 gave this response. ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're eagerly awaiting your plan for disarming America.

I've already said what I feel the actions taken should be. Quit being a knob about it.

 

 

No, you have not outlined a plan. No outright proposals to be enacted as a matter of law. Nothing actionable.

 

If you're as clever as you imagine yourself to be, it's probably formulated in your mind already. Just write what you feel. Show us who's the better man. "How do we do this?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This is rather embarrasing.

 

I could have sworn Jokal505 gave this response. ....

 

I've asked both what their specific plan would be, and for Jocal, I even suggested a list of limitations.

 

No one seems up to it. A fine way to advocate change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're eagerly awaiting your plan for disarming America.

I've already said what I feel the actions taken should be. Quit being a knob about it.

 

I'm still shaking my head as to why you feel I should cut my collection down from twenty, to say....ten. Or even five firearms. What if I wanna add another two dozen more collectible guns to my quiver? Because in case you didn't know it, guns are a very good investment. Fact my initial $3k stake is now already worth 5-ish......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said that having more out there in the ether statistically increases the likelihood that they're going to be used to end someones life early. As I've said time and time again... it's simple math. If a gun has a .001% (made up number for argumentative purposes) chance of killing someone and you all of a sudden put a second one out there then suddenly .002% of guns have a chance of killing someone. When we're talking in terms of hundreds of millions (~270 if my mental math is correct) then decreasing the number of weapons that are POTENTIALLY available to be picked up by the wrong person mathematically decreases the likelihood that someone is going to die that doesn't have to.

 

Which explains all those school shootings over in the Confederation Helvetica.

 

So. If I own 7 guns rather than just one or two, the likeyhood that I'll go to work and shoot up the place is greater? Interesting concept even though I'm not on board with it.

 

Care to take a stab at my proposal posted last night? Give us the procedure to follow to confiscate all handguns and auto-loading rifles. No excuses, no deeply-held principles as to why. Just your realistic, workable plan to do this.

 

I'm not suggesting that this is possible or not possible. I'm saying, "let he who calls the battle lead the charge".

 

Lead us.

 

How do we do it? Be very specific.

 

 

Here's the rub... Say you get the idiots in Sacramento to pass such a law, what about Texas and the South?

 

The problem isn't with the guy with a bunch of guns, who is into it enough to secure them properly, it's the guy with one gun "for protection" who leaves it loaded in the dresser so his kid or a burgler can find it. You need to educate that guy.

 

 

Wes, try looking at it this way-----of the twenty firearms we have, only TWO of them was brought brand new-----the rest of them date somewhere 'tween 2001 and 1932 . So you know what that means? Yes, My Son, it means I, me, myself have single-handidly taken over custodial duties of eighteen firearms, from sixteen different former owners. Put your math hat on now and tell us what the statistics are that one of those eighteen old guns will be used in a crime, now that one person owns them, rather than sixteen people......

Jeez Rick, this needs to be reposted in Statistical anarchy :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you have not outlined a plan. No outright proposals to be enacted as a matter of law. Nothing actionable.

 

If you're as clever as you imagine yourself to be, it's probably formulated in your mind already. Just write what you feel. Show us who's the better man. "How do we do this?"

 

1st is to start by banning the sale of the affected weapons..

 

2nd is to collect the ones already out there... which is tough. Buybacks have been shown to be effective in the past so that's a good place to start. As for those people who don't want to... I can't give you a good answer. Maybe have the police systematically go through the list of registered gun owners and confiscate or send away to modify the affected weapons? That sounds a bit too 1984-y for my tastes personally. Unfortunately Boothies idea of having Sikorsky choppers with electromagnets isn't too far off what it would actually take. This is the hole in my plan and I accept it.

 

 

I'm still shaking my head as to why you feel I should cut my collection down from twenty, to say....ten. Or even five firearms. What if I wanna add another two dozen more collectible guns to my quiver? Because in case you didn't know it, guns are a very good investment. Fact my initial $3k stake is now already worth 5-ish......

 

Stocks don't kill people...

 

Edit: Though stockbrokers with guns are another potential risk. Case in point is mr. mccabe here ;)

 

Running and ducking....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're eagerly awaiting your plan for disarming America.

I've already said what I feel the actions taken should be. Quit being a knob about it.

 

Is there anything we can learn from the Swiss, to make us safer from ourselves?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

 

This is rather embarrasing.

 

I could have sworn Jokal505 gave this response. ....

 

I've asked both what their specific plan would be, and for Jocal, I even suggested a list of limitations.

 

No one seems up to it. A fine way to advocate change.

