We have a new Governator here in California,

[NMH]

You seem also a little too proud of your intimate acquaintance with "nowhere" as if anyone should actually care to relate to your view of that microcosm on planet Earth. Yes it would be useful to have a gun handy when a BEAR (wtf is a 'bare' ? ) rears it's big stately body up and takes a swipe at disembowelling you . If it missed and you have a loaded barrel pointed in the desired direction - you then have to decide whether to try a shot into the animal, and if that is even worthwhile depending on the calibre of your piece.

If you are to live in a jungle, you need to be prepared to do jungle living. If you live in a city, you need to do city living. Telling someone in Charlotte that their world is safe, aren't you just brushing aside the need for a weapon in 'safe' Carolina ? I thought you said it was a necessity to be armed in the urban jungle too? Your inalienable rights to hunt vs to defend are countered by the temperature of the environment aren't they? I mean, I would like to have a fuckin' Howitzer and a Centurian Tank if I think the other bloke is coming after me with a sub-machine gun. I'll make do fine with a saturday night special if he's got a knife, or mace if he's got a broken bottle.

How about we all get nuclear weapons, or mine our front garden in case someone walks there without our permission ?? "Horses for courses" is the pertinant expression, and you go do the American thing with paper/scissors/rock to your heart's content until some muthafukka pops a cap into that heart - that's what a lot of people are trying to tell you here.

Now, seeing as you are red-blooded and GUN-ho, then why complain about North Korea and their Nuclear Weapons - I assume you disapprove of that ?? IF my assumption is correct, perhaps you might explain how it was justifiable that the USA was the ONLY country to ever use nuclear weapons on humans?
(I'm giving you this conundrum to save time arguing, but I think it'll burn out a fuse on most Americans to consider that)
The Atomic Bomb actually was NOT the most prolific of killers of the Japanese civillians, incidentally - it was just the quickest single device I believe.

Gotta go now Clint, I see some pesky Injuns on yonder ridge

 

[Bare]

I personally would play Mayo and Butters as centre halves with Cullip just behind them. Give Jones and Watto responsibilities to roam forward when we break, and try out Piercey as the front point of a midfield diamond with the two loan players doing the donkey work behind him. [/B][/QUOTE]

I didn't post this. There must be some sort of computer glitch.

 

[NMH]

I personally would play Mayo and Butters as centre halves with Cullip just behind them. Give Jones and Watto responsibilities to roam forward when we break, and try out Piercey as the front point of a midfield diamond with the two loan players doing the donkey work behind him.

I didn't post this. There must be some sort of computer glitch. [/B][/QUOTE]

No? Pity, it was probably the most sensible thing you said.

Personally, I would've suggested arming FDM with a 'daisy-cutter' for inside the box, had Cullip using a ballero with a garrot for Butters. Watto could have a chainsaw, and Jonesy plant mines.
Just in case their manager is good at motivation, we plant anthrax in their dressing room, and Ted Kadinsky could take care of their physio. Michael Jackson would have a little time alone with their mascot, and let Ted Bundy in with the player's wives.
Dr Mengels would be the medic in the treatment room, and Jeffrey Daumer could clean up after him. Our lads would all wear massive amounts of padding and helmets, so that we could all say that "soccer WITHOUT protection is a girls game".
Cheerleaders would make sure that the crowd didn't get bored with having to watch a sport, and if any foreigners outplayed us we could give them immediate citizenship and loudly proclaim them 'GREAT ENGLISHMEN'.

Ok, now we can get it on, open a can of whip-ass, ready to rumble, and wipe the floor with those pinko commies.

 

[Lord Cornwallis]

"People LIKE you"
Not you alone. Don't flatter yourself.

As for showing me where nowhere is, I think it might be between your ears.
Anyway, I'm bored of you now, so have a great life in them there hills.

 

[looney]

I agree with bare. The first thing totolitarians do is disarm the populace.

f*** that, and if any burgler climbs into my house I want the means to blow the fucker away.


Bare you must have met all the gutless ones here now who abdicate responsibility at the first oppertunity.

 

[Simster]

Looney, for me it is a simple trade off - the right to bear arms and protect yourself from trespassers and would be attackers, against the likelihood of accidents and madmen and dangerous militia groups mis-using that right.

The homicidal rate is ten times higher in America than it is here. On that basis, I think forfeiting the right to bear arms is a price well worth paying and it would appear most people on this thread would agree with me.

In fairness it's the same in many walks of life. If our traffic accident death rate was ten times higher than other similarly advanced countries, there would be more clamour for improved driving tests and restrictions on who could apply for a driving license, and rightly so.

 

[Bare]

This just appeared in the St Louis Post-Dispatch.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...Man+kills+intruder+holding+shears+to+his+wife

Even at 73 the man took care of his own. Didn't hand over anything but a bullet or two and didn't wait for the police which would've been to late. Grandpa doesn't live in fear either.

 

[NMH]

Defining that a little further, escalating the armaments and artilliary, for America, has gone from the microcosm of shooting natives who were armed with knives (then selling THEM guns so they could in turn shoot the next people around the bend), to killing millions with sophisticated hi-tech missiles then selling the same impressive equipment around the world.

As long as the end result is $$ profit, it doesn't appear to be too much of a concern what the price in human life ultimately is - all in the name of 'defense' .

Ah well, it keeps the population from over-running the planet eh?
I just have to hope I'm not part of the next little 'demo' .

Oh yeah, let's not forget that Saddam used weapons on his own people . The US were selling him weapons to fight Iranian people, how could he DO that? Your people, my people, their people..... what does it matter as long as weapons are sold and regimes and governments can profit ? YEEE-HAAAA !

 

[Dandyman]

The first thing totolitarians do is disarm the populace.

