Do you fuckers still think handguns are so cool now?

[The Scatologist]

Teen Killed for a Kiss Mourned in N.J.
By JOHN CURRAN
Associated Press Writer

ATLANTIC CITY, N.J. - For Elisa Hernandez, no meant no - and a tragic death at age 15.
When a frustrated suitor named Alfred Bishop asked her for a kiss, she refused him. Again and again, he asked. She said no. When he pulled out a revolver and pointed at her head, she pushed it away.

"She laughed him off," Atlantic County Prosecutor Jeffrey Blitz said.

The rejection cost her: After being rebuffed, Bishop shot her through the eye, cutting short the life of a bubbly, self-assured high school sophomore who loved hip-hop and dancing and went by "Lisa," according to authorities.

"She was just joyful, a funny, outgoing person who didn't care if people talked about her," said friend Barb Parred, 21. "But something she didn't want to do, she wouldn't do it."

Bishop, 21, fled after the shooting late Tuesday but was captured in Washington, D.C. He was being held without bail.

"It doesn't make any sense," said the victim's mother, also named Elisa Hernandez, 32. "I think there's more to it than this. My feelings tell me that."

On Tuesday night, the teen walked across the courtyard from the Brigantine Homes housing project unit she shared with her parents, both casino workers, and two siblings to visit with friends.

She was already inside apartment 880A visiting with three girls who lived there - their mother, the only adult in the household, wasn't home - when authorities say Bishop arrived.

Diagnosed as schizophrenic at age 10, Bishop had recently split with his girlfriend of six years and quit taking his medication because it made him sleepy and sluggish, according to his mother, Lisa Bishop, 40.

He had been drinking and smoking marijuana earlier that night, said Lisa Bishop, who talked to her son by telephone after the killing.

Alfred Bishop, who served a year in prison for aggravated assault by auto and was released nearly two years ago, was at the apartment because he had stored some of his belongings there, according to Blitz.

After some casual conversation in the kitchen, Bishop tried to get Hernandez to kiss him, but she laughed at him, according to Blitz.

Bishop then pulled out the gun, put it to her head and again demanded a kiss, Blitz said. According to witnesses, she said no and pushed the gun away twice before he shot her through the left eye and fled, Blitz said.

Hernandez died at the scene.

"He told me he did it and it was a big mistake and he loved me and was sorry to put me through all this," Bishop's mother said.

His lawyer, Joel Mayer, said Friday that Bishop didn't intend to shoot. He said Bishop was a non-violent man, an assertion also made by Bishop's ex-girlfriend, Nicole White, 22.

"I've been with him for six years and he never pulled a weapon on me, and we've been through everything," said White, the mother of Bishop's 3-year-old daughter. "He was never violent. We had our ups and downs, but he never hurt me."

Bishop had threatened Hernandez previously, according to Hernandez' family.

"That was not any accident, because two days before he killed my daughter, he was in my house drinking with me," said Luis Santiago, 34, the victim's father. "And I told him, `Yo, stop playing with a gun like that. You're a young kid. I've been in jail too much time. You will find yourself in jail for life.'

"Also, he told my daughter `You are going to be mine, or you are going to be dead,'" Santiago said.

[fanofdave]

a very tragic incident. however, the jackass who pulled
the trigger could have as easily used a knife, a bat, his
hands to strangle; the list could go on and on. you're
focusing on the item used to kill, not the fact that HE killed.

if you put a gun on the floor and tell it to shoot someone,
it won't. some jackass has to put it in his hands and use it.
people kill people.

is a fork responsible for making people fat?
or are the people responsible for picking it up and
shoveling all that shit into their guts with it?

your next move will be to tell me how ineffective
gun laws are.
well, gun laws aren't to stop crime. gun laws are to set
consequences if you are fucking stupid enough to use
one in a crime.

we have laws against rape, incest; the list goes on and on.
yet these things still occur. laws won't stop illegal activities.
laws will mearly state the consequences you will deal with
if you CHOOSE to be a fuck up.

[BigBadBrian]

Let's ban all handguns. :rolleyes:

[Seshmeister]

We did and it's great!

[4moreyears]

As my quote says at the bottom. Just because a few nut jobs are out there those that choose to have a gun should be able to protect themselves.

[FORD]

"Handguns are made for killin'. Ain't no good for nothin else" - Ronnie Van Zant

[diamondD]

Especially killing a thug breaking in your house...

[fanofdave]

That's not what Ronnie says at the local gun club
when we're target and skeet shooting...

[capnfrantic]

Another "I'm scared to fight but I have a gun" pussy boy....

[Mishar_McLeud]

Originally posted by fanofdave
a very tragic incident. however, the jackass who pulled
the trigger could have as easily used a knife, a bat, his
hands to strangle; the list could go on and on. you're
focusing on the item used to kill, not the fact that HE killed.


I don't agree, when a one uses melee weapons, assault depends on his strength (physical and mental) alone, while a gun gives a feeling of superiority, plus a person acts like a mediator between a gun and a victim. IMO it's much easier to pull a trigger than to hit with a blade.

[Mishar_McLeud]

Originally posted by diamondD
Especially killing a thug breaking in your house...
There are rifles for such occasions

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by Mishar_McLeud
There are rifles for such occasions

Exactly.

The advantage of a handgun is it can be concealed.

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by Seshmeister
We did and it's great!

No Kidding. You live in a lemming-like society to begin with. Keep following the script, Toto......:cato:

[Full Bug]

Americans need a gun registry like we have here, it cost 500 million and counting and nobody gets killed here anymore, killers use butter knifes now so all you get is a bruise....

[Golden AWe]

Handguns are cool, when idiots play with them - that's not cool at all.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Full Bug
Americans need a gun registry like we have here, it cost 500 million and counting and nobody gets killed here anymore, killers use butter knifes now so all you get is a bruise....

Exactly. I'm a "liberal" who likes guns. The problem here is somewhere in the middle in the US, where the NRA fights to have guns given away freely to everyone and gun-control advocates, who favor an absolute banning, fail to see that there are simply too many guns to take away. Neither concept works very well. ALL gun's should be registered! Period! and background checks performed on buyers of all weapons.

I think one of the few things that the New York state gov't does correctly is the handgun permit. One must go through: a six-month waiting period, writing a short essay as to why one needs a handgun, a background check that includes four provided references interviewed by the State Police. One must also go through a two-day safety and gun-law course. And then, you HAVE to buy a handgun after all is complete!

Also, it seems to easier to get ASSAULT RIFLES than handguns in many states, such as Virginia. This seems more blatantly foolish! The uneven state level gun laws in this country cause some southern states to be a sieve where assault weapons can be purchased anonymously, with only a drivers licence and "imported" to states with stricter gun accountability laws.

This tragic case is an example of that. Washington, DC has a city-wide ban on handguns, but I suspect the weapon originated from next-door Virginia, where they practically offer two-for one "fire" sales on guns, and you only need a drivers licence to buy them. I've always wondered about the irony of it being easier to buy a gun in some states than it is to get a fucking drivers licence! As if a gun is just a powertool!

[Nickdfresh]

BTW, anyone carrying a copy of this book into a gunstore should never, ever be sold a gun under any circumstances.
http://www3.cerritos.edu/fquaas/graphics/catcher.gif

[Golden AWe]

In Funland, we have a gun registry too...even if you move to another town/city, you have to registry your gun at the local administration.

l: owner of a hunting rifle and a shotgun

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by Golden AWe
In Funland, we have a gun registry too...even if you move to another town/city, you have to registry your gun at the local administration.

l: owner of a hunting rifle and a shotgun

FINe and dandy: at least you can still own guns. :D

Some countries want to take those away also.

[Golden AWe]

Yup...we're one lucky nation. But I would like to have a foreign grrrlfriend again...hahahah

[academic punk]

Originally posted by fanofdave
a very tragic incident. however, the jackass who pulled
the trigger could have as easily used a knife, a bat, his
hands to strangle; the list could go on and on. you're
focusing on the item used to kill, not the fact that HE killed.

if you put a gun on the floor and tell it to shoot someone,
it won't. some jackass has to put it in his hands and use it.
people kill people.

is a fork responsible for making people fat?
or are the people responsible for picking it up and
shoveling all that shit into their guts with it?

your next move will be to tell me how ineffective
gun laws are.
well, gun laws aren't to stop crime. gun laws are to set
consequences if you are fucking stupid enough to use
one in a crime.

we have laws against rape, incest; the list goes on and on.
yet these things still occur. laws won't stop illegal activities.
laws will mearly state the consequences you will deal with
if you CHOOSE to be a fuck up.


Not a bad post, but I still find fault with the logic of your first point. Shall we dispense nuclear weapons for each and every household and person who desires one?

If the fucker didn't have a gun, circumstances - BOTTOM LINE - in this particular incident would have been far different. And I'm willing to wager he wouldn't have been copping the attitude he was in the first place.

[Cathedral]

Being a collector of handguns and other assorted weapons of choice myself, I am here to tell you all that gun laws do nothing more than penalize the law abiding gun owner.
Everytime some jerk commits a crime like this the first reaction is "We need more gun laws", and that's just plain bullshit.

What we need is for the 'existing' laws we already have to be enforced and prosecuted.

Laws only work on the law abiding, not the lawless.............

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by academic punk
Not a bad post, but I still find fault with the logic of your first point. Shall we dispense nuclear weapons for each and every household and person who desires one?



No, as they are currently against the law. :)

[FORD]

The bottom line here is that this fucking piece of shit, with a documented history of mental illness, should have NEVER been sold a gun in the first place. This is why mandatory background checks are a must, and the gunshow loophole must be closed (see "Columbine" for what happens for when crazy pieces of shit can buy weapons from unregulated militia wackos)

[drejr77]

I realize art and music cannot be blamed for violence. But look at the CULTURE at work here, people! Two fucking stupid hip-hop kids who worship a culture that promotes violence, sexism, misogyny, etc.
The males are usually violent, and the females allow this. Hip-Hop music killed feminism. It's a shame that somebody got killed, but hey, the fucking parents are stupid as well. The victim's father sees the kid with a gun and doesn't stop him preemptively? Darwin at work again folks.
Besides, as stated above, insane people will find ways to kill no matter what. Bare hands, weapons, whatever.

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by drejr77
I realize art and music cannot be blamed for violence. But look at the CULTURE at work here, people! Two fucking stupid hip-hop kids who worship a culture that promotes violence, sexism, misogyny, etc.
The males are usually violent, and the females allow this. Hip-Hop music killed feminism. It's a shame that somebody got killed, but hey, the fucking parents are stupid as well. The victim's father sees the kid with a gun and doesn't stop him preemptively? Darwin at work again folks.
Besides, as stated above, insane people will find ways to kill no matter what. Bare hands, weapons, whatever.

Actually, I think music CAN be blamed for violence, or at least contribute towards it. Listen to the lyrics. They are chilling. :eek:

[FORD]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Actually, I think music CAN be blamed for violence, or at least contribute towards it. Listen to the lyrics. They are chilling. :eek:

True. When I hear the lyrics to "Upchuck for Breakfast" I have an overwhelming urge to strangle Sammy Hagar.

[TLR]

I have the right to have a gun(s) and I choose to take advantage of it. A gun has never killed anyone. The person pulling the trigger has, though. Anyone who says/thinks differently is misguided, at best...

[diamondD]

Originally posted by Mishar_McLeud
There are rifles for such occasions


But they don't fit in my bedside table's drawer! ;)

[BrownSound1]

Ford you are absolutely right...I have no problem with that at all.

Outlawing handguns is not the answer. That's a similar mentality to outlawing alcohol because of drunk drivers. The alcohol isn't the problem, it is the individuals.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by TLR
I have the right to have a gun(s) and I choose to take advantage of it. A gun has never killed anyone. The person pulling the trigger has, though. Anyone who says/thinks differently is misguided, at best...

True to a point, but....

A car never killed anyone, IT'S THE FUCKING STUPID SHIT DRIVERS! So, let's let everyone go out a buy one regardless of age, mental state, past driving records, or whatever! Why have driver's licences? Why make kids take roadtests! They're impeding on freedom damnit! Every American should be able to waltz into a dealer and purchase a car without insurance or a licence. After all, that's personal liberty isn't it?

[drejr77]

To add to my original post, art and music cannot be blamed directly for violent behavior. However, when stupid people (most of the U.S. population) listen to suggestive art/music/lifestyles like hip-hop, they turn into Neanderthals. So yes, in a sense, music and art can be blamed, but I place the blame on bad parenting and bad gene pools.
Obviously, schizophrenic hip-hop fans are dangerous.