 

That's NOT what I'm saying...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well for one thing every one of the guns issued in Switzerland is to a member of the armed forces. I'm sure they're more consciencious about gun safety than joe blow in the USA who wants a .38 special to protect him from robbers and keeps it in his nightstand.

 

Also, up until 2007 the ammo that was issued with their rifles was sealed and routinely inspected for not being opened or used. Now those same weapons are issued without ammunition.

 

Then after the militiamen are discharged from their service they are given the option to keep or give back the gun. If they choose to keep it then the automatic function is removed at a factory.

 

All ammunition sold to the public for these guns is at ranges and it must be used there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

We're eagerly awaiting your plan for disarming America.

I've already said what I feel the actions taken should be. Quit being a knob about it.

 

Is there anything we can learn from the Swiss, to make us safer from ourselves?

 

Give every household an M4? with the requirement that they all know how to shoot it and are responsible for the consequences?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm still shaking my head as to why you feel I should cut my collection down from twenty, to say....ten. Or even five firearms. What if I wanna add another two dozen more collectible guns to my quiver? Because in case you didn't know it, guns are a very good investment. Fact my initial $3k stake is now already worth 5-ish......

 

Stocks don't kill people...

 

 

Unless they are "Collapsible, Folding and Adjustable", then they are are as lethal as barrel shrouds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

Well for one thing every one of the guns issued in Switzerland is to a member of the armed forces. I'm sure they're more consciencious about gun safety than joe blow in the USA who wants a .38 special to protect him from robbers and keeps it in his nightstand.

 

Also, up until 2007 the ammo that was issued with their rifles was sealed and routinely inspected for not being opened or used. Now those same weapons are issued without ammunition.

 

Then after the militiamen are discharged from their service they are given the option to keep or give back the gun. If they choose to keep it then the automatic function is removed at a factory.

 

All ammunition sold to the public for these guns is at ranges and it must be used there.

 

a man boy and his Wikipedia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

I think Mr. Weffie is realizing that while well intended, the implement restriction approach has some issues in implementation.

 

yea well, welcome to Liberalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1st is to start by banning the sale of the affected weapons..

 

2nd is to collect the ones already out there... which is tough. Buybacks have been shown to be effective in the past so that's a good place to start. As for those people who don't want to... I can't give you a good answer. Maybe have the police systematically go through the list of registered gun owners and confiscate or send away to modify the affected weapons? That sounds a bit too 1984-y for my tastes personally. Unfortunately Boothies idea of having Sikorsky choppers with electromagnets isn't too far off what it would actually take. This is the hole in my plan and I accept it.

 

 

OK, thanks. I'll comment later; got called in to work. If you come up with ways to get around the admitted obstacles then please add on. The short form: we as a culture would have to suspend a lot of societal protections to which we've become accustomed, and one wonders if those actions will be received better than the perceived evils of handguns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well for one thing every one of the guns issued in Switzerland is to a member of the armed forces. I'm sure they're more consciencious about gun safety than joe blow in the USA who wants a .38 special to protect him from robbers and keeps it in his nightstand.

 

Also, up until 2007 the ammo that was issued with their rifles was sealed and routinely inspected for not being opened or used. Now those same weapons are issued without ammunition.

 

Then after the militiamen are discharged from their service they are given the option to keep or give back the gun. If they choose to keep it then the automatic function is removed at a factory.

 

All ammunition sold to the public for these guns is at ranges and it must be used there.

 

a man boy and his Wikipedia.

 

Riveting stuff. I don't care enough to go spelunking through boring, long winded articles in our library.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland

 

And yes, implementation is the tough part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This is rather embarrasing.

 

I could have sworn Jokal505 gave this response. ....

 

I've asked both what their specific plan would be, and for Jocal, I even suggested a list of limitations.

 

No one seems up to it. A fine way to advocate change.

 

That's NOT what I'm saying...

 

 

Sorry if I offended and missed the intention. No ill will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Riveting stuff. I don't care enough to go spelunking through boring, long winded articles in our library.

http://en.wikipedia...._in_Switzerland

 

And yes, implementation is the tough part.

 

challenging one's "beliefs" is boring indeed. I suggest a day or two in the real world LH.

 

What exactly have I done to you to warrant you going after me personally?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And it was 15 years ago today that one of the most horrific shoot outs in America took place, right up the street. Thank fricken gawd the only people who died were the bad guys.....

 

 

(First of four vids. Well worth the time)

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zm1PEY8F4xE&feature=BFa&list=PLC1ECCF29D8C5DA22&lf=rellist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well for one thing every one of the guns issued in Switzerland is to a member of the armed forces. I'm sure they're more consciencious about gun safety than joe blow in the USA who wants a .38 special to protect him from robbers and keeps it in his nightstand.