:

The first stage of my ruthless dictatorship will be compulsory spelling classes.

 

[US Seagull]

This just appeared in the St Louis Post-Dispatch.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...Man+kills+intruder+holding+shears+to+his+wife

Even at 73 the man took care of his own. Didn't hand over anything but a bullet or two and didn't wait for the police which would've been to late. Grandpa doesn't live in fear either.

And compare that to how many reports there are of shootings in todays papers? One instance of an old man (possibly) saving himself doesn't justify thousands of gun related deaths every year. The intruder would have most likely taken the money and left if the old man hadn't popped a cap in his ass. And before you say the intruder deserved it, in modern society (i.e. not the 19th century that you live in) justice is dispenced by the courts, not by crazy old men acting as judge, jury and executioner.

 

[US Seagull]

I see no one is telling me about Hitlers great society

Because it's a retarded comparison in the first place. You're grasping at straws if that's the best you've got.

 

[NMH]

He's not really taking any of us up any more. I s'pose he's run out of big enough examples.

"I'll see your Iran, with this Hiroshima, and raise you a North Korea"

"I'll call your bluff with an old man in St Louis, and raise you a handi-capped lady who fought off a purse snatcher"

 

[Bare]

I think I've made my point and Looney seconds it.

I still don't know how to tell if I'm a Redneck.

 

[Simster]

Your point appears to be that a homicidal rate of ten times the average for the Western world is a price well worth paying if it means old men in St Louis can shoot burgulars.

Yep, it's another world beater.

 

[NMH]

I think I've made my point and Looney seconds it.

I still don't know how to tell if I'm a Redneck.

Yes, well done old mate you've been seconded by someone called 'looney' .
You should brag about that, tell everyone in tham thar hills dude!

"I'z gots a raht to bare arms fellas, I'z bin seconded by a looney - only a looney could agree with me" etc.

BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAA !

 

[US Seagull]

I think I've made my point and Looney seconds it.

I still don't know how to tell if I'm a Redneck.

Amongst all the people that have contributed to this thread you have found exactly one person to agree with you. Oh yeah, you've definitely won this one. I'm running out right now to buy an assault rifle...primarly to protect myself from people like you.

 

[US Seagull]

Okay here's a story that demostrates why guns ought to be banned:

Participant at KKK Initiation Wounded After Shots Are Fired Into Sky

I call this instant Karma

 

[Bare]

Oh but I have made my point clearly. Many attacked me for my gun ownership and I've posed some questions to which no one has responded:
1) I have the right to defend myself. I have the right to choose a gun to do that, as opposed to a club or knife. Nothing contrary was offered.
2) Some one said I was like Hitler and I say I'm not for reason #1 and challenged anyone to exalt on Hitlers great gun controlled society, how civilized they were in the Third Reich. No one said a word and rightfully so.
3) Someone said I should just hand over my things to a thief as opposed to defending my self and I challenged them to explain why I should and again no response.

Many have sighted these outrageous things about my gun ownership. They include murder, stupidly shooting in the air, how I'm responsible for world opinion, NMH has gone on in great length about the world situation and God knows what all. But the three questions remain.

I am not a criminal. I've murdered noone. (Shot at one to defend myself.) I don't use a gun to pilage, rape, assault or in general commit any kind of crime. Yet you insist on implying I am a criminal and sighting criminal use because I own a gun.

Criminals in the US, in general, are forbidden by law to own or possess a firearm of any kind. There are other limitations as well. It doesn't mean they don't have guns. It only means it's against the law.

In the US, one has the right to own or not to own a gun. I haven't advocated the same for the UK. My point is made and it stands.

Now watch some NAZI attempt to throw me off!

 

[Easy 10]

Now watch some NAZI attempt to throw me off!

For you, ze vor is over. Surrender your veapons immediately or face ze consequences, Americana. You vill bow down before mein Fuhrer and beg forgiveness for your insolence.

SCHNELL.

 

[US Seagull]

Oh but I have made my point clearly. Many attacked me for my gun ownership and I've posed some questions to which no one has responded:
1) I have the right to defend myself. I have the right to choose a gun to do that, as opposed to a club or knife. Nothing contrary was offered.
2) Some one said I was like Hitler and I say I'm not for reason #1 and challenged anyone to exalt on Hitlers great gun controlled society, how civilized they were in the Third Reich. No one said a word and rightfully so.
3) Someone said I should just hand over my things to a thief as opposed to defending my self and I challenged them to explain why I should and again no response.

1) I don't think anybody has said you don't have a right to defend yourself, but you shouldn't have the right to use a gun. If you have the right to choose a gun, then perhaps I should have the right to chose a nuke to protect myself. I remind you that it was alleged that Iraq had chosen WMDs to defend itself and apparently it didn't have that right. It's choice of WMDs was seen as a threat to others. Your choice of a gun is a threat to others, because if you can walk into Wal Mart and buy a shotgun so can anybody else. Only convicted criminals are forbidden to buy guns but you know what, they don't need access to international arms smugglers to get their weapons, they just need to get their buddy to go buy them a gun instead (or steal yours when they break into you house). The very same access to guns that you have makes it's much easier for criminals to get guns.
2) As I said before, nobody took up your Hitler challenge because it's retarded and you know it. It's a pointless straw man argument that does nothing to advance this debate. So anybody who's for gun control is pro-hitler? Well if the reverse is true then you should worry about Arnie.
3) What was said was that it wasn't worth getting yourself killed just to protect some stuff. Pulling a gun on an attacker is probably more likely to get you killed than doing nothing. Get some insurance, lock your doors and windows and don't go wandering down dark alleys at night. That's how you protect yourself.

It's not that nobody responded, it's just that your head was too far up your ass to notice.