[Full Bug]

Originally posted by Cathedral
Being a collector of handguns and other assorted weapons of choice myself, I am here to tell you all that gun laws do nothing more than penalize the law abiding gun owner.
Everytime some jerk commits a crime like this the first reaction is "We need more gun laws", and that's just plain bullshit.
What we need is for the 'existing' laws we already have to be enforced and prosecuted.
Laws only work on the law abiding, not the lawless.............
Most sensible post I have read all day....

[kentuckyklira]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
As my quote says at the bottom. Just because a few nut jobs are out there those that choose to have a gun should be able to protect themselves. By your logic drugs should be legal too. After all, there are tons of people out there who take the occasional line of cocaine and smoke the occasional joint without dropping out of society!

[The Scatologist]

You handgun advocates talk as though theres gonna be a armedburglar breaking into your house every night. Even still, a shotgun will be more then adequate for that kinda thing.

Let's see, a burglar with a handgun vs a common citizen with a handgun. Who's gonna win? The burglar, because he is probably some of the following, desperate, psycho, used to crime, etc.


Now let's see, a burglar with a handgun vs a common citizen with a shotgun, who's gonna win? See my point?



You say that you have a right to bear arms and that being able to buy handguns easily is your right to freedom, but you know what? You're just being selfish. You're impeding on other people's freedom. Freedom from being able to walk outside safely.

Sure criminals may still get their guns, but it'll be a lot fucking harder so there will be less crime anyway.



You think that fucking guy woulda just used a knife or something to kill that girl? Fuck no, there were other people there with him, he woulda been taken down. If you think that this incident had as much chance to happen if he was strangling her, then you're truely delusional, and I wonder if you're even sane enough to carry a handgun in the first place.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by drejr77
To add to my original post, art and music cannot be blamed directly for violent behavior. However, when stupid people (most of the U.S. population) listen to suggestive art/music/lifestyles like hip-hop, they turn into Neanderthals. So yes, in a sense, music and art can be blamed, but I place the blame on bad parenting and bad gene pools.
Obviously, schizophrenic hip-hop fans are dangerous.

To reflect on someone's post, art and music have no direct causal effect on violent, demented morons. The truth is, if you have one douchebag killer whose father didn't love him enough, he'll make violent associations to the Teletubbies!

I speak of the killer of John Lennon and the would be assassin of President Reagan. I will not name these attenion whore murders by name since that was their original purpose!

Show me a John Lennon lyric that would make any well adjusted individual kill!

Show me the passage in "Catcher in the Rye" that tells one to pick up a gun and kill! I surely can find none. Yet demented fanatics latch onto to this stuff, hell, there are passages in the Bible about killing that drive people to shoot abortion providers! And then there's Charles Manson...

[FORD]

Originally posted by drejr77
To add to my original post, art and music cannot be blamed directly for violent behavior. However, when stupid people (most of the U.S. population) listen to suggestive art/music/lifestyles like hip-hop, they turn into Neanderthals. So yes, in a sense, music and art can be blamed, but I place the blame on bad parenting and bad gene pools.
Obviously, schizophrenic hip-hop fans are dangerous.

We really gotta leave the music out of this. I grew up listening to Punk Rock. Songs like "I Shot Reagan" by Suicidal Tendencies "Police Story" by Black Flag, "Class War" by DOA. These ain't lovey dovey pacifist songs here. You know what? I have no documented history of violence. No criminal record, and though I make no claims of being completely sane (who could be in the times we live in?) I'm certainly not a schizo or anything.

So let's take the music off the table and deal with the reality, which is simply this...

Criminals and psychos should not be able to purchase guns, or any other weapons for that matter.

Enforce that reality and there won't be a need to mess with the rights of law abiding, reasonably sane citizens.

[diamondD]

I'll drink to that! :guzzle:

[twonabomber]

Originally posted by FORD
"Handguns are made for killin'. Ain't no good for nothin else" - Ronnie Van Zant

far as they're cuntcerned, so are airplanes.

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Actually, I think music CAN be blamed for violence, or at least contribute towards it. Listen to the lyrics. They are chilling. :eek:

I bet your parents said the same thing about Ozzy!

I find it so depressing to see how some of you have just turned into the reactionary, censorship, do as I say not as I did outlook that you used to rebel against.

[Cathedral]

This whole thread is way out of control, this is why gun debates never lead to anything constructive. people are too pre-occupied with associations, comparisons, and inability to see things with any focus.

We could legislate the hell out of everything if we chose too because life in and of itself is dangerous.

No, the focus needs to be on how to make gun ownership safer.
Fact is, the criminals will always be armed, especially in todays social climate....I shall be armed as well for the day that is coming where someone will, again, enter our home illegally.
I am a law abiding citizen, I have safety and responsibility as my priorities as a gun owner.
Parents like me who own firearms should be held accountable for any crimes involving their weapons by our children.
They should not be left loaded in easily accessible areas, they should not be left loaded, period.
Trigger locks should be "MANDATORY" or the firearm should be disassembled and stored in seperate, locked, boxes.
Any failure to prove these things have been done means 20 years for the parent should their child commit a crime.

But something that troubles me in this thread. I get the impression that people distinguish a difference between a shotgun and a pistol, why is that?
I have a sawed off double barrel shotgun that would be very easy to conceal, and have you ever seen what a slug does to a body?
Buckshot makes a real nasty mess too, so to me there is no differentiating between the types of firearms available.

A GUN IS A GUN IS A GUN IS A GUN......ALL ARE HARMLESS UNTIL SOMEONE PICKS THEM UP!

Look, I don't see the problem being a lack of laws, I see the problem being a severe lack of responsibility and consequence being enforced on the gun owners themselves.

I can tell you with 100% confidence that MY home is safe for any kid to run loose in. you wouldn't know i owned weapons unless i showed them to you. no gun racks, none stashed in drawers, all safe, all hidden, and quickly accessible and ready for me to use in a matter of seconds. I am in control 110% of the time.
Taking away peoples guns isn't the answer, and if they have taken yours away then you are not a free man or woman, and are forced to rely on those who will not protect you for protection.

I have a copy of the Constitution in my ammo box, and i know my right's and responsibilities. I know i don't have the right simply to own the gun, but i do know my right to bear arms should a militia force be needed in my community.

But, as things stand right now, we haven't spent enough time enforcing gun laws to actually know which one's need reform.
And even at that, the problem cannot be fixed without first addressing the social culture issues with our youth.
They simply don't care about anything anymore, human life included.

Crying because you don't like the fact that i could wage a small war on my street won't grant you any comfort when your new laws keep me from helping to protect that same street should the governmental structure collapse.
You think people that have nothing won't be looking to take what you have from you?
Now stay with me here, this is an example of what the US Constitution means by having a right to bear arms, strictly hypothetical, completely possible as a scenario.

Ain't nobody walking all over me and mine, that i'll guaren-damn-tee you. and where i'll be, should society begin going to hell, there will be plenty of food sources to shoot with my guns....you have fun trying to make you a bow and arrow that'll bring down a deer, or accurate enough to nab a squirrel or a rabbit.

The good ole' southern boy with his confederate flag on his truck will be your best friend, or worst enemy when your hungry, city boys and girls.

Now i'm a peacful law abiding citizen of the United States of America, I like my luxeries just like the rest of you...and i like knowing i can protect myself if i have too. stop trying to unarm me by thinking eliminating the guns will do anything but weaken your odds of survival in dire situations. in fact, your actions against guns shows a level of maturity that tells me you'd be a responsible gun owner as well, and you would be able to protect yourself as well should the need arise.
There are more of us who are responsible than those who are not, trust me on that.

[academic punk]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh


Show me a John Lennon lyric that would make any well adjusted individual kill!




Most of his love songs to Yoko...

(and everything of hers he permitted on his own albums)

[academic punk]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh


Show me the passage in "Catcher in the Rye" that tells one to pick up a gun and kill! I surely can find none.

"This ain't a deer shootin' hat. This is a PEOPLE shootin' hat."

"And then I dreamed of going down into the lobby with a shotgun in hand, and blowing that crazy Maurice away"

"Where do the ducks go?"
"Huh?"
"The ducks...where do they go in winter?"
"Whhadya...stupid? How should I know?"
"Oh yeah? WELL FUUUUUUCK YYYOOOOOUUUUU!!!!"
*BLAM!!!*

[Full Bug]

Originally posted by academic punk
Most of his love songs to Yoko...

(and everything of hers he permitted on his own albums)
LOL!:D

[Nitro Express]

Handguns are pea shooters that shoot weak cartridges. I preffer the 500 Nitro Express myself.

[Nitro Express]

In a world full of millions of guns, anyone knows you can buy anything you want if you want to break the law. If you can score some herroine you can score an full automatic Uzi, Kalishnakov, M-16 as well. Fuck the handguns, get a Krinkov on the black market. Osama Bin Laden loves his.

[The Scatologist]

Anwser me on this, why are people so bent on using guns to defend themselves. There are alternatives right now like Tasers. Although I do believe they are not as effective, I really someone needs to spend some funds coming up with a new long range self defense weapon of some kind.




But answer me this, Let's say your argument holds true about sawed off shotguns. Can you honestly say, and since you are obviously Christian, put your hand over a Bible, and say that you honestly believe that there would be the same amount of crime in the States if handguns were outlawed?


Yes, you can conceal a sawed off shotgun, but still not as easily. You would have to wear some sorta heavy trench coat or carry it in a bag. There's also the trouble of sawing it off in the first place. Isn't it illegal to have a sawed off shotgun? Don't you think a lot more criminals would be caught since it would be easier to identify them?



I'm all for rifles and such, and yet, you people keep repeating the argument about hunting and such. It's as though you just always have to mention that part because your own argument is so weak that you need to add that bit in to make it seem stronger.


How about coming up with a post based on:

1. Not trying to be cool
2. Not trying to be a macho man
3. Based on what you think, and not your emotions.

[Big Train]

OK first off, I REFUSE to enter into the music debate (I'm still tired from the last one). Ford made a good point here. The kid was mentally ill. The gun was merely a convienent tool. He could have killed with any number of instruments.

Would anyone say we should BAN the mentally ill or anyone diagnosed or having any sort of experience with mental illness? Or anyone with serious violent tendencies. Boot them out to Canada (to help them get their violent crime stats up to par...Ha ha..). No, NOBODY would advocate such a thing. But a large number of incidents revolve around such scenarios.

I'm cool with how everything sits right now, although I think everyone who owns or wants a handgun should go through extensive checks no matter where they buy it. Gun shows...gotta go.

I'm neither for nor against the 2nd amendment. If you accept the responsibility, you accept the risk. Most gunowners do and are very honorable and respectful people. As long as we are aware that these tradegies will occur, then fine.

Close the loopholes, crack down on the ill and violent and pressure criminals. You can't engineer it out of society. You just can't.

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by The Scatologist


Can you honestly say, and since you are obviously Christian, put your hand over a Bible, and say that you honestly believe that there would be the same amount of crime in the States if handguns were outlawed?


Yes

[The Scatologist]

You can still reduce it though. Also, the kid may have been mentally ill, but the handgun just made it that much easier. Sure the kid may have used other measures, but all it took for him, was to hold a gun, place it in the girl's eye, and pull a little trigger.

It makes killing all too easy. Would you be as comfortable chopping up someone with a axe as you would be pulling a little trigger?

The pojnt of banning mentally ill people is moot, for guns are not people. Banning handguns however, will help reduce the number of mentally ill people getting possession of them, for obviously, the background checks are not really sufficient.

Hell, criminals used to buy their guns at Walmart till like a year or 2 ago.


Also, read the post about a idea I have for gun control. I think it's pretty good, I'd like your opinion.

[The Scatologist]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
Yes




Explain to me the abnormally high amount of crime in areas where handguns are prevalent then.

[Dan]

Originally posted by The Scatologist
How about coming up with a post based on:

1. Not trying to be cool
2. Not trying to be a macho man
3. Based on what you think, and not your emotions.

Don't own a Gun,not a Gun person and will never own one.
I think this story is sad, a person being killed by a loser who just fucked up.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by academic punk
"This ain't a deer shootin' hat. This is a PEOPLE shootin' hat."

"And then I dreamed of going down into the lobby with a shotgun in hand, and blowing that crazy Maurice away"

"Where do the ducks go?"
"Huh?"
"The ducks...where do they go in winter?"
"Whhadya...stupid? How should I know?"
"Oh yeah? WELL FUUUUUUCK YYYOOOOOUUUUU!!!!"
*BLAM!!!*

Shut up!:D

[Ally_Kat]

One of us might feel uncomfortable hacking someone with an ax, but if someone is screwed in the head, I don't think it matters gun, ax, or table knife.