 

Also, up until 2007 the ammo that was issued with their rifles was sealed and routinely inspected for not being opened or used. Now those same weapons are issued without ammunition.

 

Then after the militiamen are discharged from their service they are given the option to keep or give back the gun. If they choose to keep it then the automatic function is removed at a factory.

 

All ammunition sold to the public for these guns is at ranges and it must be used there.

 

a man boy and his Wikipedia.

 

Riveting stuff. I don't care enough to go spelunking through boring, long winded articles in our library.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland

 

And yes, implementation is the tough part.

 

 

Wait a minute----are you really advocating for the confiscation of all privately owned firearms....because some one you know had an errant round land three feet away from his head? Really? That's your motivation?....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And Wesley is quite rational. Reduce the threat, duh.

We don't want or need firearms or dynamite laying all about the homes for the same reasons.

 

WIth cars, due to need and want, I say let's take our chances.

 

I've asked you and LH for some plans and specifics over the past day or so. In deference to your legitimate concerns, would you care to address the question?

 

Sorry my present web access doesn't allow me to cite the exact post(s).

Thanks.

 

 

I decline to answer how to collect your guns, but would enjoy a conversation about your ride.

 

Like I said, hearts and minds first. And on any subject you may not find me very nuts and bolts.

It's moot. With such little consensus on the forum and in the country, I'm not sure the point of your many questions about how to collect the damn things.

I'm, just into the anthropology at play here, you might say.

 

I respectfully disagree with the early poster who predicted mass centuries for us to grow past this.

But at this point, containing the guns is simply more pragmatic than iffy social education or cultural reform IMO.

And we may need all three.

 

The value for me is the discussion, to hear from the pro gun side. No shock and awe from them so far.

The most scary guy on this thread is LH.

As pointed out by another poster, the gun collection problem possibly goes beyond state level.

Atoyot, the second amendment is more dangerous around here than an Ohio target .22.

 

My take is that our society can't handle firearms, but I'm not pleased that it seems to lay out like this.

Stuck in the past? My first gun was a weathered 1x6 hand-sawed by my dad into the shape of a Remington-looking rifle. The barrel and stock were done with a drawing knife.

The family dog and I took that gun and prowled all the nearby orchards, big-time, sometimes finding obsidian arrowheads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just breaking-----a gal who went to high school with The Nursetta found dead a couple of hours ago. Very un-good...... :(

 

 

 

http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_20061451

 

Fuck, it was The Nursetta's friend AND her mom. Mom also was dating a local cop. This one's got bad written all over it....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

Thanks for your thoughtful post jocal.

 

MY take is that this society can't handle the personal responsibility that comes with having firearms - it splashes over into far too many places where people like to place the blame on others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see a lot of "because it hasn't affected me yet therefore it must not exist" in this thread. Grabbler (who I respect and like), atoyot, etc... the reason an accident hasn't touched your lives yet is that you're lucky and your number hasn't come up yet.

 

The point made by Jocal in his posting that news article is one I hope you all see.

 

A kid took a gun that his mother had just laying around, brought it to school and it accidentally discharged and killed a girl.

 

If that gun hadn't existed then a girl would be alive today.

 

By the same token, Who or what is to blame here?

 

1) the mother? an (possibly) inept parent that (may have) failed to educate the child in gun safety.

2) the child? who having been taught about gun safety decided to ignore it.

 

3) OR, the idiot mother (who is exactly why an IQ test should be taken before breeding) for leaving the gun lying around?

 

Its not the gun thats for sure.

 

Maybe this is just an education issue? on all counts.

 

Look at crime stats in the UK since they restricted firearms!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

oh cool our Aussie Milque Toast bretheren are getting ready to respond.

 

Look at crime stats in the UK since they restricted firearms!!

 

 

ssshhhh they didn't BAN them - they simply required registration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think many people posting here are missing the point.

 

Guns don't kill people.

 

 

 

Gun owners kill people.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think many people posting here are missing the point.

 

Guns don't kill people.

 

 

 

Gun owners kill people.

 

Gawd you're an idiot....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

I think many people posting here are missing the point.

 

Guns don't kill people.

 

 

 

Gun owners kill people.

 

Gawd you're an idiot....

 

yes he is. What else is Knewn.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh cool our Aussie Milque Toast bretheren are getting ready to respond.

 

 

Would call us aussie's spineless to our faces?

 

Without your gun small dick replacement device with you of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With such little consensus on the forum and in the country, I'm not sure the point of your many questions about how to collect the damn things.

I'm, just into the anthropology at play here, you might say.

 

 

I guess that's my skin here as well. If there is to be a consensus one way or the other, or a half-way point such as the conditions I challenged you with, its going to come from respectful dialogue and a mutual understanding of our concerns, both ways. Again, I respect your position whether I agree on the solution or not.

 

My list, incidentally, is comprised of my personal, theoretical, back-against-the-wall, at gunpoint myself, either give 'em all up versus give some up but keep these, cocession limit.... If I KNEW 101% that it it would go no further.

 

But we know that if such a concession were made, it would not stop. And the black market would be SO very happy.

 

Which ride you want to talk about, the Harpoon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

Would call us aussie's spineless to our faces?

 

Without your gun small dick replacement device with you of course.

 

I have worked with many, many Ozzies and Kiwis who would laugh at you....

 

you have some sort of fascination with small dicks? ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think many people posting here are missing the point.

 

Guns don't kill people.

 

 

 

Gun owners kill people.

 

Gawd you're an idiot....

 

 

Why ricko, because I state a fact?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

Why ricko, because I state a fact?

 

Nope - most likely because you're an idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would call us aussie's spineless to our faces?

 

Without your gun small dick replacement device with you of course.

 

I have worked with many, many Ozzies and Kiwis who would laugh at you....

 

you have some sort of fascination with small dicks? ?

 

I am sure they would - I am a funny guy!

 

And no I have no issue with small dicks - thus I don't feel the need to own a gun.

 

However many of my family do as they own a property (what you would call a ranch)

Out in the Country over here, Guns are considered a tool.

In the city it is the gun owner that is considered a tool.

 

Angry people like you should not own them - despite your little issue.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh cool our Aussie Milque Toast bretheren are getting ready to respond.

 

 

Would call us aussie's spineless to our faces?

 

Without your gun small dick replacement device with you of course.

 

Ozzies? Hell yes.

 

Kiwi's? No fuking way..... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why ricko, because I state a fact?

 

Nope - most likely because you're an idiot.

 

 

Looks like I struck a nerve hey Rambo!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

And no I have no issue with small dicks - thus I don't feel the need to own a gun.

 

and how long have you been thinking about guns and dicks? This is fascinating stuff folks..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

Looks like I struck a nerve hey Rambo!

 

Yup - the nerve you struck was our insight into your mind. Guns and dicks folks - you can't make this shit up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh cool our Aussie Milque Toast bretheren are getting ready to respond.

 

Look at crime stats in the UK since they restricted firearms!!

 

 

ssshhhh they didn't BAN them - they simply required registration.

WTF?

 

You try and register a handgun in the UK? Good fucking luck on that one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh cool our Aussie Milque Toast bretheren are getting ready to respond.

 

 

Would call us aussie's spineless to our faces?

 

Without your gun small dick replacement device with you of course.

 

Ozzies? Hell yes.

 

Kiwi's? No fuking way..... :lol:

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

oh cool our Aussie Milque Toast bretheren are getting ready to respond.

 

 

Would call us aussie's spineless to our faces?

 

Without your gun small dick replacement device with you of course.

 

Ozzies? Hell yes.

 

Kiwi's? No fuking way..... :lol:

 

:D

 

I stand corrected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that would be mean and cruel and earn you quite a few free beers at the club of your choice....

 

LH has a few issues to work on. My guess is that he doesn't know Switzerland mandates a "gasp" fully automatic assault rifle in every home. With ammo on the spot. I've been to the armorers shops in Swizzy. The SIG's are a work of art - wrong caliber but a work of art.

 

edited to add:

 

I'm still looking for a good BBQ sauce recipe - as long as it starts with tabasco...

 

Kevin, scroll back to last night to see I'm fully aware of Switzerland's domestic policy on defense. Unlike them however we have not been, historically, under daily threat of being overrun by our neighbors (the reason for the mandated assault rifle).

 

 

 

 

 

 

Spoken like a man who was not raised in the inner city

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like I struck a nerve hey Rambo!

 

Guns and dicks folks - you can't make this shit up.

 

So when your trigger jams you call on mob support? Like many Gun owners you are a coward.

 

An inadequate coward at that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well for one thing every one of the guns issued in Switzerland is to a member of the armed forces. I'm sure they're more consciencious about gun safety than joe blow in the USA who wants a .38 special to protect him from robbers and keeps it in his nightstand.

 

Also, up until 2007 the ammo that was issued with their rifles was sealed and routinely inspected for not being opened or used. Now those same weapons are issued without ammunition.