Guns aren't allowed in prisons for prisoners, yet they are still able to injure and/or kill someone when they feel the need. There are other ways to aquire weapons. There's always the black market.

[Ally_Kat]

Originally posted by The Scatologist
Explain to me the abnormally high amount of crime in areas where handguns are prevalent then.

Do you think that that violence is only because of handguns? A good portion of the guns that criminals get, they get illegally. Banning handguns will not get rid of the handgun violence completely. And the handgun violence it does get rid of will just be replaced with other violence, like knives or aluminum bats for example.

[Big Train]

Originally posted by The Scatologist
You can still reduce it though. Also, the kid may have been mentally ill, but the handgun just made it that much easier. Sure the kid may have used other measures, but all it took for him, was to hold a gun, place it in the girl's eye, and pull a little trigger.

It makes killing all too easy. Would you be as comfortable chopping up someone with a axe as you would be pulling a little trigger?

The pojnt of banning mentally ill people is moot, for guns are not people. Banning handguns however, will help reduce the number of mentally ill people getting possession of them, for obviously, the background checks are not really sufficient.

Hell, criminals used to buy their guns at Walmart till like a year or 2 ago.


Also, read the post about a idea I have for gun control. I think it's pretty good, I'd like your opinion.

Made it easier sure, but a sharp knife a close range isn't hard either. If we are talking degrees of difficulty, weapons are pretty low on the scale of what's needed for success. Ask any military man, access is more important than weapons. The fact that he is around her is what made it easy in the first place and that never should have happened. We are looking for root cause here and the root is his illness. That's what made him dangerous. The weapon made it easy, but depending on the situation, any number of things would make it easy.

Banning people with dangerous conditions is not a moot point, as it is the root cause for the problems to begin with. When you see people being unruly at ballgames (go SOX..), when security comes do they toss out the people or their weapons (Beer, taping their loud mouths..). They go for the root cause. In this case, it is very un-PC to discuss root causes, as it may cause us to classify people.

I read your post and have read several articles (believe Popular Science or Mechanics had a similar article not to long ago..). It's interesting stuff, provided the tech could not be easily disabled.

Just don't let anyone steal your intellectual property...or you'll end up like my biz. But, oh yea, we are greedy assholes, so whatever...

[Ally_Kat]

Gun Control’s Twisted Outcome

Restricting firearms has helped make England more crime-ridden than the U.S.

By Joyce Lee Malcolm


On a June evening two years ago, Dan Rather made many stiff British upper lips quiver by reporting that England had a crime problem and that, apart from murder, "theirs is worse than ours." The response was swift and sharp. "Have a Nice Daydream," The Mirror, a London daily, shot back, reporting: "Britain reacted with fury and disbelief last night to claims by American newsmen that crime and violence are worse here than in the US." But sandwiched between the article’s battery of official denials -- "totally misleading," "a huge over-simplification," "astounding and outrageous" -- and a compilation of lurid crimes from "the wild west culture on the other side of the Atlantic where every other car is carrying a gun," The Mirror conceded that the CBS anchorman was correct. Except for murder and rape, it admitted, "Britain has overtaken the US for all major crimes."

In the two years since Dan Rather was so roundly rebuked, violence in England has gotten markedly worse. Over the course of a few days in the summer of 2001, gun-toting men burst into an English court and freed two defendants; a shooting outside a London nightclub left five women and three men wounded; and two men were machine-gunned to death in a residential neighborhood of north London. And on New Year’s Day this year a 19-year-old girl walking on a main street in east London was shot in the head by a thief who wanted her mobile phone. London police are now looking to New York City police for advice.

None of this was supposed to happen in the country whose stringent gun laws and 1997 ban on handguns have been hailed as the "gold standard" of gun control. For the better part of a century, British governments have pursued a strategy for domestic safety that a 1992 Economist article characterized as requiring "a restraint on personal liberty that seems, in most civilised countries, essential to the happiness of others," a policy the magazine found at odds with "America’s Vigilante Values." The safety of English people has been staked on the thesis that fewer private guns means less crime. The government believes that any weapons in the hands of men and women, however law-abiding, pose a danger, and that disarming them lessens the chance that criminals will get or use weapons.

The results -- the toughest firearm restrictions of any democracy -- are credited by the world’s gun control advocates with producing a low rate of violent crime. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell reflected this conventional wisdom when, in a 1988 speech to the American Bar Association, he attributed England’s low rates of violent crime to the fact that "private ownership of guns is strictly controlled."

In reality, the English approach has not re-duced violent crime. Instead it has left law-abiding citizens at the mercy of criminals who are confident that their victims have neither the means nor the legal right to resist them. Imitating this model would be a public safety disaster for the United States.

The illusion that the English government had protected its citizens by disarming them seemed credible because few realized the country had an astonishingly low level of armed crime even before guns were restricted. A government study for the years 1890-92, for example, found only three handgun homicides, an average of one a year, in a population of 30 million. In 1904 there were only four armed robberies in London, then the largest city in the world. A hundred years and many gun laws later, the BBC reported that England’s firearms restrictions "seem to have had little impact in the criminal underworld." Guns are virtually outlawed, and, as the old slogan predicted, only outlaws have guns. Worse, they are increasingly ready to use them.

Nearly five centuries of growing civility ended in 1954. Violent crime has been climbing ever since. Last December, London’s Evening Standard reported that armed crime, with banned handguns the weapon of choice, was "rocketing." In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent.

Gun crime is just part of an increasingly lawless environment. From 1991 to 1995, crimes against the person in England’s inner cities increased 91 percent. And in the four years from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled. Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York. England’s rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America’s, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police. In a United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations published in July, England and Wales led the Western world’s crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people.

This sea change in English crime followed a sea change in government policies. Gun regulations have been part of a more general disarmament based on the proposition that people don’t need to protect themselves because society will protect them. It also will protect their neighbors: Police advise those who witness a crime to "walk on by" and let the professionals handle it.

This is a reversal of centuries of common law that not only permitted but expected individuals to defend themselves, their families, and their neighbors when other help was not available. It was a legal tradition passed on to Americans. Personal security was ranked first among an individual’s rights by William Blackstone, the great 18th-century exponent of the common law. It was a right, he argued, that no government could take away, since no government could protect the individual in his moment of need. A century later Blackstone’s illustrious successor, A.V. Dicey, cautioned, "discourage self-help and loyal subjects become the slaves of ruffians."

But modern English governments have put public order ahead of the individual’s right to personal safety. First the government clamped down on private possession of guns; then it forbade people to carry any article that might be used for self-defense; finally, the vigor of that self-defense was to be judged by what, in hindsight, seemed "reasonable in the circumstances."

The 1920 Firearms Act was the first serious British restriction on guns. Although crime was low in England in 1920, the government feared massive labor disruption and a Bolshevik revolution. In the circumstances, permitting the people to remain armed must have seemed an unnecessary risk. And so the new policy of disarming the public began. The Firearms Act required a would-be gun owner to obtain a certificate from the local chief of police, who was charged with determining whether the applicant had a good reason for possessing a weapon and was fit to do so. All very sensible. Parliament was assured that the intention was to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals and other dangerous persons. Yet from the start the law’s enforcement was far more restrictive, and Home Office instructions to police -- classified until 1989 -- periodically narrowed the criteria.

At first police were instructed that it would be a good reason to have a revolver if a person "lives in a solitary house, where protection against thieves and burglars is essential, or has been exposed to definite threats to life on account of his performance of some public duty." By 1937 police were to discourage applications to possess firearms for house or personal protection. In 1964 they were told "it should hardly ever be necessary to anyone to possess a firearm for the protection of his house or person" and that "this principle should hold good even in the case of banks and firms who desire to protect valuables or large quantities of money."

In 1969 police were informed "it should never be necessary for anyone to possess a firearm for the protection of his house or person." These changes were made without public knowledge or debate. Their enforcement has consumed hundreds of thousands of police hours. Finally, in 1997 handguns were banned. Proposed exemptions for handicapped shooters and the British Olympic team were rejected.

Even more sweeping was the 1953 Prevention of Crime Act, which made it illegal to carry in a public place any article "made, adapted, or intended" for an offensive purpose "without lawful authority or excuse." Carrying something to protect yourself was branded antisocial. Any item carried for possible defense automatically became an offensive weapon. Police were given extensive power to stop and search everyone. Individuals found with offensive items were guilty until proven innocent.

During the debate over the Prevention of Crime Act in the House of Commons, a member from Northern Ireland told his colleagues of a woman employed by Parliament who had to cross a lonely heath on her route home and had armed herself with a knitting needle. A month earlier, she had driven off a youth who tried to snatch her handbag by jabbing him "on a tender part of his body." Was it to be an offense to carry a knitting needle? The attorney general assured the M.P. that the woman might be found to have a reasonable excuse but added that the public should be discouraged "from going about with offensive weapons in their pockets; it is the duty of society to protect them."

Another M.P. pointed out that while "society ought to undertake the defense of its members, nevertheless one has to remember that there are many places where society cannot get, or cannot get there in time. On those occasions a man has to defend himself and those whom he is escorting. It is not very much consolation that society will come forward a great deal later, pick up the bits, and punish the violent offender."

In the House of Lords, Lord Saltoun argued: "The object of a weapon was to assist weakness to cope with strength and it is this ability that the bill was framed to destroy. I do not think any government has the right, though they may very well have the power, to deprive people for whom they are responsible of the right to defend themselves." But he added: "Unless there is not only a right but also a fundamental willingness amongst the people to defend themselves, no police force, however large, can do it."

That willingness was further undermined by a broad revision of criminal law in 1967 that altered the legal standard for self-defense. Now everything turns on what seems to be "reasonable" force against an assailant, considered after the fact. As Glanville Williams notes in his Textbook of Criminal Law, that requirement is "now stated in such mitigated terms as to cast doubt on whether it [self-defense] still forms part of the law."

The original common law standard was similar to what still prevails in the U.S. Americans are free to carry articles for their protection, and in 33 states law-abiding citizens may carry concealed guns. Americans may defend themselves with deadly force if they believe that an attacker is about to kill or seriously injure them, or to prevent a violent crime. Our courts are mindful that, as Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes observed, "detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an upraised knife."

But English courts have interpreted the 1953 act strictly and zealously. Among articles found illegally carried with offensive intentions are a sandbag, a pickaxe handle, a stone, and a drum of pepper. "Any article is capable of being an offensive weapon," concede the authors of Smith and Hogan Criminal Law, a popular legal text, although they add that if the article is unlikely to cause an injury the onus of proving intent to do so would be "very heavy."

The 1967 act has not been helpful to those obliged to defend themselves either. Granville Williams points out: "For some reason that is not clear, the courts occasionally seem to regard the scandal of the killing of a robber as of greater moment than the safety of the robber’s victim in respect of his person and property."

A sampling of cases illustrates the impact of these measures:

• In 1973 a young man running on a road at night was stopped by the police and found to be carrying a length of steel, a cycle chain, and a metal clock weight. He explained that a gang of youths had been after him. At his hearing it was found he had been threatened and had previously notified the police. The justices agreed he had a valid reason to carry the weapons. Indeed, 16 days later he was attacked and beaten so badly he was hospitalized. But the prosecutor appealed the ruling, and the appellate judges insisted that carrying a weapon must be related to an imminent and immediate threat. They sent the case back to the lower court with directions to convict.

• In 1987 two men assaulted Eric Butler, a 56-year-old British Petroleum executive, in a London subway car, trying to strangle him and smashing his head against the door. No one came to his aid. He later testified, "My air supply was being cut off, my eyes became blurred, and I feared for my life." In desperation he unsheathed an ornamental sword blade in his walking stick and slashed at one of his attackers, stabbing the man in the stomach. The assailants were charged with wounding. Butler was tried and convicted of carrying an offensive weapon.

• In 1994 an English homeowner, armed with a toy gun, managed to detain two burglars who had broken into his house while he called the police. When the officers arrived, they arrested the homeowner for using an imitation gun to threaten or intimidate. In a similar incident the following year, when an elderly woman fired a toy cap pistol to drive off a group of youths who were threatening her, she was arrested for putting someone in fear. Now the police are pressing Parliament to make imitation guns illegal.

• In 1999 Tony Martin, a 55-year-old Norfolk farmer living alone in a shabby farmhouse, awakened to the sound of breaking glass as two burglars, both with long criminal records, burst into his home. He had been robbed six times before, and his village, like 70 percent of rural English communities, had no police presence. He sneaked downstairs with a shotgun and shot at the intruders. Martin received life in prison for killing one burglar, 10 years for wounding the second, and a year for having an unregistered shotgun. The wounded burglar, having served 18 months of a three-year sentence, is now free and has been granted £5,000 of legal assistance to sue Martin.

The failure of English policy to produce a safer society is clear, but what of British jibes about "America’s vigilante values" and our much higher murder rate?

Historically, America has had a high homicide rate and England a low one. In a comparison of New York and London over a 200-year period, during most of which both populations had unrestricted access to firearms, historian Eric Monkkonen found New York’s homicide rate consistently about five times London’s. Monkkonen pointed out that even without guns, "the United States would still be out of step, just as it has been for two hundred years."

Legal historian Richard Maxwell Brown has argued that Americans have more homicides because English law insists an individual should retreat when attacked, whereas Americans believe they have the right to stand their ground and kill in self-defense. Americans do have more latitude to protect themselves, in keeping with traditional common law standards, but that would have had less significance before England’s more restrictive policy was established in 1967.

The murder rates of the U.S. and U.K. are also affected by differences in the way each counts homicides. The FBI asks police to list every homicide as murder, even if the case isn’t subsequently prosecuted or proceeds on a lesser charge, making the U.S. numbers as high as possible. By contrast, the English police "massage down" the homicide statistics, tracking each case through the courts and removing it if it is reduced to a lesser charge or determined to be an accident or self-defense, making the English numbers as low as possible.

The London-based Office of Health Economics, after a careful international study, found that while "one reason often given for the high numbers of murders and manslaughters in the United States is the easy availability of firearms...the strong correlation with racial and socio-economic variables suggests that the underlying determinants of the homicide rate are related to particular cultural factors."

Cultural differences and more-permissive legal standards notwithstanding, the English rate of violent crime has been soaring since 1991. Over the same period, America’s has been falling dramatically. In 1999 The Boston Globe reported that the American murder rate, which had fluctuated by about 20 percent between 1974 and 1991, was "in startling free-fall." We have had nine consecutive years of sharply declining violent crime. As a result the English and American murder rates are converging. In 1981 the American rate was 8.7 times the English rate, in 1995 it was 5.7 times the English rate, and the latest study puts it at 3.5 times.

Preliminary figures for the U.S. this year show an increase, although of less than 1 percent, in the overall number of violent crimes, with homicide increases in certain cities, which criminologists attribute to gang violence, the poor economy, and the release from prison of many offenders. Yet Americans still enjoy a substantially lower rate of violent crime than England, without the "restraint on personal liberty" English governments have seen as necessary. Rather than permit individuals more scope to defend themselves, Prime Minister Tony Blair’s government plans to combat crime by extending those "restraints on personal liberty": removing the prohibition against double jeopardy so people can be tried twice for the same crime, making hearsay evidence admissible in court, and letting jurors know of a suspect’s previous crimes.

This is a cautionary tale. America’s founders, like their English forebears, regarded personal security as first of the three primary rights of mankind. That was the main reason for including a right for individuals to be armed in the U.S. Constitution. Not everyone needs to avail himself or herself of that right. It is a dangerous right. But leaving personal protection to the police is also dangerous.

The English government has effectively abolished the right of Englishmen, confirmed in their 1689 Bill of Rights, to "have arms for their defence," insisting upon a monopoly of force it can succeed in imposing only on law-abiding citizens. It has come perilously close to depriving its people of the ability to protect themselves at all, and the result is a more, not less, dangerous society. Despite the English tendency to decry America’s "vigilante values," English policy makers would do well to consider a return to these crucial common law values, which stood them so well in the past.



Joyce Lee Malcolm, a professor of history at Bentley College and a senior adviser to the MIT Security Studies Program, is the author of Guns and Violence: The English Experience, published in May by Harvard University Press.

[Hardrock69]

An armed populace will continue to give those nations around the world who are troublemakers the impression that we are a bunch of trigger happy lunatics.

Why do you think it is ok in America to show violence and murder on TV 24/7 and not sex?

[bueno bob]

I have several guns and amazingly enough I've never killed anyone.

Like the legal system - it ain't perfect, but it's all we got.

[ashstralia]

i saw a bit of an 'oprah' show a few weeks ago.

it was summat like 'things i regret', or
'if i could turn back time'.

the first dude left his car running in a closed garage.:rolleyes:

the second dude came home and found somebody in his kitchen,
and shot him. it was his son.:rolleyes:

you will have another school massacre sooner rather than later.

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by Ally_Kat
� In 1999 Tony Martin, a 55-year-old Norfolk farmer living alone in a shabby farmhouse, awakened to the sound of breaking glass as two burglars, both with long criminal records, burst into his home. He had been robbed six times before, and his village, like 70 percent of rural English communities, had no police presence. He sneaked downstairs with a shotgun and shot at the intruders. Martin received life in prison for killing one burglar, 10 years for wounding the second, and a year for having an unregistered shotgun. The wounded burglar, having served 18 months of a three-year sentence, is now free and has been granted �5,000 of legal assistance to sue Martin.
[/i]

Did you highlight this so that I would remember to post for the fucking 5th time the details of this case.

Ok...jeez.

Martin shot a kid in the back while he was running away with an unlicensed gun and then lied to the police about what had happened.

On appeal he got 5 years and served 3.

Your article is tyypical cut and paste bullshit from the gun lobby.

Explain the fact that the US murder rate is so much higher than any civilised country.

Most murders are done in the heat of the moment. If you have a gun to hand someone gets killed if you don't they get a punch in the face.

[stilleddiesangel]

As Sesh said, we in the UK have banned handguns and personally, that suits me fine. It's not the law abiding gun owners of the world that bothers me, it's when kids find them and get hold of them, and they do.. frequently... and with tragic results.. When I worked in the states my bosses six year old son found his. I caught him playing with it.. scary shit.

Guns desensitise the holder, it's easy to pull a trigger, there's no personal contact, it's harder to take a knife and stab someone.. it means physical contact...

[The Scatologist]

The reason a gun is much different then a knife is because of the amount of advantage it can give someone.


A guy with a knife still has a chance of being taken down by just one guy. The report said that there were other people in the room with them. You really think it would have been just as easy with a friggin knife?


Now when the guy had a handgun, there could have been 10 other people in that room, and they wouldn't have been able to do shit, cause they don't wanna be the guy to get shot in the face for trying to stop him. Not to mention, he woulda just pulled the trigger on the girl's face first, then turned the gun around on the guy.

[Nickdfresh]

True. It would have been difficult to have conducted the Columbine massacre with a meat cleaver.

You know, I get kind of upset with this, I once worked as a teacher's aide in a local high school district I currently live in. After I left, it hit the news that three local teens were planning a similar school shooting, and that one of the teens was going to take a high powered rifle and pick off the cops as they came! It was discovered because some of their classmates got wind of it and turned them in. They all received youth detention, and one of the little bastards' parents even tried to make the school let him attend prom and graduate with his class, but I think they had to move because of threats, I don't know. Things like that really change your perspective.

[TLR]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
True to a point, but....

A car never killed anyone, IT'S THE FUCKING STUPID SHIT DRIVERS! So, let's let everyone go out a buy one regardless of age, mental state, past driving records, or whatever! Why have driver's licences? Why make kids take roadtests! They're impeding on freedom damnit! Every American should be able to waltz into a dealer and purchase a car without insurance or a licence. After all, that's personal liberty isn't it?

I don't remember saying anything about allowing ANYONE to purchase a handgun, did I? I said I (personally...me, myself and I) have the right to own guns and I do. Period. You are taking liberties with what I said. I stand by what I said about people, not guns, being responsible for the killing. That applies to ANYTHING one chooses to use as a weapon. Someone could drown you playing "Marco Polo." Maybe we should outlaw swimming pools...

[The Scatologist]

By your logic, people, not nukes, destroy cities, and anyone should be allowed to have possession of nuclear weapons.


Boy you sure are dumb.

[Big Train]

Scat,

I will try to be nice and say you are missing the point here. These arguments get very circular. Nobody is saying anybody SHOULD have anything or that reasonable restrictions should not be in place, as they are.

People pull the trigger, stab the knife, shoot the catapult etc...The degree in which tradegy happens obviously is in relation to the intensity of the weapon. People still are the root cause. That's the real core issue of the gun issue: the people.

If it was only about the weapons, nobody would have ever been harmed by bags of garden fertiziler. It was due to people with evil intentions that made mass problems out of a simple tool to beautify the home. That may be too simple an analogy for you, but it's true. A gun is just a simpler, more direct version, but in certain cases, Columbine for example, fertilizer used correctly could have caused damage on a much more horrific scale.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by TLR
I don't remember saying anything about allowing ANYONE to purchase a handgun, did I? I said I (personally...me, myself and I) have the right to own guns and I do. Period. You are taking liberties with what I said. I stand by what I said about people, not guns, being responsible for the killing. That applies to ANYTHING one chooses to use as a weapon. Someone could drown you playing "Marco Polo." Maybe we should outlaw swimming pools...

My comments were not aimed at you personally. I am sure that you are, as am I, a responsible gun owner.

But I have a serious beef with over-zealous gun advocates that proclaim that a gun is merely a tool. An item that requires about as many government restrictions as a Dewalt 12-volt cordless drill. I believe that analogy to be false.

[Nitro Express]

Fuck. I don't know why people always finger the United States and give us shit over our Constitutional right to own firearms. The United States is far from being the old west. If you live in New York City, owning any type of firearm is highly regulated. Every state and city is different. If you really want to live in the old west again, move to Yemen. You can buy a Kalashnikov for $25 US dollars and having an assult rifle is a symbol of your manhood. You can get gold plated Kalashnikovs as well for a boost of your social status. Oh yeah, grenades of variouse kinds are available at the local market as well. Small grenades are popular in Afganistahn for fishing. Fuck the pole and worms, they just chuck in a lemonhead grenade and toss it into the fishing hole.

The Wyoming fish and game, The Sierra Club, the U.S. Forrest Service, and the FBI would hang me up by my nuts if I tried such a trick here in the United States. My mom can remember when my grandad used to go down to the local farmers co-op to buy dynamite to blow stumps out of the ground with. Now you can't just run down to the store and buy dynamite. Shit, you hardly can buy good ammonium nitrate fertilizer anymore since Timothy McViegh made his little bomb.

The last time I bought a handgun, I had to fill out the BATF form and wait for the clerk to call the FBI database. Apparently I'm in good standing because I was able to buy the gun. Of course I could legally buy a used gun from someone selling one in the local want ads with no paper trail.

Smart people don't sell their guns that way anymore. By doing so, you invite criminals to your home who cannot purchase a gun through the retail stores. If you purchased the gun, it's still registered to you and if the person you sold it to uses it in a crime, you are in deep legal trouble because as far as the papertrail is concerned, it's still your gun. No, smart people sell their guns through licensed gun dealers on consignment. That way the purchaser has to fill out a new BATF form and the serial number on that gun now becomes their responsibility.

Yeah, sure, we can make the gun laws even stricter, but doing so won't change anything. Most gun owners in the United States are responsible. A hell of a lot more responsible than most people driving cars on the road. By the way, five times more children drown in five gallon buckets than die from guns. Sure, gun crimes are menacing and guns are dangerouse. But cars are dangerouse, gasoline is dangerouse, chain saws are dangerouse, kitchen knifes are dangerouse.

My niece drowned in my sisters backyard pool. It was a horrible tragedy and happened because someone let their guard down for just a few minutes. The little girl fell in and couldn't swim, by the time someone realized there was nodody on the back patio it was too late. Should we ban backyard pools?

[The Scatologist]

I always find it foolish when people try to compare gun's, a weapon designed to be well, a weapon, to things such as a backyard pool.

You know what REALLY makes a gun dangerous? It's the fact that it is a GUN. It doesn't fucking matter if you can just cook up home made bombs with fertilizer. The problem is that as long as handguns are legal,hotheads and morons will always use them in inappropiate ways.

To many cowards, a handgun is like a tool to get their way. You really think that guy who shot the girl in the head would have had the balls to do that if he didn't have a gun?

When was the last time you heard of someone killing someone with a backyard pool intentionally? Sure, it happens in a few freak cases, but theres all kinds of murder everywhere.



Also, imagine a different scenario. What if your niece, would have found a handgun instead and accidentally shot herself, which happens.
You would not even have a excuse for that.

Yes, i'm willing to bet that you MIGHT be a responsible person, however, we ALL slip up sometimes, and just because YOU are responsible, does not mean everyone else is.


There IS a reason why every responsible person is not allowed to have a nuke in their backyard or anthrax cooking in the kitchen you know.



Oh, about Yemen and Afghanistan, Yes, I'm sure they are VERY good example of how life in this country should be like :rolleyes:

[jacksmar]

McALLEN, TEXAS -- Sitting behind a glass counter that held gold pieces, silver coins and antique watches in his shop, Harold Falknor said Thursday that he could not eat nor sleep after fatally shooting a 36-year-old hold-up man the day before.

The 64-year-old coin shop proprietor who Wednesday shot to death a fleeing robbery suspect in front of his store said partial motivation for his actions came only because he's been held up before and survived being shot during that previous robbery of La Casa Coin Co.

"If a person cannot defend himself in this world, it's not worth living in," he said.

Falknor recounted how 12 years ago three "white Aryan Nation people" entered his store, which was then located near 10th and Pecan Street, and robbed him at gunpoint.

After collecting their loot, they ordered him to lie face down on the floor. They then shot him in the head with a .22-caliber gun above his right ear, fracturing his mastoid bone, he said.

"The bullet went through and into the floor," he said, recalling a hole that remained in the floor of his shop after the incident.

He said doctors could not explain how he lived through the trauma, other that that he was lucky. Falknor said jokingly that the reason for his survival could have been his "hard, German head."

Joking aside, the events of 12 years ago caused him to install an electronic lock on that shop's front door so he could screen customers before they entered, he said.

But the front door of his shop at 104 N. 10th St., which he moved to just last year, only uses a standard bolt lock, which remained open for customers Thursday afternoon.

"The first thing I thought (Wednesday), I said to myself,  Oh, no, not again. This can't be happening again,'" he said. "I feared for my life like I never feared before."

Falknor said the hold-up man had come into the store approximately 30 minutes before the shooting to inquire about the price of gold pesos.

After some haggling over the deal, the man left, only to return soon afterward with a handgun, Falknor said.

"He put the gun to my head and said in Spanish that he was going to shoot me in the groin and take everything in my back room," Falknor recounted. "He parked right here in front and I knew he was going to book it."

After the man fled the shop, Falknor said he went to find his .38 Police Special -- a gun he has kept within his places of business for more than 30 years -- from behind a shelf. Then he followed the perpetrator into the parking lot.

"I wasn't thinking anything, really. I should have felt relieved that I was still alive, but I just followed him out and shot him," he said.

Watching the getaway van reverse out of its parking space, Falknor said he saw the man stop his vehicle and reach down between his legs, as if for a gun. He said it was that move that changed his aim from the van's tires to the robber himself -- a deed he isn't proud of.

"You can't take a man's life just like that. But I had no idea it was going to come down to something like this -- you don't preplan this," he said.

Released by police about four hours after the midday shooting with no charges against him, Falknor said he has since received "over 1,000 phone calls" from concerned residents and business owners, most of whom are well-wishers.

Sitting in the shop Thursday were plants that had been sent over by friends, one of which sported an American flag.

"I don't know who gets the idea that I'm in the wrong -- I know there's a dead person out there and I feel very sorry about that -- but once you pull the trigger, that's it, there's no turning back," he said. "The reason I'm sitting here right now is because they found the stolen goods and three guns in his van."

Police confirmed Thursday that they had found evidence in the van which corroborated Falknor's account of the robbery, but would not confirm that they had found three guns in the vehicle.

Meanwhile, Falknor said La Casa Coin would continue to be open for business, with only an alarm for security until he gets his gun back from police.

Fear of another attack still affects him, he said, but financial constraints force him to keep going.

"If they want to rob somebody, they're going to rob somebody," he said. "But I'm pinching. I have to make a living."

---------
JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA -- Police said a neighbor shot a teenage neighbor inside at an Arlington apartment complex Friday afternoon.

Robert Johnson came home from work about 3 p.m. and noticed that the sliding glass door of his Oak Hill apartment was open.

"He scared me. I ran outside and got my handgun," Johnson told Channel 4. "I didn't know who was in the house at the time, so I shot him."

The teen was taken to Shands-Jacksonville Medical Center with a bullet wound to his thigh. Police said he will face burglary charges when he gets out of the hospital.

Police don't expect to file charges against Johnson.

---------------

Woman Who Once Thought "Guns are Bad" Kills Would-be Rapist

Like most women in this country, I was raised to be a victim. When the existence of guns would come up in my family, I was always told that "guns are bad" and that "only bad people would want to own a gun." I believed it... and that simple mistake has changed my life forever.

When I was a junior in college, I was brutally raped. As I had always been taught by the so-called experts, I didn't resist very strenuously, believing that I would only be hurt worse for fighting back. And I was lucky. No one had ever mentioned that a large portion of rapists kill their victims. Perhaps my living was an oversight, since I have been told that I very nearly bled to death from the personal injuries from the rape. I was lucky to live through a very painful recovery, and being reminded of my violation almost every time I went to the bathroom. I was lucky, because I lived to have almost five years of almost nightly waking up screaming. I was lucky to live. Many women are not so lucky.

And of course, I spent much of those five years playing mind games with myself, wondering what I did to invite the attack, what I could have done to abate or even deter it. And the worst part of it... the very WORST part of all of it... the infuriating knowledge that I did NOTHING to stop it. My rapist most likely continued on to do similar to other women after me. And I didn't do a damn thing to stop it. To this day, I have a hard time facing that knowledge. I consulted with various counselors and psychologists for a while, trying to "work through my rape-related misplaced guilt." Reliably, every counselor assured me that "there was nothing you could have done..." and that anything the rapist did after my own rape "is not my fault." Again, I was being trained to play the victim.

After five years of continuing nightmares, and finding no comfort in being "reassured" that, effectively, I really was as helpless as I felt, I began on my own to look into what I could have done. I took several "women's self-defense" classes, in which the strongest countermeasure taught was a chorus-line kick to the groin. As one of the few things I had tried during my rape, I can speak from experience that it only seemed to make my own rapist more excited. I was beginning to think that maybe everyone was right; maybe there is nothing a woman can do to protect herself from predators. In many ways, I felt more helpless than ever.

About six months ago, a small sign appeared at the local gym offering a free "two day self-defense seminar." I had little faith, but being free of cost and myself being free the requisite Friday and Saturday, I called the number and signed up. After going through the standard "don't walk dark alleys, lock yours doors, etc." speeches, the seminar turned to presenting guns as a viable defense. Had I known at the onset that this seminar would present guns in a positive light, I honestly would have never signed up - after all, guns are bad! Mostly out of politeness, I decided to stay to the next break rather than walking out. By the time the break came, I no longer wanted to leave. Here, at last, was a REAL way that I could have made a difference, not only to myself, but to any victims after me.

Over the next week, most of my free thought was involved in doing the soul-searching advised in the seminar - Could I REALLY pull the trigger against another person? If you knew more of the details of my own ordeal, you would understand why I found myself filling out an application for concealed carry shortly after. I had joined the "evil gun owners." If nothing else, at least I could now go down fighting instead of pleading for my life. While still very bad when they occurred, my nightmares finally began to come less often. While they had previously been reenactments of my rape, they now had become not being able to get to my safely locked gun in time. I began to unlock my handgun each night before going to bed. Seemingly paranoid or not, I felt safer doing so, and feeling safe has not been a common thing for me in the past few years.

Very sadly, about two months ago, I was awakened to the sound of something falling over in my apartment. I had almost gone back to sleep thinking it was the cat when I heard the door of my bedroom opening wider. As I had learned in the seminar, and subsequently drilled into my head, I was quickly propelled through my escalation sequence : I drew my handgun, and issued a single command to "freeze where you are." When the intruder not only continued to approach, but made a rude comment about what he was going to do to me, I double checked my aim squarely on his chest. As he crossed the "imminent threat distance," I was forced to pull the trigger. All told, it took two additional shots before he fully understood how seriously I was determined to stop him.

I have since been cleared of all charges (it WAS self defense, and perhaps surprisingly, the cops agreed). My nightmares have almost disappeared (I once dreamt of running out of ammo... but I still take this as a huge improvement!). While I have some guilt about having to shoot someone, I have never once regretted it. While this may seem vain or even sick to you, I will even admit to feeling something akin to pride for not only protecting myself, but also stopping one rapist permanently.

If you are a woman, please do not buy into the culture of learned helplessness, and please do NOT believe the lies about guns. They are the ONLY thing which empowers a woman sufficiently enough to protect herself against a violent attacker. If you think living with defensive homicide would be worse than being raped, you have clearly never had to walk that dark road - as someone who has, please learn from my own experiences before duplicating them.

If you are a man or a parent, please encourage the women in your life to seriously consider more serious protection than a cooking spice. Train yourself in the use of guns, and train any other members of your family and friends who are willing to accept responsibility. Remember, I would gladly replace my current "Never again" with "Never AT ALL" any day.

[Seshmeister]

FACT:In 2002, there were 30,242 gun deaths in the U.S:

17,108 suicides (56% of all U.S gun deaths),
11,829 homicides (39% of all U.S gun deaths),
762 unintentional shootings (3% of all U.S gun deaths),
and 300 from legal intervention and 243 from undetermined intent (2% of all U.S gun deaths combined).
-Numbers obtained from CDC National Center for Health Statistics mortality report online, 2005.

FACT: In 2002, there were 1,231 gun deaths in the state of Illinois, a 5% decrease from 2001 Illinois gun deaths. The 2002 Illinois gun deaths included:

728 homicides (59% of all IL gun deaths),
466 suicides (38% of all IL gun deaths),
and 17 unintentional shootings, 6 legal intervention, and 14 of undetermined intent (3% of all IL gun deaths combined).
-Numbers obtained from CDC National Center for Health Statistics mortality report online, 2005.

FACT: Suicide is still the leading cause of firearm death in the U.S., representing 56% of total 2002 gun deaths nationwide. In 2002, the U.S. firearm suicide total was 17,108, a 1% increase from 2001 numbers. Total gun suicides in Illinois for 2002 were 466, a decrease of 8% from the 2001 numbers. Most suicides in the U.S. are committed with firearms.
-Numbers obtained from CDC National Center for Health Statistics mortality report online, 2005.

FACT: While handguns account for only one-third of all firearms owned in the United States, they account for more than two-thirds of all firearm-related deaths each year. A gun in the home is 4 times more likely to be involved in an unintentional shooting, 7 times more likely to be used to commit a criminal assault or homicide, and 11 times more likely to be used to attempt or commit suicide than to be used in self-defense.
-A Kellerman, et al. Journal of Trauma, August 1998; Kellerman AL, Lee RK, Mercy JA, et al. "The Epidemiological Basis for the Prevention of Firearm Injuries." Annu.Rev Public Health. 1991; 12:17-40.)

FACT: A gun in the home increases the risk of homicide of a household member by 3 times and the risk of suicide by 5 times compared to homes where no gun is present.
-Kellerman AL, Rivara FP, Somes G, et al. "Suicide in the Home in Relation to Gun Ownership." NEJM. 1992; 327(7):467-472)

FACT: Contrary to popular belief, young children do possess the physical strength to fire a gun: 25% of 3-to-4-year-olds, 70% of 5-to-6-year-olds, and 90% of 7-to-8-year-olds can fire most handguns.
-Naureckas, SM, Christoffel, KK, et al. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 1995.

FACT: Comparison of U.S. gun homicides to other industrialized countries:
In 1998 (the most recent year for which this data has been compiled), handguns murdered:

373 people in Germany
151 people in Canada
57 people in Australia
19 people in Japan
54 people in England and Wales, and
11,789 people in the United States
(*Please note that these 1998 numbers account only for HOMICIDES, and do not include suicides, which comprise and even greater number of gun deaths, or unintentional shootings).

- Provided by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence


FACT: Among 26 industrialized nations, 86% of gun deaths among children under age 15 occurred in the United States.

- Provided by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence

FACT: Contrary to popular belief, young children do possess the physical strength to fire a gun: 25% of 3 to 4 year olds, 70% of 5 to 6 year olds, and 90% of 7 to 8 year olds can fire most handguns.

- Naureckas, SM, Christoffel, KK, et al. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 1995

FACT: Taxpayers pay more than 85% of the medical cost for treatment of firearm-related injuries.

- Martin M, et al. "The Cost of Hospitalization for Firearm Injuries." JAMA. Vol 260, November 25, 1998, pp 3048, and Ordog et al. "Hospital Costs of Firearm Injuries." Abstract. Journal of Trauma. February 1995, p1)

FACT: While handguns account for only one-third of all firearms owned in the United States, they account for more than two-thirds of all firearm-related deaths each year. A gun kept in the home is 22 times more likely to be used in a homicide, suicide or unintentional shooting than to be used in self-defense.
- Kellerman AL, Lee RK, Mercy JA, et al. "The Epidemiological Basis for the Prevention of Firearm Injuries." Annu. Rev. Public Health. 1991; 12:17-40

[jacksmar]

http://www.nraam.org/

[Seshmeister]

http://www.iovercompensateforhavingasmallpenis.com (http://www.nraam.org/)

[conmee]

More than a gun debate, what caught my eye in the original post was "housing project" and "schizophrenic" and "served a year in prison" and a 15 year old girl having both a 21 year old female friend, and obviously, regular social interaction with a non-family member 21 year old mentally-ill, ex-con, male.

This is a gun issue, only indirectly. The more important issue for the U.S. is that "housing projects" are home to mentally ill/disabled folks/criminals (who knew? lol) instead of affordable health care facilities, and proof again that prison time is very rarely a place for criminals and mentally disturbed folks to be rehabilitated. Without adequate therapy and treatment and support, prisons only harden criminals, for the most part, and make them even more pissed off and ready to take out there frustrations on society.

And of course, only after the health-care, affordable housing, responsible parenting, reformed prison system issues are tackled, THEN we can get to the issue of a handgun being used to end a life.

A guy like this shouldn't have been able to acquire a handgun in the first place. But you know what? He did, and he was able to circumvent existing laws, because that's what criminals do, especially when they have no healthcare support and no guidance, and stop taking their medicine. And even going so far as to ban handguns entirely won't keep criminals from acquiring them. The only real solution is to stop the manufacture, distribution, and sale of handguns, and to confiscate all existing handguns out there. But you do that, and the only folks left with guns are the government and the criminals. I'm not as paranoid as FORD ;) , but I'm not sure that scenario would make me feel safer than I do today.

Icon.

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by The Scatologist
The reason a gun is much different then a knife is because of the amount of advantage it can give someone.


A guy with a knife still has a chance of being taken down by just one guy. The report said that there were other people in the room with them. You really think it would have been just as easy with a friggin knife?


Now when the guy had a handgun, there could have been 10 other people in that room, and they wouldn't have been able to do shit, cause they don't wanna be the guy to get shot in the face for trying to stop him. Not to mention, he woulda just pulled the trigger on the girl's face first, then turned the gun around on the guy.

I watched "Trama - Life in the ER" this weekend. Why, I don't know. :rolleyes:

Anyway, one of the cases at Charity Hospital in New Orleans was where a 14 year old kid was brought in with a knife sticking out of his back. The blade had been jabbed in with such brutal forced that it was bent and the handle was broken off. The culprit? His pissed off girlfriend. Maybe a handgun wasn't convenient....but that steaknife sure was.

Bottom line....whacko people are going to go nuts with whatever is available. And in Germany, they will eat the evidence. :gulp:

[Matt White]

LONG STICK GO "BOOM"!!!

[Jesterstar]

This is really the dumbest thread I have ever seen on this boared. People kill people with Handguns all the time. It's the choice and actions of a individual. Not the Hand Gun. The HandGun can't pull it's own trigger.

God Damn Scat your a fucking moron.

[Hardrock69]

Note that wherever there are laws allowing people to carry a concealed handgun, the major crime rates go down.

Gun Ownership Mandatory In Kennesaw, Georgia
Crime Rate Plummets

by Chuck Baldwin


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The New American magazine reminds us that March 25th marked the 16th anniversary of Kennesaw, Georgia's ordinance requiring heads of households (with certain exceptions) to keep at least one firearm in their homes.

The city's population grew from around 5,000 in 1980 to 13,000 by 1996 (latest available estimate). Yet there have been only three murders: two with knives (1984 and 1987) and one with a firearm (1997). After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982.

And it has stayed impressively low. In addition to nearly non-existent homicide (murders have averaged a mere 0.19 per year), the annual number of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, and rapes have averaged, respectively, 1.69, 31.63, 19.75, and 2.00 through 1998.

With all the attention that has been heaped upon the lawful possession of firearms lately, you would think that a city that requires gun ownership would be the center of a media feeding frenzy. It isn't. The fact is I can't remember a major media outlet even mentioning Kennesaw. Can you?

The reason is obvious. Kennesaw proves that the presence of firearms actually improves safety and security. This is not the message that the media want us to hear. They want us to believe that guns are evil and are the cause of violence.

The facts tell a different story. What is even more interesting about Kennesaw is that the city's crime rate decreased with the simple knowledge that the entire community was armed. The bad guys didn't force the residents to prove it. Just knowing that residents were armed prompted them to move on to easier targets. Most criminals don't have a death wish.

There have been two occasions in my own family when the presence of a handgun averted potential disaster. In both instances the gun was never aimed at a person and no shot was fired.


http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/2nd_Amend/crime_rate_plummets.htm

[TLR]

Originally posted by The Scatologist
I always find it foolish when people try to compare gun's, a weapon designed to be well, a weapon, to things such as a backyard pool.

You know what REALLY makes a gun dangerous? It's the fact that it is a GUN. It doesn't fucking matter if you can just cook up home made bombs with fertilizer. The problem is that as long as handguns are legal,hotheads and morons will always use them in inappropiate ways.

To many cowards, a handgun is like a tool to get their way. You really think that guy who shot the girl in the head would have had the balls to do that if he didn't have a gun?

When was the last time you heard of someone killing someone with a backyard pool intentionally? Sure, it happens in a few freak cases, but theres all kinds of murder everywhere.



Also, imagine a different scenario. What if your niece, would have found a handgun instead and accidentally shot herself, which happens.
You would not even have a excuse for that.

Yes, i'm willing to bet that you MIGHT be a responsible person, however, we ALL slip up sometimes, and just because YOU are responsible, does not mean everyone else is.


There IS a reason why every responsible person is not allowed to have a nuke in their backyard or anthrax cooking in the kitchen you know.



Oh, about Yemen and Afghanistan, Yes, I'm sure they are VERY good example of how life in this country should be like :rolleyes:

I find it foolish when someone continues to try and blame an inanimate object for something. I know this has been mentioned already in this thread, but let's outlaw cars...drunk drivers kill people, but it must be the CAR'S fault. Hell, let's outlaw shoelaces...someone might hang themselves or strangle someone. We can all just wear shoes/sneakers with velcro instead. Let's also outlaw tire irons, baseball bats, plastic bags (so nobody can suffocate someone), matches and lighters (for arson), anti-freeze (so vengeful people can't spike their spouse's drink of choice for a slow, agonizing death) and what the hell, while we're at it...how about making it illegal for an individual to touch another (that would make it impossible to beat another to death with one's barehands).

Sound foolish, Scat? Of course it does. Just like your distorted sense of reality...

[The Scatologist]

the statistics say all.


373 people in Germany
151 people in Canada
57 people in Australia
19 people in Japan
54 people in England and Wales, and
11,789 people in the United States
(*Please note that these 1998 numbers account only for HOMICIDES, and do not include suicides, which comprise and even greater number of gun deaths, or unintentional shootings).

[Nitro Express]

This forum just inspired me to go out and buy another handgun. I now have a brand new Kimber 45 and she's beautiful. Why do I live in America? You can't fuckin walk in a store and buy a 45 auto in Japan or Canada but you can do it here. Rock and Roll!

[The Scatologist]

Guns are for pussies

[Jesterstar]

Originally posted by Nitro Express
This forum just inspired me to go out and buy another handgun. I now have a brand new Kimber 45 and she's beautiful. Why do I live in America? You can't fuckin walk in a store and buy a 45 auto in Japan or Canada but you can do it here. Rock and Roll!

I pray they Shoot Accurate and deadly............Viva La America Sir.

[Junyore Grades]

Originally posted by The Scatologist
Guns are for pussies

That's right! I could kill you with a well-placed tooth pick.

[Hardrock69]

Of course America has higher numbers of firearms-related homicides.

We have many times more the population of these smaller countries. Not only that, if you were to put the same amount of firearms per capita in each of these smaller countries that America has, the results would be equal (per capita) across the board.

In every million people of population over an equal amount of time, the average results will be the same. The same average number will be born, the same average number will die.

What you are all forgetting is that gun-related deaths and also deaths related to aggression, anger, warfare, and accidents (over the entire history of mankind and all other creatures) are still a very small number compared to the leading cause of death on earth.

The leading cause of death is fucking.


Our ancestors fucked and had children. Those children grew up and died.

Along the way, hopefully some of them fucked. And had kids. Which grew up and died. All the way up until the present day.

Thank your parents for murdering you.

It may take decades for you to die, but your parents are the cause of your eminent demise, just by causing you to be born.

Guns are irrelevant in comparison.

:D

[Dan]

Originally posted by Hardrock69
Of course America has higher numbers of firearms-related homicides.

We have many times more the population of these smaller countries. Not only that, if you were to put the same amount of firearms per capita in each of these smaller countries that America has, the results would be equal (per capita) across the board.

In every million people of population over an equal amount of time, the average results will be the same. The same average number will be born, the same average number will die.

What you are all forgetting is that gun-related deaths and also deaths related to aggression, anger, warfare, and accidents (over the entire history of mankind and all other creatures) are still a very small number compared to the leading cause of death on earth.

The leading cause of death is fucking.


Our ancestors fucked and had children. Those children grew up and died.

Along the way, hopefully some of them fucked. And had kids. Which grew up and died. All the way up until the present day.

Thank your parents for murdering you.

It may take decades for you to die, but your parents are the cause of your eminent demise, just by causing you to be born.

Guns are irrelevant in comparison.

:D

Great post,but The words Make Love and Making Love would have been used instead of fucked and fucking.lol.

[Nitro Express]

Yeah, Kimber pistols are made in the USA in New York State of all places. They forge their own reciever blanks and machine it all in house. Not cheap, they start at around $800 and go up from there but this gun has the best fit and finish out of any 45 I've purchased off the shelf. Much better than what Colt was making actually. Why did I buy it? Because I could. Do I need it? No. I didn't need another Stratocaster either but I bought another one of those too. 45's make me think of Elvis. He gave one to Nixon and shot his television set with one. An American classic!

[Hardrock69]

Originally posted by Matt White
LONG STICK GO "BOOM"!!!

LMFAO!!!
:D

And Dan...yeah I guess you are right.
;)

[DrMaddVibe]

My fault...I thought this was going to be about air cooled grips on handguns...instead of this drivel.

Carry on.

[stilleddiesangel]

Originally posted by The Scatologist
the statistics say all.


373 people in Germany
151 people in Canada
57 people in Australia
19 people in Japan
54 people in England and Wales, and
11,789 people in the United States
(*Please note that these 1998 numbers account only for HOMICIDES, and do not include suicides, which comprise and even greater number of gun deaths, or unintentional shootings).

From a UK perspective it is of course, 54 too many, but compared to other places, it's not that bad.

[Nitro Express]

Yeah but since you don't live here and it's not your problem why worry about it?

[Seshmeister]

I'll take that as you conceding this argument...:)

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by Seshmeister
I'll take that as you conceding this argument...:)

Only if you're will to admit that you've conceded your LIBERTY. ;)

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Only if you're will to admit that you've conceded your LIBERTY. ;)

To not get shot?

Having said that, handguns are cool. But so are restrictions placed on their ownership.

[Seshmeister]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Only if you're will to admit that you've conceded your LIBERTY. ;)

Ok I'll swap a little bit of liberty not to get shot.

I'm old fashioned that way,,,

[jacksmar]

373 people in Germany
151 people in Canada
57 people in Australia
19 people in Japan
54 people in England and Wales, and
11,789 people in the United States

Perspective: 300+ million in US
30 million in Canada
http://www.tsra.com/Lott112.htm

http://www.tsra.com/Lott54.htm

http://www.tsra.com/Lott94.htm

There is evidence that restrictions on people’s ability to defend themselves encourages criminals to attack.
The potential defensive nature of guns is indicated by the different rates of so-called “hot burglaries,” where
residents are at home when the criminals strike. 59 percent of the burglaries in Britain, which has tough gun
control laws, are “hot burglaries.” By contrast, the U.S., with laxer restrictions, has a “hot burglary” rate of
only 13 percent.

Truth: Any force, political or otherwise, that is so dedicated to guaranteeing the defenselessness of good people is morally vacuous.

[singerman]

the stats say it all.....the harder it is to obtain guns...the safer the streets are gonna be from gun related crime

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by singerman
the stats say it all.....the harder it is to obtain guns...the safer the streets are gonna be from gun related crime


"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"
-- Adolf Hitler, April 15, 1935

[singerman]

Originally posted by jacksmar
373 people in Germany
151 people in Canada
57 people in Australia
19 people in Japan
54 people in England and Wales, and
11,789 people in the United States

Perspective: 300+ million in US
30 million in Canada
http://www.tsra.com/Lott112.htm

http://www.tsra.com/Lott54.htm

http://www.tsra.com/Lott94.htm

There is evidence that restrictions on people’s ability to defend themselves encourages criminals to attack.
The potential defensive nature of guns is indicated by the different rates of so-called “hot burglaries,” where
residents are at home when the criminals strike. 59 percent of the burglaries in Britain, which has tough gun
control laws, are “hot burglaries.” By contrast, the U.S., with laxer restrictions, has a “hot burglary” rate of
only 13 percent.

Truth: Any force, political or otherwise, that is so dedicated to guaranteeing the defenselessness of good people is morally vacuous.

And of the 59% of burglaries in britain,how many people do you think were shot compared to the 13% of burglaries in the u.s?.....i would much rather be in the 59%, knowing im probably not get a gun in my face while im in my bed!

[singerman]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"
-- Adolf Hitler, April 15, 1935

yep....probably the only sane thing the man ever said lol...err...before he tried to take over the world!
The countries with the tightest gun laws have the least gun crime...that is a fact

[moose]

Originally posted by Full Bug
Americans need a gun registry like we have here, it cost 500 million and counting and nobody gets killed here anymore, killers use butter knifes now so all you get is a bruise....

BS.....more like a BILLION greenbacks. Instead of banning handguns and registration of all firearms, why don't the law makers of our nations make the penalty equal the crime. Stiffen up the laws, put all the fuckers in jail for life or better yet just fuckin fry them..............

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by moose
BS.....more like a BILLION greenbacks. Instead of banning handguns and registration of all firearms, why don't the law makers of our nations make the penalty equal the crime. Stiffen up the laws, put all the fuckers in jail for life or better yet just fuckin fry them..............


What he said. :killer:

[singerman]

what about resticting the production of ammo?....easier than trying to stop guns getting in the wrong hands!.....a toy is useless without any batteries

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by singerman

The countries with the tightest gun laws have the least gun crime...that is a fact

And the least liberty to defend yourselves.....

You will be taken over by the Islamofascists invading your tiny little island nation who will bend you over like a seventeen year old virgin on prom night.

:gulp:

[singerman]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
And the least liberty to defend yourselves.....

You will be taken over by the Islamofascists invading your tiny little island nation who will bend you over like a seventeen year old virgin on prom night.

:gulp:

mmmm....wasnt the most intelligent answer i was looking for but well done for trying...any adults out there?

[singerman]

Originally posted by Seshmeister
Ok I'll swap a little bit of liberty not to get shot.

I'm old fashioned that way,,,

read it please brian

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by singerman
mmmm....wasnt the most intelligent answer i was looking for but well done for trying...any adults out there?

Well consider the source, he actually posts Ann Coulter articles!:D

[singerman]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Well consider the source, he actually posts Ann Coulter articles!:D

yes,but does he read them or just post them? ;-)

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by singerman
yes,but does he read them or just post them? ;-)

Probably mostly the latter.:D

[Cathedral]

Roll over one night and notice there is someone in your room just a few feet away from you going through your wifes purse, how would you react knowing this stranger has invaded the security of the home you and your entire family live in?
We had an alarm also, but back then they ran through the phone lines and once the guy snipped the line outside, it wasn't worth a dime.

The man came into my house armed with a knife, I had a gun, there's a joke there, but in this instance and it's outcome, it isn't appropriate.

From my cold dead hands, baby, from my cold dead ass hands....

But seriously, sit back, close your eyes and think about what your options would be if you had the same thing happen to you?

What would you do?

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Cathedral
Roll over one night and notice there is someone in your room just a few feet away from you going through your wifes purse, how would you react knowing this stranger has invaded the security of the home you and your entire family live in?
We had an alarm also, but back then they ran through the phone lines and once the guy snipped the line outside, it wasn't worth a dime.

The man came into my house armed with a knife, I had a gun, there's a joke there, but in this instance and it's outcome, it isn't appropriate.

From my cold dead hands, baby, from my cold dead ass hands....

But seriously, sit back, close your eyes and think about what your options would be if you had the same thing happen to you?

What would you do?

I agree, to an extent, but I think we need tighter restrictions on guns in this country.

About ten years ago, they arrested a lily white little college boy who was going into gun stores in Virginia and buying up handguns and assault rifles with his NYS licence (I think) and importing them to gangs in New York State because the laws are far more lax down there.

I think he got over 20 years in prison since the judge decided to throw the book at him, but still, should criminals really have such unfettered access to weapons?

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by singerman
what about resticting the production of ammo?....easier than trying to stop guns getting in the wrong hands!.....a toy is useless without any batteries

I have a loader that allowes me to re-load my shells at home, restricting ammo sales won't do a damn thing to decrease gun crimes.

But what will decrease those crimes is the doubt a criminal has about if the victim he is planning to attack is or isn't armed.
I carry a pistol in a shoulder holster when i work inspections, depending on the neighborhood i have to go into and the fact that the crappy hoods have a Rot in every yard, I need protection that is effective.

But in Ohio it is legal to carry and conceal now, and i can't wait till the end of the year to see the stats on crime due to that law.

I'm actually a proponant of a Wild West mentality. not in the sense that there should be shootouts in the streets, but that the idea that everyone is carrying a gun it will most certainly make a criminal think twice about creating a potentially deadly situation for himself.

[twonabomber]

Originally posted by Cathedral

But in Ohio it is legal to carry and conceal now, and i can't wait till the end of the year to see the stats on crime due to that law.



just from reading the local papers, i haven't seen any mention of anyone involved in a crime being a permit holder. and the way the media is lately, they'd be all over that shit.

[singerman]

Originally posted by Cathedral
I have a loader that allowes me to re-load my shells at home, restricting ammo sales won't do a damn thing to decrease gun crimes.

But what will decrease those crimes is the doubt a criminal has about if the victim he is planning to attack is or isn't armed.
I carry a pistol in a shoulder holster when i work inspections, depending on the neighborhood i have to go into and the fact that the crappy hoods have a Rot in every yard, I need protection that is effective.

But in Ohio it is legal to carry and conceal now, and i can't wait till the end of the year to see the stats on crime due to that law.

I'm actually a proponant of a Wild West mentality. not in the sense that there should be shootouts in the streets, but that the idea that everyone is carrying a gun it will most certainly make a criminal think twice about creating a potentially deadly situation for himself.

im not too sure what a reloader is ,could you explain a bit more about them?

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
I agree, to an extent, but I think we need tighter restrictions on guns in this country.

I agree only if those restrictions are aimed at the criminal element, but to date they aren't enforced.

And let me tell you, Gun Registration has only hurt the law abiding citizen.
Criminals rarely use a registered firearm in a robbery, and if it is registered, it isn't registered to the guy doing the robbing, it was stolen.
Registration only tells the authorities where the legal guns are so they know where to go collecting if they were to ban them all together.
I have some that are registered, and a few that i absolutely cannot register for various reasons.

Guns should be issued a title of ownership at the time of production, like a car, that follows it throughout its existance.
Possesion of a gun without a title of ownership should have at least a 5 year prison sentence for those unlawfully possessing said weapon.

I'm all for legislation that protects the law abiding gun owner and punishes the criminal. But i have yet to see any that do that because there are too many people wanting to take them away from everyone.

They are too easily accessible, that i won't deny, but there are better ways to deal with it than what i have seen proposed in my lifetime.

If someone has the balls to break into a home where he knows the people are home sleeping, AND brings a weapon with him. what the hell is an unarmed victim going to endure should they wake up startled?
If you break into my home and i am there, I play possum while i reach under my pillow slowly, then i yell, "STOP, DO NOT MOVE".....If you move your ass is shot, period.

I also have the belief that in the event you do actually shoot a criminal in your home, KILL THEM, let me repeat that, KILL THEM!
You only want ONE story being told after the fact because i have seen two occasions where the wounded criminals filed a civil suit against the people they were robbing, and one criminal won damages that in one of those cases bankrupted the home owner.

Oh, and that idea was not mine, it was from about half a dozen County Sherrif's that i had the liberty of being friends with in the 80's.

One story, and if you don't touch a thing or try to hide anything the case will be closed rather quickly.
Don't be shooting someone as they are fleeing the house and drop dead outside or it's your ass, prison time, Murder in the 1st.

Keep it simple, move nothing, call 9-1-1 IMMEDIATELY!

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by singerman
im not too sure what a reloader is ,could you explain a bit more about them?

It is machine that allowes you to re-pack your used shells with a new pin (the thing that the hammer on the trigger hits to fire the shell), gun powder, and a new lead tip.

I don't buy ammo very often at all, except for shotgun shells.

[moose]

Martial Law!!!
You wanna come into my house and fuck with my family, I'm gonna shoot you, no ifs ands or buts about it. I worked hard for everything I have, no freakin cocksuckin junkie is goin' to threatin' my wife and kids and get away with it. Except of callin 911 I'd load the fucker in my truck take him up to bush and dump him in a swamp. Let him fuckin rot.
Cheers Catherdral I agree with everything you have said.

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by twonabomber
just from reading the local papers, i haven't seen any mention of anyone involved in a crime being a permit holder. and the way the media is lately, they'd be all over that shit.

Exactly, just more proof that guns aren't the problem, the current laws and how they are basically un-enforced is the problem.

But if just one person is saved because a criminal thought twice about attacking, carry and canceal should be nation wide and everyone would have a gun on their hip again.

I know it sounds drastic, but we live in a much more dangerous society where courts do little to nothing for people who are threatened by others until a crime has been commited.
Just a week or so ago there was a little 5 year old girl that found her mom and dad shot in their bedroom, both died.
And the couple had tried to get some action taken against the mans threats but got nowhere because no crime had been commited yet.
Sorry, but in 99% of those situations, after the fact is too late.

The couple didn't own a gun and i can only assume that they may have had a chance if they had.
People, nobody is going to look out for you, that's a pipe dream that will cost you your life.

Learn Gun Safety, Get a Permit and then Purchase at least one pistol in the name of protection. Your families lives could depend on it one day.
After the fact is simply too late..............

[singerman]

Originally posted by Cathedral
It is machine that allowes you to re-pack your used shells with a new pin (the thing that the hammer on the trigger hits to fire the shell), gun powder, and a new lead tip.

I don't buy ammo very often at all, except for shotgun shells.

ahh...i see now thanks!

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by moose
Martial Law!!!
You wanna come into my house and fuck with my family, I'm gonna shoot you, no ifs ands or buts about it. I worked hard for everything I have, no freakin cocksuckin junkie is goin' to threatin' my wife and kids and get away with it. Except of callin 911 I'd load the fucker in my truck take him up to bush and dump him in a swamp. Let him fuckin rot.
Cheers Catherdral I agree with everything you have said.

My family has over 400 acres of land in the boonies that has not had a stranger on it in my lifetime.....If i wanted someone to vanish, they damn well could very easily.

People vanish every day, and it is simply shocking how many are never found at all.
Which proves another point....You can't trust anyone because you never really know what someone is capable of, and that's a sobering truth to behold.

[singerman]

i really dont see an answer to it all really......is it a case of 'trying to shut the gate after the horse has bolted?'

[singerman]

i still say halve the number of bullets produced......less bullets,less gun crime

[Cathedral]

That's a great analogy, and it does seem to be the case.
I know i have never killed a man out of rage, never robbed anyone, never had a lack of responsibility for my weapons. Yet people who fear guns are hell bent on taking mine away.

It makes no sense because the unlawful don't obey laws and the law offers no pre-emptive protection to victims of the lawless.

Therefore, behind MY doors I govern myself, police myself, protect myself.
Leave me alone and i'll be there when society breaks down to help protect you and feed you.
Most people here would think i was crazy if they actually knew how prepared i am for an end of days scenario.

But these are also things that will make me a target for those who are desperate.
All i can say is "Bring It On", we may need the meat off their bones to survive.

You know what scares me most, what happens outside everyday now.
In a time when we should be valuing life as it has never been before, we put less value on it than has ever been before.

I'm as prepared for anything as i can be, the rest is up to God and what his plan for me is.

[rustoffa]

Man, I've purchased alot of bullets over the years....

It's hard to believe those fancy bullets used to go for thirty-two dollars a box!
:D

[Cathedral]

Here ya go rustoffa, if you shoot as much as i do it will pay for itself in less than a year.

Reloader (http://dillonprecision.com/template/p.cfm?maj=12&dyn=1&cookieClean=1)

[moose]

Originally posted by rustoffa
Man, I've purchased alot of bullets over the years....

It's hard to believe those fancy bullets used to go for thirty-two dollars a box!
:D

Shit for my Weatherby's I pay $89.00(CND) for 20 freakin Nosler Partitions. Was @ Cabela's in Michigan and found the exact same for $39.00. Just imagine how many "cases" I bought, I have enuff ammo now for my grandkids................

[rustoffa]

Originally posted by Cathedral
Here ya go rustoffa, if you shoot as much as i do it will pay for itself in less than a year.

Reloader (http://dillonprecision.com/template/p.cfm?maj=12&dyn=1&cookieClean=1)

Bro, I'm way too lazy...I unloaded a marginal one I had on ebay not that long ago. The bagged ammo at the shows gets pretty cheap towards sunday afternoon closing time.:D

My brother's pretty dependable and occasionally, I'll barter my personal "Don't baby your Binelli" instruction for some custom sheelackers if I need 'em.

Ya think the black talon market needs a spiking?

;)

[yamaha86tt350]

i love hand guns and all other guns for that matter there good for gettin rid of morans....oops my keyboard made a spelling error.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by yamaha86tt350
i love hand guns and all other guns for that matter there good for gettin rid of morans....oops my keyboard made a spelling error.

This must be a Wayne L. alias. Nobody else could possibly be this stupid!:rolleyes:

[FORD]

Originally posted by yamaha86tt350
i love hand guns and all other guns for that matter there good for gettin rid of morans....oops my keyboard made a spelling error.

Morans??

Hey, I think I know this idiot!
http://www.askforjanice.com/photos/freeper.jpg

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by FORD
Morans??

Hey, I think I know this idiot!
http://www.askforjanice.com/photos/freeper.jpg

Must be an alias for DLR's Cock. He's spelled it that way dozens of times. Along with maroon, maran, etc....

[yamaha86tt350]

hey good one clown. your smart. man are you smart. why don't you take a tip here and listen to the man you worship so much. maybe it will open your eyes. try monday and tuesdays radio show.

[FORD]

orr eye could just sit inn fronte of a cumpooter and tipe illitirat stoopid shit all day becuz i am a dumb ass who beleves what evir rush limbo tellz me.

http://www.d0c.dk/pic/retard.jpg

[yamaha86tt350]

hey ass clown didn't i already SON u once already? ya i did remember u couldn't come up with a good comeback so u just did the little kid thing and said some stupid shit that was supposed to be an insult or something........ha ha ha ha!

now if ur gona cry about the spelling let me know and next time it will be in a 5 paragraph essay with a thesis and all.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by yamaha86tt350
hey ass clown didn't i already SON u once already? ya i did remember u couldn't come up with a good comeback so u just did the little kid thing and said some stupid shit that was supposed to be an insult or something........ha ha ha ha!

now if ur gona cry about the spelling let me know and next time it will be in a 5 paragraph essay with a thesis and all.

How old are you? Have you graduated from special edu...er high school yet?

[FORD]

I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

I only wish V-Bulletin had a literacy filter module.

[yamaha86tt350]

na, i was supposed to a hot minute back but i didn't. its not b/c i didn't like riding the short bus or anything it was actually kinda cool the kids were all very nice. its not b/c i didn't like school either, i mean all my classes were fun, and best of all we got to go to lunch like 10 or 15 minutes before all the other kids......man it was great. later on in my 4th year...i think thats senior, right? anyway in my 4th year i met this lovely woman and thats when it went down hill. she would call me out of school every day and come pick me up and we'd go out to mcdonalds for breakfast and then we would go back to her place and i'd serve her up a healthy dose or two of the D. next thing i know i forgot all about first and second hour and focused on fucking your mother. than one day the skank comes and tells me i got her pregnant so i bounced....................now your here. i only wish id thrown her down the stairs or something before u were born..............by the by i know you guys are like einstein here n shit especially FORD so i figured u could tell me why your spell check spells I'd wrong?..........i mean the literacy filter module is a good idea but...................................

[yamaha86tt350]

at the time of creating the last post i was attempting to bite my ear and drooling on myself all at the same time and i still managed to catch your (as ford would put it) illiterate mistake.

[Nickdfresh]

*huh** wha'** You were saying something?

[mayorwest]

See the funny thing here is how old guys take the Internet so seriously. Were not writing letters to our congressman or typing papers here, it’s the Internet. Kids these days, or well anyone who is knowledgeable or familiar with the Internet knows that shortening up or abbreviating words is just Internet chat. It speeds up the communication process and makes it easier, quicker and more fun to communicate over the Internet. The best example next to forums are IM’s, people use expressions like brb, and u, or they use slang in their typing, its as if you were talking to the person as opposed to writing them a letter using a typewriter and mail, remember its 2005. Now this does not by any means mean the person is illiterate in anyway. If anything it’s the person criticizing others for this Internet chat who is the one who is unknowledgeable and illiterate to computers and the Internet. Think about it if the internet was as inconvenient, slow, and dragged out as these old guys think typing should be, than it would take you like a half hour just to get to a porn site, and even longer to get in and get something. Get with the times this is the INTERNET learn it, love it, master it.

[Nitro Express]

My first job out of college was working in the finance dept. in a divsion of Hewlett Packard. I was really lucky to get the job because HP really ran your through the wringer in the inteview process and was very selective. I felt like I had joined the elite.

I always did well on my college papers, I took honors composition in high school. I felt I could write pretty damn good and I thought it meant something.

That's until I started getting sloppy in office memos. This was pre-internet but we still had a company network with electronic mail. If it was writing by a secretary, the grammar and spelling were pretty good, but if it came from the vice president or who ever themselves, the writing was sloppy as hell. Just terriable!

The internet has made us even more sloppy.

I once had a teacher that said that people with judge you by the way you write and speak. That's still very true. Most everyone has gotten sloppy because they are in a hurry and abbreviate and hack stuff out. If you are trying to debate something in writing though, you might want to try and write beter than the person you are arguing with because they will always attack your grammar usage and spelling to make you look like and idiot. Much like how politicians catch hell if the pronounce something wrong or spell something wrong.

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by mayorwest
See the funny thing here is how old guys take the Internet so seriously. Were not writing letters to our congressman or typing papers here, it’s the Internet. Kids these days, or well anyone who is knowledgeable or familiar with the Internet knows that shortening up or abbreviating words is just Internet chat. It speeds up the communication process and makes it easier, quicker and more fun to communicate over the Internet. The best example next to forums are IM’s, people use expressions like brb, and u, or they use slang in their typing, its as if you were talking to the person as opposed to writing them a letter using a typewriter and mail, remember its 2005. Now this does not by any means mean the person is illiterate in anyway. If anything it’s the person criticizing others for this Internet chat who is the one who is unknowledgeable and illiterate to computers and the Internet. Think about it if the internet was as inconvenient, slow, and dragged out as these old guys think typing should be, than it would take you like a half hour just to get to a porn site, and even longer to get in and get something. Get with the times this is the INTERNET learn it, love it, master it.

Better watch Nickfresh is an english teacher and he has nothing better to do than grade poples posts!!!

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
Better watch Nickfresh is an english teacher and he has nothing better to do than grade poples posts!!!

Apparently you have nothing better to do than to spam message boards with BS.

Former English teacher actually.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by mayorwest
See the funny thing here is how old guys take the Internet so seriously. Were not writing letters to our congressman or typing papers here, it�s the Internet. Kids these days, or well anyone who is knowledgeable or familiar with the Internet knows that shortening up or abbreviating words is just Internet chat. It speeds up the communication process and makes it easier, quicker and more fun to communicate over the Internet. The best example next to forums are IM�s, people use expressions like brb, and u, or they use slang in their typing, its as if you were talking to the person as opposed to writing them a letter using a typewriter and mail, remember its 2005. Now this does not by any means mean the person is illiterate in anyway. If anything it�s the person criticizing others for this Internet chat who is the one who is unknowledgeable and illiterate to computers and the Internet. Think about it if the internet was as inconvenient, slow, and dragged out as these old guys think typing should be, than it would take you like a half hour just to get to a porn site, and even longer to get in and get something. Get with the times this is the INTERNET learn it, love it, master it.

Wow, another obvious troll/alias that posts a line of horseshit on her very first day, I don't know where to begin with this, so I won't waste my time other than to say, you have yet to mast ur anything my son but bate.;):splooge:

BTW, I use slang all the time...in the appropriate forum of communication. Some people, mostly stupid, are only capable of using such slang in EVERY forum of communication.

When writing dialect for literary effect, I use an appostrophe (i.e nothin') so everyone knows I am not (totally:D) a sloppy fuckwit unable to express coherent ideas in written language. And most of that "internet" lingo/slang originated in the 80's, I had a girlfriend who would write me that would write to me how she would "luv u 4-ever," she didn't. But rock-on oh thy spirit of youth!

And Wayne L. he's okay too, he's over 40+ and can't write a shopping list coherently!

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by 4moreyears
Better watch Nickfresh is an english teacher and he has nothing better to do than grade poples posts!!!

Nick that spelling error was for you.

JH

[Nickdfresh]

I didn't notice, I really don't care. Obviously the point of my posts you were referring too went over your head, but it was not about spelling.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by larbo
why johnny ringo, are we having problem's? everyone has a right to protect thereself. but gun's should not be allowed in city limit's for obvious reasons. more sophisticated background check's a must. cutting back on the production of bullet's is'nt going to solve the problem. I make my own bullet's and so does a lot of my buddies here in w.v..city boy's and gun's don't mix. that's yet another proven fact. you don't hear a lot about drive-bys in the country. it's not glorified here. what is allowed in rapper's video's on mtv and BET need's to be monitored in a big way.

Really, what caliber of bullets did you make pussy? What kind of gun do you own?

Dude, the only load you get is your buddies launching cum-globbers in your face.

And where the fuck is my I-Pod I put on order a week ago?!

[larbo]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Really, what caliber of bullets did you make pussy? What kind of gun do you own?

Dude, the only load you get is your buddies launching cum-globbers in your face.

And where the fuck is my I-Pod I put on order a week ago?!

30.6, 30-30, 12 gauge, .357 to name a few. I target practice a lot so I go through cases of bullets per month. I-pod? don't know wtf you talkin bout willis.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by larbo
30.6, 30-30, 12 gauge, .357 to name a few. I target practice a lot so I go through cases of bullets per month. I-pod? don't know wtf you talkin bout willis.

You joined the Burbank Rod & Gun club? Excellent!

[larbo]

yeah! how'd you ever guess genius?

[Nickdfresh]

Because I am a genius! Don't you forget it boy! I know who to call out almost instantly, and you fit the bill immediately.

So tell us more about the real you.

Nice GAY sig btw, you really like listing the names of your favorite men that bitch slap you, huh fag?

[Panamark]

Martin Bryant opened fire in the small Tasmanian township of Port Arthur on 28 April 1996, killing 35 in the worlds worst spree-killing massacre.

After this, the Australian government literally banned guns.
It would be interesting to see the death stats now, as oppossed
to those days.

We can still own rifles, but its very strict, you need to have all sorts
of police background checks, pass a gun license test, and pretty
much give a good reason why you need it in the first place.

Hand guns are allowed for sporting shooters, but your hand guns
must be stored in safes at your gun club...

I agree with having a firearm to defend yourself. I had owned several
rifles including a M-16 and a Russian SKS.... But we are limited to
pretty basic rifles now. (And its no walk in the park to get one)

I would love to know the Australian gun death stats, after these
measures, and also the effect its had on home invasions...

I think police background checks and gun lincense tests would be
a good start in the US..

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Panamark
...

I think police background checks and gun lincense tests would be
a good start in the US..

Some states do in fact have stringent controls on firearms, but it varies. New York State, for instance, makes one provide references, go through a handgun safety course, and other background checks before you can own a pistol and receive a pistol permit.

[Viking]

http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/diversitybk750.jpg

[lucky wilbury]

:D

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by lucky wilbury
:D

i like it!!!

[Nickdfresh]

I'm a "liberal" and I own several guns including an "assault rifle.''

It's later than you think!;)

So I am going to bed!