 

Then after the militiamen are discharged from their service they are given the option to keep or give back the gun. If they choose to keep it then the automatic function is removed at a factory.

 

All ammunition sold to the public for these guns is at ranges and it must be used there.

 

a man boy and his Wikipedia.

 

Riveting stuff. I don't care enough to go spelunking through boring, long winded articles in our library.

http://en.wikipedia...._in_Switzerland

 

And yes, implementation is the tough part.

You have a future as a consultant in front of you son.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stand corrected. 'Schooled' is the correct SA term I believe.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

 

So when your trigger jams you call on mob support? Like many Gun owners you are a coward.

 

An inadequate coward at that.

 

So let me guess. You think gun owners are those who don't know how to defend themselves with fisticuffs?

 

Sweet mother of fucking god you're an idiot.

 

Really. Please don't breed. You and Gator have a special place on these boards.

 

I stand corrected. 'Schooled' is the correct SA term I believe.

 

 

I was trying to be nice to those less - well let's just say - fortunate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boomer's link is two thirds Swiss military history and about guns and gun discipline as part of the fabric of their culture.

Then the guncite.com source includes other interesting bits.

 

 

By David B. Kopel and StephenD'Andrilli (American Rifleman, February 1990)

 

Pastedfrom <http://guncite.com/swissgun-kopel.html>

 

Switzerland proves that lenient licensing is all that is needed to stop gun crime.

 

And thanks to the "howitzer licensing" system there is no howitzer crime in Switzerland.

 

Handgun Control should push America to adopt the Swiss policy: having the government sell machine guns at discount prices to anyone with an easily obtained permit.

 

Opponents of lenient sentencing would argue, correctly, that America does not have the stable, integrated community structures of Switzerland. Thus, the American government must take a more coercive, authoritarian role in controlling prisoners, to make up for the lack of community controls.

 

Every 48 seconds, someone uses a handgun to defend himself against a crime (according to Florida State University's Gary Kleck, using data collected by liberal pollster Peter Hart in a poll paid for by the anti-gun lobby).

 

Gun accidents account for less than 2% of the nation's 92,000 accidental deaths annually.

 

Suicides have little to do with gun availability. Japan has no guns, while Switzerlandis deluged with every gun in the book, and both nations have the same suiciderate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that would be mean and cruel and earn you quite a few free beers at the club of your choice....

 

LH has a few issues to work on. My guess is that he doesn't know Switzerland mandates a "gasp" fully automatic assault rifle in every home. With ammo on the spot. I've been to the armorers shops in Swizzy. The SIG's are a work of art - wrong caliber but a work of art.

 

edited to add:

 

I'm still looking for a good BBQ sauce recipe - as long as it starts with tabasco...

 

Kevin, scroll back to last night to see I'm fully aware of Switzerland's domestic policy on defense. Unlike them however we have not been, historically, under daily threat of being overrun by our neighbors (the reason for the mandated assault rifle).

 

 

Spoken like a man who was not raised in the inner city

 

Sooo...LH, Historically speaking,....

In the Civil War people were not in fear of being over run by opposing armies?

Western settlers were not afraid of Mexican, or Indian invaders? (I;ll grant you the Canadians have not been a problem lately, but they are sounding uppity lately) )

 

In WW2 we had volunteers on UBoat sighting patrols, even along the town you live in....

Bunkers were built on sand dunes along the beaches you sail by every summer.

why?

 

Do you know anyone who owns a ranch (aka 'farm') along the Rio Grande? I do. You want to tell them they don't need guns today?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just breaking-----a gal who went to high school with The Nursetta found dead a couple of hours ago. Very un-good...... :(

 

 

 

http://www.dailynews...ews/ci_20061451

 

Fuck, it was The Nursetta's friend AND her mom. Mom also was dating a local cop. This one's got bad written all over it....

 

Shoot EM - I feel compelled to say somethin' helpful, but, I'm not sure that I'm smart enough to know what that might be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just breaking-----a gal who went to high school with The Nursetta found dead a couple of hours ago. Very un-good...... :(

 

 

 

http://www.dailynews...ews/ci_20061451

 

Fuck, it was The Nursetta's friend AND her mom. Mom also was dating a local cop. This one's got bad written all over it....

 

Shoot EM - I feel compelled to say somethin' helpful, but, I'm not sure that I'm smart enough to know what that might be.

 

 

Thanx, but don't fret it....I'm the same way. But unfortunately this one was bad. Really bad. Friend of her friend saw the scene through the front door----suffice to say it's quite grisly....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites